Pioneer Press: Revisiting the KG Trade

Post #1 » by **Klomp** » Wed Nov 4, 2009 7:35 am

http://www.twincities.com/timberwolves/ ... ck_check=1

OK, so not the most positive look at the trade. However, towards the end when looking towards free agency, this quote caught my attention.

"Guys around the league joke about cities they don't like to play in, and Minneapolis is not on that list," Legler said. "It's a great place to play. The franchise just has to show some growth so guys know what direction the team is heading. You have to show that somebody is making the right personnel decisions."

Post #2 » by **Calinks** » Wed Nov 4, 2009 7:53 am

klomp44 wrote:http://www.twincities.com/timberwolves/ci_13707600?nclick_check=1

OK, so not the most positive look at the trade. However, towards the end when looking towards free agency, this quote caught my attention.

"Guys around the league joke about cities they don't like to play in, and Minneapolis is not on that list," Legler said. "It's a great place to play. The franchise just has to show some growth so guys know what direction the team is heading. You have to show that somebody is making the right personnel decisions."

Then who is?

Post #3 » by **Klomp** » Wed Nov 4, 2009 8:05 am

Seattle???

I'd probably say Memphis, Sacramento, OKC, Milwaukee, Charlotte, Utah, or Toronto...

jade_hippo · Post #4 » by **jade_hippo** » Wed Nov 4, 2009 9:15 am

Salt Lake, Sacto, and OKC are probably the worst, Portland isn't great either I don't think. Toronto is a blast of a city, its like NYC but the people are nice; very diverse place. I think Toronto gets a bad rap because its across the border.

Post #5 » by **Worm Guts** » Wed Nov 4, 2009 1:28 pm

I wouldn't guess Portland, definitely Milwaukee though.

shrink · Post #6 » by **shrink** » Wed Nov 4, 2009 1:54 pm

jade_hippo wrote:Salt Lake, Sacto, and OKC are probably the worst, Portland isn't great either I don't think. Toronto is a blast of a city, its like NYC but the people are nice; very diverse place. I think Toronto gets a bad rap because its across the border.

I've heard TOR gets mentioned because of the taxes.

shrink · Post #7 » by **shrink** » Wed Nov 4, 2009 2:14 pm

Regarding the article, this guy doesn't have a clue. Check this out:

Ray Richardson wrote: Garnett was 31 when Wolves owner Glen Taylor gave then-vice president Kevin McHale permission to make the trade with the Celtics. Taylor was paying Garnett $26 million in his final season with the Wolves, a salary that contributed to the Wolves' inability to bring quality help for Garnett in free agency. To improve the team, Taylor and McHale believed they had to make a trade many thought never would be made.

The issue for Wolves fans is what the club got in return. Of the five players who came from the Celtics, only Jefferson and Ryan Gomes are still with the team. One of the five, guard Gerald Green, was traded to Houston before finishing his first season with the Wolves and is now out of the league. Guard Sebastian Telfair was traded to the Los Angeles Clippers in the summer, and forward-center Theo Ratliff was waived in the middle of the 2007-08 season.

I actually emailed this guy because he either doesn't understand how finances affect the NBA, or he is deliberately trying to spin this towards his opinion.

Gant · Post #8 » by **Gant** » Wed Nov 4, 2009 3:13 pm

Did the article mention the draft choices?

cpfsf · Post #9 » by **cpfsf** » Wed Nov 4, 2009 5:10 pm

06-07 MIN 76 Games 39.4 MPG 12.8 RPG 4.1APG 1.2 SPG 1.7 BPG 22.4 PPG
07-08 BOS 71 Games 32.8 MPG 9.2 RPG 3.4 APG 1.4 SPG 1.2 BPG 18.8 PPG
08-09 BOS 57 Games 31.1 MPG 8.5 RPG 2.5 APG 1.1 SPG 1.2 BPG 15.8 PPG
09-10 BOS 5 Games 28.0 MPG 6.8 RPG 2.2 APG 0.6 SPG 1.4 BPG 11.2 PPG

Gant wrote:Did the article mention the draft choices?

Love or Flynn, who was our returned pick from Boston?

john2jer · Post #10 » by **john2jer** » Wed Nov 4, 2009 5:15 pm

klomp44 wrote:http://www.twincities.com/timberwolves/ci_13707600?nclick_check=1

OK, so not the most positive look at the trade. However, towards the end when looking towards free agency, this quote caught my attention.

"Guys around the league joke about cities they don't like to play in, and Minneapolis is not on that list," Legler said. "It's a great place to play. The franchise just has to show some growth so guys know what direction the team is heading. You have to show that somebody is making the right personnel decisions."

Love that quote, I might have to sig that.

john2jer · Post #11 » by **john2jer** » Wed Nov 4, 2009 5:17 pm

cpfsf wrote:06-07 MIN 76 Games 39.4 MPG 12.8 RPG 4.1APG 1.2 SPG 1.7 BPG 22.4 PPG
07-08 BOS 71 Games 32.8 MPG 9.2 RPG 3.4 APG 1.4 SPG 1.2 BPG 18.8 PPG
08-09 BOS 57 Games 31.1 MPG 8.5 RPG 2.5 APG 1.1 SPG 1.2 BPG 15.8 PPG
09-10 BOS 5 Games 28.0 MPG 6.8 RPG 2.2 APG 0.6 SPG 1.4 BPG 11.2 PPG

Gant wrote:Did the article mention the draft choices?

Love or Flynn, who was our returned pick from Boston?

Neither. Seems like everyone's failing on that. the pick we owed to Boston was to be given 2 years AFTER we gave our pick to the Clippers, and if it wasn't by 2012, it became a 2012 2nd round pick. Some joker commented on the article with faulty information as well.

So in actuality what we got back from the Celtics was a 2nd round pick unless we somehow give up our 1st to the Clippers this year, which likely won't happen.

Gant · Post #12 » by **Gant** » Wed Nov 4, 2009 8:19 pm

The Wolves got their own pick back (I think it was Flynn), and the Celtics first rounder last season.

john2jer · Post #13 » by **john2jer** » Wed Nov 4, 2009 8:26 pm

Gant wrote:The Wolves got their own pick back (I think it was Flynn), and the Celtics first rounder last season.

Wrong. Please see above where I explained what pick we got back. It wasn't Flynn. We haven't even gotten to the draft yet that we owed them the pick.

Esohny · Post #14 » by **Esohny** » Wed Nov 4, 2009 8:30 pm

Ellington is the first of the picks that we got (looking like a solid addition IMHO).

Gant · Post #15 » by **Gant** » Wed Nov 4, 2009 8:34 pm

john2jer wrote:
Gant wrote:The Wolves got their own pick back (I think it was Flynn), and the Celtics first rounder last season.

Wrong. Please see above where I explained what pick we got back. It wasn't Flynn. We haven't even gotten to the draft yet that we owed them the pick.

I see. You're right, that would have turned into a second rounder.

Wolves2011 · Post #16 » by **Wolves2011** » Wed Nov 4, 2009 10:54 pm

Pioneer press FORGOT ABOUT KEY PARTS OF THE KG TRADE.

We got back our - the wolves- first round pick. It brought us Love and Miller.

Miller was half of what got us Rubio [Miller and Foye for rights to #5 pick which got Rubio].

The KG trade also brought cap space [Ratliff contract], which we haven't used yet.

So the Boston trade brought us:

Jefferson
Gomes
Love and
half of Rubio
cap space to be used next summer

Thats not bad, but you won't see that in that article....

Breakdown777 · Post #17 » by **Breakdown777** » Thu Nov 5, 2009 3:05 am

It's all hypothetical, but it's impossible to judge what would've happened with the pick we got back from Boston. If that trade didn't happen, perhaps a desperation move for a guy like Iverson may have made the wolves 11th worst, thus giving up our pick to the Clippers in the 2008 draft (probably anthony randolph/thad young), thus we would give BOS our pick 2 years later if still protected, so 2010 draft. In that scenario, BOS doesn't get KG or a championship, and yeah...can you see where I'm going with this?

In all, I'm glad we did the trade. That team was stuck in suck-pergatory and wasn't going anywhere until we moved the big ticket. I think Big Al is an excellent return piece. I'm not really interested in what the media thinks of the trade, because they are all writing skewed opinions to boost reading and make money.

Now I'm ranting, but it sort of bugs me that ESPN is airing Knicks/Cavs, Knicks/Raptors, and Knicks/Heat JUST to play the NEW YORK HAS CAP SPACE AND GETS WHATEVER THEY WANT crap. It's so speculative, and it does not make those good games to watch. It just gives the media chances to say WHAT IF NEW YORK DIDN'T SUCK?" It's biased, and stupid, but that's how the money train rolls.

Tekkenlaw · Post #18 » by **Tekkenlaw** » Thu Nov 5, 2009 3:46 am

KG trade was pretty bad. But what can you expect when your GM is a former Celtic great. He wasn't going to trade him to the Suns for Amare or the Lakers for Bynum and Odom.

Post #19 » by **Basti** » Thu Nov 5, 2009 3:51 am

Wolves2011 wrote:Pioneer press FORGOT ABOUT KEY PARTS OF THE KG TRADE.

We got back our - the wolves- first round pick. It brought us Love and Miller.

Miller was half of what got us Rubio [Miller and Foye for rights to #5 pick which got Rubio].

The KG trade also brought cap space [Ratliff contract], which we haven't used yet.

So the Boston trade brought us:

Jefferson
Gomes
Love and
half of Rubio
cap space to be used next summer

Thats not bad, but you won't see that in that article....

hate to break it to you but even though we did get back our pick it didn't have any consequences on picking Love etc. because firstly we owe our 1st rounder to the Clippers until 2012.

Post #20 » by **Basti** » Thu Nov 5, 2009 3:54 am

Tekkenlaw wrote:KG trade was pretty bad. But what can you expect when your GM is a former Celtic great. He wasn't going to trade him to the Suns for Amare or the Lakers for Bynum and Odom.

1. Phoenix didn't want to trade Amare 2. tbh I wouldn't have wanted Amare for KG 3. I also didn't really like the trade offer the Lakers had. sure in hindsight it would have made sense but back then Bynum was nothing short of a prospect while Al was a more proven player.