Minnesota Sports Forum

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

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.

alexftbl8181 wrote:Just because he wasn't limping doesn't mean he's able to play NBA level basketball. It probably takes a little more effort to play in the NBA then it is to throw a pitch. It's not like he hasn't had knee issues in the past

True, but I also was in the 3rd row to watch KG play against Portland, when he was also allegedly "bone on bone" (unless all his cartilage magically disappeared after that game :) ). He was moving as well as any T-Wolf not named Wiggins or LaVine. He was definitely playing NBA level basketball that night, and that's what I'm expecting for 20 minutes a night next year.

I voted meh...only because Flip just assured Young would not be on the team, he could have traded for a few new basketballs and I might have voted Good instead.

longstrangetrip wrote:

alexftbl8181 wrote:Just because he wasn't limping doesn't mean he's able to play NBA level basketball. It probably takes a little more effort to play in the NBA then it is to throw a pitch. It's not like he hasn't had knee issues in the past

True, but I also was in the 3rd row to watch KG play against Portland, when he was also allegedly "bone on bone" (unless all his cartilage magically disappeared after that game :) ). He was moving as well as any T-Wolf not named Wiggins or LaVine. He was definitely playing NBA level basketball that night, and that's what I'm expecting for 20 minutes a night next year.

Plus Garnett may finally be ready to be called a center. Him at 20 mins anchoring the second unit and being a 4th quarter interior defender is a great role for him. I can't think of many 2nd unit bigs who got more than Garnett at 40. My expectations are right in line with yours LST.

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.

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.

I'm not talking about mentorship. I'm talking about leadership. Mentorship is guidance on and off the floor in life that requires a connection with the person you are mentoring. I'm talking about general leadership. Someone who is going to tell them how to play the game and prepare for the game the right way. Someone who knows Flip's system and can get everybody playing the way they should in the system. Just the other night someone tweeted Ajinca has a go to move that KG told Onuaku how to stop. He called it out while it was happening and Onuaku stopped him. That's the leadership I am talking about. I don't care if he has an emotional connection with the kids. The point is to have a leader who can keep people doing the right things on the court to be better players. Ricky does that on offense. KG can do it for the defense. That's the type of leadership this team needs for the next two years while our young guys are developing their habits on the court and in preparation to play the game. That's the value he brings.

khans2k5 wrote:I'm not talking about mentorship. I'm talking about leadership. Mentorship is guidance on and off the floor in life that requires a connection with the person you are mentoring. I'm talking about general leadership. Someone who is going to tell them how to play the game and prepare for the game the right way. Someone who knows Flip's system and can get everybody playing the way they should in the system. Just the other night someone tweeted Ajinca has a go to move that KG told Onuaku how to stop. He called it out while it was happening and Onuaku stopped him. That's the leadership I am talking about. I don't care if he has an emotional connection with the kids. The point is to have a leader who can keep people doing the right things on the court to be better players. Ricky does that on offense. KG can do it for the defense. That's the type of leadership this team needs for the next two years while our young guys are developing their habits on the court and in preparation to play the game. That's the value he brings.

It sounds awesome.

Garnett remains a very smart player. Maybe it rubs off on the younger, inexperienced players. It will go a lot further if he can stay on the court for as much as possible. So, he can show them instead of being just another old guy in a suit.

longstrangetrip wrote:

alexftbl8181 wrote:Just because he wasn't limping doesn't mean he's able to play NBA level basketball. It probably takes a little more effort to play in the NBA then it is to throw a pitch. It's not like he hasn't had knee issues in the past

True, but I also was in the 3rd row to watch KG play against Portland, when he was also allegedly "bone on bone" (unless all his cartilage magically disappeared after that game :) ). He was moving as well as any T-Wolf not named Wiggins or LaVine. He was definitely playing NBA level basketball that night, and that's what I'm expecting for 20 minutes a night next year.

Well there's a reason why he can only play 20 minutes a night instead of 35 and it isn't because he's out of shape.