ImageImageImage

Is McHale Running the Grizzlies?

Moderators: Domejandro, Worm Guts, Calinks

User avatar
RD&KG2
Rookie
Posts: 1,019
And1: 2
Joined: Mar 31, 2003
Location: MN/IA

Re: Is McHale Running the Grizzlies? 

Post#41 » by RD&KG2 » Thu Jul 2, 2009 7:58 pm

bruceallen61 wrote:
RD&KG2 wrote:If this is turning into a Zach Randolph - Al Jefferson debate, forget about money, contracts and all of that, ask every Realgm member who they would rather have and you would get one answer of Zach Randolph (if he has a Realgm account that is).


The difference between the two is that you'd need a prybar to get jefferson and his great long term deal to get him from the wolves. Where as Zach is obtained for virtually nothing and has very little impact on their finances. He does very similar things but will cost a little more each season, and probably won't be a long term solution MEM isn't going to use that cap space on anything else, AND they still have capspace this and NEXT year left over.


Please read the bolded text.
"First of all I'd like to thank myself for all the hard work I put in"--Carmello Anthony.
User avatar
SSUBluesman
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,268
And1: 1,534
Joined: Nov 02, 2004

Re: Is McHale Running the Grizzlies? 

Post#42 » by SSUBluesman » Thu Jul 2, 2009 8:03 pm

bruceallen61 wrote:
ssublesman wrote:That lineup looks awfully familiar...hmm, let me see if I can place it...
Camby
Randolph
Thornton
Gordon
Davis


How is that lineup remotely similar? Davis, Camby, Kaman, and Randolph eat up all their capspace. Even talent/fit wise the players don't have similar games. Let alone the Grizz have way more in terms of flexible cheap contracts and still have the ability to further use their remaining cap this and next year.

ssublesman wrote:So you have no problems with:

Trading Al for Randolph straight up.


Did I ever say this. eyeroll?

ssublesman wrote:So you have no problems with:

Trading our lineup(and assets) for the Grizz lineup(and assets).


I never even remotely implied any implications of talent between the 2 teams. We have more valuable long term assets. Al Jefferson is locked into a long term deal that helps cap. We have players earlier in their rookie deals and similar cap situations even after the trade. I'm sorry you can't understand the difference between the two situations. The griz had a huge chunk of asset in cap space and they used some of it to fill a huge hole on the team.

Let's put it in terms you can understand: (You should at least attempt to disregard anything besides talent in this)

The Grizz need what Randolph can do. There are a handful of 20/10 bigs in the league. Howard, Al, Bosh, Duncan, Yao, Randolph. I think that's it?

There's probably a handful of other guys who are close. Gasol, Boozer, Jamison, Lee, maybe some others I'm forgetting. But that will be our list.

Here's the price...
Howard, - unavailable
Al, - unavailable more or less
Bosh, - maybe available in a s&t extended for mayo + Thabeet + pick?!?
Duncan, - unavailable
Yao. - unavailable
Gasol, - unavailable
Boozer, - something similar to bosh package
Jamison, - probably expirings, but he just got a long term deal and is more range jump shooter
Lee - as far as knick fans are concerned lee s&t = rubio
Randolph - 8m cap space this year, 17m capspace next year

Most of the pure capspace deals are for 1 year salary dump and picks. The grizz still have enough space to do these sort of deals this year if they choose. They will also have enough to dabble in the FA market in 2010 or get another FA this year. They like MN won't be looking at a max FA in 2010 so 10-15m in capspace should be more than enough to get a player that fills whatever need they have after they audition a post player next to thabeet and their backcourt core.

ssublesman wrote:I really didn't read much further, as you clearly didn't watch much (any) of the team last year with your comments about Conley, and the statement about chemistry is pure idiocy.


yawn. You did nothing aside from blanket statements and vague references, Way to go champ.


Camby is a defensive big with no post game, Thornton is a single-minded slashing SF, Gordon a dynamic young SG, and Davis a PG who needs the ball to be effective. Sounds an awful lot like that Grizz lineup you were bragging up...but better.

Of course the main point is that the lineup looks good on paper...very good in fact. And it got the Clips the number 1 pick.

Of course you didn't say it. That's my point. For all your talk about how Randolph is "comparable" to Al, if you had to you wouldn't make the switch. Essentially I'm calling you out on how you don't even believe your own nonsense.

Oh sure, Randolph would fit a need...IF THEY WERE CONTENDING. Which they're not, and won't be. They're rebuilding, which means it's foolish to add someone who is going to make you good enough to stay out of the top 5 but not good enough to get into the playoffs. Then again, like I said the Clips did get Griffin...

I thought it was pretty clear: you are commenting on a team that you didn't watch, which calls into question your statements about said team. Your dismissal of the role chemistry plays on a basketball team calls into question any understanding or knowledge you would have as to how the game actually works.
Naz Reid.
User avatar
revprodeji
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 22,388
And1: 8
Joined: Dec 25, 2002
Location: Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought
Contact:

Re: Is McHale Running the Grizzlies? 

Post#43 » by revprodeji » Thu Jul 2, 2009 8:15 pm

Word is Iverson might join them too.
http://www.timetoshop.org
Weight management, Sports nutrition and more...
User avatar
Tiggo Bitties
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,507
And1: 0
Joined: May 03, 2005

Re: Is McHale Running the Grizzlies? 

Post#44 » by Tiggo Bitties » Thu Jul 2, 2009 8:40 pm

Mayoistooslow wrote:For the last few years, I strongly envied the Grizzlies as the team that was doing the right things, making the right moves, and becoming a powerhouse. Aldridge, Roy, Bayless, Oden, Rudy. Now that Oden hasn't panned out (should've taken Durant), Rudy is upset, and now the Randolph trade, I'm very much back in favor of the way my Wolves do business.



LOL WUT
the_bruce
Analyst
Posts: 3,536
And1: 57
Joined: Jun 01, 2007

Re: Is McHale Running the Grizzlies? 

Post#45 » by the_bruce » Thu Jul 2, 2009 9:49 pm

SSUBluesman wrote:Camby is a defensive big with no post game, Thornton is a single-minded slashing SF, Gordon a dynamic young SG, and Davis a PG who needs the ball to be effective. Sounds an awful lot like that Grizz lineup you were bragging up...but better.


Really? I know I totally said Grizz > LAL, and a bunch of other stuff. I was bragging. I mean those are my direct words. Grizz = CHAMPS. Way to imply or make up things that were never said. I think you need to work out your reading comprehension.

SSUBluesman wrote:Of course you didn't say it. That's my point. For all your talk about how Randolph is "comparable" to Al, if you had to you wouldn't make the switch. Essentially I'm calling you out on how you don't even believe your own nonsense.


You can't imply a point because someone doesn''t say something. That's completely devoid of logic.

I wouldn’t make the switch because the SITUATIONS aren’t even REMOTELY comparable between teams. Things are more complex than simply player A is better than Player B. If you could actually look past the voices in your head and stop jumping to conclusions you might be able to make sense of more complex concepts.

SSUBluesman wrote:Oh sure, Randolph would fit a need...IF THEY WERE CONTENDING. Which they're not, and won't be. They're rebuilding, which means it's foolish to add someone who is going to make you good enough to stay out of the top 5 but not good enough to get into the playoffs. Then again, like I said the Clips did get Griffin...


If you think it is good PR to run a team devoid of talent, and offer a product on the floor that sucks repeatedly for YEARS then great. My point is I think the changes for the Grizz are enough to make the team AT LEAST competitive next year and DOES NOT hurt flexibility over the next 2 years.

A few extra lotto balls doesn’t guarantee a star.

SSUBluesman wrote:I thought it was pretty clear: you are commenting on a team that you didn't watch, which calls into question your statements about said team. Your dismissal of the role chemistry plays on a basketball team calls into question any understanding or knowledge you would have as to how the game actually works.


ONCE AGAIN. I never said the chemistry doesn’t play a role. Of course you can make up whatever you like as it seems to be your forte, but you certainly proved to me a few things about your character or lack thereof.

cheers!
jlogic20
Junior
Posts: 443
And1: 0
Joined: Jul 18, 2004

Re: Is McHale Running the Grizzlies? 

Post#46 » by jlogic20 » Thu Jul 2, 2009 9:56 pm

i guarantee the griz win the season series vs the wolves..
younggunsmn
Head Coach
Posts: 6,740
And1: 2,566
Joined: May 28, 2007
Location: Hiding from the thought police.

Re: Is McHale Running the Grizzlies? 

Post#47 » by younggunsmn » Thu Jul 2, 2009 10:26 pm

forget the players involved,
the griz just handed a rival (LAC) 17 million in 2010 cap space and cleared a logjam at the pf position for them. 17 million in 2010 cap space is worth a HELLUVA LOT MORE than zach randolph. Had they included jaric you could make an argument justifying the risk, but this is just highway robbery. There will probably be 2 dozen free agents who are better than him next year, and after re-signing gay the griz now will have ZERO cap room next year. So this is the team you're stuck with, like it or not. Z-Bo got suspended last year for sucker-punching an opponent, if it gives you any indication of the kind of character you're getting.

The clips HAD TO MOVE Randolph. They were the desperate ones, not memphis. Or maybe you believe z-bo would have been more than thrilled to play 15 minutes a game behind griffin for the next 2 years.

Milsap and Lee are much better fits for memphis because they don't need the ball to be effective.
Had they succesfully gone after milsap, they could have weakend Utah and OKC (who will probably get him cheaper now).

Iverson is about the worst player they could sign. Talk about killing any growth or progress in mayo and conley.

This short-term fixing philosophy is what undid mchale year after year, and it won't work any better for the grizz.

I guarantee in 2 years you will regret this move, if not sooner, and I guarantee z-bo misses at least 20 games this year. This still doesn't make them a playoff team in a loaded west, and the bottom of the lottery is the worst place for a team to be.
User avatar
big3_8_19_21
RealGM
Posts: 12,113
And1: 421
Joined: Jan 17, 2005

Re: Is McHale Running the Grizzlies? 

Post#48 » by big3_8_19_21 » Thu Jul 2, 2009 10:30 pm

Even giving Lee 10 million a year would have been better than this.
Thriving on mediocrity since '89.
User avatar
Foye
Club Captain- German Soccer
Posts: 25,055
And1: 3,612
Joined: Jul 29, 2008
Location: Frankfurt
 

Re: Is McHale Running the Grizzlies? 

Post#49 » by Foye » Thu Jul 2, 2009 10:43 pm

jlogic20 wrote:i guarantee the griz win the season series vs the wolves..


Yeah, maybe...but who else does not? I guess it will be hard to find many teams who lose the series against us next season :lol:
GopherIt!
RealGM
Posts: 10,599
And1: 24,742
Joined: Oct 20, 2007
Location: bird watching
Contact:

Re: Is McHale Running the Grizzlies? 

Post#50 » by GopherIt! » Thu Jul 2, 2009 11:07 pm

If Mem wins more games because of this that is good for the Wolves, more lotto balls coming our way.
B Calrissian
Head Coach
Posts: 6,928
And1: 17
Joined: Sep 22, 2007

Re: Is McHale Running the Grizzlies? 

Post#51 » by B Calrissian » Thu Jul 2, 2009 11:35 pm

revprodeji wrote:Word is Iverson might join them too.


Being an Iverson fan, I would hate for that to happen. Just go back to Brown.

How on earth would there be enough shots for a line up of Mayo/Iverson/Gay/Randolph/Gasol?
the_bruce
Analyst
Posts: 3,536
And1: 57
Joined: Jun 01, 2007

Re: Is McHale Running the Grizzlies? 

Post#52 » by the_bruce » Fri Jul 3, 2009 12:01 am

17 million in 2010 cap space is worth a HELLUVA LOT MORE than zach randolph.


You can't actually quantify this yet. The fact that more teams will have cap making cap less valuable since it will be a resource many teams have. You can say that with the new nba economy contracts will be less lucrative making it so players don't get contracts that big. Thus making a big difference between his former contract and new cap friendlier contract in terms of production, but you don't account for several factors.

1) How the grizz would use this cap. Would they really be able to offer a max contract to a player and have that player take the contract above their current team? Doubtful.

2) The impact of more teams with caproom weighted against potential free agents available who may or may not be a better fit than Zach. The potential to use the cap in trades for other assets dwindles as more teams will have cap available to trade for picks. Making it less valuable.

3) The value of Capspace in 2011 when zach and jaric come off the books after other teams have maxed out their salary and need to get under the cap. David West? Maybe Noah, Horford, or Brendan Wright take it up to the next level?

4) Availability to use Zachs contract in a s&t for another star at current economic rates. e.g. Minor salary dump for outgoing team with 1 player who has a garbage post 2010 contract and a resigned star more suitable for the grizz. zach + small asset for new pf at resonable contract + salary dump contract

There will probably be 2 dozen free agents who are better than him next year

Really. I'd like to see that list. If we are going to be realistic there are probably 10-20 "better" all of whom would probably goto other teams first or more than likely their original teams. Better yet I'd look for better free agents @ the 4 because that's what the Grizz need. Off the top of my head I think its Bosh, Boozer, & Dirk.

, and after re-signing gay the griz now will have ZERO cap room next year.

Untrue. I spit balled it in my head but even if they give Gay ~10m yr I think they come in around ~50m.

The clips HAD TO MOVE Randolph. They were the desperate ones, not memphis. Or maybe you believe z-bo would have been more than thrilled to play 15 minutes a game behind griffin for the next 2 years.

The clips didn't have to do anything, players with bigger contracts have sat for longer. I'd love for you to conjecture what I believe, go ahead and do so.

There was probably a reason Jarics contract wasn't attached as it would have worked had the team not used cap. I think the grizz are far more shrewd then anyone is giving them credit. The grizz will then have 24m falling off the books in 2011 and probably 30m in cap when nobody is likely to have cap, making cap more valuable and a core of conley, mayo, Gay, & Thabeet. Still enough to give an entertaining product to a potential new buyer, still young enough of a core to build on and solid caproom each of the next 3 years.

I guarantee in 2 years you will regret this move, if not sooner, and I guarantee z-bo misses at least 20 games this year. This still doesn't make them a playoff team in a loaded west, and the bottom of the lottery is the worst place for a team to be.


It's not like I have any say, or even like the griz.

Can I get odds on Zbo playing 62 or more games? I'd take it even money pretty quickly. I'd even take odds on the grizz win total this season if someone was up for it.

I think MEM will be very competitive next season. Even if you don't like Randolph he will have an impact on the court. Even in a small sample from last year on LAC.

LAC last year..
Without Z-Bo in lineup
6 - 37

With Z-Bo in lineup
13 - 26

It goes way beyond the simple impact of 1 player on the court. Teams will be forced to prep for additional defensive schemes against the griz something they didn't have to do last year. Teams will have to be prepared for thabeet and less easy buckets in the paint.

We can all disagree on the value of this move, The value of players (I hate Zbo), but we shouldn't act like we know more of the Griz big picture. That team has other concerns aside from players, contracts, cap space, etc. They also have basketball analytic tools far beyond what most of us have access to and a team of personel dedicated to analyzing the data. There is certainly a reason they didn't bindle jaric into the deal, because by all accounts they could have.
younggunsmn
Head Coach
Posts: 6,740
And1: 2,566
Joined: May 28, 2007
Location: Hiding from the thought police.

Re: Is McHale Running the Grizzlies? 

Post#53 » by younggunsmn » Fri Jul 3, 2009 2:24 am

bruce I have no idea why you spend so much time and effort defending this move.

Zach Randolph has MAJOR NEGATIVE TRADE VALUE. Do you not understand this?
Add Jaric to the deal AT A MINIMUM to make it fair.

The grizz will be at 46+ million minimum, plus their 2 draft pick holds next summer, BEFORE they sign Rudy Gay. your spitballing is inaccurate. they effectively capped themselves out next summer.
The Clips would have been at 53 million salary committed in 2010 before the trade, now they will be at 36 million plus draft pick cap holds.
Enabling that huge of a swing has ENORMOUS trade value, far more than Zach Randolph is worth.

in the summer of 2011 they will also have to re-sign conley and marc gasol, with mayo following the next year. 2011 cap room argument is ludicrous.

This move is OWNER-DRIVEN, just like drafting a backup center 2nd overall over a trade down was OWNER DRIVEN, just like the Pau Gasol trade was OWNER-DRIVEN. Their owner is an idiot who meddles in their affairs far worse than Taylor ever did.

I loved their young core of mayo/gay/marc gasol before this offseason, but they have not added players who compliment those guys, they added a black hole and longtime cancer instead. I was rooting for this team until the horrible moves they made this offseason. At best they win 40 games, so what that won't make the playoffs in the west.
the_bruce
Analyst
Posts: 3,536
And1: 57
Joined: Jun 01, 2007

Re: Is McHale Running the Grizzlies? 

Post#54 » by the_bruce » Fri Jul 3, 2009 11:35 pm

younggunsmn wrote:bruce I have no idea why you spend so much time and effort defending this move.

Zach Randolph has MAJOR NEGATIVE TRADE VALUE. Do you not understand this?
Add Jaric to the deal AT A MINIMUM to make it fair.

The grizz will be at 46+ million minimum, plus their 2 draft pick holds next summer, BEFORE they sign Rudy Gay. your spitballing is inaccurate. they effectively capped themselves out next summer.
The Clips would have been at 53 million salary committed in 2010 before the trade, now they will be at 36 million plus draft pick cap holds.
Enabling that huge of a swing has ENORMOUS trade value, far more than Zach Randolph is worth.

in the summer of 2011 they will also have to re-sign conley and marc gasol, with mayo following the next year. 2011 cap room argument is ludicrous.

This move is OWNER-DRIVEN, just like drafting a backup center 2nd overall over a trade down was OWNER DRIVEN, just like the Pau Gasol trade was OWNER-DRIVEN. Their owner is an idiot who meddles in their affairs far worse than Taylor ever did.

I loved their young core of mayo/gay/marc gasol before this offseason, but they have not added players who compliment those guys, they added a black hole and longtime cancer instead. I was rooting for this team until the horrible moves they made this offseason. At best they win 40 games, so what that won't make the playoffs in the west.


They are by no means capped out this year or next and my spitballing of this years cap was fairly accurate. In 2010 they won't be "max", but they won't pursue a max FA anyway. They will also have 2 contracts & various picks/young assets to work a s&t if necessary to make up for lost cap. Which I doubt they do as the owner is attempting to stay as flexible as possible.

This year they should be at: 48.8m
Next year they will be at: 50m (with rudy resigned @10m, & their 2 2009 picks)
In 2011: somewhere around 20m capspace(w\ a resigned conley, gasol, gay, 2 2009 draft picks, & mayo on rookie contract)

I never denied Randolphs negative trade value, but you have to take into account situational factors with regards to capped monetary value. I’m debating the situational aspects in regards to a players value vs salary cap.

First you must determine what a fair price for Randolph would be per year. I think most teams would be delighted for Randolph @12m/yr. That’s a fair estimate imo.
In 2009 he will cost 3m more
In 2010 he will cost 5m more

You must also determine the actual value of capspace in 2010 in relation to the value of player talent and contracts. There will be plenty of teams with cap space in 2010. This actually lessens the buying power of the cap space since more cap space is available through the league. So whatever the griz cap space ends up being in 2010 whether it be 10m, 5m, 1m. The actual buying power of that money is offset by the flood of available cash.

Now let us consider a couple of factors. Even when pursuing a 2nd tier FA the grizz will probably need to overpay by %10-20, just like MN. I think that’s a fair estimate. There is also the fact that there will be many other teams with said cap space. This again will lessen the buying power and produce more competition between teams and free agents. I don’t have a crystal ball but again I’d guess that the buying power of that cap space will decrease the value somewhere between 10-20%. The downturn in the economy may cancel out this effect, but who knows.

So here’s your example:
Free Agent A aquires interest of several teams. We will say he’s hedo level and for simplicities sake say the contract he wants is going to average 10m a year. Fair enough imo. The problem is that there’s more teams willing to make this sort of contract next year so that 10m, might become 11-12m between 2 favorable free agent destinations. But what if one of those teams is a less favorable free agent destination like MEM? That 11-12m becomes 12-14m, plus the long term contract the team was just locked into for 5 years. That contract also typically isn’t flat as it will increase each year thus further impacting future cap and flexibility.

So now we have a few numbers. Lets recap 2010.
2010 Randolph on court value: 12m (though I’m sure you could debate this)
2010 Randolph is overpayed: 5m (17m)
A free agent could cost: 12-14m in 2010

So if we compared Randolph to potential 2010 free agent. The Grizz are overpaying for Randolph somewhere between 3-5m vs talent they would receive if they kept the cap space, but they maintain the use of future cap flexibility. In 2011 cap space will once again become more valuable as less teams will have it and they will have plenty of it even with the resigning of their youth so it really isn’t a ridiculous argument.

So now we have 2 numbers:
2010 Randolph overpayment vs a fair contract value: 5m
2010 Randolph overpayment value vs a 2nd tier 2010 Free Agent: 3-5m

Then you need to factor in the value of what he fills on the team. They needed post scoring and they also have Thabeet to cover up some of his defensive liability. This is something that is nearly impossible to put value on. When you look at some historical need filling transactions in the NBA teams always tend to overpay. Kidd to DAL. PHX cap space for picks. ORL signing of Rashad. Those all in retrospect seem like vast overpayment because they have long term impact.

So in terms of filling the post scoring role even with the overpayment of around ~5m I don’t think it’s a bad fit at all. They could have done much worse and limited financial flexibility if they pursued Lee or Millisap.

All of that being said I never said that it would be a good move for other teams, but for a small market team with an obvious need it really isn’t that bad. This is one of those situations where it doesn’t matter what other teams perceived trade value of a player is and it isn’t really fair to judge the trade value on that fact.

I do think they could have bundled Jaric in the trade as I previously stated mostly because that would have been the best offer the clips would receive but for whatever reason they decided not to. I think they plan to use Jaric as a primary backup @ 1-3, which would cost them a similar amount to 3 primary backups @ 1-3. This saves them roster spots and potential long term contracts. They will end up taking shots with other types of players instead of committing 2m a year to 2-3 various backups on 2-3 year deals.

I'm not exactly sure why it is a problem or how you are relating to this trade being owner driven as you didn't list the benefits of it to the owner. I think the benefits are long term flexibility and you can't really blame him if he wants to make the team appeal to a new buyer.

On the clips end. They got an incredible deal and it sucks for the rest of the league that they get a get out of jail free card on his contract. Even with Jaric included it would have been a steal on their end. But the same thing was said when Randolph was in NYK. It was said they'd never get out from under his contract and somehow they did.
JMillott
Pro Prospect
Posts: 963
And1: 32
Joined: Apr 07, 2008

Re: Is McHale Running the Grizzlies? 

Post#55 » by JMillott » Sat Jul 4, 2009 5:51 pm

Zach Randolph may very well be a 20/10 PF but he doesn't do anything other then put up meaningless stats. He isn't efficent by any stretch of the word and he is not even a reasonably solid defensive player.

Giving up raw cap space to have this guy is beyond (Please Use More Appropriate Word), doing it on a team with a bunch of young players for him to lead down the wrong path is even worse.

Return to Minnesota Timberwolves