Wilkins

[Vindicater]

If we do end up moving Gomes this offseason do you guys think it might be beneficial to sign Wilkins to a 2-3 year vet deal?

Obviouslly this would happen if he doesnt get a better offer from another team and would also be left till after any big signings were completed.

I just think he could fit into that role alot of us see for Gomes. As a nice experianced vet to come off the bench as the 7th or 8th man.

Obviouslly if Gomes is not moved then this should not happen.

[Klomp]

I personally like him in the starting lineup if we can't find another wing.....he is solid and knows his role on the team...doesn't try to do too much...A better offensive Trenton Hassell....

[shrink]

1 year, and only after we have found no better use for our financial flexibility.

That said, except for today's FG%, you can often tell he's the vet out there in games.

[Klomp]

1 year, and only after we have found no better use for our financial flexibility.

That said, except for today's FG%, you can often tell he's the vet out there in games.

Today's FG% was't from a poor shot selection....many of his misses were on tip-in tries at the rim.

[Vindicater]

1 year, and only after we have found no better use for our financial flexibility.

That said, except for today's FG%, you can often tell he's the vet out there in games.

I understand your point Shrink, and I know you love having heaps of cap space. But what do you think we should actually spend that cap space on?

Even after we sign a big name free agent, or trade for a high salary player we will still need to fill the roster out. You don't do that by offering single year deals.

Look at all the championship teams, most of them have solid roleplayers who are signed to 2 or 3 year deals so they can grow with the stars.

I'm not saying that Wilkins is the roleplayer vet we should go for, but he seems a solid player who is the right age group tobe in the leadership group moving forward.

[shrink]

Two things.

First, while I like Damian Wilkins, we didn't trade to get him in the first place. He's the type of "ok" NBA player who has an "ok" NBA career. The NBA is not filled with 28-33 year old "ok" players. The stars stick, and the league has many players on guaranteed rookie deals that teams cling to hope that a guy will become a star while they wait until they are out from his contract, and the rest are filled with rotation guys/fifth starters like Wilkins. Sicne he is not a desired commodity, he can be easily replaced, and signed to contracts that will fit our finances best. If Wilkins doesn't want a one-year deal, there are plenty that do.

Second, one year is especially important this season, because of the impending CBA and potential lock-out. The CBA is going to have to undergo drastic changes in revenue sharing, and the owners are also going to request major financial concessions from the players to fight the losses they've accrued for 2008-2011. Teams will want to avoid obligations that run past 2011 for any but key players.

I think this summer you're going to see many players like Wilkins signing one year deals, and we'll follow suit.

[Krapinsky]

1 year, and only after we have found no better use for our financial flexibility.

That said, except for today's FG%, you can often tell he's the vet out there in games.

I understand your point Shrink, and I know you love having heaps of cap space. But what do you think we should actually spend that cap space on?

Even after we sign a big name free agent, or trade for a high salary player we will still need to fill the roster out. You don't do that by offering single year deals.

Look at all the championship teams, most of them have solid roleplayers who are signed to 2 or 3 year deals so they can grow with the stars.

I'm not saying that Wilkins is the roleplayer vet we should go for, but he seems a solid player who is the right age group tobe in the leadership group moving forward.

At this point is his career there isn't a market for his services. At anything greater than 1 year we would simply be bidding against ourselves. Why sign him for three years if we don't have to? He could tear an ACL and we would still have to pay him. A number of players could fill that role. Remember Carney lat year? Everyone fell for him, but the reality was, he couldn't get playing time for any other team except the wing needy Wolves.

[moss_is_1]

He has been a nice player in the lineup, but I'm sure Brewer will see extended minutes next season if he becomes more consistent with his good games. Plus adding some sort of wing in the draft, and Ellington getting more minutes as well. I wouldn't mind a small 1 year deal for him.

[horaceworthy]

I don't see us keeping Wilkins around. We should be adding 2 wings this offseason, whether through the draft or an FA/draft combo, then we've got Brewer, Ellington and possibly Gomes to work in. I like Wilkins, he works hard, I just don't see a place for him.

[Slum_Dillinger]

Love him, but we Dr.K said it best. No need to bid against ourselves. If we lock him up for a one year where he can help groom some young wings, play solid backup minutes, be a steady presence in the locker room and fill in if/when we have injuries than I would love to have him back. But like with Carney, it wont leave me heartbroken if we dont keep him.

[moss_is_1]

I think Jonny Flynn said that he was one of the biggest guys that help him out in the locker room.

[skorff26]

1 year, and only after we have found no better use for our financial flexibility.

That said, except for today's FG%, you can often tell he's the vet out there in games.

I understand your point Shrink, and I know you love having heaps of cap space. But what do you think we should actually spend that cap space on?

Even after we sign a big name free agent, or trade for a high salary player we will still need to fill the roster out. You don't do that by offering single year deals.

Look at all the championship teams, most of them have solid roleplayers who are signed to 2 or 3 year deals so they can grow with the stars.

I'm not saying that Wilkins is the roleplayer vet we should go for, but he seems a solid player who is the right age group tobe in the leadership group moving forward.

You first get the all-star players and then you lock up the roleplayers. You can find roleplayers all over the place, you get your all-stars first and find roleplayers that compliment your stars not the other way around.

[Vindicater]

1 year, and only after we have found no better use for our financial flexibility.

That said, except for today's FG%, you can often tell he's the vet out there in games.

I understand your point Shrink, and I know you love having heaps of cap space. But what do you think we should actually spend that cap space on?

Even after we sign a big name free agent, or trade for a high salary player we will still need to fill the roster out. You don't do that by offering single year deals.

Look at all the championship teams, most of them have solid roleplayers who are signed to 2 or 3 year deals so they can grow with the stars.

I'm not saying that Wilkins is the roleplayer vet we should go for, but he seems a solid player who is the right age group tobe in the leadership group moving forward.

You first get the all-star players and then you lock up the roleplayers. You can find roleplayers all over the place, you get your all-stars first and find roleplayers that compliment your stars not the other way around.

If you read my original post I said we would not sign him untill after we looked into the bigger signings. I also said we would not get into a bidding war for his services and allow him to look elsewhere first.

If he is able to be signed to a cheap vet minimum 2 year deal I think we would be silly not too as he brings all the intangibales you want at the 7/8/9 spot in your rotation and he is the right age to grwo wth the youngr "stars"