Taking Stock
by Eric in Madison on Jul 9, 2010 12:00 PM CDT
160 comments
A fairly busy couple of weeks since the draft for everyone in the league, including the Timberwolves. As we sit here today, the Wolves have added 2 immediate roster players through the draft (Johnson, Hayward), a couple of likely stashes (Bjelica, Prentiss), resigned Milicic, reached an agreement with Pekovic, and traded for Martell Webster and Mike Beasley. As we currently stand, the Wolves have 3 players still on their roster from before the hiring of David Kahn: Jefferson, Love, and Brewer, and at least Jefferson is likely gone before he plays another game for the Wolves.
I thought I would take stock of where the roster sits right now, and see what sort of team the Wolves are assembling, and what further adjustments need to be made. Over the jump.
As pessimistic as I am, I will say this: at the very least, there has been addition by subtraction this summer. Minutes given to the likes of Pavlovic, Pecherov, and Hollins last year should be going to a higher caliber of player this year, which has to help the win total. The Wolves have added some more quality depth.
Have they become a team, though, that is deep in essentially (below?) average players? Guys who perhaps are legitimate rotation players in the NBA, but no more than that? Flynn, Sessions, Webster, Johnson, Beasley, Brewer, Milicic, Pekovic could all be described that way. Are we sure that ANY of them will be above average for their positions this year? I'm not sure we can be.
It's clear that management is trying to assemble a team that has length, can move, and show improved shooting from what we endured last year. Those are good goals, and there has been some progress toward them. One thing that has not been accomplished is the thing that Kahn harped on regularly: finding a "number 1" player. A best player. A dominant force. Frankly, I don't really blame him for this; getting that guy is one thing that is really a matter of luck. (He could have rolled the dice on Cousins, though...)
It seems to me that they still need a natural off-guard that can score, and at least one intelligent veteran that can help shepherd what is a very young team at this point. (A real athletic presences up front wouldn't hurt either). Can a combination of Al and any of the above mentioned pieces bring those things?
That's where we sit right now. If the season started tomorrow, I suppose we'd be looking at a lineup of:
Flynn/Seesions
Webster/Brewer
Johnson/Brewer/Beasley
Jefferson/Love/Beasley
Milicic/Pekovic
Of course, Jefferson looks as good as gone. Is this a team that's better than last year's 15 win fiasco? I suspect it is, yes; it's hard to be that bad, and there is more quality depth. Is the front line "talent" any better? If so, it seems to me only marginally. The lack of star power is pretty glaring. I'd like to see serious improvement in the standings this year. I'm not convinced I will. What say you?
1 recs |
160 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Apparently people disagree with the average thing
though I completely agree. I got crap yesterday for suggesting we do something like Flynn, Pekovic, and Johnson for Josh Smith and Mike Bibby’s contract.
We definitely made improvements, but I question whether they were good enough improvements. Probably not.
Rudy Gay: Feeding his family since 7/1/10
Thats Silly
I does nothing for us. Do we really want a disengaged J-Smoove?
He was great last season and he finally stopped taking so many terrible jumpers. I don’t know why you wouldn’t want Josh Smith.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
As much as I love Smoove
does it make sense to move three of our most competent scorers for him? (adding Beasley does soften the blow)
I don’t see Sessions, Brewer, Webster, Smith, Darko filling the hoop with any consistency at all. Sessions, Webster, Beasley, Smith, Darko might work a little better, but can Beasley be a #1 scorer at the 3?
The fact that I had to spend a lot time kicking it around in my head means it’s probably about fair value. A lack of scoring is a problem for that team, but it’d be a helluva defensive team. I’d probably hang on to Al for another year while the team tries to find a scorer and since he’d be less redundant with Pekovic gone, it would be a good call to at least hang on to him til the deadline when the market heats up. You aren’t building a team for next year, you’re building it for the years to come, and if you can replace the scoring by the time Rubio arrives, it’s a great deal.
Smith is far and away the best player in the deal and the Wolves are giving up scoring to get him, but no one who brings Smith’s skills and production to the table. I’d do it.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
My original proposed deal was to
send the three I mentioned for 2/5 of a playoff team’s starters and then try to include a 3 or 4 team deal somehow to get Chandler for Brewer and cap space.
Might have to include Jefferson to make salaries match, but then we would have needed a SG back (Vince Carter (muahaha), JR Smith, Monta (yuck, but not a bad fit with that team), JRich, etc. Not ideal options, but options nonetheless).
My original deal’s lineup was something along the lines of:
Bibby/Sessions (Rubio)
Ellington/ Webster or Brewer (Bjelica)
Webster or Brewer (potentially Smith)/Hayward/Smith (Bjelica)
Smith/Love/Chandler
Chandler/Darko/Love (Paulao)
Jefferson on the outs (or give Chandler time to heal 100% and keep Jefferson until the deadline for the volume scoring)
The biggest gripe people had was that we didn’t have scoring. Which I took to mean that we didn’t have a volume scorer. Tons of efficiency in this lineup (especially if we traded Brewer instead of Webster, which is more likely). Might be tough to win close games, but just the fact that games would be close would be a huge step. Also, we’d definitely increase someone’s usage whether it be a little bit for everyone or one or two people taking a heavier burden.
The deal definitely looks even better with Beasley though. I’d make him and Josh Smith form some type of a hybrid forward position where you play them both together but both just as forwards. The deal also seems a lot more difficult with anything except Dampier involved for Jefferson since capspace is nearly gone now and it was already limited before. Most likely the Chandler portion of the deal could be dropped in favor of Jefferson unless we can trade him straight up for Hollins while moving Jefferson in a salary saving deal. But now I’m just thinking out loud.
Rudy Gay: Feeding his family since 7/1/10
Can Roll With Anything Except
Flynn/Sessions
If the rest of the team are not "Top Tier", then they need
a facilitator to make them optimal in their roles.
Flynn/Sessions cannot do that.
We need a top PG.
"You don't have the talent, but you can work harder than everyone else."
by WillistonCoyote on Jul 10, 2010 5:56 PM CDT up reply actions
Glass 90% empty, starting to fill up?
This is a shockingly optimistic post from you Eric…Has Kahn offered you a bribe?
In general I agree with your assessment. I would add that several of the new players have the potential to surprise us. It’ll be interesting to see what Rambis can do with this collection of guys, especially since he stumped for some of them (Webster, Milicic…)
If you had to choose 1 player to be on the Wolves...
would you choose Cousins or Beasley?
Cousins. Without thinking twice.
We Are the Washington Generals
by Eric in Madison on Jul 9, 2010 12:35 PM CDT up reply actions
Yes.
The guy’s reputation vastly exceeds his actual deeds. His future could be all kinds of badness, but he’s 19.
The Wolves taking Beasley leads me to think that Cousins “badness” wasn’t much of an issue for Kahn in the lead up to the draft.
Could have been huge
His gamble with Beasley is a second round pick and a 1st round pick swap that may turn out to be to our benefit.
The gamble with Cousins was an athletic outside shooter who fills a position of need.
I didn’t agree with the draft pick, but I understand the logic
by midlife crisis on Jul 9, 2010 2:23 PM CDT up reply actions
Agreed
If you asked me should I gamble a 4th pick on a potential headcase/allstar or a 2nd round draft pick for a potential headcase/Allstar I would pick Beasley everyday.
Indeed
Peculiar to dodge a potential issue in Coudons only to accept Beasley’s baggage, albeit without a lotto pick price tag.
"I was trying to focus on breathing," Milicic said. "I was just focusing on breathing so I didn’t die."
by Auswolf on Jul 9, 2010 4:31 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
if they keep him they will pick up the option
since half of it won’t actually be paid with a lockout.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 9, 2010 7:34 PM CDT up reply actions
The Wolves will move Jefferson
and Hollins before the season. Hollins for nothing more than a 2nd rounder from a desperate free agency loser, and Jefferson for hopefully something of value. That leaves decent playing time for Darko, Love, Beasley, and Pek.
Cousins v. Beasley? Completely apples to oranges...
I have been pretty consistent in my dislike for Cousins and I don’t really care to get into that again. That said, I would have been doing cart-wheels to get Cousins at the No. 35 pick that we used to nab Bjelica. That’s the equivelent of what we did yesterday to get Beasley.
That’s the point with all this. Cousins would have cost us the No. 4 overall pick; Beasley cost us a 2nd-rounder. I don’t really see any possible similarities here.
This is what pisses me off
Kahn says we need a #1 transcendent player to build around. I agree complete – no NBA team in the last 20 years has won titles with out 1 (more likely 2) all time great type players.
Kahn says we may have 1 in Rubio. I am not sure – historically, Euro stardom has not guaranteed NBA stardom as the games are played in such different fashions. Plus, we still have to work out the financial details. But Rubio may just be 1. I am cool waiting to see.
But Kahn is given another chance – yet he absolutely dismissed Cousins who is widely recognized as the 1 prospect this year who might be a superstar. Cousins is too immature for Kahn.
So, instead, we use the last of our cap space on a former #2 draft pick who has been a bust PRECISELY because he has shown a lack of maturity in doing the work necessary to develop his talents!! The lack of dedication to his craft. That is demonstrated immaturity folks. For 2 years in the NBA.
So someone needs to explain to me how Cousins is too immature for the Twolves to draft – the Twolves who are self proclaim to want to become the Leaders in Player Development – but Beasley is not. Because I don’t get it.
Eh
Risking a high lotto pick vs. risking a smallish amount of cap space are two different things in my opinion. And besides, Beasley is already an above average NBA player. Webster isn’t. Wes Johnson isn’t. Demarcus Cousins isn’t. Darko isn’t. Beasley actually produces….Just not as much as people thought he would.
by Rascal Flatts on Jul 9, 2010 9:44 PM CDT up reply actions
Rascal
My issue is that we need a #1 player and we are going to need to take risk to get one. We are going to get 1 via trade or top tier FA. We are going to need to draft and/or sign “out of favor” players to hopefully get one.
Who do you think has the greater chances of being a superstar? Cousins or Wes? The consensus of most exerts would be Cousins. No knock against Wes – he will likely be a contributing player for many years. But almost no one see him as superstar.
We needed to take the risk.
Arg
It should say "We are NOT going to get 1) I wish there was an edit key – or I typed faster than I think!!
If the Cousins lovers are right
this draft will look awful for the Wolves, but it seems like nobody ever asks the question of what happens if they take Cousins and he becomes Beasley in two years. Taking Cousins and failing might be the end of NBA basketball in Minnesota, especially considering that they can’t just try again the next couple years….the Clippers are getting a pick in the next two years. If the Clipper issue wasn’t hanging over their heads, it might make sense to take a chance, but not when they only have one 1st rounder the next two years.
Not necessarily
disagreeing with your take on passing on Cousins. I’m just saying that I wouldn’t call it confusing on Kahn’s part that he took Beasley since the stakes are a lot lower with that risk. He’s two years into his rookie contract and we gave up a 2nd rounder for him + a swap of first rounders in like 2032 or something….A potential implosion with the #4 pick is a different risk/reward equation. I tend to agree with you that the Cousins pick was probably the right one, but I don’t find taking on Beasley as a double standard.
by Rascal Flatts on Jul 9, 2010 10:38 PM CDT up reply actions
Bust?
Has Michael Beasley reached superstardom at the age of 21 yet? No. Has he had far to many run-ins and issues for my liking? Absolutely Yes. At 21, are we really calling him a bust after he started 78 games for a 47-win team last year? As John Hollinger said, Beasley’s PER at the PF position is 18.9. Big Al Jefferson during his 6th year had a 19.0 PER.
As I said in an earlier thread, I’ve been a consistent Beasley basher, but I love this trade and I certainly think it’s an overly-emotional statement to call this 21-year-old kid a bust.
It makes for an interesting read to check out Hollinger’s take on this trade from ESPN Insider:
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.
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.
Bust? Yes
Based on this:
If a #2 draft pick, only 2 years in league, comes onto the market in a fire sale mode, with 6 or 7 teams still under the cap space, with 3 or 4 more teams needing a PF, tell me how only 1 teams bids, and with only a 2nd round pick at that?
The reason – the player has demonstrated, at the NBA level, to not take his craft seriously.
Now I don’t want people to take this wrong – I think it is a great move for the Twolves. These are the kind of chances we need to take.
I just don’t want the BS of Cousins being too immature while Beasley is not to be a justification for failing to take the BPA in the draft again this year. (re Curry vs Flynn last year)
I agree
It does make the Cousins thing all the more galling, doesn’t it?
We Are the Washington Generals
by Eric in Madison on Jul 9, 2010 10:06 PM CDT up reply actions
yeah
I have a hard time believing that Kahn had confidence that Beasley would be available if he didn’t select cousins. Maybe he did, but that would have to be a pretty big reach non the less. Huge gamble if that impacted Kahns approach to cousins vs wes.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jul 9, 2010 10:26 PM CDT up reply actions
As talented as both Cousins and Beasley are...
If The Wolves took Cousins, I would hope that Kahn would have still made this Beasley trade. I don’t think one precludes the other.
Yes...
This. Adding average NBA players isn’t hard, and getting slightly above average guys only slightly harder. We should be taking every possible risk to land a player with high upside.
I hear you, but
Call me off base, but it seems like an impossible comparison to make without taking into consideration what it would take to acquire each player. We didn’t spend a Top-5 pick on Beasley…
Trust me, as a traditional Beasley hater, I would be leading the anti-Beasley parade if The Wolves gave up a Top-5 pick for him. But they didn’t. As I said before, I would have been thrilled to get a kid as talented as Cousins with the same return that it took us to get Beasley.
I believe it’s entirely logical to hate one player at No. 4 and love that very same player with a No. 35-40 pick.
Apples v. Oranges
Cousins required a lottery pick and an opportunity cost for a different player of substance.
Beasley was essentially given away for cap space, no trade, no opportunity cost.
What do they both have in common? Immaturity and petulance. It is quite possible that Cousins turns into a Beasley between the ears.
I've asked the same question of a few folks...
…and the answer I got from all of those who answered was this: Kahn didn’t think much of Cousins as a player. He thought he was Al Jefferson all over again: slow, only good in a limited way on offense, not able to be a defensive presence, etc. They admitted that Cousins didn’t impress at the Chicago mini-camp but ultimately what put him behind Johnson was that Kahn didn’t like his game. I’m not sure what scenario is worse: that he’s lying about the immaturity issue right before taking on Beasley, or that he’s wildly off on Cousins’ talent.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
It’s like to the degree McHale underrated athleticism, Kahn overrates it (e.g., Flynn over Curry, Johnson over Cousins).
Johnson more athletic than Cousins????
Agreed with Flnn being more athletic than Curry (still have a Tourette’s like attack thinking back to not taking Curry), but for his size Cousins is pretty nimble and athletic and would give him the edge.
Wes is athletic to the extreme,
he just can’t use it to full effect because he can’t get to the rim.
by Bad News Wolves on Jul 11, 2010 1:31 AM CDT up reply actions
Or
does it become 2008 all over again, where the Wolves let the better player (Mayo) leave, while being stuck with Love?
I’ll ask for the 10,000 time (without ever getting a response)…If Cousins was such a transformational figure (he is talked about like the 2nd Alonzo Mourning), then how could he possibly have not been taken in the top 3??? It’s not like this draft was top loaded with Shaq and Mourning. If Cousins was this good, and this sure thing, why wouldn’t he have gone #1…Great PFs are far more valuable than PGs.
I don't think there is a good answer...
…for anyone that didn’t do background checks on the guy. I’ve asked around a bunch on this front and the best I could come up with was someone who said he’s like Brandon Roy but instead of having a knee that might give out, he has a brain that might give out. Now, that’s not me talking and I hesitate to put it even down here in the comments, but I think that’s the conclusions that other teams took when comparing him to players they had ranked just as high on their boards. There’s just no way for us to know on that front. All we have is his play and stats.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Nicely stated...
I still say the Wolves, of course, had every right in the world to not like Cousins, for whatever reason. That’s what they’re paid for.
But if that’s the case, and you’re sitting there at #4 in what you consider a “3 player draft” but you have a fistful of picks and the team above you is being indecisive and sending out signals left and right they may want to move down, you got to move up and get Favors. You got to. This isn’t the NFL draft where you sit back and accumulate square pegs for square holes; this team needed a guy with some juice, and it kills me they maybe got too stubborn/complacent/cute/clever to do it.
Let’s say they do a “drastic overpay” and give NJ the 4 and 16 to move up one spot. Adrian Whodjowhatshisname tweets about 500 times about how the Nets got Kahn to fall right into their trap, right? Right. But the Wolves walk away with a top prospect at the 4/5 who gives them a dimension they completely lack and is necessary for an up-tempo team. So what’s the harm? Particularly when they could have then, supposedly, moved Flynn for Paul George, a player with a similar skillset to the guy they took at #4.
SnP, question
In your opinion, how much input do Rambis and Ozone have into the draft pick process?
Did they think Cousins should be the pick, but Kahn overruled them?
My best guess...
…is that they were in full agreement about Johnson but both really wanted Favors. I think the 2nd round is proof positive that Ronzone has a ton of say.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
If that's the case...
Why does the blame fall completely on Kahn? Don’t get me wrong, he deserves the blame and should take the fall if the pick busts, but it’s not like he went lone wolf (my apologies) and disregarded his staff.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jul 12, 2010 5:01 PM CDT up reply actions
This seems important in evaluating Kahn
Ultimately, he makes the pick and will be blamed. But is he the only one in the room saying “wes, wes, wes!” and everyone else is yelling “DMC, DMC, DMC”? I imagine their were a range of opinions in the draft room.
For the same reason Rubio fell to #5
Some teams have a very specific need that the player does not fill, some teams already have a star player at that position, and some teams flat out have a brain fart and make the wrong choice.
History is full of draft brain farts (Bowe over Jordan being the biggest)
So instead of reaping someone else’s mistake (like he did with Rubio), he choose the safe path with Wes – for a team that plays before 6000 live bodies and won 15 games.
And how many dead bodies?
Rudy Gay: Feeding his family since 7/1/10
No dead bodies
just the 5000 or so ghosts that make up the balance of the announced attendance of 10K+ each night.
True story. Last year, I had more games (4) when I was the only patron in my row vs games (1 vs Lakers) when my row was completely full.
And I have very good, between the baseline, lower bowl seats.
Hmmm
maybe I’ll sneak down from the upper deck to join you in one of those 4.
Rudy Gay: Feeding his family since 7/1/10
Frankly
it happened all the time. People snuck down. I did not care – it was more fun to have some people around.
Yeah
I actually think it’s dumb not to let people come down after the first quarter and a halfish. Looks better on TV and provides customers with a better experience. Obviously it’s not something that can be encouraged or they’ll never sell tickets, but it’s something that they shouldn’t try so hard to discourage.
I don’t know how to phrase it, it’s a fine line between being jerks about it and discouraging it enough to not lose money. Right now I think they (and probably most teams) are just slightly on the wrong side of it.
Rudy Gay: Feeding his family since 7/1/10
What a joke analogy
Cousins = Jefferson?
Cousins hasn’t played a tick in the NBA, Jefferson damn near made the All Star team in 2008/09 prior to injury.
Jefferson has perhaps the best back-tp-the-basket moves in the league.
The only comparison is that they are not quick.
It's based on hope
If Jefferson was two inches taller with the longer arms and twenty pounds heavier, we wouldn’t be locking up darko, we would be watching the best post up center in the game since Shaq was in his prime and probably the best for many many years to come.
I was incensed at the time that we didn’t take Cousins, but with the Beasley trade I feel that Kahn managed to gamble for a potential #1 anyway. Cousins was a huge gamble at that spot but many of us felt like we needed to win the lottery. Beasley already has limited downside and by the same stats that we considered with Cousins, pretty well unlimited upside. If Beasley pans out, Wes Johnson was absolutely the right choice. We only need one #1 player.
by midlife crisis on Jul 10, 2010 6:44 AM CDT up reply actions
Value argument
I’m inclined to think the risk of taking Cousins at 4 is vastly greater than Beasley for a 2nd round pick. Wes lines up as a solid NBA guy, gives them perimeter scoring they so desperately needed, and is a likable kid. Could it blow up in their faces, if Cousins becomes a superstar next to Tyreke? You bet.
Kahn is taking the cheap gamble over the expensive gamble.
SNP reported immediately after the draft that Kahn passed on DMC not b/c of maturity issues, but b/c he thought Wes would be a better NBA player. I hadn’t heard this prior to the draft, but SNP specifically responded to this in a follow-up.
by TWolvesFanInLA on Jul 10, 2010 1:27 AM CDT up reply actions
He was...
….behind Johnson on their draft board.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Cousins
was not below Johnson on the 1st board, but was dropped after Chicago.
(Where, by the way, Cousins only was measured and did interviews)
It isn't that simple though
Because had we taken Cousins, we almost certainly wouldn’t have traded for Beasley. So really, it is would you rather have Cousins and our 2011 2nd round pick, or would you rather have Johnson and Beasley.
I for one would definitely rather have Johnson and Beasley.
by wolves21ok on Jul 9, 2010 4:42 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
+1
Good point. I’m really hoping Beasley can lay off of the juice some, mesh with some of his teamates, and mature a bit. It’d be nice if he were one of those need a fresh start guys.
Johnson, he may have a bit more potential than most of us are giving him credit for, me included. I just have to ignore his age.
If I were Beasley
I would love to prove that I am better than (LeBron, Wade, Bosh).
I wanted Cousins, but like the idea of Beasley & Wes at this point.
Problem when evaluating Kahn is he couldn’t know that he would get Beasley.
I'd rather be lucky than smart...
…as the old saying goes.
Cousins looks like a "JaMarcus" to me
I wouldn’t take a chance.
"You don't have the talent, but you can work harder than everyone else."
by WillistonCoyote on Jul 10, 2010 6:08 PM CDT up reply actions
What a wonderful world it would be
Thank you, Eric, for another thoughtful post.
But we need the rapid return of jumpin’ Joe Hollins, the parameter shooting of dead-eye Pech, and what team wouldn’t want someone named Sasha? They may not have been good but they were extremely predictable. Why? Hollins would aimlessly jump at the drop of an empty beverage container being dropped to the floor by a fan.
Alas, that was so 2009/10.
So, as we stand today we have overstock.com at PF/SF/SG. Are there hidden gems in the remnants? Only time will tell.
Player Development
All Kahn seemed to preach last summer was how the Wolves were going to lead the league in player development. Well, he officially has his chance to prove that. I agree with EIM, that as much as the Wolves have improved their depth, they haven’t done a whole lot to improve the startering lineup. I understand the baby steps philosophy too, but your starters are the guys that matter most.
I think you could argue that not only has Khan not found a “#1” type player he hasn’t found a #2 type player either and he very well could trade the only #3 player they have in Jefferson. Depth is great if you have something in front of it, and right now that is what they are lacking.
by jama on Jul 9, 2010 12:44 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
This is well put
We Are the Washington Generals
by Eric in Madison on Jul 9, 2010 12:51 PM CDT up reply actions
1, 2, 3
Best chance now is Beasley, Rubio, Johnson. That’s more of a 2, 2, 3 if it pans out. The #1 still needs to come from the lottery.
Honestly though if they just become another Blazers / Jazz team that gets to the 2nd round of the playoffs half the time they’ll be in much better shape.
Cast off, layaway plan, novice
That folks is your 1, 2. and 3.
Two of these guys have yet to play a minute in the NBA. A third was thrown over for cap space to a 15-win team who could do no damage.
If not now, when?
Kahn started this off-season saying we need a sure-fire #1, a go to person who could be turned to in the closing minutes to win a tight game.
He had the best opportunity of his contracted tenure to make a difference. That difference:
Pek
Darko
Beasley
Johnson
Webster
(yawn)
The best opportunity to do that this year was
either get the #1 draft pick, and take Wall, or be a desirable location for any of the top 3 FAs. The Wolves didn’t have a chance of any of those after the lottery.
Boozer? Amare? Lee? Gay? Nope, those aren’t #1s and I don’t think any of those really considered the Wolves. Joe Johnson wasn’t going anywhere with that Atlanta offer.
Turner will not be a #1. Favors probably won’t be a #1 but could a game changer on defense. Cousins could be a #1, but probably not on a running team… and could also completely flame out.
I think a lot of people kind fell in love with the idea that the Wolves could land Melo, but I don’t know why.
My point is that I just don’t think there was a number 1 to be had by the Wolves this year. In fact, I think they took a flier with the one guy available to them that just might, maybe develop into something like a #1 in Beasley.
by Krotz the Wall on Jul 9, 2010 1:16 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
I mean really, how many #'s are there in the NBA?
Lebron, Wade, Kobe, Durant, CP3 (maybe), and……..? So we failed because we didn’t get one of those guys? That’s quite the expectation to set for yourself and this team. The only way we get a #1 is by winning the lottery, and even then it’s a longshot that said player will turn out to be a #1. Most “teams” consist of a couple 2’s, a 3, and a bunch of role players/depth.
by Deebs on Jul 9, 2010 1:41 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Long post alert
There are 13:
James
Wade
Howard
Durant
Bryant
Paul
Duncan
Nowitzki
Williams
Bosh
Anthony
Nash
Roy
There are also 10 who aren’t yet, but have an ok chance to qualify in the future
Oden
Rose
Griffin
Rubio
Evans
Curry
Wall
Turner
Favors
Cousins
That makes 23 players who Kahn could pitch to me as the future best player on an NBA champion without receiving eye rolls. None of the 13 vets were remotely attainable (and several won’t qualify for this status much longer). Of the young players, none of them were at all available except Cousins, Favors, and maybe Turner. So I’ll continue to dislike the drafting of Wesley Johnson, but I agree that, draft notwithstanding, you can’t criticize Kahn’s failure to acquire a true “best player on a champion” type unless you can make a plausible case for how he could have gotten one.
In the name of optimism, however, you’ll notice that Rubio is one of the 10 young guys with a chance to be that kind of player. An even greater cause for optimism is the fact that no Celtic made my list. Individually, none of Garnett, Pierce, Allen, or Rondo is good enough to be a guy you’d build a contender around. But they were right there. We all love the romanticized view of alpha dogs putting their teams on their backs, but to suggest that it’s the one and only way is bullshit. Championships by committee do happen, albeit less frequently. The Celtics almost did it. The Pistons did it. The 2002 Kings and 2000 Blazers were flukey losses away from doing it.
You can sit on your hands forever, refusing to improve your team until you luck into that one special player. And maybe that gives you the best odds. But I personally am glad that we’re pressing forward and putting together the best roster that we can, while remaining free of bad contracts and viable for the long term. Maybe Rubio is the savior. Maybe the 2011 draft will bail us out. Maybe a trade will materialize that allows us to consolidate assets into the guy. Or maybe we’ll have a bunch of our guys pan out and become a starless super team.
My point is that I just don’t think there was a number 1 to be had by the Wolves this year. In fact, I think they took a flier with the one guy available to them that just might, maybe develop into something like a #1 in Beasley.
I disagree. Even my own ticket agent (you know he’s getting this from above) says that Cousins could be the most talented guy in this draft class. IMO there was a potential #1 type guy…maybe not a LeBron or Durant type talent, but a #1 type talent guy. We passed.
i'll be laughing at this comment by the end of this season...
and probably the next.. and the next.. and the next…
take it from another "ticket agent"
your source was giving you his opinion…what i heard from mine…cousins and minnesota was a match made in hell, overweight center with attitude problem and just as good of a chance to be a bust as a playa…Turner was at the top of the board and favors was next…followed by world wise wes (didn’t bother to put JW on the board). And that’s just an opinion…no ticket rep has dinner with Kahn and discusses the gritty details…
That was not an opinion from a ticket rep
That was a sales pitch.
We know how to tell a when salesman is lying…
Never know in the draft
Wade picked 5
Kobe picked 13
Durant picked 2
CP3 picked 4
Only one on the list that was picked 1 was LBJ. The draft is a bit of a crapshoot sometimes.
Wes was the best pick for a team that needs help and not a project (both mentally and physically). Couldn’t waste another high draft pick.
You're viewing the world in a small prism
I don’t agree that it’s only a top draft pick or a top 3 FA. That’s putting the world in shrink wrap.
In reality, the world is much larger:
There were several good draft picks in addition to John Wall. And, frankly, no one knows how these draftees will develop in the NBA, including John Wall.
As for free agency, take a look at the entire list of free agents and tell me there aren’t others of high stature besides the “top 3 FAs”.
http://www.nba.com/freeagents/2010/
You have to realize there is a huge gap between Pek, Darko, Beasley, Webster and the “top 3 FA’s”, right?
=====
But more importantly, you are missing the gist of my comment. Namely, with numerous draft picks and an appropriately $13M under the cap, now was the time to make a significant upgrade. The best opportunity of Kahn’s tenure.
But, there was absolutely nothing creative done by Kahn to date. Beasley was handed to him by Riles.
re: Melo: I Can't Stand His Constant Fake Smile
…for 28 minutes … plus, if you get him, you have to put two balls in play simultaneously.
The guy, IMO, seems to be trying to show the world how cute he is rather than having
his head in the game.
"You don't have the talent, but you can work harder than everyone else."
by WillistonCoyote on Jul 10, 2010 6:15 PM CDT up reply actions
My do I disagree with that
The statistical low post monster according to Hollinger and Givony and was available at the 4th pick? And we passed on him for (and let me know if you’ve heard this before) for the super nice guy from Syracuse?
That was your number 1. And if any team was built to take a chance on a guy like Cousins it was the Wolves. Good Lord, we have so many posters here pining their hopes on a guy in Rubio who may or may not ever come here (or at least until after the lockout) – is that not a risk as well?
Summer League is irrelevant unless it validates my opinion
by Son of Gerald Green on Jul 10, 2010 6:20 PM CDT up reply actions
#1 guy no - but the line up is stronger
Assuming it is nothing I like the starting line-up and depth much more than last year. Not starting gomes, wilkins, and hollins is an immediate upgrade.
Look at the most used starting 5 last year compared to this year, without factoring in anything for Jefferson.
2009
Flynn
Brewer
Gomes
Jefferson
Hollins
Flynn
Brewer
Wilkins
Love/Jefferson
Jefferson/Love
Flynn
Brewer
Gomes
Jefferson
Milicic
It seems like they have upgraded 2, 3, 5. i say it is an upgrade at center just to have darko the entire season vs a combo of Darko, Jefferson/Love, and Hollins. i am not sure about 4 – loosing Jefferson’s offense will hurt but loosing his efficiency and defensive short-comings with BEasy filling could be a positive.
Getting Jefferson out of the 5 spot
inserting a true center and having a more athletic 4? Yea, for the defense.
by Breaking Ankles on Jul 9, 2010 1:31 PM CDT up reply actions
Compare rosters
2009 2010
Flynn/Sessions Flynn/Sessions
Brewer/Ellington Webster/Brewer/Ellington
Gomes/Wilkins/Pav Johnson/Hayward
Jeff/Love Jeff/Love/Beasley
Darko/Hollins Darko/Pek/Hollins
Granted that we will get something back for either Jefferson or Love. I am liking the progress. As someone one said, we are taking a step in the right direction. Just not a pole vaulting leap.
The team is certainly better now than they were at the end of the season.
The Wolves certainly don’t have a #1 right now, and when they trade Al they won’t have an established #2 either. In most other ways, the current group is better.
Last year is what I call Transitional Roster # 1. There were a bunch of moves, mostly moving money around, with a the only move of real note being Sessions as a solid backup PG. Al, Love, Flynn and a bunch of filler (with Brewer working himself into a decent energy/scorer off the bench type player). Beside Ellington and Gomes, there wasn’t anyone else on this team worthy of the minutes they were getting. Darko came in a validated what most everyone knew… size can make a difference… but wasn’t revolutionary. This lineup allowed the FO to ‘position itself’ for this off season and focus on developing some players and seeing if Al and Love could work together. All said, the team was awful.
Now we have the makings of Transitional Roster #2. This line up (and I’m assuming Al is gone) lacks any established offensive star game changer type. However there is now NBA level talent at each position, or at least size when we’re talking about the 5. Even more, while you hold up a long list of players who are at best merely ‘average’ right now, there are players at every position with something to prove, unrealized potential, and some plus skills. Defense should be improved over last year, though Johnson may take a while to transition away from the Zone mentality. This team is miles more athletic and lengthy. This is a better shooting team.
Additional pluses:
Darko = if he even manages ‘average’ for a center he is easily the Wolves best true center in history
Flynn = Second year pro who definitely has skill and could yet prove to be above average as a PG (that D really needs to improve though)
Love = We still don’t really know what we have there. He is a terrific rebounder, good passer, and makes the team better is a lot of different ways. What can he do as a starter, or with better defensive help… and outside shooters.
Webster = above average athlete and good defensively… what will he do with a chance to start
Brewer = is there more improvement to be had there?
Beasley = he is a true wild card here. He easily has the most talent of everyone currently on the Wolves. He could be a #2 or even a #1 down the line. There is a lot of work to do there though, both on Beasley’s part and in Wolves’.
Johnson = will be an very good pro and could even be a #2 type… has the athleticism and size to be an above average defender, and he is a good outside shooter… and a slasher.
The idea behind the Transitional Roster #2 is having options at each position with the possibility that 1 or 2 of those players will blossom into something more than expected.
With the idea that Rubio will be coming eventually, a player who has the court vision and passing ability to maximize some of these guys talents, you see which of these talented, if unrealized guys, can grow and has game. With depth of average guys, you have the ability to move them to teams looking for help heading into the playoffs.
What we have right now is a potentially average, sub-playoff team, that has athleticism and youth. Some of these guys will get better. We are not currently tied to any terribly long, overly bad contracts. We have prospects, assets, and maybe a 30 win team this season.
The idea is to get to Transitional Roster #3
Rubio and Flynn/Sessions
The best of Webster/Brewer/Ellington
The better if Johnson/Beasley
The better of Love/Beasley
Darko/Pek
and whatever might come in the draft next year
That becomes Young Core Roster in place with cap flexibility, assets to trade, and a system in place. There still isn’t a #1 on that team most likely, but ones come as a result of luck more than anything else. However, we might just have three high operating #2s.
by Krotz the Wall on Jul 9, 2010 1:09 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Depth
was one of our team’s biggest reasons for losing, last year. With guys like Sessions, Brewer, Beasley, and Pekovic possibly coming off the bench, we should be a much-deeper team.
We just need to parlay some of these assets into a bona fide shooting guard. Mayo or Gordon would be ideal. Or, win the lottery next year and draft Harrison Barnes. Something like that.
Cleveland
will win the lottery next year. Right Mr. Stern?
More than one poster has said that Darko is the best center...
…ever to play on the Wolves. Assuming he gets in shape, plays like he showed he is able to play last year.
Here’s a question:
Is Darko as good as or better than Luc Longley? And if so, is that good enough for now?
Best center to ever play on the Wolves
Is saying very, very little. Luc Longley? Now that depressing.
KG played C at times
so basically in however many minutes he did so, he did more for us than any other C we have ever had… Or, all of them combined. Doesn’t this qualify KG as our best C ever? I don’t think it’s unfair to say he was so good that he gets 2 positions in addition to best Wolf of all time.
Rudy Gay: Feeding his family since 7/1/10
What about Rasho
He averaged 11 & 7 with a couple blocks and did a decent job clogging the middle. The only problem was that he wilted in front of Shaq. If Darko plays like Rasho I would be thrilled for the low price.
by midlife crisis on Jul 10, 2010 6:52 AM CDT up reply actions
Felton Spencer 3rd?
Beyond that it’s a whole lotta nothing.
Dean Garrett
Was very good with Marbury to set him up.
I think Dean Garrett deserves some credit for that
Not many people in this league have been able to play next to Marbury let alone play better next to him.
Rudy Gay: Feeding his family since 7/1/10
The point of the question on Luc Longley was
…that he has some champion rings.
We don’t need the best player at every position, and the Bulls showed, with Cartwright and Longley, that the center position can be filled by a competent but not great player on a championship team.
Of course it varies from team to team, and year to year, but that’s the facts.
wolves signed eddy curry
"Brian Cardinal left Purdue being the only Boilermaker to receive both the "Mr. Hustle" Award and the "Courage" Award four years in a row"
is what i'm hearing?
"Brian Cardinal left Purdue being the only Boilermaker to receive both the "Mr. Hustle" Award and the "Courage" Award four years in a row"
also tyrus thomas got locked up by charlotte according to
http://twitter.com/WojYahooNBA/status/18143739041
"Brian Cardinal left Purdue being the only Boilermaker to receive both the "Mr. Hustle" Award and the "Courage" Award four years in a row"
only its was a joke.
"Brian Cardinal left Purdue being the only Boilermaker to receive both the "Mr. Hustle" Award and the "Courage" Award four years in a row"
What does "addition by subtraction" mean?
“at the very least, there has been addition by subtraction this summer. Minutes given to the likes of Pavlovic, Pecherov, and Hollins last year should be going to a higher caliber of player this year, which has to help the win total.”
That sounds like “improving depth.” “Addition by subtraction,” to me, is when you trade away Ricky Davis and Mark Blount because they’re soaking up minutes and not helping you win.
by Miss Test Pattern on Jul 9, 2010 3:20 PM CDT reply actions
I think it's mostly
because they are now no longer on the roster and Kurt Rambis can no longer find a reason to play them. Therefore, subtraction!
Rudy Gay: Feeding his family since 7/1/10
Brian Cardinal. is gone I'm sure.
Ellington should be added.to the list.
Nice post E
I agree that, for example, giving Beasley Ryan Hollins’ minutes and giving Martell Webster Sasha’s minutes will equal a few more wins next year. I think the roster as currently constructed can definitely challenge for 25 wins. I am just not sure the ceiling of this roster is much higher than that of the roster Kahn inherited, is it?
Flynn: Looks like a career backup at best
Sessions: Is a career backup (though better than Flynn)
Ellington: Could be a nice fourth guard on a good team
Johnson: Obviously, too soon to tell but college stats + age = likely upside as a 4th or 5th best player on a good team (and more likely a 6th or 7th man)
Webster: Could possibly start on a good team but would probably come off the bench.
Darko: Wouldn’t be a bad back-up center.
Pekovic: Translated stats look nice, but not “top 4 guy on a good team” nice.
So really the only guys I feel you could make an argument have the potential to be “good team starters” are Beasley, Jefferson and Love. Jeff is clearly getting moved, but you’re still left with your two best players playing the same position, and one of them with clear risk factors. Basically, 15 months into the Kahn experience I feel like we still have two (maybe at best three, depending on whether Johnson or Pek pan out) slots filled on that mythical beast, the Next Good Timberwolves team.
by Jason in the Nati on Jul 9, 2010 4:28 PM CDT reply actions
Agreed with a lot of this. Initially, I thought Kahn was going in the right direction with the Miler/Foye deal, but he’s done little since then but shuffle the roster (admittedly for better fitting players) and add depth. This is all well and good, but not the best use of the boatload of assets we were so often reminded of during last year’s debacle. Others have said this and I agree…it’s easy to get better when you won 15 games. Jason, you said it well above, what’s the upside of this roster vs what Kahn inherited?
The upside has increased
I think it’s no question.
As biggity2bit has mentioned several times, we have a plethora of intriguing players with very real potential to break out: Pekovic, Nemanja, Wes Johnson, and The Legend of Rubio all have very strong upside. Flynn still has plenty of late-bloomer potential, regardless of how much we’ve soured on him. It won’t take long to see how Webster reacts to increased minutes, but right now he’s got something to prove. Beasley and Darko both have something to prove also. And here’s hoping Love gets real, consistent minutes. He could easily be the league leader in OR.
I’m not saying they’ll all reach anything above “average player”, but our upside last year was “maybe Brewer will learn to shoot, or Al will learn to defend, or Hollins will learn how to play Basketball”. This roster offers much more hope than that.
Sure. Our upside is now beyond that of a 20 win team. Nothing near championship level upside though. Any yes, I get all the gotta start somewhere stuff, but how do we take the next step?
Rubio and Player Development
Most of it just comes down to Ricky at this point, but all our young guys should get a little better each year.
Once we have a fringe playoff squad, we can start worrying about “championship level”. You’re setting your sights too high! One step at a time.
Beasley is not the second best player on the Wolves right now. He might have the talent to be, but right now, the production isn’t there. Modest improvement from Beasley would put him somewhere around the 4th best player on the team. I’ll take both Love and Webster over him, for sure. My guess is that at least one of Pekovic or Wes will be better than him. Sessions could be, if he ever figures things out in MN, but that’s a pretty big “if” right now.
As you said, there’s a lot of good role players on the team, which leaves a pretty glaring need for Rubio to come over and be good. The search for that alpha dog is still really, really important and if that guy happened to play shooting guard or center, all the better, but really, if they get a shot at a guy of that caliber, the Wolves would have to take it, regardless of position.
Basically, this team is 2 really good players away from being dangerous. Rubio could be one of them. The other one is still MIA. Kahn has assembled a fairly flexible roster with tradeable assets, so he’s put himself in a position to find that guy. If he can, say what you will about his moves up to this point, he’ll be a success. Now, uh, who’s confident he actually does find that guy?
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Kahn is doing a good job
He’s gained good players, and still has flexibility. He’s hired an excellent coach who players want to play for. He’s hired an excellent talent evaluator in Ronzone.
We are miles ahead of where we were.
He’s made some moves I didn’t love, but the Wolves are definitely in a better position than they were two years back. The flexibility of the roster is (to me), it’s biggest asset right now. The Wolves are sitting on one beta dog (Love), have the rights to another (Rubio) who might end up being better than that, though I’m skeptical that that will be the case. All they need is that one truly elite player. Those guys are tough to find, but Love, Rubio and good role players should equal a pretty decent team, just not a contender. That’s where the truly elite player can change things. Let the Harrison Barnes prayers, BEGIN.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Not calling him a number 2, just one of the very good players an elite player needs to succeed at the next level. He scores fairly efficienly, is one of the best rebounders in the entire NBA, plays respectable man defense, and is an excellent passing big. You don’t need to drop 20 a game to be a huge part of a contender. Guys who rebound and pass like him and don’t completely fail a team anywhere on the court qualify. He’s a high end role player. A sidekick. Think Jameer Nelson or aging KG. Both of those guys were top 3 players on teams that could have won a championship this year by doing specific things very well. That’s what Love’s ceiling is.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Agreed...
Love needs to be a No. 3 option on a good team. Just fantasizing, but add Rubio and Harrison Barnes to Love and rest of the young nucleus… then you’ve got something.
BTW… the closest NBA franchise to Harrison Barnes hometown of Ames, IA? You know it, dog!
So I’m sure The Clippers will enjoy it when Barnes ends up with them…
Amusing how Love wasn't tagged as average
Yet Beasley and Johnson were. Pretty funny to me.
The Love-fest goes on.
This is on the Wolves Twitter panel
Beasley deal not done, according to #Timberwolves official. As of now, still belongs to the #Heat. Could be done in next few days.
"I was trying to focus on breathing," Milicic said. "I was just focusing on breathing so I didn’t die."
Oh
"I was trying to focus on breathing," Milicic said. "I was just focusing on breathing so I didn’t die."
Oops
Charlotte have matched NJ’s offer sheet for Tyrus Thomas 40m/5
Kyle Korver to sign with Chicago 15m/3
"I was trying to focus on breathing," Milicic said. "I was just focusing on breathing so I didn’t die."
Couple of notes
Regarding Senior Beasley
That’s why we don’t even let my Dad touch the remote
Summer League is irrelevant unless it validates my opinion
by Son of Gerald Green on Jul 9, 2010 8:26 PM CDT up reply actions
Ha
Mike Beasley Sr. seems to think it’s a done deal. His description is “Father of NBA player Mike Beasley of the Minnesota Timberwolves” or something like that.
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."
Reclamation City or Garbage Disposal
If the starting lineup looks like this next year:
Flynn
Webster
Johnson
Beasley
Darko
Draft pick wise we are starting 2- 2’s, a 4 and 2-6’s. To get picked in the top of the draft you have to have enough talent/skill for scouts to notice. That is a lot of talent. None of them are over the hill and just playing for us in their twilight years.
However, three of them are busts or semi-busts because of their high draft pick status and what they have actually done in the NBA. So is MN now the reclamation center for failed players or the garbage disposal grinding them up on the way out of the NBA and in to the sewer?
Nice summary. After all this, we still appear to be in a holding pattern for Rubio and 2011 lotto pick. Maybe it will work out. But I tend to agree with your synopsis: they ought to be improved, but they’re still going to be outmanned almost every night.
I’ve half of mind to try something like Rubio-for-Favors and then Love-for-Harden (+ sweetner?). (I love me some Love, but Harden’s got potential to be a do-it-all, efficient 20 ppg guy on the perimeter, which they absolutely must find before they’ll go anywhere). Move Pek for a future first and call it a day.
Flynn/Sessions
Harden/Ellington/Brewer
Johnson/Webster/Brewer
Jefferson/Beasley
Favors/Darko
The dream of a wide-open Rubio team would be gone, but this team would be fully formed starting now, and it has some potential to be similar to the Blazers, actually. (And it’s not like that team couldn’t run: outside of Al, the other 4 profile as above-average in transition). And Jefferson’s the old man of the group at 25. This obviously isn’t as sexy as landing both Rubio and Barnes in 2011 and becoming THE team to watch on NBA League Pass. But that’s not likely to happen, anyway. Can’t blame them for taking that gamble, though, I suppose.
Waiting for Barnes:)
OKC does need a 4 and Harden would be good if they can pry him away. Morrow could be a nice addition as well for the 2 and he is a lights out shooter from beyond the arc. Can’t dribble to save his life which would not be good when you have Johnson on the other wing.
The best thing so far is that they didn’t bring in a geezer FA at a max salary to try and save the team.
I am all for trading the allure of Rubio for something in the pocket like a high pick in the next draft (can’t miss if you trade his rights to NJ or Cleveland) or a young stud like Favors. The more ping pong balls we have next year, the better the chance of landing the #1 and maybe Barnes:
I agree on Rubio. I don’t think his potential is any much higher than Favors’s, and given the time it will take for Rubio to arrive and the possibility that when he does it won’t be on a rookie contract, I’d consider the bird in hand approach.
But, you’re either selling hope or selling wins, and Rubio’s their hope. They’re not trading him, which is probably fine. At this point, my dream offseason stretch run would be something like Pek + Wes for Favors (not sure if NJ does this, but it’s my dream…and it gives them a PF and a guy they mulled over in the draft, assuming it wasn’t posturing). Then Al for either a wing (hard to imagine), or cap space which they would then use to acquire one.
To be clear...
this isn’t exactly my dream scenario. I’d prefer to somehow add Favors, keep Rubio, and ship out Al for a wing.
I bet the odds
are less than 50/50 that Beasley starts the season as a Wolf. He’ll get moved for a 1st rounder expected to be in the mid-teens. Bottom line is Wolves give up cap space for a few months, get an extra 1st rounder, and the option to swap with Miami over the next seven years.
Disagree
Beasley is exactly the type of gamble you make if you are Kahn. No lose proposition. Team option next year, so you get some cap space back if he bombs. Or he may have something to prove and you’ve added a huge talent for nothing.
The Wolves aren’t getting big FAs with their cap space until we improve the team. So, it’s a catch 22. Our best chance is hit the lottery in the Draft or this kind of deal.
You have to keep Beasley over a mid-teens future 1st. I mean Beasley or Babbitt or even Paul George? Beasley helps you make the leap forward or bombs out. Babbitt/George level players help you take small steps.
by ChicagoViking on Jul 9, 2010 10:48 PM CDT up reply actions
Beasley way makes up for Cousins
I like Wes and he should be solid. Now, we have (or will have soon I hope) a gamble player who could help us transform the team.
2011 starters — Rubio, Webster, Johnson, Beasley, Darko
That’s pretty good with a solid bench. Kahn would need to upgrade SG and C. Who knows? The Al chip, Love, or next year’s draft pick could get one of them. I hope we actually need to send our pick to the Clippers. Ok, that may be dreaming.
by ChicagoViking on Jul 9, 2010 10:53 PM CDT up reply actions
Cousins/Al/Johnny
I didn’t read every comment, so forgive me if this has been touched on, but I feel like everyone is forgetting that Cousin’s refused to workout for us? And was quoted in saying that he did not want to be drafted by us.
Just Sayin…
On the Subject of Al Jefferson, i really believe that Al is poised for another career year, after having worked off the injury rust, so if we do not move him, it may not be the worst thing to happen to this squad. However I still believe that Indiana is enamored enough with Johnny Flynn that they would probably take a Johnny and Al package for Danny Granger and maybe Luther Head, or cash considerations. The real issue there is that I have absolutely no confidence that Kahn would part way’s with Flynn, even for a premier scorer in Granger, and a decent shooter off the bench in Head. Although if Kahn really believed that Rubio was coming next year (which he isnt IMHO) it might be the right move for a team in a re-building phase.
Any links to that quote
where Cousins says he doesn’t want to play with us?
Rudy Gay: Feeding his family since 7/1/10
Right after the Chicago camp
Cousins agent said that Cousins would not be coming to work out in Minneapolis because he (the agent) concluded that the Twolves had already made up their minds not to draft Cousins. Always some risk of injury in a work out – no need to do one for a team not interested in you.
From what I heard, no one in the Twolves organization made any immediate effort to contact the agent to correct his conclusion. Only after the Favors workout, did they call to try and schedule another workout. And that was all smoke screen.
But Cousins
never said he didn’t want to play for MN?
Rudy Gay: Feeding his family since 7/1/10
The fact that ..
the Cousins’ camp came out and said that they were not going to work out here, was in itself a statement from Cousins’ that he was not interested in playing here. The flimsy excuse that they figured we were not going to take him, was nothing more than posturing.
Agents do that all the time
His agent didn’t think it was a good location for him. Cousins just let his agent do the talking because most college players know little of the Timberwolves’ roster or their plans to move Jefferson.
Had we talked to them and told them Jefferson is on the outs I’m sure they would have been just fine with a guaranteed 20mpg. And that’s assuming they have foul trouble. He could easily get more than that.
Rudy Gay: Feeding his family since 7/1/10
Correct
Cousins never said he would not play in Minnesota
I Can Roll With Anything Except
Flynn/Sessions
If the rest of the team are not “Top Tier”, then they need
a facilitator to make them optimal in their roles.
Flynn/Sessions cannot do that.
We need a top PG.
"You don't have the talent, but you can work harder than everyone else."
by WillistonCoyote on Jul 10, 2010 5:50 PM CDT reply actions
Hold our breath until Ricky shows up
Ricky is a facilitator. Guess we will see if he does want to play for the Wolves someday.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Canis Hoopus
Related FanShots on Canis Hoopus
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 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.
