longstrangetrip wrote:I'm watching the replay while reading the GDT. I understand the dissatisfaction with this franchise...the drama is embarrassing as is our defense. That said, I've enjoyed the pace of the first three games...all three games have been very entertaining. Rose's passion for the game has a lot to do with that.
But man, this defense is porous. I'm convinced ANY success Thibs had in Chicago defensively was all about Butler and Noah, and nothing about him. He is absolutely a terrible defensive coach and has proven this year that he has no business coaching an NBA team than doesn't have Jimmy Butler playing.
I'm don't get resting Butler in this game and am disgusted that he wasn't even on the bench...he should be fined for not making the trip. But tonight once again proved what was obvious in preseason...this team is nothing without Butler. I still think we bounce back to take Indy with Butler back in the starting lineup.
And please, Josh Richardson is not the answer. Cam has pointed out his terrible stats to begin this season, and didn't even mention his careless turnover in final seconds of the opener that caused them to lose to the lowly Magic. I'm not at all a fan of Thibodeau, but not taking Pat Riley's insulting offer is at least one positive.
LST - I'd agree that Richardson is not THE answer. But I see him along with another 1st round pick as part of the answer to moving this franchise forward. It seems silly to focus on Richardson's stats in this tiny 3-game sample to start the season. Obviously, his full-season stats from last season are FAR more indicative of his play and potential.
I've noticed that those on this board most adamently opposed to the failed Richardson deal we've all read about are those who appear to believe we have a decent chance of re-signing Butler next summer. I get that. I just don't see that as anything other than a long shot. Meanwhile, I think there's a significant chance Jimmy gets hurt and misses 20+ games again this season. He has one knee now without a miniscus and I suspect the other one is in the same deteriorated condition. He's closing in on 30 with a history of different ailments causing him to miss 15+ games a season on average when he was in his early to mid 20s. His injury propensity, coupled with his expiring deal, his trade demand and open disdain for this organization all tell us he needs to be moved. I'd like to believe we could get a better return for Jimmy than Richardson, a lottery-protected 1st and Waiters' terrible contract. But if we could, I think that offer would have already materialized. If a better offer did materialize but Thibodeau turned it down, then I'm at a loss for words.
Fair comments, Lip, and your position is entirely supportable. I don't think that the anti-Richardson deal people are only basing their hopes on Jimmy staying, because I think most if not all of us see that as a long shot. Better said, not trading Jimmy leaves open the possibility of two favorable outcomes...he stays at the end of the year, or he leaves and we pick up a good option in free agency. I want Jimmy to stay because I like the prospect of both of those options better than a deal with Riley.
thedoper wrote:That was a really fun game. Josh Richardson gives us the win.
longstrangetrip wrote:
lipoli390 wrote:
longstrangetrip wrote:I'm watching the replay while reading the GDT. I understand the dissatisfaction with this franchise...the drama is embarrassing as is our defense. That said, I've enjoyed the pace of the first three games...all three games have been very entertaining. Rose's passion for the game has a lot to do with that.
But man, this defense is porous. I'm convinced ANY success Thibs had in Chicago defensively was all about Butler and Noah, and nothing about him. He is absolutely a terrible defensive coach and has proven this year that he has no business coaching an NBA team than doesn't have Jimmy Butler playing.
I'm don't get resting Butler in this game and am disgusted that he wasn't even on the bench...he should be fined for not making the trip. But tonight once again proved what was obvious in preseason...this team is nothing without Butler. I still think we bounce back to take Indy with Butler back in the starting lineup.
And please, Josh Richardson is not the answer. Cam has pointed out his terrible stats to begin this season, and didn't even mention his careless turnover in final seconds of the opener that caused them to lose to the lowly Magic. I'm not at all a fan of Thibodeau, but not taking Pat Riley's insulting offer is at least one positive.
LST - I'd agree that Richardson is not THE answer. But I see him along with another 1st round pick as part of the answer to moving this franchise forward. It seems silly to focus on Richardson's stats in this tiny 3-game sample to start the season. Obviously, his full-season stats from last season are FAR more indicative of his play and potential.
I've noticed that those on this board most adamently opposed to the failed Richardson deal we've all read about are those who appear to believe we have a decent chance of re-signing Butler next summer. I get that. I just don't see that as anything other than a long shot. Meanwhile, I think there's a significant chance Jimmy gets hurt and misses 20+ games again this season. He has one knee now without a miniscus and I suspect the other one is in the same deteriorated condition. He's closing in on 30 with a history of different ailments causing him to miss 15+ games a season on average when he was in his early to mid 20s. His injury propensity, coupled with his expiring deal, his trade demand and open disdain for this organization all tell us he needs to be moved. I'd like to believe we could get a better return for Jimmy than Richardson, a lottery-protected 1st and Waiters' terrible contract. But if we could, I think that offer would have already materialized. If a better offer did materialize but Thibodeau turned it down, then I'm at a loss for words.
Fair comments, Lip, and your position is entirely supportable. I don't think that the anti-Richardson deal people are only basing their hopes on Jimmy staying, because I think most if not all of us see that as a long shot. Better said, not trading Jimmy leaves open the possibility of two favorable outcomes...he stays at the end of the year, or he leaves and we pick up a good option in free agencyor he leaves and we pick up a good option in free agency. I want Jimmy to stay because I like the prospect of both of those options better than a deal with Riley.
If there is one thing we can count with this org. is that any capspace would go to waste. So getting a pick and a promising young talent is the route to go. Plus without Butler playing for the year we'd likely get a better pick. And without Butler we have a better chance of getting rid of Thibs. I guess I don't see what fun it is fighting for an 8th seed with almost zero chance of advancing past the first round.
thedoper wrote:That was a really fun game. Josh Richardson gives us the win.
longstrangetrip wrote:
lipoli390 wrote:
longstrangetrip wrote:I'm watching the replay while reading the GDT. I understand the dissatisfaction with this franchise...the drama is embarrassing as is our defense. That said, I've enjoyed the pace of the first three games...all three games have been very entertaining. Rose's passion for the game has a lot to do with that.
But man, this defense is porous. I'm convinced ANY success Thibs had in Chicago defensively was all about Butler and Noah, and nothing about him. He is absolutely a terrible defensive coach and has proven this year that he has no business coaching an NBA team than doesn't have Jimmy Butler playing.
I'm don't get resting Butler in this game and am disgusted that he wasn't even on the bench...he should be fined for not making the trip. But tonight once again proved what was obvious in preseason...this team is nothing without Butler. I still think we bounce back to take Indy with Butler back in the starting lineup.
And please, Josh Richardson is not the answer. Cam has pointed out his terrible stats to begin this season, and didn't even mention his careless turnover in final seconds of the opener that caused them to lose to the lowly Magic. I'm not at all a fan of Thibodeau, but not taking Pat Riley's insulting offer is at least one positive.
LST - I'd agree that Richardson is not THE answer. But I see him along with another 1st round pick as part of the answer to moving this franchise forward. It seems silly to focus on Richardson's stats in this tiny 3-game sample to start the season. Obviously, his full-season stats from last season are FAR more indicative of his play and potential.
I've noticed that those on this board most adamently opposed to the failed Richardson deal we've all read about are those who appear to believe we have a decent chance of re-signing Butler next summer. I get that. I just don't see that as anything other than a long shot. Meanwhile, I think there's a significant chance Jimmy gets hurt and misses 20+ games again this season. He has one knee now without a miniscus and I suspect the other one is in the same deteriorated condition. He's closing in on 30 with a history of different ailments causing him to miss 15+ games a season on average when he was in his early to mid 20s. His injury propensity, coupled with his expiring deal, his trade demand and open disdain for this organization all tell us he needs to be moved. I'd like to believe we could get a better return for Jimmy than Richardson, a lottery-protected 1st and Waiters' terrible contract. But if we could, I think that offer would have already materialized. If a better offer did materialize but Thibodeau turned it down, then I'm at a loss for words.
Fair comments, Lip, and your position is entirely supportable. I don't think that the anti-Richardson deal people are only basing their hopes on Jimmy staying, because I think most if not all of us see that as a long shot. Better said, not trading Jimmy leaves open the possibility of two favorable outcomes...he stays at the end of the year, or he leaves and we pick up a good option in free agencyor he leaves and we pick up a good option in free agency. I want Jimmy to stay because I like the prospect of both of those options better than a deal with Riley.
If there is one thing we can count with this org. is that any capspace would go to waste. So getting a pick and a promising young talent is the route to go. Plus without Butler playing for the year we'd likely get a better pick. And without Butler we have a better chance of getting rid of Thibs. <b>I guess I don't see what fun it is fighting for an 8th seed with almost zero chance of advancing past the first round. </b>
Kinda like a team with Josh Richardson, Andrew Wiggins and Karl Towns as their 3 best players? We're better off letting Jimmy walk than getting locked into that 10 seed for the next 3 years.
I'd rather be in the lottery then have our talent capped. Wiggins and Towns need to improve AND we need a third star or a couple more solid players and it's not Jimmy. Jimmy already made it clear he is gone.
We're counting on the Wolves landing a legit player in free agency? And not overpaying for a 2nd or 3rd rate player in doing so... ?
Ummm...
At this point, because of the way this situation is handled... and their own limitations... the Wolves can't even play the "come play with two budding superstars and build something!" card. This team cannot improve significantly through free agency. It's simply not the modern NBA for teams like the Wolves.
AbeVigodaLive wrote:We're counting on the Wolves landing a legit player in free agency? And not overpaying for a 2nd or 3rd rate player in doing so... ?
Ummm...
At this point, because of the way this situation is handled... and their own limitations... the Wolves can't even play the "come play with two budding superstars and build something!" card. This team cannot improve significantly through free agency. It's simply not the modern NBA for teams like the Wolves.
Well Abe...might as well enjoy your time as a reborn Celtics fan. Please report back how it is.
AbeVigodaLive wrote:We're counting on the Wolves landing a legit player in free agency? And not overpaying for a 2nd or 3rd rate player in doing so... ?
Ummm...
At this point, because of the way this situation is handled... and their own limitations... the Wolves can't even play the "come play with two budding superstars and build something!" card. This team cannot improve significantly through free agency. It's simply not the modern NBA for teams like the Wolves.
So that means we're better off locking in a mediocre team via trade? At least in free agency if you strike out you can sign serviceable guys to short deals and keep your options open.
AbeVigodaLive wrote:We're counting on the Wolves landing a legit player in free agency? And not overpaying for a 2nd or 3rd rate player in doing so... ?
Ummm...
At this point, because of the way this situation is handled... and their own limitations... the Wolves can't even play the "come play with two budding superstars and build something!" card. This team cannot improve significantly through free agency. It's simply not the modern NBA for teams like the Wolves.
So that means we're better off locking in a mediocre team via trade? At least in free agency if you strike out you can sign serviceable guys to short deals and keep your options open.
Yes. It's better to lock in talent of any kind for $10M per year... especially talent that at least has a chance of continuing to improve... than overpay for very similar talent in free agency...
The Wolves are so far down the list of any relevant free agent. I just don't see how that's a viable option.
- The worst weather.
- Lousy organization. Historically. And especially now.
- Lousy owner.
- Lousy max contract guy on the books for the next 4 years (Wiggins).
- Lousy city. (relatively speaking. Let's just say it's more of a hockey town than basketball town... at least the perception of it)
There's just not much to offer prospective free agents... sans money. Getting Richardson for Butler. That stings. Obviously. Getting Richardson for $10M for the next 3 years. I can live with that.
Maybe it comes down to me not being optimistic the Butler situation ends up favorably for the Wolves. Mostly because of the long history of ineptitude at the top. They have to convince me before I go against historical precedent.
AbeVigodaLive wrote:We're counting on the Wolves landing a legit player in free agency? And not overpaying for a 2nd or 3rd rate player in doing so... ?
Ummm...
At this point, because of the way this situation is handled... and their own limitations... the Wolves can't even play the "come play with two budding superstars and build something!" card. This team cannot improve significantly through free agency. It's simply not the modern NBA for teams like the Wolves.
So that means we're better off locking in a mediocre team via trade? At least in free agency if you strike out you can sign serviceable guys to short deals and keep your options open.
Yes. It's better to lock in talent of any kind for $10M per year... especially talent that at least has a chance of continuing to improve... than overpay for very similar talent in free agency...
The Wolves are so far down the list of any relevant free agent. I just don't see how that's a viable option.
- The worst weather.
- Lousy organization. Historically. And especially now.
- Lousy owner.
- Lousy max contract guy on the books for the next 4 years (Wiggins).
- Lousy city. (relatively speaking. Let's just say it's more of a hockey town than basketball town... at least the perception of it)
There's just not much to offer prospective free agents... sans money. Getting Richardson for Butler. That stings. Obviously. Getting Richardson for $10M for the next 3 years. I can live with that.
Maybe it comes down to me not being optimistic the Butler situation ends up favorably for the Wolves. Mostly because of the long history of ineptitude at the top. They have to convince me before I go against historical precedent.
Richardson costing 10 million literally means nothing when it's coming to us with a bad contract like a Waiters or someone else. It instantly gets negated unless it comes back to us with an expiring deal. Being on a good deal only matters if you can take advantage of it in free agency. So you get a good deal for a 10 million dollar role player and we compete for the 8 seed because we are still capped out with that good deal. What are you accomplishing?
AbeVigodaLive wrote:We're counting on the Wolves landing a legit player in free agency? And not overpaying for a 2nd or 3rd rate player in doing so... ?
Ummm...
At this point, because of the way this situation is handled... and their own limitations... the Wolves can't even play the "come play with two budding superstars and build something!" card. This team cannot improve significantly through free agency. It's simply not the modern NBA for teams like the Wolves.
So that means we're better off locking in a mediocre team via trade? At least in free agency if you strike out you can sign serviceable guys to short deals and keep your options open.
Yes. It's better to lock in talent of any kind for $10M per year... especially talent that at least has a chance of continuing to improve... than overpay for very similar talent in free agency...
The Wolves are so far down the list of any relevant free agent. I just don't see how that's a viable option.
- The worst weather.
- Lousy organization. Historically. And especially now.
- Lousy owner.
- Lousy max contract guy on the books for the next 4 years (Wiggins).
- Lousy city. (relatively speaking. Let's just say it's more of a hockey town than basketball town... at least the perception of it)
There's just not much to offer prospective free agents... sans money. Getting Richardson for Butler. That stings. Obviously. Getting Richardson for $10M for the next 3 years. I can live with that.
Maybe it comes down to me not being optimistic the Butler situation ends up favorably for the Wolves. Mostly because of the long history of ineptitude at the top. They have to convince me before I go against historical precedent.
Richardson costing 10 million literally means nothing when it's coming to us with a bad contract like a Waiters or someone else. It instantly gets negated unless it comes back to us with an expiring deal. Being on a good deal only matters if you can take advantage of it in free agency. So you get a good deal for a 10 million dollar role player and we compete for the 8 seed because we are still capped out with that good deal. What are you accomplishing?
