Camden wrote:Flip's been fleeced in every trade he's done since the Love deal.
Brewer - Daniels and a 2nd
Williams - Neal and a 2nd
Future 1st - Payne
Young - Garnett
What the fuck are we doing?
Still have hope on the Payne deal, but see what you mean.
I don't. Brewer, Williams and Young aren't exactly 3/4 of the NBA Mt. Rushmore...you can't expect to get much back for them unless you are ridiculously overvaluing them. Addition by subtraction, my friends.
Flip JUST acquired these guys like yesterday.
Yep, that's where Flip is perhaps rippable, not for trading Thad Young. Although in all fairness to Flip, Corey and Mo were free agents so the deals didn't cost us anything.
longstrangetrip wrote:It looks to me like the board is about 80-20 against the deal...I'm only seeing Tim. Doper and me on board with it, and not as passionately as the objectors. Did I miss any other proponents of this deal?
I'm generally on board. As I have said before, I see this deal more about subtraction than addition. I have been consistent from the start in saying that Thad isn't my idea of a prototypical PF...well, not even a halfway decent one. I value rebounding and defense first in a PF, with scoring ranking behind those attributes. And we were never going to get defense or rebounding from Thad. It's odd to say that we have significantly upgraded rebounding and defense by swapping a 26 year old for a 38 year old, but we have...that's about all you need to know about Thad Young. He's a likable guy so I wish him luck in Brooklyn, but if he plays significant minutes for the Nets, I expect their winning percentage to be about the same that Thad has put up in his career to date.
The only reason I'm not completely on board with this deal is my personal dislike for Garnett...it rivals cool's. While I cheered for him and admired the intensity of his game while he was here, I often had to do it while plugging my nose...just knew a little too much about him. It's kind of sad that the two greatest players in Wolves history also happened to be the two I detested the most. Why am I willing to take Garnett back, when I wouldn't be so pleased with taking Love back? Easy...Garnett makes his teams better, while Love (perhaps like Thad) does not.
The biggest downside for me about this deal is that tickets on the street just got much more expensive...
I think most are too young to remember what having mentorship and real veteran leadership did for KG's game in his first few years or they just hate KG as a person (which is understandable Cool and LST). For instance, just look at how Magic talks about Kareem. Many superstars have had real veteran leadership around them in their initial success. I think this is a net plus for us.
It really depends. People respond differently. Some need a kick in the ass and someone in their face whereas others perhaps respond better with a lighter, more reinforcing touch. I honestly don't know what KG's style is (I suspect he's more of the old-school type) and I don't know what works best with the young guys he's supposed to help.
Fair enough he may end up being be a shitty teacher. But that doesn't negate the impetus to try and put someone in that role. The fact is no one becomes great at anything without good mentorship along the way.
Camden wrote:Flip's been fleeced in every trade he's done since the Love deal.
Brewer - Daniels and a 2nd
Williams - Neal and a 2nd
Future 1st - Payne
Young - Garnett
What the fuck are we doing?
I don't understand what the plan is. You can't say they are in full rebuild mode with the moves they've made, yet they have only 10 wins. Outside of next years lottery pick, they don't really have a bunch of picks compared to other rebuilding teams, and the players they have now aren't really worth anything. Getting Wiggins is great, but as the Wolves have shown time and time again, they suck ass at surrounding a superstar.
What do you mean? We're surrounding KG with Rubio, Wiggins, Pekovic, and Martin. Flip FINALLY got KG the players he needed. Now we sign him up for two more years and that 8th seed is within our grasp!
CoolBreeze44 wrote:Just can't believe that this is the only deal we did today. It's pure comedy.
Flip is investing in mentorship. He is going to draft another big likely and wants KG to be what McHale was for him. A skilled big with an array of moves that will pass that on. I understand your aversion to KGs antics. But if he took that teaching role seriously, it will be an asset.
10 - 20 years ago, I bet there were a lot of "But McHale will be a great teacher for the big guys on the block."
Either you have the skill and desire or you don't. A guy twice their age barking at them isn't going to make a dent with a lot of millionaires just out of their teenage years.
McHale was great for KG's game. Skill and desire are absolutely factors, but to ignore mentorship and teaching is insane. You saw it in KG's game, after working with McHale he started adding Mchale's drop-step and up and under moves. Great footwork and defensive positioning for a big takes practice and teaching. But more generally, everyone great at anything had a mentor and a teacher. Your statement is far too pessimistic. These teenage millionaires may presumably want to become teenage billionaires no?
Sean Rooks
Andrew Lang
Tom Hammnonds
Cherokee Parks
Dean Garrett
Rasho
Bill Curley
Andrae Patterson
Marc Jackson
Joe Smith
Ervin Johnson
Mark Madsen
Oliver Miller
Olowakandi
John Thomas
Tskitskiviski
Mark Blount
Al Jefferson
Kevin Garnett
Was McHale worthless as a mentor? No. But we read SO MUCH about how important his mentorship was going to be. It makes for a great narrative... even if it's not much more than fluff.
Talent and desire are much, much, much more important. Do you really think Garnett wasn't a HOF player with/without McHale? Do you think Jefferson only becomes a 20/10 guy if he teams with McHale?
You forgot about Mchales biggest pet project, Ndi Ebi
I believe KG would have a better chance of getting through to these kids as an asst coach instead of a player. KG isn't going to win a title here as a player. He might as a coach.
That being said, who knows if he has any interest at all in coaching OR mentoring. He may only want to buy a share of the team and work the front office side. I don't readily see mentorship or coaching qualities in him.
CoolBreeze44 wrote:Just can't believe that this is the only deal we did today. It's pure comedy.
Flip is investing in mentorship. He is going to draft another big likely and wants KG to be what McHale was for him. A skilled big with an array of moves that will pass that on. I understand your aversion to KGs antics. But if he took that teaching role seriously, it will be an asset.
10 - 20 years ago, I bet there were a lot of "But McHale will be a great teacher for the big guys on the block."
Either you have the skill and desire or you don't. A guy twice their age barking at them isn't going to make a dent with a lot of millionaires just out of their teenage years.
McHale was great for KG's game. Skill and desire are absolutely factors, but to ignore mentorship and teaching is insane. You saw it in KG's game, after working with McHale he started adding Mchale's drop-step and up and under moves. Great footwork and defensive positioning for a big takes practice and teaching. But more generally, everyone great at anything had a mentor and a teacher. Your statement is far too pessimistic. These teenage millionaires may presumably want to become teenage billionaires no?
Sean Rooks
Andrew Lang
Tom Hammnonds
Cherokee Parks
Dean Garrett
Rasho
Bill Curley
Andrae Patterson
Marc Jackson
Joe Smith
Ervin Johnson
Mark Madsen
Oliver Miller
Olowakandi
John Thomas
Tskitskiviski
Mark Blount
Al Jefferson
Kevin Garnett
Was McHale worthless as a mentor? No. But we read SO MUCH about how important his mentorship was going to be. It makes for a great narrative... even if it's not much more than fluff.
Talent and desire are much, much, much more important. Do you really think Garnett wasn't a HOF player with/without McHale? Do you think Jefferson only becomes a 20/10 guy if he teams with McHale?
Talent and desire are important. But talent and desire plus mentorship and coaching push it over the top. There is a reason true superstars are surrounded by iconic coaches and veterans, there is no reason to diminish the impact. I can say with certainty that McHale helped KG on his path to the HOF and KG would gladly admit that. You saw the difference in the types of moves KG and AL would make with their moves and footwork. There was a reason for that. I would say that McHale got a lot out of many of those players on that list. Rasho may have ended up out of the NBA if he didn't start on the wolves.
Camden wrote:Flip's been fleeced in every trade he's done since the Love deal.
Brewer - Daniels and a 2nd
Williams - Neal and a 2nd
Future 1st - Payne
Young - Garnett
What the fuck are we doing?
I don't understand what the plan is. You can't say they are in full rebuild mode with the moves they've made, yet they have only 10 wins. Outside of next years lottery pick, they don't really have a bunch of picks compared to other rebuilding teams, and the players they have now aren't really worth anything. Getting Wiggins is great, but as the Wolves have shown time and time again, they suck ass at surrounding a superstar.
I'm confused why we couldn't win more than 10 games with future HOFers Brewer, Williams and Young logging large minutes. Must have been bad luck...
Probably because our three best players missed the majority of the first half. Yep, that would do it.
You've been a big believer in this team playing .500 ball down the stretch based on what you've seen when we're healthy, yet now you conveniently act like those three weren't productive/decent NBA players?
You're mistaken, though, if you think we got all we could for Brewer or Young. We can argue about Williams, but that trade was more as a favor for Mo.
longstrangetrip wrote:It looks to me like the board is about 80-20 against the deal...I'm only seeing Tim. Doper and me on board with it, and not as passionately as the objectors. Did I miss any other proponents of this deal?
I'm generally on board. As I have said before, I see this deal more about subtraction than addition. I have been consistent from the start in saying that Thad isn't my idea of a prototypical PF...well, not even a halfway decent one. I value rebounding and defense first in a PF, with scoring ranking behind those attributes. And we were never going to get defense or rebounding from Thad. It's odd to say that we have significantly upgraded rebounding and defense by swapping a 26 year old for a 38 year old, but we have...that's about all you need to know about Thad Young. He's a likable guy so I wish him luck in Brooklyn, but if he plays significant minutes for the Nets, I expect their winning percentage to be about the same that Thad has put up in his career to date.
The only reason I'm not completely on board with this deal is my personal dislike for Garnett...it rivals cool's. While I cheered for him and admired the intensity of his game while he was here, I often had to do it while plugging my nose...just knew a little too much about him. It's kind of sad that the two greatest players in Wolves history also happened to be the two I detested the most. Why am I willing to take Garnett back, when I wouldn't be so pleased with taking Love back? Easy...Garnett makes his teams better, while Love (perhaps like Thad) does not.
The biggest downside for me about this deal is that tickets on the street just got much more expensive...
I think most are too young to remember what having mentorship and real veteran leadership did for KG's game in his first few years or they just hate KG as a person (which is understandable Cool and LST). For instance, just look at how Magic talks about Kareem. Many superstars have had real veteran leadership around them in their initial success. I think this is a net plus for us.
KG was good because he was talented, not because he was mentored properly
This is so hilarious. Talent only gets you so far. This is like saying coaches, systems don't matter. The most talented team doesn't always win. Anyone who plays sports knows this. Talent is good, but talent with proper instruction is great.
Sure. Talent doesn't always win.
But you CAN'T win without talent. And Garnett already had the talent and desire with or without McHale. Wiggins either has it or he doesn't with or without the new teammate who's double his age showing up half the time for road games. Same with Lavine. Muhammad. Et al.
I look at Kevin Durant as an example. Who helped him learn how to win? He came in to an awful team in an awful situation. He showed some bad habits on a bad team. Did the arrival of Desmond Mason and Chris Wilcox teach him how to win? Or, did he simply have the drive to want to get better... and the talent to pull it off?
CoolBreeze44 wrote:I believe KG would have a better chance of getting through to these kids as an asst coach instead of a player. KG isn't going to win a title here as a player. He might as a coach.
That being said, who knows if he has any interest at all in coaching OR mentoring. He may only want to buy a share of the team and work the front office side. I don't readily see mentorship or coaching qualities in him.
But Flip has been selling the mentorship idea way before this deal. Talking in many interviews about how KG had true veteran leadership when coming to the wolves. I am sure it was part of the discussion convincing KG to come as a player. It really would be insane if that conversation never happened. KG should not be playing more than 15 mins a game. I think everyone sees that.
