Darko And More
by Stop-n-Pop on Jul 1, 2010 11:09 PM CDT
Email
PrintIt's been a busy 24 hours for the Wolves. A few thoughts on what went down below the fold.
Let's start by having some fun with numbers:
- Cost of DeMarcus Cousins for the next 4 years: roughly $12 mil ($3.1 mil this year).
- Cost of Darko Milicic for the next 4 years: $20 mil ($5 mil this year).
- Cost of pick 16 + Ryan Gomes' buyout for 2010: roughly $2.4 mil.
- Cost of Martel Webster: $4.8 mil.
Difference between the two paths in 2010:
- 16 + buyout + Cousins: roughly $5.5 mil.
- Darko + Webster: $9.8 mil.
Possible lineup differences:
- Alternate reality: (James Anderson/Luke Babbit)/Cousins
- Isle of Kahn: Wesbter/Darko
Now, let's throw Wes Johnson and a max deal for Rudy Gay into the mix:
- Cost of Rudy Gay for the next 5 years: $80+ mil
- Cost of his doppelganger Wes Johnson: in the neighborhood of $15-20 mil depending on player options.
Granted, we have no idea what type of production Mr. Johnson will put up, but he's the same type of player as Rudy so I'll go back to what I wrote a day or so after the draft:
This off-season can still be salvaged. With a good Al Jefferson trade and a decent free agent signing (or two) the Wolves can still have an A+ off season, no matter what happened on draft day. That's the crazy thing. Kahn can still luck his way into this thing. He can still accidentally make lemonade.
In theory, the Wolves still have a shot to bring this thing on home in a very acceptable manner. I'm still willing to give them a bit of time to allow the other shoe to drop because it's a reasonable thing to do and we all know that Al Jefferson is going to be moved. That being said, my faith in David Kahn to be able to pull this off in practice is pretty much lying at a low level these days. Kahn is busy at work at his masterpiece and I have a bad feeling that while we're all hoping for a second version of Appetite for Destruction, we're going to get a double album mess of a flame out. Use your illusion indeed.
What is especially problematic for Wolves fans is that their way forward during the past few seasons has been soooooooo obvious as to set itself firmly in the minds of even the most casual Minny sports fan. Brandon Roy should have been taken over Randy Foye. Jonny Flynn didn't make a lick of sense in relation to Stephen Curry. In terms of the editorial wing of this website, our last four drafts would have gone Noah, Love, Curry, and Cousins with players like Mario Chalmers, Ty Lawson, and DeJuan Blair thrown in for good measure.
While there is obviously a lot of behind-the-scenes action that goes on in an NBA front office that would leave even the most dedicated fan dizzy and overwhelmed, I honestly do not think it would be too much of a stretch to say that the team would have had better luck in the draft had they simply crowdsourced their player selection. The point of all of this isn't to brag or boast about anything or to say that the team should be handed over to a group of fans; rather, it is simply to point out that this is a fan base that has absolutely zero tolerance for GMs and POBOs who think they are too cool for school. At this point we want the simple move. Take the BPA. Don't get too attached to an abstract plan. Make the most of your small-market assets...stuff like that.
David Kahn is dangerously close to stepping over the line from modestly creative to being as cute as a Care Bear. Sir Hugs-a-Lot is not someone I want heading up my favorite professional sports franchise.
The kicker here, and the only thing that keeps me screaming towards Thunder fandom (which will happen at the trading deadline if the other shoe doesn't drop) is this: What else is Kahn supposed to do? I'll quibble with him about Johnson over DMC, but what is he supposed to do here? Max out Rudy Gay? Max out David Lee? Make an offer to Chris Bosh? In theory, the Wolves entered the off season with a boat load of assets, but in reality, they did so with a very limited sphere of action.
David Kahn has, and has always had, one obvious big move: Getting rid of Al Jefferson in a sign-and-trade and then trying to move a trade exception plus additional assets for a good player at the trade deadline. No one is going to sign straight-up with the Wolves for anything close to a reasonable amount. They get to sign people with an added step. They have to make trades. The Al Jefferson sign-and-trade has been obvious for almost a year now. It doesn't really matter who they get in return as long as he is young, talented, and can be packaged with some of the duplicate assets, trade exception, and a draft pick near the trading deadline for a big name player. That's their only home run swing. It probably won't work, but what else are they supposed to do in order to swing for the fences? Yeah, they could draft better, but spending roughly as much on Darko as Atlanta does on Zaza isn't insane. Bringing over Pek for what they brought him over for is actually a pretty damn good signing.
David Kahn and the Wolves are taking their home run swing. I won't say what I think about their chances or what I think about Kahn's eye for talent because this post isn't about those things. It's simply to point out that they aren't flying off the reservation like national pundits like Bill Simmons and Adrian Wojrarowski say they are....yet. This thing in its current form is as ugly as hell. All of the balls are in the air and the chips are on the table. In order for everything to fall into place, the mismatched assets have to be moved for a piece that fits. (You can read more about trade exceptions by clicking here.)
The bottom line here is that the Wolves have a limited color palette from which they can paint. Yeah, it's crazy that they have 5 power forwards and that Kahn seems to only draft guys at one position in each draft, but it's not like smart NBA followers can't, at the very least, see what he's trying to do. Al Jefferson is going to get moved for a usable asset and they can hopefully get a TPE to use with other assets at the trade deadline. If Kahn can't complete these moves (or other similar ones), and if he cannot catch the balls that are all in the air at the same time, then yeah, he's a crazy screw up who swung for the fences and missed. Also, and more importantly, if Kahn does go down in flames, it won't be because he drafted a bunch of duplicate players, it will be because he drafted bad (or the wrong) duplicate players. Choosing Flynn and Johnson over Curry and Cousins will likely hurt much more than does signing Darko to $5 mil/year, especially if Darko can play at a decent level as a starting center. Kahn's eye for talent is what should scare people, not his willingness to take what is a fairly understandable (and the only available) home run swing. For instance, if he can move Al for something that involves Derrick Favors and then make a deadline deal for Melo (or CP3), he's hit a home run. A big one. If not, then we're looking at the Atlanta path to mediocrity or a complete flame out.
This, to me, is the rub with Kahn. I think it's quite obvious what he is trying to do and, in a weird way, I can't help but to respect him for it. He is taking a swing for the fences and while he is an easy target in terms of each singular move he makes, I think he takes a bit too much heat for pursuing a team building route that most likely represents the path forward with the highest ceiling for success for a team like the Wolves.
Additionally, by signing players like Darko, Pek, and Webster, Kahn has furthered the franchise's commitment to making the most of its available resources: Player development with guys who are obtainable is the goal here. Taking on castaways and EuroLeague players isn't at the top of the list for teams like the Bulls, Heat, or the Lakers, but for a team like the Wolves, it's a different story altogether. His critics are quick to point out that no one wants to come to the frozen tundra, but they aren't so quick to acknowledge the other side of this very real coin.
This post isn't to excuse Kahn for everything that he has done; rather, it is simply to say that I think his most vocal critics are barking up the wrong tree. His blindside isn't that he hands out contracts to players like Darko or that he drafts a bunch of guys at the same position, it's that he doesn't appear to have a very good eye for talent. That's a pretty damning statement all by itself.
Also, it should be noted that while he passed up on the BPA Cousins, he has thrown his lot in with a reverse allocation of resources: spending a bit more on a center (Darko) + Wes Johnson instead of going hog-wild with a max deal for Gay and using DMC as a cost-effective option at the 5. Again, what he is clearly trying to do is not crazy. It's just that he doesn't seem to be able to select the BPA when it is presented to him.
At the end of the day, the Wolves still could pull this off. I don't have a lot of faith that they can do so, but I do think the route they are taking is fairly clear, and that it represents their best path forward to a high ceiling. The problem is that if they swing and miss, they are right back at square one. Kahn is all-in on Rubio. Kahn is all-in on swinging for the fences this year. That's a lot of pressure, specifically on the upcoming Jefferson trade and their dealings at the trade deadline. This is why I have said over and over again that this is the date where I'll know if they're going to make it or not. If Kahn cannot catch everything that is in the air right now by then....well, I already have my Thunder jersey picked out.
PS: I also think it should be noted that the Wolves have upgraded the talent on their roster this off season. Even by passing over the BPAs at several steps of the way, they have replaced some dead weight with what should be better talent.
246 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Melo has a 3 year, $65 mil extention on the table right now
Keep an eye on it. How he reacts will say a lot about what he thinks Denver’s future is. He wasn’t very optimistic on it following the Jazz series
Denver is documented as interested in Jefferson and are putting a lot out there right now. I’ve read articles and talked to various fans who bring up Kenyon Martin, JR Smith, Nene, and Billups all as players Denver would trade for Al. But not Melo
BUT if he decides he doesn’t want to be in Denver, they might be forced to trade him anyway
Also, I'm actually getting more confident that Jefferson will net us something good
Getting some solid insight into where the big men free agents might go, it’s obvious no the demand far outstrips the supply. Especially when you hear things like Boozer to Orlando (meaning a big man big man to a team NOT poised for free agent spending) That would leave one more team that saved up out in the cold
It’s apparent now that several teams will not sign the big man they were hoping for, and that several more are looking for big men that we weren’t aware of. For all his faults, everything and everyone is saying Jefferson is near or at the top of a lot of those teams’ lists
If Boozer goes to Orlando
and the Wolves can help NJ land Bosh, there will be at least three teams making serious offers for Jefferson in a month (between Chicago, Miami, Dallas, and New York).
Good summary of where things stand
FWIW, even if you don’t have to be a full OKC fan, getting a Durant jersey seems reasonable.
I think something gets forgotten when judging Kahn’s plan. Other teams frankly just did a great job of getting into position to beat out the Wolves for free agents. A year ago, I doubt anybody realistically saw so many teams with this much cap space. That threw two wrinkles into Kahn’s plan. One is that getting any significant FA is no longer a possibility. Two, it makes the Wolves cap space less valuable to other teams, either as a way to acquire cap space, or to get an overpriced player for a few years, just not many of those guys available right now.
That said, Kahn has made some adjustments to his plan, without flat out saying the plan has changed. He apparently saw that Jefferson’s value would increase over the summer as more free agents are signed, rather than dumping him for another bad contract before the draft. The decision to play Jefferson 35 MPG last winter (at the expense of several wins) will pay off soon. Teams may wonder if Al’s knee will get back to 100%, but at least they know he can play full minutes for an entire season. Kahn also grabbed Webster, allowing him to deal either Brewer or Webster in a couple months to one of the teams short on players after missing out on the free agents. My guess is that the Wolves can move Webster (or Brewer) for a likely mid-teens 1st rounder in a couple months, if they so choose. Basically, they are going to end up moving this years 16th pick for a similar pick next summer, while avoiding the Gomes buyout….seems like a good deal to me.
Something else he has done is make Love the starting PF. I wish I could link all of the fanposts and Game Threads from last winter bemoaning the lack of PT for Love…I am amazed how little those people have said about this change since it became obvious. People who literally thought 6 months ago that Love was a soon to be All-Star have been in hiding all of a sudden, where are you??
The signing of Darko and Pekovic seem reasonable, especially considering the offer Mike Miller supposedly has from the Lakers. Seeing what Gay and Joe Johnson are getting paid makes it hard to criticize Kahn for not signing a big name FA, in fact, he may deserve credit for helping convince Memphis to seriously overpay for a player who is at best a marginal all-star level player.
Oh well, I’m sure many of you will laugh when I write this, but I really believe this team as currently constructed is a 30 win team next season. Getting anything of value for Jefferson will only increase that number.
by Rumblebee on Jul 1, 2010 11:41 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Good points! I'll add my 2 cents...
Your point on Love being the PF is so obvious it seems strange, as you say, that there’s been no one else saying it, and giving credit for a good move. Likewise, your point on Kahn trying to maximize the value he can get for Al — via playing him, and waiting for better offers.
Here is what has impressed me. Kahn went all out to get Gay, Lee, and others to come to MN for contract talks. What this did was to force Memphis’ hand. That cleared the field a bit, right away. On one level, it seemed stupid. On another level, it made the game simpler.
I think his wooing of Lee is in the same vein — maybe he’ll force someone’s hand and further clarify the FA situation. The faster other pieces fall into place, the faster we get to see what we can realistically do. Bottom line, Kahn is doing what he can to force the pace. He’s not in a strong position to do this, but he is having an effect regardless.
OK, let’s say Lee comes here, goes to a Twins game, and is impressed with the Wolves organization, and says some nice things about the coach and our prospects. That is a small win right there. If he badmouths the Wolves, well, not much lost, as everyone else is too. But most likely Lee will say nice things even if he’d rather stay in NY, or go to Chicago or Miami or whatever. That helps the cause in a minor way, and it also helps to pick up the pace.
i think Kahn’s overtures to many FAs is designed to force the action, and I think it is smart. It’s like getting a bunch of moves out of the way early in a chess game.
Hadn't thought of that
But yes, when you’re ahead in chess the best thing to do is exchange and simplify the game. The analogy isn’t perfect here because we’re not “ahead”, but it could quicken the pieces falling and giving us more time to shop Al.
Also, never thought Memphis would pay Gay $16 million a year. That and a few other signings today made me make the big eye Jim face. WOW.
Kahn has earned points with me today just by not throwing stupid money at slightly above average and average players.
Bosh
I would still like to know that they at least called Bosh up and asked him to come visit. He’s a 4 that can run and pass and score extremely well and plays very solid D to boot. Make it known that Al is available for a S&T at least to show players that yes, we’re trying to make the big leap to contention.
and if there’s any truth to him wanting to be “the man”, he would have absolutely no competition here.
Maybe that is next
I will say I like the way this offseason is going so far. I don’t love it but I am feeling positive about it. I think Webster could really fit in well for our offense, and has the potential to really shock some people (the kid can flat out shoot). I was actually glad to see us take Johnson over Cousins as history has shown lots of highly touted bigmen burn out early due to injuries or less than reputable decisions off the field. Johnson is a good player that has the potential to be a Rudy Gay type player but is a good character guy that is destined for a long career. Cousins has the potential to be more but he also has the potential to flame out fast and set us back further (and possibly in ugly fashion, a PR battle the Wolves can’t handle at this point).
But as for calling Cousins the clear BPA, I would like to know where you purchased your crystal ball. I seem to recall a severe reaction in the NFL when EVERYONE criticized the Texans for taking Mario Williams over the “clear BPA” in Reggie Bush. But history has proved the Texans right. No one can “know” the best player available before anyone has played a single NBA game. Let’s keep things in perspective.
On another note, I still believe that Rubio will be signing his contract with us this time next year so that keeps my spirits up. Despite what the media says, Minnesota is still a perfect place for a shy kid like Ricky to avoid the media scrutiny he would be bombarded with in the big city and would likely end his time in the NBA prematurely. I also believe that he is excited about playing for Rambis. Don’t believe the media (who would obviously benefit from him being in a big market and aren’t remotely objective or interested in real reporting), he WILL be here.
Again
whoever said it first, I’m thinking it again now – either Kahn is some crazy genius or he’s flying by the seat of his pants. Or he’s Forrest Gump.
"Styx might be the mullet of bands."
The draft ... is like a box of chocolates
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." -- Yogi Berra
by Wile E Coyote on Jul 2, 2010 11:29 AM CDT up reply actions
You mean there's a little map inside the cover
that tells us exactly what each one will be?
I never quite got how that caught on. As they say, “stupid is as stupid does” or something like that.
And shit happens.
I looked ahead to the open road, thought about the people and what they know, and wrote a book called "People Don't Know Nothin!"
The full quote from the movie is
My momma always said, “Life was like a box of chocolates. You never know what you’re gonna get.”
For some GMs, the draft is a high stakes game of poker and prediction, skillfully finding the player with the best blend of talent, upside, and fit.
For other GMs, it is like a box of chocolates.
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." -- Yogi Berra
by Wile E Coyote on Jul 3, 2010 10:28 PM CDT up reply actions
So you're saying
That by scheduling FA visits with Gay and Lee, Kahn is actually increasing the value Jefferson will have on the open market? In economic terms: The supplier masquerades as a demander to inflate the value of his own supply.
Or is he just dumb, really wants to sign them, and is lucky that we can’t?
If he calls up Boozer’s agent, we’ll know for sure…
by fatman_cometh on Jul 3, 2010 11:16 AM CDT up reply actions
Kahn seems to be showing a real Jeckle and Hyde
ability in implementing the plan.
As little as last week, Charlie Walters reported that in a FA staff meeting, someone questioned Kahn about who realistically would sign a FA with the Twolves. Out of the ~50+ FA (most fans only talk about the top 10 or so), Kahn said only 3 would not sign with us. That is simply delusional. Kahn’s staff (including people that he hired) had made inquiries to nearly every agent and learned that the Twolves were not the primary or secondary option for nearly every FA out there. We would only get leftovers and we would likely have to over pay to get them. So how do you say that? It does not even make an acceptable smokescreen – it just makes one question his perspective.
Kahn knows that for the Twolves to be a championship contender, Kahn’s stated goal, we need at least 1, more likely 2, transformational players. It’s possible we have one in Rubio – though I am still skeptical that he comes in 2011-12 with the lockout threat. Kahn identified and tried to get Turner but, and I applaud Kahn for this, the price was too high and he walked away.
But he sorely missed the opportunity to, as SnP puts it, “swing for the fences” by not taking Cousins. Wes Johnson is a solid NBA prospect that will likely have a long career. But he is not a transformational player. Cousins has the chance to be – and we choose to be conservative. If Kahn really believed he needs 2 super stars, he had to take the chance and draft Cousins. He choose the safe route.
Sign Pekovic and Darko are fine moves on the surface – but the timing is curious. Why the 1st day? We owned Pekovic’s rights. He was not going anywhere. Darko was only signing with us – or at least had a huge predisposition to sign with us. His agent gave us no indication that he was soliciting offers. So what was the rush? We now have a very unbalanced roster which every NBA GM knows has to change by trading Big Al. What does that do to Big Al’s value? If I am a smart GM, I wait Kahn out – the price for Big Al is very likely to drop. I hope I am wrong, but at the trade deadline, it was not likely people were standing in line to get Big Al. In fact, we all know that Indiana flat out refused him.
So, maybe someone gets desperate because they did not get their coveted FA and offers up big for Big Al. I hope so. Otherwise, I see a 25¢ on the $1 type trade in our future.
This is not meant as a rant against Kahn. I see some growth. But I sure wonder about some of these decisions.
by Just A Fan on Jul 2, 2010 9:06 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I think they made the announcement...
….because they found out pretty early on after announcing that Rudy was coming that he was going to get the Godfather offer from Memphis and they were left out in the cold. It would have seemed desperate to sign Darko and Pek at the end of the free agent cooling off period when everyone they wanted was already off the table.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
I still shake my head
on why we even asked Gay to come to MN. Memphis owner was on record as saying they would match any offer. His agent gave us no positive feed back in early conversations (April time frame when the 1st round of conversations were had) that Gay would sign with MN.
So, the only possible reason that I can think of for bring Gay to MN so publicly, was to get Memphis, an up and coming team in our division, to over pay and burden them with salary cap issues for the next several years.
Which is OK. But is that what a 15 win team should be targeting on the 1st day?
I agree with you – I think the Darko and Pekovic signings were announced to save face.
Completely agreed...
…on being baffled about asking him to come. Unless it was simply a way to make Memphis make a move on the guy to force a sign and trade with some of their other assets, I don’t get it, especially in light of Johnson and Webster.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
If it is that obvious that we didn't need him
Then Memphis is equally foolish for both 1) (over) Paying him 16M per and 2) falling for our “trick” to make them overpay.
I think it is far more likely that Memphis got that deal done before he left due to other teams Gay was about to visit. Gay accepting an offer to come visit us, was probably more a choice by his agent to drive up the price. (e.g. more suitors = more money).
So I think we all “want” Kahn to be smart that we are now giving him credit for nothing. We weren’t the only team out there that was bringing him in, and “trickery” on that level hasn’t really be displayed before on choices that Kahn has made.
Kahn said something about Pek having a timing issue
I assumed that he needed a commitment from the Wolves by date X in order to make decisions about his European contracts.
Darko’s new salary number is lower than his cap hold. And Kahn said (surprisingly?) that retaining Darko was key before looking at trading Al. So in signing Darko early Kahn increased their cap space a bit and ensured he wouldn’t be left without a starting C if/when he trades Al. He certainly could have renounced Darko’s rights instead, and gotten rid of the cap hold – I dunno why he didn’t do this since we didn’t need his Bird rights.
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." -- Yogi Berra
by Wile E Coyote on Jul 2, 2010 9:24 AM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
Very good point about the cap hold
Maybe it was just a sign of their commitment to him. It’s kind of Twinsy in terms of organizational loyalty. This is a team that 100% cannot afford to treat players like crap, no matter who they are.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
agreed
The wolves (especially after Taylor badmouthed KG for “tanking”) need to continue to treat players in a top notch manner. Wade’s comments and reluctance to deal with Chicago stems from the “class” level of that organization. Miami treats their players right and so the players like to go there (for other things too). This is one thing that every team can control. But sadly they don’t. Horrible business acumen there.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 2, 2010 9:50 AM CDT up reply actions
Confirming..
…the cap hold is a big mover here. They reduced the amount associated with his spot from around $11.3 mil to $5 mil/year.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jul 2, 2010 10:19 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Agreed
Darko clearly loved it here and we were showing him loyalty in making him a priority signing. It sends a message that we take care of our players, and it will pay dividends down the road. Loyalty is a rare commodity in today’s money driven sports world, and it is not appreciated anywhere more than in Minnesota.
The date was (is) 7/15
“Nikola Pekovic has until July 15th to opt out of the final year of his contract with Panathinaikos in Greece — he could then play in the NBA, where the Timberwolves hold his rights.”
NBC Sports
by Miss Test Pattern on Jul 4, 2010 2:48 PM CDT up reply actions
I'd agree that RG probably should not have been a 1st day priority
except that I doubt there is anybody banging on the door to get here. Kahn probably figures it is best to let things play out, and then make a move. Kind of like getting Sessions last summer, by no means exciting, but about all they can realistically do.
Sometimes if you can’t improve yourself, the best way to get competitive is to harm you competition (the reason political ads are now so negative). I’m not sure Kahn pushed Memphis to overpay, but they did and there is some correlation. Also, by getting him off the market, teams are going to be faster to pursue the big guys, because the RG fall back is no longer in play. The faster they go, the more time can be spent on moving Jefferson. In response to your above Jefferson comment about other teams waiting out Kahn, it is possible the opposite is in play. Other teams are going to be desperate to sell tickets, and need a complete team to promote. Not saying Big Al will sell a ton of tix, but it’s tough to sell a team lacking a PF. I still doubt they get more than about 50 cents on the dollar, but I think the the discount will at least be on Kahn’s term, meaning a useful piece, not just a body.
The thing about swinging for the fences
is that in some cases, you miss. Especially when the pitch is a slow knuckleballer that is erratic and unpredictable. Sometimes it is smarter just to make contact and take the solid hit up the middle.
Actively looking for red flags since my 5th grade traveling team
And that would be fine
15 wins, goes to 23 wins, goes to 30 wins, goes to 38 wins – and by that time – who is left in Target Center to care? How much money does Taylor keep losing in the interim while we keep hitting singles?
We have to hope that Wes Johnson
represents an extra base hit and puts the team in scoring position.
It's not just character issues...
Injuries also must be considered. And we all know that big men are injured more often and more seriously than other players. All in all, the risks in DMC were too high, especially since we had a guy, Darko, who will likely outplay DMC in the next 2 years.
I don’t think the number of wins in DMCs 1st 2 years will be different from the wins with Darko and Pek at the C position.
So if your numbers are correct, we’d still be at 23 wins, 30 wins, and maybe more than 38 wins the 3rd year. That assumes that DMC is healthy and motivated. If he fails at either of those, then the numbers are worse.
I’m willing to go along with the evaluations of Rambis and Ronzone — and I am confident that if they both wanted DMC, he would have been drafted.
by timmuggs on Jul 2, 2010 10:33 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I will say
that from leadership perspective (and I’m talking in general terms here, not in defense of Kahn), I want my leader to believe that we have a shot even if we realistically don’t. How many Cinderella teams are there each year who get pretty far in the NCAA tournament? There’s some every year. I’m not saying that it’s their belief that they could that got them there, but if they believed they couldn’t how many would have failed? I’m OK with a leader believing the highly improbably despite the honest assessments of his staff AS LONG AS he himself is aware of the improbability. That’s the question for Kahn – is he trying to keep the troops up, or is he truly Great Leader?
"Styx might be the mullet of bands."
Think we have a chance
Like the HAWKS?
by WinTheLottery on Jul 2, 2010 12:33 PM CDT up reply actions
AJ's value
I think it’s only decreased because of our roster imbalance if there is only one suitor out there. Then it and the Wolves are left playing chicken trying to get the best deal they can. But if more than one team is interested, our need to sell takes on much less importance. Instead, the bidding war will dictate the value.
by stuntmonkeys on Jul 2, 2010 11:48 AM CDT up reply actions
This is no longer just about Kahn
Lets me clear: Kurt Rambis and Tony are actively involved in personnel decisions too.
I believe the best actions to date regarding free agency is inaction. With the first wave of franchise leveraging contract signings, the real actions—including the Al Jefferson situation—will take place next week and beyond.
The Pek and Darko signings are completely on Rambis and Tony. Kurt bought into Darko early and is hell bent on extracting his maximum potential. We will see how that pans out.
We’ve gone over the draft picks repeatedly before. None of us knows for certain how these draftees will fare in the NBA. Everyone drafts on potential.
by Flagrant on Jul 1, 2010 11:45 PM CDT reply actions 3 recs
Couldn't agree more
I don’t view Kahn as the lead talent evaluator anymore. I see him as the final decision maker, the fall-guy, and the negotiator, but not the lead talent evaluator. If there’s one thing I really do believe about Kahn, it’s that he’s more corporate than less corporate, and a corporate guy understands the value of having great managers working for him. (That would be Rambis and Ronzone). I still think we should be appreciative that we have a POBO who didn’t overspend at all for Darko and Pek. I highly doubt their contracts will become albatrosses at any point, and that’s worth something as we all here well know after the Hudson (and others) debacle.
What I find most interesting so far about this offseason is the (at times) dramatic shift in values or philosophy going on. Dominant low post scorer is out, competent defensive low post presence is in. Gomes is out, Webster is in. Bassy and Rhino are out, Flynn and Pekovic are in. Some guys seem like Rambis guys (Darko in particular, Webster, but maybe Wes too), but Kahn apparently loves athletic guys (Gay, Ty Thomas, Wes, Webster, Hollins, Flynn, etc.) Just seems like such a dramatic shift from the kind of players we’re used to getting (Gomes).
"Styx might be the mullet of bands."
Here's hoping we pick up a domestic assistant GM to be Ronzone's counterpart
Rambis did say adding a second one is a possibility
I hereby nominate monikers for Rambis and Ronzone...
We can call them Rambo and Ronzo, just to make the discussion flow more smoothly.
Car RamRon?
I looked ahead to the open road, thought about the people and what they know, and wrote a book called "People Don't Know Nothin!"
Congratulations Wolves!
Memphis saved you from Gay! And they way overdid it too.
If you can move Jefferson & have one more bad season (for draft purposes) you should be on your way up!
(but now there will be no Gay, Love, Sessions… ;( )
In Bayless I trust.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
Or Gay Johnson Love
Interviewer: Can you understand why teams value potential ahead of experience and accomplishment in the draft? Wes Johnson: "Yeah. I understand. It’s the youngness of everything – older guys like young women, so it’s the same way."
Best one I've heard is
Young Cousins Gay Love Sessions
But that would require a four way and those are difficult.
In Bayless I trust.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
I was fond of the days when we also coveted Jeff Foster and Nick Young
Foster Young Gay Love Sessions.
I looked ahead to the open road, thought about the people and what they know, and wrote a book called "People Don't Know Nothin!"
I think Boston might come knocking for Al.
with Rasheed Wallace’s contract
"I was trying to focus on breathing," Milicic said. "I was just focusing on breathing so I didn’t die."
I hope some one comes with a good offer for you guys.
Jefferson ain’t worthless. In fact I think he is top tier NBA talent when it comes to post offense.
But he certainly doesn’t fit a team of young impressionable talent with and Love. You need a cleanup/defense five from my perspective.
Plus with the deal Drew Gooden got…? Jefferson should be worth a max contract…
In Bayless I trust.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
that's funny
even funnier than Gay Love Sessions
by midlife crisis on Jul 2, 2010 12:43 PM CDT up reply actions
Bad idea. Why would we want that expiring?????
What good would Rasheed’s contract do us? Having more cap space does really nothing for or organization. We don’t sign free agents. We draft or trade for guys. Any free agents that we could sign or that would sign here we don’t want anyway.
Unless you’re saying that Taylor would want it to cut costs, which I suppose is feasible. I don’t think they’re dumb enough to throw Al away for literally nothing, though.
Let me clarify
If we were able to use that expiring retirement to get another player, it might be worth it, but at that point wouldn’t you just skip the middleman and make the trade for a player? I could see Wallace’s contract being involved for salary reasons in a three or four way trade, but otherwise it’s worthless to us.
I will say
I’m more on board with the Johnson pick if the other option was maxing Rudy Gay.
Your thoughts hit the subject right on the head. The problem isn’t that the Wolves aren’t getting better. I think they’re probably around a 30 Win team at this point in time. They can compete for the Playoffs possibly when Rubio comes over. The problem is missing out on the more talented pieces is probably what’s going to keep them from ever developing into a Championship team. I think a Love/Curry/Cousins/Rubio grouping could have had a chance to compete to win playoff series. I’m not sure I see the upside with the current group.
Upside
Bjelica has lots of upside. And most of our other players have some room above them to grow into. But a Portland type balanced roster might be our best outcome with this group, with Rubio being our Roy.
David Lee
I am anxious to see what sort of money (or package of assets in trade) it takes to sign David Lee, because I would love to see him in a Wolves uni. I’d prefer him over Gay, that is for sure. I think a front court rotation of Lee, Love, Darko and Nikola would be decent. Our wings would be Brewer, Wes and Webster. With Ricky Rubio running the show.
THAT sounds like a good (or, at least, fun) team! All we’d need is a quality “2,” and we’d have a year or two to find the right guy for that job. (I’m assuming Big Al is used in the acquisition of Lee).
Maybe I am just being overly optimistic, but Kahn’s maneuvering has started to win me over, little by little.
-N!
ps. Please don’t hop on the Thunder bandwagon. We need you here.
This is the most moderate post I've seen from SnP in a long time
Here’s what we know:
Campaigning to grab Gay caused Memphis to sign him to a ridiculously over-priced contract.
We may have missed on on DMC, but we have no assurance Sacramento wouldn’t have simply taken Wes, who is also useful to their rebuilding. Sure, DMC may be the best thing since Shaq, but we simply don’t know that at this point. I perceive the potential for DMC and Evans to but heads over who is the MAN on the squad. Again, we don’t know.
It’s not impossible to think the campaigning for Lee serves the same purpose. Make someone overpay for him, since he duplicates (almost exactly, with a bit more skill at running the floor) what Al does. Get him off the table as soon as possible. That makes another free-agent unavailable to the teams with ridiculous cap space and less options to sign. This cannot help but make Al more intriguing as a SnT or straight trade.
Kahn has made the Wolves VASTLY longer, more athletic:
Wes,Webster, Bjelica, Darko, and Pek change the shape of our roster. The Wolves are now long and athletic at 2 (Webster, Brewer), 3, (Wes, Webster, Brewer, Bjegica, even Hayward to some degree), 4 (Bjegica), and 5 (Darko over Al).
I suspect this is simply paving the way to making Al a more viable trade option.
Pencil me in as a Kahntender (good choice, foo). If the Wolves can move AL for a viable, athletic, LONG player who can man the other wing spot next to Wes or Webster in the starting 5, I am all for it. Our starting 5 and bench will be vastly more capable. I love biggity’s take on throwing as many long, position-irrelevant wings out there as we can. Potentially, it could revolutionize the roster of NBA teams.
I believe deeply in Rambis’ ability to develop players. With the Lakers, that’s all he did. Changed Gasol into a defender, shaped Bynum. Let’s see what he can do. I’m excited for the roster as it stands and there is clearly more to come.
by JMGrady on Jul 2, 2010 12:54 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Agree
I really like the post. This was a much more intellectual stab at Kahn’s efforts than most people are either willing to give or are capable of giving. And I absolutely agree with a lot of what you have to say here. I think that the combination of Kahn, Kurt, and Tony actually might be capable of doing some pretty great things. They are creating a brand of basketball that is different than we have seen here for the last few years. Those Mike Miller days were just boring (in my opinion), and this new up-tempo style they seem to be seeking is definitely appealing to me.
They need to play the Al card right, and in order to do that they might need to wait it out. Wait for phase 1 of FA to blow over, wait for the anchors on SportsCenter to all lose their voices from talking about Lebron, then start shopping Al to the teams that failed to bring in Bosh or Boozer. This team is definitely capable of flirting with the 30 win mark, and between Webster, Johnson and Brewer, should have a player capable of being a good 3 in this league. We need a great shooting guard to top it all off. We have depth now, which is something we haven’t been able to say. Granted, a lot of the depth is unproven at this point, but you have to throw out the old “upside” word again. At least at this point.
I’m happy with what Kahn has done. I hope he keeps it going and gets something out of Al. And I hope they send Al to a good team. He really deserves it. Get that dude to the playoffs somehow if its possible.
agreed on al
i do wish the best for him, i enjoyed his 21 and 11 season on my fantasy squad.. i wont miss his quadruple pump fake/deke/up an under moves though
I know we gotta trade Al, and I'm all for it...
… but how could you not love his post moves? He might be the most creative and improvisational post scorer in the game right now (I didn’t say best, just most creative). I really enjoyed watching him work.
By the way, I’ve been on board with trading him for some time because of the defense/passing and redundancy at PF with Love. But the man can do some work in the post.
because his reaction time is horrible
I used to remember watching Humphries play for the Gophers. Humphries gets the ball, dribble, dribble, take a contested shot. The man never passed…ever. It was not enjoyable. BBall is a team game, I hate the isocentric play.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 2, 2010 12:28 PM CDT up reply actions
What if...?
Actually, I wonder if Kahn was really serious about signing and overpaying Gay. It seems to completely fly in the face of his usual m.o., instead of finding highly regarded players and paying them as much as it takes to get them here, he tends to find players who have shown promise but been marginalized and sign them for reasonable deals, or get them in a cheap trade, or a low draft pick. It’s a sort of guerilla warfare management style. Hollins was the first such signing, but since Rambis came these players tend to have a few of these attributes in common, good hustle, highly coachable, good defense, still youngish, and high BB IQ – Sessions, Pavlovic, Darko, Webster, Pekovic, Lazar. Gay doesn’t fit into that mode at all, and I wonder if Rambis really liked him. So, I’m wondering if they didn’t just want to make noise and scare some clubs into overpaying the big stars so that they could sweep in and sign some of the solid but unheralded players at a huge discount. I don’t know exactly who they’ll target but one name that jumps into my head is Ronnie Brewer. He seems like the type of guy Rambis would love and as it turns out Memphis ended up not matching his offer sheet because they wanted to sign Gay. So… what do you think? Is it a good Kahnspiracy theory?
Love the Kahnspiricy
You know the media loves to rip on Kahn but I learned a few facts about him that could make them reconsider:
David Kahn never wet his bed as a child, the bed wet itself out of fear.
The quickest way to a man’s heart is through David Kahn’s fist.
David Kahn actually wrote the first dictionary. The definition for each word is as follows— a swift roundhouse kick to the face.
If David Kahn were a calendar, every month would be Kahntober, and every day he would kick your ass.
by ScroogeMcDuck on Jul 2, 2010 4:08 AM CDT up reply actions
spending some time on the old chuck norris’ websites are we? ;)
by Wim (Belgium) on Jul 2, 2010 6:51 AM CDT up reply actions
Stupid and Unlucky: a review of Timberwolves history and what it can tell us about today
First time poster.
I have been a wolves fan since `89. I have been to almost every significant game in Wolves history. I was even siting courtside when the Wolves beat the Kings in game 7 in 2004. That was the single greatest moment of my life as a sports fan.
I say all this because something about the Darko signing highlighted the fact that the Wolves have the worst luck of any team in the league in the draft; some of it is deserved but most not. . It just seems all too familiar where in the free agency for the draft class of 2003, we sign Darko, the so called bust of maybe the best draft in history. So I present to you history of the T-Wolves having back luck in the Draft.
In 1989, our first draft, we pick 10th because the lottery at that time was all 14 teams who didn’t make the playoffs. So we start off with some bad luck. We have an NBa We draft Pooh Richardson when Tim Hardaway was on the board. Now the story goes that the decision was between Pooh and Timmy. But the GM decided that Pooh would be better because he went to a big college program at UCLA. NOT TRUE
1992, oh 1992. The Wolves finished dead last in the standings with 15 wins (sound familiar?). In a draft which featured Shaquille O’neal and Alonzo Morning, the Wolves get to pick third. Who do they get but Christian Laettner. Quick Sidenote— People talk about draft busts today but nobody mentions Mr. Headcase. I remember him screaming an obscenity into the stands at halftime one game because the Wolves were losing. He couldn’t handle losing making him maybe the biggest draft bust in history. I am actually also a little worried that Rubio won’t handle losing very well either. That is the real reason he didn’t come here this year.—We have clearly angered the basketball Gods.
1993 was the worst though. We actually got a good player in this draft but it turned out that he too was a headcase, Mr. J.R. Rider. He was late for his first practice with the Timberwolves. He played well here over his first two years here but clashed with authority and eventually got traded. Just before the trade though, he was arrested for marijuana possession. At the time of his arrest, he also had an illegal cell phone; it had been altered to charge calls to someone else’s bill.
In 1994 we took the lenky Donyell Marshall with, you guessed it, the fourth pick, just after Jason Kidd at 2 and Grant Hill at 3. BUST
1995—The grace of God does sometimes shine on the downtrodden. Kevin Garnett falls to us at 5. My favorite player ever in his time here and also one of the nicest most gracious people you will ever meet. I met him once and asked him to take a picture with me. The trainer said that, that wasn’t allowed but Kevin said to take the picture anyways. We also trade Donyell Marshall for Tom Gugliotta
1996—The only true year of hope in Timberwolves history. Stephon Marbury arrives from Milwaukee for Ray Allen and a future 1st round pick. (seemed like the best trade in Wolves history). The Kid and Stephon Marbury were absolutely dynamic. We make the playoffs for the first time but get swept by the Rockets. It doesn’t matter the future looks up for us. The Big 3 is born.
1998- Rasho mania comes to the Twin Cities. We had gone to the playoffs two straight years. We almost upset 2nd seeded Seattle. Everybody felt a breakthrough season was upon us.
1999—Things start to turn. In the draft we grab Wally World with the 6th pick right before Rip Hamilton at 7, Andre Miller at 8, Shawn Marion at 9, and Jason Terry at 10. Then the lockout. Then to top it off, unexpectedly and mercilessly, Steph transforms into Starbury and decides he needs to be the star of a team and then demands a trade. We get to the playoffs at the 8th seed and get trounced by Tim Thomas and the Spurs in the first round. Let me take a moment to remind you that at this point we have nothing to show for trading away Ray Allen except losing Tom Gugliotta and a 1st rounder.
Then comes the single worst move in professional sports history—The Joe Smith scandal. This cost use 5 first round draft picks and effectively wasted the prime of Garnett’s career. It is a dark dark time the team.
We recover a couple of our draft picks, the first being in 2003. Hilariously we pick Ndubi Ebi at 26 right before Kendrick Perkins at 27, Leandro Barbosa at 28, and Josh Howard at 29.
In 2005 we pick knucklehead Rashad McCants whose most notable accomplishments in life is seemingly to be, doing just enough on an exceedingly talented UNC to the NCAA title and dating the ugly Kardashian sister. Danny Granger when three spots later.
2006- Brandon Roy…it’s still too soon to talk about.
Now with the perspective before you, I would like to make three simple points about the current state of the team:
1. Historically we have been equal parts unlucky and stupid.
2. Never say that you miss McHale. Kahn may have made a few mistakes but McHale is one of the worst GMs in sports history.
3. The fact that our GM has a plan and is approaching the task of rebuilding this team in an intentional and systematic way is incredible. We have never had that before.
So while the current management team hasn’t hit any home runs yet. I am overjoyed that we are hitting singles and not striking out.
by ScroogeMcDuck on Jul 2, 2010 3:45 AM CDT reply actions 5 recs
Good stuff..
….thanks for that detailed input and don’t hesitate to post more in the future.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Hitting singles
…and taking FAs to Twins games…maybe Kahn’s decided to mimic the Twins’ approach to rebuilding! Now we just need some minor league teams (Europe, apparently), and a few years for talent to develop (when’s Rubio coming over again?), and finally some scrappy, never say die attitude (young, hungry players with something to prove).
Huh.
I started this reply entirely for light humor purposes, but I now oddly feel like I’ve painted myself into a corner of observational discovery based on reasoning, (as in what was supposed to be in jest makes too much sense), and now I’m not sure what to do.
Aha! Got it – more coffee. Back later.
"Styx might be the mullet of bands."
Two key differences between the franchises
Twins correctly find and develop awesome young talent (Mauer, Santana, etc). As a result they have some of the league’s top players, which is required to win at a high level. Cannot say the Wolves have ever been good at this. Hopefully that will change with Ronzone and perhaps another quality FO hire.
Twins FO is tomb quiet most of the time. An attribute that I think Kahn should adopt more often. To be fair, I think it may be an unfair assumption when people say Kahn talks to the media out of pride. I think a few key reasons are (1) trying to ressurect the Wolves brand and profile in the marketplace, and (2) trying to set expectations. Fans have had a pretty clear view of where Kahn was taking them and I think have been fairly patient due to that.
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." -- Yogi Berra
by Wile E Coyote on Jul 2, 2010 10:48 AM CDT up reply actions
One thing always overlooked in that 1999 draft
Is that we took Will Avery (when we already had Terrell Brandon) right before Ron Artest (when we really didn’t have any strong wing players). Will Avery arguably was our biggest first round bust on this entire list given how high we picked him. Maybe Artest was not as much of a known commodity then, but I remember liking him.
From the early 90’s, these were my thoughts from PSR’s poll on the worst wolves draft ever:
“The shadow teams are every bit as bad as the late McHale era. Instead of Longley, Laettner, Rider it could have been for example Jim Jackson, Allan Houston, Terrell Brandon. Nice players.
With the downgraded picks due to lotto, Shaq, Penny/Mashburn (or Shawn Bradley!), Grant Hill. Of course the teams would have been better, so you wouldn’t have picked up all three – but to get even one would have been huge for the franchise."
Memories...
I still have my Pooh Richardson jersey somewhere in my parents attic…
1999 Marbury, Wally
I just wanted to point out a couple of inaccuracies:
We traded Ray Allen + Andrew Lang for Marbury. (We received Lang and Spudd Webb for Laettner & Sean Rooks.)
The draft pick that we used to choose Wally was New Jersey’s #1, which was part of what we received in exchange for Marbury.
The leftover from the Ray Allen trade was Wally.
Great list but if I can add...
The first player we drafted was Rich Mahorn in the 1989 Expansion Draft. You’ll recall he promptly told us to go eff ourselves and never played for Minnesota.
You can’t make it up.
by fanslaststand on Jul 2, 2010 11:35 AM CDT up reply actions
Rick, not Rich
Least I can do is get his name right.
by fanslaststand on Jul 2, 2010 11:42 AM CDT up reply actions
The first sign
that it was going to be hard to get players to come to ‘sota for a winter sport. If the league ran from May to October we’d be a perennial powerhouse.
by fanslaststand on Jul 2, 2010 12:28 PM CDT up reply actions
One more qualification...
The lockout was in the 98-99 season, the year they drafted Rasho. Wally was a rookie during a full 82-game year.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jul 2, 2010 12:06 PM CDT up reply actions
Excellent post, SnP...BUT...
…I’d like to take a stab at disabusing you of your BPA fixation.
The smartest GMs don’t simply pick the BPA ( and who really knows who that is anyway—Marvin Williams, anyone?). They slot the talent in any draft and then draft, within the slot where their pick falls, the player whose skill set best fits their needs. The GMs who get in trouble are those who pick a guy, based on need, whose talent falls in a slot below the slot in which the team picked.
If we can agree that the top slot in this year’s draft featured five players—-Wall, Turner, Favors, Johnson, and Cousins—then we can agree that Kahn could have picked any one of the five and remained true to the slotting system. Arguably, the Wolves; greatest need going into the draft was at wing and the post. So if Cousins was indeed the BPA, shouldn’t Kahn have picked him, given the fact that the position he plays is a position of team need?
The complicating factor is that a “best player available” assessment, if done properly, isn’t (or shouldn’t be) predicated on sheer athletic/basketball skill. If DeMarcus Cousins had a well-conditioned body, a high motor, and a selfless, coachable attitude, do you think he would have gotten by Washington? Certainly, he wouldn’t have been available to the Wolves at 4. It was these other factors—the indifference to conditioning, the immaturity and temper; the resistance to coaching—that allowed him to fall. (By the way, if asked, would you take the Nets or even the Sixers to task for not drafting him?)
As for Luke Babbitt at 16, if BPA was determined by outside shooting ability alone, Babbitt likely would have been a top-10 pick. But he fell because he won’t be able to guard anybody at any position. Would the slow-footed, nonathletic Babbitt been a wise pick for a team in desperate need of wing defense and that plans to play an up-tempo game?
Hindsight, as they say, is always 20-20, and it’s easy today to take Kahn to task for picking Flynn over Curry. But a lot of FOs had serious doubts about Curry’s ability to play the point, and Kahn—knowing how badly the team needed length at the 2—wasn’t about to draft a 6-foot-3 tweener, no matter how good a shooter he was. Sure, knowing then what we know now, any one of us would pick Curry over Flynn. But at the time—given what Kahn hoped to accomplish—Flynn was the right pick.
I guess I’m saying that I don’t buy—don’t buy at all—your assertion that Kahn doesn’t have an eye for talent. I believe he knew exactly how good Curry and Cousins are, but for sound reasons (Curry’s lack of length and apparent inability to play the point; Cousins’ immaturity, poor conditioning, and locker-room-lawyer potential, he made the right picks at the right time.
by kurosawa on Jul 2, 2010 6:43 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
I think your last point..
….is a very good one, but I take Kahn at his word when he says that he didn’t take Cousins for basketball reasons, and I take him at his word when he said that he thought Flynn was a better point than Curry. I think in both cases, he was flat-out wrong for talent eval reasons instead of anything to do with fit. Curry showed himself to be a very solid point in his last year in college and he quickly showed himself able to handle a high usage rate in the pros. Cousins was in an above average paced team in college and he’s headed to a team with the 7th highest pace in the NBA. Granted, there’s not a direct correlation between pace and the type of fast break ball the Wolves want to play, but his reasoning for Cousins’ lack of fit seem a tad confused, especially in light of the Darko signing (he’s not exactly a fast break center either).
My philosophical difference with Kahn is that I think 15 win teams have no business taking players on fit, especially with the amount of assets the Wolves had. If Cousins was the BPA, I think you take him and use everything else to change on the fly to fit the pick. After all, it’s not like he didn’t blow up most of the team anyway. They were just as far away from a solidly talented running team as they were from one that could have been built around Cousins’ style of play.
That being said, the man clearly has a plan and he is sticking to it. Defense is probably what put Webster ahead of Babbitt and James Anderson (my pick for BPA at 16). Again, I don’t think 15 win teams should operate this way but he’s clearly swinging for the fences to have a competitive team this season, and this falls in line with everything the team has said. They’ve been remarkably consistent on this front and while I can quibble about the selection of Johnson and the trade for Webster, they have addressed their weakest positions 2/3 (if Webster or Johnson can play the 2) while adding depth to the wing (i.e. Brewer to the bench with Ellington).
FWIW, I don’t think I have 20/20 hindsight with Curry. I had him as the 2nd best player in the draft as a high usage point guard. My hindsight comes in the form of understanding that since they got their hands on Rubio, Curry wouldn’t have had the ball in his hands enough to be the type of effective player he can be with a high usage rate. I’m not sure that this is what Kahn had in mind when he made the pick, but if Flynn ends up as the backup point guard, that’s a pretty solid pick…if Rubio turns out to be the player we all hope he can be.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
I think a big thing to remember
Is that Kahn has two years left on his contract. Traditionally, FO types and coaches are left go or extended with a year remaining on their deal. So Kahn needs to show something this year, or he’s out the door. If you think about it that way, trying to maximize the potential of this season makes sense.
Plus..
…I think there is a lot of pressure from the business side of the team to stop losing money. I’ll go back to the interview we did with Chris Wright. I think Glen Taylor is close to the end of his rope with the direction of this franchise and that may have a lot to do with them throwing all their eggs into this season’s basket. Granted, Taylor’s wounds are largely self-inflicted, but I think the reason why Kahn got this job was as much for his pitch on the revenue side of things as it was for strictly basketball-related activities.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
well
winning at a decent clip and playing an entertaining style will definitely drum up business. Plus, the business side is also why I have felt Rubio is absolutely untouchable. He is simply too charasmatic and known to the general public to trade for another reasonable player. That type of player adds a lot of marketing value and casual fan interest to a team. (also known as $$$)
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 2, 2010 7:47 AM CDT up reply actions
I would also add
that Kahn admitted his mistake on Curry, or rather, that Curry proved him (and a number of other GMs) wrong.
I honestly don’t know if Kahn has an eye for talent or not. I think he’s very focused on guys that have at least one physical advantage over the average at their position – superior length, superior size, superior strength, or superior athleticism (at least for the starters – backups can have this too or one superior skill, like Ellington’s shooting). Darko, Gay, Lee, Hollins, Webster, Wes, Favors, Turner, Flynn, Rubio, and George (who I think was the mystery player they were targeting before Indy took him) all fit this profile.
Compare that list to the players he’s shipped out – Foye, Miller, Rhino, Bassy, Gomes. There’s some very solid basketball skill there, but not much in terms of physical attributes that would allow you to overcome most opponents. If I had to wager a guess I would say that Kahn is of the mind that you can’t teach 7’ with hops, but you can teach a better shot, better passing, better rotations, etc. I’m not going to say whether this is right or wrong, but rather will just let it be as a hypothesis right now. I will say that I am cautiously optimistic about Rambis’ ability to help players after Brewer’s positive developments last year. This year will be the big test – can Flynn turn into a starting PG prospect with some defense? Can Sessions develop a three point shot? Can Darko begin consistently using even 50% of his talent?
"Styx might be the mullet of bands."
It's mainly about the money
Sure, Glen Taylor likes to win games. He sits closer to the team bench than any other owner. But the last four years gave him a wake-up call—if the team doesn’t win with an iconic star, fans stay away in droves, while the players get their salaries no matter what. Billionaires don’t get to be (and stay) billionaires piddling away millions and millions of dollars in real cash every year with no end in sight.
There are no Stars coming here in free agency, and one of the worst things Taylor could do now is overpay some free agent in his late 20s, or trade for a Monta Ellis/Gilbert Arenas-type contract. So they appear to have taken what I think is a realistic tack:
1. Ten youngish guys, all making around 4-5 milllion per year
2. Shorter contracts to maintain flexibility and player motivation
3. Get an advantage by specializing (in this case, Euroscouting)
4. Hope that wins and revenue follow
5. Keep an eye out to add the right Star at the right price at the right time
Ironically, I think Kahn would be okay with running the business and contract side of this process. The problem came when he fashioned himself an expert in player evaluation (because of his legal and media background, I guess?), and decided to be the “face of the franchise.” If he stays in his office and out of the gym and away from the microphone, the plan has a chance to work.
That last point..
…is what I think they’ll have to hang their hat on. Ronzone knows what he is doing and I’m hoping he has a very large say in the player selection process.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Do you guys think
that Kahn’s ‘face of the franchise’ thing is a Taylor bit? I’ve always had the sense that Kahn is always in front of the cameras/microphones because that was part of his job – this rebuild is all on him, and either he does well or he gets fired, but there is no more country club so to speak. Kahn’s the fall guy, and actually I kind of prefer him to be behind the mike if it means a measure of protection for Rambis and Ronzone. I personally believe Kahn at heart is a business guy who’s learned a lot about scouting. Rambis and Ronzone are the primary talent eyes now, with Kahn making the final call (and suffering the consequences if he gets it wrong).
"Styx might be the mullet of bands."
bit or not..
…he’s definitely going to take all the fame or blame.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Which is alright by me
I’d rather have Rambis and Ronzone in the long run, to be honest. I’m a bigger believer in Kahn than most, simply because to me every thing that he does appears to be calculated and part of a bigger plan or strategy (and I think that kind of process pans out in the long run). However, the real strength of the organization right now might be Rambo and Ronzo. It’s still early, but if I had to make a bet I’d bet on those two.
"Styx might be the mullet of bands."
Don't you think...
that this Darko thing is going to be a defining move of Kahn’s? I mean, he’s getting BLASTED by Bill Simmons for this move — look at his Twitter avatar thing… there are new t-shirts being made, based on this move. Put simply, America thinks Darko Milicic sucks at basketball, and Kahn just signed him to a long-term contract. If Darko works out, Kahn knew something that nobody else seemed to. If not, he’s a fool.
Until I start seeing Zaza shirts
Or collectible decoratively braided Drew Gooden outrage goatees, I think I’ll simply by the Bill Simmons salt shaker. It’s a big one, capable of holding many, many grains. He signed him for 3 years at $5 mil/year with an optioned 4th season. Once they move Jefferson, they will have downgraded the salary at the 5 from over $12 mil/year to Darko + Pek. For a guy who wrote that big of a book on basketball, his outrage on this one is kind of out there.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Simmons is tired
both internally and as a description of his work. I’ve read him since before he came to ESPN, and I’ve probably read more of his words than anybody else’s. But he should have have stayed with writing for Kimmel’s show, and worked harder to sell a script or two while he was trying to Go Hollywood. Without a new challenge, you can tell he’s getting stale.
He’s got a great gig, and if/when he re-ups with ESPN he’ll have all the money and success any basement blogger could ever dream of. But in terms of the quality of his writing and originality of thought, it’s not even what it once was.
He’s watching Adam Carrolla very carefully to see if there’s an effective business model in fee or ad-based podcasts—if Carrolla can make it work, look for Simmons to follow.
Yeah...
I’ve read him for 3+ years now, and I can say that I enjoy his comedy-writing routine a whole lot more than his “expert” NBA stuff. I got his book for Christmas, enjoyed the first 200 pages, then stopped when he started the deep analysis of the best players, ever. I don’t need his opinions on that, and didn’t find them interesting or enlightening.
His football, baseball, and general pop culture writing makes me laugh out loud, sometimes. With basketball, I enjoy his stuff about the partying habits of players, and other light humor stuff about how fat Eddy Curry is and all that. But, this David Kahn vendetta is bringing to light how little he actually understands about the league that he poses as an expert about. Sure, Kahn might be bad at his job — but the idea that he’s butchered the Wolves franchise to any extent (so far) is way over the top, and he was making this claim well-before the Darko signing. It calls into question everything he writes about smaller market teams, with less national exposure.
I look forward to the day Minnesota wins more than Houston, and Kahn has us in a better place than Simmons’ boy Darryl Morey. I’m sure he’ll explain that away in typical sarcastic fashion.
Not to mention
Simmons was against the Foye/Miller trade. So when he bashes Kahn on the handling of Rubio, it’s a little baffling since the Wolves would have never even had that pick if he was GM.
Kahn bashing is justified
The one year body of evidence is an absolute squander of talent. We can talk about the added flexibility, but so far that has amounted just Webster/Darko. It was only luck that we ended up with Rubio and could have easily been looking at a Thabeet/Flynn draft. Up to now, he has proved only that he can make a team tank by his roster building prowess. I’m still of the wagon until given a good reason to hop back on. Several of us were hoping for 30 wins this past season and after the first game felt there might not be room for Rubio once he comes.
by midlife crisis on Jul 2, 2010 2:42 PM CDT up reply actions
No offense...
But those of you hoping for 30 wins last season are/were seriously misguided.
He's positively Limbaugh-esque...
…in that he’s fantastic as a one-pony show but once you introduce a counter argument, he looses a lot of his appeal/talent/whatever. He’s also like Limbaugh in that he’s on auto-pilot at this point and I don’t even know if he believes any of it anymore.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
He's certainly bought into
his own hype. The language of his writing early in the 2000s when I started reading him was much the earnest fan that loved following and joking about sports. Now he’s an insufferable know-it-all with insider access and gets offended if anyone dare do something he doesn’t like. Hard to write like a common fan when you’re hanging out with sports/entertainment stars all the time.
It's one thing to have a media background, and another to be an on-air personality.
The sooner he steps out of the limelight, the better. This offseason’s moves so far seem to be solid though certainly not earth-shattering. Yet when I hear Kahn talk about them – or hold a press conference to talk about inviting Rudy Gay, who then cancels the visit – they seem worse than they are.
What about Kahn's abilities on the relocating franchises (NBDL) side of things?
Not to get all conspiracy theory on you…
Great point.
And there could be something to that Kahnspiricy. I think the next three years are crucial to keeping the franchise in MSP. A couple of things in the favor of Wolves fans having a team to root for:
1. Taylor’s a Minnesotan, so if he does tire of losing money, I think he’ll work hard to sell to a locally-based owner.
2. The same economic malaise that is hurting the Wolves’ fortunes is killing the economies of other cities.
3. In light of ongoing budget cuts and/or tax increases, the wisdom of “Hey, let’s build a billion-dollar arena to lure the Timberwolves to our town!” is going to be questioned at every turn.
4. There are/are going to be a ton of teams for sale and relocation, and less people interested and able to buy them, so I don’t think Glen’s going to get an offer he can’t refuse.
5. If Kahn’s ultimate task is to smoothly move the Wolves to a new location, judging by his past accomplishments I’m not sure we should worry about him achieving ANYTHING he sets out to do. In fact, it appears it’s usually better to assume that the opposite outcome comes to fruition.
Re: #5
Nicely done. I can rest easy knowing the Wolves will be here.
SnP
When Kahn said he passed on Cousins for basketball reasons, I took that to include the attitude/character stuff. I interpreted it that way because I thought he made those comments in the context of whether we passed on Cousins for “fit” reasons. I thought he was saying that Johnson, all things considered, was the better prospect, and that we didn’t make the choice just because we have a hole at the wing position. Maybe I’m wrong, but I think he was including Cousins weight/attitude stuff in that comment. Who knows.
On the media call (I think...I can't remember where for sure)
He was straight up asked about that and he said it was a pure fit decision. He thought he was basically Al Jefferson.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Which
to be fair, is quite a valid projection for Cousins. I’m pulling for the guy to succeed, but I have a hard time shaking off the suspicion that he’ll become a very productive player who ultimately isn’t a cornerstone guy. Perhaps in that way landing next to Tyreke will be the best for him – he’ll be a better player in Sacto than he would have been here.
"Styx might be the mullet of bands."
Can I restate how I think you guys disagree?
Kahn has a plan, in that he wants an athletic team, populated by high-IQ big men who can move up nd down the floor and pass well. He wants fast, athletic wings.
I think SNP is saying that what Kahn’s plan SHOULD BE, is to continue swinging at the BPA in the draft until you pick up two guys who pan out. Then build the rest of the team around the styles of those two superstars.
I’m not sure which plan makes more sense, honestly. But I’m not sure that Kahn’s ability to evaluate the talent is really a factor, at least as compared to simply following his decided-upon plan.
by stuntmonkeys on Jul 2, 2010 12:39 PM CDT up reply actions
Decided-upon plan
I think that what you said makes a lot of sense. The Wolves historically have not drafted extremely well and I think Kahn’s model looks more like Portland. They had high picks but never the top one. The team they have has good players across the board but no one that is in the top 5 in the NBA at their position, with the possible exception of Roy. It seems that if you are the Wolves any banking on getting a top two pick to turn your franchise around is never going to happen so you might as well build with what you have. Another point to consider with drafting DMC was that it immediately forced Kahn into HAVING to make a move with Al thus weakening his potential bargaining position. Drafting DMC then becomes a two step process, and you just don’t know how step two would have worked out.
I'd argue..
…that you have to always be a team built on targets of opportunity rather than an overarching plan. You need a coach that is flexible and who can roll with the punches (Rick A. from Houston is my favorite example) and you need to value each and every single pick in the draft as if it were a top pick. Always looking to upgrade at every position should be the default setting.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
That's fine...
but by all accounts, Minnesota rated Wes as a better player at face value AND he fit the “overarching plan” as well. I mean, if The Wolves considered DMC as twice the player that Wes is, then I’m sure they would have picked DMC.
It’s like Chad Ford’s article every year on drafting by tiers to avoid reaching. In short, you never draft a player from a lower-tier (regardless of position) if there are still players available in a higher tier. Chad Ford and, obviously, The Wolves front office viewed Wes and DMC in the same tier. But Wes filled a bigger need and fit their system better. Those were presumably the tie-breaking criteria.
Upgrade
Don’t you think that there has been flexibility demonstrated by the FO. The plan had to be adjusted as soon as the 2nd pick (our supposed spot) turned into the 4th spot. Rolling with the punches will forever be part of the plan of any front office. Rambis has talked about the triangle as a learning tool and not a set make or break offense.
As to the value of picks, I agree that the Wolves have traditionally placed less value than other franchises on their draft picks and it has always concerned me. That being said they upgraded two starting postions in Wes probably by mid season over Corey and Martell Webster over….. take your pick.
I too was very favorable on taking Anderson at 16 over Babbitt. Our team cannot defend and that is obvious to Kahn as well. It seems that he values Webster’s ability to defend over Anderson’s ability to score. I would have sent Flynn to Indy for the 10 to get George. I also would have drafted DMC at 4 and traded him before he could have reached the guys for his post draft interview. The thing with draft picks is none of them have played an NBA game. No one can say that someone will be better than someone else until they prove it. If you conducted the 2000 NBA draft again Michael Redd probably goes 1 and not 43, every team missed on that.
Al is probably going to have more value post free agency than he had on draft night. Some teams are going to whiff at the big signees and hopefully we get something that makes sense. Opportunity can present itself on draft night, free agency and the trade deadline so I think we need to be ready for anything.
I don't think they have...
…in the sense that they’re all-in on Rubio and getting him a squadron of uber-athletic and lengthy players who can slash to the rim, rebound, shoot 3s and catch ally-oops. I’m not so sure I buy the teaching tool talking point. That’s just a hunch on my part.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Triangle
If you don’t buy the teaching tool speak than shouldn’t they have done everything possible to get Evan Turner or Joe Johnson because the only truly successful versions of the triangle were run with 25 shots a game coming out of the 2 guard position (Jordan, Bryant). That would have shown me the lack of flexibility that you are talking about. The way that this team is being assembled looks more like pieces to a team rather than fits to the triangle. Kevin Love and Johnny Flynn do not “fit the overarching plan of the triangle” Both of them would be better served in a pick and roll free flowing offense. If Kahn was so bent on a system they would both be gone as well.
This is where...
…I think they’re making it up as they go along. I don’t think they’re running it all that much, nor does it matter. It was ALL bad and I think they realized very early on that talking about the Triangle was a mistake because it would be latched on to in the local media. He tried to walk it back by saying they didn’t use it much before the teaching tool talking point was rolled out.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
What would you have done
What would you have done differently this year only. No look backs to last year. Who do you draft and who do you try to sign in free agency and finally who do try to trade for.
I know I would have taken....
….Cousins and Anderson. Beyond that I don’t know. I have no idea what they are being offered or what is really possible. I’m a big fan of DDM and I like the idea of a 4 out/1 in style offense in the pros.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Curry
First, to be clear, I like Stephen Curry. But I still have concerns about his ability to defend and think his rookie year was at least partially inflated by Golden State’s running ways. This is much like I’ve never been overly impressed by Monte Ellis.
I know folks have anointed Curry as the Oakland verions of Baby Jesus, but I’m actually pretty high on Jonny Flynn as well. Though hindsight says Curry probably would have been a better pick, I certainly refuse to lump the Flynn-Curry decision in with the Roy-Foye decision.
I’m a big believer in Flynn as an elite 6th-man… which I also think will ultimately be Curry’s best role if he ever gets the opportunity to play for a championship contender.
Well said
All of these players are so overrated until we see them perform in the playoffs. That reveals what kind of heart/warrior mentality they have. And also whether they can be shut down when the other team really sets out to do that (see Wally Szerbiak).
Did you watch much of Curry?
He’s nothing like Ellis. He’s a real point and a surprisingly gifted passer on top of being a lights out shooter. He’s a starter on a very good team, not a 6th man, because he can actually run an offense.
Interviewer: Can you understand why teams value potential ahead of experience and accomplishment in the draft? Wes Johnson: "Yeah. I understand. It’s the youngness of everything – older guys like young women, so it’s the same way."
Cool it...
I didn’t say Curry and Ellis were the same player… I said both have inflated numbers because of the system in which they play. And I still believe that. Everybody in Oakland has inflated numbers.
I totally agree that Ellis CAN’T play PG and that Curry CAN play PG. But just because Curry is capable to play minutes at PG, I’m not sold on Curry as a hands-down starting PG on a championship squad. Trust me, I’m a big fan of his. But Deron Williams, Chris Paul, Jason Kidd and Steve Nash he is not. There’s a big difference between being capable of playing PG and being the answer at PG…
And I disagree
That being on GSW makes him look like a better player than he is. For Ellis, sure, but Curry is a good player on any team. If you watch him play, it’s evident that he’s a real point and a nifty passer. And Nelli may green light launching 3’s, but he doesn’t make them for you.
Interviewer: Can you understand why teams value potential ahead of experience and accomplishment in the draft? Wes Johnson: "Yeah. I understand. It’s the youngness of everything – older guys like young women, so it’s the same way."
Plus he had the benefit
of playing 36 mpg for the season including 39 mpg after the break, in a wide open guard friendly offense. If you would have put Flynn in the same situation I think people would have a much different opinion of Flynn. I would still rather have Curry, but I think the systems these guys played in exaggerated the difference.
BPA in a desperate fan's opinion
Great post kurosawa…have been waiting for someone to take a shot at the “assumed fact” that DMC was the best player available. Short of Bill Simmons, there were plenty of experts that had Wes Johnson rated as the 4th best player available (not a mock draft). Fan’s here have become desperate, and I get it, but this desperation has caused them to reach for anyone that maybe just maybe might just be a superstar…possibly. How simply you overlook all the huge read flags that could just as easily predict a bust (overweight, bad attitude, uncoachable, didn’t want to be here). Safe is not sexy, and Wes was viewed as the safe pick so no one gets excited. He was safe because he is NBA ready, very coachable, great attitude, strong wing player that can shoot, on the floor leader, very long and athletic….hmmm sounds like a lot of things this team sorely needs. Straight out of a scout’s mouth, one whose name you all know and respect “When was the last time an overweight center came out of college and became a center? Name one…Shaq was lean and fit when he came out.” Now add that to a running offense…
I understand why we don’t have patience in the Timberwolves but not having patience to see out Kahn’s plan is a little unfair…he’s been here barely over a year.
by Bob Wolfey on Jul 2, 2010 9:23 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
More Tradable assets
Good post (though I don’t think we anyone knew how good Roy would be). One thing to note about all the contracts of FA that Kahn has signed is that they are very tradeable assets. The Gay contract will bog down that franchise for years.
You are correct that dealing big Al for a star is crucial for the rebuild. I think there will be two windows for this. After the big FAs sign and some of the losers get desperate to fill their cleared cap, at this years trade deadline. Think the deadline may be where the best deal would be… but personally I’d love to go into the season with the roster set and let everyone get their roles early.
I genuinely think Kahn is following a very good plan. Also think that Johnson was this year’s “don’t get all Teddy bear cute with this pick; pick the guy who’s a perfect fit and wants to be here” pick. No matter how Cousins turns out, this was the obvious pick to make.
Can't Underestimate that point...
That Wes Johnson WANTED TO BE HERE. Call it the safe and boring pick, but I don’t want a fat, argumentative, lazy player who doesn’t want to be in Minnesota… regardless of DMC’s talent.
Who cares who wants to be here?
Nobody wants to really be here in relation to the good places/teams in the league. “He likes us, he really likes us” is no way to build anything.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
In an interview on DX
Wes was asked where he wants to go in the draft. His answer: “someplace warm”. And we think Kahn isn’t a risk taker!
He didn't want to be here.
Give me a good guy like Wes anyday. Cousins will be a team cancer in his prime and not realize the error of his ways until his skills are in decline.
Purple is angry...
….and barn swallows have happy lice. Random meaningless thoughts are fun.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Totally ridiculous.
Have every professional athlete make a list of their top three preferred destinations, and the Wolves, Vikings, Twins, and hell the Wild wouldn’t show up on any of them.
Ahhh the Curry argument
“We had to take Flynn. He really really wanted to be here. And Curry sort of implied that he didn’t.” Now we’re doing the same with Cousins. What 20 year old African-American soon to be wealthy athlete is going to by dying to come to Minnesota?
I thought we put this argument to bed. Kahn made his mistake. Did a nice trade in getting Rubio, and now we look at this year. But enough of the “who really wants to come here” nonsense
Kahn Has a Top Secret Plan that even he doesn't know about
by Son of Gerald Green on Jul 2, 2010 11:34 AM CDT up reply actions
Dreadful comparison
Curry is a high-character, high-motivation kid who grew up in the NBA culture. Cousins is a low-character, unmotivated kid with talent.
Kahn made the wrong personnel decision on Curry… history has proven that. But to just gloss over Cousins’ major warts would have been silly, especially when Wes was available. It’s not like the Minnesota talent-evaluators had DMC rated higher than Wes. They didn’t pass on Cousins solely because of character issues… baskeball also had something to do with it.
I mean, quibble about The Wolves’ draft board all you want (those are legit topics to debate). But the fact is that Minnesota, for better or for worse, liked Wes more as a player and as a person. That’s why they chose him.
A bit premature...
I don’t think history has proven that Curry would have been the better pick yet. I think that looks most likely thus far, but it’s still waaay too soon to say it’s been proven. :)
by stuntmonkeys on Jul 2, 2010 12:45 PM CDT up reply actions
How on earth do you know that he has a fantastic character?
One of the big things I have tried to do here on Hoopus is to leave character out of the equation. We don’t know these guys and I highly suspect we’d hate them all if we did. The only thing we can really know about is how they play on the court.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Nothing wrong with that...
but we’re all rubes here who get the bulk of our information online. It’s a proven fact that character issues can derail careers and render talented kids busts.
So I’m not bothered that you refuse to consider character as a factor, but there’s certainly plenty of precedent for why character is a critical, critical factor in whether a player succeeds in The NBA or not. Ignoring such an obvious factor seems pretty negligent as it relates to forming an opinion of a prospect. Like it or not, it matters.
I don't think you get what I'm saying here
I’m saying that it’s pure speculation for any of us to talk about the character of guys we don’t know. I don’t give a rat’s behind about whether or not teams do it. Of course they do. They perform exhaustive background checks. No one is saying this doesn’t come into play at that level. What I’m saying is that it’s BS to throw it into a fan argument about the worth of a person you have never met. You know what else derails c careers? Sucking, and that’s what we can argue about with something approaching objectivity here on the site.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Just because we can't properly identify
the character of every pro athlete does not prevents us from recognizing bad behavior when we see it. Sure, the vast majority of us can’t really say whether Steph Curry is a good guy and no one should claim to be able to figure all of that stuff out. But just throwing up the hands altogether on character stuff, when there are clear issues present, is just as limiting of a viewpoint.
Actively looking for red flags since my 5th grade traveling team
Just to recap..
…you say that bad behavior is there but you can’t define it other than that you know it’s there, but then you move on to say that there are clear issues present. This is the entire problem. It’s a problem of faith. The response to this is the same argument atheists have been using against religion for centuries. What you are claiming is built on something that has to be accepted on faith/hearsay/etc in order to exist and there is no real way to engage it. You can’t define it, quantify it, or relate it to anyone with any sort of metric, but you want it validated and accepted as if it could clear all of these bars. Veering away from the atheist take, I’m not saying character doesn’t matter in player selection. It does. A lot. I have always said that the Wolves need to do their homework on a guy like DMC. All I’m saying is that it’s an impossible thing to wield in a format like this.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jul 2, 2010 2:59 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
But it is definable
In Cousins’ case, the bad behavior in question is in the form of screaming at coaches (on video), alteractions with other players on the court (on video) and difficulty being coached due to temper issues (cited by teammate Daniel Orton). It’s not faith at all. There are actual events to point to that demonstrate these behaviors. Do they mean that Cousins is definitely going to be the next Ron Artest? No. But that doesn’t mean that a fan is not justified by feeling that the presence of those behavioral red flags is a reason to pass on drafting the player.
Actively looking for red flags since my 5th grade traveling team
Really?
That’s definable? How so? What was he screaming about? Was it better or worse than KG’s language? Define better and worse.
It’s a leap of faith for anyone here to make comments about these guys’ character, no matter what we see on TV. It’s by definition undefinable because we have zero context, zero constants, and such a small window in on things that we most likely see what we want to see. I’m astonished that hearsay is accepted for DMC when we have had numerous examples from the national media in the last year or so about them being wrong on the Rubio front or with something as simple as Kahn supposedly saying that Derrick Favors was fat. Yeah, it’s kind of entertaining but it’s meaningless.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
I got it.
Look, SnP, in my four days on CH you’ve quickly become one of my favorites. You’re engaging, you know your stuff and you post insightful commentary. I just guess you’re getting a reaction from me on this because character is real (even if it’s very nebulus, which I have already acknowledged). If you don’t want to talk about it, I’m OK with that.
But it’s very relevant and very real, so I’d appreciate not being scolded for discussing such an important issue just because it’s not quantifiable.
Thanks....
…I appreciate your input and patronage. I’m not saying I don’t want to talk about it and I’m not scolding you. Let’s put it this way. Say you believe in God and I don’t. Your evidence for God’s existence is to point at a book on the table and say “because of the bible”. That’s a meaningless statement and there’s nothing anyone can do with it other than to get all worked up for nothing. Some people will accept what you accept on faith and others won’t. All I’m saying here at Hoopus is that people take a secular approach to the Wolves. Instead of saying “the bible tells me not to kill” how about relaying that in terms of altruism and other forms of secular morality? Saying DMC is a cancerous nitwit is not secular basketballism. It requires a leap of faith. You see something that is seemingly obvious (him acting out) and you assign it a supernatural genesis in place of having access to the science (background interviews, private investigators, etc) that would place what you see in definable secular basketball terms.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Hmmm...
This is sort in interesting. What if we look at the history of overweight big men drafted in the NBA in the top 5. I don’t know if you call that “character,” but it is scientific and telling.
Likewise, one could scientifically list observed behaviors Cousins’ has exhibited, look for those same behaviors in past draftees, and look for correlations.
Sociologists do these things all the time. One of the reasons it’s viewed as a “soft science” is because judgment is required when defining, observing and categorizing such behaviors. But, it is nevertheless the attempt to apply science to measure such things.
That's fine..
…but you’re going to have to wade through defining the terms that are in play here. Overweight for position? Overweight for age? Are you talking body fat percentage or simply pounds? What about pounds per inch?
Look, the guy scores a certain number of points per possession. His team scores a certain number of points per possession while he is on the court. He has similar ratios for blocks, rebounds, and free throws. All I’m arguing is that this sort of take is as deep as I think we can go on a blog before it all falls apart into nonsensical bickering. It’s one thing to say “I think he has some issues” and quite another to say “Those issues will kill any team that drafts him because he’s a crazy cancer.” This is a very clear editorial decision we made early on with this site and it’s one of the things that we think provides us with some distinction from other destinations. This is why I’m spending an inordinate amount of time talking about it. I do it whenever it comes up and I notice it. We’re not a gossip site. We’re not a speculative site. We’re not going to rag on teenagers we don’t know. And so on and so forth.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
I'm OK with that perspective
But you have demonstrated that you know the difference between quantitative and qualitative analysis. There are thousands of dissertations based solely on qualitative analysis (surveys, interviews, expert opinion, observation)
The character stuff is not at all quantitative, but it’s certainly in bounds. There is a place for both.
Good lord
“Chad Ford tells me so” is not qualitative analysis. As someone with a very worthless social sciences degree (or two), there still is, at the very least, a facade of using the scientific method in gathering he said/she said data before dumping it into an excel spread sheet over on the hippie side of campus. “God exists” is not qualitative analysis. It’s a feeling reinforced by people who feel the same way. “I trust John Holinger’s analysis on PER so he must be trustworthy on character references” is also a feeling. The whole point here in this back-and-forth is that you do not even clear the social science bar. That’s the sort of thing that is done at the team level and with background checks, interviews, etc. Anthropologists use correlative data in drawing comparisons between populations they don’t know much about with ones they do. They make educated guesses about how people lived thousands of years ago by making detailed first-person observations about similar modern populations. At some step of the way, there has to be something more than…..well, you are soooooooooooooo far removed from this sort of study that I am completely baffled by you trying to use it as an example of you being right. Again: I’m not saying this stuff is out of bounds for people who have access to the principal actors or who are actually pulling the levers and paying the checks. What I am saying is that it is ridiculous for us to talk about character in any meaningful way here on this site because you simply don’t know these guys and you’re only going to find material that buttresses what you already believe.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jul 2, 2010 4:32 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Not to interrupt the back and forth
but the “character” and lack of team success isn’t backed up either. J.R. Rider was a cancer, but he also played on a terrible team. I remember the Jail Blazers destroying the Wolves and almost going to the Finals during their era. Kobe is not a good guy, yet the Lakers seem to be doing all right.
It’s about the talent.
Well, as others would attest to on this board
I don’t really think KG is a good character guy either.
However, to address your points about Cousins:
When I see a player screaming at his coach in an argument kind of setting, I think its out of line. It happens, sure, even to the best of guys. But I tend to think that the whole “respect your coach” thing is important. I don’t think it really matters what he was screaming about or the language he uses. Its the act of screaming at a coach, by itself, that I take issue with. However, if it were just that – in absence of the fight he was in high school and the stuff with Orton – then it wouldn’t be as big of a deal. When put together, however, it suggests a pattern of behavior.
But I don’t use hearsay to create opinions about DMC. I, like you and others on here, don’t believe much of what the national media reports. I watch the videos myself, and listen to the interviews that are posted with teammates and coaches, and make up my own mind.
Sure, I couldn’t tell whether Tiger Woods was a good guy or not. But I can definitely tell whether Zach Randolph is a law-abiding citizen or whether Shawn Kemp is a believer in contraception. I can’t make every call on behavioral issues. But when evidence presents itself, I do think I’m qualified to use it and put it into a larger framework.
Actively looking for red flags since my 5th grade traveling team
Once laws are broken..
…and the authorities come into play, then I agree with you. Or, short of that, if a guy displays things like racism, bigotry, sexism, objectification of women, etc…then I think that deserves a look too. We’ll call this the Mel Gibson test, I suppose. I guess I’m just asking that people be aware that there is a very large part of the team eval process that we simply do not have access to and character is a large part of that. Also, I’m not sure there is a direct correlation between performance and a-holishness in the first place. KG is probably an a-hole but for a while he was our a-hole and that glossed a lot over. There just aren’t a lot of constants with character and…well, I probably shouldn’t be so hard on foobee or anyone else. I just want to impress upon people that extrapolating harsh claims from this sort of info is very problematic from an editorial/community viewpoint…..especially when it comes to teenagers.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Have you heard this term, "basketball character" recently?
I think it’s a pretty interesting concept… i.e. – a player can be an incredible dirt ball, in theory, but if that same player is a gym rat, film-watching, coachable leader of men, then they say he’s got “basketball character.”
I think it’s a good concept. Unfortunately the players with poor off-the-court character usually don’t have much basketball character either… but I will say that the on-the-court stuff prevails, regardless of whether a guy is a dirt-bag in his personal life.
How do you feel about Darko?
Is there a statute of limitations on saying he would rape the female relatives of refs?
by Miss Test Pattern on Jul 4, 2010 2:56 PM CDT up reply actions
Nah... we get all that stuff from published reports anyway.
Maybe some folks sit in their basements breaking down film on players, but beyond watching games and forming subjective opinions here and there on this stuff, I’d say the bulk of the blogosphere base their opinions on what folks like Hollinger, Ford, Stein and that ilk say in their analyses. I mean, I think most of us have careers and social lives.
So if, say, Hollinger says that Player X can’t defend on the perimeter, I sour on said player. If, say, Stein says Player XY is a shooting guard with terrible shooting mechanics, I sour on said player. If, say, Ford says that Player XYZ has a reputation for being lazy and spending his nights in strip-joints, I sour on said player. Some are on-court issues; some off – but all very, very relevant.
I don’t at all think we need to base character concerns solely on personal interactions with players in order to formulate an opinion. That seems silly. All I know is that the broad bucket of “character concerns” is very relevant because we’ve all seen bad character derail careers every year. Therefore, I can’t see how you’d suggest that something so relevant should ever be off-limits.
I see...
…so this is why you call a teenager you don’t know a fat cancer. I get it now. You’re arguing with things I’m not even remotely saying. I’m not saying you need to spend hours breaking down film. If Hollinger says that Player X can’t defend the perimeter, you can pull up 82Games.com, Basketball Prospectus, or BasketballReference and actually show this claim to be valid or invalid. The sources for this claim are in the open. When he says that he’s been told DMC is a boob, there’s nothing to argue over, there’s nothing to compare, there’s nothing to put it into context. That’s BS. Character issues are relevant to the people making the picks, but not with people who can’t possibly have sourced access to the type of information to make it mean something. You may as well tell everyone that you heard about a player’s character from an invisible unicorn.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Two contexts
You’re 100-percent correct that statistics are more concrete; Character is very nebulus… but both are very, very real.
I mean, was I the first person you’ve heard to harshly criticize DMC’s character? It’s posted by trusted resources all over the web and TV. It’s a thematic commentary by dozens of respected NBA reporters/analysts who know their stuff, are incredibly well-connected and do this type of thing for a living. Over the years, I have just come to trust the commentary of some of these people and believe character to be highly relevant. So if they can talk about it, why can’t the blogosphere?
"Trusted sources"
By whom? I’m not saying you can’t talk about something. I’m just saying that if you’re going to tell me (or anyone else here) something along the lines of “Player X is a fat cancer who will destroy the team in 5 years” and your only input for believing such a thing is your faith in, say, Chad Ford to suddenly 100% value accuracy over page hits, then you may as well tell me you believe such a thing because a fly just landed on your shoulder.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Can I ask...
SNP, do you think there is some risk that Cousins fails to become a good NBA player for what we’re generally calling character issues? I think you’ll say “yes.”
Is there also some risk that Wes J will fail for the same reasons? Yes.
Are the odds that Cousins fails for those reasons greater than the odds that Wes does? I’d say “yes.” But maybe that’s where you disagree.
I’d agree that it’s very dangerous to start talking about these probabilities as if they are facts about a player – and that some certainty can be justified.
But I think there is a greater risk with some guys, and that needs to go into the calculus somewhere. Just because it can’t be defined with reliability doesn’t mean it can’t be considered.
Since you asked..
….I think he’ll be fine. I can relate to the guy on a certain level. I yelled at my high school coach, threw a bag of ice at an assistant coach, and was effectively kicked off the team. I got into a few fights during my time in high school and I had a terrible first year of college because of girls and partying. Then I joined the military and grew up.
I personally think he’s a goofball kid with some fairly normal anger issues. He just happens to be gigantic and a millionaire.
It’s not up to us to make a decision on the guy’s character. It’s up to the team that cuts the checks. I hope they check the hell out of him. I hope they conducted numerous background checks and personality studies. I sure as hell would with someone I was going to give a million bucks to. I’m just saying we don’t know what any of that risk really is. I’m not telling people to not talk about it. I’m just telling them that they will be doing so by referencing things that I will not take seriously.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Here, let me fix this for you . . .
“I had a terrible an awesome first year of college because of girls and partying.”
"It’s posted by trusted resources all over the web and TV"
So, when these same trusted resources talk about what an idiot Kahn is, you’re on board with that, as well?
Or when they say..
…that he called Derrick Favors fat and out of shape?
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
The problem with bumping people down
You don’t always know what it’s going to mean to the sport. I can understand Wes as a pick but I don’t see how you put him in the same talent tier as Cousins. It reminds me too much of Warren Sapp. Clearly a monster player, but also clearly too stupid and not enough motivation (failed a drug test before draft rather than showing up at 16% body fat) to make it in the NFL. Character is clearly a huge impact, but teams have been historically very poor in assessing it (JR Rider for the flip side)
by midlife crisis on Jul 2, 2010 3:28 PM CDT up reply actions
True, true
But the NBA is the hardest league for the incumbent team to retain its players. MLB has draft pick compensation, NFL has franchise-player/transition-player tags and I don’t know much about hockey.
I think Toronto would be interested to know which players want to be there right about now…
Of course he wants to be here
That way he gets 4th rather than 3rd money. I can only assume Cousins thought he was going in the top 3, otherwise his posture was very very stupid (or he has dreams of multiple championships with Tyreke)
by midlife crisis on Jul 2, 2010 2:49 PM CDT up reply actions
Kahn's Second Fault
I agree that Kahns biggest flaw in my mind has been his eye as a talent evaluator. That being said, another thing I’ve had an issue with is the way Kahn has or more aptly hasn’t utilized expiring contracts and extra cap space. Without knowing how this whole offseason ends I think Kahn has a lack of understanding on how to massage and mange that little extra space under the cap.
Presti has been the master of this. Kahn continually talks about adding assets, but has he really added as many assets as he could have. The trade with OKC when he gave up the 32 pick is a prime example. How did that trade help the Wolves? Some of these smaller moves are the ones that can add up to a more major move.
The main problem with the plan to acquire a major piece via trade is that the Wolves don’t have that 1st round draft pick to trade. Unless they trade Rubio they are never going to be able to get that number 1 player without including 1st round picks.
by jama on Jul 2, 2010 8:38 AM CDT via mobile reply actions
My view on the Pek/Darko combo at center
I actually like these signings, although I know I am in the minority.
Darko is young, a legit 7 footer, 275 pounds, fairly athletic for his size when in shape, a good passer, good BBIQ, decent defense. Pek is young, nearly 7 feet, very strong, sets good picks, very good in the low block.
That is a pretty interesting and stable combo for less than 10 million per year.
If you can acquire Shaq or Howard, by all means build around a high priced C. But for most teams I think a center by committee with reasonably priced guys is a better investment. Many of the high priced Cs are busts like Curry, Dampier, etc. I would rather spend on the money on other positions where there is less bust potential (PF, SG, …)
This view point was probably influenced by watching much of the Bulls championship reign. They were never really above average at C (Longley, Cartright, etc.), but they had legit size, competence, and depth at that position.
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." -- Yogi Berra
by Wile E Coyote on Jul 2, 2010 10:56 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
If you'll have me...
I would like to join your wolfpack.
I looked ahead to the open road, thought about the people and what they know, and wrote a book called "People Don't Know Nothin!"
Plus (and this is especially important with this team and fanbase)
it’s way more fun to watch active athletic wings flying around and launching threes than it is to see some low-post master pull a triple-fake move on the way to a nice lay-up off the backboard.
Very true
I think it’s also interesting that outside of the dominant superstar centers in the league, many of the most respected and sought after centers at the trading deadline are what I’d call the ‘hold it down’ guys – tenacious, tough defensive guys who can rebound and block shots for you. I’m think of guys like Haywood, Perkins (although I know he’s not on the trading block), Noah, Camby, Birdman, etc. No one’s dying to have Spencer Hawes, he of the 10 ppg scoring average and deft passing in backup minutes. I think defensive presence is a great role for Darko, and one that he can embrace and be very good at (and well respected for).
"Styx might be the mullet of bands."
ESPN Rumors info
While many knocked Minnesota GM David Kahn’s decision to lock up Darko Milicic on Thursday, ESPN’s John Hollinger reminds us on Friday that his signing of Nikola Pekovic, the team’s 2008 first-round draft pick, for three years and $13 million was a solid move.
But as Adrian Wojnarowski of Yahoo! Sports reports, the Spurs may not be pleased about the signing.
“The Spurs are negotiating to bring over 2008 first-round pick Tiago Splitter this summer, and Pekovic’s deal promises to elevate Splitter’s leverage,” he wrote. “A 7-foot center from Brazil, Splitter is considered a far superior prospect to Pekovic. The Spurs’ ability to pay Splitter from its midlevel exception and still have some of that money to use on another free agent has been somewhat compromised.”
If the Spurs end up not bringing Richard Jefferson back at a reduced rate, as has been rumored, they could have more money for Splitter.
Sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you don't
I feel really bad about screwing up the Spurs rebuilding plans
NOT
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." -- Yogi Berra
by Wile E Coyote on Jul 2, 2010 11:17 AM CDT up reply actions
Hollinger info
July 1: Darko Milicic re-signs with Timberwolves
Milicic
Milicic
The first free-agent contract of the summer might have been the worst. The feeding frenzy had barely started when word came from up north that the Wolves had signed Darko Milicic to a four-year, $20 million deal. Short of offering the rest of his free-agent money to Kwame Brown, I’m not sure what more embattled Wolves GM David Kahn could have done to cement the impression that he’s in over his head.
Milicic had his moments after he came over from New York last season and gave Minnesota something of a defensive presence in the middle, but the two questions I always have to ask when I see a deal like this are: (1) Who were they bidding against, and (2) What’s a reasonable expectation for this player going forward.
The answer to the first query is nobody. Nobody else in the NBA wanted Milicic at anything close to that price, and his threat to return to Europe was just that if money was going to be any kind of factor. In all likelihood, Minnesota could have comfortably won the bidding for Darko’s services at a fraction of the price.
The answer to the second is shown by his statistical performance — even last season he was a subpar offensive performer, while defensively he was decent but nothing special. (Unless, that is, you had been watching Al Jefferson all season.) He’s a backup center, basically, and backup centers aren’t supposed to make this kind of bank — especially when their attitude and motivation have been questioned at every stop in a seven-year career.
Additionally, there was a real opportunity cost here — signing Milicic cost the Wolves nearly half their available cap space. While it’s true that high-priced free agents were unlikely to consider Minnesota as a reasonable landing spot, especially once it became apparent Rudy Gay’s stay on the market would be brief, there were still secondary players Minnesota could have pursued.
The under-the-radar part of Minnesota’s day is that the Wolves made one other move that was really good. They inked Nikola Pekovic, their 2008 second-round draft pick, to a three-year, $13 million deal, and should have an instant impact player to join Milicic and Kevin Love in the frontcourt rotation. (I get the impression Jefferson isn’t long for the Land O’ Lakes.) The Montenegrin big man has some of the same pros and cons as Jefferson — he’s a big, strong post player with iffy mobility — but he costs a quarter of the money.
Nonetheless, the Milicic contract stole the day. Nobody’s quite sure what the plan is in Minnesota, and for every step forward the franchise takes another two back. Today was a fitting microcosm, as Pekovic’s addition was offset by the bizarrely generous commitment the Wolves made to Milicic.
Sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you don't
Hollinger is a smart guy, one of the few worth reading at 4 letter
And he is correct in that Darko is a mediocre center who will probably not improve much even at his current youngish age.
But some of that stuff is silly. We were bidding against Europe – duh. Pekovic needed to be paid at least that much or it was better for him financially to stay in Europe. Darko would want a little more since he is the incumbent starter and likely could have made a lot in Europe.
The world is changing. There are more than 29 teams competing for players now.
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." -- Yogi Berra
by Wile E Coyote on Jul 2, 2010 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions
29 other teams I mean
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." -- Yogi Berra
by Wile E Coyote on Jul 2, 2010 11:20 AM CDT up reply actions
Darko and Europe
So somebody in Europe was going to give Darko $19 million? Have you read the newspaper, Europe’s financial situation is not exatcly good at the moment. There is no way Darko would have gotten close to that kind of money in Europe right now. It doesn’t matter what other Centers in the NBA are getting paid, it matters what they would pay for Darko right now, and Kahn overpaid by about 40%. Plus Darko wasn’t going to go to just any team, the Wolves, and Kahn, were basically negotiating against themselves.
Ya
I found this as lazy reporting:
The answer to the second is shown by his statistical performance — even last season he was a subpar offensive performer, while defensively he was decent but nothing special. (Unless, that is, you had been watching Al Jefferson all season.) He’s a backup center, basically, and backup centers aren’t supposed to make this kind of bank — especially when their attitude and motivation have been questioned at every stop in a seven-year career.
Um, hey John – go check what the going rate for these centers are in the NBA. It’s about $5 million a year. Stop writing a column every single day and get back to the outstanding stuff you used to put out .
"Styx might be the mullet of bands."
They're "bidding"
against the cap hold number.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Time will tell
If Darko continues on the same stat path, sure this was too much.
Kahn/Rambis obviously see more. I think a lot of this is confidence. Darko has had little backing until he got to MN. And yes, a good deal of that may be deserved.
So, they could have negotiated harder to get a lower contract, say 3 mil/year. And by doing so they send a signal that their confidence is just so-so. So, to me, it’s a 2 mil/year bet. And that’s no where near the J. Johnson/R. Gay bet. Are they really 14 mil players getting 16 mil? `
If Darko’s main hold back is confidence and he turns that around, he becomes worth it. If it’s straight talent that he can never improve, then we will lose.
It’s too early to judge this contract folks. What if he signs a 1 yer deal for 3 million and then bolts/asks for higher pay after a much improved year? That 1 year, 3 per would be very popular at CH.
by ChicagoViking on Jul 2, 2010 12:14 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Hakim Warrick?
It’s not like it’s necessarily a terrible contract, but look, if Hakim Warrick is worth four years, $18M (which he just signed with PHX), then I’m completely comfortable with the contracts that we gave to Darko and Pekovic. I’d much rather have the two Euros we just retained than Warrick.
As springy as Hakim Warrick is, I think he’s one of the most over-rated players in the league (even as a complementary player).
Really? I kind of like Warrick
That’s not a terrible deal fof him in this environment. Shoots a decent percentage, gets to the line a fair amount. Does some things. 25 minute a night guy.
We Are the Washington Generals
by Eric in Madison on Jul 2, 2010 12:05 PM CDT up reply actions
Me too.
When the Bucks came to town, early last season, Warrick was pretty tough for our bigs to contain. He’s a solid player, worth that contract, in my opinion. I’ve never heard of him being rated very high, so I don’t understand the “most over-rated players in the league” comment at all, in this case.
I'm very biased...
against terrible defensive players. And Hakim Warrick is one of the very, very worst post defenders in The NBA. I believe I call him over-rated because I see so many folks on these forums being blinded by hops. Warrick is springy and can throw down, but I just don’t see him as a very effective player.
That said, it’s not like Phx poured a ton of cash into him, so I guess it’s not dreadful. He’s just a player I’ve never been high on and I wouldn’t want him here in Minnesota… so glad he’s in the Western Conference because our bigs will see him four times a year and likely have some very good offensive nights.
You could be right...
I have not watched Hakim Warrick with any sort of close attention over his career. I just noticed at Target Center last season that he was outplaying Love and Jefferson by a fair margin. If you say he’s a bad defender, that might be true. Then again, it might not. But from the little I’ve seen and read about the guy, his contract seems reasonable.
Offensively, though...
He can finish and has a pretty decent 10-12 footer. And this makes me wonder about Kevin Love… what’s the latest consensus on his ability to defend. Though he’s definitely a below-the-rim guy, I’ve actually been pretty impressed with his small-space quickness for a big-guy.
I am optimistic this year because in my estimation, this is the first year he’s ever had any depth in perimeter-defense help. I think he was made to look really over-matched defensively by penetrating wings in his first two years. A athletic wing getting to the hole really put him at an enormous disadvantage.
Just hoping he can be a neutral defender this year now that the Webster-Wes-Brewer triumvirate will be there to help on the perimeter.
GET OVER IT...
Cousins is in Sac-town; Wes is in Minny. Learn to like the kid, he’ll probably show you some great stuff. As for the overgrown cancer known as DMC, he didn’t fit in here and would have demanded a trade from Minny the second he walked off the stage.
Why?
Why didn’t he fit in here, and why would he have demanded a trade? And even if he would have, so what?
Do you really need to ask why DMC didn't fit?
With rights of Al, Love and Pekovic already in tow on draft night, did you see the need for another non-mobile, non-athletic big-man? Especially considering that Kahn, Rambis and the rest of the front office have been gearing up for longer, athletic types?
I mean, it’s one thing to like DMC. But I’m sure you’d agree that the best way to build a team is to have a plan and follow through on that plan with personnel decisions. So, whether you agree with The Wolves personnel philosophy or not, the fact is that DMC doesn’t fit in with what they are trying to do in adding long/athletic types… gotta respect that they are setting a game-plan and following it.
Bottom line is that DMC and Wes should both have near-equal impacts in The NBA and Wes just fits Minnesota’s roster construction better.
I don't buy it
Darko and Pek aren’t more mobile or athletic than Cousins (or less expensive, for that matter), so it’s not like Kahn is hell bent on filling the position with a version of Hollins that has a clue.
I like Wes and I think he’ll do well here. But I would have been very nearly has happy with George at SF, and I think we could have traded up for him with a little creativity and without a crippling cost. The point is that you almost never get a shot at a really good center; decent small forwards are easier to find.
Kahn may end up having been right to pass on Cousins for Wes, and at this point I hope he was. But I think it was a risk worth taking. And I think it’s legitimate to judge Kahn based on whether he called this one correctly. I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt on Flynn over Curry and signing Hollins. No GM makes all the right calls. But if he missed on Cousins, his batting average will have fallen below my Mendoza line.
Maybe if he was 7-2
But, with shoes on, Cousins measured under 6-11 (6-10 3/4" to be exact) at the combine. And he’s a ground-bound guy just like the rest of our post-players. On the other hand, perimeter defense, shooting and athleticism were enormous needs.
BTW, I fully agree that it’s legitimate to judge EVERYTHING than Kahn does. I mean we even scrutinize the guy’s tone of voice. Nobody’s trying to silence you – criticize on, that’s what these forums are for.
I just think that almost everybody had Wes and Cousins in the same draft tier, so it’s not at all a stretch to go with the guy who filled bigger needs. If Wes was rated by most teams as a mid-1st rounder and Kahn took him 4th, that would seem like a more sensible gripe. But he was rumored to go anywhere from 2nd to 6th… he wound up going 4th and fills some major needs here. So I just find it odd that the pick would be questioned that much.
First of all,
Cousins was measured with a standing reach of 9’5". Darko’s was 9’3.25". As has been written many times around here, you don’t defend with the top of your head.
And my argument is that you could have gotten an athletic perimeter player in other ways. In fact, we did by getting Webster for the 16th pick and a “toxic” contract. So while I agree that we needed to upgrade the wings, I thought we could have done that AND taken a chance on Cousins.
Going into the draft, I thought it was perfectly reasonable to think that we could get Cousins or Favors and George or Henry. I would have been even happier if we could have gotten Wes instead of George/Henry at a reasonable price. For me, Johnson + Webster was a letdown by comparison. You disagree.
Strib Reminiscing...
I do like that addage – I think you posted that on Zgoda’s page as well. And I happen to agree with it.
I think you’ve been gone from the Strib page for a while, but if you care to check leading up to the draft I was probably the biggest anti-Wes guy on the board. I will admit that I came around on him and accepted his selection.
My only point today is that I think it’s hard to quibble too much about picking Wes over Cousins (or vice-versa) because they are both in the same prospect tier. My biggest hope leading up to the draft was that we either move up or down… I wasn’t nuts about staying at No. 4 either way. But since we did, I find it hard to argue with the pick too much either way.
Very few people
had Wes and Cousins in the same draft tier. And Wes “was rumored to go anywhere from 2nd to 6th”—where was that rumor that he was going to go 2nd?
You know, it’s fine to defend Kahn at every turn. But don’t make up reasons for your Kahntentions.
I'm pretty sure Philly brough Wes Johnson in for a visit...
So I think that means he was an option, albeit a slim possibility. So nobody’s making anything up here, my friend.
That's bull.
Show me one mock draft that had Johnson at the two. And to say that you’re “pretty sure” doesn’t exactly boost your case that you’re not making things up.
Doug Collins did talk up Wesley Johnson at one point during the draft
but no mocks that I ever saw had Johnson at the two.
Actively looking for red flags since my 5th grade traveling team
BTW, any rube can do a mock...
Bottom line is that he visited Philly and they had good things to say about him. If you want to nit-pick about semantics, then carry on. The point is lots of teams at the top of the draft considered Wes and he went right in the same ballpark where everybody thought he would go. Don’t miss the forest for the trees on this one.
Philly was considering trading down
That’s the reason they wanted him to visit. They also wanted to let everyone know they were willing to trade their pick
by midlife crisis on Jul 2, 2010 3:46 PM CDT up reply actions
Ground bound
At 290 he better be ground bound or his knees won’t last as long as his rookie contract.
by midlife crisis on Jul 2, 2010 3:43 PM CDT up reply actions
"With rights of Al, Love and Pekovic already in tow on draft night"
Were you complaining about Kahn making a move for Rudy Gay, after having Brewer, Webster, Lazar, and Johnson in the fold already?
Besides, the original comment was
As for the overgrown cancer known as DMC, he didn’t fit in here and would have demanded a trade from Minny the second he walked off the stage.
I was curious about him being “an overgrown cancer”—that’s a harshly incorrect judgement of the kid.
You're quoting two different people.
I’m pretty sure I said the first thing, but not the portion highlighted in blue. That said, I don’t necessarily disagree with it. BTW, from a perspective of debate, how do you know he’s not “an overgrown cancer?” You’re pretty quick to dismiss anti-DMC sentiments, so I’m just wondering how you are so certain that the contrary is any more true?
On another note, the best pre-draft quote I heard was when David Kahn called Cousins a “sweet kid.” Who knows maybe Cousins is a little teddy-bear… I wish him will in Sacto.
Lordy..
…now you’ve really stepped into no man’s land. If you claim that something exists without any proof and someone calls you on it, the correct response is not “prove to me that it doesn’t exist”. PD didn’t wade into that pool, you did.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
PD: "that’s a harshly incorrect judgement"
… is exactly the opposite of what I said. How do I know he’s a bad character guy any more than anybody else know’s he’s not?
The point is, it’s open for debate and that’s OK.
No...
…that’s completely wrong. He is not claiming that DMC is a good character guy. Again, if you claim that something exists without evidence and you are called on it, it is not the burden of the guy who questioned you to produce the proof that it doesn’t exist, as he’s not the one who made a statement without evidence. The burden of proof is on you, not him. No one’s debating whether he is good or bad. The debate (if there is one) is how on earth can people who don’t know him say whether or not he’s good or bad.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Hey foobee
If you scroll up to the original comment, you’ll see I was originally responding to a comment not made by you. You responded to the comment that I made.
Most of the work I’ve seen you do here in the five whole days since you’ve joined seems to go like this:
1. Make a statement based on opinion (certainly the Internet’s raison d’etre, and perfectly acceptable)
2. Get called out on it by people who disagree with you
3. Bend/twist facts to support your opinion
4. Get called out on bending and twisting facts to support your opnion
5. Get defensive over repeated calling out
6. Humbly or huffily apologize
This is no way to make friends and influence people.
by PoorDick on Jul 2, 2010 3:38 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Dale Carnegie - I like him too.
I will take exception to Points 3-4, though, and don’t think I’ve been overly “huffy.” I’m also not sure if I’ve been overly apologetic. But I do try to be humble and open-minded, so I appreciate that sentiment.
I would agree with the rest of your progression though.
No big whoop.
Passions run high right now on this team. I’m sure that by the time the Post-Trade-Deadline Torpor sets in next spring, we’ll either be agreeing that Kahn is awesome, or banning together to form a virtual lynch mob.
Just think of us as...
…the local yokels hanging out at the barbershop in “Hoosiers.” Right now we’re ready to hold a vote to remove Kahn. But if Ricky Rubio becomes Jimmy Chitwood and all Kahn’s quirky approaches (and mounting losses) bloom into a team that buzzsaws the league, there we’ll be, slapping backs in the stands.
Isn't Rambis actually Norman Dale?
And wouldn’t that make Kahn the principal who hires Dale? And doesn’t the analogy require that before the team can be successful, Kahn has to become bedridden and completely unable to interfere with the coach’s decisions? And is it wrong to root for that to happen, just until the Wolves make the state championship NBA Finals?
Good point...
Although like Norman Dale, Kahn’s been out of the game for an extended period of time and this job is likely his last shot.
So many layers…
A thought about "system" teams...
By this, I mean teams that obviously want to pursue a style of play and get players who fit it, as opposed to building a style of play around the guys already there. The early-decade Kings would be an example of a “system” team: they obviously needed C-Webb to be a title contender, but their other pieces (Turkoglu, Divac, Christie, Brad Miller, Stojakovic) were based on fitting the Princeton offense. Ultimately, having that style of play led to regular-season consistency and some trades where they moved less talent for more talent (Williams for Bibby, Williamson for Christie, Pollard and Turkoglu for Miller).
With that in mind, is it possible that some of these guys end up increasing their value if they’re placed in a system that exploits their strengths and hides their weaknesses? To be honest, the Wolves haven’t had that system since the WCF year. Their success under Flip allowed them to make lopsided deals (Dean Garrett for Marc Jackson, Peeler and Smith for Cassell and Johnson) that improved their team. Ultimately, I think it’s at least possible that a team with an established and effective system ends up more successful than a more-talented and less-cohesive team and ends up with players who are valued more than their talent suggests. I don’t know if this is what will happen for the Wolves, but adding players who aren’t BPA but fit their desired style of play might lead to more success and more-valuable assets.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jul 2, 2010 12:26 PM CDT reply actions
This
System is a large part of why the Jazz are always competetive. You just need to establish an identity to create known roles and provide entertainment. A good coach can tweak it to get slightly better results and a good GM can take those players having better than realistic years and turn them into more talented versions of themselves.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 2, 2010 12:33 PM CDT up reply actions
"System" teams seem like a rarity
The Sloan Jazz, the D’Antoni / Gentry Suns, the Poppovich Jazz, and Phil’s Lakers are the only recent examples of “system” teams I can think of. Detroit’s Larry Brown championship squad, maybe… but that’s about it.
All these teams, except the Pistons, had an elite player in a key role. Before Williams came to the Jazz, they were still a pnr system team, but without the star that made them competitive.
Teams like the Cavaliers, despite their LeBroniness, had mismatched pieces without a team philosophy in place, and ended up underachieving when it mattered; but teams like the Suns, when given players that fit a philosophy, seem to overachieve a bit (who had the Suns as conference finalists before the season? Anyone?)
I don’t know what this means, but it’s reassuring. Kahn and Rambis are definitely installing a philosophy of some sort (long athletes, running offense), and this seems to be a recipe for success.
Wow..
…Al Jefferson just got a bit more valuable with Boozer being the last power forward out there on the free agent market. That’s insane money for a guy with a rebuilt knee, a busted eyeball, and who doesn’t play defense.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
I don't think Bosh has decided yet
although it has been hinted that he is going to MIA.
Wierd that Wade is doing the free agent tour. Make up your mind man. Are you recruiting for the Heat or leaving?
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." -- Yogi Berra
by Wile E Coyote on Jul 2, 2010 2:30 PM CDT up reply actions
Wade is starting to look like an idiot
And he’s going to be left with Boozer if he’s not careful.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
I thought it was interesting that Chris Bosh
took a shot at Wade on Twitter by saying that he would not bring a video crew along to his free agency meetings (like Wade is doing) because he (Bosh) is a professional. The same Chris Bosh who has been tweeting around the clock about the entire free agency process, asking his fans where he should go, etc.
Actively looking for red flags since my 5th grade traveling team
yeah..
..that was pretty direct.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
David Lee
Don’t forget about him, unless you think Kahn is signing him over the weekend. He’s a tier below Boozer, but still a good player.
let's hope...
…he gets a crazy offer too.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
So sad
that our biggest cheers during free agency are for when Kahn is prevented from doing what he wants to do.
by PoorDick on Jul 2, 2010 3:10 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
DMC may have been the BPA ....
…. but I think Kahn and Rambis may have thought that by taking WJ they could
avoid migraine headaches the likes of Sprewell, Arenas, Alston, and
Eddie Curry can give you. He may have been good to get & trade, however.
Minnesota doesn’t have the opportunities that some teams have. They can’t
get NBA free agents to play there; heck, they can’t even get Euroleague
players they’ve drafted to play there! What’s a guy to do?
I think Prez and coach have it tougher than the big markets, so they need
to be cut some slack.
If GSW and Stop’n’Pop have to take a hike, they have to take a hike. This is
going to take longer than it does in a big market town with glitz and stars;
maybe twice the time. Even when we had KG things weren’t smokin’.
We’re fighting a war on several fronts and the logistics don’t look good,
so we have to fight a guerilla war. That takes time and commitment for
the long haul. Don’t give up now.
"Let's Roll"
by Williston_Coyote on Jul 3, 2010 6:17 AM CDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Canis Hoopus is straight T-Wolves straight from Minnesota.
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Next Game
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Video: Boston works in a half-court football snap after winning the tip
- Judging the choices for the Eastern Conference All-Star team reserves
- Judging the choices for the Western Conference All-Star team reserves
- Jeremy Lin draws inspiration from Tim Tebow
- Stephen Jackson is already tired of Milwaukee
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
