khans2k5 wrote:AbeVigodaLive wrote:alexftbl8181 wrote:khans2k5 wrote:alexftbl8181 wrote:Wait Khan, isn't getting KG to sign for 2 more years a bad thing? I have no clue why it would be considered good
This team lacks leadership outside of Rubio. KG signing for 2 years is a great bridge deal for us like Martin. We can't turn the whole ship over to the under 25's. We need some veteran leaders in place. Plain and simple. We aren't a playoff team next year and possibly the year after so having guys like KG be veteran leaders on the team is important for the next two years until our 20 year olds mature. He won't be in the way of anybody's development so I see it as a win-win. We aren't getting a quality starting 4 for his salary next year so I don't see the problem with keeping him on as a backup.
You need enough talent in order to have leadership be valuable. Also hard to lead when you can't stay on the court
The other concern is the willingness of people almost 1/2 his age to be led.
Sorry, but a lot of 20 year old millionaires might give more lip-service to the power of his mentorship than actual listening. Outside of both being basketball players, where's the connection going to come from? Garnett's altruistic nature to turn things around? Young players acting beyond their years to seek out the counsel of a seasoned vet? Neither one of those is close to a given.
Garnett has always been a lead by example sort of guy. That loses a bit of punch when he plays only 15 minutes... for only 50 - 65 games.
I think Garnett still does enough good things on the court to be a decent rotation guy. But I don't buy into the mentorship story any more for next year than I did for this season.
Where do you come up with this stuff? The first thing out of our 20 year olds mouths after the trade was respect for a guy they never knew and I don't know if they had even met him before. Lavine was even a bit afraid of KG coming back and getting on them to be better. Nothing about Wiggins, Lavine and company says they are loud mouth rookies who would reject KG's leadership just because he's old and they have money. Give me one credible piece of information that they act out because they are millionaires and don't need anybody's help, otherwise I'm just gonna treat that whole section as you just talking out of your ass. This isn't some random vet trying to lead the team. It's the franchise and their future boss who is talking. He's a HOFer, not a regular vet and our young guys are smart enough to respect what he says and use it to get better. Show some evidence behind your thought process that our guys are anything but 20 year old sponges and would more likely fight KG instead of learn. It seems like a made up worry out of left field just to give you a reason to put down KG's leadership effect on the team without giving any real substance as to why they would be that way.
First of all... I don't know what LaVine or Wiggins or Chase Budinger or any player really thinks of Garnett. I never claimed I did. The thing is... neither do you.
I do know that the NBA historically has had many petulant young players. And there are anecdotal stories in NBA history that former stars in their late 30s and 40s aren't always connected with people who could be their children's ages. Heck, we see a version of it every week on TNT with Barkley and that crew and other greats. That doesn't mean it will happen... but the "lip-service" I mentioned could very well be just that. We don't know yet.
Remember, Ricky Davis said the right things. Michael Beasley. Antoine Walker. Et al. Literally hundreds of knuckleheads say the right things. Wiggins and LaVine don't seem like knuckleheads... but that still doesn't mean they will take to Garnett's style. It could simply be a personality clash. It could be that age thing. It could be any number of reasons.
You can't force mentorship and say it's going to work out because you say it will work out. Or, even if THEY say it will work out in advance. For example, Garnett and Sam Mitchell panned out. But what if Sam Mitchell wasn't here? What if it was Dell Curry or Eddie Johnson even a great player like Hakeem or Patrick Ewing? Would Garnett have bonded as well? Would they have been as good of mentors?
There are too many variables to just concede that a mentorship and leadership will work because one guy is an older, all-time great and other guys are young and promising players.
That's all I'm saying.