Making the argument for adding vets over more rookies
We are 78-250 since KG left and have regressed over the past two years. While I think coaching has been a big problem, our roster is also a nightmare, imbalanced in the worst way, with lots of youth, no veteran leadership, and a need to play people out of position (Wes and Beasley). There has even been talk of trying Randolph at the 5. That would not work, as he would get demolished on a nightly basis due to lack of strength. If anything Randolph is a 3/4, not a 4/5. As excited as I am to finally (hopefully) be brining Rubio over, he will need 2-3 years to establish his game in the NBA and build chemistry with teammates. That means a lot more Ridnour next year, who could be a competent back-up. Adding more inexperienced players through the draft this year, even players that warrant the #2 pick, will doom us to failure and Love will bolt before we have a chance to even be competitive again.
I'll admit that I was seduced with the "blueprint" model and thought if you stockpile enough talent in a thoughtful way, and call them "assets", you can build a championship-caliber roster. Well, tear up the blueprint because we have drafted like crap (and been unlucky as always with lottery position), and now have arguably our 4 best players (Love, Beasley, Randolph, and Tolliver) at the same position. Kahn is the classic over-thinker, whose grandiose plan for some kind of special "championship roster" may have taken this franchise down a notch from McHale, which is quite an accomplishment. Kahn decided "long and athletic" was the way to go. I assume this was because Rubio literally fell into our lap. It makes some sense, but not without Rubio and arguably not with your star player not exactly fitting that mold.
When we had McHale, I used to crave some kind of "philosophy" we could build around, and now I long for a GM that can just get us back to being competitive by assembling a mix of good NBA players that know their role and play their true position. Even if it is just 40-45 win teams, mediocrity would feel better than misery.
I think we need to learn a lesson from three of the teams in our conference: Portland, Memphis, and OKC.
1. Portland tried to build through the draft, and while they are still competitive, it is not because of Roy/Oden/LMA/Fernandez/Bayless/Batun, that roster we were all jealous of at one point. It is because of LMA and three guys they got after they assembled their "core": Wes Mathews, Gerald Wallace, and Andre Miller, two of which are older veterans.
2. Memphis took out the Spurs and were one game away from the WCF this year without their young star Rudy Gay. Most would agree Memphis has a roster that appears to have been built with a blindfold and a handful of darts.
3. OKC didn't get to where they are with a blueprint, they lucked out and got Durant. So unless we think D Williams is going to be our Durant, we need to trade this pick. I for one do not think D Williams will even be able to see Kevin Durant's ceiling, much less touch it. Plus he adds to our stockpile of tweener forwards.
When you look at these three teams, you see a lot of random, unpredictable chaos. You don't see blueprints. You get lucky in the draft (OKC) or you make a few good trades (Portland and Memphis), that at one point didn't look like good trades (Memphis).
Here is my argument: We need an all-star vet to pair with Love, and at a potentially high cost to our blueprint and our payroll. Monta, Iggy, and Gay all have flaws in their games and large contracts, but they might be available for some of the assets we have without giving up Love and Rubio. If we do not add this type of player to our roster over the summer, we will have another GM with another blueprint, and Love will be sending us postcards from the West Coast.
Kahn has proven to be a decent trade-maker and a very poor drafter, with the exception of getting lucky once in the draft with Rubio. As fun and seductive as the NBA draft is, we need to give Kahn a shot at trading the #2 and possibly #20 pick for another star to pair with Love. The truth is, you are just as likely to find a star/franchise player at #6, or #15 or #23, as you are at #2. And the chances of finding a guy at #2 this year that ends up being better than Monta, Iggy or Gay is probably less than 20%. I'll put my money on Kahn making a better trade than a draft pick every day of the week, and twice on Sunday.
Bringing over Rubio and trading our pick(s) for another established star this summer will go a long way in Kahn redeeming himself. He can then say he traded Big Al and kept Love, somehow landed Rubio, and found another all-star caliber wing to pair with them both. Not bad.
Who is with me? Seriously, show of hands.
68 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
You only get one hand! Two at most!
I have full-blown concerns that being a fan of this team has made me more of a hipster than I ever intended to be.
by BrettAhlgren on May 25, 2011 2:57 PM CDT up reply actions
Not necessarily...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIwEirlMhuI
Everything in the computer need my face on it. Mega Gigabytes, son!
I don't know if I'd use Memphis as an example here
http://espn.go.com/espnradio/feeds/rss/podcast.xml?id=2445552
’You’re young, you’re young, you’re young.’ And the next thing you know, they’re not young any more and their career is over and they haven’t accomplished what they wanted to… It’s not that you’re young, it’s that you don’t understand. And if you want to understand how to win and do the things that are necessary to win, then you have a chance. It has nothing to do with your age."
- Lionel Hollins.
Also...
….at the start of the year, this:
Team service time/age
Minnesota Timberwolves 2.73 24.22
Memphis Grizzlies 2.57 24.61
Oklahoma City Thunder 3.27 24.73
I used the word “inexperienced” instead of youth because obviously experience is more important than age in many ways.
Memphis:
Tony Allen – 7th year
Shane Battier – 10th year
Mike Conley - 4th year
Marc Gasol – 3rd year
Rudy Gay – 4th year
Zach Randolph – 10th year
Their core has a good amount of experience, way more than we have.
OKC has Durant.
I'm just saying that not even Memphis or OKC..
….think youth (which both have had a lot over the past 2 years; not just this year) is not their problem. The problem the Wolves have is bad coaching and bad players. This is why they play bad basketball. This is why they play bad offense. This is why they play bad defense. They’re simply not that good and the players they do have with “potential” (whatever that means) are not developed in any meaningful fashion. Tony Allen, Battier, Gay, Gasol, Randolph, and Conley are all average or above average players. Randolph is upper level. Age and experience are being used like a crutch by the Wolves to mask their inability to develop players. Why don’t they develop? Either they’re not that good, the developers don’t know what they’re doing, or a combo of the two.
Memphis won 40 games last year with, I believe, the youngest team in the league. Conley, Young, Darrell Arthur, Thabeet, and DeMarre Carroll, and Rudy Gay all had over 800 minutes (carroll was at 795) while being 23 or younger. OKC won 50. They’re winning because they have people who know what they’re doing coaching players who can actually play.
The reason I’m trying to make a point here is because this team complains about youth and experience in ways that cover up for the most basic problems with the franchise’s player selection/development process. Youth and inexperience are not crutches. Bad coaching and terrible player selection are. Kahn will likely trade away the top pick in franchise history based on a single talking point: we’re too young. That, to me, is a colossal mistake based on ridiculous reasoning. Youth and inexperience are not necessarily partnered with bad play; bad players and bad coaching are.
by Stop-n-Pop on May 25, 2011 2:19 PM CDT up reply actions 4 recs
I agree we need to get rid of Rambis. He is a terrible coach and a terrible manager/developer of talent. I do think we have a lack of talent, which was somehow magnified by Rambis, and I agree Memphis has a better collection of talent. But when I look at Portland’s and Memphis’ rosters, I see a mix of young guys and more experienced guys. Memphis’ mean age looks similar to ours, but we don’t have guys like Randolph, Battier, and Allen who have been around the league awhile and have learned what it takes to win. I think to compete in the NBA, you need this type of a mix of youth(“potential”) and experience on your roster, and these guys need to have played together for several years. Or you need an absolute superstar like Durant.
I want to trade the #2 pick for selfish reasons – so I can tolerate watching games next year. Not being competitive makes the games really hard to watch. I like to win. Next year is year 5 post-KG and it’s time to put the dream of crafting the ultimate roster aside and just go out and get a few experienced above-average NBA players with the remaining assets we have who are not Rubio and Love. Or I think we will be facing another rebuilding process again in two years without Love. And I’m not sure we will even have a fan base left at that point.
I completely get that
I think it is absolutely necessary to bring in guys who know what they’re doing and who have experience. I simply don’t think the Wolves have enough baseline talent in the first place. They have Kevin Love. I’m all for patience and growing together as long as there are some talented players in the mix. I think they need to add 1 good player in this draft plus an average/above average starter via trade. I would sell every non Love/Rubio/#2 asset for a Wes Matthews level starter just to have (hopefully, depending on Rubio and the top pick) 4 average starters.
FWIW, I think they’re past the point where they can avoid starting over again post-Love.
by Stop-n-Pop on May 25, 2011 2:45 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Then what do you do with #2?
Can the Wolves build around both Love and Williams? It seems like that only works if we play Love at center or Williams at SF for significant minutes. Maybe that’s OK and we just work with the best talent we can get, but it does seem less than ideal.
My hope is...
…that either Kanter or Biyombo are the real deal. I’d rather them not get cute, but if they could figure out how to trade down to get Biyombo and then try and trade up for Kawhi Leonard or Burks. I’d then hope to use available cap space for a lopsided trade during the season and after knowing how CBA plays out. I think they’re insane to take on salary before the CBA. Again, the best interests of Kahn’s continued employment are not in line with the best long term interests of this team. I want this:
1- Rubio/Ridnour
2- Johnson/Webster/Ellington
3- Leonard/Beasley/Webster
4- Love/Pek/Tolliver
5- Biyombo/Pek/Tolliver/Love
or:
1- Rubio/Ridnour
2- Burks/Webster/Ellington
3- Johnson/Beasley/Webster
4- Love/Pek/Tolliver
5- Biyombo/Pek/Tolliver/Love
I don’t give a rat’s ass about Randolph, Darko, or trades for hugely expensive guys before we know what the new CBA number is. If they can find a way to take a flier on someone like Josh Selby, Avery Bradley, Malcolm Lee, CDR, or another very moderately priced shooting guard, fine. If they can land Hand the 2nd unit over to Beasley and throw a big load on Rubio and Biyombo from the get-go. Rubio, you do all the ball handling. Biyombo, you have Love’s back. Johnson and Leonard, create havoc on the wing. Of course, they’ll need someone to coach them up, but I think this is a fairly realistic use of their assets and I think you have a very nice core when you consider the strength of this particular draft. This is their last shot to make it right before Love makes his contract decision.
by Stop-n-Pop on May 25, 2011 3:39 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
I could live with that draft
I think we’d still be pretty bad next year, but things would look quite a bit better. Biyombo/Kanter + Burks/Leonard would be a draft I could get behind.
Unfortunately, this is always the time of year when I get hopeful about all the ways we could improve our roster only to be let down on draft day. I’d still be OK with trading for Iggy or Monta with the #2, especially if we could dump Flynn and/or Darko in the process.
Dammit SnP, I don’t need hope right now. I need to prepare for the worst.
I'd be fine with Ellis...
….provided they find someone to patrol the paint. Tyson Chandler did wonders for Dallas. Ibaka is going to be that type of player for OKC. If you have porous scorers on the perimeter, you need someone to have his back. This is why the low-usage, rebounding, defending center is sooooooo important. The entire league is geared around allowing perimeter players to go nuts. The PF is becoming the offensive inside position. The center needs to have defensive flexibility and not use up a bunch of possessions.
This is their last shot to make it right before Love makes his contract decision.
#dread #fear #trembling
Now will you all please raise your right hand ... and place the paper bag over your head.
by Cedarpenguin on May 25, 2011 3:46 PM CDT up reply actions
Now you're talking.
Bring on Biyombo! The wing is still a mess in either of your scenarios. I wonder whether we could something as simple as trading down with Cleveland and swapping Darko for Gibson in the process. Not that Gibson is very good (or a natural SG), but it gets rid of Darko and the salaries work.
I dig it
Scenario One is intriguing, particularly if, as you say, they’re somehow able to add a Wes Matthews type (Marcus Thornton? Chase Budinger? Roddy Beaubois?) via trade. You’d like to think a Beasley or AR or Pek might fetch someone of that calibur?
...so long as they get a real guard
Beaubois has Biyombo-like arms, to boot! Could be a beautiful thing.
...so long as they get a real guard
If we like arms
Kawhi Leonard and Marshon Brooks have the 2 biggest discrepancies between height and Wingspan.
Really?
Both scenarios add three rookies, including Rubio and two from a weak draft and with major question marks.
I think if we can send some salary along with #2 for Iguodala (Flynn and Pekovic would be nice!), it will mitigate the cap hit we take, although not completely by any means.
I also think AR should not be put in the same category as Darko. AR is younger and more productive.
by Rascal Flatts on May 25, 2011 4:10 PM CDT up reply actions
Not a weak draft in the middle.
This is a weak draft at the top. In the middle there are lots of role players to be had.
I just don't see how adding three more rookies does us any good
Regardless if they are considered solid middle first rounders or not, they are still unproven and they are still more than likely to end up being below average NBA players. We also shouldn’t assume that players like AR, Beasley, Wes Johnson, and Ricky Rubio are totally tapped out in terms of potential. Cashing in #2 for a player like Ellis or Iguodala gives you a bird in the hand while also not forgoing potential that still exists on the roster. It balances things out and gives the fanbase much needed hope that improvement is on the way.
by Rascal Flatts on May 25, 2011 4:17 PM CDT up reply actions
It could also put them in a spot..
….even worse than they were before: locked into a huge deal without enough funds to resign Love and additional help. I just don’t think it makes sense to trade for a big contract before the new CBA. Let’s say the owners end up with a soft cap in the mid 40s. Suddenly, the Wolves become one of the biggest players in the league’s trade market. Iggy is on the books for 3 more years (4 with options). Philly is on the books for over 50 mil next year with only 11 players. I’m not against trading for the guy. I just don’t think you do it before the draft, for a number of reasons.
by Stop-n-Pop on May 25, 2011 4:21 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Also possible
that a new CBA reissues the Alan Houston rule that allows teams to shed a horrid contact.
If Philly can dump Brand, then maybe they feel different about Iggy’s contract.
I remember when the Wolves signed...
…Trenton Hassell as a defensive stopper right before the hand check rules went into effect. I think Iggy has the chance to be the big contract version of this set up.
That is true
But I am dubious that any big-time trades will be made before the CBA expires, for that very reason. Plenty of time to trade afterwards, if and when a new one gets hammered out.
Well said, and I like the bird in the hand analogy, because that is what we are talking about here. I seriously worry about what another < 20 win season would do to the psyche of our players and the fan base. Rookies take years to develop. It is rare that you find an instant impact rookie. I don’t feel we can bring in young guys that will take several years to develop and settle into their games. We are already trying to finally bring Rubio over, who is literally just a kid both physically and mentally. I can’t see how it makes any sense to bring in other rookies right now if we want to start winning some games and keep Love interested.
I worry about...
…what a guy who needs to win now will do to the long term chances of this franchise, especially in light of Love likely not staying, the new CBA, and no 1st round pick next year. Do they sell out for 1 year of 20-30 wins only to watch Love walk away and no new pick and a big contract that straps them in the new CBA environment, or do they try to make the best of the assets they’ve told us all about over the past few years…which just happens to be young draft picks.
If it wasn’t for the CBA and the possibility of Love not resigning, I’d say go for Iggy. I just think that it, like everything else Kahn does, is needlessly reckless in terms of prioritizing the best possible outcome faaarrrrrr over the most likely one.
So Love doesn't walk anyway
if we load up on rookies and win 19 games again? I’d prefer the route of getting an above average vet + Rubio + make the obvious changes to playing style/defense that could have yielded 5-10 more wins even with our existing roster and put up 30 – 35 wins next season. I think our chances of keeping Love are 10X better if we do that versus putting a bunch of eggs into this draft.
by Rascal Flatts on May 25, 2011 5:18 PM CDT up reply actions
I just think..
….they have a better chance of getting someone like Iggy after they find out what the new CBA landscape looks like. I think if they lock in now, and if they give away their top pick of all time, they put off disaster/day of reckoning for maybe a year or two. I think the best chances of keeping Love are finding a competent coach and a good GM. I honestly think that bridge has already been crossed. It’s not happening. I think the only way he stays is if he gets a whiff that the people putting the team together and coaching it kind of sort of have a clue as to what they’re doing. Maybe getting 2 promising rookies + Rubio panning out (as another rookie) makes that happen. I don’t know. I just think that if they move before the new CBA hits, they risk way too much for an uncertain return. They can get just as uncertain of a return if they keep the picks…and for much less of an investment.
And again..
…once they find out what the new CBA looks like, then, by all means, go after someone like Iggy if it is feasible financially.
It's not a bad idea to wait for the new CBA
…to better evaluate the situation. And this is probably the most likely scenario, as most teams are probably not chomping at the bit to rearrange their rosters and commit to new salary with this big unknown hanging out there.
My gut tells me that getting more wins next year by adding a few experienced players that compliment Love would give him (and the fans) more of a feeling that we are moving in the right direction, and give us the best shot at re-signing him. If we bring in more rookies, more inexperienced players that don’t know how to play the right way, I can just see Love getting frustrated midway through the season and saying F*** it, I’m out of here.
But it’s just a guess, and really I have no idea what actions would make staying more appealing to Love, or what would give us the best chance at becoming a playoff team again. I hope that the new CBA reflects the imbalance in the league right now and actually increases our chance of retaining Love through financial incentives. But you never know.
I also feel like knowing Taylor, we are probably stuck with Kahn for a while longer. So while making a change at the FO level might make Love feel more confident, it’s probably not an option right now, unfortunately.
Love doesn't leave money on the table
At least not for his 1st big extension. Guys always take that. He is a young player just about to potentially triple his salary. He will stay 4 more years.
by TO12 on May 26, 2011 1:09 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
"Johnson and Leonard, create havoc on the wing."
And preferably, for the opponent.
I don't do "fanshots."
it's painful to read this and also believe that there's no chance it happens
I haven't written an insightful post in years.
by littleboxes on May 26, 2011 10:03 AM CDT up reply actions
You could be right about being past the point of needing to start over again, especially with the Owner/GM/Coach combination we have right now. If we can keep Love, Rubio, and the #2 pick, and still bring back an average/above average starter, I would be all for that, especially if they are good at dribbling the ball without throwing it out of bounds or two opposing players.
I’m just guessing (like you mentioned) that the three assets of any true value to other teams are Love, Rubio and the #2 pick. Since I don’t feel the #2 pick will bring us a player that can have an impact in the next 1-2 years, that also fits our roster, I think the best bet is to use it to get a star back.
But if we can land another above-average player without the #2, I think that would be great.
I agree with S n P to a point. I don’t think we need to add a veteran superstar. If we could just add one average to above average starter that would help us get better. But I’m still in favor of trading into next years draft as opposed to licking at two or trading down. There are of course risks involved with not knowing where your pick will end up. But I think any top ten next year will probably have as much value as our pick this year. Especially when you consider that the consensus number two plays the same position as our best two players (Tolliver and Love). I saw where a Suns fan suggested the trade of Dudley and next years pick for the number two and player x (Darko, Flynn, Pek or whoever makes salaries work). It seems to me that’s about the best we could do. Dudley isn’t bad and I don’t see Phoenix as a team on the rise but rather a team just starting to retool.
by Achilles Fang 1 on May 25, 2011 3:04 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Is there really such a thing as starting over?
Can teams really build around youth, have them grow up together, and become a team that can compete for multiple years? This just doesn’t seem very realistic. It seems like a false hope by desolate fans. Championship windows are small, injuries happen, salaries escalate, free agents flee, and some players don’t pan out as hoped. We witnessed firsthand how the KG/Starbury/Googs core fell apart.
I feel the Wolves need to build for the present, without mortgaging the future. Building around a young core doesn’t seem to work. Just look at the 04-05 Bulls. That team had a handful of high draft picks, they made the playoffs and they seemed like they were building for something great. Now, 6 years later, only Deng remains from that team. It’s only because their plan fell apart and they were lucky enough to strike gold in the lottery, that they are now a championship caliber team.
I agree with you, we need better coaching and better talent. I’m sick of building around the hope that we may someday catch lighting in a bottle.
Maybe it's just semantics
No Love resigning + no 1st rounder (Clippergeddon!) = starting over, for me. Throw in a new POBO and coach. There is still a long way for this team to fall.
I'd really like to add Iguodala
but I also want to draft Biyombo. Someone (I’m looking at you, Kahn) needs to figure out how to make both of those things happen without giving up Love or Rubio. I think if we added Iggy, Rubio, and Biyombo we’d almost have a coherent roster. Or at least we’d have a more interesting one.
Add a decent coach and it could be fun to watch.
by Madison Dan on May 25, 2011 2:03 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
BB might be worth trying to grab as a project because defensively he might not take as long to make an impact. And I wouldn’t mind more youth as much if it is at the center position. I’m just tired of our wing players that can’t dribble, don’t know when to take shots, and turn the ball over constantly. I would prefer a vet center like Tyson Chandler, but that is probably a pipe dream.
If we can nab the #16 pick from Philly in an Iggy trade, do you think packaging #16, #20 and something else could get us high enough to get BB?
by Fitter on May 25, 2011 2:14 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Maybe.
At Liberty Ballers, they seemed to like 2 + Beasley for Iggy + 16. I kind of thought Beasley would be part of what would help us move up, though (in part because of the rookie contract — so they could let him go if it doesn’t work out).
I don’t really expect anything very interesting to actually happen, though.
My sense is that many Philly fans (not that this matters) would love to have the #2 for Iggy, and mention adding #16 for Wes or even Webster (irony). Iggy is on a bit of a downturn numbers wise, which is probably why he is even possibly available, but at 27, I think he could have another 4-6 years of prime basketball left. I love the fact that his assists keep going up, he consistently maintains a 2-1 A/T ratio, and he plays defense.
I don’t really expect anything interesting to happen either, especially with the potential lockout this summer. The only hope I have is that Kahn knows his job is on the line to start winning next year, and in my mind, and hopefully his, that entails getting a competent coach and bringing in a few players that can have an instant impact.
Part of the argument around drafting someone versus trying to trade the pick for an established player comes down to whether you want to try to build a championship roster through the draft and development of players, or if you just want to return to competitiveness and some first round exits. I for one, just want to get a competitive team back out there that can get back to postseason play, and fire up TC and the fan base again. The time is now. This is our window. Watching the rise of Memphis and the fall of Portland has convinced me that there is no such thing as a “blueprint” in the NBA.
To add a somewhat intelligent Philly perspective
Iguodala was injured from the get go last season and it showed in his offensive numbers. His defense, however, was worthy of 1st team all-defense (though he only made 2nd team).
There are a lot of Philly fans that just want Iguodala gone because they can’t seem to understand that you can contribute a helluva lot to the basketball court without scoring 20+ points per game. They think he is overpaid because he doesn’t put up the sexy stats. A lot of people out there just do not seem to understand the value that Iguodala has.
But even those of us who do value Iguodala highly do also see the value in trading him away. I personally suggested #2 + Wes for Iguodala +#16 for a few reasons. The main reason is that I think the team should be looking towards the future and building around Jrue Holiday and Evan Turner. To do this Philly needs bigs and a wing that can play alongside the two youngsters. I think Wes would fit nicely playing alongside two playmakers. He wouldn’t need to create shots for himself. His role would just be to find open spots on the floor and take high percentage shots. With the pick the Sixers can get their big man whether it be Kanter, Biyombo, or Valanciunas. Ideally they’d be picking a little bit later so that they wouldn’t be passing up on what is looking like the consensus 2nd best player in the draft but Minnesota just looks like the perfect fit for this kind of trade.
I don’t think this will happen though. The Sixers front office seems to be in favor of doing whatever they can to win as many games as they can right now. That would mean holding on to Iguodala. I don’t think they have any intention of dumping salary to build for the future.
by yosoysean on May 25, 2011 3:15 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
I think I'd do #2 + Wes for Iguodala + #16
But I don’t know if you could call my perspective “somewhat intelligent.”
I think that deal would benefit both teams, but I’ve heard Kahn doesn’t like Iggy, so who knows. If he doesn’t like Iggy, he sure as hell better not be going after Granger…
He’d also have to get rid of Wes in this scenario, and I have no idea what sort of value Kahn thinks Wes has. I doubt it’s accurate though.
Thanks for stopping by.
Why pay for $$$$
The #2 for Iggy? Don’t be ridiculous! Philly will be looking to move his salary. They’ll take expirings.
You can't dust for vomit.
a more interesting one
I agree. Sadly, I’d settle for Crazy Old KG & Crazy Vaseline-Eating Steph back next year. Now that would be interesting.
And most sad of all is that we’d be better.
I don't think there is much of an argument to be made
It is pretty obvious we need vets. I dunno what train of thought believes more rookies is the answer.
It's a false argument
We need more above average NBA players. It doesn’t matter if they are 9th year or 2nd year if they are producing at an above average NBA level. We have lots of young guys who are not producing at the level needed. We’d be in trouble if we has a bunch of old guys doing the same thing.
Correct
They need good players and good coaches. They had vets with Kevin Ollie, Brian Cardinal, Mark Madsen, Jason Collins, Mike Miller, etc.
The opposite is true, yes
But I at least feel that we do have talent, but a coach/veteran player to help those players realize the talent is what is needed.
Here's 10 ideas
1) Fire Kurt Rambis
2) Fire David Kahn
3) Hire experienced, competent GM
4) Hire experienced, competent Head Coach
5) Buyout and put Darko on the next ship to Europe
6) Sign Rubio
7) Draft Derrick Williams
8) Draft Marshon Brooks
9) Sign a couple vets (Nazr Mohammed, Shane Battier)
10) Trade Beasley/Hayward to Cleveland for future #1 and Varejao
Team:
PG – Rubio/Ridnour/Flynn
SG – Webster/Brooks/Ellington
SF – Williams/Battier/Johnson
PF – Love/Tolliver/Randolph
C – Varejao/Mohammed/Pekovic
Battier will likely stay in Memphis but who knows. Webster at SG is not ideal. Maybe the SG version of Wes can step it up next year.
Reduce turnovers, reduce personal fouls, shoot better, win.
Boy, that would kick many kinds of a$$
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." -- Yogi Berra
by Wile E Coyote on May 25, 2011 5:52 PM CDT up reply actions
If we sign Rubio and draft Williams/Brooks we won't have the money to sign Battier and Mohammed
We already spent it on Webster/Pekovic and Darko
Great summary PoohRubio
Love it, love everything about it, and it’s not nearly as crazy as the usual message board proposals. 2009 Example: “trade Flynn for Detroit’s #7 Pick – IT’S A NO BRAINER”
"C'mon, c'mon, the club is open" - Bob Pollard
by Son of Gerald Green on May 26, 2011 9:17 AM CDT up reply actions

by 

















