RealGM

I touched on this in the CLE-MIN trade thread, but do you think that McHale is trying to follow the development pattern Danny Ainge set for the Celtics, that turned them from one of the worst teams in the league into the conference champs?

In general, the Celtics did all they could to clear salary, do poorly to get a good draft pick, and hoard youth, so they would have both the cap room and trade assets to acquire two All Stars to add to Paul Pierce. To me, MIN seems inches away from a similar position, and may be trying to institute this plan next summer. Here's the corelation, and how BOS acquired each piece:

Paul Pierce >= Al Jefferson. Both teams have a star in place.

Ray Allen (32) = Mike Miller (28)
or
Ray Allen = BOS 2007 1st + (Wally 92 yr) + Delonte West (1yr)) = MIN 2009 1st + cap space/expiring +

Rajon Rondo = Randy Foye

Posey = 2007 BOS MLE = 2009 MIN MLE? or Gomes?

BOS Team filler (Perkins, etc) = MIN team filler (Craig Smith, etc)

Garnett = Ratliff (2007 exp) + 2 young potential stars + two 1sts = Cardinal (exp) + Madsen (exp) = more potential stars + 2-3 1sts

Now clearly the more precise match-up for position would be KG for Al. Al may be able to match KG offensively and on the boards, but he has a long way to go on defense. However, it may be easier (and cheaper) to acquire in trade a Pierce-like swingman than finding another KG, so we may be a little closer. Overall, the Celtics win with defense, so we'd definitely need to improve all our players/acquisitions in that area.

Do you think McHale is trying to copy the Ainge method, and will try to bring in two big free agents? Like BOS, MIN may need to trade for the first one to make the spot appealing for the second trade to go through. You'll note neither of these acquisitions were done by signing free agents themselves, but by trading it away. I maintain it is by developing their drafted players, and by trade, not FA, that MIN will get its stars. To me, it looks like we've already started down the BOS model.

I am frankly stunned by your question. Ainge traded youth for a superstar, and he traded with us. We are now going through the long and laborious process of losing games and drafting in the lottery. You can get to the top by signing stars or growing your own. Ainge is on the first path, McHale is on the second.
Is there any part of this that's not obvious?

its pretty much what everybody does, grab as many assets as financially feasible, make a trade when an opportunity presents itself and the window is open, then tear down and repeat the process when the window shuts

the problem is when you get thrust into that nether-region because of bad trades, overpaid players, and penalties via illegal contracts for example. **** happens when you improperly evaluate what you're signing, trading for, or drafting, but no team intends to be in that situation.

IcemanMN wrote:I am frankly stunned by your question. Ainge traded youth for a superstar, and he traded with us. We are now going through the long and laborious process of losing games and drafting in the lottery. You can get to the top by signing stars or growing your own. Ainge is on the first path, McHale is on the second.
Is there any part of this that's not obvious?

I'm sure exactly what you're saying but Ainge spent 3 years losing, drafting in the lottery and accumulating young talent before he traded for Garnett and Allen. I can see the comparison.

There is definitely comparisons, no doubt about it. Any team that's rebuilding would LIKE to go the build within approach, but a lot of times that may take longer than they like or doesn't work like they like, so they take all the assets they've acquired and make a big splash. Most just don't work as well as it did for Ainge in Boston and I wouldn't recommend doing it in most cases.

Worm Guts wrote:

IcemanMN wrote:I am frankly stunned by your question. Ainge traded youth for a superstar, and he traded with us. We are now going through the long and laborious process of losing games and drafting in the lottery. You can get to the top by signing stars or growing your own. Ainge is on the first path, McHale is on the second.
Is there any part of this that's not obvious?

I'm sure exactly what you're saying but Ainge spent 3 years losing, drafting in the lottery and accumulating young talent before he traded for Garnett and Allen. I can see the comparison.

Right. Ainge went through it for 3 years and said "enough of this ****", and called his old pal McHale.

Devilzsidewalk wrote:its pretty much what everybody does, grab as many assets as financially feasible, make a trade when an opportunity presents itself and the window is open, then tear down and repeat the process when the window shut.

I guess I can see that, but then we'd have to say Boston did it to an extreme fashion, and had the greatest return on the strategy ever, going from 26th to 1st in one season.

I think most teams try to hang onto their young talent, which means that they only have access to mediocre players from other teams .. not enough to get over the hump. Win-now teams don't commit to winning now, and win-later teams don't commit to winning later. I can understand the latter a little, because the owner wants to put out a product fans will still come see, and so many teams (well, coaches or in the market, CEO's) are judged by how they've done over a short period of time. However, staying in the middle, getting middle picks, and not fixing your salary .. well .. keeps you in the middle.

BOS kept Pierce, but they threw everyone else into play, and completely commited to winning with older vets. Next season, MIN's team will all be vet expirings or young players. They'll have cap space and a suitcase full of tradable assets with young players and picks. Would MIN follow BOS' plan, trade for two elite, veteran All Stars from teams that weren't going anywhere?

the difference w/ Boston was Kevin Garnett; you can get guys like Ray Allen and Iverson, but rarely does anything close to a guy like Garnett come on the trade market. If you replace Jefferson and Gomes w/ KG, I don't think they get close. Mind you that Jefferson developed a lot in MN as a #1 option, in Boston he'd be a #3 option and his game would have suffered.

For MN to repeat would be like having Dwyane Wade and Chris Kaman come on the market at the same time, and we'd have some of our later draftpicks hit the jackpot. Boston also did uncommonly well in the draft, Gomes was a 2nd rounder and Jefferson late-lotto, and Rondo a late 1st enabled them to gamble by having a very young PG. Boston got lucky in many ways that everything worked out well all at the same time- draftpicks out-performed their positions, Ray Allen happened to come on the market at the same time getting KG to allow the trade, and they had a huge expiring at just the right juncture too.

Its mostly coincidence, I don't think you can plan all that. We can hoard picks n younguns, but we'd have to have for ex. the Boston or the Utah 1st rounder pick land sevens to have those extra legit assets that give a team the depth where you can throw 3, 4, 5 guys in a trade to land one huge star.

Foye>>>>>Rondo

lol at alot of things in this thread first Foye is no where near as talented as rondo not even close. Perkins would be the best center the wolves have ever had so I dont see him as a junk filler and is def more valuable than craig smith.

Posey is a lock down defender something gomes will only dream of being.

As usual devilz stated my thoughts, only better. Boston's situation was the rare planetary alignment of having a star that they needed to commit a winning team to, having luck in the draft, having an aging star available, and having the right combination of talent and expirings to land a superstar.

Minnesota's star is young, has only been here one season, and is committed to the plan (at least for the forseeable future). Minnesota has never been lucky in the draft. Minnesota's talent core is mostly young and unproven.

If the Wolves' front office were faced with a similar situation as Boston, I could see them jumping on it. It's just that situations like that are very rare. Most likely, we will develop our talent and add more throught the draft and trades...and hope for the best.

Tekkenlaw wrote:Rondo>>>>>Foye

fixed it for you.

Celts fan here. I say Melo is traded by the deadline. He would be a great fit next to AL. Not alot of D being played but they will win. I would give up anyone on the MIN roster except miller and Jefferson for Melo.

he'd be a huge upgrade, but I like the maturity level of the team and would rather go for lesser players like Deng that fit that mold rather than invest in Carmelo Anthony's Traveling One Man Extravaganza

I agree and have said myself that the Wolves are attempting to follow the "stockpile assets until they can cash in" strategy that worked for Ainge and the Celtics. I also agree, though, that this is a long-shot strategy for building a champ. I can see it working for building a playoff team, but unless the Wolves get very lucky it will be difficult to turn that into a title.

As Devilz pointed out, you see players on the Ray Allen/Allen Iverson/Carmelo Anthony level move every season. And if the Wolves play their cards right they could end up adding someone of that talent level through a cash-in-the-youth trade. The problem is, that the Wolves are now missing the most difficult piece to fill: the superstar. A Jefferson/Melo-type led team probably isn't winning a title. They need the addition of the Tim Duncan (draft), the Shaq (FA to Lakers, then post-prime trade to Heat), or the KG-level talent to move to the top of the heap like the Spurs, Lakers, Heat, and Celtics did. Those types of players are obviously hard to come by, and all of the elements have to come into play at the same time for it to work. It is possible, but it is a risky proposition to bank on that.