Q12543 wrote:Hicks, I think the problem some folks might have is that we spent the kind of money and signed the kind of contracts that doesn't make it easy to fill those holes. Thibs went all in on "winning now", but put some real constraints on future moves while at the same time constructing a roster that doesn't always seem to fit well together.
Our future moves would have been just as constrained if Thibs didn't sign anyone or if he made cheaper deals because once KATs extension kicks in that's it. Last season was the offseason to acquire enough high value assets to be flexible for deals. Not spending to near the cap last year would have been silly because the Wiggins and KAT extensions would have erased that space anyway. And we would have been in an real pickle with Lavine too if he would have played as colossally bad as he did in Chicago.
Mmmm, let me put this another way. Given the amount of churn and $ spent, fans may be didn't expect there to be this many holes. It's just a weird fitting roster he has put together and we have the same two holes we've had for the past 10 years: 3-point shooting and defense. Perhaps the coach deserves some of the blame.....
Q12543 wrote:Hicks, I think the problem some folks might have is that we spent the kind of money and signed the kind of contracts that doesn't make it easy to fill those holes. Thibs went all in on "winning now", but put some real constraints on future moves while at the same time constructing a roster that doesn't always seem to fit well together.
Our future moves would have been just as constrained if Thibs didn't sign anyone or if he made cheaper deals because once KATs extension kicks in that's it. Last season was the offseason to acquire enough high value assets to be flexible for deals. Not spending to near the cap last year would have been silly because the Wiggins and KAT extensions would have erased that space anyway. And we would have been in an real pickle with Lavine too if he would have played as colossally bad as he did in Chicago.
Mmmm, let me put this another way. Given the amount of churn and $ spent, fans may be didn't expect there to be this many holes. It's just a weird fitting roster he has put together and we have the same two holes we've had for the past 10 years: 3-point shooting and defense. Perhaps the coach deserves some of the blame.....
We traded 3 players for one that could play this year. It would be foolish to think there weren't going to be holes this year. That is how it works in the transition year after making a big deal like Thibs did. We're so much better off than we were a year ago. The 16 win improvement is proof of that.
thedoper wrote:Has Minnesota ever been a buyout destination? I think Thibs has done as good as any GM we've had at getting free agents here.
We've never been a FA destination for stars, but that doesn't excuse failing to sign good bench players like Belinelli and Ilyasova. Past Wolves free agent signings include Terry Porter, Fred Hoiberg, Trenton Hassell, Try Hudson, Joe Smith, Malik Sealy and JJ Barea. so it's not as if no good role players have ever signed with the Wolves as FAs. I'm sorry, I can't give Thibs a lot of credit for signing Teague to a guaranteed $19 million per year contract. I doubt any other team would have paid him that much. I doubt any other team offered Taj $28 million over two years.
I'd be really disturbed if our front office didn't even pursue Belinelli and Ilyasova. That would truly be inexcusable. If we pursued them and got turned down, I can live with that - but I'd want to know why. I get the weather, etc. But much of our problem luring FAs in the past is that we've been a bad, losing team. As a winning team when these two guys were bought out, we should have been an attractive destination.
George Hill got the same money as Teague, it was the going rate for that level of player at the point. Taj has been well worth the money and filled a huge need for us this year. Imagine if we would have signed Patterson like so many around here wanted. Ouch. Teague and Taj are at or near the top of your list of past free agent signings. Thibs has gone far to improve the talent on this team, I get that you don't like his coaching style, but we are way more talented this year than last.
Here's my point. It's one thing to sign free agents by giving them a lot of money that few if any other teams are willing to offer and with the understanding that they will be starters - namely Teague and Taj. It's another thing to attract and sign lower-priced quality rotation players. Thibs succeeded in the former, but has failed in the latter. Honestly, if you were an NBA player looking to sign somewhere for minimum money, would you want to play for a head coach who (1) has a reputation for not spreading playing time around beyond his starters and maybe one or two others, and (2) who is constantly yelling at you and telling you what to do on every single possession? Thibs' approach/style as a head coach has to make it harder for him to attract free agents and that's a legitimate concern. But again, I'd be far more concerned if we were to learn that Thibs didn't even pursue or failed to aggressively pursue/recruit Belinelli or Ilyasova.
It's a concern that you are completely making up. That may be your opinion and you're entitled to it but there is zero evidence that free agents don't want to come here yet. If next year we can't get someone for the MLE and bi-annual exemption I'm all ears. For now Thibs signed Teague Taj, Crawford, and Rose with little trouble.
"Making it up"? This board is all about "making it up." :) It's called speculating. Yes, I'm speculating that players might be dissuaded from signing here because of Thibs. It's logical to assume players will would rather play for a coach who is more likely to give them playing time and who won't contantly bark at and micromanage them on the court. Contrary to Hicks suggestion, there is certainly "merit" to that assumption. Can I prove it? Of course not. But it's a rational concern. But as I said, if Belinelli and Ilyasova decided they'd rather play for Brown than Thibs, I can live with that. I would, however, find it totally unacceptable if we were to learn that Thibodeau didn't pursue or aggressively recruit them. I won't speculate on that, because there's no basis for reaching that conclusion; it's a red light/green light question - either Thibs pursued them or he didn't. In contrast, whether players would be potentially put off by Thibs's coaching tendencies is a different type of question. It's a question that lends itself to reasoning based on what we know about Thibs as coach and how players are likely to respond to concerns about playing time, the style of play and how they'll be treated.
thedoper wrote:Has Minnesota ever been a buyout destination? I think Thibs has done as good as any GM we've had at getting free agents here.
We've never been a FA destination for stars, but that doesn't excuse failing to sign good bench players like Belinelli and Ilyasova. Past Wolves free agent signings include Terry Porter, Fred Hoiberg, Trenton Hassell, Try Hudson, Joe Smith, Malik Sealy and JJ Barea. so it's not as if no good role players have ever signed with the Wolves as FAs. I'm sorry, I can't give Thibs a lot of credit for signing Teague to a guaranteed $19 million per year contract. I doubt any other team would have paid him that much. I doubt any other team offered Taj $28 million over two years.
I'd be really disturbed if our front office didn't even pursue Belinelli and Ilyasova. That would truly be inexcusable. If we pursued them and got turned down, I can live with that - but I'd want to know why. I get the weather, etc. But much of our problem luring FAs in the past is that we've been a bad, losing team. As a winning team when these two guys were bought out, we should have been an attractive destination.
George Hill got the same money as Teague, it was the going rate for that level of player at the point. Taj has been well worth the money and filled a huge need for us this year. Imagine if we would have signed Patterson like so many around here wanted. Ouch. Teague and Taj are at or near the top of your list of past free agent signings. Thibs has gone far to improve the talent on this team, I get that you don't like his coaching style, but we are way more talented this year than last.
Here's my point. It's one thing to sign free agents by giving them a lot of money that few if any other teams are willing to offer and with the understanding that they will be starters - namely Teague and Taj. It's another thing to attract and sign lower-priced quality rotation players. Thibs succeeded in the former, but has failed in the latter. Honestly, if you were an NBA player looking to sign somewhere for minimum money, would you want to play for a head coach who (1) has a reputation for not spreading playing time around beyond his starters and maybe one or two others, and (2) who is constantly yelling at you and telling you what to do on every single possession? Thibs' approach/style as a head coach has to make it harder for him to attract free agents and that's a legitimate concern. But again, I'd be far more concerned if we were to learn that Thibs didn't even pursue or failed to aggressively pursue/recruit Belinelli or Ilyasova.
It's a concern that you are completely making up. That may be your opinion and you're entitled to it but there is zero evidence that free agents don't want to come here yet. If next year we can't get someone for the MLE and bi-annual exemption I'm all ears. For now Thibs signed Teague Taj, Crawford, and Rose with little trouble.
"Making it up"? This board is all about "making it up." :) It's called speculating. Yes, I'm speculating that players might be dissuaded from signing here because of Thibs. It's logical to assume players will would rather play for a coach who is more likely to give them playing time and who won't contantly bark at and micromanage them on the court. Contrary to Hicks suggestion, there is certainly "merit" to that assumption. Can I prove it? Of course not. But it's a rational concern. But as I said, if Belinelli and Ilyasova decided they'd rather play for Brown than Thibs, I can live with that. I would, however, find it totally unacceptable if we were to learn that Thibodeau didn't pursue or aggressively recruit them. I won't speculate on that, because there's no basis for reaching that conclusion; it's a red light/green light question - either Thibs pursued them or he didn't. In contrast, whether players would be potentially put off by Thibs's coaching tendencies is a different type of question. It's a question that lends itself to reasoning based on what we know about Thibs as coach and how players are likely to respond to concerns about playing time, the style of play and how they'll be treated.
It's definitely speculative. I wouldn't call it logical though. Logic implies tangible evidence. All of the evidence that we have is that Thibs has a great reputation with his former players and with vets like Teague and Crawford. Once we hear that players aren't coming here because of Thibs I'm all ears, but your just improvising right now.
Q12543 wrote:Hicks, I think the problem some folks might have is that we spent the kind of money and signed the kind of contracts that doesn't make it easy to fill those holes. Thibs went all in on "winning now", but put some real constraints on future moves while at the same time constructing a roster that doesn't always seem to fit well together.
Our future moves would have been just as constrained if Thibs didn't sign anyone or if he made cheaper deals because once KATs extension kicks in that's it. Last season was the offseason to acquire enough high value assets to be flexible for deals. Not spending to near the cap last year would have been silly because the Wiggins and KAT extensions would have erased that space anyway. And we would have been in an real pickle with Lavine too if he would have played as colossally bad as he did in Chicago.
Mmmm, let me put this another way. Given the amount of churn and $ spent, fans may be didn't expect there to be this many holes. It's just a weird fitting roster he has put together and we have the same two holes we've had for the past 10 years: 3-point shooting and defense. Perhaps the coach deserves some of the blame.....
We traded 3 players for one that could play this year. It would be foolish to think there weren't going to be holes this year. That is how it works in the transition year after making a big deal like Thibs did. We're so much better off than we were a year ago. The 16 win improvement is proof of that.
Right, but after the Butler trade, he still made a lot of moves that shaped the roster. The Patton pick looks like a mistake to me (I know its still early); Dribblin' Jeff and dribblin' Jimmy and difficult-shot Andrew are all guys that seem to prefer working from 20 feet in....they just step all over each other and we end up having everything bunched up, which leaves us super vulnerable to transition buckets going the other way.
It's weird, because I agree that at a macro level, the team had a successful season. I just don't like how they fit together and how Thibs the coach has sort of compounded it.
Q12543 wrote:Hicks, I think the problem some folks might have is that we spent the kind of money and signed the kind of contracts that doesn't make it easy to fill those holes. Thibs went all in on "winning now", but put some real constraints on future moves while at the same time constructing a roster that doesn't always seem to fit well together.
Our future moves would have been just as constrained if Thibs didn't sign anyone or if he made cheaper deals because once KATs extension kicks in that's it. Last season was the offseason to acquire enough high value assets to be flexible for deals. Not spending to near the cap last year would have been silly because the Wiggins and KAT extensions would have erased that space anyway. And we would have been in an real pickle with Lavine too if he would have played as colossally bad as he did in Chicago.
Mmmm, let me put this another way. Given the amount of churn and $ spent, fans may be didn't expect there to be this many holes. It's just a weird fitting roster he has put together and we have the same two holes we've had for the past 10 years: 3-point shooting and defense. Perhaps the coach deserves some of the blame.....
We traded 3 players for one that could play this year. It would be foolish to think there weren't going to be holes this year. That is how it works in the transition year after making a big deal like Thibs did. We're so much better off than we were a year ago. The 16 win improvement is proof of that.
Right, but after the Butler trade, he still made a lot of moves that shaped the roster. The Patton pick looks like a mistake to me (I know its still early); Dribblin' Jeff and dribblin' Jimmy and difficult-shot Andrew are all guys that seem to prefer working from 20 feet in....they just step all over each other and we end up having everything bunched up, which leaves us super vulnerable to transition buckets going the other way.
It's weird, because I agree that at a macro level, the team had a successful season. I just don't like how they fit together and how Thibs the coach has sort of compounded it.
Obviously there can be improvement. Hopefully Thibs takes a hard look at personnel and style of play which I'm quite sure he will. I imagine multiple moves to shape the roster further based on what we witnessed last season. I totally understand not liking his style, but we need to play a macro game and look for improvements year by year. Year 3 of Thibs tenure is going to be big.
Q12543 wrote:Hicks, I think the problem some folks might have is that we spent the kind of money and signed the kind of contracts that doesn't make it easy to fill those holes. Thibs went all in on "winning now", but put some real constraints on future moves while at the same time constructing a roster that doesn't always seem to fit well together.
Our future moves would have been just as constrained if Thibs didn't sign anyone or if he made cheaper deals because once KATs extension kicks in that's it. Last season was the offseason to acquire enough high value assets to be flexible for deals. Not spending to near the cap last year would have been silly because the Wiggins and KAT extensions would have erased that space anyway. And we would have been in an real pickle with Lavine too if he would have played as colossally bad as he did in Chicago.
Mmmm, let me put this another way. Given the amount of churn and $ spent, fans may be didn't expect there to be this many holes. It's just a weird fitting roster he has put together and we have the same two holes we've had for the past 10 years: 3-point shooting and defense. Perhaps the coach deserves some of the blame.....
We traded 3 players for one that could play this year. It would be foolish to think there weren't going to be holes this year. That is how it works in the transition year after making a big deal like Thibs did. We're so much better off than we were a year ago. The 16 win improvement is proof of that.
Right, but after the Butler trade, he still made a lot of moves that shaped the roster. The Patton pick looks like a mistake to me (I know its still early); Dribblin' Jeff and dribblin' Jimmy and difficult-shot Andrew are all guys that seem to prefer working from 20 feet in....they just step all over each other and we end up having everything bunched up, which leaves us super vulnerable to transition buckets going the other way.
It's weird, because I agree that at a macro level, the team had a successful season. I just don't like how they fit together and how Thibs the coach has sort of compounded it.
I agree, Q. No one can honestly say we're not a better team than we were last season. Thibs clearly upgraded our roster significantly with the acquisitions of Butler, Gibson and even Crawford. I'm not sure about Teague as a net upgrade over Ricky. I like both players and see that swap as a draw. Ricky's contract was better, but we got a first round pick in return. Overall, Thibs significantly improved the roster compared to last season. The question is whether he optimized the assets he had or, in other words, whether he put together the right mix of players at the right price to eventually move up from and 8th seed and become a true championship contender. Then there's the question about whether Thibs, the head coach, is getting the most out of the players he has. Many of have doubts on both questions. I think we'll have pretty clear answers to both questions by next February.
Q12543 wrote:Hicks, I think the problem some folks might have is that we spent the kind of money and signed the kind of contracts that doesn't make it easy to fill those holes. Thibs went all in on "winning now", but put some real constraints on future moves while at the same time constructing a roster that doesn't always seem to fit well together.
Our future moves would have been just as constrained if Thibs didn't sign anyone or if he made cheaper deals because once KATs extension kicks in that's it. Last season was the offseason to acquire enough high value assets to be flexible for deals. Not spending to near the cap last year would have been silly because the Wiggins and KAT extensions would have erased that space anyway. And we would have been in an real pickle with Lavine too if he would have played as colossally bad as he did in Chicago.
Mmmm, let me put this another way. Given the amount of churn and $ spent, fans may be didn't expect there to be this many holes. It's just a weird fitting roster he has put together and we have the same two holes we've had for the past 10 years: 3-point shooting and defense. Perhaps the coach deserves some of the blame.....
We traded 3 players for one that could play this year. It would be foolish to think there weren't going to be holes this year. That is how it works in the transition year after making a big deal like Thibs did. We're so much better off than we were a year ago. The 16 win improvement is proof of that.
Right, but after the Butler trade, he still made a lot of moves that shaped the roster. The Patton pick looks like a mistake to me (I know its still early); Dribblin' Jeff and dribblin' Jimmy and difficult-shot Andrew are all guys that seem to prefer working from 20 feet in....they just step all over each other and we end up having everything bunched up, which leaves us super vulnerable to transition buckets going the other way.
It's weird, because I agree that at a macro level, the team had a successful season. I just don't like how they fit together and how Thibs the coach has sort of compounded it.
I agree, Q. No one can honestly say we're not a better team than we were last season. Thibs clearly upgraded our roster significantly with the acquisitions of Butler, Gibson and even Crawford. I'm not sure about Teague as a net upgrade over Ricky. I like both players and see that swap as a draw. Ricky's contract was better, but we got a first round pick in return. Overall, Thibs significantly improved the roster compared to last season. The question is whether he optimized the assets he had or, in other words, whether he put together the right mix of players at the right price to eventually move up from and 8th seed and become a true championship contender. Then there's the question about whether Thibs, the head coach, is getting the most out of the players he has. Many of have doubts on both questions. I think we'll have pretty clear answers to both questions by next February.
That assumes Thibs is going to stand pat with the changes he made in one year. He doesn't strike me as someone who is satisfied being an 8 seed and not competing. It was his first year of making significant roster changes. I would assume he would have a multi year plan that can adapt. So far he optimized what he gave up from what I can see. No one in that deal is ever going to be Butler.
Q12543 wrote:Hicks, I think the problem some folks might have is that we spent the kind of money and signed the kind of contracts that doesn't make it easy to fill those holes. Thibs went all in on "winning now", but put some real constraints on future moves while at the same time constructing a roster that doesn't always seem to fit well together.
Our future moves would have been just as constrained if Thibs didn't sign anyone or if he made cheaper deals because once KATs extension kicks in that's it. Last season was the offseason to acquire enough high value assets to be flexible for deals. Not spending to near the cap last year would have been silly because the Wiggins and KAT extensions would have erased that space anyway. And we would have been in an real pickle with Lavine too if he would have played as colossally bad as he did in Chicago.
Mmmm, let me put this another way. Given the amount of churn and $ spent, fans may be didn't expect there to be this many holes. It's just a weird fitting roster he has put together and we have the same two holes we've had for the past 10 years: 3-point shooting and defense. Perhaps the coach deserves some of the blame.....
We traded 3 players for one that could play this year. It would be foolish to think there weren't going to be holes this year. That is how it works in the transition year after making a big deal like Thibs did. We're so much better off than we were a year ago. The 16 win improvement is proof of that.
Right, but after the Butler trade, he still made a lot of moves that shaped the roster. The Patton pick looks like a mistake to me (I know its still early); Dribblin' Jeff and dribblin' Jimmy and difficult-shot Andrew are all guys that seem to prefer working from 20 feet in....they just step all over each other and we end up having everything bunched up, which leaves us super vulnerable to transition buckets going the other way.
It's weird, because I agree that at a macro level, the team had a successful season. I just don't like how they fit together and how Thibs the coach has sort of compounded it.
I agree, Q. No one can honestly say we're not a better team than we were last season. Thibs clearly upgraded our roster significantly with the acquisitions of Butler, Gibson and even Crawford. I'm not sure about Teague as a net upgrade over Ricky. I like both players and see that swap as a draw. Ricky's contract was better, but we got a first round pick in return. Overall, Thibs significantly improved the roster compared to last season. The question is whether he optimized the assets he had or, in other words, whether he put together the right mix of players at the right price to eventually move up from and 8th seed and become a true championship contender. Then there's the question about whether Thibs, the head coach, is getting the most out of the players he has. Many of have doubts on both questions. I think we'll have pretty clear answers to both questions by next February.
That assumes Thibs is going to stand pat with the changes he made in one year. He doesn't strike me as someone who is satisfied being an 8 seed and not competing. It was his first year of making significant roster changes. I would assume he would have a multi year plan that can adapt. So far he optimized what he gave up from what I can see. No one in that deal is ever going to be Butler.
OK, I think we finally agree, Doper. I agree it's unlikely Thibs will stand pat this summer. And I think we have to assume he has a multi-year plan. So let's see what he does with our MLE, the 20th pick in the draft and the minimum salary exception. Those are three tools he has, although the MLE plus retaining Belly will likely push this team over the luxury tax threshold. So will he keep Belly? Perhaps he'll explore sign-and-trade deals for Belly. I'm sure he'll explore trades potentially involving any of the Wolves' current players except Butler, Towns, Taj and Teague. I'm not sure where Thibs is at regarding Wiggins. He'll probably make our 20th pick available, but I think he'll be reluctant to deal it when you consider that he rejected offers for it last summer. So it will interesting.
thedoper wrote:Has Minnesota ever been a buyout destination? I think Thibs has done as good as any GM we've had at getting free agents here.
Here's my point. It's one thing to sign free agents by giving them a lot of money that few if any other teams are willing to offer and with the understanding that they will be starters - namely Teague and Taj. It's another thing to attract and sign lower-priced quality rotation players. Thibs succeeded in the former, but has failed in the latter. Honestly, if you were an NBA player looking to sign somewhere for minimum money, would you want to play for a head coach who (1) has a reputation for not spreading playing time around beyond his starters and maybe one or two others, and (2) who is constantly yelling at you and telling you what to do on every single possession? Thibs' approach/style as a head coach has to make it harder for him to attract free agents and that's a legitimate concern. But again, I'd be far more concerned if we were to learn that Thibs didn't even pursue or failed to aggressively pursue/recruit Belinelli or Ilyasova.
It's a concern that you are completely making up. That may be your opinion and you're entitled to it but there is zero evidence that free agents don't want to come here yet. If next year we can't get someone for the MLE and bi-annual exemption I'm all ears. For now Thibs signed Teague Taj, Crawford, and Rose with little trouble.
For all of the yelling and histrionics and bull-headedness we perceive from Thibs... Jamal Crawford... one of the most free-spirited players/gunners in recent NBA history signed here.
And he's been given freedom to do virtually anything he wants via the stats + eye test.
Do you know who leads the team in shot attempts per minute?
1. Derrick Rose
2. Jamal Crawford
Now... we can have an entirely different conversation about WHY this is one of the worst developments in recent NBA history considering that KAT is 6th on the team for shots per minute despite shooting 55/42/86.
But let's leave that for this summer... or after tonight's game.
