Poll - Will Kahn Somehow Blow Signing Love?!!!
by MNMastiff on Jan 24, 2012 1:02 PM CST
Email
Print
As per Jerry Zgoda's post this morning, it amazes me the Wolves have not signed Love to the max for four years or five, whichever Love prefers. With him, Rubio is likely to stay. If Love chooses to be offended by the Kahn's labored reasoning at to whether he is worth the extra year, he can hold off till summer, at which point the Wolves must trade him or lose him a year later as an unrestricted free agent.
Kahn is a perfect example of John Wooden's aphorism: "Don't confuse activity with accomplishment" . Kahn's dizzying array of trades each of his first three draft days have not resulted in any successes, with the notable (OK, wonderful) exception of trading Foye and Miller for the Rubio pick.
Kahn's fundamental fallacy is believing he is smarter than everyone else, though he has no track record to bolster that. He is a legend in his own mind, almost a bit Chili-like in that regard.
If he somehow blows signing Love.....
126 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
In order to have a good shot at a championship you have to get yourself into adventurous territory.
Unless you are a big market team or are gifted with a Lebron in the draft., and even so.
I'm no Kahn apologist. . .
But if a contract isn’t done, I think either Love or Taylor will be to “blame”.
As opposed to drafting or trading, Kahn has a pretty limited set of options: basically offer whatever he recommends to his boss (Taylor) or take Taylor’s advice on what to offer. if you are talking about spending $60 – $80 million of the franchise’s money, you better believe input is coming from the Coach, the POBO the owner and others in the organization, with the owner having final say (it’s his money). If they are lowballing him then I think it comes from Taylor.
On the other hand, if the offer is made and Love rejects it, then it’s on Love. He doesn’t want to be here, so let the sign and trade discussions begin!
by Sterno on Jan 24, 2012 1:40 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
I don't see how this is all on Kahn
it appears at minimum the Wolves have offered Love essentially the max salary per-year he can make. Maybe they haven’t added the 5th year on it, maybe they have I don’t know.
But I would be shocked to find out, if Love goes unsigned after tomorrow, that it is a Kahn screw-job.
I don't know what an art house is, I don't know what goes on in an art house, I have never been in an art house, and I can't imagine it's any place I ever want to be.
If he offered the max and Love turned it down...
…I don’t know how Kahn could have done anything different. If they are playing chicken with a 5th year and Love calls his bluff, I can understand Kahn wanting to get as good a deal as possible. However, playing chicken can lock both sides into a situation where they are stubborn for stubborn’s sake and that would be bad for everybody. I think Kahn deserves some blame if Love doesn’t sign simply for the fact that the $80 mil number should have been obvious since the day the CBA was signed. He’s their best player, other teams will pay him as much as they can, end of story. I don’t see where Kahn has much leverage here. If he does manage to get Love to take less, and provided it doesn’t piss him off, then wow. Hat’s off to Kahn.
Here's how I think Kahn (or Taylor, depending on who you think is leading the negotions) has potentially blown the deal
The Wolves offered Love $61/4. That’s $1 million more than Love could make on the open market. That’s essentially saying “you’re a max player, but no one can match what we can offer, so screw you, we’re not offering the max.” That’s a ridiculous position to take, especially with someone of Love’s ego.
Yeah..
…that would be craptastic. There’s 1 offer the guy should get from the team. By not giving him a 5th year, you’re basically inviting him to risk a single year with the QO (where he’d push for a trade the entire time) before he walks for nothing (provided he wasn’t traded). His QO is $6.1 mil. He takes about a $9 mil bet to get another contract with a better team. He can then sign for 4 years with the new team and still be like 28 or 29 when the next deal comes up. I can’t believe they haven’t given him the offer yet. Why even bother playing chicken with the guy who holds all the cards? I get that this is negotiating, but both sides aren’t exactly dealing from similar levels of strength.
It's only a $9 mil bet if the Wolves offer the 5 year max
Which by all accounts they haven’t yet. It’s almost like Kahn doesn’t believe Love can be a good player…
i love how you create a narrative on how the negotiations are going
totally based on nothing but what you want to believe in order to rip kahn.
http://loisaidabbclub.tumblr.com/
Twitter: @loisaidabbclub
by beatsandpeasnyc on Jan 24, 2012 2:09 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
Making up nothing
Just quoting the most respected reporter following the Wolves. And the lack of a true max offer is an objective reality, not an opinion. If Love was passing on the true max, then the Wolves would have done everything in their power here. The point is that Kahn is once again being clever rather than wise.
there ya go again...
as in the collective ’ya"
huff and puff all you want, but no one who knows is talking.
and when a deal is made, all these opinions recede back into the cracks in the wall.
http://loisaidabbclub.tumblr.com/
Twitter: @loisaidabbclub
by beatsandpeasnyc on Jan 24, 2012 2:24 PM CST up reply actions
This is tiresome bullshit
You do this whenever someone disagrees with you about anything relating to Kahn. Just disagree.
by Stop-n-Pop on Jan 24, 2012 2:34 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
thats what i was doing
maybe i should make up a different narrative on how Kevin and his Agent are trying to structure a deal that helps the franchise win long term, thats why its taking up to the deadline to get this done ….and this would have the exact same level of truth to it.
knee jerk kahn’s a douche analysis can be responded to by knee jerk kahn’s not a douche analysis, right?
http://loisaidabbclub.tumblr.com/
Twitter: @loisaidabbclub
by beatsandpeasnyc on Jan 24, 2012 2:41 PM CST up reply actions
BS, that's not what you're doing
You roll with the narrative bullshit constantly. So much so that it has become a narrative/trend of its own.
Take it for what it is without implying that it is part of some sort of agenda that is being carried along. BREAKING NEWS: People operate with biases and preferences and confirmation bias exists. I appreciate the attention to the deconstruction of unwarranted narratives in actual reporting, but in what amounts to virtual water cooler talk, it gets old.
Just make an argument instead of just asserting that other people are operating only with the motive of framing Kahn as a douche so they can extend something other than their own opinion.
It's a tough row to hoe...
…using reason to work all that way towards an objective definition of something only to be blocked by animal instincts, impulse and uncontrollable emotions and urges. I just chalk it all up to absurdity and call it a day. ;)
spin your stories, its just entertainment
and continue to use a ration based approach, its appreciated.
but some people think its the truth, and thats how angry mobs are formed.
http://loisaidabbclub.tumblr.com/
Twitter: @loisaidabbclub
by beatsandpeasnyc on Jan 24, 2012 3:10 PM CST up reply actions
Plus...
…you’re a member of a cult. Way to go.
I think Madison Dan had the best line I’ve read recently when he said something to the effect of “It’s not Left Behind, it’s a basketball blog.”
Oscar Wilde
Had this great line about “Knowing a young man of potential who was ruined by answering his correspondence”
no cult claims going on here...
but did you just compare stop n pop to Oscar Wilde?
all in good fun. thread done, ty.
http://loisaidabbclub.tumblr.com/
Twitter: @loisaidabbclub
by beatsandpeasnyc on Jan 24, 2012 3:22 PM CST up reply actions
*rational
http://loisaidabbclub.tumblr.com/
Twitter: @loisaidabbclub
by beatsandpeasnyc on Jan 24, 2012 3:11 PM CST up reply actions
I don't totally agree with you. . .
But let me start off by saying that if Taylor/POBO are trying to “negotiate” I think it’s stupid. You are going to cave eventually so why risk upsetting your best player?
HOWEVER, if you believe Love cares about the money first and foremost, the Wolves do hold a lot of cards. For one thing, if Love takes the QO that is is an $8 – 9 million hit NEXT YEAR which is worth a lot in present value relative to any hypothetical fifth year.
Throw in the reduced raises he can get each year if he signs with another team (that assumes no sign and trade, if that is still possible in the CBO), and there are real dollars at stake. Not so much that Love is going to cave necessarily (which is why the “negotiation” if that is what is happening, is so stupid) if he wants to go to the West Coast, but it is enough to make him think about it.
I wonder how much pent-up hostility Love has towards Kahn...
For all the losing the past two years, for having to get a 30/30 to win regular playing time from Rambis, for Kahn’s smug attitude… Love seems like a great guy, but he is a 23 year old NBA star. Don’t underestimate the examples of self-entitlement set by his peers, let alone by his extended Beach Boys clan :)
Dunno
From what I have been able to tell, Love plays things close to the vest and, at the cliched end of the day, Kahn was able to deliver a coach that Love really, really likes. I think there was some definite hostility towards Rambis but I don’t get the sense that there is any directed at Kahn at this point. From what I can tell, Kahn’s kind of faded from view all over the place…allowing the new basketball guys to run the basketball.
I thought this was interesting
http://youtu.be/XzgrQpO9CU0?t=5m
Joe Mauer grounded into double play, second to shortstop to first, ________ out at second
Kurt Rambis?
Kevin Love says “Fired.”
Too hot to handle, too cold to hold
They're called the Ghostbusters and they're in control
Point Well Taken
Though if Kahn is as self-important as I am suggesting, signing Love close to the deadline, with some fuss, will have more psychological value to him than a clean quiet signing weeks ago. Think of him as a pyromaniac fireman… :)
If I had a shot at $80 mil..
…..I think I could put up with some BS.
(FWIW, I think he signs the max deal. I thought for a while that if there was a player who could pass on that cash it would be Love, but then I thought about it some more and $20 mil is a lot to leave on the table….for anybody.)
i think this is pretty much on the money
Wolves 2011-12: Crossing the Rubikahn....alea iacta est...... " et tu Ricky?"
by Tangerine dream on Jan 24, 2012 3:58 PM CST up reply actions
I've got to say.
Its a smart play by the FO to at least negotiate for the freedom to give the 5 year max to someone else. Provided they are not actively pissing off their best player, and all sides understand this is business, then we should try and convince Love to take the 4 year max. With the big three from the Heat all taking less than max contracts so that the team can actually get some other players, there has been a precedent set saying sometimes good players will take less than the max if it affords them the chance to play on a better team. Kahn has already been outspoken about money not being an issue in signing Love. Its my belief that if Love will only accept the 5 year deal then he’ll get it.
Unicorns, Leprechauns, and Magic F***ing Beans!
Not entirely true
The Wolves offered Love $61/4. That’s $1 million more than Love could make on the open market.
Assuming a salary cap of $58 Million.
Scenario 1: Love resigns for 5 years with Wolves with max raises. Starting salary at $14.5 Million with 7.5 percent raises each year. 5 years – $84.2 Million.
Scenario 2: Love resigns for 4 years with Wolves with max raises. Starting salary at $14.5 Million with 7.5 percent raises each year. 4 years – $64 Million. (If extended again at the max, for comparison to 5 year scenarios, next 5 years – $84 Million)
Scenario 3: Love signs as a restricted free agent with another team, Wolves can match. Starting salary at $14.5 Million with 4.5 percent raises each year. 4 years – $62 Million. (If extended again at the max, for 7.5% raises, for comparison to 5 year scenarios, next 5 years – $79.8 Million)
Scanerio 4: Love plays out his qualifying offer, signs maximum 4 year deal starting at 25% of the cap as an unrestricted free agent with max 4.5% raises. 5 years – $68 Million.
In conclusion, Love waiting to test free agency costs him a minimum of $5 Million over the next 5 years, and if he wants to become an unrestricted free agent, it will cost him $16 Million.
Michael Beasley is a Small Forward. Derrick Williams is a Power Forward.
by Ebomb on Jan 24, 2012 2:16 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
It doesn't cost him anything
It’s reducing his earnings, which is a different psychological matter entirely. If it wasn’t, every college student in Minnesota would be beating down the doors to Carleson.
If potential earnings are the primary concern of "every college student in Minnesota," you mean.
"Oh my, oh my, oh my. Is that great basketball or what?" --Hubie Brown, Jan. 20, 2012
by Cynical Jason on Jan 24, 2012 2:57 PM CST up reply actions
Think we know what the primary concern is...
Party on, bro!
Ummmm....
…Last I checked CSOM had like a 5% admittance rate. (don’t quote me)
So people DO beat down the doors.. but most aren’t admitted. And those who do recieve the easiest gobs and gobs of money you can imagine.
I feel like that's way too low
Carlson is not that hard to get into. Maybe the students applying to get in are not as good as the science schools at the U, because I don’t think any of the science/eng schools are that low
90% of the crap I say on here is sarcastic
by CoffeeJanitor on Jan 24, 2012 6:18 PM CST up reply actions
IIRC..
the approximate cutoff to be considered for carlson is like top 10% class rank and 33ish on the act? That’s like 99th percentile or something.
Top 10% class might be right, 33 ACT is definitely wrong
30 on the ACT is already within the top 1%. I know way too many doofuses that are in CSOM to think that they all got around 30.
I might be wrong, but this is just my intuition
90% of the crap I say on here is sarcastic
by CoffeeJanitor on Jan 25, 2012 1:26 AM CST up reply actions
interesting
90% of the crap I say on here is sarcastic
by CoffeeJanitor on Jan 25, 2012 4:50 PM CST up reply actions
Scenario 1, 4, and 5
5. Love signs a four year max deal with the option to opt out after three years. He will never take 4 years straight up when he can get 5 years straight up. But the argument I’d make if I were Kahn is this:
“Kevin, look at the position you’re in, the leverage that you have. Ricky is going to have that same leverage three years from now. If you want to build a championship team with Ricky, we need to have that extra bullet at our disposal.”
If that works, the Wolves sign Love for four years with an opt-out after three. They then have Bird rights still. Rubio will be agreeing on the five year contract before/during the 2014-15 season, and Love will be extending during that season…or be dealt like Carmelo.
You can't...dust...for vomit.
these negotiations
without a doubt must and do have a ‘future of the franchise’ tone to it…as in, here’s how we’re going to build a title contender, and this is how your contract allows us to do that.
and if Kevin Love says no thank you and decides on a one year deal, then he immediately becomes the bad guy and we have to trade him.
http://loisaidabbclub.tumblr.com/
Twitter: @loisaidabbclub
by beatsandpeasnyc on Jan 24, 2012 2:06 PM CST up reply actions
Some pretty spotty assumptions around here
Bad assumption A: By locking up Love to the max, Rubio signs. No, Rubio plays out his deal and decides what to do then. There will be a whole new round of “Do I want to stay here? How good is this team? Love got max so now I can’t, and I think I’m better than him?” In short, who knows.
Bad assumption B: By not offering Love the max they are insulting him. No. Don’t see if how if we said, “if you take less than max we can get more players and possibly sign another max player”, that’s some serious insult to Love. It’s just business.
Bad assumption C: By not signing Love, we are screwed. No, Love is an awesome trade chip and we still will be able to get an amazing deal for him (hypothetically speaking). (Yes, I want to sign him)
My points are that, we are jumping to a lot of conclusions. Pretty sure he’s get a large, fat contract in the next day or so. Plus Kahn for all his faults is a patient negotiator. I wouldn’t read into too much.
by Rodman99 on Jan 24, 2012 2:11 PM CST reply actions 2 recs
And I'm too lazy to retype
In short… Love will sign. Just be patient.
Funny you cite bad assumptions
And then make assumptions about what we are thinking. I thought the question was, “If Love doesn’t sign, is it Kahns fault?”
No one sated any of your “assumptions” so you are “assuming” we mean them. I for one didn’t say anything about any of those three, only who to assign “blame” to if Love doesn’t sign.
Fine I'll retype
Questionable assumptions…
- With Love, Ricky is likely to stay.
Ricky will review his worth and the team’s future like anyone else. Love is nice, but there’s a lot of other players on other teams signed too.
- That negotiating with Love for anything less than max is some over-the-top insult.
Saying that we could get more players, and possibly another max-type player with money we save is just part of the business. Yes treat him with respect, but you can be a wimp either.
- Kahn is somehow screwing things up.
We have no idea what’s happening.
Here's the thing
About asking him to take less. Fine, ask. But he’s in a different situation than the Miami guys were; those guys had already gotten paid max dollars after their rookie deals before they signed with Miami. It’s much easier to consider taking less when you’ve already cashed in. Love has not.
I've changed my sig. The Wolves are now like a reasonably decent meal.
by Eric in Madison on Jan 24, 2012 2:36 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Fair point
But I would hope he could realize he’s absurdly marketable and make it up.
very few
NBA players are going to “make up” 20 million dollars through advertising/promotional stuff.
It’s a fairly steep drop off from “makes tons of money advertising” to “makes not a ton advertising” and it’s mostly based on your ability to sell tennis shoes.
Love’s got deals with Jose Cuervo, Target, Best Buy and Right Guard but 361 degrees isn’t a Nike deal.
Per year:
Lebron 30 million
Durant 14 million
Garnett 14 million
Wade 14 million
Dwight 12 million
Kobe 10 million
Amare 8 million
Melo 6 million
Wall 5 million
here's how i negotiate with kevin love
“kevin, here’s all the money we can offer you over the next 5 years. go ahead you can take it all. we are happy to have you here.
“however, it would impact our cap by $X. if you could take a little less, we could get a solid vet or another player (list off all kevin love’s friends and UCLA bruins in the league). it’s your choice. please let us know by Jan 24 kthx.”
by illwafer on Jan 24, 2012 2:20 PM CST reply actions 3 recs
Did I mention
I saw Mormon missionaries in Hungary?
I can’t say I see how the Mormon religion would have a mass public appeal in Europe. Omitting point ten would help the matters. Well thinking about it, Christianism shouldn’t have that much of a mass appeal too, I mean the weather isn’t that cool in the Middle East and it’s certainly not in Europe. Screw it all, we need a church that says the new Jerusalem will be built just south of Gödöllő!
shouldn't we as fans
want him to sign a 4 year deal so we have more opportunities to surround him with the kind of talent to win a Title?
don’t really understand the animosity of trying to do that…have we become so cynical that we don’t believe mgmt can pull this off?
http://loisaidabbclub.tumblr.com/
Twitter: @loisaidabbclub
by beatsandpeasnyc on Jan 24, 2012 3:26 PM CST reply actions
Um ... yup
Current and previous administrations left little reason for optimism in the areas of strategy, player acquisition, financial planning, winning team construction, or contract law.
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." -- Yogi Berra
by Wile E Coyote on Jan 24, 2012 3:31 PM CST up reply actions
then this thought
is dysfunctional…
understandable, but dysfunctional.
http://loisaidabbclub.tumblr.com/
Twitter: @loisaidabbclub
by beatsandpeasnyc on Jan 24, 2012 3:48 PM CST up reply actions
I don't see how signing him to a 4 year deal helps create opportunities to surround him with talent
In fact, it seems to me that it has the opposite effect: 1 less season with which to surround him with talent. As a fan, I want their best guy (and one of the best in the league) to be locked up for as long as possible, especially given that he’s 23 years old.
I've changed my sig. The Wolves are now like a reasonably decent meal.
by Eric in Madison on Jan 24, 2012 3:34 PM CST up reply actions
Because 60/4 gives the team sooooooo much more cash to work with than 80/5. %
(Side note: are states without income taxes going to be even more attractive now?)
Isn't it the 5 year "designated player" it takes away from a potential FA...
And this is a big free agent summer.
Wish someone with more skills than me would look at the summer FA market, and our cap situation to see where we stand.
We could do some salary dumping, or picking up at the deadline.
We’ve all be throwing up some solid names, but I want another star dang it!
Actually saw my post for a second and then it disappeared.
Could be my IT guy messing with me and trying to coax some work out of me.
This has happened to me numerous times.
I’ve taken to leaving the post and then returning and so far all has been well. I don’t have an IT guy, except for that little imp inside my computer, if I ever catch that bastard….
"pokin' the animals at the Canis Hoopus zoo"
by pastyearsears on Jan 24, 2012 8:02 PM CST up reply actions
Per Larry Coon:
• 2011 CBA: Players coming off their rookie scale contracts can extend for four additional seasons, although the team can designate one player who is eligible for five seasons at the maximum salary. A team can have only one designated player on its roster at any time. All other veterans can extend for four total seasons, which includes the seasons remaining on their current contract. The extension in an extend-and-trade contract is limited to three total seasons, which includes the seasons remaining on the current contract.
I think the 5th year deal is something only teams can offer their own guys, not something that other teams can use to lure anybody in. If they have Bird Rights, then new contracts with a UFA can get 5 years with the big 7.5% yearly raise. 4 years and 4.5% raises are for all sign and trades.
Let’s say the Wolves get Love to sign for 4 years. Their “saved” money will just go to (hopefully) resigning him for another 4 or 5 year deal in year 5 for just as much money.
Darren Wolfson has a good article on the extension here. Here’s what Love can make with the Wolves vs. other teams.
Year 1
Wolves can offer: $13,668,750.00
Another team can offer: $13,668,750.00
Year 2
Wolves: $14,693,906.20
Other: $14,283,843.70
Year 3
Wolves: $15,719,062.40
Other: $14,898,937.40
Year 4
Wolves: $16,744,218.60
Other: $15,514,031.10
4-year total
Wolves: $60,825,937.20
Other: $58,365,562.20
Year 5
Wolves: $17,769,374.80
Other: Not able to offer a 5th year
The kicker here is that differences in state taxes can make up a chunk of that incentive to stay here in Minny. The carrots simply aren’t big enough to really, really matter.
I think Darren nails it: Love can name what he wants and get it. He might not even want the 5 years. He may want the ETO.
In other words..
…Love can make up the 5th year money on the 2nd deal no matter where he goes. It’s not a certainty, but if he’s healthy he’s going to make that money. Is $2.5 mil more in Minny over 4 years worth it?
My best bet would be that Love and his agent want maximum flexibility. He’s going to get paid pretty much no matter what. Now it is all about winning and playing in a place he wants to play in.
Also, maybe he doesn't even want the 5th year
I’m not sure how the ETO works or how it can come into play. Here’s hoping the team has done its homework on the new CBA.
I've been wondering if the max has been offered for some time
And it’s just been Love mulling it over. What was all the “personal stuff” he was working on during the summer about? He’s obviously a guy who thinks about the future, and thinks big. If taking a little less is even in play he could score a little PR hit to add to his hard working, over achiever image. After the lockout it seems doubtful players want to, personally, give back a little to help out the owners, however.
"pokin' the animals at the Canis Hoopus zoo"
by pastyearsears on Jan 24, 2012 8:13 PM CST up reply actions
Pretty sure he had a girlfriend from his college
he had issues with that last year so that was probably it
90% of the crap I say on here is sarcastic
by CoffeeJanitor on Jan 24, 2012 9:46 PM CST up reply actions
Good stuff
So we can still sign a “max” free agent, and we’d never be able to give him 5 years anyway. Thus the 5 year designation, would only affect Rubio?
More likely no one.
It may happen, but Rubio is a rookie 3 years away.
600 N First Ave "like a Pirate's cove".
This
My understanding is that the 5th year is only available for extensions, not new contracts for free agents…who can get 5 years anyway if they have Bird rights. The 5th year carrot is supposed to be meant for small market teams to have incentives for their big guys to stay at home. The more I think about it, it really would be insane for the Wolves not to offer Love this from the get-go and that the real reason for the inaction might be that Love might not want the 5th year…or at least the option to get out with his Bird rights still active.
And..
…as you can see from Darren’s chart, the carrot doesn’t exactly provide a lot of incentive to stay in a small market. What a stupid lockout.
I guess it really is injury insurance though
With these guaranteed deals, that year is significant.
I think it just underscores the urgency that any team should have...
….with a superstar on a rookie deal. You win as quickly as you can because the clock is ticking on the 7 or so years you have him. Flip Williams for help at a position that can share the court with Love and Rubio for 30-35 mpg, sign the best free agent you can in the off season and hope for the best. The clock is ticking.
Crazy thought of the day.
Call Stern/Hornets up. Offer Derrick Williams and Pekovic for Okafor and the worse of the Minnesota and or New Orleans pick this year.
New Orleans get $5 million in cap relief. The number 2 overall draft pick from this years draft at a position of need and the better of the two draft picks they have coming up in the draft. That way they can move forward with Gordon, Williams and the highest draft pick they have this year. They don’t have to wait a year for the draft pick and can have it now in Williams.
The Wolves get a center that can defend and more importantly rebound and a chance to add wing in this draft.
600 N First Ave "like a Pirate's cove".
Other than the idea of trading away Pek (grrrrrrr),
this is a pretty solid proposition.
"Oh my, oh my, oh my. Is that great basketball or what?" --Hubie Brown, Jan. 20, 2012
by Cynical Jason on Jan 24, 2012 5:08 PM CST up reply actions
I've been extremely reluctant to trade Williams
But the day after Mn got beat by a deep core of good perimeter ball handlers and scorers and Love was stellar, I’ve been thinking that another good big was their greatest need. So….(He hesitates to gather his courage)…I announce my support for a damn good Airete trade idea based on an excellent SNP analyses.
Wait! What if Williams is a superstar in two years and Okafor is just old? Would Okafor really make that much of a difference? Good thing I’m not a GM/POBO.
"pokin' the animals at the Canis Hoopus zoo"
by pastyearsears on Jan 24, 2012 8:31 PM CST up reply actions
In two years...
Williams will still be a 4. We will hopefully still have an all-star 4. Okafor will be coming off the books, but we’d have bird rights if it’s working out and we need to go over cap. Other cap implications are just too far out as the only players we’d be committed to when Okafor drops off would be JJ, Ricky, and Love with Johns as a RFA
How much would it help? I’m not certain, but Darko and Pekovic had a lower DRB% last year than Paul George, Omri Casspi, Matt Barnes and Trevor Ariza. Love is really good on the glass, but defensive rebounding is a weakness in all of our non-Love bigs.
600 N First Ave "like a Pirate's cove".
by Airete on Jan 24, 2012 10:31 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Thanks Doc, I feel a lot better.
"pokin' the animals at the Canis Hoopus zoo"
by pastyearsears on Jan 25, 2012 9:42 AM CST up reply actions
Throw in Wes and/or Beasley while you're at it.
Kahn doesn’t sell high on his busts… er… draft picks, though.
Check out Humdinger TV on YouTube.
http://twitter.com/HumdingerTV
The Okafor movement is spreading!
Needless to say I like the idea. Between that draft pick and the Utah one we can take 2 shots at shoring up our wing rotation, now if someone would make an offer for Beasley…
I liked Gortat much better, but I just don't see that as an option
Center isn’t our only need by any means, but I know what I’d want from a center. Defense rebounding and high efficiency scoring at the rim. Darko can defend. Pekovic can score. Neither can rebound. The team is maybe waiting on Brad Miller. I don’t have access to Brad or the team doctors so I can’t say much about this.
Dally would have been interesting, but we didn’t have the cap space and he shares agents with Darko. Howard isn’t happening. Marc Gasol wasn’t ever leaving Memphis. DeAndre Jordan was locked up by the Clippers. Bynum isn’t available for anyone other than D12. We didn’t have any chance at paying Chandler. Kaman’s injury history worries me. Biedrins can rebound, but if the team were paying anyone that much I’d want them to actually be good. Varejao is less expensive than Okafor, but he’s played nearly 70 less games over the same career span, isn’t as good and is on a longer deal. If Bogut is available I’m interested, but I don’t see the Bucks as willing to move him. The Lopez brothers don’t rebound well enough to be worth the money or assets needed to get one. Looking ahead to developing bigs that rebound we passed on Cousins, Monroe, JV, Kanter, Vucevic and the Manther. McGee is only an option if Washington is willing to part ways.
We have the status quo where we hope that AR figures it out. Historically he can rebound, but he’s played less career minutes than Wayne Ellington for a reason while being in the league longer. We can count on Love to keep us in the rebounding game, but he might not take such a beating if the other team had to account for 2 bigs hitting the glass. The option of getting another elite rebounding PF and playing two PFs is possible with someone like Humphries, but I just don’t see the team taking this option. If they do I’d bet it would be with Williams who isn’t an elite rebounding or Beasley who’s pretty average at the PF.
A better option might be targeting wings, but I’m not finding a lot of teams with good wings missing a PF.
600 N First Ave "like a Pirate's cove".
Yeah PF is the deepest position in the league
Which is why I’m having trouble finding trades involving Williams that I like. I really wanted JV, Gortat or Varejao last offseason. I think Okafor is the most obtainable of the acceptable bigs. In the less acceptable department, I thought Kwame Brown (currently injured) might be a guy to look at. It turns out he’s just a slightly better version of Darko (higher efficiency, lower usage, barely better rebounding, fewer blocks but similar Drtg – not the most useful of stats across teams).
based on the only 1 5 year guy on the roster part
The 5th year might end up being a poison pill of sorts, in that it would eliminate the ability to trade a 5-year guy (like Love) to any team that already had one, and it would eliminate the ability for the wolves to trade for a 5 year guy as well. From that perspective, having 4-year max guys makes a lot more sense for both players and owners in terms of roster flexibility and maximizing trade value if need be.
I don't think a team
acquiring a five-year player is bound to the restriction like that. It reads to me like no team can sign more than one player to a five-year deal. They didn’t sign the traded player to the deal, so they’re still free to sign a five-year contract with one of their current players.
I could be wrong, though.
"Oh my, oh my, oh my. Is that great basketball or what?" --Hubie Brown, Jan. 20, 2012
by Cynical Jason on Jan 24, 2012 5:10 PM CST up reply actions
"A team can have only one designated player on its roster at any time"
seems pretty clear to me, in fact it would even lead me to think it was written expressly to close any ‘have one teams sign the 5 year deal and trade them to another’ loopholes, but then that’s Coon’s faq, not the actual contract.
Which makes the
“I could be wrong, though” part of my post more likely.
I should have expected that.
"Oh my, oh my, oh my. Is that great basketball or what?" --Hubie Brown, Jan. 20, 2012
by Cynical Jason on Jan 24, 2012 11:55 PM CST up reply actions
this seems especially restrictive
by this interpretation, if you sign a 5 Year you are adding any team that also has a 5 year player on their roster to a “no trade” list?
http://loisaidabbclub.tumblr.com/
Twitter: @loisaidabbclub
by beatsandpeasnyc on Jan 25, 2012 9:19 AM CST up reply actions
My understanding is that its all about the Franchise Tag
not using it on Kevin gives us an opportunity to use it on someone else down the road who’s on our roster.
If all of you are convinced that resigning that someone else on the roster is not dramatically increased by having this franchise tag then its not an issue. I guess i’d like to have as many bullets as possible to bring in as much talent.
Bottom line expectation could very well be this: We’re suddenly in the “Window” phase for this franchise…next 4 years or bust.
http://loisaidabbclub.tumblr.com/
Twitter: @loisaidabbclub
by beatsandpeasnyc on Jan 24, 2012 3:47 PM CST up reply actions
Again, it's one "at a time"
And Rubio and Williams and our 2012 first rounder (who probably won’t exist) are the only candidates affected by this, unless you think Wes or Wellington will demand five years. :-)
You can't...dust...for vomit.
I've always wondered why there isn't a provision regarding state income tax for all the leagues
Whereby someone signing in Minnesota would be entitled to be paid, whatever it is, 8% more than someone signing in Florida.
I would guess some owners cough Taylor cough would rather be less competitive than have the “obligation” to pay an extra 8% in salary.
At any rate, it would be interesting to see who is for and against the idea.
by fanslaststand on Jan 24, 2012 5:47 PM CST up reply actions
Don't say that.
I had food in my stomach. Now I need a new keyboard.
"Oh my, oh my, oh my. Is that great basketball or what?" --Hubie Brown, Jan. 20, 2012
by Cynical Jason on Jan 24, 2012 7:10 PM CST up reply actions
Actually
I think it’s pretty complicated because their pay gets prorated per game and they have to pay in every state they play in, or at least that’s what I thought I heard once. Or maybe I’m confusing the NBA with rock music tours.
Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!
I know that you are right about MLB.
So in the case of a player playing in florida, they would get paid about half their games at no personal income tax with the rest spread out over whatever else the rest of the team carrying states average.
So it’s not like 15% vs 0, but there is definatly an advantage.
". . . have we become so cynical that we don’t believe mgmt can pull this off?"
Erm . . .
"Oh my, oh my, oh my. Is that great basketball or what?" --Hubie Brown, Jan. 20, 2012
by Cynical Jason on Jan 24, 2012 4:23 PM CST up reply actions
Is it possible that the agent is carrying it to the end for publicity?
All publicity is good publicity, after all. With Free Kevin Love, everyone was talking about him, and it helped put him in the national spotlight. His game kept the spotlight on him. Given that it doesn’t look like the wolves will be worldbeaters this year, the only way he gets attention is if HE get attention. The more this lingers, the more other teams start thinking maybe.
At the risk of injury before signing?
I donno if that’s good advice.
by fanslaststand on Jan 24, 2012 5:49 PM CST up reply actions
I take solace in the fact that there has yet to be a player that has turned down a max after their rookie contract
Plus, for all his faults, Kahn has been pretty damn good with the finance side of the franchise.
90% of the crap I say on here is sarcastic
There should be another option
“Oh S#*@, does Kevin not want to stay here?”
by googoleeoottooooleeoottooooleeeatta on Jan 24, 2012 4:56 PM CST reply actions
Kevin Love not wanting to be here
Will not kill the franchise. It’s conceivable it might save the franchise. He’s an incredible asset, one way or another.
You can't...dust...for vomit.
If he doesn't want to be here
His trade value immediately drops. No way in hell we’re getting a fair trade for him if this is the case— and really, the only fair trade I can think of is Love for an established top 3-5 player in the league who is relatively young (DWIGHT). He is already one of the best players in the league and hasn’t even hit his prime.
90% of the crap I say on here is sarcastic
by CoffeeJanitor on Jan 24, 2012 7:38 PM CST up reply actions
incredible asset means nothing if he doesn't want to stay here
but crisis averted
Joe Mauer grounded into double play, second to shortstop to first, ________ out at second
Ha
90% of the crap I say on here is sarcastic
by CoffeeJanitor on Jan 24, 2012 9:46 PM CST up reply actions
I'd like to apologize...
I didn’t have time to read through everything, so if someone brought this up, it’ll be redundant.
The word is that each team can only sign one player to the 5 year extension to their rookie contract. If Love signs for 5 years, then we can’t sigh Rubio, Williams, or anyone else we get to a 5 year max contract. My guess is that Love wants the 5 year max, but Kahn is trying to get the four year. The idea being that we could extend Love again, but he now has more “juice” for Rubio or whomever.
As for Kahn “screwing it up”. There’s no way. Kahn’s weakness is talent evaluation. It’s not contract negotiation. If push comes to shove, they’ll sign Love to the 5 year deal. But, I think that he’s trying to convince Love that it’ll be better for him (and the team) in the long run to take the 4 year deal.
We’ll see what happens.
Except for the whole opt out thing
90% of the crap I say on here is sarcastic
by CoffeeJanitor on Jan 26, 2012 12:08 AM CST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Allen Iverson presented the game ball for Sixers’ Game 6, talked about his future (VIDEO)
- Can the Lakers improve with Kobe Bryant making $30 million?
- Orlando Magic coaching rumors include Jerry Sloan and Scott Skiles
- Jrue Holiday needs to shoot more for Sixers to win, according to Doug Collins
- Create-a-Caption: Jeff Pendergraph scares his Pacers teammates
