Iggy available for expirings...

[Breakdown777]

Another plus to getting Iggy+Dally for Expirings is that the value is amazing if you're willing to spend a little extra cash. Also, if it doesn't work out, there seems to be a few easy ways to fix it if you can wait an extra season (which we might have to do anyway).
Dally will be an expiring soon, so if it doesn't work out we won't have him for long.
Iggy is a good player. In my mind, someone would take him regardless of how much he is paid.

The only drawback I see in the long term is that our 2010 draft pick might drop, but we all know as MN fans the odd's of us getting to pick where we want is unlikely no matter what the odds are. In a draft where surefire stars and prospects = N, we'll still end up picking N+1.

Flynn/Sessions (one day Rubio)
Brewer/Ellington
Iggy/Gomes
Jefferson/Love
Dally/Pek/Hollins
+draft picks
That team has the potential to compete with any team that isn't the Lakers and Blazers over the next few years. The only other way we become a team that good (or better) in the next 2-3 seasons is getting a superstar in the draft. I know we should be striving for a championship, but I feel like even getting to the Western Finals would be something I'd be happy with. Being a 4/5 seed and winning a round or two in the playoffs is still winning basketball, and it'd be nice to see some winning basketball.

Furthermore, Maybe that team is good enough to nab someone like Durant when they become a FA, giving us an even better chance of attracting a star to put us over the top.

[Worm Guts]

I think Martin and Johnson are better fits for the triangle. Open? Shoot it. Guarded? Pass and cut.

All Phil Jackson's teams seem to be built around wings who are great ball handlers. Jordan, Pippen, Bryant, Odom are all great ballhandlers and playmakers, and not a sharp-shooter in the bunch.

[Krapinsky]

I think Martin and Johnson are better fits for the triangle. Open? Shoot it. Guarded? Pass and cut.

All Phil Jackson's teams seem to be built around wings who are great ball handlers. Jordan, Pippen, Bryant, Odom are all great ballhandlers and playmakers, and not a sharp-shooter in the bunch.

Odom, for the most part doesn't play on the wing. Besides those players they're next to sharp shooters, not ball handlers - -- Steve Kerr, John Paxson, Horry, Fisher, Vujacic, Ariza (last year). Jordan and Kobe are/were so good that Phil gave/gives them a lot of slack, but you'll still see Phil get on Kobe whenever he stops running the offense and starts going one on one. Towards the end of games though, especially, they'll break out of there offense and he'll let Kobe take over.

So one, two ball handlers -- great. Every team needs a go to player that can break a team down off the dribble for late in the shot clock situations. However, a team isn't going to work if there's four of those guys and no one to play off of him.

[Worm Guts]

So it's more about the players not fitting each other instead of not fitting the triangle. I'll agree with that.

[Krapinsky]

So it's more about the players not fitting each other instead of not fitting the triangle. I'll agree with that.

Some of both -- you're just focusing on the ball handling. Pippen, Jordan, Kobe were/are all great jump shooters too. Iggy, Turner not so much. The triangle doesn't work if you can just sag off the wings.

[Worm Guts]

Young Pippen and Jordan weren't great jump shooters, by any means. And Kobe's never been a high 3 point percentage guy.

[Krapinsky]

Young Pippen and Jordan weren't great jump shooters, by any means. And Kobe's never been a high 3 point percentage guy.

Lot's of arguments to be made here --

For 1) Bulls began there first 3 peat in 1990, the same year Michael started hitting from distance.

For 2) It's friggin Kobe and Michael -- perhaps the 2 shooting guards of all time. They can score at will. Iggy and Turner can't be compared. The talent disparity is too great that an argument can't be made on basic skill -- penetration vs. ball handling.

For 3) Despite sometimes low %, you never saw those guys left open on the arc though did you? Kobe % is down because of all the contested shots he takes and shots he takes at the end of the shot clock.

[Worm Guts]

Young Pippen and Jordan weren't great jump shooters, by any means. And Kobe's never been a high 3 point percentage guy.

Lot's of arguments to be made here --

For 1) Bulls began there first 3 peat in 1990, the same year Michael started hitting from distance.

Actually Jordan shot 31% from behind the arc during their first championship. Jordan was up and down from the 3 point line through out his career. The Bulls also won championships in years when Jordan shot 23% and 27% from behind the arc.

For 2) It's friggin Kobe and Michael -- perhaps the 2 shooting guards of all time. They can score at will. Iggy and Turner can't be compared. The talent disparity is too great that an argument can't be made on basic skill -- penetration vs. ball handling.

Fine, but Pippen and Odom are both of a similar mold in that they were/are great ball handlers but not great shooters and still had their place in the triangle.

[Krapinsky]

Not really sure where to keep going on this... like I said, some of it's fit and some of it's the triangle. There's a lot of variables to consider in making these comparisons. Aside form those above, there's also the fact that the game has evolved. Team defense is something that had evolved greatly, and because of that teams take more 3 pointers than ever before.

Another point --- (probably my best point) the triangle is supposed to take the focus of the defense off the best player. Jackson implemented it in Chicago to prevent the Pistons from doubling Jordan. That's also why it worked Kobe. So in this sense it's not shooting or ball handling that matters, it's whether a player is good enough to force a double team. If he can there'll be other players open to shoot, or to make a play of the dribble. Regardless, they'll be open.

Iggy on the other hand, is never going to demand a double team. Turner, who knows? Wall, probably. On our team Jefferson does. That's why you see the offense run through him. It's to attract a double team so we can find the open man. I just think that's why we need shooters to make people pay for doubling.

Sorry if I'm rambling here, hopefully that's articulated well enough.

[Worm Guts]

Maybe you're right, I don't anything about the triangle except for Phil Jackson uses it. I just thought it was weird to say Wesley Johnson and Kevin Martin were a better fit for it when the players Phil used seemed to be more like Iguodala and Turner.

[Devilzsidewalk]

are we catering to the triangle, or to a fast break team though? Kahn always talks about running, he never ever brings up the triangle

[Krapinsky]

are we catering to the triangle, or to a fast break team though? Kahn always talks about running, he never ever brings up the triangle

He always says the plan is to get out and run, but then to fall into the triangle when we're forced into a half court set.

[Devilzsidewalk]

are we catering to the triangle, or to a fast break team though? Kahn always talks about running, he never ever brings up the triangle

He always says the plan is to get out and run, but then to fall into the triangle when we're forced into a half court set.

bottom line, I think Kahn wants an exciting team for attendance and interest in the team. He always brings up being exciting and he knows an up and down team is appealing to the eye. Everything I've seen so far points to him looking to build a good team that runs the court and puts up points. Usualy the thinking is championship or bust and get smart guys that play efficient offensively and man up on defense, but its easier to make a profitable team thats competitive and runs on the break a lot and puts up points in bunches, and that seems to be the direction. We always hear running, and scoring, and shooting, and fun, and exciting from Kahn. I don't ever remember hearing about defense or controlling the paint etc, which is fine. Just that I think the talk about the triangle is just that, talk. Kahn wants to see exciting basketball, not half court execution. He's fine w/ Rambis teaching the triangle, but he's gonna have to do it w/ run and gun players.

[moss_is_1]

are we catering to the triangle, or to a fast break team though? Kahn always talks about running, he never ever brings up the triangle

He always says the plan is to get out and run, but then to fall into the triangle when we're forced into a half court set.

bottom line, I think Kahn wants an exciting team for attendance and interest in the team. He always brings up being exciting and he knows an up and down team is appealing to the eye. Everything I've seen so far points to him looking to build a good team that runs the court and puts up points. Usualy the thinking is championship or bust and get smart guys that play efficient offensively and man up on defense, but its easier to make a profitable team thats competitive and runs on the break a lot and puts up points in bunches, and that seems to be the direction. We always hear running, and scoring, and shooting, and fun, and exciting from Kahn. I don't ever remember hearing about defense or controlling the paint etc, which is fine. Just that I think the talk about the triangle is just that, talk. Kahn wants to see exciting basketball, not half court execution. He's fine w/ Rambis teaching the triangle, but he's gonna have to do it w/ run and gun players.

Basically what I think to. Kahn is just gathering players and then Rambis is being stubborn and teaching the triangle, when we don't have the personel. But we are running. We aren't running the triangle that much though really.

[revprodeji]

Players can learn to be decent shooters. Turner is a very good mid range shooter so there is no reason to think he could not be a decent 3pt shooter in time.

[Narf]

I think you guys are looking at the triangle the wrong way. Jordan was the pointguard. The year he shot 27% from 3, BJ Armstrong shot 40% from 3 while playing as many minutes as John Paxson playing "Point Guard". The Lakers had Fisher, another SG playing PG, next to Kobe shooting 3's.

I don't care what Jordan and Kobe were called, they were that team's PG for all practical purposes with a shooting combo guard opposite them. Regardless of who we have as our primary ball handler and play maker, we need an outside shooter to compliment them. I'm not saying Iggy doesn't have a place, I'm just saying we better have a 3 point shooter in the other wing spot. Just my opinion though.