SBNation.com User Blog: Wim (Belgium)

Off season workouts: open question about focus points

Wim (Belgium) — Fri, 22 Apr 2011 20:19:53 -0000

The season is over. With the result that we had we can only hope our players are already working their ass of trying to improve for next season.

Now, my question is this: when a given player has clear strengths and weaknesses, do you focus more on trying to improve the weaknesses or do you focus on improving the strengths.

Put more into context:

Darko Millicic, decent but not stellar defense, shoddy post play. Do you focus on trying to become a stellar defender that really shines in that skill or do you try to improve the post play to be no long an annoying problem.

Michael Beasley is the other way around, do you work on defensive footwork to be able to guard SF better or do you focus on becoming an elite high-flying finisher around the rim.

Off course, the only good answer is both .. these guys train so much that you can't do the same thing all day long, you have to have some diversification anyway ... but hypothetically speaking, if you had to pick one..

Got some thought on it myself but would like to see some of your thoughts first..
What say you!?

The season is over. With the result that we had we can only hope our players are already working their ass of trying to improve for next season.

Now, my question is this: when a given player has clear strengths and weaknesses, do you focus more on trying to improve the weaknesses or do you focus on improving the strengths.

Put more into context:

Michael Beasley is the other way around, do you work on defensive footwork to be able to guard SF better or do you focus on becoming an elite high-flying finisher around the rim.

Got some thought on it myself but would like to see some of your thoughts first..
What say you!?

Your 10-11 lineup depth charts

Wim (Belgium) — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 23:08:23 -0000

I'v always been a big fan of the system of writing down depth charts by writing the number of minutes next to the player.
As going over our roster was keeping me awake I decided to get out of bed and write down how I think our rotation should look like for the coming season.This is completely ignoring injury backup though. Only position where this could be a problem is the 1 as we have plenty of interchangeable 2/3's and 4/5's.

Please feel welcome to post your own!

1: Ridnour (24) / Flynn (24)
2: Johnson (24) / Webster (24)
3: Brewer (24) / Beasley (16) / Johnson(8)
4: Love (36) / Beasley (12)
5: Darko (24) / Pekovic (24)

Some notes:

I think it's impossible with the talented big men we have that we do not play Beasley some at the 3. No way we can play them all only 24 minutes or less. I'd let Brewer take the smaller, more wing-type opposings 3's as much as possible while playing Beasley against the somewhat bigger players with less range on their shot... as much as that is possible.

The group that is in front should start. Whom of the 2 PG's start is the toughest question for me .. I would fiddle around with it and see what gives the best synergie in the lineups... But I went with Ridnour cuz I think he has the better chance of still being here when and if Rubio comes over (which is highly debatable).

Either way you configure it .. we have some pretty nice firepower from outside combined with inside presence. Especially with Beasley and Pekovic against opposing 2nd string front courts .. they should score at will! I miss that a little with Love + Darko but I'm still confident that is the best combination to put against opposing starting players.

Can't find anything more than an injury backup role for Ellington and Hayward on this team. Would ship them to the D-league where they would probably dominate (especially Ellington).

Would also not get why we would get another big man .. if only for injury backup purposes as with the other 2 mentioned above.

So .... what say thee? Am I giving too many players 30+ minutes? Would you try to give Hayward and/or Ellington 8mins? Who's minutes would you cut down? Let me hear it.

Why the Wes Johnson pick is worse than the Foye pick

Wim (Belgium) — Fri, 25 Jun 2010 07:16:29 -0000

It's not that we don't like Wes at all. He's probably a good fit and a nice player. While he isn't quite the "star" I had hoped we would get, he has the potential to be a part of a good team.

So it's not the guy, it's the pick. Let me take a shot at refreshing your memory what actually went down on draft night a few years back ... the year of Brandon Roy ... and tell you why McHale was more impressive compared to Kahn.

It's not that we don't like Wes at all. He's probably a good fit and a nice player. While he isn't quite the "star" I had hoped we would get, he has the potential to be a part of a good team.

In 2006, the Timberwolves had the 6th pick. Even though most of them have underwhelmed, the top 4 was pretty much a lock: Morrison, Bargnani, Ty Thomas and LMA were gonna be first. The Hawks then reached immensely for a big (Shelden Williams ... whom I'd trade for Shelden Cooper at this point .. love that show) and thus the Wolves were on the clock with Foye, Roy and Gay still on the clock.

At the time it was definitly perceived those 3 were in the same tier. Yes we now know they are definitly not in the same talent tier, in reality, but I truly believe that's how it was perceived.

So within the Tier, McHale had the Combo-guard Foye as the biggest need and put him up at the top. At this point I have to mention again, I'm not comparing the talent evaluation. A lot has been said about why they had Foye at the top of their board and all that. So I'm not comparing the talent evalution on Foye vs Wes ... I'm comparing the draft process.

You see, we did have Foye on top of our board. But still we didn't pick him. Why? McHale was smart enough to know that people behind us wanted Roy. He even had a deal in place with Houston that would have picked Foye with the 8th pick and packaged him with Luther Head for Roy. So even though McHale wanted Foye, he saw the value in letting him slip past and getting more value through a trade for the guy.

Blazers GM Pritchard saw through it and called the bluff, picking Foye and thus forcing a less lucrative trade for the Wolves. They did get a little extra for Foye but it was just a little cash.

Either way you slice it. McHale at least tried to get more for the guy he wanted ... and in fact, he did.

Fast forward to 2010 and we can clearly say Kahn just messed up badly.

The first huge mistake is this: how is it possible that the whole league knew, including the fans, that we were locked into Wes Johnson. Even McHale was able to keep everyone except Pritchard in the dark. No one really knew if we were going with Roy or Foye. Kahn couldn't convince anyone on Cousins vs Johnson. He didn't even try.

Wesley was absolutely not considered a consensus for the 5th pick at the time. If we wanted him (and we did) we should have kept our mouths shut 100% about it because...

The exact same scenario as in 2006 was present. We knew Detroit wanted Cousins. Detroit had the 7th pick. We could at least have drafted Cousins (like McHale drafted Roy) ... made a deal with Detroit that IF Johnson was there at #7 ... we would trade him (like McHale had with Houston) .. and in the probable scenario someone else picks Johnson ... you can still work out a trade that sends you a little bit more than just Wes Johnson (like Portland did)... even if it's just a 2nd rounder, even if it's just a little cash. I don't care. There's no way we could have walked away with less than what we have now if Kahn had had the guts to pick Cousins. Maybe the team that picks Johnson wants nothing to do with Cousins ... but you still walk away with Cousins .. I don't have to tell you anymore why we like him so much, it's been said before more than enough. Besides, even that was improbable because the most likely team to pick Johnson would have been Sacramento, who were widely considered to like Cousins.

Kahn just chickened out and played out his hand too early.

The only excuse Kahn has is that Cousins was an obvious bad fit for our current roster (while Roy was not on the 2006 roster), which would have made it obvious we were trading one of Cousins, Jefferson or Love. But it still doesn't excuse the pick. It only shows even more clearly that he overvalues Jefferson even more than we tought.

So Kahn, congratulations, you did the impossible. You surpassed McHale in draft-night misery on your 2nd go at it. I thought it was impossible, but you did it with flying colors.

Poll

Who handled their respective top pick better: McHale in 2006 or Kahn in 2010

McHale in 2006 had the better draft process

58 votes

Kahn in 2010 had the better draft process

34 votes

Didn't read this: Mchale

4 votes

Didn't read this: Kahn

14 votes

110 votes | Poll has closed

How 'bout Caron Butler

Wim (Belgium) — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 19:53:36 -0000

With Caron Butler (and the rest of the Wizards team for that matter) on the trading block ... Would you like to get him if we could? Can we?

Too old? Not a great enough shooter? Let me hear it.

With Caron Butler (and the rest of the Wizards team for that matter) on the trading block ... Would you like to get him if we could? Can we?

Too old? Not a great enough shooter? Let me hear it.

My personal view is that he would be a great addition and if he can be had on the cheap, why not make a move now. He's 29 yrs old so not really into the core but I think if he sticks around he could still help us turn the ship around more quickly. Not really sure if we could offer anything other than expering deals ... maybe they'd have some use for getting their guard back?

Former wolf Kirk Snyder not doing too well..

Wim (Belgium) — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 20:40:10 -0000

Former wolf Kirk Snyder not doing too well..

"This is it" and basketball

Wim (Belgium) — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 11:43:49 -0000

Not only the best basketball player is called MJ...

Last week I went to see "This is it" at the movies. For those of you who live on Mars: it's the movie with footage from the rehearsel of Michael Jackson's last show, which he never got to perform.

Besides that his "Thriller" was the theme song for our beloved zombies last year, I couldn't help but see parallells throughout the movie with basketball/our T-wolves.

Not only the best basketball player is called MJ...

Last week I went to see "This is it" at the movies. For those of you who live on Mars: it's the movie with footage from the rehearsel of Michael Jackson's last show, which he never got to perform.

Besides that his "Thriller" was the theme song for our beloved zombies last year, I couldn't help but see parallells throughout the movie with basketball/our T-wolves.

First off, it was apparant the size of the whole thing and the amount of people involved required clearly defined roles and especially hierarchy. SnP already touched on this last year: if you have a hierarchy it's important everyone respects the chain of command.

This is something Kahn has done very nicely I think. He's made a clear organisated structure in which everyone has a clearly defined role in the front office.
On the team, I'm curious as to how this is going to unfold. It's too early to tell but we're clearly lacking some structure.

This is closely nitted with the next thing that struck me. Everyone working on that show absolutely worshipped MJ. I think this was because of two obvious reasons

He is the best
He's never an ass about being the best, asks things gently

As there was a clear cut "the man" it was obvious who made the important decisions. You could even see MJ say what he wanted in a video editing thingy ... what does he know about video clips .. but still, there was no question people were going to do it his way.

Linking this to our puppies, I'm very curious who's gonna be the man on our team. People still think it's going to be Big Al? I don't. First of all, it isn't a 100% surefire shot that he is the best, K.Love plays more balanced two-way and I think Flynn could be special (not talking about Rubio, that's the number 1 reason why him not being here is scary .. we can't work on his rank in the pecking order).

Second, when MJ wanted something his way, he would always say it in a gentle, soft way "it's all with the LOVE, L-O-V-E". I think it's been noticed before that Jefferson isn't the best in communicating his frustrations to his teammates ... yelling things when he didn't get the ball. If you don't learn to keep your cool and say things in a good way you'll never get the respect of guys below you in the pecking order, no matter how good you are.

I'm not saying you can't say it the way it is .. but by being in a passive stance when saying it instead of a aggressive one .. results are so much easier to get.

So ... who's gonna be the one, el numero uno, the man. Flynn? Kevin? Rubio? ... Free agent?

The last parallel was off course the passion that Michael has for his music. These people are doing the same thing 24/7 and still never seem to get bored of it. We can only hope our players share the same passion.

What say you?

Poll

Who will eventually be the leader on the team, the guy the others turn to.

Big Al

2 votes

K-Love

7 votes

Flynn

5 votes

Rubio

24 votes

Nobody currently on the roster

6 votes

Someone else currently on the roster??

0 votes

44 votes | Poll has closed

Hitting in the name of...

Wim (Belgium) — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 17:55:28 -0000

Wanted to put this up a little earlier but then I crashed my motorcycle so it was postponed a little (don't worry I'm OK, nothing really bad just an aching shoulder and a bruised ego as I crashed it in right in front of the school where I teach :)).

Without further ado, this post is about Intentional fouling. It's a topic that for a long time has been lingering in my head but the trigger for this post was this foul by Jarvis Hayes (Ed Note: changed to Jarvis) which donned him an injury .. (it might as well have been Hollins who was injured: dangerous, dangerous stuff...)

As a born-and-raised-in-Belgium-kid soccer was the game of the playground. Soccer is the only team game nationally televised so naturally I've watched some soccer in my day as well. Since I've made the switch to basketball I've always found it remarkable that it sometimes is a good thing to make a foul.

In soccer, if you make a foul close to the goal it's a penalty kick, which means a very big chance of making a score. It has even come to the point that if a player would have been head to head with the goaly but the defender makes a desperation foul, the defender is immediately thrown out of the game... Sometimes it's still worth a gamble to make a foul but it's never a good thing if you get caught. (Though I have to say in soccer 1 point is worth a lot more than 1 basket in bball.)

In basketball on the other hand, when there's a situation where the offense is gonna get a sure 2 points, the defender can make the decision to just ram the guy and make him earn the points again. Again, as he already earned them once by doing the thing that would have given him the 2 sure points.

The only negative for the one making the foul is one foul for the defenders. So ok, you can't really do that all the time but still. 1 foul, often on a player who's just a sub and won't be getting 5 fouls anyway is a small price to pay for trading 2points @ 100% for 2points @ 75%...

So, my question to you all is this: what would be against a rule that, in a situation like in the video above, says the offense gets 2 points anyway + 1 bonus free throw. After all, shouldn't the defence be punished for making fouls instead of the offense?

For the sake of clarity: I'm not talking about "regular" shooting fouls, I'm talking about these fouls that are clearly to prevent the offense from getting the easy basket. I find it so weird that a player gets called a "professional" for doing something that's "against the rules"... especially since that thing was dangerous for both players.

As a final treat to you all, the inspirition for the title of this fanpost:

Gallinari for Rubio? 'nuff said

Wim (Belgium) — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 13:26:48 -0000

As a poster at Canis Hoopus (the T-Wolves SB nation blog) I was wondering the simple following: Would you guys ...

a.) trade Gallinari straight up for Rubio's rights.
b.) trade Gallinari straight up for Rubio if it was certain he would come over a.s.a.p.
c.) trade Gallinari + a protected pick (2012 or so) for Rubio (remember, I'm not a GM, you don't have to blow smoke :))

Thanks for your reply

As a poster at Canis Hoopus (the T-Wolves SB nation blog) I was wondering the simple following: Would you guys ...

Thanks for your reply

I heart Kahn: the flowchart

Wim (Belgium) — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 12:00:00 -0000

I've made no secret about it: I'm drinking the Kahn-Aid. With some spare time on my hands (not really but I did it anyway) I made a little flow chart for you guys to have an overview of the trades Kahn has made.

You can also watch the chart here.

Some things that struck me:

Kahn managed to save a total of 4mil in combined 09 and 10 salary. This might not seem very spectacular but I think it's pretty amazing if you look a little closer. We had to add 5mil to make the Wizards draft pick trade work! If we look at only that party of the equation you can see that Kahn managed to turn Miller, Foye and Brown into 1.6mil LESS salary .. and still get Rubio.

I'll let you decide on the talent part of that equation: Miller Foye and Brown for Rubiorights, Wilkins, Pecherov and Daniels (Atkins doesn't stay) ... I'd say that's pretty nice.

Check out the flexiblity:Telfair, Madsen and Smith had only 5.140mil in exp this year. Mostly because Telfair had a 2yr deal. Kahn managed to turn that 2yr deal and 2 smallish expirings into once nice neat 7.9mil package.

For the upper part, the Draft-trade damages the flexibility. We have 2 exp and have to trade it for 2 exp and a large 2yr deal. But Kahn strikes again, turning the 2exp, the large and the smallish Bobby Brown contract into 3 expirings.

All this has effectively helped in making room for new talent: Hollins at 2.2mil, Rubio rights, Sessions at 4mil and the signing of Flynn and Ellington. It clearly shows Kahn is thinking long term, doing what he said he would

getting as much out of the draft as he could
afterwards packaging together as much exp. money in as little number of contracts
making as much as possible roster and cap space to add some free agents/draft picks

What say you?

edit: corrected typo in title (hart = dutch for heart ;))

ESPN completely losing the pedals

Wim (Belgium) — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 07:19:47 -0000

ESPN completely losing the pedals

Check out our bit at position #29. Sjees, there are more teams that have 2 good PG's, get the h*ll over it.

What's bothering me is that the coverage is getting so so bleak. They're trying to cover everything so much that they seemingly don't have to time to dig into it (anymore). I'm so curious how they're gonna package it when Rubio does come over and he says he never was against going to Minnesota .. they're gonna say he is lying?

Quick hit: National media thingy

Wim (Belgium) — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 09:56:17 -0000

Wasn't really sure if it should have been a fanpost or a fanshot... I was reading through the draft grades thingy and here's what struck me in the evaluation of GSW:

Analysis: I think it's too early to know what grade to give Golden State. I love Curry, and if the Warriors keep him, I think he's a great addition to Monta Ellis in the backcourt. Neither guy is a pure point guard, but Curry's shooting should complement Ellis' slashing nicely.

OH; so when GSW plans on playing a back court of 2 PG's; one being a slasher and one being a shooter .. it should complement nicely .. when the T-wolves plan on playing a back court of 2 PG's; one being a scorer and one being a distributor ... that's absolutely out of whack?

Wasn't really sure if it should have been a fanpost or a fanshot... I was reading through the draft grades thingy and here's what struck me in the evaluation of GSW:

Would you give up our 2010 first rounder for Washington's nr5

Wim (Belgium) — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 21:43:46 -0000

Just a regular little poll on a saterday eve because I'm wondering how the perception of the strength of this draft is. Fill out the poll and maybe comment if you'd like.

Both Curry and Harden are available here.

Needed some more words... Needed some more words... Needed some more words... Needed some more words... Needed some more words... Needed some more words... Needed some more words... Needed some more words... Needed some more words... Needed some more words... Needed some more words... Needed some more words...

Just a regular little poll on a saterday eve because I'm wondering how the perception of the strength of this draft is. Fill out the poll and maybe comment if you'd like.

Both Curry and Harden are available here.

Poll

Trade our 2010 Minnesota First round pick for Washingtons nr5 pick

Yes

7 votes

Yes, but ONLY and ONLY if it's top 5 protected

18 votes

No

14 votes

You idiot, our 2010 pick is already promised to the Clippers in the Jaric trade (the agony)

16 votes

55 votes | Poll has closed

2nd round central

Wim (Belgium) — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 07:52:47 -0000

[psycho paranoia rant]Why is there no news yet! Why don't we know who the new GM is gonna be; Are they playing with us? Are they backing out? You trying to steal my precious gm? Precious .. precious .. It's gonna be Lindsey right .. RIGHT[/rant]

Ok, so we're all waiting for the announcement of the new GM. Until then I'd like to touch on a subject that has been labeled as Euro Stashing (by me, proudly). Those 2 2nd rounders. We have to keep busy people!

The reason the subject hasn't been touched I imagine is because we at Hoopus I've seen most try to avoid talking about what they don't know much about. Since none of us have really watched any Euro games (right?) we have to rely on what DX and others have to say.

Everyone is half expecting them to be traded but in case that doesn't happen we need to get some players that won't contribute right now but might down the road. The most obvious kind is Euro players .. but maybe there's some US players too? Let's see what we got.

It's harder to predict the second round than it is the first. It frequently happens that players get picked who weren't even on the DX mock (Mavrokefalidis, Craig Smith, Chris Richard, ...) and that the ones that were projected to go in the early 2nd round don't get picked at all.

That said, I'd still like to know who you guys like at 45 and 47. Again, doesn't all have to be Euro stashing but ability to contribute now has very little value on our already full team (with already 3 first rounders to add).

My short list:

Nando De Colo

Already mentioned by SnP earlier. A french PG/SG.
A slightly undersized SG (or combo) who's main forté is scoring. Also has sufficient ball handling and court vision to at least assume co-pg duties.

His biggest negative, according to DX, is his defense.

Tyler Smith

Somebody already mentioned him (claim thy daps) and he was also on the short list of last year.

I still believe we have no use for a 2nd string SF. We've already got more than enough of those (Gomes, Miller, Carney) and I don't think I'd pick Smith over any of these three.

Nevertheless a prototypical jack-of-all trades wing is still something we all like.

Sergio Llull

A pick and roll passing PG. Need I say more? ... Hope not, because I don't know more anyway... Would be very excited with him in the 2nd.

Patrick Mills

He's already been mentioned for the #28 pick. Here. As I mentioned, the 2nd round is very unpredictable, you never know who might slide.

Omri Casspi

Likely won't last. Player who's still young and seems to have nice upward potential. Could be nice to have once the SF-battle settles (once Miller is traded, once we know if Brewer and Foye come through and how it all fits (i.e. if Foye goes, does Brew go fulltime SG? etc).

Dark Horses:

Milan Macvan
Henk Norel
Josh Heytvelt
Slava Kravtsov

You'll probably see I left out Taj Gibson. Don't like him but I'm sure some of you disagree.

So, who else did I forget and who do you like or dislike

Marcus Williams cut

Wim (Belgium) — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 21:07:30 -0000

Marcus Williams cut

Wanna give this guy a shot here? Who knows...

Clearing NY cap space

Wim (Belgium) — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 11:31:58 -0000

After having watched the first half of NC vs Duke and only realising after about 10 minutes of playing time that Ty Lawson wasn't the guy wearing the nr 22 (not a good sign for him) I read this article on the four letter network that got my trade juices flowing.

The most important parts of the article in case you don't wanna read it (though I would suggest you do):

The Knicks had been expecting the salary cap to grow to more than $60 million by the summer of 2010, but Stern's pessimistic forecast means it should stay somewhere south of $60 million.

So, if we add up Curry, Jeffries, Gallinari, Chandler, the 2009 pick (at a rough guestimate of $2 million) and seven phantoms to reach the 12-spot mandate, the Knicks will be at roughly $29 million.

Let's say the Knicks were to retain Lee at $11 million and Robinson at $6 million for 2010-11. Their committed payroll, including Curry, Jeffries, Chandler, Gallinari, the 2009 first-round pick and five phantoms, would be $46 to $49 million.

That doesn't leave them enough money to make a max offer to even one premiere free agent when the Summer of LeBron comes along.

The solution is to get rid of Curry and Jeffries

And that's where we come in. Because we're the ones with some tradeable assets and might be willing to take something bad for a young talented player.

The most important parts of the article in case you don't wanna read it (though I would suggest you do):

The Knicks had been expecting the salary cap to grow to more than $60 million by the summer of 2010, but Stern's pessimistic forecast means it should stay somewhere south of $60 million.

So, if we add up Curry, Jeffries, Gallinari, Chandler, the 2009 pick (at a rough guestimate of $2 million) and seven phantoms to reach the 12-spot mandate, the Knicks will be at roughly $29 million.

Let's say the Knicks were to retain Lee at $11 million and Robinson at $6 million for 2010-11. Their committed payroll, including Curry, Jeffries, Chandler, Gallinari, the 2009 first-round pick and five phantoms, would be $46 to $49 million.

That doesn't leave them enough money to make a max offer to even one premiere free agent when the Summer of LeBron comes along.

The solution is to get rid of Curry and Jeffries

And that's where we come in. Because we're the ones with some tradeable assets and might be willing to take something bad for a young talented player.

As always we don't deal in simple two team trades so I just HAD to incorporate a 3rd team. As you can see on this link to the trade machine this deal actually includes the Miler for Sczerbiack swap we've been coveting. Only to send Wally World straight back outta here to New York.

Why everyone does this:

Minny:

Starting SF problem: fixed. I was really a big fan of Gallinari and I think he'd fit in very nicely. Point Forward with ability to get free throws and some range if I remember correctly. He's still very young and so comes in cheap. Haven't really seen him play a lot (he had injuries I think?) and the adjustment for Euro players is probably always a bit harder and always takes them a bit longer (see Nowitzki, Dirk) but he's got the physcials (he's long for a SF) and the talent so I'd love to share SF between Brewer and Gallinari.

We do have to take on some VERY bad contracts. Curry is ok. Once he gets his game back on track I'd have no problem with him getting some 20ish minutes to relieve Love a bit right now and help out next year. So Miller straight up for Curry I think is not really a very bad swap at this point.
Jeffries' contract is just bad, way bad. But I'd still do it if it could net me Gallinari without giving up any young talent of our own.

Cleveland:

They might need a little sweetner pick for this but I don't see why they don't do it if they can get a pick out of it? Maybe the (protected) NY pick so NY can clear that amount of their books before it ever gets on it. I'm reluctant to parting with one of our picks because we're already taking on such bad contracts.

New York:

If you read the article you know why they like this. It gives them a chance to keep Lee, Robinson, Chandler and still maybe sign 2 max deals. Yes they have to give up Gallinary but they aint keeping all four of those guys anyway. It's actually so good for them I'd try to make them give up a future first rounder somewhere around where they will have both Bosh and Lebron. If they pull it off, no biggie, if they don't, lovely.

A fitting cog? Nick Calathes notepadding

Wim (Belgium) — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 11:29:55 -0000

With my internet down for the weekend I had nothing much else to do than watch the recording of a Gators game. With "Similarities: Shaun Livingston" on his draft profile at ESPN I was intrigued. Does this cog fit our machine and if so, is his quality high enough or should we look for someone better that fits less?

First of all, I'm not at home right now so I'm not really sure anymore what game it was but I think it was against "Vanderbilt".

What do I think we need? If I'd make a job application for it, it would read "We're searching for a PG, ability to play SG is a very big plus". I don't want us to go with a SG who has some PG skills because of this:

If Telfair goes down we don't want Foye or any other "SG with PG skills" to play our point for 30 minutes. I want to see 30+ minutes of a point and max 15 minutes of a "SG with PG skills", like Foye. If Telfair goes down we need to have someone that can play the point for 30 minutes without a problem.

If you turn it around, if Foye would go down it's no problem to fill the missing 2-guard minutes with Brewer sliding down from 3 to 2 and Gomes spending more minutes at the 3 ...

So when I'm talking about that it "fits", I'm talking about this.

Here's what I wrote down:

Excellent court vision especially in traffic, knows where everyone is. Ballhandling is also very good, looks like he's going at 110% speed but manages to keep complete control. -> Trademarks of a true point.

6'5" is very good size, is that accurate? He looks big but I wouldn't say 6'5"?

Seems much quicker than I anticipated. I had the notion he wasn't pegged as a good defender but he looks fine imo? Knows where he needs to be, quick enough and doesn't sleep on any plays.

Had some nice passes that I tought looked kinda goofy, it was like a lob pass inside but with the speed of a regular pass. The guy that got it missed it but I'm sure our Jefferson would have made that one.

He did make some decision mistakes.

Strokes the 3ball very nicely, reminds me a bit of a Dereck Fisher.

Not really explosive, he's fast but the explosion isn't there.

Seems like a good chemistry guy, always tapping teammates and looked like a leader out on the court.

All in all, I still have some doubt it his overall skill is high enough. He totally totally fits on our team but he still has a ways to go until he's a Livingston and probably hasn't got the same ceiling. Either way, if we drop out of the top 10, my favourites for the 1, 3 and 5 are respectively Calathes, Clark and Thabeet. Though I'm not sure the 1 and 3 position guys are the starters we need (while at the 5 we only need a backup).

Especially with Calathes being on the first round bubble he's an excellent candidate for our 2nd or 3rd first round pick.

As a side note, I also watched Willie Warren, Greg Monroe and Blake Griffin. Blake looked polished, but that won't surprise anyone. I was really not impressed at all with both Warren and Monroe. Warren doesn't fit, Monroe doesn't either but I don't know, he felt "unspecial".

Truehoop network

Wim (Belgium) — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 20:06:05 -0000

Truehoop network

Notepadding Earl Clark

Wim (Belgium) — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 09:22:35 -0000

Just some quick notes that I wrote down on Earl Clark as I was watching the Louisville vs Ole Miss game.

Looks to pass first, dribble second
Excellent rebounding: big leaper, good size, good positioning and knows when to block out
Looks very mature physically (big, strong body)
From on 3pointer doesn't look great, I would abandon the 3point shot in the pro's
Excellent awareness out of the high post
Can make the most out of every possession, doesn't "screw up"
Can get to the rim on his own, gets a nice number of free throws on them
Plays very good inside outside/high-low with their center, if the guy would hit more of those he'd have even more assists
Stamina seems good, he doesn't mail in on anything, stays active through the whole game

This guy is really growing on me. Hope I'll be able to do some euro scouting in the christmas break!

Trading For Noah: try #2

Wim (Belgium) — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 10:03:40 -0000

After I hugely underestimated the underestimating of one Devin Harris, lemmie give it another go. As always, comments are more than welcome, I'm hoping this one looks a little less lopsided.

The link to the trade is here: ESPN Trade Machine link

Add our Utah/Boston pick to Chicago
Add Knicks 2010 first rounder to Chicago

Hope that works for all of you guys because I won't be typing it out here for the sake of order (3-way trades are such a mess). Again my arguments for making the trade from the different standpoints.

Bulls

The Bulls exchange Hughes in the backcourt for Miller. I'd think that's about even?

Smith for Noah. Just as Noah is a better fit for us, Smith offers more inside scoring.

Giving up Gray (or Simmons if you'd like that better) is the bad part for them. Though if they get the Boston/Utah pick, they should be able to get an equal replacement.

Hinrich for Marbury, on talent I think Marbury can give them what Hinrich does. They'd have to go looking for a replacement for Hinrich but with the cash this opens up they'd have the chance to sign someone a lot better than either. With Hinrich gone it gives them another 10 mil extra in the 2010 sweepstakes. This is the biggest incentive for this trade for the Bulls.

Basicly it's also Hinrich for the Knicks pick next year. You might argue they'd want a player back for Hinrich instead. I think a first rounder is the best they'll get without taking back a 7-9 ish contract. So they get Free agency money (10mil minus guaranteed rookie) + a new rookie in 2010. If they really wanna free up some money for 2010 wile picking up something on the way, this is their best shot.

T-wolves

Doesn't make us an instant contender off course but it seems a step forward.

In the back court we give up Miller in favor of Hinrich. We all know we've got plenty more people that can play the two: Foye, Mccants, Brewer and ever Carney. Let alone the fact that Hinrich can play some combo-SG as well, I think he'd be good/great with Foye. Hinrich is only 27 which makes him fit "he'll be a veteran when Big Al is in his prime" role even better than Miller. His contract isn't fantastic, but it isn't bad either, we'd have him locked up for 4 more years + we'd probably still have some cash for whomever would be willing to play for us in 2009/2010. This trade off course fails if suddenly Miller starts shooting again, otherwise, I say on talent we break even but fix both PG and SG logjams which makes me less nervous about selecting Griffin (or Thabeet!) come June.

In the front we lose Smith and gain Noah. Though not a typical Center, Noah can play it and would be a much better complement to Jefferson. He's also young which is always a plus on our team. Might have a positive effect on Brew as well. Gray was very high on my 2nd round draft board back in 2006 (?). He's a very solid back-up center for when we want to go big. You could exchange him for Cedric Simmons if the Bulls don't want to give up Gray, not sure about it.

We give up our two expiring contracts but keep enough for a leftover semi-star who might come over here. I'd rather make this smaller improvements than hoping for Lebron, as long as we can plug one hole with a leftover, I'm ok for 2010.

We give up a pick that could give us some leverage for the draft. Though the positives weigh up to this imo.

Knicks

They get rid of Marbury.

Lebron 2010 is save.

They get someone they can actually use in that back-court in Larry Hughes, they get him for 2 years. He's definitly got enough to be a back-up.

They have some 4mil more on the books now and 20mil next year. Which is a negative. But if they can trade away Marbury NOW and get a decent player for 2 years in return, they should take it and run. RUUUUUUUN. Especially since they need some back-court help.

They probably don't mind giving up that pick since they're going in the right direction (so it won't be a really really high one probably), especially if it's a 2010 pick because they don't want the guaranteed money on their books as they're going all out spending spree in 2010.

Since they were thinking about buying out Marbury (for probably just a little over Hughes salary) they get Hughes for free in exchange for 2010 first rounder. I think I'd like that.

Open fanpost: Who do we want managing?

Wim (Belgium) — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 09:02:48 -0000

It's been mentioned a few times in the comments here and there but not a lot of response there. So I'm wondering, who would be valid candidates for GM'ing in the future? I got the idea from the Hartman interview that the commitiee country club is going to do this year's work, so probably it'll be mostly Hoiberg doing the picks since he's the one responsable for "scouting" while Stack is the main man for "players from other teams" (that's why he said Stack is the one to call for trades, I don't think Stack is the real replacement of McHale).

Eventually, we'll need someone who's highest in the chain of command, but who? Maybe someone from a winning organisation .. or someone from a rebuilding one (Portland?).

Anyone got any exact names? Don't be shy...

ESPN's Sheridan Catching up

Wim (Belgium) — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 14:44:32 -0000

ESPN's Sheridan Catching up

ESPN seems to be catching up to what we've been saying for a little while now: not only Witt, not only McHale, but both have to go if we want to have any chance of going forward...

Read about it here.

ESPN Draft Watch on Thabeet

Wim (Belgium) — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 22:14:35 -0000

As I'm gonna be banging the Thabeet drum (as SnP put so nicely) I'll have to post anything positive about him. So for the ones who missed it, here's what Ford had to say:

I've been among Thabeet's biggest skeptics, but I'm quickly running out of allies. More and more scouts appear convinced that the big man from UConn is finally able to deliver. We always knew Thabeet could block shots and run the floor. But his improved rebounding and confidence on the offensive end have more scouts calling him a top-5 lock.

In fact, with a few more supporters, he could become the consensus No. 2 pick in the draft. I'm still skeptical of the Dikembe Mutombo comparisons, but there's no doubt he made the right move skipping the draft the past two years. Thabeet is finally learning how to play basketball, and at 7-foot-3, he has the chance to make a real impact now.

It seems like it's quickly becoming a "go after Curry and Thabeet" draft for me. Check out the rest here

As I'm gonna be banging the Thabeet drum (as SnP put so nicely) I'll have to post anything positive about him. So for the ones who missed it, here's what Ford had to say:

It seems like it's quickly becoming a "go after Curry and Thabeet" draft for me. Check out the rest here

Mega deal monday 3-way edition

Wim (Belgium) — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:43:41 -0000

No mega deal monday without a 3 way trade (yea I really got nothing to do at work, the shipment of the necessary cable got delayed).

Here's what I got. Keep in mind I used the trade machine which won't accept Smith's contract yet, checked out the numbers manually and it seems to work even better with Smith in there.

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/features/traderesult?players=136~3422~2382~1981~3224~130~3003~2777~558&teams=4~16~16~16~16~17~17~17~17&te=&cash= (+ the pick and smith)

To the Wolves

* Chris Douglas-Roberts

* Joakim Noah

* Devin Harris

* Kirk Hinrich

Outgoing Players: Rashad McCants, Randy Foye, Mike Miller, Brian Cardinal, Craig Smith, Picks

Why this works for the Wolves: Devin Harris was really really undervalued at Dallas, check out how they're doing without him .. and that's with Kidd in his place, not really the first the best either.. I'm totally sold on the guy, he's an excellent both ways player.

CDR needs some more time to mature and we give up a about all our SG's in the process. We lose a little at that position. Still, CDR was a sophomore if I remember correctly and we all know we were high on him last year before the draft (no?). Corey's ready for more minutes at SG and don't forget about Carney whom but cheecks are probably the only thing that's warmed up about him. We give up a lot at SG but we weren't going anywhere anyway.

If Corey moves over to SG and since we get Noah, Love can move over to SF a bit. Especially when we get Peko or a center through draft in here.

Noah + Al really looks good to me.

Hinrich is another nice guard who could be a more than excellent 6th man.

Negatives: Free Agency is out the window though we've already established why this is not a problem. We lose all our 3point shooters though I'm not sure it'll matter since Wittman doesn't know how to set them up anyway. If it is a problem you could change either Foye or Mccants with Brewer, I just like Brewer best out of the 3. If we keep Foye or Mccants instead of Brewer it might spread the floor better so you can interchange them if you want.

To the Bulls:

* Vince Carter

* Craig Smith

* One of our earlier picks or package.

Outgoing Players: Joakim Noah, Kirk Hinrich

Why it works: the Bulls are a growing them that seems to need a little star power to get over the hump back to eastern greatness. I'm not sure Carter is the answer but they might take a flier on him since they don't really lose a lot. They aren't going anywhere with Hinrich and also aren't going anywhere with Noah.

Negatives: If they had plans for free agency, Carter's contract botches that. Are they gearing up for 2010?

To the Nets

* Rashad McCants

* Randy Foye

* Mike Miller

* Brian Cardinal

* Our earliest pick

Outgoing Players: Chris Douglas-Roberts, Vince Carter, Devin Harris

Why it works: Foye is from NJ if I'm right? Miller is no Vince Carter but he might be more willing to be the veteran on a rebuilding-on-the-fly team. They get their pick between Foye and Mccants instead of CDR which could also hasten their rebuilding signifanctly. Moreover, they rid themselves of Carter's 4 remaining years and have a much better shot at Lebron+someone else.

Negatives: they might not be willing to part with Devin Harris for the chance to go after Lebron. Foye and Mccants are nowhere near Harris' skill. Might take untill next year for Jersey to submit to the lure of signing Lebron. The early pick might set this straight a bit, not sure if it would be enough. I frist tried for Hinrich to the Nets but his contract is too long. Not sure if some further tinkering might improve the situation for the nets. At this point they might get more for Carter elsewhere.

SOOO, what say you!

No mega deal monday without a 3 way trade (yea I really got nothing to do at work, the shipment of the necessary cable got delayed).

Here's what I got. Keep in mind I used the trade machine which won't accept Smith's contract yet, checked out the numbers manually and it seems to work even better with Smith in there.

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/features/traderesult?players=136~3422~2382~1981~3224~130~3003~2777~558&teams=4~16~16~16~16~17~17~17~17&te=&cash= (+ the pick and smith)

To the Wolves

* Chris Douglas-Roberts

* Joakim Noah

* Devin Harris

* Kirk Hinrich

Outgoing Players: Rashad McCants, Randy Foye, Mike Miller, Brian Cardinal, Craig Smith, Picks

If Corey moves over to SG and since we get Noah, Love can move over to SF a bit. Especially when we get Peko or a center through draft in here.

Noah + Al really looks good to me.

Hinrich is another nice guard who could be a more than excellent 6th man.

To the Bulls:

* Vince Carter

* Craig Smith

* One of our earlier picks or package.

Outgoing Players: Joakim Noah, Kirk Hinrich

Negatives: If they had plans for free agency, Carter's contract botches that. Are they gearing up for 2010?

To the Nets

* Rashad McCants

* Randy Foye

* Mike Miller

* Brian Cardinal

* Our earliest pick

Outgoing Players: Chris Douglas-Roberts, Vince Carter, Devin Harris

SOOO, what say you!

When being traded means just a little vacation

Wim (Belgium) — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 22:25:36 -0000

When being traded means just a little vacation

I just read here that McDyess has been waived by the Nuggets. This seems another one of those moves were a salary filler is brought into a trade just to be cut and rejoin the team 30 days later.

I don't like this one bit, either you change the rule so the player isn't allowed to be resigned in the same year instead of the same month, so this creativity with the rules doesn't work anymore OR you change the rules in a way like the 25% rule doesn't apply to straight up swap of 1 versus 1 player (you would have to incorporate some further ruling so that you can't do 5 1v1 swamps instead of 5v5 .. so as to make sure there's no abuse of the rule) ... or something else ..

It's no use having rules if they can be circumvented.

Scratch Granger of your 2009 FA lists

Wim (Belgium) — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 12:41:08 -0000

Scratch Granger of your 2009 FA lists

ESPN reported here that Danny Granger has just gotten a 5 year extention from his team the Indiana Pacers right before the deadline.

Hollinger's Forecasts are in!

Wim (Belgium) — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 19:58:30 -0000

Hollinger's Forecasts are in!

Hollinger's forecasts are in. Write him in for 31-51 to our prognosis page so we can watch if we beat him at the end ^^.

Rookies getting burn(ed)?

Wim (Belgium) — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 11:05:31 -0000

I've been walking around with the feeling for a while now. Are our rookies getting enough burn in their first year into the league? We've heard McHale say he didn't expect our nr3 pick to take over... Why not McHale? We've seen it happen before. No, not just Lebron, there was this kid way back, he was the first in over 20 years to get drafted straight out of high school...

So when I read the post on Corey I started wondering again if he had gotten enough burn. Decided to check out the numbers and here's what I found out.

First of all: here's my über-pro Excel graph: http://users.pandora.be/wolvenclaw/chart.gif

As you can see I've used the mpg stat from the last 4 drafts (not including 2008 since they haven't played yet). I averaged the mpg for the top 10 players and also included the average for the number 13, 14 and 15 picks, so we could have some comparison material for McCants.

The numbers are clear. My feeling seems to have been wrong. Our rookies are right up there with the averages. Especially if you take into account that the Top5 average was a good bit higher than the 5 to 10 average. Since our rookies weren't top5 picks we could even say they're scoring pretty high in mpg compared to their peers.

Also, both Foye and Mccants played their rookie years on a team that was supposed to be trying to make a push for the playoffs. So with plenty of veteran competition they still managed to get a good bunch of minutes.

Another thing that stood out to me is that most players that are successfull right now all got significant boosts in their 2nd year mpg-wise. There were a few exceptions with players that already had a high mpg-stat (Howard, Paul) and with some that only started to get minutes from their 3rd year on (Jefferson). Generally speaking though, players not getting big minutes in their second year don't get more minutes in the coming years.
This again confirms that a players second year goes a long way of telling how the rest of the players career could turn out. There's a good chance by the end of the year we'll be talking about how nice it is that Brewer pulled it together .. or how much it bites he didn't.

Individual player predictions on ESPN

Wim (Belgium) — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 11:16:57 -0000

Individual player predictions on ESPN

No love for Ricky No D on biggest negative impact it seems. They aren't paying attention.

Another interview: Gomes

Wim (Belgium) — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 18:47:49 -0000

Another interview: Gomes

Another interview with one of the players. This time: Gomes.

I'm always happy to hear this guy, he seems such a bright minded guy. Not just saying what he should say but really telling what he thinks. Love the guy

Twenty minutes with Telfair

Wim (Belgium) — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 04:47:55 -0000

Twenty minutes with Telfair

For the ones who don't follow Timberwolves.com:

http://www.nba.com/timberwolves/news/twenty_minutes_with_telfair_080806.html

To me, he says all the good things and it's kind of funny he seems he's gonna be the guy that Marbury was supposed to be. His jersey is coming on my wall if he sign an extra extension after this year.

He only got a little caught when Mike asked him who he would pick for a 2on2 team but it's funny so it's allowed ;).