Kahn on Carney

[Esohny]

There's nothing wrong with being gay, having gay thoughts, or watching the Sex and the City movie on my birthday.

This would be true if you were female and hot but something tells me you aren't.

Bingo.

[john2jer]

So wait, are you saying the Wolves forum isn't crawling with hot babes who wanna make my night? Why do I bother coming here then?

[John Doe [MIN]]

And seriously, someone's bagging on the Lawson/Denver/Charlotte/whatever trade? We took 2 point guards, and trade the 18th pick after the guy we wanted didn't fall to us. Were we supposed to just take Lawson at that point and keep 3 point guards? Assuming at the time we had a shot at Rubio playing?

If Lawson is performing as a top 5 player, doesn't that mean you can bash everyone who had picks 5-18 for not selecting/keeping him? Terrible logic.

And seriously, go take a look at Brandon Jennings as of late. He's been downright ugly shooting the ball, and he's playing in a system that let's him play 70 minutes a game and keep the ball in his hands for 20 of the 24 seconds on the shot clock. If you can't see that the roles would be reversed if Jennings was in Minnesota and Flynn was in Milwaukee, then you're just not paying attention. Or don't know the game.

I'm bagging on the logic that led to it. A lot of metrics for evaluating draft prospects had Flynn and Lawson rated similarly (often with Lawson higher). Both have similar games. One was shooting up the board, the other inexplicably dropping. So we take the one we have to reach for rather than getting great value by taking the other identical (if not better) one at 18?

Rubio/Curry/Lawson/Ellington is a hell of a draft. Maybe we trade one when Rubio comes over, but that's the plan with Sessions/Flynn anyway.

And yes, Jennings is still better than Flynn, despite Flynn's godly .508 to .484 advantage in TS% (read: neither number is good). Jennings has a higher assist%, lower turnover%, and is still shooting .393 on a high volume of threes, which is way better than Flynn's outside shooting. I don't see what Flynn gives you that makes up for Jennings' superiority as a playmaker and floor spacer. For the record, I wanted Curry at 6, so this is all kind of a moot point anyway.

[Worm Guts]

Rubio/Curry/Lawson/Ellington is a hell of a draft. Maybe we trade one when Rubio comes over, but that's the plan with Sessions/Flynn anyway.

Kahn didn't know if Rubio was going to play in the NBA or not at that point. I think one of the reasons Telfair was traded was because he wanted to have room for Rubio just in case. There's some merit to the idea that Lawson at 18 was better value than Flynn at 6 or that Stephen Curry is a better fit with Rambis's system (although I still like Flynn' more for his physical abilities).

[john2jer]

Butterfly Effect.

Taking Curry instead of Flynn is no guarantee that you can get Lawson at 18. It changes everything. I understand that your hindsight is 20/20, but your logic is faulty.

And as far as Lawson vs Flynn. It's kind of obnoxious that people are staring at per36, without understanding how those numbers come about. Lawson is playing with Carmelo Anthony and Chauncey Billups. He has good defenders behind him that make things eeasier on the defensive end. When he's in the ball is in his hands and he's allowed to just go.

Completely different situation than what Flynn has. Rambis is working on developing Flynn into a complete point guard. Lawson is being allowed to just play.

Unfortunately the vacuum doesn't exist to assume you can just swap players and assume the numbers/production will hold true.

Plus, I think Jennings ran his mouth too much for the Wolves liking before the draft, and while he was here during the point guard workout.

[horaceworthy]

I'm bagging on the logic that led to it. A lot of metrics for evaluating draft prospects had Flynn and Lawson rated similarly (often with Lawson higher). Both have similar games. One was shooting up the board, the other inexplicably dropping. So we take the one we have to reach for rather than getting great value by taking the other identical (if not better) one at 18?

Rubio/Curry/Lawson/Ellington is a hell of a draft. Maybe we trade one when Rubio comes over, but that's the plan with Sessions/Flynn anyway.

Rubio/Curry/Lawson/Ellington would have been even more PG overkill from the draft than we already had. I still like the trade with Denver, it's too bad that pick turned out to be Lawson, but I prefer rolling that pick over into the next draft. I wanted Curry in the draft as well, and I think he's been better than Flynn as of late, but there isn't a big enough difference between the two of them for me to really regret Kahn's decision.

And yes, Jennings is still better than Flynn, despite Flynn's godly .508 to .484 advantage in TS% (read: neither number is good). Jennings has a higher assist%, lower turnover%, and is still shooting .393 on a high volume of threes, which is way better than Flynn's outside shooting. I don't see what Flynn gives you that makes up for Jennings' superiority as a playmaker and floor spacer. For the record, I wanted Curry at 6, so this is all kind of a moot point anyway.

Since the end of October, Jennings has been shooting 32.8% from beyond the arc (41/125). He got off to an incredibly hot start, but I'm not sure you can call him a floor spacer. His season totals still look good, but that's a testament to how hot he started the year off. Flynn had a poor October from the perimeter, but since then he's been hitting thees at 37% clip (27/73). I do agree that Jennings is the superior playmaker. Like john2jer said, Flynn's on a tighter leash than Jennings when it comes to that aspect of the game. Flynn's made some progress, but I'd still say Jennings is better.