Minnesota Sports Forum

monsterpile wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:Monster -- We're on the same page when it comes to Beasley. I might be OK swapping Beasley and a 2nd-rounder for Myles Turner. But I would not give up Beasley and our #19 pick for him for all the reasons I discussed. I see Myles playing 40-50 games at most and not helping us a lot on the boards. And he could cost $18M which would eat into the money we'd otherwise have to use the full MLE under the luxury tax threshold. I just don't see that as worth giving up meaningful assets. I like the idea of signing Jalen Smith or Hartenstein for less than $10M and not giving up any assets to get them. And I'd rather have Nurkic with his injury risks than Turner because Nurkic is a superb rebounder and I think we could sign him as a FA without giving up assets in a trade. I'm fine trading Beasley, but we don't have to trade him to upgrade our PF or C position next to KAT. We use him in another deal.

Did Hartenstein really do enough this last year to propel him into mid-level territory? Personally I don't think he did. It was one game but when he played in the playoff game I was like...eh. If I wasn't sort of a fan of his I may have missed he was even in the game. Again it's 1 game I happened to see but yeah. I think he is more in the 5 million range and that's partly because Inthink teams are going to look at him as a pure center not a PF. I'm really not sure if Jalen Smith is a PF or if he is a center. I kinda doubt anyone is gonna pay much more than 5 million for him either. Maybe I'm wrong and those guys are worth it but I kinda have a hard time being like yes let's pay those guys to be the key pickup of the offseason. If I'm paying the full midlevel or close I want someone that's more proven.

Also as the draft becomes nearer I'll have to get something really good for #19 included in the package unless we also get a lower 1st round pick or higher 2nd like Orlando would be able to supply.

monsterpile wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:Monster -- We're on the same page when it comes to Beasley. I might be OK swapping Beasley and a 2nd-rounder for Myles Turner. But I would not give up Beasley and our #19 pick for him for all the reasons I discussed. I see Myles playing 40-50 games at most and not helping us a lot on the boards. And he could cost $18M which would eat into the money we'd otherwise have to use the full MLE under the luxury tax threshold. I just don't see that as worth giving up meaningful assets. I like the idea of signing Jalen Smith or Hartenstein for less than $10M and not giving up any assets to get them. And I'd rather have Nurkic with his injury risks than Turner because Nurkic is a superb rebounder and I think we could sign him as a FA without giving up assets in a trade. I'm fine trading Beasley, but we don't have to trade him to upgrade our PF or C position next to KAT. We use him in another deal.

Did Hartenstein really do enough this last year to propel him into mid-level territory? Personally I don't think he did. It was one game but when he played in the playoff game I was like...eh. If I wasn't sort of a fan of his I may have missed he was even in the game. Again it's 1 game I happened to see but yeah. I think he is more in the 5 million range and that's partly because Inthink teams are going to look at him as a pure center not a PF. I'm really not sure if Jalen Smith is a PF or if he is a center. I kinda doubt anyone is gonna pay much more than 5 million for him either. Maybe I'm wrong and those guys are worth it but I kinda have a hard time being like yes let's pay those guys to be the key pickup of the offseason. If I'm paying the full midlevel or close I want someone that's more proven.

Also as the draft becomes nearer I'll have to get something really good for #19 included in the package unless we also get a lower 1st round pick or higher 2nd like Orlando would be able to supply.

KG4Ever wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:Monster -- We're on the same page when it comes to Beasley. I might be OK swapping Beasley and a 2nd-rounder for Myles Turner. But I would not give up Beasley and our #19 pick for him for all the reasons I discussed. I see Myles playing 40-50 games at most and not helping us a lot on the boards. And he could cost $18M which would eat into the money we'd otherwise have to use the full MLE under the luxury tax threshold. I just don't see that as worth giving up meaningful assets. I like the idea of signing Jalen Smith or Hartenstein for less than $10M and not giving up any assets to get them. And I'd rather have Nurkic with his injury risks than Turner because Nurkic is a superb rebounder and I think we could sign him as a FA without giving up assets in a trade. I'm fine trading Beasley, but we don't have to trade him to upgrade our PF or C position next to KAT. We use him in another deal.

Did Hartenstein really do enough this last year to propel him into mid-level territory? Personally I don't think he did. It was one game but when he played in the playoff game I was like...eh. If I wasn't sort of a fan of his I may have missed he was even in the game. Again it's 1 game I happened to see but yeah. I think he is more in the 5 million range and that's partly because Inthink teams are going to look at him as a pure center not a PF. I'm really not sure if Jalen Smith is a PF or if he is a center. I kinda doubt anyone is gonna pay much more than 5 million for him either. Maybe I'm wrong and those guys are worth it but I kinda have a hard time being like yes let's pay those guys to be the key pickup of the offseason. If I'm paying the full midlevel or close I want someone that's more proven.

Also as the draft becomes nearer I'll have to get something really good for #19 included in the package unless we also get a lower 1st round pick or higher 2nd like Orlando would be able to supply.

Hartenstein is legit. I watched a lot of him. There were a lot of Clippers fans who wanted him to start over Zubac. I would be shocked if he didn't get paid above $5 million. I would think a rebuilding team like Portland, OKC, Detroit or even Sac is going to offer him a sweet deal. I would be thrilled if the Wolves came away with him.

Q-was-here wrote:

worldK wrote:1 name I haven't seen mentioned is Richaun Holmes. I think he would be an excellent fit next to towns.
He has that nifty floater game that we saw Brandon Clarke burned us with in the playoffs. He can score around the basket and shoot respectably on the perimeter.
Defensively, he can guard centers and pf. He is definitely more mobile than Nurkic or Turner and I would say more mobile than KAT himself. I would prefer him over Turner and Nurkic as a target.
We only have beasley;s contract that would make a trade possible and I would be okay with a 1 on 1 swap.

Yup, good call. We've brought his name up a couple years now off and on.

Again, any GM worth his salt should be able to obtain a solid big via trade or free agency this summer. Add Holmes to the list of targets.

FNG wrote:

KG4Ever wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:Monster -- We're on the same page when it comes to Beasley. I might be OK swapping Beasley and a 2nd-rounder for Myles Turner. But I would not give up Beasley and our #19 pick for him for all the reasons I discussed. I see Myles playing 40-50 games at most and not helping us a lot on the boards. And he could cost $18M which would eat into the money we'd otherwise have to use the full MLE under the luxury tax threshold. I just don't see that as worth giving up meaningful assets. I like the idea of signing Jalen Smith or Hartenstein for less than $10M and not giving up any assets to get them. And I'd rather have Nurkic with his injury risks than Turner because Nurkic is a superb rebounder and I think we could sign him as a FA without giving up assets in a trade. I'm fine trading Beasley, but we don't have to trade him to upgrade our PF or C position next to KAT. We use him in another deal.

Did Hartenstein really do enough this last year to propel him into mid-level territory? Personally I don't think he did. It was one game but when he played in the playoff game I was like...eh. If I wasn't sort of a fan of his I may have missed he was even in the game. Again it's 1 game I happened to see but yeah. I think he is more in the 5 million range and that's partly because Inthink teams are going to look at him as a pure center not a PF. I'm really not sure if Jalen Smith is a PF or if he is a center. I kinda doubt anyone is gonna pay much more than 5 million for him either. Maybe I'm wrong and those guys are worth it but I kinda have a hard time being like yes let's pay those guys to be the key pickup of the offseason. If I'm paying the full midlevel or close I want someone that's more proven.

Also as the draft becomes nearer I'll have to get something really good for #19 included in the package unless we also get a lower 1st round pick or higher 2nd like Orlando would be able to supply.

Hartenstein is legit. I watched a lot of him. There were a lot of Clippers fans who wanted him to start over Zubac. I would be shocked if he didn't get paid above $5 million. I would think a rebuilding team like Portland, OKC, Detroit or even Sac is going to offer him a sweet deal. I would be thrilled if the Wolves came away with him.

I understand the excitement here about Hartenstein...he's an intriguing big man who plays hard. But there is certain things about him that would give me pause:

1) He has hands of stone. I'm often surprised at some of the terrific set-up passes that go right through his hands...similar to another guy I like a lot- Vando. He averages 2.5 turnovers per 36. Vando only averages 1.4.

2) He is a fouling machine- he seems to average a foul a minute every time I watch him. I just looked up his foul rate per 36, and 5.9 is very high. To put that in perspective- we worry about KAT's foul rate, but he only averages 3.9 fouls per 36.

3) He seems like an aggressive rebounder when I watch him, but his numbers are underwhelming. I want my "big" candidates to average double figures rebounds per 36, and he averages 9.8. Rebounding is an issue for the Wolves, despite starting Vando who averages almost 12 rebounds per 36.

All that said, I would not be opposed to picking up Hartenstein. He plays hard, and there's a chance the issues I list above are a product of being a young player (he's only 23) who hasn't had enough minutes.

monsterpile wrote:

Q-was-here wrote:

worldK wrote:1 name I haven't seen mentioned is Richaun Holmes. I think he would be an excellent fit next to towns.
He has that nifty floater game that we saw Brandon Clarke burned us with in the playoffs. He can score around the basket and shoot respectably on the perimeter.
Defensively, he can guard centers and pf. He is definitely more mobile than Nurkic or Turner and I would say more mobile than KAT himself. I would prefer him over Turner and Nurkic as a target.
We only have beasley;s contract that would make a trade possible and I would be okay with a 1 on 1 swap.

Yup, good call. We've brought his name up a couple years now off and on.

Again, any GM worth his salt should be able to obtain a solid big via trade or free agency this summer. Add Holmes to the list of targets.

What are the Kings looking to do at the spot next to Sabonis? That could make Holmes available. If so are there other teams that would be interested? Holmes has some injury history of his own that's a concern. He also hasn't taken many shots outside of 16 feet for years. He is ridiculously good at the 10-16 foot range since he went to the Kings. He doesn't seem like a good fit with Sabonis based on stats but ai have not watched him play much the last few years...some of that is because he hasn't been healthy.

Looking back at Holmes career his first season he would have been about the same age as Naz Reid was going into this season. It took Holmes a while to get where he is now. I'm not suggesting we bank on Reid improving defensively but he is still quite young for a big. Of course the biggest problem is he is a year away from being an UFA and then he can sign wherever he wants and he could get a nice contract elsewhere.

Naz Reid and Beasley for Holmes and maybe some other minor asset (maybe move up a couple picks in the 2nd round and maybe Harkless would be interesting. The Kings may be able to do better it would likely depend on how the value Reid and whether they thought. Beasley could help them on the floor or in another deal. Holmes is basically signed for 3 more years 36 million with a player option on year 3 and he turns 29 in October.

KG4Ever wrote:

FNG wrote:

KG4Ever wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:Monster -- We're on the same page when it comes to Beasley. I might be OK swapping Beasley and a 2nd-rounder for Myles Turner. But I would not give up Beasley and our #19 pick for him for all the reasons I discussed. I see Myles playing 40-50 games at most and not helping us a lot on the boards. And he could cost $18M which would eat into the money we'd otherwise have to use the full MLE under the luxury tax threshold. I just don't see that as worth giving up meaningful assets. I like the idea of signing Jalen Smith or Hartenstein for less than $10M and not giving up any assets to get them. And I'd rather have Nurkic with his injury risks than Turner because Nurkic is a superb rebounder and I think we could sign him as a FA without giving up assets in a trade. I'm fine trading Beasley, but we don't have to trade him to upgrade our PF or C position next to KAT. We use him in another deal.

Did Hartenstein really do enough this last year to propel him into mid-level territory? Personally I don't think he did. It was one game but when he played in the playoff game I was like...eh. If I wasn't sort of a fan of his I may have missed he was even in the game. Again it's 1 game I happened to see but yeah. I think he is more in the 5 million range and that's partly because Inthink teams are going to look at him as a pure center not a PF. I'm really not sure if Jalen Smith is a PF or if he is a center. I kinda doubt anyone is gonna pay much more than 5 million for him either. Maybe I'm wrong and those guys are worth it but I kinda have a hard time being like yes let's pay those guys to be the key pickup of the offseason. If I'm paying the full midlevel or close I want someone that's more proven.

Also as the draft becomes nearer I'll have to get something really good for #19 included in the package unless we also get a lower 1st round pick or higher 2nd like Orlando would be able to supply.

Hartenstein is legit. I watched a lot of him. There were a lot of Clippers fans who wanted him to start over Zubac. I would be shocked if he didn't get paid above $5 million. I would think a rebuilding team like Portland, OKC, Detroit or even Sac is going to offer him a sweet deal. I would be thrilled if the Wolves came away with him.

I understand the excitement here about Hartenstein...he's an intriguing big man who plays hard. But there is certain things about him that would give me pause:

1) He has hands of stone. I'm often surprised at some of the terrific set-up passes that go right through his hands...similar to another guy I like a lot- Vando. He averages 2.5 turnovers per 36. Vando only averages 1.4.

2) He is a fouling machine- he seems to average a foul a minute every time I watch him. I just looked up his foul rate per 36, and 5.9 is very high. To put that in perspective- we worry about KAT's foul rate, but he only averages 3.9 fouls per 36.

3) He seems like an aggressive rebounder when I watch him, but his numbers are underwhelming. I want my "big" candidates to average double figures rebounds per 36, and he averages 9.8. Rebounding is an issue for the Wolves, despite starting Vando who averages almost 12 rebounds per 36.

All that said, I would not be opposed to picking up Hartenstein. He plays hard, and there's a chance the issues I list above are a product of being a young player (he's only 23) who hasn't had enough minutes.

Fair points. The only other negative that I can think of with him is his free throw shooting. What I do like about him is that he is an excellent passer, can hit the three, decent shot blocker and rebounder and has very good on/off numbers (much better than Zubac). I think with more playing time under his belt, he can improve on the fouls. When you are a backup who didn't get much playing time before, he might tend to be a bit aggressive.

monsterpile wrote:

KG4Ever wrote:

FNG wrote:

KG4Ever wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:Monster -- We're on the same page when it comes to Beasley. I might be OK swapping Beasley and a 2nd-rounder for Myles Turner. But I would not give up Beasley and our #19 pick for him for all the reasons I discussed. I see Myles playing 40-50 games at most and not helping us a lot on the boards. And he could cost $18M which would eat into the money we'd otherwise have to use the full MLE under the luxury tax threshold. I just don't see that as worth giving up meaningful assets. I like the idea of signing Jalen Smith or Hartenstein for less than $10M and not giving up any assets to get them. And I'd rather have Nurkic with his injury risks than Turner because Nurkic is a superb rebounder and I think we could sign him as a FA without giving up assets in a trade. I'm fine trading Beasley, but we don't have to trade him to upgrade our PF or C position next to KAT. We use him in another deal.

Did Hartenstein really do enough this last year to propel him into mid-level territory? Personally I don't think he did. It was one game but when he played in the playoff game I was like...eh. If I wasn't sort of a fan of his I may have missed he was even in the game. Again it's 1 game I happened to see but yeah. I think he is more in the 5 million range and that's partly because Inthink teams are going to look at him as a pure center not a PF. I'm really not sure if Jalen Smith is a PF or if he is a center. I kinda doubt anyone is gonna pay much more than 5 million for him either. Maybe I'm wrong and those guys are worth it but I kinda have a hard time being like yes let's pay those guys to be the key pickup of the offseason. If I'm paying the full midlevel or close I want someone that's more proven.

Also as the draft becomes nearer I'll have to get something really good for #19 included in the package unless we also get a lower 1st round pick or higher 2nd like Orlando would be able to supply.

Hartenstein is legit. I watched a lot of him. There were a lot of Clippers fans who wanted him to start over Zubac. I would be shocked if he didn't get paid above $5 million. I would think a rebuilding team like Portland, OKC, Detroit or even Sac is going to offer him a sweet deal. I would be thrilled if the Wolves came away with him.

I understand the excitement here about Hartenstein...he's an intriguing big man who plays hard. But there is certain things about him that would give me pause:

1) He has hands of stone. I'm often surprised at some of the terrific set-up passes that go right through his hands...similar to another guy I like a lot- Vando. He averages 2.5 turnovers per 36. Vando only averages 1.4.

2) He is a fouling machine- he seems to average a foul a minute every time I watch him. I just looked up his foul rate per 36, and 5.9 is very high. To put that in perspective- we worry about KAT's foul rate, but he only averages 3.9 fouls per 36.

3) He seems like an aggressive rebounder when I watch him, but his numbers are underwhelming. I want my "big" candidates to average double figures rebounds per 36, and he averages 9.8. Rebounding is an issue for the Wolves, despite starting Vando who averages almost 12 rebounds per 36.

All that said, I would not be opposed to picking up Hartenstein. He plays hard, and there's a chance the issues I list above are a product of being a young player (he's only 23) who hasn't had enough minutes.

Fair points. The only other negative that I can think of with him is his free throw shooting. What I do like about him is that he is an excellent passer, can hit the three, decent shot blocker and rebounder and has very good on/off numbers (much better than Zubac). I think with more playing time under his belt, he can improve on the fouls. When you are a backup who didn't get much playing time before, he might tend to be a bit aggressive.[/qu
So he can't catch the ball? Yikes that's troubling.

Also Hartenstein has taken 47 3's his entire career. Per 36 the guy has taken less than one 3 point shot per game. I'm certainly not saying he is a zero from out there but I wouldn't call it a big strength of his game at this point. To put it in perspective we are basically taking about a guy that takes slightly more 3's per 36 than Taj Gibson (took 38 this season) over the same time.

I don't know how you conclude he can't catch the ball. The ball moves well when Hartenstein plays. Comparing him to Vando makes little sense. Hartenstein can initiate offense and gets many more touches than Vando. H ranks 125th in NBA in turnovers per 36 and is ranked 131st in assists per 36 and has an assist to turnover ratio of 2.0. That is hardly troubling.

KG4Ever wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

KG4Ever wrote:

FNG wrote:

KG4Ever wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:Monster -- We're on the same page when it comes to Beasley. I might be OK swapping Beasley and a 2nd-rounder for Myles Turner. But I would not give up Beasley and our #19 pick for him for all the reasons I discussed. I see Myles playing 40-50 games at most and not helping us a lot on the boards. And he could cost $18M which would eat into the money we'd otherwise have to use the full MLE under the luxury tax threshold. I just don't see that as worth giving up meaningful assets. I like the idea of signing Jalen Smith or Hartenstein for less than $10M and not giving up any assets to get them. And I'd rather have Nurkic with his injury risks than Turner because Nurkic is a superb rebounder and I think we could sign him as a FA without giving up assets in a trade. I'm fine trading Beasley, but we don't have to trade him to upgrade our PF or C position next to KAT. We use him in another deal.

Did Hartenstein really do enough this last year to propel him into mid-level territory? Personally I don't think he did. It was one game but when he played in the playoff game I was like...eh. If I wasn't sort of a fan of his I may have missed he was even in the game. Again it's 1 game I happened to see but yeah. I think he is more in the 5 million range and that's partly because Inthink teams are going to look at him as a pure center not a PF. I'm really not sure if Jalen Smith is a PF or if he is a center. I kinda doubt anyone is gonna pay much more than 5 million for him either. Maybe I'm wrong and those guys are worth it but I kinda have a hard time being like yes let's pay those guys to be the key pickup of the offseason. If I'm paying the full midlevel or close I want someone that's more proven.

Also as the draft becomes nearer I'll have to get something really good for #19 included in the package unless we also get a lower 1st round pick or higher 2nd like Orlando would be able to supply.

Hartenstein is legit. I watched a lot of him. There were a lot of Clippers fans who wanted him to start over Zubac. I would be shocked if he didn't get paid above $5 million. I would think a rebuilding team like Portland, OKC, Detroit or even Sac is going to offer him a sweet deal. I would be thrilled if the Wolves came away with him.

I understand the excitement here about Hartenstein...he's an intriguing big man who plays hard. But there is certain things about him that would give me pause:

1) He has hands of stone. I'm often surprised at some of the terrific set-up passes that go right through his hands...similar to another guy I like a lot- Vando. He averages 2.5 turnovers per 36. Vando only averages 1.4.

2) He is a fouling machine- he seems to average a foul a minute every time I watch him. I just looked up his foul rate per 36, and 5.9 is very high. To put that in perspective- we worry about KAT's foul rate, but he only averages 3.9 fouls per 36.

3) He seems like an aggressive rebounder when I watch him, but his numbers are underwhelming. I want my "big" candidates to average double figures rebounds per 36, and he averages 9.8. Rebounding is an issue for the Wolves, despite starting Vando who averages almost 12 rebounds per 36.

All that said, I would not be opposed to picking up Hartenstein. He plays hard, and there's a chance the issues I list above are a product of being a young player (he's only 23) who hasn't had enough minutes.

Fair points. The only other negative that I can think of with him is his free throw shooting. What I do like about him is that he is an excellent passer, can hit the three, decent shot blocker and rebounder and has very good on/off numbers (much better than Zubac). I think with more playing time under his belt, he can improve on the fouls. When you are a backup who didn't get much playing time before, he might tend to be a bit aggressive.[/qu
So he can't catch the ball? Yikes that's troubling.

Also Hartenstein has taken 47 3's his entire career. Per 36 the guy has taken less than one 3 point shot per game. I'm certainly not saying he is a zero from out there but I wouldn't call it a big strength of his game at this point. To put it in perspective we are basically taking about a guy that takes slightly more 3's per 36 than Taj Gibson (took 38 this season) over the same time.

I don't know how you conclude he can't catch the ball. The ball moves well when Hartenstein plays. Comparing him to Vando makes little sense. Hartenstein can initiate offense and gets many more touches than Vando. H ranks 125th in NBA in turnovers per 36 and is ranked 131st in assists per 36 and has an assist to turnover ratio of 2.0. That is hardly troubling.

I'm going off what FNG said and then you said they were all fair points. What I said has nothing to do what he does after he has the ball.

monsterpile wrote:

KG4Ever wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

KG4Ever wrote:

FNG wrote:

KG4Ever wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:Monster -- We're on the same page when it comes to Beasley. I might be OK swapping Beasley and a 2nd-rounder for Myles Turner. But I would not give up Beasley and our #19 pick for him for all the reasons I discussed. I see Myles playing 40-50 games at most and not helping us a lot on the boards. And he could cost $18M which would eat into the money we'd otherwise have to use the full MLE under the luxury tax threshold. I just don't see that as worth giving up meaningful assets. I like the idea of signing Jalen Smith or Hartenstein for less than $10M and not giving up any assets to get them. And I'd rather have Nurkic with his injury risks than Turner because Nurkic is a superb rebounder and I think we could sign him as a FA without giving up assets in a trade. I'm fine trading Beasley, but we don't have to trade him to upgrade our PF or C position next to KAT. We use him in another deal.

Did Hartenstein really do enough this last year to propel him into mid-level territory? Personally I don't think he did. It was one game but when he played in the playoff game I was like...eh. If I wasn't sort of a fan of his I may have missed he was even in the game. Again it's 1 game I happened to see but yeah. I think he is more in the 5 million range and that's partly because Inthink teams are going to look at him as a pure center not a PF. I'm really not sure if Jalen Smith is a PF or if he is a center. I kinda doubt anyone is gonna pay much more than 5 million for him either. Maybe I'm wrong and those guys are worth it but I kinda have a hard time being like yes let's pay those guys to be the key pickup of the offseason. If I'm paying the full midlevel or close I want someone that's more proven.

Also as the draft becomes nearer I'll have to get something really good for #19 included in the package unless we also get a lower 1st round pick or higher 2nd like Orlando would be able to supply.

Hartenstein is legit. I watched a lot of him. There were a lot of Clippers fans who wanted him to start over Zubac. I would be shocked if he didn't get paid above $5 million. I would think a rebuilding team like Portland, OKC, Detroit or even Sac is going to offer him a sweet deal. I would be thrilled if the Wolves came away with him.

I understand the excitement here about Hartenstein...he's an intriguing big man who plays hard. But there is certain things about him that would give me pause:

1) He has hands of stone. I'm often surprised at some of the terrific set-up passes that go right through his hands...similar to another guy I like a lot- Vando. He averages 2.5 turnovers per 36. Vando only averages 1.4.

2) He is a fouling machine- he seems to average a foul a minute every time I watch him. I just looked up his foul rate per 36, and 5.9 is very high. To put that in perspective- we worry about KAT's foul rate, but he only averages 3.9 fouls per 36.

3) He seems like an aggressive rebounder when I watch him, but his numbers are underwhelming. I want my "big" candidates to average double figures rebounds per 36, and he averages 9.8. Rebounding is an issue for the Wolves, despite starting Vando who averages almost 12 rebounds per 36.

All that said, I would not be opposed to picking up Hartenstein. He plays hard, and there's a chance the issues I list above are a product of being a young player (he's only 23) who hasn't had enough minutes.

Fair points. The only other negative that I can think of with him is his free throw shooting. What I do like about him is that he is an excellent passer, can hit the three, decent shot blocker and rebounder and has very good on/off numbers (much better than Zubac). I think with more playing time under his belt, he can improve on the fouls. When you are a backup who didn't get much playing time before, he might tend to be a bit aggressive.[/qu
So he can't catch the ball? Yikes that's troubling.

Also Hartenstein has taken 47 3's his entire career. Per 36 the guy has taken less than one 3 point shot per game. I'm certainly not saying he is a zero from out there but I wouldn't call it a big strength of his game at this point. To put it in perspective we are basically taking about a guy that takes slightly more 3's per 36 than Taj Gibson (took 38 this season) over the same time.

I don't know how you conclude he can't catch the ball. The ball moves well when Hartenstein plays. Comparing him to Vando makes little sense. Hartenstein can initiate offense and gets many more touches than Vando. H ranks 125th in NBA in turnovers per 36 and is ranked 131st in assists per 36 and has an assist to turnover ratio of 2.0. That is hardly troubling.

I'm going off what FNG said and then you said they were all fair points. What I said has nothing to do what he does after he has the ball.

Well I didn't say they were "all" fair points as Hartenstein isn't a perfect player (very few NBA players are) and he certainly doesn't literally have "stone hands" and I can't really say that I would use those terms to describe Hartenstein. Is he a bit turnover prone and foul prone? Perhaps, but the latter should be correctable and the former should be understood in the context that he looks to move the ball from the pivot and an assist to turnover rate of 2.0 isn't horrible and it improved after the all-star break. Given that this is the first year he got regular minutes, he's still a young developing player and yet, he has already shown he can defend well, block shots, rebound well, pass well for a big man and score efficiently and with some range. I think all he needs is more minutes to really break out.