Q12543 wrote:Yup, Gasol would be a fantastic addition. Basically wins wherever he goes - arguably the most important cog on those Memphis teams that just kept winning 50+ games year after year. The problem is he's signed for cheap for next season too.
I've thought highly of Marc. But he's 36 years old and doesn't have much left in the tank. A number of former NBA players have talked about how the physical decline happens precipitously once you hit a certain age, usually between 34-36. Marc averaged only 4.1 rebounds and 1 block in 19 minutes per game this season. I don't want the Wolves to give up any assets to trade for a 37 year old cheerleader on the bench.
Favors still strikes me as the best alternative. He's 29/30 years old and can still play. He averaged 5.5 rebounds and 1 block in only 15.4 minutes per game. He would instantly be our starting PF next to KAT. The fact that he played only 15 minutes a game tells me the Wolves wouldn't have to give up much to get him. He's a guy who could bring veteran leadership with a long history on a winning team and also have the credibility of a contributing player, probably a starter. I'd envision him playing 20-25 minutes a game with Vando getting the rest of the PF minutes.
bleedspeed177 wrote:I remember Andrei Kirilenko being one of the most underrated signings for the Wolves back in the day. I would think that type of guy would be a huge benefit here.
Well, Kirilenko was actually a really good player still. I'm talking about potentially finding someone that may not even be able to play that effectively anymore, but carries a big stick in the lockerroom and personifies all of the habits needed to create winning culture. Its basically an Ed Davis or Anthony Tolliver with a ring.
Yes, but I think it is important that leaders start and play. I think the good cheerleader on the bench player is not nearly as impactful.
Well, that gets at the heart of the thread topic. Udonis Haslem doesn't play a lick, yet the Heat swear by his value due to his influence on other players. The Heat seem to consistently play hard and compete even if they don't have A-list talent on their roster every year.
Obviously we need a certain baseline of talent and skilled players to be competitive and win at an acceptable level. But once you hit that baseline of talent - which I think we might have done - how important is it that you get vets that have won tons of games in their careers and exude all the right characteristics of a "winning" type personality and ethos even if they don't play a lick?
Q12543 wrote:Yup, Gasol would be a fantastic addition. Basically wins wherever he goes - arguably the most important cog on those Memphis teams that just kept winning 50+ games year after year. The problem is he's signed for cheap for next season too.
I've thought highly of Marc. But he's 36 years old and doesn't have much left in the tank. A number of former NBA players have talked about how the physical decline happens precipitously once you hit a certain age, usually between 34-36. Marc averaged only 4.1 rebounds and 1 block in 19 minutes per game this season. I don't want the Wolves to give up any assets to trade for a 37 year old cheerleader on the bench.
Favors still strikes me as the best alternative. He's 29/30 years old and can still play. He averaged 5.5 rebounds and 1 block in only 15.4 minutes per game. He would instantly be our starting PF next to KAT. The fact that he played only 15 minutes a game tells me the Wolves wouldn't have to give up much to get him. He's a guy who could bring veteran leadership with a long history on a winning team and also have the credibility of a contributing player, probably a starter. I'd envision him playing 20-25 minutes a game with Vando getting the rest of the PF minutes.
Understood. See my reply to Bleed above.
My question is this - does a Marc Gasol provide more value to this team because of his winning pedigree than an Ed Davis, even if he plays the exact same role as Davis in terms of minutes, which is basically barely playing? Or does that not really matter and it's only about what a player can provide on the field of play?
Q12543 wrote:Yup, Gasol would be a fantastic addition. Basically wins wherever he goes - arguably the most important cog on those Memphis teams that just kept winning 50+ games year after year. The problem is he's signed for cheap for next season too.
I've thought highly of Marc. But he's 36 years old and doesn't have much left in the tank. A number of former NBA players have talked about how the physical decline happens precipitously once you hit a certain age, usually between 34-36. Marc averaged only 4.1 rebounds and 1 block in 19 minutes per game this season. I don't want the Wolves to give up any assets to trade for a 37 year old cheerleader on the bench.
Favors still strikes me as the best alternative. He's 29/30 years old and can still play. He averaged 5.5 rebounds and 1 block in only 15.4 minutes per game. He would instantly be our starting PF next to KAT. The fact that he played only 15 minutes a game tells me the Wolves wouldn't have to give up much to get him. He's a guy who could bring veteran leadership with a long history on a winning team and also have the credibility of a contributing player, probably a starter. I'd envision him playing 20-25 minutes a game with Vando getting the rest of the PF minutes.
Understood. See my reply to Bleed above.
My question is this - does a Marc Gasol provide more value to this team because of his winning pedigree than an Ed Davis, even if he plays the exact same role as Davis in terms of minutes, which is basically barely playing? Or does that not really matter and it's only about what a player can provide on the field of play?
Gasol has still been good enough to get run on most teams. He's still a positive player.
Problem is he's on a team that also has M. Harrell and A. Drummond at C... and whose best lineup uses Anthony Davis at C.
