Chris Kaman

[Krapinsky]

I think he's a guy we should try and go after. He's in the last year of his deal and coming of some injury plagued seasons, so he should be cheap.

On the bright side, he isn't too old, and he has an offensive skill set --- can pass/shoot out of the highpost -- that would fit in an Adelman system.

What would it take to get him?

Martell/Pekovic/Utah 1st?

I think most people would do that.

Beasley/Pekovic?

I think most people would not do that.

Martell/Pekovic/Randolph

That seems about right, value-wise, to get a deal done.

What say you?

Rubio (30) /Ridnour (18)
Johnson (34)/Lee and Ellington (14 combined)
Beasley (34)/Williams (14)/Hayward (0)
Love(34)/Williams (14)/AT (0)
Kaman (30)/Darko (18)

[The J Rocka]

Wolves definitely have interest but I have a feeling the asking price may be a bit too high. Clippers probably want Beasley included in any package we offer. I assume that's what the Clippers asked for with the last trade rumor and we declined.

[Krapinsky]

Wolves definitely have interest but I have a feeling the asking price may be a bit too high. Clippers probably want Beasley included in any package we offer. I assume that's what the Clippers asked for with the last trade rumor and we declined.

Clippers are said not to be high on Beasley. According to Clips fans, they basically see him as a negative. With high usage scorers like Griffin and Gordon already, Webster would be a legitimate fit for them at the SF position.

[Foye]

I'm not a fan of Kaman.

Saw him play for Germany in the Eurobasket. He turned the ball over a lot. Good on offense, shaky at best on defense. He would probably be a 15 pts scorer for us but we would also receive more points than with Darko as a C.

[The J Rocka]

Wolves definitely have interest but I have a feeling the asking price may be a bit too high. Clippers probably want Beasley included in any package we offer. I assume that's what the Clippers asked for with the last trade rumor and we declined.

Clippers are said not to be high on Beasley. According to Clips fans, they basically see him as a negative. With high usage scorers like Griffin and Gordon already, Webster would be a legitimate fit for them at the SF position.

I agree with the better fit but if the asking price was something like Webster + Pek + UTA 1st I'm not sure why we didn't accept that trade. Either the Wolves feel that he's overpaid and can get somebody better or there isn't enough value going back to the Clippers.

[john2jer]

Why does it seem that once a week a thread gets posted about Chris Kaman?

[Krapinsky]

Why does it seem that once a week a thread gets posted about Chris Kaman?

Because you don't have a life?

[shrink]

Not a fan, and why offer any pick for a guy with one year left .. and at $12.2 mil, no less!

Moreover, even if we thought Kaman would help, LAC would have disincentive to trade him to us, and worsen our 2012 pick next year.

A better plan might be to see if they simply amnesty him. It'd be tough for their owner, but it would put their payroll at $37 mil, and give them lots of cap space to play with in a now wide open free agent market.

[Krapinsky]

Not a fan, and why offer any pick for a guy with one year left .. and at $12.2 mil, no less!

Because with all that said, the trade could make us better and we are trying to win. There's a strong chance the Utah pick becomes a second rounder. We also send out $15 M in salary - saving us $3M in dollars, while also giving us flexibility of having a $12M expiring contract and the possibility of having additional cap space next year.

Who knows, maybe Howard will want to play with Love, Williams, and Rubio? Maybe Garnett will want to retire a T-Wolf?

Moreover, even if we thought Kaman would help, LAC would have disincentive to trade him to us, and worsen our 2012 pick next year.

This has merit, but only if they think he makes us that much better.

A better plan might be to see if they simply amnesty him. It'd be tough for their owner, but it would put their payroll at $37 mil, and give them lots of cap space to play with in a now wide open free agent market.

Why would they do that when he has trade value? Wasn't an Iggy-Kaman deal thrown out there? Gomes seems more likely.

[john2jer]

Why does it seem that once a week a thread gets posted about Chris Kaman?

Because you don't have a life?

Well yeah, obviously, but that's not the point. I've already said no to Kaman, quit asking about him.

[Krapinsky]

Why does it seem that once a week a thread gets posted about Chris Kaman?

Because you don't have a life?

Well yeah, obviously, but that's not the point. I've already said no to Kaman, quit asking about him.

One or two more threads and you'll be convinced. These things jsut take time.

[shrink]

A better plan might be to see if they simply amnesty him. It'd be tough for their owner, but it would put their payroll at $37 mil, and give them lots of cap space to play with in a now wide open free agent market.

Why would they do that when he has trade value? Wasn't an Iggy-Kaman deal thrown out there? Gomes seems more likely.

1. First, the value in a trade like that, isn't in Kaman, but the other team's willingness to add lots more salary.
2. Second, obviously, one of those teams didn't want to do that deal.
3. Even if you still believe a $12.2 mil Kaman has trade value, you'd have to agree that $12.2 mil in raw cap space (since LAC's payroll would be below the cap) has more value - especially after all those new FA's enter the market after amnesty. Heck, when we see the penalties for being over the lux, it's trade value could be extremely valuable to a team with a high payroll.
4. I could see Gomes, I could see Kaman, and I could see "nobody." But Gomes at $4mil/yr for two years is a lot closer to his value than $12.2 mil for Kaman for one.
5. Lastly, people could argue Pekovic is such a bad deal to justify the trade. I'm not one of those people, but that's an argument I could see.

[Krapinsky]

Hooray. it's been awhile since we had one of these. Thank you for taking the bait.

A better plan might be to see if they simply amnesty him. It'd be tough for their owner, but it would put their payroll at $37 mil, and give them lots of cap space to play with in a now wide open free agent market.

Why would they do that when he has trade value? Wasn't an Iggy-Kaman deal thrown out there? Gomes seems more likely.

1. First, the value in a trade like that, isn't in Kaman, but the other team's willingness to add lots more salary.

Teams that need a center, like the Wolves, or the 76ers, are going to value Kaman to an extent. All contracts are relative, but Kaman would certainly be more valuable to the Wolves than Webster and Pek for the same money. That's why the Wolves probably need to add a kicker.

2. Second, obviously, one of those teams didn't want to do that deal.

The 76ers likely wanted Aminu too and the Clippers likely balked at that.

3. Even if you still believe a $12.2 mil Kaman has trade value, you'd have to agree that $12.2 mil in raw cap space (since LAC's payroll would be below the cap) has more value - especially after all those new FA's enter the market after amnesty. Heck, when we see the penalties for being over the lux, it's trade value could be extremely valuable to a team with a high payroll.

I'll agree that raw cap space has more value, but $12.2M worth of "more value" to the owner? Kaman's deal would still be guaranteed. Then the Clips would still need to find a back up center, and the going rate for a decent one is $4-5M minimum.

4. I could see Gomes, I could see Kaman, and I could see "nobody." But Gomes at $4mil/yr for two years is a lot closer to his value than $12.2 mil for Kaman for one.

I don't think that's necessarily true. If the Wolves had $12M to spend I would much rather they spend it on a one year deal on Kaman than spend 1/3 of it for two years on a nearly worthless Ryan Gomes who wouldn't be much of an upgrade over Hayward.

5. Lastly, people could argue Pekovic is such a bad deal to justify the trade. I'm not one of those people, but that's an argument I could see.

I don't know if "such a bad deal" is how I would frame it, but I think if you add up the total salary vs. production, i think Kaman is probably > than Webster + Pekovic + Randolph, especially since Pekovic + Randolph will make our team worse if given playing time over our available replacements (Tolliver, Randolph, Darko) and the same would probably ring true for just about any team in the league.

[Esohny]

Eesh.

[LordBaldric]

Kaman seems like a poor compliment to Kevin Love in the front court. We need an athletic help defender. Whether a C or PF doesn't matter much to me since Love can slide over and play center most of the time IMO. Maybe Randolph can be that be that guy if our new coach can get his neurons to start firing correctly.

[Narf]

I would not trade Randolph, Webster, and Pekovic
I would, however, trade Darko, Webster, and Pekovic or Ellington or Miller (assuming we don't have a better trade in the works).
Kaman is a 1 year rental and has enough warts that I'd rather invest in Randolph long term. He's a solid defensive PF with elite athleticism, I'd like to see him at age 23 under Adelman before I give up on him.

[shangrila]

Kaman has never had a good season next to a quality PF. He sucked next to Brand, played well when the guy went out with injuries, sucked next to Randolph and sucked next to Griffin. Odds are he'll suck next to Love so...pass.

[Saltine]

Nope, he isn't very good and doesn't fit next to Love at all. I'm not sure how he would be an upgrade over Pek, much less help the team at 12 million a year, why collect another teams mistakes?

[Krapinsky]

Nope, he isn't very good and doesn't fit next to Love at all. I'm not sure how he would be an upgrade over Pek, much less help the team at 12 million a year, why collect another teams mistakes?

[Krapinsky]

ESPN's player ranking has Kaman #88 in the league.

Ahead of some sexier names:

OJ MAYO
KENDRICK PERKINS
ROY HIBBERT
JAVALE MCGEE
WESLEY MATTHEWS


You guys are vastly underrating him.