ImageImageImage

Any Significance to Taylor Veto?

Moderators: Domejandro, Worm Guts, Calinks

Tirion
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,752
And1: 290
Joined: Oct 27, 2005

Re: Any Significance to Taylor Veto? 

Post#21 » by Tirion » Sat Mar 17, 2012 8:58 am

How old is Taylor anyway?

Any chance he dies before Love-Rubio era is over?
User avatar
Scottypax
Ballboy
Posts: 34
And1: 0
Joined: Dec 14, 2011

Re: Any Significance to Taylor Veto? 

Post#22 » by Scottypax » Sat Mar 17, 2012 12:49 pm

Taylor should let Kahn be the General Manager. That's his job! I'm frustrated that the owner would veto the trade.
User avatar
mandurugo
Starter
Posts: 2,120
And1: 231
Joined: Aug 14, 2002

Re: Any Significance to Taylor Veto? 

Post#23 » by mandurugo » Sat Mar 17, 2012 1:20 pm

DaKidKG wrote:
Steve_Holiday wrote:I don't know if I even believe the report to begin with.

This.


Yep, pretty thinly sourced in a media hungry market.
C.lupus
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 30,827
And1: 8,857
Joined: Nov 02, 2007

Re: Any Significance to Taylor Veto? 

Post#24 » by C.lupus » Sat Mar 17, 2012 3:00 pm

Klomp wrote:But does anyone look at the fact that Taylor was unwilling to add salary (Fisher) in an attempt to add a key piece (Crawford) for a playoff run?

I'm not sure Crawford is really a key piece. If it was someone like Gordon, it would probably be worth adding an extra contract but Crawford? I don't think so.
Klomp
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 68,803
And1: 22,392
Joined: Jul 08, 2005
Contact:
   

Re: Any Significance to Taylor Veto? 

Post#25 » by Klomp » Sat Mar 17, 2012 3:04 pm

C.lupus wrote:
Klomp wrote:But does anyone look at the fact that Taylor was unwilling to add salary (Fisher) in an attempt to add a key piece (Crawford) for a playoff run?

I'm not sure Crawford is really a key piece. If it was someone like Gordon, it would probably be worth adding an extra contract but Crawford? I don't think so.

He would've been a key piece for this year's playoff run...
tsherkin wrote:The important thing to take away here is that Klomp is wrong.
Esohny wrote:Why are you asking Klomp? "He's" actually a bot that posts random blurbs from a database.
Klomp wrote:I'm putting the tired in retired mod at the moment
C.lupus
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 30,827
And1: 8,857
Joined: Nov 02, 2007

Re: Any Significance to Taylor Veto? 

Post#26 » by C.lupus » Sat Mar 17, 2012 3:11 pm

We would have been but he's still not worth $8.4 million.
User avatar
eyeteeth
Starter
Posts: 2,109
And1: 147
Joined: Jul 17, 2010
Location: somewhere on the Front Range

Re: Any Significance to Taylor Veto? 

Post#27 » by eyeteeth » Sat Mar 17, 2012 3:16 pm

I have conflicting feelings about sending Beas to the Lakers. I want to see him do well, don't want to see the Lakers do well, want him to have a good home, not certain the Wolves can be that for him... It's kind of a mess.

But this "report" (by which I mean "hearsay," or even better, "unsubstantiated nonsense") doesn't mean bupkus. If it were true, it would be worth thinking about. But without some kind of reporting from a non-LA media outlet, I'm just going to ignore it.
Image
Dr. Laker
Sophomore
Posts: 102
And1: 4
Joined: Jan 13, 2003
Location: Hollywood

Re: Any Significance to Taylor Veto? 

Post#28 » by Dr. Laker » Sat Mar 17, 2012 7:05 pm

eyeteeth wrote:I have conflicting feelings about sending Beas to the Lakers. I want to see him do well, don't want to see the Lakers do well, want him to have a good home, not certain the Wolves can be that for him... It's kind of a mess.

But this "report" (by which I mean "hearsay," or even better, "unsubstantiated nonsense") doesn't mean bupkus. If it were true, it would be worth thinking about. But without some kind of reporting from a non-LA media outlet, I'm just going to ignore it.


Yeah - the Los Angeles Times is completely lacking in credibility. :roll: :roll:
User avatar
Saltine
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,396
And1: 1,002
Joined: Jul 20, 2003
Location: Land o' Lakes
     

Re: Any Significance to Taylor Veto? 

Post#29 » by Saltine » Sat Mar 17, 2012 7:54 pm

When it comes to Wolves basketball they are. :)

How did that Pau Gasol trade work out? ;)
shangrila
RealGM
Posts: 13,511
And1: 6,584
Joined: Dec 21, 2009
Location: Land of Aus
 

Re: Any Significance to Taylor Veto? 

Post#30 » by shangrila » Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:53 pm

Maybe they figured they could try and sign Crawford in the offseason without having to take on more salary?
Dewey
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,898
And1: 1,070
Joined: May 22, 2001

Re: Any Significance to Taylor Veto? 

Post#31 » by Dewey » Sun Mar 18, 2012 3:14 am

Tirion wrote:How old is Taylor anyway?

Any chance he dies before Love-Rubio era is over?


You win "The most classless post ever" award ... Can't believe this was not removed.
Flip response to Love wanting out, "He has no reason to be upset, you're either a part of the problem or a part of the solution"
User avatar
Saltine
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,396
And1: 1,002
Joined: Jul 20, 2003
Location: Land o' Lakes
     

Re: Any Significance to Taylor Veto? 

Post#32 » by Saltine » Sun Mar 18, 2012 4:28 am

Tirion wrote:How old is Taylor anyway?

Any chance he dies before Love-Rubio era is over?


Glen will be 71 next month, he's a pretty nice guy. My girlfriend used to work for him in Mankato, she has nothing but good things to say. He isn't cheap, and he does care. She was very surprised to see that he knew not only the names of all his employees, he knew what was going on in their lives, their families names, everyone where she worked... He's an all right dude, who employs over 9000 people.

http://www.taylorcorp.com/company/Pages/about-us.aspx

We are lucky to have him, he is a far better dude then most of the owners in sports, and far wealthier.
Araxen
Junior
Posts: 411
And1: 136
Joined: Aug 10, 2004
         

Re: Any Significance to Taylor Veto? 

Post#33 » by Araxen » Sun Mar 18, 2012 6:07 am

Glenn has spent over the cap before for this team before so he isn't a cheap owner, but now isn't the time to be overspending. Especially bailing the Lakers out of their bad contracts. This year isn't playoffs or bust. Playoffs are a bonus for this team this year and not a necessity. This team is still in it's early stages of competing. With Rubio out the playoffs aren't that big of deal too, but they will be next season. Kahn has a huge burden of adding a SG in the off-season now and I hope we don't have to settle for Crawford and Kahn is able to get someone better.
Tirion
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,752
And1: 290
Joined: Oct 27, 2005

Re: Any Significance to Taylor Veto? 

Post#34 » by Tirion » Sun Mar 18, 2012 1:17 pm

Araxen wrote:Glenn has spent over the cap before for this team before so he isn't a cheap owner, but now isn't the time to be overspending.


People need to stop with “Taylor is willing to pay when necessary” crap. The only real MAX contract he gave was to KG and that was almost 20 years ago. The last 10 years he was cutting costs at every opportunity.
User avatar
EddyCool
Rookie
Posts: 1,166
And1: 16
Joined: Feb 21, 2005

Re: Any Significance to Taylor Veto? 

Post#35 » by EddyCool » Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:28 pm

Tirion wrote:
Araxen wrote:Glenn has spent over the cap before for this team before so he isn't a cheap owner, but now isn't the time to be overspending.


People need to stop with “Taylor is willing to pay when necessary” crap. The only real MAX contract he gave was to KG and that was almost 20 years ago. The last 10 years he was cutting costs at every opportunity.

That's completely wrong.

His problem has been hiring and sticking to GMs that haven't been spending money wisely. He allowed McHale to spend too much money once the CBA changed after KG's and Shaq's contracts. We were bad because we spent too much and couldn't add talent without cap-flexibility and draft picks.

In the time after KG's contract and before Kahn, McHale overspent and continued to pour money into mediocre or oft-injured player such as: Wally Szczerbiak (near-max deal), Troy Hudson, Trenton Hassell, Mike James, Ricky Davis/Mark Blount (traded Szcz for Blount's longer deal), Terrell Brandon, Marko Jaric, and Marcus Banks off the top of my head. Who the team was cheap about? Cassell, Sprewell, Rasho... is that it? You can have the Rambis draft-pick selling conspiracy, too. They overpaid Rambis when they hired him, anyway.

As a candidate for the GM job after McHale was fired, Kahn's reputation out of Indiana was Donnie Walsh's salary cap guy, so coming in and clearing out all of the garbage and starting clean, which is what happened in the first year and a half. They paid at or over market value for Darko, Pek, and JJ. There hasn't been a single max contract possibility in years outside of Al and Kevin, and both were signed. We've never been more attractive to any FAs than somewhere that we couldn't out-bid.

Whatever.
Nikola Pekovic wrote:I'd like to go back to the time they used swords. I think I'd be good with a sword.
Tirion
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,752
And1: 290
Joined: Oct 27, 2005

Re: Any Significance to Taylor Veto? 

Post#36 » by Tirion » Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:39 pm

So if Kahn was the janitor, why he's still around? Cause cleaning not over yet. And it will not be over, cause Taylor is not about winning anymore.
thinktank
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,299
And1: 2,639
Joined: Jul 02, 2010
Location: Mpls

Re: Any Significance to Taylor Veto? 

Post#37 » by thinktank » Sun Mar 18, 2012 6:32 pm

Tirion wrote:So if Kahn was the janitor, why he's still around? Cause cleaning not over yet. And it will not be over, cause Taylor is not about winning anymore.


Under the new CBA, all GMs have to be janitors. You're stuck in the old CBA.
psundeen
Freshman
Posts: 68
And1: 1
Joined: Feb 25, 2012
       

Re: Any Significance to Taylor Veto? 

Post#38 » by psundeen » Tue Mar 20, 2012 12:29 pm

I sort of feel proven right on this topic. If he wouldnt stay in Houston theres no way he would have been ok with playing in Minnesota... Sad but true, pro athletes think we're Siberia!
Worm Guts
Forum Mod - Timberwolves
Forum Mod - Timberwolves
Posts: 27,385
And1: 12,264
Joined: Dec 27, 2003
     

Re: Any Significance to Taylor Veto? 

Post#39 » by Worm Guts » Tue Mar 20, 2012 12:35 pm

It wasn't worth the risk.

Return to Minnesota Timberwolves