SB Nation User Blog: mutleyil

If we end up having to trade Ricky Rubio

mutleyil — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 02:49:08 -0000

Since the day after the draft, I’ve been contending that we will never see Ricky Rubio play in a Minnesota Timberwolves uniform. From the way he’s answered questions (saying he wants to play in the NBA while expressly avoiding saying he wants to play in Minnesota, repeatedly stating the T’Wolves hold his rights “for now,” etc…), to the words of his father, to the reported actions of his agent Dan Fegan (working on trade possibilities basically the moment after we took him)…it just seems very clear he doesn’t want to be here. And if he really doesn’t want to come here, in the end, there’s nothing we can do to make him.

It’s too bad…he’s a perfect fit for a young, building team. He’s the quintessential unselfish, “he makes everyone around him better” guy that could be great on the court AND could actually help attract other top notch players because they know he lives to get them the ball. He’d be a rock star here, and maybe…just maybe…Kahn can eventually sell him on this. It’s also possible that all this posturing is just to gain leverage against his Spanish team when it comes time to settling his buyout, and it would have happened no matter who took him. I tend to think not, simply because he went out of his way to praise OKC and Sacramento before the draft. If all this hemming and hawing is really just a cleverly orchestrated ruse by Fegan, then having Ricky speak glowingly about other cities a few days ago seems a like a bit of a faux pas.

So if we eventually accept that our best course of action is to trade Ricky Rubio, what are the options? We would need to find a landing spot he found acceptable. From what we know so far, here are the main criteria in his decision: Market size, climate, availability of minutes, and joining a good program. We don’t necessarily need to find a place that fits all 4, as he was willing to go to SAC or OKC, but a situation that meets several of these criteria should be considered good to go. In addition to these factors, we also need to consider the needs of our beloved Wolves, so I am adding in availability of good assets as a MAJOR piece of criteria for good trade partners. Anyone that doesn’t meet that requirement is out. Here is what I arrived at:

Teams that are out

Celtics - Rondo is intriguing, but we would already have Flynn. Everyone else on their roster is old and/or expensive and/or a role player.

NY Knicks - They don't have a single player we could use that would be more than a role player.

Raptors – Not a good trade fit, and RR wouldn't go anyway.

Bulls - Lots of attractive assets, but their PG need is ZERO with D Rose.

Cavs - Varejao would be OK, but no other good pieces for us in a package. Unless they want to offer up that LeBron guy…

Pistons - I don't value Stuckey that much, and the other players at our positions of need are old and expensive.

Pacers - Don't think RR would go, and don't see any package NOT involving Granger that would work (which IND wouldn't go for).

Bucks - Not even bothering…if he won't come to us, Milwaukee has no chance.

Hawks - Just traded for Jamal Crawford…drafted Jeff Teague. Don't see them parting with Joe Johnson or Al Horford as part of a deal.

Bobcats - Don't think RR would go. Already have Augustin and Felton at PG. Too bad…Wallace, Henderson, Okafor, Bell are all good to great assets.

Heat - Just don't see a match…if only Beasley could play full-time SF, but I just don't see it.

Magic - Their roster is set…going for it this year…best assets are very expensive…not a good fit.

Wizards - Think they'd trade Foye and Miller back to us? HA HA HA HA HA…you got served Flip…

Rockets - Don't see any good, young, inexpensive talent that we could build a deal around.

Grizzlies - It's Memphis…enough said…

Nuggets - Think they're commited to Lawson, and not sure if Denver would work for RR.

Thunder - Not happening…they already passed on him once in favor of Westbrook.

Jazz - Sticking with D Williams…probably less attractive city for RR than Minneapolis.

Clippers - No chance while Baron Davis is there, and I don't see him as moveable at this point.

Lakers - No chance. Nothing but Kobe, Gasol, and role-playing crap… How did they just win the damn title?!?!

Kings - Passed on him once already. Can't think much of RR if they think Evans is a better fit with Kevin Martin.

Spurs - Their roster is set…going for it this year…best assets are very expensive…not a good fit. (Yes, I copied this directly from my Orlando comments)

This leaves us with the following potential trade partners:

Hornets - No way, right? They already have CP3. However, NOLA is in serious financial trouble. Is there is anyone else that could make letting CP3 go seem palatable to the fanbase other than RR? There's something poetic about La Pistola assuming his rightful place in New Orleans 35 years after Pistol Pete was there. We have plenty of filler to balance the salaries, and I would even throw in Love if need be. CP3 and Flynn don't seem like a good match, but who cares? You go get CP3 when you can, and turn Flynn into something else later.

NJ Nets - A package involving Brook Lopez or Devin Harris/Courtney Lee is worth considering.

Suns - A very interesting possibilty. The chance for Rubio to learn with the master, Steve Nash, for one year. As of now, their best offer would be Barbosa and Robin Lopez, which doesn't quite do it for me. Both are way too one-dimensional, and Lopez has almost ZERO basketball IQ. However, if they complete the alleged Stoudemire deal with GS, they could offer some combo of Biedrins, Barbosa, Bellinelli, Curry. Would keep an eye on a Phoenix team in transition...RR would be a GOD there.

Warriors - X-Factor based on Stoudemire rumors. Would need to send Ellis or Curry back to give RR the minutes. Anthony Morrow or Andris Biedrins would also be very attractive prospects.

Blazers - Do we get Pritch-slapped or do they get Kahned? There are a lot of good fits here. Rudy Fernandez, Nicholas Batum, One of Us Pryzbilla, maybe even Oden…all very attractive assets. Potentially a good fit, but I would be extra cautious about trading RR to a division rival.

Mavericks - A package around Josh Howard and Jason Terry would be worth listening to. Not really turning me on though. Kind of redundant to some pieces we already have in Brewer and Flynn.

76ers - Andre Iguodala and Sam Dalembert would be good fits, but a lot of $$$. They also drafted Jrue Holiday. Least likely, but possible.

So after much ado, what have we arrived at? At the present time, there’s really only 7 teams that seem to be potential partners, and a few of those are reaches at best. I like a few of these options…specifically the idea of getting CP3 or a post-Stoudemire Phoenix deal. Rubio’s buyout situation may go on into OCT, so we have until then to see how things shake out. What say you, my fellow Wolves rubes, about the options in front of us? Anything you like here, any other options you see that I missed, or do we hang on to the Rube at all costs?

Wolves and Peace...

mutleyil — Sat, 23 May 2009 07:34:01 -0000

OK. I started writing a post to respond to the David Kahn hiring. After a while, the post basically grew to the length of War & Peace. Instead of crushing an existing post, I thought a new Fan Shot would be more appropriate. Against all of my better judgment, I am astonishigly not horrified by the Kahn hiring.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!KAHN!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry, I had to do that at least once…

While I hate that we are in the position we are in, I always love transitional franchise moments like this. These are the rare times when a professional sports organization actually gives you a small window into it’s soul. During the status quo, all you ever get is the following:

· Coach A is doing a great job (Coach A gets fired 2 weeks later)

· Our GM has us in a good position for the future (translation: we’re 12-42, we’ve been in the Lottery for 12 consecutive years, and we have cap space no decent free agent would ever consider)

· We have a good, young, developing nucleus of players (which means our players haven’t performed or developed, so we’ll refer to them as “young” and “developing” instead of saying they suck)

Hiring a new GM or Coach is the only time we get some “true” insight into the organizational opinion. They try to sell us so hard on the fact that “New Hire A” is the second coming of Jesus, they inevitably end up giving us the definitive post-mortem indictment on the previous regime. The choice itself also is usually an indication of what the owner felt was wrong. The new people hired are usually a fascinating psychological profile simply based on the way they present themselves. I checked out a transcript from the Kahn presser today, and here’s what I’m extrapolating:

1 - Papa Glen in his opening remarks: “I think that this is really an important step in our future at a time when we're growing our team, developing a plan for the future and to bring the right person on at the right time was a very important decision for us and I'm pleased with the decision that we made

-My take: “Growing as a team”…”Developing a plan for the future?” I thought we were developing our team for the future since we traded KG two years ago? Tells me what he thinks of the progress of McHale’s development plan. Funny thing is, I feel McHale’s last couple years have been competent. It’s the 10 before that where we got screwed.

2 - David Kahn in his opening remarks: “I had ownership of some D-League teams and it was last summer when we sold our Tulsa team to Oklahoma City I began to consider to come back in this type of vain. I've been around the NBA my whole adult life, 24 years either in it or in the periphery of it.”

-My take: As someone that has interviewed people, I find they usually try to establish their bona fides in areas where they are weakest. It’s fascinating really. They want you to know their weaknesses are OK rather than selling you on how powerful their strengths are, which I find baffling. Kahn is clearly trying to address being out of the game for so long in his opening statement, which tells me that he is worried about that.

3 - Kahn is asked: What's Kevin McHale's status with you? DK: "I had the over-under on that question at seven seconds, so you just got the under. Thank you, you owe me Glen.”

-My take: Hilarious! Everything I’ve read indicated Kahn was a soulless, dick of a boss to work for. This comment alone indicates he at least has a sense of humor. IMHO, a self-deprecating sense of humor indicates you are free thinker and comfortable with uncertainty and criticism…big plusses!

4 - Kahn is asked: Do you consider yourself a personnel guy or a finance guy?" DK: "It's impossible to bifurcate those in today's NBA, you've got to have both.”

-My take: Anyone that can accurately use the term “bifurcate” in an NBA prress conference is clearly bright. I fancy myself as a bit of a grammar “richard” that enjoys using big words to get people thinking. People that possess this skill are rarely fake intellegentsia (see how I did that just now?), and most often are better at what they do than others.

5- DK: “There's a tendency in our league to think that there's only one way to do things.”

-My take: I love hearing this. Every organization I have ever worked for was inherently resistant to change because it makes things difficult bureaucratically. Having an open mind to doing things in a new way is welcome. I should point out, this comment was made in the context of keeping McHale as coach. Kahn seems comfortable going into the draft without a coach, if necessary. I am fine with this because I think we should choose a coach based on our talent and how we want to play. Very few coaches are capable of adjusting to their rosters these days.

6 - Papa Glen gets grilled about rejection:

GT: Let me say it to you this way now, that is false. I don't know how stronger to say that. That is just inaccurate, false, I know those statements did not come from those candidates, because it was never talked about, and I know it didn't come from anyone who did the interviews, so I don't know where that came from. I can tell you that David responding here is what every candidate was told, basically I'll say it in smaller words: that if you're coming here, you want success. If you want success, you're going to have to have control over your own future.

-My take: WHAT??? Seriously, what did you just say? I was with you through the 2nd sentence…after that, it turned into pure gibberish. Are you going senile?

A few other thoughts:

-Glen’s diatribe on the hiring process was pathetic. He was clearly trying to save face for himself, and failed miserably. Note to Papa Glen: if you don’t want people to think you got rejected by multiple people, don’t make it Point# 1 in your Presser. I took Public/Presentational Speaking about 10 years ago in college, and starting your pitch on what it’s NOT about is the dumbest thing you can do.

-Even in print only, Glen came across as addled and irascible. Dude, you are trying to convince anyone you can that your team is worth spending $$$ on…don’t be a bitter dick in high visibility situations like this.

Bottom Line:

David Kahn strikes me as guy with a really unimpressive resume, but he killed at the interview. Personally, in a general business sense, I put a lot more stock in an interview anyway. In my experience, the resume gives you 1/3 of the hiring picture (does he claim he can do the job?), and the interview gives you the other 2/3 (Is the resume total bullshit? AND How would he fit into our culture?). Every job I’ve ever gotten was the result of a good interview and an “embellished” resume. So far DK’s words are all spot on (which is a revelation to this team), we’ll see if his actions follow. I’m way less depressed now than I was 2 days ago, and I’m giving him the benefit of the doubt for now…

The myth that Derrek Lee is NOT declining...

mutleyil — Fri, 01 May 2009 02:49:52 -0000

A previous post arguing that Derrek Lee was not declining was a poor example of statistical analysis...

They were grouping certain years of stats together in a way that supported their argument, which is a pretty disingenuous thing to do. Saying DLee of 2001-2004 is equal to DLee of 2006-2008 might be statistically true, but it masks the historical trending. Here is what DLee has done since 2001 whenever he has played a full year:

BA/OBP/SLG/OPS/OPS+

2001: .282/.346/.474/.820/112

2002: .270/.378/.494/.872/131

2003: .271/.379/.508/.888/131

2004: .278/.356/.504/.860/117

2005: .335/.418/.662/.1080/174

2006: Played 50 games / wrist injury

2007: .317/.400/.513/.913/131

2008: .291/.361/.462/.823/110

I'm not even including his horrendous numbers from this year. Look at those year over year numbers and it's pretty clear what's happening with DLee. He was an ascending player until 2005. There was a hiccup in 2004, where he got traded to the Cubs, had to deal with playing in cold weather, and was booed and subjected to "HEE SOP CHOI" chants for two months. Whether or not you believe this year’s stats are trend or mirage, since 2005 he has clearly been in statistical decline.

I'd also like to take this opportunity to point out one thing that drives me nuts. Every time someone states an opinion that another person doesn't like, the aggrieved person hysterically demands that you "prove it statistically." Guess what stats geeks? Baseball is not 100% defined through statistics. Looking at a boxscore will never tell you the same thing that watching a game does. In my opinion, scouting with your eyes will tell you half the story, numbers will tell you the other half. Anyone that relies too heavily on one approach or the other is a fool.

As someone that's been involved in baseball for my entire life, I can tell you this from a scouting perspective: Derrek Lee's bat speed is gone. He can't hit the high inside fastball, he can't protect the outside corner, and he's starting his swing early to get his cheat on which is leaving him susceptible to the low and away outside pitch. Even when he connects, he is now showing warning track power...the last true sign that the bat speed is gone for an aging vet. Add this to the statistical evidence I’ve already given, and I think we can safely say that it’s time to gracefully show Derrek the door.

I truly hope no one here gets me wrong…I love Derrek Lee's defense, and appreciate his faithful service to the club for the last 6 years. Unfortunately, a big market team with a $140 mil payroll and World Series aspirations can't afford a .280 hitter with 13 HR and 80 RBI that is a good guy at 1B. And they especially can't continue to bat him 3rd.

Draft Shots...

mutleyil — Sat, 14 Mar 2009 03:57:17 -0000

OK. It's midnight on Friday, and I have been overdosing on conference tournaments for the last two days. I probably reek of BO, my wife hates me, and I think I might have wizzed myself at some point during last night's 6 OT UCONN-Syracuse game. All that being said, I am convinced that I've had a basketball epiphany, and can see a path forward for our beloved Pups. Here it is for beter or worse...

Every good NBA team needs to have 6-7 well-rounded players that can score, play some D, and have a specific specialty (low post scoring, man to man D, 3 point shooting, etc...). Good teams start these players, then bring in specialists to give them a rest and impact the particular game based on what's going on. We basically have a team of one-dimensional specialist players, which is why we stink and have no ability to absorb injuries. For your consideration, here are the people in our rotation. I'm not even going to bother discussing throwaways like Mark Madsen, Bobby Brown, Shelden Williams, Jason Collins, and Kevin Ollie.

Bassy - Pace-pushing PG. Plays no D, no outside shot, and not a particularly effective executor of a half court offense

Corey Brewer - Plays D. Can't shoot, can't create, and general basketball IQ is questionable.

Brian Cardinal - The fact he's not in the "throwaway" section is amazing. Love the effort and energy, but he's in there to goon it up. There's value in that, but again, a 1 dimensional player.

Rodney Carney - Great fast breaker. Not much else. Gets hot from 3 occasionally. Very good at pressuring his man, very bad at letting said man blow by him and score.

Randy Foye - A scorer...nothing more. And a passive one at best. Ben Gordon type, except less explosive. Nothing more than a good 6th man that could bring scoring off the bench. Poor defender.

Al Jefferson - Great low post scorer. Doesn't play D, block out, or provide much help D. Love him, but way too 1 dimensional.

Craig Smith - Poor man's Corliss Williamson. Good choice in limited matchups, but an erratic that's a complete defensive liability.

Well Rounded Players

Ryan Gomes - A perfect 6th man on a good team. Good inside or outside. Can go left or right. Plays a little D.

Kevin Love - Great rebounder, good passer, great help defender, big inside & outside offensive upside.

Mike Miller - It pains me to say this, but Mike Miller is a hell of a player. That's why I'm so pissed that he self-limits his game. If he just shot more, he could be one of the best swing men in the league. Unfortunately, he is hell-bent on being the next Magic Johnson when the the next Ray Allen would be more appropriate.

Long story short, we have way too many 1 dimensional players on this team. There's only 1 position where it's OK to be that way - Center. A true defensive Center would be welcome, and allow Al and Kevin to play in their natural position. We need a better PG, SG, and C if we are ever going to move forward. That's why this is my dream draft:

1st pick (top 4) - Hasheem Thabeet - I have been a huge Thabeet detractor for a long time, but after seeing him lately, I'm willing to go with him. He should get better and better, and we desperately need someone to protect the paint.

Next pick (mid first round) - Ty Lawson - Great floor general that we need, excellent defender to help shore up our laughable perimeter D, and his outside shot has noticeably improved this year. I feel very strongly that he is this year's Deron Williams.

We take the other 2 1st round picks (and an expiring contract) and get Caron Butler from Washington to be our 2 guard. Not only do we get a great player, but his nickname is TUFF JUICE...I love it.

So we start next year with this lineup:

PG: Ty Lawson, SG: Tuff Juice, SF: MIke Miller, PF: Big Al, C: Thabeet

Now that's a lineup that can score, and actually stop people. Then, here is our bench:

PG: Bassy, SG: Foye, SF: Gomes, PF: Love, C: Collins / Random Free Agent

Then we have our specialists:

Corey Brewer is our D specialist, Rhino as the new Gary Trent.

Coaching Situation

mutleyil — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 05:08:52 -0000

So...let me get this straight.

Jon Gruden has won a Super Bowl.

Mike Shanahan has won two Super Bowls.

Bill Cowher has won a Super Bowl.

They're all avaliable, and in "F YOU former franchise" mode, so they want to kick some ass. But we're gonna stick with Chili? I think I want to vomit.

This is like a porn star walking up to you and asking if she can "practice" on you, but we're gonna say "No I'm married to a frigid, asexual control freak...I'm good."

PLEASE ZYGI...DITCH THE FAKER FOR A REAL COACH!!!

An Irreverent Guide to the Minnesota Vikings vs. Houston Texans

mutleyil — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 17:29:43 -0000

As I was analyzing and thinking about this week’s matchup with Houston, I realized something. In many ways, the Houston Texans are us. And we are the Houston Texans.

Except for the weird fascination with longhorn cattle…. Not sure I understand what’s up with that. As any Minnesotan can tell you, anything with a set of horns that long should have a blonde lady named Helga attached to them. Anything else is just craziness.

Cultural issues notwithstanding, let’s examine our similarities:

We both have Quarterback problems

We both have flawed, yet talented defenses

We both have highly touted Offensive Coordinators as Head Coaches

We would both be ecstatic if we could trade said crappy Head Coaches for each other

In the midst of disappointing seasons, fans of both teams can take hope in one fact:

You will make the playoffs this year

You will miss the playoffs this year and the coach you love to hate will be terminated with extreme prejudice at the end of the year

Personally, I prefer winning. On the back of our last game against the Bears, I can no longer say Brad Childress is a completely incompetent clown. He worked his way all the way up to mediocre by opening up the playbook and…GASP…throwing on first down!!! Of course, Childress himself once said “About the worst thing you can be called is mediocre” so take my “compliment” for what it is.

One thing I have learned in the last three years of the Childress regime is that past performance is NOT indicative of future results. There have been many times when I thought we turned a corner, only to come out and lay an egg the next week…i.e last year’s Redskins game. I’m giving you one more chance Brad, which is about 10 more chances than anyone else around here has given you. DON’T SCREW IT UP!

VIKES 31

HOUSTON 17

SKOL Vikings, let’s win this game!!!!