Convince Me Otherwise

[TheFuture]

Was there a Glen Taylor press conference after the draft? Or are we referring to his talk with Doogie?

I hate to say this, but I couldn't help but wonder if Glen is suffering from some form of dementia when I listened to him on Doogie's Scoop podcast. And once again, I thought he let more info out of the bag than Thibs/Layden would have liked...

I can confirm he is losing his health. Not fond of the current choices, but I do understand why.

[JasonIsDaMan [enjin:7981157]]

Here's the thing:

I've seen some of you (like Khans), if not all of you, badmouth Terry Ryan for not being able to get The Twins past The Yankees/RedSox. And I don't see how this ends any differently. If HOU makes a big move and/or UTH keeps Hayward, I see a 4th seed ceiling. Once again, better than watching KAT sitting next to some kid with cancer in Seacaucus. BUT YOU DON'T GET TO BITCH AFTERWARDS BECAUSE IT WAS ALL THAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN!!!!!!!!!

The only, and I mean only, chance this has is if Butler is still good 2 years from now and can accept a smaller dealer to fit more than him/AW/KAT under that cap. But as long as SAS/GSW/CLE stay the way they are currently constructed and stay healthy, it's not happening.

I don't buy our only chance is to sign yet another player. Injuries happen. People forget 3 years ago the flood gates of injuries opened for GS to even make their first finals. Then last year Steph tweaked his knee and they lost to Cleveland. This year Kawhi goes down. You're telling me if KD goes down Butler/Wiggins/Towns can't compete and maybe beat Steph/Klay/Draymond? Shit happens. There's always a degree of luck involved with winning a title. Houston has one star. They'd need to sign two to get where we are going. Utah would need to add another pending they don't lose Hayward and they have no cap and market to do so. LeBron doesn't have unlimited years of great play left and may even leave if they don't win next year. To write us off now is just dumb. The whole level of competition could be different in 2 years when Butler's deal is up and we could be a contender at that time with the ability to offer him the most money and years. I don't know how that doesn't put us in the driver seat to keep him.

You know what I'm not buying there Khansie? Two years from now, when this team, WITH NO FURTHER MOVES OF SIGNIFICANCE, topping out at a #4 seed with a series win or two, and you coming on here and not talking about that is great and definitely doesn't suck and how there is no way you couldn't have done better yourself and how sorry you are for badmouthing Terry Ryan.

And that's the best you got? If 3 other teams have 5 major injuries each, the Wolves will be sitting pretty? Kind of like how the rest of the NFC was sitting pretty when the Vikes were down to Macalester's OT's? If that is honestly your plan, then 1) wow & 2) Remember that when it happens to a Minnesota team.

This team is still 3, if not 4, players away from being a legitimate contender. $17m in cap space, and (probably) no first next year. I don't see it.

[khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]]

Here's the thing:

I've seen some of you (like Khans), if not all of you, badmouth Terry Ryan for not being able to get The Twins past The Yankees/RedSox. And I don't see how this ends any differently. If HOU makes a big move and/or UTH keeps Hayward, I see a 4th seed ceiling. Once again, better than watching KAT sitting next to some kid with cancer in Seacaucus. BUT YOU DON'T GET TO BITCH AFTERWARDS BECAUSE IT WAS ALL THAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN!!!!!!!!!

The only, and I mean only, chance this has is if Butler is still good 2 years from now and can accept a smaller dealer to fit more than him/AW/KAT under that cap. But as long as SAS/GSW/CLE stay the way they are currently constructed and stay healthy, it's not happening.

I don't buy our only chance is to sign yet another player. Injuries happen. People forget 3 years ago the flood gates of injuries opened for GS to even make their first finals. Then last year Steph tweaked his knee and they lost to Cleveland. This year Kawhi goes down. You're telling me if KD goes down Butler/Wiggins/Towns can't compete and maybe beat Steph/Klay/Draymond? Shit happens. There's always a degree of luck involved with winning a title. Houston has one star. They'd need to sign two to get where we are going. Utah would need to add another pending they don't lose Hayward and they have no cap and market to do so. LeBron doesn't have unlimited years of great play left and may even leave if they don't win next year. To write us off now is just dumb. The whole level of competition could be different in 2 years when Butler's deal is up and we could be a contender at that time with the ability to offer him the most money and years. I don't know how that doesn't put us in the driver seat to keep him.

You know what I'm not buying there Khansie? Two years from now, when this team, WITH NO FURTHER MOVES OF SIGNIFICANCE, topping out at a #4 seed with a series win or two, and you coming on here and not talking about that is great and definitely doesn't suck and how there is no way you couldn't have done better yourself and how sorry you are for badmouthing Terry Ryan.

And that's the best you got? If 3 other teams have 5 major injuries each, the Wolves will be sitting pretty? Kind of like how the rest of the NFC was sitting pretty when the Vikes were down to Macalester's OT's? If that is honestly your plan, then 1) wow & 2) Remember that when it happens to a Minnesota team.

This team is still 3, if not 4, players away from being a legitimate contender. $17m in cap space, and (probably) no first next year. I don't see it.

Why is James Harden and a team full of role players better than a team with Butler, Towns and Wiggins? Why is an old CP3, always injured Blake and no offense DJ better than our big 3? OKC can't hold a candle to this team. There's a reason the Spurs are looking to find Kawhi help. You severely underrate how good we are gonna be and severely overrate how good the rest of the conference is gonna be. There's 1 team that if they stay together and if they stay healthy are at the top. The rest of the conference is either starting to age out with guys like Pau Gasol, Manu, Parker and CP3 or they are literally built around one guy to our 3. But feel free to keep guaranteeing our failure. Why do you even bothering coming here anymore if it's all over already?

[WildWolf2813]

If you believe that Dunn and Lavine are better long term assets than Butler there is no convincing you at this point. Winning may help some of the ails you are feeling for a while I hope. Nothing is guaranteed in any business. I like that we gained a surefire player for some of our long term potential, without parting with our two best assets. In our situation it was going to be a chore to keep our core together either way. Winning and making some noise in the playoffs has to be part of developing the momentum to build a complete team. GS made moves around their core long before they became what they were. They acquired Bogut, they signed Iggy. There were naysayers linked to those moves as well I am sure. But I believe this is the sort of tweaking that is necessary for building a great product long term. Thibs doesn't strike me as the kind of person who is going to ignore the risks in this situation, and as you point out they are there. But there were legit risks in relying on the development of Dunn and Lavine. We could have kept them and equally trapped as a 3-8 seed. Or we could have had another year missing the playoffs and started seeing disgruntled young players. On court success is always going to give you more options. We have to stay diligent in scouting, keep angling for young assets to round out the core. Allow yourself a little joy, especially in a sports environment where we have had so little of it for ages.

GS did NOT make moves around their core "long before they became what they were." Look at my "case for patience" thread for the particulars. The Warriors made their big jump from a 23-win lottery team to a 47-win playoff team BEFORE they acquired Iggy. And although they acquired Bogut the summer before their leap to the playoffs, Bogut missed the vast majority of that season with an injury. The difference? The warriors added three key rookies that summer -- Klay Thompson, Draymond Green and Harrison Barnes. They added only one important vet named Carl Landry, but he wasn't that critical and they didn't give up any young core players to get him. The Thunder made a similar move from 23 wins to 50 wins without adding any significant veterans or trading any of their core young guys. Instead, they added two key rookies that summer -- James Harden and Serge Ibaka. It was those additional plus the continued maturation of Durant and Westbrook that resulted in the Thunder becoming the contender they became. The biggest mistake that franchise make was trading Harden, not knowing at the time that Durant would leave. The Bulls back in the late 80s went from 30 wins to nearly 50 wins with the addition of Pippen and Grant to Jordan in his 3rd season.

There's definitely a case to be made for the Butler trade. But pointing to other organizations is just part of a false narrative. The true narrative of success is that young players struggle for a while, but if you've finally assembled enough of them and they're really talented, they will ultimately succeed with experience. And actually, the experience isn't 5-10 years, but closer to 2-4 years.

Did you forget when they beat us out for David Lee (an all-star) and signed and traded Randolph and 2 other guys to get him? It's not as if they didn't get outside help (and damn good help too). Leave it up to some of you guys and y'all woulda kept Randolph because of the potential he had.


Future- you have to understand something: the day Golden State begins to fall off doesn't mean we had next in line, but you're never gonna be in the convo for being next in line by losing 50 games a year. As I said this season, how could anyone enter next year with the same team and have the same expectations after how they disappointed? At some point you either get used to losing and don't get better (which is where I think Wiggins is at) or you get disenchanted (which is where the players will be if you keep losing). Glen even said if the team did better this year he probably stays the course, but the team was the biggest let down in the NBA. How can that be rewarded with more undeserved patience? After 13 years of futility, it isn't patience. It's watching the league pass you by while you do nothing. For every time you have someone say "cmon guys in 2-3 years they'll be ready" I can find someone here who heard the same hook and line 2-3 years ago. It gets to a point where you stop believing it.

IMO, the only way you can be upset with this trade is if you think Wiggins shoulda been in the deal instead of LaVine.

[Lipoli390]

If you believe that Dunn and Lavine are better long term assets than Butler there is no convincing you at this point. Winning may help some of the ails you are feeling for a while I hope. Nothing is guaranteed in any business. I like that we gained a surefire player for some of our long term potential, without parting with our two best assets. In our situation it was going to be a chore to keep our core together either way. Winning and making some noise in the playoffs has to be part of developing the momentum to build a complete team. GS made moves around their core long before they became what they were. They acquired Bogut, they signed Iggy. There were naysayers linked to those moves as well I am sure. But I believe this is the sort of tweaking that is necessary for building a great product long term. Thibs doesn't strike me as the kind of person who is going to ignore the risks in this situation, and as you point out they are there. But there were legit risks in relying on the development of Dunn and Lavine. We could have kept them and equally trapped as a 3-8 seed. Or we could have had another year missing the playoffs and started seeing disgruntled young players. On court success is always going to give you more options. We have to stay diligent in scouting, keep angling for young assets to round out the core. Allow yourself a little joy, especially in a sports environment where we have had so little of it for ages.

GS did NOT make moves around their core "long before they became what they were." Look at my "case for patience" thread for the particulars. The Warriors made their big jump from a 23-win lottery team to a 47-win playoff team BEFORE they acquired Iggy. And although they acquired Bogut the summer before their leap to the playoffs, Bogut missed the vast majority of that season with an injury. The difference? The warriors added three key rookies that summer -- Klay Thompson, Draymond Green and Harrison Barnes. They added only one important vet named Carl Landry, but he wasn't that critical and they didn't give up any young core players to get him. The Thunder made a similar move from 23 wins to 50 wins without adding any significant veterans or trading any of their core young guys. Instead, they added two key rookies that summer -- James Harden and Serge Ibaka. It was those additional plus the continued maturation of Durant and Westbrook that resulted in the Thunder becoming the contender they became. The biggest mistake that franchise make was trading Harden, not knowing at the time that Durant would leave. The Bulls back in the late 80s went from 30 wins to nearly 50 wins with the addition of Pippen and Grant to Jordan in his 3rd season.

There's definitely a case to be made for the Butler trade. But pointing to other organizations is just part of a false narrative. The true narrative of success is that young players struggle for a while, but if you've finally assembled enough of them and they're really talented, they will ultimately succeed with experience. And actually, the experience isn't 5-10 years, but closer to 2-4 years.

Did you forget when they beat us out for David Lee (an all-star) and signed and traded Randolph and 2 other guys to get him? It's not as if they didn't get outside help (and damn good help too). Leave it up to some of you guys and y'all woulda kept Randolph because of the potential he had.


Future- you have to understand something: the day Golden State begins to fall off doesn't mean we had next in line, but you're never gonna be in the convo for being next in line by losing 50 games a year. As I said this season, how could anyone enter next year with the same team and have the same expectations after how they disappointed? At some point you either get used to losing and don't get better (which is where I think Wiggins is at) or you get disenchanted (which is where the players will be if you keep losing). Glen even said if the team did better this year he probably stays the course, but the team was the biggest let down in the NBA. How can that be rewarded with more undeserved patience? After 13 years of futility, it isn't patience. It's watching the league pass you by while you do nothing. For every time you have someone say "cmon guys in 2-3 years they'll be ready" I can find someone here who heard the same hook and line 2-3 years ago. It gets to a point where you stop believing it.

IMO, the only way you can be upset with this trade is if you think Wiggins shoulda been in the deal instead of LaVine.

Lol. Wild -- Just so you know, the great David Lee was already with the Warriors when they won 23 games. They took their big jump into the playoffs the following season when they added rookies Klay Thompson, Draymond Green and Harrison Barnes. They also added Bogut, but he only played around 30 games that season. Again, I'm fine with the Butler trade. He brings a lot to the table -- allstar play and intangibles that can push our two young potential stars, Wiggins and KAT. And as Thibs pointed out, he's in his prime, not in his early 30s and on the verge of beginning his decline. It was a bold move and I applaud the organization for it.

By the way, I didn't like Anthony Randolph and wouldn't have signed him in the first place. He was a proven underachiever by the time Kahn brought him in. Not exactly the same as LaVine or even Dunn -- and that's a gross understatement. David Kahn had the "I'm smarter than everyone else" syndrome. So he thought Darko would be great when the rest of the League had long since concluded he was an irretrievable bust. He thought Brandon Roy's knees were miraculously healed even though they still had no cartilage. And of course, he thought the underachieving, low energy, low IQ Anthony Randolph would blossom under the guidance and genius of Kahn and Rambis.

Thankfully, Thibs seems to know what he's doing. And as a result, the Wolves will likely be relevant again starting next season. Given all the close games and lost leads last season, I still believe the team would have taken a leap next season and made the playoffs without this deal. But this deal makes that leap far more certain.

[Monster]

Well since you brought it up this should be fun.

Of all the stuff Kahn did that didn't work out I probably could live with nearly all his swing for the fences on uber talents even if I didn't agree with many of the moves. They really didn't have stars and he tried to get some. For example when he dealt for AR the guy was still only 21. Heck he is still a couple weeks from his 28th birthday in July! As more time goes on the more the guy gets absolutely ripped not even so much for what moves he made or didn't make but what a joke he was as an executive. His latest piece on SI about Curry had some merit in light of Lavar Ball but the way he painted himself actually made himself sound even more like an idiot. I think it was the Dunc'd on podcast that was really ripping him one on that article with some good points. Jon K said recently on a podcast or radio spot something like "Kahn claimed nobody worked harder than he did and the reality was nobody worked less than David Kahn." coming from Jon...ouch.

[AbeVigodaLive]

Dig the trade.

- Odds are that KAT, Wiggins AND LaVine hit their ceilings was low. Probably lower than most would want to admit. And... having each on the team might have undermined each guy's growth a bit. Promise is great. But the cemetery of fallen failed promising NBA players is much larger than the pantheon of promising players who reached their ceilings.
- NBA players have to learn how to play in the NBA. More importantly, they have to know how to win. Sure, they could learn on their own. Or, they could learn from an old loud fat guy in a suit. Or, by a guy who's actually done it and can still do it.
- The odds of keeping all Three (KAT, Wig, Lavine) for 10 years or whatever was ridiculously low. Remember, we're in a new NBA where players are actively encouraged to move more often. Shorter contracts are there for a reason...
- Today's 32-year old is not yesterday's 32-year old. For every Larry Bird of yesteryear... we have a Steve Nash, Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, et al... more rest. More sleep. Better food. Better training. More knowledge. Et al...
- The team needed to learn how to win... and play defense. Those are two things Zach LaVine was ill-fit for... and there were few anecdotal reasons to think those things would have changed.

[kurrdog53 [enjin:7013678]]

I'll try to do some convincing lol. Lavine's potential is not higher than the player Butler is today. Lavine has a 0% chance to become the defender Butler is and Butler is still a great offensive player who gets better every year. Zach could become a better offensive player than Jimmy, but there is a 0% chance Zach becomes the elite two way player that Jimmy is. Guys just don't go from God awful defenders to elite. They go from God awful to above average maybe.

I don't think people understand how good Butler is. Top 15 doesn't really do justice to what he does on both sides of the ball. He scores 23 points per game, lives at the free throw line, shuts down your best player and was the second most clutch player in the league last year behind Westbrook statistically. The triple doubles of Harden and Westbrook are flashy, but the real grit and grind plays that win games come from a guy like Butler because he does it on both sides of the ball. We just paired that with a generational talent in Towns and now a guy in Wiggins who is a significant mismatch as the 3rd best player on a team. We just paired the second most clutch player in the league with a team who would have been playoff bound last year if they just could have closed games out.

We have two top 15 players now. The only other teams who can say that are the Warriors and Cavs. This makes us a contender. And when you are a contender you just need a break to get to a finals. The Warriors caught a break this year when Kawhi went down. Who knows who wins that series with the way it was started if he stays healthy. I think we are now the 3rd best team in the conference. Jimmy Butler is Harden and Westbrook kryptonite. The Clippers don't have a prayer at stopping a wing scoring combo of Butler and Wiggins. The Jazz might be losing two starters. And nobody else in the conference really has the pieces to make a big jump as of this post.

We have two guys who live at the line in Wiggins and Butler which is old school winning basketball and a generational offensive talent in Towns in the frontcourt none of these teams can stop. If Towns and Wiggins make significant defensive strides I think that overtakes the Spurs for 2nd best team. And when I say 2nd or 3rd best team I don't necessarily mean in regular season record. I mean when it comes to the playoffs and you have to beat someone 4 out of 7, I think we are setup to be the second or third best team at doing that. We have the tools to be a contender. I think that's gonna keep Butler around and we'll be a very good team for years to come and the cost was good potential, but potential that I don't think ever reaches Jimmy's level.

Totally agree with this. If we had hope that LaVine would be Jimmy Butler someday, then we keep him. But, unfortunately, he was never going to be the 2 way player Jimmy is currently. So you make the trade for that reason alone.

KAT is offensively, already a superstar and still scratching the surface. Defensively, he has a long way to go, but I am sure Thibs thinks he can make him better and knows Jimmy will help him. So you make the trade for that reason too.

Wigs has the potential to be a Jimmy Butler offensively and defensively. Butler should help show him how to get there. I worry that he doesnt have Butler's motor or toughness. So you make the trade for that reason too, so you have that tough guy (next to the guy with the potential).

Dunn could be great someday, but I think we had to sell high on him now (if that is what you can call it, next to LaVine in a trade). Coming out of the draft, it sounded like we were getting Damon Lilliard who can be an elite defender. If you think he can be that, trading him was a gamble. But I do not see it. I see Tony Allen, maybe. So for that reason you make the trade.

#16 was icing on the cake and not as helpful as #7, but it was better than not getting anything back.

[Lipoli390]

Well since you brought it up this should be fun.

Of all the stuff Kahn did that didn't work out I probably could live with nearly all his swing for the fences on uber talents even if I didn't agree with many of the moves. They really didn't have stars and he tried to get some. For example when he dealt for AR the guy was still only 21. Heck he is still a couple weeks from his 28th birthday in July! As more time goes on the more the guy gets absolutely ripped not even so much for what moves he made or didn't make but what a joke he was as an executive. His latest piece on SI about Curry had some merit in light of Lavar Ball but the way he painted himself actually made himself sound even more like an idiot. I think it was the Dunc'd on podcast that was really ripping him one on that article with some good points. Jon K said recently on a podcast or radio spot something like "Kahn claimed nobody worked harder than he did and the reality was nobody worked less than David Kahn." coming from Jon...ouch.

Monster - You've mounted a stirring defense of Mr. Kahn. :). I often like it when a GM swings for the fences, but Kahn was swinging with a plastic bat. No, let me correct myself, a paper bat. I hadn't heard Jon's comment about Kahn's work ethic, or lack thereof. Kahn's even more pathetic than I thought - and that's saying something.

[Monster]

Well since you brought it up this should be fun.

Of all the stuff Kahn did that didn't work out I probably could live with nearly all his swing for the fences on uber talents even if I didn't agree with many of the moves. They really didn't have stars and he tried to get some. For example when he dealt for AR the guy was still only 21. Heck he is still a couple weeks from his 28th birthday in July! As more time goes on the more the guy gets absolutely ripped not even so much for what moves he made or didn't make but what a joke he was as an executive. His latest piece on SI about Curry had some merit in light of Lavar Ball but the way he painted himself actually made himself sound even more like an idiot. I think it was the Dunc'd on podcast that was really ripping him one on that article with some good points. Jon K said recently on a podcast or radio spot something like "Kahn claimed nobody worked harder than he did and the reality was nobody worked less than David Kahn." coming from Jon...ouch.

Monster - You've mounted a stirring defense of Mr. Kahn. :). I often like it when a GM swings for the fences, but Kahn was swinging with a plastic bat. No, let me correct myself, a paper bat. I hadn't heard Jon's comment about Kahn's work ethic, or lack thereof. Kahn's even more pathetic than I thought - and that's saying something.

Just curious were you against the Beasley trade?