Page 1 of 2
Hollinger
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 3:51 pm
by Twolves98
Minnesota Timberwolves
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insider/ ... ers-100727He explains no real reasons we had a bad offseason...
Just a warning for the futureRealGM Forum Policies wrote:As stated in the above forum rules, users shall not upload, post or otherwise make available on RealGM.com any material protected by copyright, trademark, or other proprietary right. Users shall be solely liable for any damage resulting from any infringement of copyrights, proprietary rights, or any other harm resulting from such a submission. In simpler terms, no Insider or similar articles from subscription services can be posted. Newspapers, magazines and other online news articles are allowed.
-Klomp
Re: Hollinger
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 3:58 pm
by Esohny
Shrug. It's Hollinger. He sucks slightly less than Bill Simmons.
I'm sure that the Wolves just happened to score really low in a completely arbitrary "Offseason Rating System" that he made up while taking a deuce.
Re: Hollinger
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 3:59 pm
by Klomp
Just a warning for the futureRealGM Forum Policies wrote:As stated in the above forum rules, users shall not upload, post or otherwise make available on RealGM.com any material protected by copyright, trademark, or other proprietary right. Users shall be solely liable for any damage resulting from any infringement of copyrights, proprietary rights, or any other harm resulting from such a submission. In simpler terms, no Insider or similar articles from subscription services can be posted. Newspapers, magazines and other online news articles are allowed.
-Klomp
Re: Hollinger
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:00 pm
by shrink
Thanks for posting this - it was an interesting read. Its fun to see the extremists on one side balance out the extreme apologists here. Not every move Kahn has made is bad. But that does not mean he hasn't made some bad ones.
A team can have an overall goal, like rebuilding, but it needs to be a balanced approach, since you also need to maintain a product that ticketholders can still find some reason to watch. A move on one side (for example, adding Ridnour) doesn't mean that the overall plan isn't in an opposite direction. If you get one 30 year old PG, that does not mean your entire direction has to be nabbing 30 year olds or PG's.
Re: Hollinger
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:04 pm
by shrink
Klomp, can you jog my memory on the rules, or tell me I'm completely dreaming this up ...?
I was under the impression that you could quote a small percentage (20%) of a source, as long as you credited the author and provided a link to the article as a whole. Is that true? Or is every bit copy-writed, and we should be talking about what they have to say without any direct quotes?
Re: Hollinger
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:09 pm
by Worm Guts
shrink wrote:Klomp, can you jog my memory on the rules, or tell me I'm completely dreaming this up ...?
I was under the impression that you could quote a small percentage (20%) of a source, as long as you credited the author and provided a link to the article as a whole. Is that true? Or is every bit copy-writed, and we should be talking about what they have to say without any direct quotes?
You can quote articles, but you can't copy and paste paid for information. At all.
Re: Hollinger
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:10 pm
by Master Amino
Yep, and acquiring a 2nd overall pick a few years removed for 2nd rounders means absolutely nothing...
Hatehs gonna hate.
Re: Hollinger
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:13 pm
by Klomp
Worm Guts wrote:shrink wrote:Klomp, can you jog my memory on the rules, or tell me I'm completely dreaming this up ...?
I was under the impression that you could quote a small percentage (20%) of a source, as long as you credited the author and provided a link to the article as a whole. Is that true? Or is every bit copy-writed, and we should be talking about what they have to say without any direct quotes?
You can quote articles, but you can't copy and paste paid for information. At all.
Bingo. Look back at the last sentence of the block I quoted from the Forum Policies.
Re: Hollinger
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:14 pm
by shrink
So 100% of a free article can be posted?
Re: Hollinger
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:15 pm
by Worm Guts
Nope, only 3 paragraphs.
Re: Hollinger
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:27 pm
by Dewey
Perception based on personnal speculation ...
We also need to keep in mind the draft lottery has had a direct impact on some teams look like losers and some winners ... I'd like to see Hollinger try to make chicken salad out of chicken $#!%. he would fold like a baby.
Take that ONE players away from most teams in the league and you have ... well ... Miami.
Re: Hollinger
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 5:13 pm
by Twolves98
Just a warning for the future
RealGM Forum Policies wrote:
As stated in the above forum rules, users shall not upload, post or otherwise make available on RealGM.com any material protected by copyright, trademark, or other proprietary right. Users shall be solely liable for any damage resulting from any infringement of copyrights, proprietary rights, or any other harm resulting from such a submission. In simpler terms, no Insider or similar articles from subscription services can be posted. Newspapers, magazines and other online news articles are allowed.
-Klomp
Top
Alright thanks Klomp I didn't know about this and will remember next time
Re: Hollinger
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 7:00 pm
by Dale Cooper
Either way, Hollinger basically put what I've been saying. To paraphrase (that's allowed, right?):
-Rebuilding yet signing Ridnour and trading first-rounder for Webster
-Darko getting 20 mil is not a value contract
-The league has too many PG's to corner the market on them like Minny is trying to do
-They aren't getting guys who fits in Rambis's system
-They take Wes Johnson over Cousins due to character, then add Darko and Beasley
-Unloaded two of their three best players for cents on the dollar
-They'll suck for years
-KAHN!
Re: Hollinger
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 7:16 pm
by Esohny
Dale Cooper wrote:Either way, Hollinger basically put what I've been saying. To paraphrase (that's allowed, right?):
-Rebuilding yet signing Ridnour and trading first-rounder for Webster
-Darko getting 20 mil is not a value contract
-The league has too many PG's to corner the market on them like Minny is trying to do
-They aren't getting guys who fits in Rambis's system
-They take Wes Johnson over Cousins due to character, then add Darko and Beasley
-Unloaded two of their three best players for cents on the dollar
-They'll suck for years
-KAHN!
So, you admit that half the things you say are nonsense, and you're proud of it? Good work.
Re: Hollinger
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 7:27 pm
by Dale Cooper
No, why would you imply that? Are you one of those people who hate Hollinger and dismiss stats and think that Monta Ellis and Jonny Flynn aren't terrible players?
Re: Hollinger
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 7:41 pm
by Esohny
Monta is mediocre. Stats are fine. Flynn was a rookie who underperformed.
But stats become great when somebody creates their own magic equation and arbitrarily assigns weights to different inputs based on nothing.
Please, can you find some time to lecture on the greatness of Dave Berri? There's been a void here since the late Wolves2011 left us.
Re: Hollinger
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 7:57 pm
by horaceworthy
Dale Cooper wrote:Either way, Hollinger basically put what I've been saying. To paraphrase (that's allowed, right?):
-Rebuilding yet signing Ridnour and trading first-rounder for Webster
-Darko getting 20 mil is not a value contract
-The league has too many PG's to corner the market on them like Minny is trying to do
-They aren't getting guys who fits in Rambis's system
-They take Wes Johnson over Cousins due to character, then add Darko and Beasley
-Unloaded two of their three best players for cents on the dollar
-They'll suck for years
-KAHN!
-Rebuilding teams still acquire vets. Rebuilding doesn't mean a team only brings in guys 22 and under.
-It's not value, but it isn't so outlandish he could end up being worth it, if he can build on what he showed in his stint in MN last year.
-Nonsense on the trying to corner the market bit.
-The team that will take the floor next year is a vastly better fit for how Rambis wants to play than lasty year's group.
-They took Wes Johnson because they liked him more than Cousins. I'm not sure being stupid is any better than being a hypocrite, but it isn't like Kahn hadn't already shown a tendency to overdraft from 'Cuse.
-Sessions isn't good enough for that to matter a whole lot, although I do think he's a fringe starter/good backup. Jefferson was in part traded to open up time for a guy you've called a star and top 25 player in the league.
-Depends on if Love's as good as you think he is, what happens with Rubio and lotto luck. It's not like they hadn't sucked for years and suffered from years of mismanagement before Kahn arrived.
-Kudos on spelling his name right.
Re: Hollinger
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 8:31 pm
by Kurosawa
I've found freedom from anger and angst over what's being written and said about David Kahn and the Timberwolves. Want to know my secret? Never get upset about anything anybody writes or says, no matter how inaccurate, outrageous, biased, insulting, or off-the-wall it may be.
How am I able to be Zen and stay cool in the face of the rabid, snarling, teeth-baring pack of jackals who chew Kahn's carcass to the bone every day? One simple bit of recognition; one tiny tidbit of ultimate truth:
It will all resolve itself on the court--and this season.
This year--not next year or three years down the road--we will know whether Kahn is the shrewd (or at least competent) GM we hope he might be, or if he's the in-over-his-head idiot he's made out to be. We'll be able to tell if Rambis's system is a good one, and if Kahn has acquired the players he needs to be successful with it. We will know not by virtue of won-lost record, but by simple observation of the quality of play.
So let the jackals gnaw away. Ultimately, it's just talk. The truth shall be revealed, and it shall set us free. One way or the other.
Re: Hollinger
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 8:36 pm
by AQuintus
Honestly, in this same article, he says that the Lakers had are a loser this off season. Not because of anything they did (he actually says they improved their PG rotation), but because of what the Heat did.
It's a completely worthless article.
As for the Wolves section, Hollinger (and everyone at ESPN), needs to spend less time with Bill Simmons. They're all starting to copy his weak jokes and bad takes regarding the Wolves. Simmons at least as a (bad) reason to act the way he does (he's still extremely bitter that we wasn't a serious candidate for the Wolves' GM job). The other guys are just doing it because they're ignorant sheep.
Re: Hollinger
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 9:54 pm
by Kurosawa
Love the way Hollinger tacks a year onto Ridnour's age--calling him 30 instead of 29--just to make it sound worse.
His "cornering the point guard market" comment is hilarious. By my count, we have three point guards under contract--one of which just underwent hip surgery.
Ooops--need to remind myself that I'm all Zen about this s--t now.