Why Gay and Johnson Should NOT Be FA Targets

[Kurosawa]

I mostly just read the great discussion on this board but feel compelled in this case to post an opinion contrary to the prevailing thought that the Wolves ought to pursue Rudy Gay or Joe Johnson this summer.

Both are outstanding talents, but neither would fit the system the Wolves are employing under Rambis. The triangle is predicated on unselfishness, court awareness, and unhesitating passing to the open guy when the double team forms. Neither is especially keen on passing the ball--especially Gay, who might fairly be described as a black hole. And in addition to being something of a chucker himself, Johnson is poised to soon step over the threshold to the wrong side of 30.

Instead, I agree with those who've noted the trade value of the raw cap space the Wolves will have and who advocate a trade instead. With a 2010 salary cap projected at between $52 million and $54 million, and only seven or eight teams (including Minnesota) projected to have significant cap space, a number of teams with rising talent at or approaching its prime and locked into multi-year contracts will be open to shedding salary to avoid an increasingly burdensome luxury tax in a down economy. Methinks we'll be able to pick and choose among a number of options that fit our system better than either Gay or Johnson, both of whom we'd have to overpay beyond their real value to get.

[Worm Guts]

Johnson's a good passer, he averages 5 assists per game. I think he would fit pretty well with what we do. I'm mainly worried about how he's going to age. He's probably not worth a max contract now, and if he started to fall off we'd be in a bad spot financially for awhile (assuming we signed him for 6 years). I would sign Johnson to the max if he would accept a 3-4 year contract.

[TheFranchise21]

I don't think we're in a position to be crossing names off our list because they aren't perfect fits. If we have an opportunity to increase the talent level on our team, we should do it.

[moss_is_1]

Johnson is far from a black hole. Plus Gay would fit nice into our scheme because he's shown a willingness to slash this season, and he would help out our shooting and fastbreaking.

[collin_k41]

Ditto to what worm guts said, Johnson is a very good passer. He's such a good overall player and just what this team needs. For his position, he gives us a huge upgrade in about every facet of the game. Add him to a good draft and I think this team will hit a growth spurt and it'll be exciting to see where it takes us. Age is a concern though. Joe Johnson is 28 and a half years old so if we sign him he'll be 29. I would be worried about the length of contract in that case because if we give him 6 years he'll be a gaudy 35 years old. I don't want to be paying him huge money when he's 35 and isn't as effective as he once was. I'd rather sign him to a 4-year deal but I don't know if that's possible if we actually want to land him.

[PeeDee]

Johnson won't leave the Hawks. They are one of the best teams in the NBA now.

[sabonis11]

I disagree on the fact that Johnson is a poor passer. As others have said before, he averages 5 assists a game (which would currently lead our team right now). However, I am in agreement that we should look into trading the cap space for a 2 or 3 to a team that feels they could attract a big name FA.

I know that it's difficult to pry away young lottery picks from other teams, but if I was Kahn I would be making calls to teams that are on the brink of having big FA money (i.e. Miami, Chicago, LA Clips). I wouldn't mind seeing the wolves take on a little bit of money in 2010 to pick up a player like Noah, Beasley, or Eric Gordon if these teams get desperate around the trade deadline to make a move for cap space in hopes of luring wade, JJ, etc. (I would love to see gordon at the 2 for us but would be difficult to make a trade that they would bite on).

I know it sounds like a bit of a pipe dream, but some of these teams may try to make a huge move in order to clear space for a big FA.

[Esohny]

Totally disagree on Johnson. The only way that Johnson isn't a perfect fit is his age, but as others have mentioned, that would just prevent me from offering him a max length deal. Not that it matters; the Hawks are in the elite now and he's not leaving unless MAYBE someone like the Nets blows the Hawks offer out of the water with max money and years and can offer a contender at the same time.

Gay I also disagree on. His age, size/athleticism, and offensive skills fit our team extremely well, and after seeing how Jefferson is gradually expanding his game (passing out of doubles, etc) under Rambis, I would like to add his major talent level to the team and see how the coaches further develop him. The only sticking point might be the price...he doesn't deserve a max contract (and I don't think he'll be offered one by any team). I think he could be had for less than max and still avoid a match by Memphis.

[Calinks]

I think Johnson is a great fit but I generally make a it a rule not to sign guards over 30 to big deals unless you are contending. I'm really hesitant to do that, we are still years away from contending and I don't know if a 33 year old Joe Johnson will be that great. A lot of guards really fall off shortly after 30.

[Krapinsky]

Instead, I agree with those who've noted the trade value of the raw cap space the Wolves will have and who advocate a trade instead. With a 2010 salary cap projected at between $52 million and $54 million, and only seven or eight teams (including Minnesota) projected to have significant cap space, a number of teams with rising talent at or approaching its prime and locked into multi-year contracts will be open to shedding salary to avoid an increasingly burdensome luxury tax in a down economy. Methinks we'll be able to pick and choose among a number of options that fit our system better than either Gay or Johnson, both of whom we'd have to overpay beyond their real value to get.

I'd love to hear who these players are....

Truth is, Gay and Johnson are looooong shots. That's aiming high if you're a Wolves fan. It will be interesting to see what Kahn does with our money once they resign with their individual teams (or once an offer for Gay is matched). There isn't really a player worth our money that's going to be a great fit.

[slinky]

I'd love to hear who these players are....

Truth is, Gay and Johnson are looooong shots. That's aiming high if you're a Wolves fan. It will be interesting to see what Kahn does with our money once they resign with their individual teams (or once an offer for Gay is matched). There isn't really a player worth our money that's going to be a great fit.

Thanks, Dr. I was just about to say that. I am perfectly fine not signing either of those two if there are better options available. But we talk about trading the cap space for a stud 2/3, and then we dont name any of those players. Let's here who these guys are cause I dont think there are as many of them as we all might think. And I am as a big proponent to signing Rudy Gay to big money as any, but I am not sure how great the other options are.

[slinky]

I know that it's difficult to pry away young lottery picks from other teams, but if I was Kahn I would be making calls to teams that are on the brink of having big FA money (i.e. Miami, Chicago, LA Clips). I wouldn't mind seeing the wolves take on a little bit of money in 2010 to pick up a player like Noah, Beasley, or Eric Gordon if these teams get desperate around the trade deadline to make a move for cap space in hopes of luring wade, JJ, etc. (I would love to see gordon at the 2 for us but would be difficult to make a trade that they would bite on).

I know it sounds like a bit of a pipe dream, but some of these teams may try to make a huge move in order to clear space for a big FA.

Well what you say might be true, I wouldnt limit the teams you look at to just 'wanting big FA money', some teams will just want to cut payroll cause they are paying lux tax at a time when they cant afford to.

Also, I understand Miami is a team that wants cap space, but I am not sure if Beasley is someone we need on the wolves, but it might be worth including a 3rd team, to bring us something else...

[Breakdown777]

I'm not sure who we'd be looking at. Who are these mystery sg/sf's? T mac? Josh Howard? guys like Kevin Martin and Jeff Green are also longshots unless we give up a major asset. I'm having a difficult time finding players who will make us that much better, on a good contract, and are a good fit/want to be here.

Caron Butler? Travis Outlaw? Boris Diaw? Iggy? I just don't know who these mystery sg/sf's we could trade for are.

[The J Rocka]

Too many possibilities but i could see this: We draft (Turner, W. Johnson, Henry) then make a trade to acquire Iggy. I don't think J. Johnson will come here. We could sign Gay but i believe MEM will match any offer. Of course this would all change if we get the first pick, which im sure we wont get, so all this would be more realistic.

[cpfsf]

Both are outstanding talents, but neither would fit the system the Wolves are employing under Rambis. The triangle is predicated on unselfishness, court awareness, and unhesitating passing to the open guy when the double team forms. Neither is especially keen on passing the ball--especially Gay, who might fairly be described as a black hole. And in addition to being something of a chucker himself, Johnson is poised to soon step over the threshold to the wrong side of 30.

Instead, I agree with those who've noted the trade value of the raw cap space the Wolves will have and who advocate a trade instead. With a 2010 salary cap projected at between $52 million and $54 million, and only seven or eight teams (including Minnesota) projected to have significant cap space, a number of teams with rising talent at or approaching its prime and locked into multi-year contracts will be open to shedding salary to avoid an increasingly burdensome luxury tax in a down economy. Methinks we'll be able to pick and choose among a number of options that fit our system better than either Gay or Johnson, both of whom we'd have to overpay beyond their real value to get.

First, I don't want a team of role players. Next, If there is a player who is the equivalent of a younger JJ or a playmaking Rudy Gay, chances are the player won't sign with us to begin with. We are not the pretty girl at the prom and we should take what we can get. Oh, and JJ's out of our league.

[john2jer]

Joe Johnson is a pretty good passer as a SG. As mentioned, that 5 assits a game is pretty fantastic. My only concerned, as already mentioned, is his age and the contract he'd demand.

[southern wolf]

I'd love to have either of them, but Minnesota will be so far from their minds come free agency, even with the amount of money Kahn will be splashing around. I just can't see it.

[Esohny]

I'd love to have both of them, but Minnesota will be so far from their minds come free agency, even with the amount of money Kahn will be splashing around. I just can't see it.

We wouldn't have the cap space for both.

[southern wolf]

lol I'll change that to either.

[shangrila]

Yeah I kind of agree. While it's hard to turn down established talent I'd still rather see the team built through the draft as that way everyone hits their prime at roughly the same time. It's not such a big deal with Gay, but Johnson would be leaving the league when Love would finally be hitting his prime.