The Worst Moves In The Offseason (Britt Robson)
• Timberwolves sign 2008 second-round pick Nikola Pekovic to a four-year, $13 million deal and re-sign Darko Milicic to a four-year, $20 million deal
A handful of prominent basketball pundits have developed a mob mentality over the supposed incompetence of Timberwolves president David Kahn. But a guy who flips Randy Foye and Mike Miller for Ricky Rubio and obtains Michael Beasley for a pair of second-round picks is probably more than just an arrogant buffoon.
That said, Kahn was bidding against himself when he gave Milicic $20 million over four years (although the last year isn't guaranteed), and should be wary of the ripple effect of also signing Pekovic, another big man who has played well in Europe. Signing Milicic and Pekovic is a concession that time and money were wasted on one of last year's free-agent signings, center-forward Ryan Hollins. But more significantly, it creates a frontcourt logjam that risks taking minutes from Kevin Love and Beasley. The Wolves need to see what they have in Beasley. But the top priority should be making Love -- their best player by a country mile and then a city block -- feel wanted. Love, who came off the bench during the second half of last season, already stated he wants to start. Alienating Love for the sake of more time for Milicic and Pekovic would make Kahn's enemies look good -- especially after Love leaves town.
over 1 year ago
Flagrant
36 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
I know that Britt Robson is very respected in general
but this seemed like a bunch of hooey to me.
Argument 1: Bidding against himself on Darko. I think we’ve all accepted that Darko’s contract is not out of line for centers with his productivity that aren’t on a rookie contract. Maybe Kahn could have negotiated it down a bit, but that seems like small potatoes to me.
Argument 2: Darko + Pek is a concession that signing Hollins was a mistake. So we should have kept playing Hollins instead?
Argument 3: We now have a crowded front court. Neither Love nor Beasley should be playing center; and Darko shouldn’t be playing power forward. So Pekovic is the only possible overlap issue, and it seems to me that he can get enough minutes at center, at least next year.
by Madison Dan on Jul 20, 2010 1:27 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
But what you don't see
is that argument 2 and 3 are really one argument.
The answer?
Hollins at C baby!
You're not letting natural selection take its course! You're like the guy who invented the seatbelt...
Complaining about adding real talent b/c we have Hollins
Is really quibbling.
At the time his signing wasn’t seen as a terrible move, so why is it not deplorable to add real talent over a guy who’s pretty obviously not a piece of the future? His contract is pretty minimal and he was a nice swing for the fences at the time. This is picking some very small nits IMO.
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."
Not to mention that “admitting he made a mistake with Hollins” isn’t a bad thing, because, you know, he actually did make a mistake. Where did the notion that GMs need to stick with their failures out of some stupid sense of pride or machismo or whatever even come from? Shouldn’t he be applauded for saying “My bad, Hollins was a dumb move. Let’s get it right this time”?
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jul 21, 2010 5:13 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Argument 1A – Bidding against himself on Darko. Britt Robson, of all people, should know that it’s not that cut and dry. If anything, we got a bargain on Darko compared to what he could’ve received for a new contract back overseas.
Argument 4 – The top priority should be making Love — their best player by a country mile and then a city block -feel wanted. The only way that statement gets proven as fact is if Love increases his performance with the minutes he’s given. If he performs well (consistently), he’ll get more minutes. And he needs to stop pouting.
"The top priority should be making Love"
It’s definitely in my Top Five . . .
by PoorDick on Jul 20, 2010 3:46 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
Darko in Europe
You actually think Darko was going to get a 3 year $16 million contract in Europe this off season? Anything to back up that thinking? European basketball teams are cutting costs across the board, I see virtually no chance that he would have seen anywhere close to that amount. Even if you factor in taxes I don’t think he would have gotten close to that.
Darko got
market rate for a big man of his size, skills, and production. The insinuation is that Kahn overpaid for him, and this probably originates from the ‘Darko is a bust and always will be’ meme in that Darko should be so grateful to us for playing him that he should accept less. Just plain ignorant, especially from Britt. You quibble at how good he is, but the contract is more than fair. Chalk it up to Kahn trying to treat guys right again – you could be Al, Darko, or Etan, but Kahn will do his best to do right by you. That’s going to pay off one day.
"Styx might be the mullet of bands."
by biggity2bit on Jul 20, 2010 9:08 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
If Darko was say...
the 37th overall pick instead of 2nd, this deal would not be view in the same light. I hate how because he didn’t turn out to be an above average player, he get ripped for getting a contract.
An average to below average player should get = an average to below average contract. That’s what happened. Done. End of story media members. Christ.
Didn't Brad Miller just sign for 3 yrs/15mil?
… to be a BACKUP Center? How would Darko’s contract be out of line if we have him pegged as a starter?? Plus he still had European options. And he may have some untapped potential. (Read these are negotiating power).
You mean pay off as in those players will take him to dinner a couple times?
Or he’ll win an NBA championship? Im confused…
"We're not talking about me and Darko in the same sentence." - Chris Webber vs KAHN!
by caseycheesecake on Jul 22, 2010 11:58 PM CDT up reply actions
Tend to agree
A four man bigs rotation shouldn’t be a problem. Pekovic may get the short end of the stick for now and rightfully so. It also helps that Beas can play some minutes at the three.
Long term I don’t know that Love and Beas can coexist. I would he surprised if either was willing to accept a sixth man role at this point in their careers. I have doubts that Love is planning on staying in Minnesota regardless of the minutes he gets, so Beasley at least gives us some insurance.
by Achilles Fang 1 on Jul 20, 2010 2:22 PM CDT via mobile reply actions
I agree with Britt... a little
I always assumed Pek was going to be dealt immediately. I don’t like that our rotation depends on Beasley playing out of position at SF to get enough minutes for our bigs. I don’t want Love coming off the bench again.
However, I completely disagree about Darko’s contract. The larger contract helps Darko feel wanted. Even though he’s a grown man he’s still only 25 years old. He’s past adolescence, to be sure, but somewhat fragile after being cursed for the last 7 years.
It’s odd that Britt isn’t sensitive to this. His articles that mentioned Rasho seemed to focus in on the insecure giant angle.
by midlife crisis on Jul 20, 2010 4:15 PM CDT up reply actions
I don't know that Love would be happier
being forced to play out of position at center, or that we’d be better off by doing so. That’s my biggest problem with Britt’s column, that he doesn’t explicitly describe how the alternative would be better. More minutes for Hollins? Playing Love at center? I just don’t see how either of those things (which I believe are implied in his arguments) make us better.
If we truly end up with a front court that is too crowded (meaning there are more players deserving of big minutes than there are minutes to go around), it’ll be a nice problem to have. I don’t think the Wolves have suffered from having too much talent lately.
C
Darko 20-28 minutes
Pekovic 20-28 minutes
SF
Johnson 20-28 minutes
Brewer 8-12 minutes
Beasley 8-20 minutes
PF
Beasley 12-16 minutes
Love 32-36 minutes
Why, exactly, will these signings mean less time for Love? The guy’s a good player, but I don’t understand why he needs to be coddled.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jul 20, 2010 2:24 PM CDT reply actions
You’re putting Beasley at a lot of minutes at SF compared to general consensus.
by Wim (Belgium) on Jul 20, 2010 3:36 PM CDT up reply actions
Right--I'd be happy and surprised if
he played that many minutes at SF. Plus, Webster sorta plays that position sometime, too, so . . .
But somebody will no doubt get hurt or traded, so maybe the Master Plan is to not worry about minutes, and just see who can flipping play.
My rotation definitely assumes a healthy rotation of Flynn/Ridnour/Brewer/Webster/Johnson/Beasley/Love/Pekovic/Milicic. It just seems like Beasley can play the 3 if Gomes was able to play there, and I think a big reason he didn’t play there more in the past was because the Heat thought he fit better in their scheme as a 4. That might not be true, but teams don’t always play a guy at the positions he can play as much as they do at the positions they want him to play.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jul 21, 2010 1:56 PM CDT up reply actions
I know it's been mentioned plenty
but they had a very thin frontcourt. They didn’t really have the luxury of going big and playing him at the 3 very often. Not just their scheme…
A few days ago, I also saw in a comment on here (but never heard a source or caught the interview or whatever) that he considers himself more of a SF (?). If anyone cares to shed more light on that, I’d love to hear more.
Regardless, I’m optimistic that he’ll be a productive player at both positions.
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'll 'jump' right to it!
Breaking down cognitive dissonance and group think since gasoline was cheap.
I'm still hoping
that if Sessions is moved in a salary dump, Hollins goes with him. Otherwise it doesn’t make any sense whatsoever.
You're not letting natural selection take its course! You're like the guy who invented the seatbelt...
Well....
for two more years I’d hardly call it a “bad contract” however I would call it a…. bad contract….
You're not letting natural selection take its course! You're like the guy who invented the seatbelt...
I'm calling it
Hollins will assist Crunch this coming season on some of those jumps off the tramp.
Breaking down cognitive dissonance and group think since gasoline was cheap.
I'd rather see the SF minutes
go to Webster and Brewer play more SG in limited minutes with Ellington as well.
C: Yes
PF: Yes, maybe slightly more for Beasley and Pekovic and play Love at C in some lineups (he did well when Jefferson was out)
SF: Same with Webster replacing Brewer
SG:
Webster 15-20
Brewer 13-18
Ellington 12-17
PG:
Flynn
Sessions
Ridnour
Ellington 1-5
You're not letting natural selection take its course! You're like the guy who invented the seatbelt...
Hollins was signed
for two years and 4.8 million total. Not the kind of money you pay for a starting center or even a good back up C. None of the “experiments” seemed to pan out though.
this is the don of timberwolves writers
he knows bad moves when he sees them. two decades of covering this team will do that.
by voiceofharlanspast on Jul 21, 2010 2:56 PM CDT reply actions
Fine to criticize the deal...
…but if we remain within the Center division…um Brendan Haywood anybody??
Seriously, we’re committed to about $28M for 6 player-years for mid-20’s skilled bigs. Dallas is going to be paying Haywood $29M…in 2013-2016. Three player-years at ages 34-36.
In no Universe can Darko/Pek be worse than that Haywood deal. Tiago Splitter needs to get with Haywood’s agent.
I'll hold your monkey.
Best deal of the summer based on top talent and affordability SPURS, period.
Tiago Splitter got what he should’ve from a spurs, based on the long wait and the fact he’s risking injury due to participation in the FIBA world campionships, when he could be putting that time to use with Pop and the guys to get the complexed system down, & that’s coming from a lifetime fan’s mouth, GO SRURS GO!
as a fan of Britt's
I’d have to say I’m pretty disappointed in this article. Good points above pointing out the logical flaws, and these are hardly large albatross deals.
I don't agree with it either
But maybe he’s just afraid to take too strong of a stance, to be seen as a homer. His first paragraph took a shot at the anti-Timberwolves media groupthink. Before that, he referenced Dwayne Casey’s coaching record here, something only a former Minnesota writer would remember. If he doesn’t include a Wolves signing in the article, he has no excuse for writing about them at all, short of dedicating an entire piece to why Kahn isn’t being given a fair rub (which would really work better as a blog post than an SI article) for which he’d be immediately written off as a biased source anyway.
I’ll stop short of agreeing it, but “Here are two things I liked, and here are two things I didn’t like” is one of the most favorable reviews of Kahn’s work we’ve seen this summer.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
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.
