Be easy, Mike Beasley
by Stop-n-Pop on Jul 9, 2010 10:21 AM CDT
Email
PrintFirst of all, let me just say that no matter what you think about David Kahn or the Wolves' most recent moves, the off season status quo for this team was a front court of Kevin Love, Al Jefferson, and DeMarcus Cousins. Throw in Luke Babbitt or James Anderson and that's still before an additional first round pick and a boat load of cap space were thrown at the wall to see what would stick.
That being said, David Kahn's post-draft moves have been widely better than advertised, culminating with his ability to gain the 2nd pick in the 2008 Draft for a swap of 1st round picks with Miami sometime in the next 7 years. Will the Bosh/Wade /James trio last 7 years on South Beach? There's an awful lot of mileage on some of those knees. We'll have to wait and see what triggers are associated with the swap, but I have a hard time believing we're looking at a Marko Jaric type situation. Remember, the Wolves traded for Marko by sending out a #1 pick and getting nothing in return. Kahn got a swap.
Before I get around to Beasley, let's take a look at two of Kahn's other major non-draft moves below the fold.
One of this off season's inexplicable punch lines has been the $20 million dollar signing of Darko Milicic. Darko's contract is for $5 mil/year with a partially guaranteed 4th season. To put this deal in context, Amir Johnson just signed with the Raptors for 5 years and $34 million ($6.8 mil/year) and Drew Gooden signed with Milwaukee for 5 years and $32 million ($6.4 mil/year). Zaza Pachulia is due $14.1 mil over the next 3 years (compared to Darko's $15). Dan Gadzuric is getting over $7 mil/year this season in Golden State. DeSagana Diop signed for the full MLE in 2008 and is due $20 mil over the next 3 years. Head on over to Sham Sports and I'm sure you can find some more examples of Bigs Gone Wild on their 2nd contract.
The bottom line with Darko is that 7 foot players on their 2nd or 3rd contracts cost some coin. Never mind the fact that Darko had a cap hold of over $11 million and he was going to be resigned no matter what, the Wolves still signed a legit 7 footer in his mid 20s with NBA experience (albeit bad experience) for less than the going rate for Drew Gooden and Amir Johnson, and possibly below the market rate for centers who can give 20+ mpg who are on their second NBA contract. Yet somehow that is a punch line. Somehow it is an example of owners throwing caution to the wind and cutting checks with no concern for the bottom line.
Whatever.
David Kahn just signed Darko Milicic and Nikola Pekovic for a combined total of $9.3 mil/year for the next 3 seasons. Do you think they will produce more than, say, Charlie V and Jason Maxiell ($37 mil over the next 3 years)? And somehow Kahn is the joker here.
As for Mike Beasley, the Wolves get a peak at the 2nd pick in the 2008 Draft for a swap of first rounders with the Heat sometime in the next 7 years. There is literally no downside to this deal. Al Jefferson is on his way out so we don't have to worry about the logjam at the 4, there will be plenty of minutes for Beasley to showcase whatever chip he should have on his shoulder at this point in his career, and it's not like the Wolves aren't getting a guy who still has a massive upside.
There will always be the issue of him getting his head screwed on straight, but the one player I have always viewed as a valid comp for Beasley is a poor man's Carmelo Anthony. Let's take a look at their first two years in the league:
Rk Player From To G MP PER TS% eFG% ORB% DRB% TRB% AST% STL% BLK% TOV% USG% ORtg DRtg OWS DWS WS WS/48
(ED NOTE: Sorry about the formatting here. I'm on the road while I'm posting this and I don't have the time to tidy it up. Click on the link for the full version without formatting errors.)
Melo clearly has the more varied game and a better feel for his teammates, but Beasley still has the potential to rebound his position well and be a solid contributor from mid-range in. It should also be noted that Melo was a year younger than Beasley when he entered the league. Here are their per36 totals:
Rk Player From To G GS MP FG FGA FG% 3P 3PA 3P% FT FTA FT% ORB DRB TRB AST STL BLK TOV PF PTS
1
Carmelo Anthony
2004
2005
157
157
5603
7.4
17.3
.428
0.7
2.4
.298
5.6
7.1
.787
2.1
3.9
5.9
2.7
1.1
0.5
3.0
2.9
21.1
2
Michael Beasley
2009
2010
159
97
4337
7.6
16.6
.461
0.5
1.5
.333
3.1
4.0
.786
1.9
5.8
7.8
1.5
1.0
0.7
2.1
3.4
18.9
They are remarkably similar types of players. Ultimately, I think Beasley has a Melo-esque ceiling with his rebounding making up for what he lacks in terms of Melo's facilitation numbers. Will he get there? Probably not, but again, 15 win teams can afford to take fliers like this, especially on guys who should have gigantic chips on their very talented shoulders.
What will be interesting to see with Beasley is where he eventually fits in with the Wolves. Is he a combo forward that can split some time at the 3 or is he straight power forward all the way? His short track record suggests the latter:
Net 48-Minute Production by Position
| 3.6 | -.101 | -.9 | 4% | 2.4 | .6 | -.9 | .0 | .7 | -1.6 | -3.9 | |
| 5.4 | -.003 | .2 | -13% | -.4 | -1.0 | .0 | -.1 | -.9 | 5.6 | 1.6 | |
| .0 | .000 | .0 | 0% | .0 | .0 | .0 | .0 | .0 | .0 | .0 |
Again, Melo has the 2nd year advantage by being more flexible as well as more proficient at each position:
Net 48-Minute Production by Position
| +12.5 | -0.280 | -2.1 | +14% | +0.7 | +1.4 | +3.5 | +0.0 | +1.4 | +0.0 | -2.4 | |
| +4.7 | -0.043 | +5.0 | +16% | +1.4 | +0.2 | -1.6 | -0.5 | +0.7 | +6.9 | +2.7 | |
| +5.5 | -0.130 | +8.0 | +11% | -3.5 | +1.1 | -0.8 | +0.3 | +0.5 | +6.9 | +0.7 | |
| +7.3 | -0.350 | +14.7 | +5% | +14.7 | -7.3 | +7.3 | +7.3 | -7.3 | +0.0 | +7.3 |
Remember, a poor man's Melo is the goal here and he needs to rebound at a higher level than Melo in order for his overall production to reach that peak.
When all is said and done about this trade, it has to be remembered that the Wolves were able to gain the 2nd pick in the 2008 NBA Draft for next to nothing. They brought aboard a massively talented young player who, it should be noted, improved during his second season in the league while dealing with some fairly significant off the court issues. He now gets a chance to continue to improve on a team that can afford to give him a longer on-court leash.
Interestingly enough, the Wolves now have the top two players from our 2008 Hoopus Draft Board: Mike Beasley and Kevin Love. I'm not sure how well this pairing will work together on the defensive end of the court, but....well, I'll repeat it until I'm blue in the face: 15 win teams can take these sorts of risks. Here's hoping that Minny can be more K-State than Miami. I think it's a fairly safe assumption that it will be, especially with what happened last night.
I can't wait to see Beasley in a Wolves uniform.
300 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I am a gigantic fan of this move
My excitement cannot be contained. This is going to be a hell of a weekend.
Check out my NBA Draft blog:
http://casperkid23.blogspot.com/
Ditto
Can’t hurt, and might help alot.
A team like ours will only acquire All-NBA players through two means:
1) the draft
2) taking a chance on a young player with some issues
I wish we had taken a chance with Cousins, not the good but limited Johnson. But Beasley is a great option #2.
What DOESN'T happen this weekend?
First it’s a very nice weekend (easily beats last weekend weather-wise), then we likely see this deal completed, Al getting shipped out, other FAs signing, some Vegas games in SL…
Beasley is going to be a stud here. I can feel it.
Check out my NBA Draft blog:
http://casperkid23.blogspot.com/
Stud backup?
I really dislike the idea of him starting in front of Love, unless it becomes painfully obvious that he deserves to. Thus far, he absolutely doesn’t.
He will not start ahead of Love.
I really like acquiring Beasley, and am more optimistic than most about how good he will be, this next year and into the future, but Love is our best player and Beasley has shown nothing in his 2 years to make an argument for him starting over Love (in the immediate sense).
If he can play SF, which I think he can, he has an opportunity to start. Otherwise he is spelling Love, with some SF minutes mixed in off of the bench.
webster at SG, beasley at SF is what im guessing
"Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die."
im gonna be all up on you like a spider monkey!
i can just see delonte west winning a game of poker against lebron, throwing down the cards he yells, "who's your daddy!"...."oh, sorry man"
by remembering9ergods on Jul 11, 2010 10:27 PM CDT up reply actions
So, taking the rest of the cap space is now "nothing?"
Why didn’t any other team want Beasley? For a 15-win team that needed to make significant headway this summer, we got what?
Pek – an unproven NBA player
Darko – a 7-year multiple cast-off center who was part of the 15-win season
Beasley – at $5M and most of remaining cap space that the Raptors and others refused to take.
Yea, this is a great result!
What would you have them do?
Seriously, I know it makes sense in theory to talk about other big name players, but who were they supposed to spend that money on? Lee and Gay were their best chances and they got away.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jul 9, 2010 10:33 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I couldn't agree more on this...
It becomes much more difficult to criticize a particular move when you take the time to look at the realistic alternatives. Were there better/higher-upside moves to be made here instead of adding Beasley for virtually nothing.
Exactly.
“THEY SHOULDN’T HAVE DONE THIS!”
“What should they have done instead?”
( . . . chirp . . . chirp . . . chirp . . . )
by PoorDick on Jul 9, 2010 10:36 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
See, I don't buy this
I actually think the “what should they have done instead” argument/response is pretty much usually crap (and I’m a little bit frustrated to see it from my respected friends SnP and PoorDIck).
It’s Kahn’s job to build a successful team. What should he have done instead? How the hell do I know? Get better players? How about that? I know it’s difficult, but ultimately, he took the gig with his eyes open, he’s getting paid to make this franchise into a winner, and I can’t possibly know what else is out there. In short, it’s not a fair question: what else should he have done? And you should know it.
Maybe this will turn out well, maybe it won’t. I don’t think I would have done it, but I see the argument in favor. I hope the guy blossoms with the Wolves.
We Are the Washington Generals
by Eric in Madison on Jul 9, 2010 10:45 AM CDT up reply actions
Thank you
The “what else was out there argument” is garbage. We don’t talk to other teams GM’s, we don’t know who else is available. We aren’t privy to all these behind the scene talks.
How about trade for Gortat instead of wasting million on Darko? Just an example.
But consider the forum
All of these message boards are full of suggested trades, signings, moves that are mostly based on nothing concrete (save for folks who know people on the insde). So it goes without saying that we’re not privy to every conversation/opportunity Kahn has… but this forum is for throwing out ideas and hopefully supporting them.
Just because it's flawed doesn't mean it's "garbage"
We don’t have full access to what happens behind the scenes, but we do know the deals that have actually gone down. At this point, there are questions about the use of the draft resources, but the top free agents wouldn’t come here, the second-tier guys all signed deals that most fans wouldn’t have wanted the Wolves to ink them to, and half of the premier free agents had PF as their primary position. Maybe Kahn hasn’t done a great job, but SnP’s main point is still valid and this team has set themselves up to improve next year and in subsequent years.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jul 9, 2010 10:59 AM CDT up reply actions
Yes and No
I agre that the team has improved and gotten better in the short and long term, but how could a 15 win team not improve? With all the assets that the Wolves had I think it would have been impossible not to have improved.
That being said, could the team have gotten better use out of those assets? Who knows, but I personally think so. This team still does not have a #1, and when they trade Jefferson they won’t have a #2 either. I think if Kahn would show a litle more restraint in the what he says to the media and how he interacts with other GM"s, more opportunities may have presented themselves. (i.e. Granger)
I agree that they didn’t maximize their assets, but let’s not have the perfect be the enemy of the good here. The players they’ve added (with the exception of Beasley) are considered long-term additions and none of them have contracts that hamper the team’s future flexibility. There’s also the possible other influences: it’s pretty obvious that Rambis wanted Darko to return, and it’s at least possible that Taylor has told Kahn to do moderate deals because the CBA is about to change and the teams overpaying the Gays and Lees of the world are going to take it on the chin once that happens. I think many were hoping for a giant leap forward because of the possibilities, but that shouldn’t mean that smaller steps forward shouldn’t be given their due.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jul 9, 2010 11:13 AM CDT up reply actions
No shit.
Baby steps, people. What if Kahn and Taylor had gone “all in” with a cap-smashing, hoodwinking, future-be-damned offseason leading to a line-up of:
Flynn
Joe Johnson
Rudy Gay
Al
Gortat
Is that team even in the top ten in the NBA, much less having any chance to overcome What Happened in Miami and what already exists in L.A.? Or Boston? Or even Denver, San Antonio, or OKC? All it does it put the team out of any flexibility for years to come, and loses enough money to make a move out of town more likely.
As the King of Kahn Komplainers, I still say you can’t bitch about what he’s done until you know what he could have done, and decided not to do.
Actually yes
I’d take that team in a heart beat. That team would probably win at least 50 games for the next 3 years. You have what I would call a #2 in Johnson and 2 #3’s in Gay and Jefferson. That team could actually compete in the West this season plus have young players like Flynn and Gay to build around for years to come. If Kahn had done that even by overpaying for those players I would have been happy.
Nine hundred things wrong with that line-up, starting with
1. Probably over the cap once the bench is added in
2. Boring to casual fans, so still no big revenue increase, and the team loses more money
3. Every starter with the exception of Gortat and Flynni is overpaid, and there is some question as to whether Gortat and Flynn are even starters
4. Johnson’s old now, and has peaked
5. Defensive liabilities from top to bottom, except for Gortat
I guess we need to agree to disagree
Johnson has at least 3 good years left. If you don’t like Flynn, wait one year and you have Rubio. That team could run just as much as the current Wolves roster will, so if that team is boring to watch so is the current team. Who cares if they’re over the cap, it’s not your or my money. I agree the defense would be questionable, but I think the you could say that about the current roster too.
well...
Who cares if they’re over the cap, it’s not your or my money.
We should all care about the financial viability of the products we enjoy or benefit from. Sustainability in all things is important. I shouldn’t have to explain that.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 9, 2010 12:04 PM CDT up reply actions
damn block quotes
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 9, 2010 12:04 PM CDT up reply actions
should read
Who cares if they’re over the cap, it’s not your or my money.
We should all care about the financial viability of the products we enjoy or benefit from. Sustainability in all things is important. I shouldn’t have to explain that.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 9, 2010 12:04 PM CDT up reply actions
grrrr
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 9, 2010 12:04 PM CDT up reply actions
how do you end the block quote?
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 9, 2010 12:05 PM CDT up reply actions
Just paste it, highlight it
and blockquote it, rather than clicking the blockquote and then pasting it all.
Rudy Gay: Feeding his family since 7/1/10
sweet
man that thing is annoying.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 9, 2010 12:36 PM CDT up reply actions
What I recommend
Whilst using the helpful buttons in a post, always use the preview button and adjust accordingly.
I got it
If the team is winning, who’s to say Taylor is losing money? WIth a winning team maybe the franchise’s financials turn around. Just because they are over the cap doesn’t always equal lost profit.
cashflow is king
and the team above has shitty cashflow. Al, JJ and Gay would make 48M a year. You mean to tell me that you think the wolves after paying that and the rest of the roster is likely to be profitable?
If someone told me that Taylor could make money with that roster short of going to the championship, I would be smelling around to figure out where the stench was coming from.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 9, 2010 12:14 PM CDT up reply actions
Johnson is a dynamic scorer
but an impossibility to actually sign, not to mention being a defensive liability. I’ll take youth, length, and future flexibility over that roster 10 out of 10 times. Kahn’s said all along he’s building a team to be a Kahntender for the long term.
I understand the desire to win immediately, but a spending spree was not in the cards this summer. Do you honestly think the roster he’s put together this summer isn’t a vast improvement?
Rudy Gay is not a #3, he’s pretty much just some dude. He’s average in nearly every facet of the game, except for defense, where he’s subpar.
Joe Johnson was the third best player on a team that got swept out of the second round in horrific fashion.
Both of these players are making max money, one of them is right on the cusp of 30 and should expect an initially slow, but steady decline. Those moves were indefensibly bad and you’re honestly envious of that? And to top it off, it looks like you have to trade away Love in an S&T to make that happen. Ew, ew, ew.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Seconded
Joe Johnson, Rudy Gay and Al Jefferson do not a playoff run make. That would be a miserable offseason with no future upside.
by Madsen's 3-Point Barrage on Jul 9, 2010 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions
Gortat?
I am completely missing the love for Gortat?
What has he done that proves he would be an improvement on our existing players?
Check out Humdinger TV on YouTube.
http://twitter.com/HumdingerTV
I don't get it either
He plays behind a great center – I am not sure if that helps the perception of his ability. I have seen him play a few times and he looks serviceable but not great.
by Breaking Ankles on Jul 9, 2010 11:26 AM CDT up reply actions
And he has a fairly expensive contract compared to our bigs
I would gladly pay Darko 20 million over 4 years than have Gortat’s contract which is as follows: 2009/10: $5,854,000, 2010/11: $6,322,320, 2011/12: $6,790,640, 2012/13: $7,258,960, 2013/14: $7,727,280
He's a big guy that had a couple of big games a few seasons ago then hasn't done anything else since
I realize the Magic have Dwight, but if Gortat was so great, he would be playing way more minutes. And Gortat is making more than we’re paying Darko.
You'd rather
the Wolves had wasted assets AND millions on Gortat?
I see both sides.
But I think the point that they are pressing is that the critique is logically predicated on the assumption that this wasn’t a hell of an effort given the range of available options. I.e. it’s only an argument with force if we insist that there are better options out there. If that’s something we can’t know for sure, then we probably have to keep it in play.
I disagreed with the way the top of the draft was handled, but I think the rest of Kahn’s work this off-season has been actually pretty impressive. As a team with space that is desperate to improve, the restraint he’s showing is encouraging. If we swing Gortat and Redick or Varejao (or something like that) for Al and change, the stable of players we begin with on opening day is, to be honest, a lot better than what I had imagined coming into the offseason.
Just throw out ideas...
I don’t think PoorDick expects you to know what offers were on the table. But, you can’t knock most every decision made by Kahn without some imagination of a better course of action. His moves need to be compared to something — even hypotheticals — in order to be critiqued.
by Andy G on Jul 9, 2010 10:55 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I think the point the SnP and PoorDick have made with the 'What should they..." argument...
Is not one of pointing to the move as ‘it was basically free any way.’ It is an eye’s open assessment of adding Beasley, an immensely talented young player, at less than $5 million for one year, for peanuts. That is a great move. That argument is… it is hard to imagine a move with better potential for the Wolves than this one… cap space or no. Better yet, we still have pieces to move, as we didn’t give up any of them to make this deal.
We still have Al that we can move. We have other players in nearly every position that could be sent out, with Al, or not, for the right deal. The Wolves got better, with potential of being a lot better, and still managed to remain flexible for other moves. Yes, that $5 million in space can no longer be used, in conjunction with Al, to take back a near Max deal… for Whom I couldn’t tell you because it wasn’t happening.
by Krotz the Wall on Jul 9, 2010 10:59 AM CDT up reply actions
I see your problem here
You have faith and hope in David Kahn (well, and respect for me, but that’s a whole ’nother issue)
I never had any belief that David Kahn would be better at making managerial decisions than would a random coin flip. So in my hard bigotry of absolutely zero expectations, I’m okay with swapping some cap room for a shot at Beasley’s redemption.
Are you joking?
I have about as much faith in your pet hamster to make decisions as I do Kahn.
We Are the Washington Generals
by Eric in Madison on Jul 9, 2010 11:07 AM CDT up reply actions
I don't trust Kahn either..
…but for the following reason: 15 win teams hit the jackpot in the draft and he screwed that pooch. In terms of building a nice cache of supporting players that are better than what he had last year and for a reasonable value, I’m pleasantly surprised. This team should have been Love/Jefferson/Cousins with Anderson or Babbit on the wing, while still being in a position to get Webster, Darko, Pek, and Beasley. As for free agency, the guy got used as a stalking horse for David Lee and Rudy Gay for crissakes. He got who he could and he may even get lucky with someone like Josh Childress or Anthony Morrow or JJ Redick. That’s what 15 win teams on the tundra have to deal with and I think he has made the team better with his non-draft moves. Hell, as much as I hate the draft, Wes Johnson makes them better.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
They currently have no cap space to sign any of those SG’s you mentioned though. And depending on who they trade Jefferson to, they may not get any cap space back either.
cap space
=may. An Al trade to Dal for Damp and picks or player or NJ for cap space and picks will resolve that goal.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 9, 2010 11:32 AM CDT up reply actions
Dallas
They aren’t trading for Jefferson after giving Heyward a ridiculous contract. Yes, the Wolves could trade Jefferson for cap space but the only team I see that as even a remote possiblity is the Nets and nobody else.
Haywood
Most definitely doesn’t solve their need for a post scorer. He’s all defense. Can’t see how this changes them wanting to go after Al.
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."
agreed
Dallas needs to win while they have Dirk since so many of the other contenders in the west will get worse next year.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 9, 2010 12:06 PM CDT up reply actions
Just so I understand
The Mavs just signed Heyward to a $55 million contract to back up Jefferson? If they were going to trade for Jefferson, or even thought it was an option they wouldn’t have signed Heyward to that contract.
Jefferson is a PF...not a C
Keep in mind that Dallas already has Terry as a non starter that sees tons of minutes.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 9, 2010 12:16 PM CDT up reply actions
Dirk is the Dallas PF
So Jefferson is going to back up Dirk? So instead of $9 million coming off the bench they have $13 million coming off the bench? Don’t see that happening either.
Money is irrelevant
We know Cuban will spend. A rotation of Dirk/Al/Haywood is solid up front, and Dirk can probably play the 3 in some matchups.
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."
exactly
the problem is that Dallas doesn’t have anyone that they can really pound it in to when their shots aren’t falling. But with Al they can and it comes in handy to have that type of flexibility. Which Cuban can afford and we cannot.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 9, 2010 12:37 PM CDT up reply actions
Also, in Dallas it isn't just about today
Cuban needs to get something in return for the Dampier contract, just to have a tradeable asset in the future. By having EC’s just about every year, Cuban can use his willingness to pay luxury tax to his advantage and always have a good, though highly paid team. If the Dampier card disappears, Cuban loses a major chip in this game.
It isn't about today with Dallas
Dirk, Jason Terry, Caron Butler, Dampier, Brandon Haywood, Jason Kidd, Shawn Marion, Najera and Tim Thomas all over 30 years old. If they aren’t built to win now, when?
Also, a lot of these guys have contracts that expire in a couple season. They could turn 1/2 their team in free agency and retirements in 1-3 years and it won’t require much cap space. These guys will just start drawing Social Security instead of playing basketball.
Heck Al is young asset on this team.
There are a number of ways...
…they could get those guys. The main one involves moving Al for the Dampier contract. I absolutely would not count that out. Dallas is not going to sit on that asset and they’re running out of guys they can trade it for.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
And being used as a stalking horse may turn out to be in our long term benefit. Our interest in Rudy Gay seems to have caused a conference rival to overpay and seriously hinder their ability to make future moves.
by TWolvesFanInLA on Jul 9, 2010 11:28 AM CDT up reply actions
Exactly!
Going after Gay and Lee were strategic moves, well played.
We knew we would not get them, but we fanned the flames of overpayment, plus got some good press from Lee’s visit, which helps to build credibility.
I cannot understand the disparagement of Kahn’s moves this offseason. He is doing very well. If it’s anger at not taking DMC, we have Rambis & Ronzone to blame, they’re the guys making the personnel evaluations. If they did not like him, how can anyone on this board say with certainty that they are wrong?
Get that out of the way, and it is hard to complain about other moves. The Babbitt opportunity is one where we just don’t know, and again, Rambis and Ronzone would have been involved, and had much better info to work from than we do.
I’m glad to see Beasley here, and we got him for almost nothing. To complain that it limits cap space begs the question — why do we need it? And if we do, that’s what the trade of Al is all about.
I’m just watching the moves with great interest, and I think the FO is doing a great job.
Man, I’d hate to interact with some of you guys on one of your bad days. In the face of really good news all I see is depression and blame-throwing.
I initially wanted DMC
Some would argue that as a 15 win team we need to take chances. I say the opposite ia true. We could not afford to miss with the fourth pick. Wes was the safest pick and filled multiple needs. It was absolutely the right pick and no one should be blamed.
by Achilles Fang 1 on Jul 9, 2010 7:06 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
both arguments make a lot of sense
I don’t think there was a wrong choice here. As with all draft picks, only time will tell whether we passed up a superstar or a headcase or just a guy.
Agreed
I was pretty livid with the draft, really wanted them to swing for the fences with Cousins instead of playing it safe with Wes. I guess it’s true that Kahn thought Wes was the better prospect since attitude issues aren’t a concern if we’re picking up Beasley.
The moves since the draft have made me much less pessimistic, and even the rumored trade involving Love & Batum gave me much enouragement that Kahn is willing to take risks to put his imprint on the team. And now we turn to Jefferson…..
Summer League is irrelevant unless it validates my opinion
by Son of Gerald Green on Jul 9, 2010 12:47 PM CDT up reply actions
I think picking Wes might have been Rambis's choice, not Kahn's
Something like “Get me a !@#$%^ perimeter shooter in here and then we can talk about forwards”
But in the hamster's defense
It’s choices are probably going to be about 50/50 whereas our GM history here has been somewhere worse than a coin flip
by midlife crisis on Jul 9, 2010 11:12 AM CDT up reply actions
My pet hamster
has stepped away from any future executive opportunities so that he may spend more time with his family. We ask that you respect his wishes for privacy, and there will be no questions.
Any questions?
My pet hamster
wrote an insane letter about the loss of woodchips from his cage, leading everyone to doubt his sanity.
Not the point
Do you guys get the concept of decision making?
When Kahn makes a decision to take on Beasley, it means he can’t use that 2nd round pick or the cap space for the duration of his contract.
When you say Kahn made a bad decision, logically, it means you think he could have used that 2nd round pick or cap space more effectively.
To which, it is completely fair to ask “how should he have done that?”
By this logic, you could criticize Kahn for not acquiring Tim Duncan, and when pressed exactly how he was supposed to do that, say “I don ‘t know, not my job. He’s supposed to be a better player.”
I’m not sure I see the downside of this move, which will seemingly not be addressed by detractors.
by Neil Annwn on Jul 9, 2010 11:08 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
What I don't get
Is that detractors attack the hypothetical " what would you have done?" question on the basis that we aren’t privvy to the inner workings of the FO. If this is the case and we don’t know what other deals are out there, then what basis is there for the opinion that we could have done better?
Come on guys, instead of complaining and then saying that you THINK we could have done better, give us some ideas as to realistic moves that could have yielded more talent for that cap space and/or 2nd round pick! If they can’t produce a realistically better deal that makes sense given the motivations of both teams, then there is literally no basis to believe Kahn could have done better. Logically it just doesn’t make sense.
Someone threw out Gortat, but what the heck has he done? He’s like 25, makes 6-7 million a year and has never produced in extended minute. On top of it, what the heck would we have had to give up for him? Cap space? I’ve heard no rumors that he was available for cap space..
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."
Gortat
Your description of Gortat sounds awfully similar to a description someone could use for Webster and people around here seem to love him now. I get what you are saying though. Until everything has played out it will be hard to say much, but I think with all the assets Kahn had, to come away with maybe 2 new starters, that are average at best is hard to swallow.
I'm not a fan of Webster
Really.. Don’t dislike him but I don’t like the idea of adding potential starters/role players to a team as bad as the Wolves, but what’s done is done, and given that fact, going after talent like Beasley makes a lot of sense to me.
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."
by Xand1 on Jul 9, 2010 12:02 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Only partly
Part of it is that I don’t know what else is or was available. Part of it is that I don’t think Beasley will contribute to a winning team, thus I don’t really want him. I would rather still have the money and pick(s).
Further, I don’t agree. If the team continues to pound out 20 win seasons, at some point the question ceases to be: what else would you (a fan) done? At some point, he shouldn’t keep his job in those circumstances, regardless of whether I can come up with “realistic” scenarios that would have been better.
And that’s another thing: what’s realistic? Doesn’t that just become a circular argument with no end? What seems realistic to me might be something you think is absurd.
In the meantime, this damn website isn’t letting me publish a fanpost about the team depth.
We Are the Washington Generals
by Eric in Madison on Jul 9, 2010 11:57 AM CDT up reply actions
But
If there’s no alternative use of that money that could improve our team, what’s the point of keeping it? It’s fine if you don’t like Beasley, you’re entitled to your opinion, but do you disagree from a philosophical standpoint that the Wolves should be doing everything they can to potentially find stars?
I don’t like Beasley either. He could easily flame out. But I would much much rather take the gamble than sign someone like Redick with that cap space. Top-end talent wins in the NBA, and we don’t have it. There’s little point in building a solid team of starters that might one day challenge for an 8th seed. I want a team that can go deep in the playoffs, and to do that you need all-stars. Beasley gives us a shot at that. I don’t see any alternative use of those assets that could have done the same, which is why I’m curious what everyone seems to think would have been a better use for said assets.
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."
OK, you want a suggestion?
Toronto signed Linas Kleiza to a 4 year, $18.8 million offer sheet. I would have preferred the Wolves try to beat that with their cap space than make the deal for Beasley.
YMMV.
We Are the Washington Generals
by Eric in Madison on Jul 9, 2010 12:15 PM CDT up reply actions
Firmly disagree
I certainly respect your opinions, but on this one we’re on opposite ends of the spectrum. Going after potentially solid starters/bench players (Kleiza/Webster) makes little sense to me. It’s all about potential until you find a stud. Beasley’s could be that guy. Not saying he will, but the fact that there’s even a slight chance makes it a better move IMO than going after someone like Kleiza.
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."
OK
I just don’t see the stud potential with Beasley. If I did, even a small chance, I’d be in favor of this. Since I don’t, I’d rather have a guy who has won, has shown toughness at both forward positions, can shoot the ball, and be a real quality glue guy.
I mean, isn’t the upside with Beasley essentially a selfish volume scorer with little else to offer?
On the other hand, I’ve been wrong plenty of times before. Maybe I am again.
We Are the Washington Generals
by Eric in Madison on Jul 9, 2010 12:34 PM CDT up reply actions
"isn’t the upside with Beasley essentially a selfish volume scorer with little else to offer"
I’ll give you “selfish volume scorer”, with the caveat of “efficient selfish volume scorer”, and he should also offer + rebounding and defense. We are talking upside here. The defense definitely isn’t there yet, and the rebounding hasn’t yet reached what we would expect based on his college numbers, but he absolutely has the “upside” to be a stud.
It might be
I’ve always had him pegged as a Shareef Abdur Rahim type of player. A 20/8 SF/PF who thrives in the mid-post with his faceup game and mismatch potential. I don’t love him, but his PER and his scoring rates have been very good for a guy his age. He regressed a bit last year, but he’s still posted PERs over 17 and 16 during his first two years so to me, it’s pretty obvious that there’s definitely potential there. His biggest strength may also soon be our biggest weakness: shot creation. He’ll have plenty of opportunities to show us he can play, assuming we keep him.
If he can put it together he could be a nice player. I’d like to try to rehab him because if he shapes up he’ll at the very least be an excellent trade chip in a couple years. I just see him as having much more potential value, either as a player or a trade chip, than any other potential use of that cap space.
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."
If the Wolves had paid Linas Kleiza
That would have made me very upset. He is getting paid the same as Beasley, with absolutely none of the upside. He is four years older, and the only thing he does better than Beasley is shoot the three. He is a good solid role player, and we have too many role players. Beasley may well strike out, but he could make an All-Star team or two. Kleiza has absolutely no shot at an All-Star team.
by Madsen's 3-Point Barrage on Jul 9, 2010 2:19 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I don't think anyone is saying that constant 20-win seasons are acceptable...
Personally, if they’re not to 30-35 by the end of his deal, he should be fired. But all of the analysis about the moves so far mean absolutely nothing until we see the results on the court. We can say which players we prefer, but we can’t say with certainty which ones will lead to the best results.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jul 9, 2010 12:11 PM CDT up reply actions
Can't argue with this
We Are the Washington Generals
by Eric in Madison on Jul 9, 2010 12:15 PM CDT up reply actions
You’re right in that there’s no concrete definition of realistic. However, businesses still have to make decisions that are based on a somewhat reasonable version of reality.
For instance, the Timberwolves could have geared all of their time and dollars towards wooing Kevin Durant to join the Wolves. Kahn and Rambis could have told free agents “nope, we’re waiting until Durant decides.”
Of course they didn’t do that and rightly so. They’re not getting Durant. While the periphery of reality might be somewhat blurry, most people, at least here, have a realistic concept of what Kahn can and can’t feasibly do.
To your second point, the team has only pounded out one 20-win season on Kahn’s watch. Of course if they’re six 20 win seasons in you can ask what should he have done. You’ve already assumed the conclusion.
If you want to know what’s available, well, there’s a finite number of players in this league and a lot of lists of free agents. Use your noodle and come up with something. ESPN has a trade machine set up. Seriously…..it isn’t like the Wolves options are locked up like the formula to Coca-Cola.
I agree with EiM and Jama on the "what should they have done instead" argument. . .
. . . and I actually like the Beasley move.
I think spending 5 million on Beasley is a good roll of the dice for the Wolves—Beasley is young and has some upside, he’s already produced reasonably well in the NBA (16ish PER which would have been third highest on last year’s Wolves), and it’s only a one year deal. I don’t feel like there was much better use for that cap space this season, but the key is that I acknowledge that my feeling is speculative, and I wouldn’t place the burden to prove otherwise on someone else.
I come out the other way on Darko—spending this year is grossly inflated, he’s at best a slightly below average center, and now we’ve tied up that 5 million going forward for the next three off-seasons as well. It seems likely to me that over the next four years, the Wolves would have found better use of that cap space (either for a free agent or to absorb some money in a trade).
+1
I get Flagrant’s point that the Wolve did give up something – the cap space – and that is valid. But I would rather see BEasy in the fold with a massive upside rather than overpaying a guy like Outlaw to warm the end of your bench… This is a great use of the cap room.
by Breaking Ankles on Jul 9, 2010 10:39 AM CDT up reply actions
If you know you have a deal lined up for Al you didn’t even really give up cap space. You couldn’t do much with the space alone anyway
Wrong
Cap space alone can do you wonders. Look at OKC as example A. B, and C for ways to use empty cap space.
The lottery didn’t get them the rights to Eric Maynor, or the pieces to trade up to get Cole Aldrich. Those moves were both made because they had extra cap space to absorb a contract and get something else in return. It’s how the Wolves got Utah’s pick this year. They took on some of Philly’s unwanteds and got a 1st round pick with it.
And what have Manyor and Aldrich done for the Thunder. The Thunder owe most of their success to finishing second in the lottery.
by Achilles Fang 1 on Jul 9, 2010 2:05 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
The cap space did do us wonders
We got Beasley.
Plus, after we trade Jefferson we may have cap space for more lopsided deals. The Beasley deal is absolutely a slam dunk, we have a guy with all-star potential at 4M for a future second round pick. So now we can’t sign Kleiza or make a different uneven trade (at the moment), big deal. There’s no way we’d do better than Beasley, unless you really think he’s a totally worthless player without any potential.
Like using it to make lopsided trades in the Wolves favor to teams who need cap space?
Like say, the Miami Heat?
and thank God for that
Our future would not have been improved with those contracts.
by midlife crisis on Jul 9, 2010 11:08 AM CDT up reply actions
Yeah, you're right
We should trust the Raptors’ lauded talent evaluators…
Who says
nobody else wanted him? Only teams with $5 million in cap space could provide what Miami wanted, so yes of the 6 teams with available cap space, perhaps we were the only ones that wanted him. Doesn’t mean the other 23 teams wouldn’t like Beasley for another player under contract.
by Jerwol on Jul 9, 2010 10:43 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
what did we give up?
Cardinal
Jawai
Pecherov
Hollins (ok, still here, but GLUED to the bench now)
So, these new guys are a little unproven…Is there any doubt they are not all huge talent upgrades?
Dare I say, the Wolves actually have some pretty impressive depth, and while we may not be good next year, we are not going to be boring…and that is the first time we’ve been able to say that in three years.
If you look at our bench right now,
It finally looks to be league average. Heck table topic conversation could our bench beat our starters??
I just think it is so cool
That we are going to have guys with intriguing upside throughout the roster. Last year our rotation was riddled with guys who clearly had no place in the league.
Rock bottom is FINALLY in the rear view mirror. Let the healing begin :)
by DougW on Jul 9, 2010 11:31 AM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
Exactly
Kahn is making choices that are positively Gladwellian.
1) Take some chances on players with upside.
2) Bring them in for a year or a few years on modest contracts.
3) Create a supportive developmental environment
4) When their contracts are up re-sign the ones who turned out and cut the rest.
It’s rational and even kind of Advanced Stat-y in it’s clear-headed utilitarianism – I’m THRILLED. (and one day I may even forgive them for selecting Wes Johnson)
by Django Z on Jul 9, 2010 3:27 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Who cares about cap space at this point?????
We will not be able to use it anyway. There are no free agents we want that will sign here. We’ll be trading Jefferson, that will give us some flexibility.
There’s no reason to care about cap space anytime soon.
Wrong
As I said above, look at what OKC has done with their extra cap space over the last couple of years. There are always teams calling you to help facilitate a trade if you have cap space.
Column A, Column B
Being under the cap by a few mill lets you absorb contracts like Beasley’s for “free”, which is what OKC has done time and time again.
It can be valuable to have modest cap room. This is the OKC plan, and it’s what we just did / will do again with the Al Relief.
But to hoard up cap space in hopes of top-tier free agents leaves you with a maxed-out STAT and a handful of peanuts.
STAT
I completely agree with that.. Again, I think the Beasley trade is a good trade. I just hope Kahn can find a way to clear $2-$3 million in cap space if/when he trades Al.
Aren't we still a few mill under?
I thought that we were sitting at around 7 million under before the Beasley move. If he makes around 4.5 that would still give us a little wiggle room..
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."
Don't know
You very well could be correct, it also depends on how Darko/Pek’s contracts are written. Again, I like the Beasley trade, I’m just hoping that Kahn leaves some room for in-season trades when they can again get something for nothing but a little cap space.
The cap coming in at 58
should help us out. I think that would have put us at about 15 in cap space going into the offseason. Darko gets 5, Peko gets about 4.5 and Beasley gets 5 (4.9). That should put us with 2-3 million left in space. We could go into next year with a sizable chunk of space if we get something in return for Al..
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."
Yes, jama, you are right
…in fact, I’d go so far as to say that if we’d had cap space, we might have gotten someone like Beasley for a song.
Is this the homerun swing?
Is this our chance to get that #1 option? I don’t see the return on Jefferson getting us anywhere near the potential that Beasley gives.
2008 Draft
First off, good post. I’m also happy with this move, even if it’s clear that more moves are on the way, and those could possibly involve Beasley leaving before he plays a game, here.
Now that we have the #2 and the #5 picks from 2008, I think we should focus on #3 or #7… Mayo and Gordon. The Wolves have logjams of sorts at point guard, small forward, and power forward. We have nobody that I would call a pure shooting guard, except Ellington. I wish we’d target one of these two guys. Whether we have to trade Wes Johnson, Michael Beasley or some combination of non-Love/Rubio assets, I think it’d be smart for a lot of reasons. Both guys handle the ball pretty well, defend pretty well and are natural fits at the 2. Might as well keep targeting the class of ’08.
It would be nice to have some clearer semblance of the 2-3-4-5 before Rubio joins the team. Right now (and I realize that more moves are coming) it seems like we’re stuffing the 3 and 4 spots, without regard for roster balance.
I think the goal here...
…is to move big Al for anything involving a TPE and then to make the big move with a combo of one of the small forwards, points, and power forwards for a shooting guard at the trade deadline. That’s why I’ve always given them until that date before my Thunder fandom. If they can’t balance the roster by then, they’ve missed their big chance.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
I want to see
ESPN ocho dedicating 5 minutes to an interview of Kahn choosing which team he going to trade a PF for a SG.
by Breaking Ankles on Jul 9, 2010 11:36 AM CDT up reply actions
Pieces
are in place for a big trade for some major players. Al = on the way out, Beasley = possible trade bait (contract). Could we get a respectable 7 ft NBA center for that combo? We all know Darko shouldn’t start..
I don't see Mayo as a solid 2
he’s a 1 that can’t (yet) play the one. He’s too short at the 2 and I’m not interested unless I think he can play the 1. But the Wolves don’t need a 1. So no interest in Mayo.
Agreed
Mayo is an undersized 2 and hasn’t delivered on all his vaunted potential. Memphis is having him play the 1 in the summer league to see if he can do the job there. If that doesn’t suggest they have concerns about him at the two, I don’t know what does.
If he is a 2, he doesn’t jibe with what Kahn seems to be looking for.
So how many undersized PF do you have now?
Five?
by caseycheesecake on Jul 9, 2010 10:34 AM CDT reply actions
I'm hoping they can field a team of nothing but..
…power forwards and point guards. %
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
?
I don’t get this post. What is a full sized PF?
"This town, this night, this crowd
Come on put them up, let me hear it loud"
by Stay classy, Joe. on Jul 9, 2010 1:38 PM CDT up reply actions
Well.
Gasol is a over sized PF if only for his Center height/length.. AL and Love are both listed at 6’10 and roughly 260. Beasley is listed 6’10 235. Amar’e is only 6’10 249. So the 5 undersized PF comment really boggles my mind.
"This town, this night, this crowd
Come on put them up, let me hear it loud"
by Stay classy, Joe. on Jul 9, 2010 1:51 PM CDT up reply actions
Beasley...
is actually more like 6’8" with an average wing span of 7’ or so. That actually does make him a bit undersized (and, unfortunately, in the NBA he has been rebounding accordingly).
is actually more like 6’8" with an average wing span of 7’ or so
Wow, you went out on court with a tape measure and Beasely just said “OK man, go ahead and measure me!”. How the hell do you know how tall he REALLY is?
by DBE on Jul 9, 2010 5:20 PM CDT up reply actions
Because they actually measured him at the combine the year he was drafted
and the results are posted on his player profile page at Draft Express: http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Michael-Beasley-605/
by Rascal Flatts on Jul 9, 2010 6:05 PM CDT up reply actions
NBA.com
Michael Beasley – #30 Miami Heat
News Schedule Roster StatsPosition: F
Born: 01/09/1989
Height: 6-10/2,08
Weight: 235 lbs./106,6 kg
College: Kansas StateSeason Statistics & Notes
Of couse it is only posted by the league who did the measuring. I’m sure its a typo. Only Draftexpress.com only has the REAL heights and weight of a 19 year old kid (who may have grown an inch or two over two years)
I hope to God that the wolves have a strong enough foundation
to support Beasley. If he couldnt get it under Wade and Pat Riley, thats not a good sign.
I suppose its worth the risk.
I'LL BITCH SLAP YOU WITH ROBERT SWIFT!!!
by My Name is Bryce on Jul 9, 2010 10:41 AM CDT reply actions
That's true, but...
Riley (and his hands touch everything in that franchise) is not the typical type of leader who puts his arms around a fragile psyche and makes that player feel wanted. If Riles is unhappy with something a player does, he destroys that player verbally… he always has.
With mental giants like Magic Johnson, James Worthy and Dwyane Wade, those guys rise to the challenge and thrive. With fragile-psyches like Beasley, they crumble.
I wish Beasley weren’t this way, but he is. So a coach like Phil Jackson will typically do better with these type of players. So the question to me is whether Kurt Rambis is more Riley or Jackson? Hopefully Rambis has the ability to work both styles in and can go Zen-Master with Beasley.
I just get the feeling that if you do nothing but tell Michael Beasley how good he is and how important he is to the team that he’ll thrive and potentially dominate games. If you berate him, he goes into a hole and gets depressed. Fair or unfair, I just think this is how he is. So hopefully we have the ability to build him up and reap the benefits of his production.
Quotes from Beasley Interview on Hoopshype
Just an interview, the following may not mean much, but comes off as more thoughtful then you may imagine:
After two seasons, do you feel like you have become kind of a lightning rod for criticism during your career?
MB: I do. Honestly, I don’t see why. Everybody makes mistakes and I feel like sometimes mine have been magnified. I feel like I’m expected to act older than what I am. I’m not saying that’s a reason to do some of the things I’ve done. But you know, I’m like everybody else: I make mistakes, learn from them and move on with your life.
Ron Artest was often criticized during the season after signing with the Lakers, but after Game 7 of the Finals everybody was talking about how he had redeemed himself. Do you see that as an example or inspiration?
MB: I don’t. You know, everybody has his own past. I’m following my own path, trying to execute my plan as well as possible and grow, not only as a player but as a person. Like I said before, everybody commits mistakes, and that’s how you build your character… What do you do after mistakes.
Also. cool Tweet from his pal Kevin Durant: Glad my bro mike Beasley is outta Miami…u gon really see him get busy this year!!
Summer League is irrelevant unless it validates my opinion
by Son of Gerald Green on Jul 9, 2010 1:01 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I saw that KD tweet
And was a bit surprised by it, just as I’m surprised that Beasley seems so well spoken. Might be a brain in there after all..
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."
Watch him with this kid interviewer.
Sweetest grade school reporter ever, complete with suit and tie. Beasley isn’t a mean guy.
by Miss Test Pattern on Jul 9, 2010 1:55 PM CDT up reply actions
Indeed
I wonder how intelligent we all were at 19. Probably we all spent our time at church & volunteering with the elderly while forgoing alcohol or any illegal substances.
But I’d be willing to bet that the same people calling Beasley a knucklehead were just as bad if not worse at his age. Albeit with not such a remarkably poor, narcissistic tattoo
Summer League is irrelevant unless it validates my opinion
by Son of Gerald Green on Jul 9, 2010 2:20 PM CDT up reply actions
I dated in the 1990s. Bad tattoos were the rule.
Don’t give yourselves too much credit, guys.
by Miss Test Pattern on Jul 9, 2010 3:59 PM CDT up reply actions
Random question...
… but does anyone know how to find out what Varejao’s trade kicker is?
He's waiting until the tatoos heal
All quotes from this point on will be scripted into the empty space below his angel wings.
by midlife crisis on Jul 9, 2010 11:17 AM CDT up reply actions
I think
those are actual wings, in which case the Wolves should call “Skins” at the beginning of every game.
That'd be a competitive advantage...
I always hated playing the smelly, sweaty big white guys in pick-up games. And if Pek and Darko are smokers, even better.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jul 9, 2010 11:47 AM CDT up reply actions
I play pick up with a guy that doesn't believe in deodorant
I usually have to guard him and it is awful. Dude is fit but still stinks worse than any fat guy i have ever played.
by Breaking Ankles on Jul 9, 2010 11:52 AM CDT up reply actions
Well at least he is humble
calling himself God’s son…
by Breaking Ankles on Jul 9, 2010 11:39 AM CDT up reply actions
I should totally change my tagline to
God’s Son?
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 9, 2010 11:42 AM CDT up reply actions
because I still can't imagine that my mom has ever had sex
so she must be a virgin which makes me an immaculate conception, right?
Does that mean I can turn water into wine? I really need to look into that.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 9, 2010 11:43 AM CDT up reply actions
Never been to church in my life...
…but I don’t think that means what you think it means.
I'll hold your monkey.
a man can hope can't he?
the money I would save…
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 9, 2010 12:38 PM CDT up reply actions
God's Son
Is more of a humble statement than it sounds. It’s a Christian term, pretty common I believe.
by Madsen's 3-Point Barrage on Jul 9, 2010 3:18 PM CDT up reply actions
Also more common
than you’d think.
Rudy Gay: Feeding his family since 7/1/10
Not Jesus. We are all childern of God.
by Achilles Fang 1 on Jul 9, 2010 2:56 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Why the comparison
Why are people comparing the Darko/Pekovic signing to Detroit’s horrible signings? People are still ripping Detroit for throwing money at bad players, is that really the bench mark we should be looking at? Again, who knows if they overpaid for the Euro bigmen, but please stop the stupid comparisons to what other teams bad deals have been. Is it possible that they could all be bad signings? Just because Kahn’s bad signing isn’t as bad as someone else’s doesn’t make it any better.
Check yesterday's news round up.
One of the main Detroit beat writers was ripping the Wolves for their terrible summer, and their gross overpayment of Darko/Pek. The response has been… compared to what the Pistons are getting for their signings?
by Krotz the Wall on Jul 9, 2010 11:37 AM CDT up reply actions
Probably just 'cause it was a Detroit writer
We could compare them to other signings this year too. Excluding the max contract guys like LeBron and Wade, I think Darko and especially Pekovic are some of the most reasonable signings out there. Agreed that Detroit isn’t the benchmark, but we’re passing by other standards as well.
Not sure if they're "stupid comparisons"
I don’t think anybody is using the other bad contracts out there to necessarily say that The Wolves’ contracts are good…
I think the point in bringing up those other bad contracts is just to draw attention to the fact that Kahn/The Wolves get an unduly high amount of criticism considering that there are a lot of really bad contracts that the folks in the national media just seem to ignore.
Are those other contracts ignored
People have been ripping almost all the signings this offseason. Have you heard people praising the signing of any of those guys as a good deal? The only deal I’ve heard that were fair market good deals so far have been Boozer and the Big 3. Looking back at past deals like Villanueva, Diop, and Gadzuric they were all panned too. A year from now Darko’s deal will be just like Diop’s, people will look at it and say umm, what were they thinking.
Maybe I'm looking at this through Minnesota-centric glasses, but...
I just think Kahn gets killed way more than his counterparts do on this stuff. I’ll leave it at that because I’m not really that passionate about this topic…
I disagree with many of your Kahntentions
but I certainly admire your self-actualizations.
Kahntinue . . .
I agree
Plus the fact that the Darko signing just happened it’s on the forefront of most people’s minds. The other thing to remember is that people don’t remember who signed those other horrible contracts because a lot of those GM’s have been fired.
dumars hasn't
so that aspect is still relavent.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 9, 2010 11:35 AM CDT up reply actions
It's come full circle
Dumars also draft Darko, we’ve officially come full circle. Dumars is still living off that NBA Championship. My guess is he’ll be canned in 18 months.
probably
but new ownership tends to do that anyways. (not that they still shouldn’t)
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 9, 2010 12:19 PM CDT up reply actions
Detoilet and Ai
Wasn’t it a rumor that they traded Billups for Ai years ago to be able to have enough cap room for the Lebron lotto? They seem to have planned for the cap space one year ahead of schedule and blew it on Gordon and franken-V.
by Breaking Ankles on Jul 9, 2010 1:19 PM CDT up reply actions
yeah...
instead of just not spending last year and saving it. Horrible cap management.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 9, 2010 1:24 PM CDT up reply actions
This doesn't get enough credit
Signing two sixth men to 10 million dollar a year contracts is absolutely indefensible. Dumars really has made mostly stupid moves over his run, especially since the Sheed trade.
by Madsen's 3-Point Barrage on Jul 9, 2010 3:20 PM CDT up reply actions
Gordon looked like more than a 6th man
At least to me. He could f’ing shoot the lights out, and I never understood Chicago bringing him off the bench. The last year has made me look dumb in that regard*
*though, I had no clue why Detroit, who has Rip Hamilton under an insane contract and wanted to develop Stuckey would choose to get him.
It's established
throughout the media that Kahn is a moron. Minnesota is incompetent. It makes a good story. So no matter what Kahn does, until they pay dividends, it was an idiotic move. Of course, when some of those moves pay off, the whole story will change, and all the claims of idiocy will be ignored.
Except Woj, who really seems to have an axe to grind, and Simmons, who may actually apologize.
I think that Darko's deal
will never be as bad as Diops. Keep in mind that it is basically a 3 year deal if it goes bad and I am guessing that at least 1/2 of one of those years will be a lockout. So you basically get Darko for a year into the new CBA and you want me to believe that this will be an albatross? I call polite BS. If it was 4 years guaranteed or more, then I can see it, but the durations is commonly overlooked for $$$ per year. It is the duration that makes deals go from eh to ugh or ew.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 9, 2010 11:06 AM CDT up reply actions
You misunderstood
I’m not saying Darko’s contract is as bad as Diop’s. What I was getting at is that because Darko’s contract just happened it’s getting talked about. A year from now there will be 10 new bad contacts that will get talked about and people will forget about Darko’s. That is more what I was getting at. A bad contract at some point turns into a large expiring one, is another way to look at it.
Darko doesn't HAVE a large contract
Not sure where you’re going with that one. If Darko had Gooden’s contract I would be hollering too.
It's large for him
3 years and $16 million is still a cap hit no matter how you look at it.
Go back and read b2b's post
This is a modest deal for a 7-footer who has the slightest bit of game. Rambis wanted him back because he sees something in Darko. Call me a fool, but I will take his assessment over yours.
I didn't misunderstand
I don’t think by the end of the season people will look at the Darko contract and say umm. You have made the decision that it is bad, but it is replacement level and crosses the gap between old and new CBA. It will serve its purpose well and that is the end of it. From an owners decision it is not bad at all. From a fan’s perspective who wants more it may be, but that’s it.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 9, 2010 11:38 AM CDT up reply actions
"A year from now there will be 10 new bad contacts that will get talked about and people will forget about Darko's"
How about a week from now:
#Celtics still interested in Kwame Brown, but with only the vet’s minimum to offer, he will likely get more $$$ to sign elsewhere.
No matter how bad Kahn does
He is unlikely to surpass the drafting career of Michael Jordan.
Oh, I think he's too smart to say it publicly,
but somewhere in private David Kahn is telling himself and others that he’s better at building a team than is Greatest Basketball Player in History.
Will Beasley ever play for the Wolves?
I actually think this was a good asset to get for basically nothing. That being said does anyone else think Beasley will get traded before he ever plays here? I know the Bobcats had interest in him and I think other teams that didn’t have cap room would have some interest. Would you trade Beasley for Tyson Chandler? Obviously other pieces are needed but Chandler is the long, athletic Center that they have been craving. Granted his injured more than he’s not but just a thought.
good point
I was just looking at the Bobcats roster, if available, Chandler would be an instant upgrade at the 5.
Like the trade with one reservation...
Every time I saw Beasley play, he looked like a one-man offense: unless the ball went in the basket or he got a rebound, his style of play didn’t mesh with his teammates. He was a ball-stopper, and when he had open jump shots, instead of taking them right away he would often take a dribble or two. This team will need scoring and he can provide it, but the way his tendencies fit into good offensive basketball.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jul 9, 2010 11:06 AM CDT reply actions
Now, this topic I care more about!
I’ve floated the same thoughts, jama. It sounds like Charlotte wanted Beasley the most but just couldn’t find the cap space (no legit takers for Chandler to make room?).
Problem is that I looked at Charlotte’s assets and there isn’t much there – only innexpensive, young players are Henderson, Ajinca, Derrick Brown – nothing special there. They already have a future 1st-rounder committed to Chicago, so moving another 1st-rounder to us seems impractical. No significant international players stashed overseas.
Any interest in Henderson?
He’s a young SG, who reports say has improved quite a bit. You could trade Beasley for Henderson, Anjica, and a 2nd round pick? Maybe a 3 team trade, the Bobcats get Beasley, the Rockets get Chandler and the Wolves get something from Houston?
I will take Making it Wayne
over Henderson thank you very much.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 9, 2010 11:44 AM CDT up reply actions
I thought
Henderson was a strong, athletic slasher with a poor jumper. Sounds like the opposite of Wayne..
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."
Pick Swap
So the pick swap is reported to be a swap of first round picks, executable by the Wolves over the next 7 years. If that’s what it ends up being, this is absolutely an asset for the Wolves. If you look at win now teams, like Miami is built to be, they take their shots over a period of 2-3 years and then they implode and rebuild. If we get to choose what year we swap, I’m guessing that there is a really good chance that we end up trading our pick 20 for something like Miami pick 8 in 2016.
Hopefully this is how the pick swap is structured. If so, +Kahn.
by Mac of the MIAC on Jul 9, 2010 11:17 AM CDT reply actions
+1
I suggested this on the last thread. But I’m betting there is and exception where the Wolves can trade if their pic is lower. The big 3’s contracts are up in 5 years I believe. So lets say year 6, this happens, then we shouldn’t have to give up anything.
It would be nice to get some details. It has not even been announced on the Wolves site.
by Mac of the MIAC on Jul 9, 2010 11:43 AM CDT up reply actions
SI is reporting it as "not yet announced" and the source "anonymous"
it’s a leaked thing. They may very well still be hammering out the details. I’m sure we’ll know more by the end of the day.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/basketball/nba/07/09/beasley.trade.ap/index.html
Amazing nugget in there.
“With Beasley gone, the Heat now have just one player ? point guard Mario Chalmers ? officially on the roster. James, Bosh and Wade have yet to sign their contracts.”
by Miss Test Pattern on Jul 9, 2010 12:45 PM CDT up reply actions
I think they have Anderson too
Or can sign him regardless of salary cap concerns.
Age of Miami stars at beginning of the year...
Bosh: 26
James: 25
Wade: 28
By the end of their deals, Wade will be past his prime and Bosh will be getting there.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jul 9, 2010 11:44 AM CDT up reply actions
Keep in mind...
…that LBJ is headed into his 8th season with over 25,000 minutes played in the regular season and playoffs. He’s could be over 1/2 way through his career. He already has the 100th most minutes played in NBA history. It’s weird to think of with a 25 year old, but he’s probably closer to the end than he is to the start, at least in a meaningful championship way.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Especially when
he’ll too banged up to make those four-step bullrushes to the basket. Teams will guard him more closely on the perimeter, and his interior and outside shooting should suffer.
Of course, he’ll have his fellow centimillionaires to pass off to, so . . .
LeBron seems a lot more like Karl Malone than KG physique-wise
Just sayin’.
Check out my NBA Draft blog:
http://casperkid23.blogspot.com/
Yeah...
….but it’s still pretty rare for a guy to get to 40k minutes, let alone 50k. I think they’ve got 5 good years with that trio. Granted, I’d take it in a second, but I’d be surprised if they’re around for 7 full years.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Agree
Miami will have a great five year run, then the bottom falls out. Don’t forget the 4th piece of the puzzle (Mike Miller) getting a long term deal. They will definitely start to fade once Wade turns 32. I like your note on LeBron’s minutes already top-100 in NBA history, I would have never known. One other thing, with their roster, the starters are going to have to average about 40 minutes per game then next couple years, plus at least that many minutes in long playoff runs.
Funny part about this is
the Bucks are going to be the death of Miami. Maggette will foul them out of the game!!!
Rudy Gay: Feeding his family since 7/1/10
I don't know if that's completely accurate
When 18 & 19 year olds are in college, it’s not as if those minutes don’t count. They’re playing games, lifting weights, doing most of the things an NBA player does. The difference is the wear and tear you put on your joints from your weight, which tends to go up over time.
LeBron is interesting because he is so big and he is so active that he could suddenly become injury prone, and that would really suck for the heat (though for us… eh, not so much)
by midlife crisis on Jul 10, 2010 7:23 AM CDT up reply actions
I wonder if college...
….is like the minor leagues, however. AAU and college seem like they’d be nothing more than long toss compared to the all-out throwing of the majors/NBA.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
That's weird..
….I put in the query for over 22k minutes played and got 100. Good catch.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
He's about to pass..
…Tony Kukoc and he’s led the league in total minutes played twice while going over 40 mpg 4 times. That’s a lot of mileage for a 25 year old. I’ve always wondered if NBA teams would start treating mpg like MLB starting pitchers.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Darko/Niko vs CV/Max
Your comparison of salaries here is terrible. Yes I am A Detroit Pistons fan but there is a reason we shipped Darko out of Detroit. He has NO UPSIDE. He is who he is. 6 pts 4 rebs is a good year for him. I have no idea what Niko’s numbers are, but 6.4 for a Legit 7 footer with a championship ring in his pocket is not worth the MLE. At all. Niko get’s 4 mil? Terrible. I wasn’t a fan of the CV signing because he was our 2nd choice since Boozer didn’t opt out. 7 Mil a year for a player that averaged 11pts & 5 boards on an offseason & messed up foot (plantar fasciitis) is not THAT bad. He will be better next season. Maxiel is just an energy guy off the bench & a decent weakside defender. He averages 6 & 5 which is all you need from a back up PF/C who is the 3rd option at best. He gets the mid level. Not much risk there. Detroit had a bad season filled with injuries & still turned out better than the T Wolves.
As for Beasley though, I agree a great low risk high rewards pick up. He;d be a better SF option next to Love or Jefferson. But most of the moves you guys are making is picking up players too similar. Drafted a SF Wes Johnson (great pick up) Then another (Luke Babbitt traded to Por) for another SF in Webster. Now you grab a combo fwd in Beasley which will compete for a starting spot over either Kevin Love, Al Jefferson (if he stays) or fight for the 3 spot with Wes Johnson, Martel Webster & Corey Brewer. What will the starting 5 in Min be & what will their Identity be? I am curious to find out.
Sorry man, but the Pistons are screwed
Darko makes the same money as Maxiell. You say Darko has no upside. Fine. Maxiell is a 6-6 reserve big man. Does he have any upside? Consider that he is nearly 2 and a 1/2 year older than Darko.
Villanueva will play better this year? Why, exactly? Last year his numbers were the exact same as every year in his career except his contract year. Dumars got worked there. He’s 6-11 and averages 5 rpg, that’s incredible. And he has a bad foot. But he’ll play better this year? Literally every sign points to him producing roughly the exact same as last year.
There is precious little upside to that squad. Dumars is a legend in Detroit, but ever since the Rasheed trade has been one awful move after another. They’re gonna be paying Rip star money for 3 more years, and he is well past his prime. Their best players are 6th men. Dumars made some solid moves early, and it has been a series of pitiful ones since. How did Billups for AI work? Wait, that cleared cap space so they could sign Villanueva and Ben Gordon. I honestly think the Pistons have one of the bottom 5 upsides in the NBA right now. Waiting for Rodney Stuckey to turn into a star is a great way to secure ping pong balls.
by Madsen's 3-Point Barrage on Jul 9, 2010 3:34 PM CDT up reply actions
Relax, the 2010-11 roster has yet to be set
Whether you like the trade or not, this off season cannot be judged quite yet for multiple reasons:
1.) WE STILL HAVEN’T PLAYED 1 GAME YET!!!!!!!!
2.) Kahn is still looking to move big AL. He has a huge salary, which garners something decent in return.
3.) I hope to see Beasley play for the Puppies, but those who say he is a nice asset are right. Now, if you package big Al and Beasley together you could get something very nice in return.
I will wait to judge Kahn until after game 1 of this upcoming season when we actually have a starting lineup and a full roster. At the All-Star break I reserve the right to praise, applaud, dislike, or trash his moves, but that is after we all see 35-45 games of a TEAM effort.
Packaging Beasley
Unless I am mistaken the Wolves can’t package Beasley with another player for 2 months. Is this correct?
I believe that is correct
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 9, 2010 12:39 PM CDT up reply actions
I think there is a 24 hour window wherein the trade can be...
…extended with another team. The trade hasn’t officially even happened yet. No reason this thing cannot change to include another team.
Who?
What other teams would be involved with a $5mil player? The way trades work is they have to be within “wiggle room” of being equal salary wise. I’m not sure there is another player out there worth $5mil in salary that I would rather have than Beasley.
this is a great deal
and you have the ability to be able to switch defensively on positions 2,3,4 when playing Beasley, Brewer and Johnson.
Milicic has had some difficulty, but he’s a good center for the triangle offense. Thinking about guys like Luc Longley, that had good passing ability, a couple of post moves and a 12 foot jumper. Plus Milicic brings defense.
I hate to say this, but Kahn might’ve done something right and you don’t even have the return from the Jefferson trade that is bound to happen
by NugNugz on Jul 9, 2010 12:27 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Hmmm....
The lack of comment from the Wolves is suspicious.
I feel like another shoe is going to drop before the end of the day.
Check out Humdinger TV on YouTube.
http://twitter.com/HumdingerTV
exactly
something is fishy here, I don’t expect him to suit up for us..even though he would be great in the triangle for us
Either that, or it might not happen, or it could get restructured
This trade could still run aground over the issue of swapping #1 picks. Alternatively, Kahn might be trying to bring in another team.
How did Beasley improve during his second season???
His PER dropped from 17.28 to 16.16, his TS% dropped from 52.8% to 50.5%, his eFG% dropped from 49% to 46%, his rebound rate dropped from 13.1 to 12.6, and these decreases in efficiency occured despite a drop in his usage rate.
The only downside to the trade IMO
I like the trade, but there is a financial downside to it. The Wolves have to decide by October 31st if they want to exercise the 4th year option on Beasley. The cost of the option is about 6.3 million ( according to HoopsHype ), which is high based on his performence so far. However, if they decide not to exercise the option Beasley becomes an unrestricted free agent.
summer league
Any chance Beasley plays in SL? I know 3rd year guys usually don’t although Mayo is (to work on PG skills) and Brewer did (coming off an injury).
I’d love to see a SL line-up of Flynn, Ellington, Wes, and Beasley with Hayward coming off the bench.
From Twitter
jonahballow David Kahn said the Michael Beasley deal is not official yet. #Twolves 4 minutes ago from Twitter ·
Check out Humdinger TV on YouTube.
http://twitter.com/HumdingerTV
B-Easley
im very satisfied with this deal….looking forward to see what were gonna do with Al Jefferson now. maybe we can get a pick of a SG for him. Time will tell.
visit my Twolves Blog at http://timberwolvesbball.blogspot.com/
by MNTicketKingIntern on Jul 9, 2010 1:56 PM CDT reply actions
Wow
I just popped in here to say how excited I am for Beasley coming here, and I have to scroll past a big bitch-fest instead.
I think Beasley is a great fit at the 4 for the kind of up-tempo game we are trying to instill here. And more than that, I think it’s great that we now have someone that can push Kevin Love for minutes if he doesn’t feel like playing the whole game again.
I’m pretty excited about the bigs on our roster right now, and can’t wait to see what they can do next year. Rambis has a bunch of young, talented guys and he can now form them into whatever he wants.
BTW, Why does everyone hate on Darko? Just look at the numbers he put up after being thrust into a starting role in a complicated offense and being in probably the worst shape of his life. I can’t wait to see what he can do next year when he is in shape and has had a chance to learn the system.
by Cobra312004 on Jul 9, 2010 2:22 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
I completely agree
There has been a lot of bitter feelings since the draft. Fanbase losing patience for a historically poorly run franchise.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 9, 2010 2:24 PM CDT up reply actions
Heh--
This quote:
I think it’s great that we now have someone that can push Kevin Love for minutes if he doesn’t feel like playing the whole game again
If you are inexplicably averse to Kevin Love’s effort level, you are going to despise Michael Beasley.
Wha??
What are you talking about Cobra?
Many of us like the Darko contract and our criticism has been of the media’s jokes about it. If anything we defend it.
As for a bitch-fest. It was a pretty intelligent discussion about opportunity costs and what is possible for a small market team that borders Canada.
If your analysis of the Wolves stops at “Hey they got the #2 pick in the draft from a few years back – cool!” then you’re not apt to enjoy the rest of our discussions.
by Django Z on Jul 9, 2010 3:34 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I thought I wouldn't spring for the NBA package being in Chicago, but...
now I have to.
I am stoked. Wolves will be a lot more fun to watch — athletic wings/shooters on Draft night, Darko/Pek as two real NBA Cs (even if just average), and now Beasley. C’mon. No more Pavs, Wilkins, Jawai, Pech, Cardinal, and not too many Hollins minutes. And Darko should be breathing. And you might get a piece back for Al, yet. Even just cap room and a good pick or role player and a good pick would be fine at this point.
The Wolves are officially an up and coming team.
by ChicagoViking on Jul 9, 2010 10:39 PM CDT up reply actions
I hear breathing helps
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 12, 2010 1:11 PM CDT up reply actions
So much for Ty Thomas
he re-upped with Charlotte for 5 years, 40 mil
Actively looking for red flags since my 5th grade traveling team
I thought the dollars were supposed to dry up at some point
but it certainly hasn’t happened yet. Those CBA negotiations are going to be fun…
Actively looking for red flags since my 5th grade traveling team
No doubt, though this contract strikes me as almost reasonable in comparison
to certain others.
Well, maybe not. Still, it isn’t the worst deal of the off-season.
We Are the Washington Generals
by Eric in Madison on Jul 9, 2010 3:53 PM CDT up reply actions
Would much rather have Beasley at $5M & $6M for the next two years.
by TWolvesFanInLA on Jul 9, 2010 4:35 PM CDT up reply actions
At least were not dealing with Boston
For as much hate as there is for Kahn, I must say it is refreshing to see a GM deal with other teams in the league for a change. I was so sick of McHale dealing solely with Boston and giving up everything and getting nothing!
Kahn is at least calling more than one team and getting some bites. He has one large chip in Al which he is trying to deal and hopefully we can find a player to fill that SG void.
This is going to be a very young team no matter what happens via trade, and I still don’t expect over 25 wins, but if this team can gel it could develop into a playoff team (with the right trade for Al and two years of good drafts) within three years.
Who are we planning to fill the SG void with?
Iggy?
Kevin Martin?
Monta Ellis?
Someone still in school?
The Chronicles of JJ Reddick?
If/when Al is moved, I hope it’s for the piece that nets us our starting SG for years to come, an athletic, smart defender who can create his own shot. But there aren’t a lot of those guys in the L.
Not sure about the Chronicles of Redick
but the Greek God Josh Childress should be on your list…..And if Ming is correct, Olympiacos wants someone in the NBA to take Childress off their hands so that they can sign…..Nemanja Bjelica! My God, this could be a win-win for us. We bring Childress back to the NBA as our starting 2-guard (I know he mostly played 3 in Atlanta, but if Webster can play the 2, than Chilly can easily do it too) while finding a developmental home for our talented, yet still immature 2nd round pick. The blueprint for a complete offseason is sitting right in front of Kahn’s freakin’ face. Step 1. Trade Jefferson for Capspace and future pick(s). Step 2. Make an offer to Childress that Atlanta won’t match due to their stupid Joe Johnson contract. Step 3. Celebrate.
by Rascal Flatts on Jul 9, 2010 10:31 PM CDT up reply actions
Webster/Johnson/Ellington
I don’t see a huge void. All three of those guys can shoot. Yeah, the knock is they can’t create. But, at least we have shooting SGs. Al for a star SG would be ideal. Al for an OK slash and create guy + a pick or cap space would be OK.
by ChicagoViking on Jul 9, 2010 10:42 PM CDT up reply actions
maynnn hol up
ayo lebron u’z a bitch mayn how u ognna got o dwyan wades team like dat mayn u a pussy.
Beasly wuss reallty good mayn! ay if u comin here u need ta chief on some of dat kill not dat dirt weed i saw in dat picture maynn.
MAYN HOL UP!
He had that Brown Frown, he needs to get some of that super duper kill, you know we got that shit here in MN, Northern Lights, Diesel, all better than what he had in that pic.
by NorthernLights666 on Jul 9, 2010 3:32 PM CDT up reply actions
I have a feeling
your hobbies may come in handy with the most recent addition to the Timberwolves Family.
About the swap....
…who gets to choose when it happens?
I keep seeing ambiguous language or ‘Beasley for a 2nd rounder and a swap.’ So, to me this suggests they get to choose. But Zgoda says we have the right to push it out 7 years, which suggests we get to choose. I assume we get to choose, because otherwise this deal is not so great, but….is there a clear statement somewhere?
I'll hold your monkey.
I have heard that Minnesota has the right to elect when to swap and has the option to not swap at all. If you hate Beasely, the stipulations of this type of a swap, are worth a second round pick alone. Could be a monumentally huge asset.
by Mac of the MIAC on Jul 9, 2010 8:43 PM CDT up reply actions
KAHN !!!!
From perceived fool in the Media to genius overnight.
I thought, like you, that the media was unfairly mocking the Minnesota
staff, that it’s much tougher for a low tier market team to put deals
together. No one wants to come because they want to be on a Star
team, or in a Star city, the endorsements aren’t there, they want a
championship now, and anything else you can think of (ice fishing is
the entertainment option here?). Now, if Jefferson can find a home,
we will be free to spend a bit.
I think this was pretty big. GOOOOOAAAAAAL !! Kahn.
"You don't have the talent, but you can work harder than everyone else."
Brilliant Move
I’m starting to get nervous that this isn’t real. We get Beasley, who, I suspect, when given the ball, will be our best player. He can create off the dribble. Finish at the basket. Hit the 3. Play defense. Rebound. And pretty much score with the J whenever he wants. We get him for a second round pick. As a bonus, when Miami goes full implode and has to rebuild about 4 years from now, we get to swap picks with them. I could legitimatly see a situation where Miami is deep in the lottery for years 4, 5, 6 and 7 and the Twolves are a playoff team. And it’s not out of the realm of possibilities that Miami becomes one of the worst teams in the league after these 3 leave.
This is better than Foye and Miller for #5. I’m going to be refreshing nba.com/timberwolves with my fingers crossed all night.
+0.8
completely agree except for the play defense part
by midlife crisis on Jul 10, 2010 7:26 AM CDT up reply actions
Hit the 3
27.5% last year.
Rebound
If he’s a small forward, then yeah, he rebounds well, but 7.7 per 36 for a PF is not good.
pretty much score with the J whenever he wants.
His TS% of .505 disagrees with that assertation.
Again, I like the Beasley move. It’s no risk, all reward. He’s a high upside guy who was acquired for nothing. That said, he has not been good so far in the NBA. He has lots of work to do.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Hollinger
Knicks, Wolves improve with trades
ESPN INSIDER
By John Hollinger
ESPN.com
Timberwolves get Beasley from Miami for picks
One of the amazing side stories to the Heat’s successful pursuit of LeBron James was that they essentially gave away the second pick of the 2008 draft, Michael Beasley, after weeks of unsuccessfully trying to get something of value in return for him. The Wolves had to give Minnesota only a second-round pick and an opportunity to swap first-round picks at some point in the next seven years, at a time of Minnesota’s choosing.
Beasley
I remain stubbornly fond of Beasley despite his struggles in Miami. For starters, he’s played dramatically better as a power forward than a small forward, and hopefully that will be his full-time position in Minnesota. According to 82games.com, Beasley had a PER of 18.9 as a power forward and just 14.9 as a small forward, which is entirely consistent with his advantages as a player — he’s too quick for power forwards to guard, but not quite skilled enough on the blocks to take advantage of small forwards.
Even with that, he’s not exactly chopped liver. He’s averaged better than a point every two minutes for his NBA career and he’s only 21 years old. This is exactly the type of player the Wolves should be looking to snatch as part of their rebuilding project — young, talented players that circumstance places on their doorstep for a pittance.
Presumably this deal signals the eventual trade of Al Jefferson. Minnesota will likely start Kevin Love and Darko Milicic and bring Beasley off the bench, where he could contend for the league’s sixth man award if he does what I think he can. It’s going to be rough sledding on D when Beasley and Love share the court together, but he’s at least dramatically more mobile than the wooden Jefferson.
You can’t blame the Heat for taking this trade, obviously — not when they were clearing the decks to bring three superstars together on one roster. That said, Minnesota made a really strong move to add Beasley so cheaply, and if the Wolves can combine it with a trade of Jefferson for a good wing player they could have a fairly respectable team this coming season.
this is interesting
media praising a Timberwolves move? I am interested in Beasley, I remember wishing the wolves could hit the lottery that year to draft him.. I hope Rambis gives him the minutes he needs
He had plenty of minutes in Miami. I just think he needs to be more of an offensive option.
by Mac of the MIAC on Jul 9, 2010 9:44 PM CDT up reply actions
no problem. He could be our starting 4, eventually
And he certainly is a top option off the bench…
Likely starting 5 in Nov — Flynn, Webster, Johnson, Love, Darko (All good O options except Darko)
Bench in Nov — Sessions, Ellington, Brewer, Beasley, Pek (Beasley easily best O option. I hope Ellington/Brewer can hit a jumper and Pek can catch after Beasley breaks down his man, a backup PF a lot of times. I know Sessions can’t shoot. He passes the ball to Beasley to get it started, though. Beasley could be a 6th man-type award candidate)
I assume Al is gone. Hayward and Al pickup or Hollins are players 11 and 12.
by ChicagoViking on Jul 9, 2010 10:33 PM CDT up reply actions
Hoping...
they ask Beasley to play summer league – Flynn, Ellington, Johnson, Beasley (+ the taxi squad) sounds like a pretty fun summer league team to watch.
Can we just go with "SCB" for Super Cool Beas on here?
“Super Cool” isn’t bad either, and would be preferable when speaking in person. Can’t do B-Easy. It’s not a bad one. But I’m a bit demonically cold-blooded towards “initals” nicknames and anything that reminds me of them. B-Easy reminds me of them.
My initial reaction
And I only just learned about this deal, I’ve been in The Middle Of Nowhere, MN for a few days.
If we start Beasley at the 3, we’ve got young players that we’re generally excited about the potential of at every position. That being -
5 – Pekovic/Darko
4 – Love
3 – Beasley
2 – Johnson
1 – Flynn/Rubio
One could almost say something totally absurd. This, for example: we’re only looking for bench players to round out our roster. That’s something we have in common with Miami. The rest of the NBA summer will be a power struggle between Pat Riley and David Kahn. But on the real, with Rubio in the equation, what are we going to trade Al for? Just financial stuff maybe. But what about the basketball stuff? Another three so Super Cool and Señor Love can battle it out at the four? A rebuilding team needs potential, and we’re not desperately looking for any of that for our starting five. Typing that makes me feel like a moron. We’ve been one of the worst teams in the league for awhile now. Just thinking that the Minnesota Timberwolves are just fine across the court and don’t need any more starters at the moment makes me feel funny. I want to lie down. I’ll leave it there.
This is completely absurd, I know. We’ve been
Whoops
Got caught trying get a final thought in there. Just wanted to add that it’s always a risk you run in situations with a lot of talent that you’re intrigued with. You don’t want to overvalue what you have. I could see us being improved this coming year and giving us some nights that give us more excitement than we’ve had in quite awhile. Just hope we don’t fall in love with any exciting potential that does occur and hesitate to make changes to the starting five that will probably still be necessary at some point if we want to build something special. Kahn doesn’t really see like the type to do that, which is something I respect about him.
God this weed is good.
Some would be skeptical of Beasley at the 3
I’m not. I think that is where he has the most potential to be a legit star. I also think it makes sense when we already have our best player at the 4.
Where I would take issue with that lineup is Wes at the 2. I just don’t see it. I suppose it works if he has the quicks to guard smaller 2s, but he cannot handle the ball, and I’ll believe the D when I see it. It also really doesn’t make sense to move him out there when a large part of what makes him a special player is his rebounding and shot-blocking, we want him to spend some time in the paint.
You can take advantage of shot blocking with a SG if he’s guarding guys who drive the lane a good bit, which I think he’s going to end up doing. I also don’t think a SG necessarily has to be a great ball handler. Though I don’t consider myself an expert on Wes yet, so I’ll yield to those with stronger opinions for the moment. But those are general basketball principles that my family has held for generations, going back to 19th century Germany and Poland.
That is good weed..
I’m no Wes expert myself, but the ball-handling thing seems to be a pretty consistent knock. I’ll give you that ball-handing isn’t a must for SGs though. Especially if they are going to be spotting up like Wes will. Still seems weird having a guy with his rebounding ability playing at SG. Are there any SGs that put up good rebounding numbers? I guess Mike Miller is the only name I can think of, and he puts in quite a bit of time at SF.
"Are there any SGs that put up good rebounding numbers?"
A good question, not sure off the top of my head. Another question to consider at the time though – how many SGs have good NBA rebounding skills/potential? Assuming Wes really does.
Still seems weird having a guy with his rebounding ability playing at SG. Are there any SGs that put up good rebounding numbers?
I’m not sure why that seem seems weird to you. It seems super awesome to me. A lineup of Flynn/Wes/Beasley/Love/Pek would absolutely murder on the glass. I’m down for at least trying it out.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
I'd give it a run, but..
My concern with having a rebounder at SG is that the skill might be wasted. The league-wide paucity of rebounding SGs could be due to the lack of talent among those players, but it could also mean that they just don’t get the opportunity to flex those skills. If he can still get boards at SG and handle the other relevant tasks, by all means, make it happen. That would be a really exciting lineup, especially when you get to replace Flynn with Rubio.
…This raises a question for me. I have trouble seeing Wes as a SG, but then when I really think about it, what is the difference between an SG and an SF? How does the skill-set differ? Does it all come down to who you can guard? Is there more to it than that? I guess if Kevin Martin can be a SG Wes can too.
but then when I really think about it, what is the difference between an SG and an SF? How does the skill-set differ? Does it all come down to who you can guard? Is there more to it than that? I guess if Kevin Martin can be a SG Wes can too.
This is basically my opinion on the issue. You just put two complementary guys on the wings and call the one who plays bigger the small forward. Wes and Beasley would probably complement each other fine, and Beasley plays bigger, so Wes is the 2. Not to force everything back to Miami, but won’t that be a fun test of positions? In a LeBron, Wade, Mike Miller backcourt, who plays what position? Wacky! (See? There are at least some reasons to be excited about that move)
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
I would probably play Miller as a super 6th...
Taking the majority of minutes that Wade and Lebron don’t gobble up on the wings. I think they are going to pick Arroyo back-up, and he should see some time backing up Wade at SG, so Miller would see more work at SF.
There will always be an opportunity to go “small” (James is the size of Karl Malone for Christ’s sake) and put Lebron at PF and Miller at SF too. Hell now that I think about it, they could also run Wade at PG, Miller at SG, and Lebron at SF for extended periods… Although I have heard that they plan on picking up Jason Williams, and between him and Chalmers there shouldn’t be many PG minutes left on the table.
If they really do pick up Arroyo and Williams, add in Shelden Williams and another useful role-playing big (preferably a D-minded monster) they are going to walk to the championship next season.
I think
we should try Beasley out as a power SG. Screw the forward role. Let’s see what this guy can do against SGs in this league. That’d be a blast of an experiment.
Rudy Gay: Feeding his family since 7/1/10
On this team, I'm all for trying Beasley out at the 3
At the same time though, I kind of think his best position will end up being the 4. So far, he’s produced much better at the 4 than the 3 (according to PER), and he’s also defended better at the 4 than at the 3.
I think Beasley’s better performance at the 4 makes sense intuitively too. He’s fast enough that other 4s are going to have fits trying to guard him, but he’s not a strong enough post player to take advantage of the size differential between himself and other 3s who are not overmatched by his speed/athleticism.
That might underestimate his back-to-the-basket game and strength, but I’ll remain skeptical until he actually produces better at the 3 than the 4. I agree though that the best case scenario is that he blossoms at the 3, especially with our best player (K-Love) at the 4.
Keep in mind the sample size people are refering to when they talk about Beasley's performance at the 3...
He didn’t play any SF his rookie year, and only player 8% of the Heat’s SF minutes in his second year. We really have no idea of good or bad Beasley is as a SF.
Definately
Absolutely would like to try Beasley at 3. I’m perfectly happy with Love, Darko, and Pek playing the majority of PF and C. Beasley could play minutes at 3 and maybe alittle 4 then have Webster and Wes playing minutes at 2/3. Honestly I would like to see Darko and Pek in at the same time…kind of a twin towers deal.
I have the same vision as you...
this would also make hanging onto Al until the trade deadline a lot more comfortable. Hopefully Rambis sees things our way.
*
shot blocking and also rebounding can be taken advantage of at the 2, not just shot blocking.
Bangin’ Z-Ro, cheifin da kill.
Let's say Beasley develops
into a 22/10 scorer who is excellent in transition and average on defense. What else would this team need? Our front court would be pretty set unless we eventually upgrade Darko.
At shooting guard, ideally we would need a scorer who can play defense who has athleticism, length, and is either in his prime or entering it soon. Iggy would be the only gettable player out there I see. Mayo at 6’4’’ and inability to get to the rim causes me to hesitate.
To me Kahn’s best move for Jefferson and/or Brewer would be to bring back Iggy or a trade exception as well as the best future picks.
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.
