Yesterday was the writing on the wall...Pietrus will be gone.

For me,If a pet project is not working out,at some point its frustrating and I go back to the drawing board and get a new pet project. If the W's could trade away Wilt,Rick Barry,Bernard King,I don't think it's certain Dunleavy is here forever.

In the offseason there were mock deals of Dunleavy + Fish for..... or Dunleavy + Foyle for,and response was not enthusiastic,nor did such a deal happen. In a year perhaps a J-Rich+ Foyle+? is part of a deal where we get something important. Pietrus gets the 2G job,there's a short contract add-in somewhere that gets us a bit of cap/payroll space,and so Cohen pays Lux tax on 3-5 Mill,a few years BUT finally has a WINNER. I'd be happier putting out a bit extra and tasting success than spending 60 mill and never being a .500 team.

 

I would never trade away JRich. He's becoming one of the top 2 guard and has a much smaller salary than what other guards are getting

 

I would not look to deal j rich for just some package of journeymen,expirings and a pick. At some point we might want to try for a guy like Okafor or D Howard,or Bosh. J Rich is a quality player,and still rising,so he's got big value. Pietrus is also improving and in a year or 2 there won't be a big dropoff,so if the deal is right...sure,it's thinkable.

I'm not looking at now,but at next summer or beyond. I'd only consider a few players as the key guy we get. I figure itwould be a package,and Foyle or Fish would be a minor part.

The real point is that there are a lot of possibilities,regarding Pietrus between now and Unrestricted FA.

 

I don't think Pietrus will become unrestricted FA, which is 3 years from now. Knowing our salary situation, other teams will definitely offer a deal, because they know we can't match the contract. For clearing some salary, two years isn't a long time.

Trading Richardson to keep Pietrus makes a lot of sense, if we ever plan to go that way. If we try to keep Pietrus, we have to let either Richardson or Dunleavy go. Problem is that Dunleavy is technically untradable for next two years due to his contract situation. Also, spending 45+ mils on Davis, Richardson, Dunleavy and Pietrus are also insane, because it leaves practically nothing for front court. So, it's really either Richardson or Pietrus, unless Pietrus decides to work for pennies. I seriously doubt that we will get Richardson for players with rookie contracts like Howard or Okafor, because of youth and salary reason. But, we can package Richardson and number of our young players and picks for a superstar; again Garnett.

Well, let's see what happens. If Mullin has any intention to keep Pietrus for a long term or cash in, he has two years to prepare...

 

What do you mean by writing on the wall? I dont not comprehend this.

 

we CAN Bird Rights Mike Pete,etc,it's a question of how much salary the front office is okay with-and that will link to what sort of success this team has.
when
i mentioned a big swap,such as J Rich and more for Okafor or Bosh or ? I'm not thinking NOW,but some point before we need to re-up Pietrus and others,at that point,we COULD do a sign + swap making the new guy's new salary the amount that's relevant,and whatever the fillers are finishes the deal. Again,all I'm trying to say is that the doors are not all closed,even if the Dun deal complicated things.

As for KG,it's sensible to keep in touch with the T-Wolves but it's pretty hard to say what is the best deal we realistically could make. If KG is REALLY on the block,most teams will put out an offer,and so it's unlikely we'd get a bargain deal. KG has a BIG contract and if we take that AND give some of our best talent plus picks,we could be thin,and not be able to get a pick or FA to build with. There's a point where it works for us and a point where it won't.

I figure that a young future star will cost,but not like a proven superstar-plus we buy some time to fill holes.

 

Technically, we can resign all our rookies. But realistically, how much luxury tax will Cohan pay? If any? In this year, only 10 teams out of 30 teams are projected to pay luxury tax, and only 4 teams are projected to pay more than 10 mils on luxury tax. Even if we pay 10 mils luxury tax, it would be very hard to keep Pietrus alone, providing that we don't/can't dump any salary. I don't think Cohan is a cheap owner, but I also doubt that he is a Cuban as well. He is a business owner, and most of owners would rather have a 0-82 teams that makes 10 mils per year than 82-0 team that cost 10 mils per year.

The problem with getting young stars for Richardson is why do they want to swap their young players for Richardson? For example, before last season, if Seattle offered Lewis for Richardson, we will probably reject the deal. Not that the talent doesn't match, but because of Richardson's youth, we want to see what he can do in the future. Guys like Bosh, Howard and Okafor falls into similar catagory. Not that talent level matches, but they would rather hold onto their young players and see what they can do in the future. That's why I suggested KG type of trade, where teams are in total rebuilding mode, and they are cashing in veterans for young talents like how we picked up Davis. Currently, KG is not on the block. But, if they miss PO this year, which isn't too unrealistic, Wolves may consider total rebuilding. KG is 30 years old, and he may not enjoy rebuilding years, and for Wolves stand, with KG, they will only get 10-14 picks every year. That's why some wolves fans are starting the petition against future KG trade already, when he isn't on the block. If Wolves wish to trade KG, they are not receiving another veteran in return, because they are in total rebulding stage. They will definitely look for young superstars, probably under 25 years old, with additions of picks. Also, for receiving team, they must have bunch of trading chips and be a contender even after trading all those players, because otherwise, KG will simply veto the trade. If you put that in consideration, there aren't too many teams that meets those requirements. If our young players like Pietrus, Zarko, Biedrins, Diogu, Taft, Monta improves like we expect them to be, we may be able to package two or even three of them with either Richardson or Murphy. of course, first they have to grow and show a lot of star potential for us to make the deal, and KG has to be available in the future.

Well, those are still good a year or two from now, but knowing that our existing contracts are very hard to trade and we may not retain most of our young players, that's the best solution I can think of in this situation...

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting REREM:</div><div class="quote_post">we CAN Bird Rights Mike Pete,etc,it's a question of how much salary the front office is okay with-and that will link to what sort of success this team has.
when
i mentioned a big swap,such as J Rich and more for Okafor or Bosh or ? I'm not thinking NOW,but some point before we need to re-up Pietrus and others,at that point,we COULD do a sign + swap making the new guy's new salary the amount that's relevant,and whatever the fillers are finishes the deal. Again,all I'm trying to say is that the doors are not all closed,even if the Dun deal complicated things.

As for KG,it's sensible to keep in touch with the T-Wolves but it's pretty hard to say what is the best deal we realistically could make. If KG is REALLY on the block,most teams will put out an offer,and so it's unlikely we'd get a bargain deal. KG has a BIG contract and if we take that AND give some of our best talent plus picks,we could be thin,and not be able to get a pick or FA to build with. There's a point where it works for us and a point where it won't.

I figure that a young future star will cost,but not like a proven superstar-plus we buy some time to fill holes.</div>
I'm just not so sure about bird rights anymore. Look at what happened with Joe Johnson and the Hawks (minus owner Steve Belkin) willing to give up those couple of first rounders and pay him an all-star contract. Although the Suns probably got a lot for him in the long run, losing him definitely slowed the momentum of the Suns.

I almost feel anytime we have the possible matchup problems Dunleavy could suffer from on offense or defense, we need to have Pietrus cover any position Bruce Bowen would cover on D(pg, sg, sf) and we need his explosiveness as a second weapon to make up for the fact we're not very athletic in the starting rotation. I don't care how smart or saavy a guy is on defense, there's no cure for plain getting beat. I guess I'll pull my Jim Barnett on Brian Cardinal here: He is one of the exceptions to that rule because he at least applies pressure and bugs the hell out of a guy. Quick hands too (1.5 steals in 24 minutes plus saves a posession or two per game, hits those shots at a good time, makes free throws.).

 

I'm starting to think that maybe you guys were right about Dunleavy. He plays so well when there's nothing to play for. Did you guys see that around the back move at the end of the Utah game? I mean, why can't he take the ball at the hoop when we need him to? He's officially in my doghouse. I was against the signing of him before, but I still defended him. At least Murphy (who I still hope gets traded while his value is high) has that fire to make the play in him. Ugh, this may be a long 3 years. On the bright side, we can probably sign Pietrus to a 1 year deal at the end of this deal and Dunleavy will be tradeable by that time. Hopefully Dundun wakes up out of this sissy demeanor soon.

 

Well, Dunleavy will probably play better than 8.7 pts with 26% from the field and 18% from the 3 pts. But it's definitely disappointing start, especially after Mullin went over the limb and gave him a controversal big contract. It feels like he doesn't have a clue what's going on. More than 50% of his jumpers are 3 pts, agressiveness or creativity on offense end is non-existant, and it's not like we rely Dunleavy on defense to begin with. He has to be the least productive player, who received 35 mins per game or more. And, what happened with his increased strength? It feels like he gets crushed like a cardboard whenever there is a contact.

Good news is that he will probably play better as time goes on. But the real problem is that will he ever come close to 9 mils per year contract he received? At this rate, he may be less tradable contract than Fisher's one...

 

Like I have stated in the other thread, give Dunleavy a few games to settle in. He's playing very sloppy but has shown signs of skills/instincts that not even Baron Davis possesses. His court vision and passing is a nice thing to have.

 

I hear all this talk about what a great passer he is. The dude only averages 2 assists a game. Brad Miller is a good passer, and he averages like 4 assists a game (and he's a center!). We don't want to always wait on Dunleavy to find his groove. He got a 9mil/year extension to provide inconsistent play? So what if he does have a great game next time, I do expect to see him just dissapear again for another 4-5 games until he does well again.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting AnimeFANatic:</div><div class="quote_post">I hear all this talk about what a great passer he is. The dude only averages 2 assists a game. Brad Miller is a good passer, and he averages like 4 assists a game (and he's a center!). We don't want to always wait on Dunleavy to find his groove. He got a 9mil/year extension to provide inconsistent play? So what if he does have a great game next time, I do expect to see him just dissapear again for another 4-5 games until he does well again.</div>

Eh, assuming you understand the game of basketball, the passing skills of Dunleavy vs. Brad Miller are not comparable. The nice passing I have seen Dunleavy make have been in transition whereas Miller's passes probably come from the low-post/half-court set. Again, I stress Dunleavy's vision. He does have good court vision.

I understand the frustration and believe me, I share it with you, but from a pure basketball point of view, I can appreciate Dunleavy's game. It's been three games...I think the most we can do at this point is hope he is worth the extension he got over the course of the entire season. I mean, if the W's start winning games, how much can we complain?

 

He does have his good qualities. I just feel he's overrated and definately not worth 9mil/year, not yet. I believe Pietrus has more upside than Dunleavy.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting AnimeFANatic:</div><div class="quote_post">He does have his good qualities. I just feel he's overrated and definately not worth 9mil/year, not yet. I believe Pietrus has more upside than Dunleavy.</div>

We shall see.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Kensaku:</div><div class="quote_post">We shall see. </div>

Yeah, we'll see.... less of this! http://members.dslextreme.com/users/jamesy...unkadayears.avi

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting AnimeFANatic:</div><div class="quote_post">Yeah, we'll see.... less of this! http://members.dslextreme.com/users/jamesy...unkadayears.avi

</div>
Well, we have Jrich who pretty much does that, but I think the thing is that Pietrus' real value is as a defensive guy and offensive sparkplug. I think of him as Brian Cardinal with athleticism and less fundamentals, but same energy and willingness to sacrifice his body and wind up on the floor. He's one tough bastard. I love Pietrus.

 

Dun understands the game but tends to take a cautious approach,which for him often means a perimeter J,or defense that has him in the right place but giving too little pressure. Pietrus is willing to take a chance,to push it aggressively. We need all of that we can get. There are teams we will whack with a Dunleavy-Murphy frontcourt,but others that will kill us. We will need what Mike P can do. We could perhaps do fine minus Dunleavy,but that is a futile point until Mike D establishes his value/potential closer to his salary.

I see Mullin's plan as getting a stable nucleus that grows togather and has everyone improving. If he is looking at that it figures he has the go-ahead to take on the salaries.

Cohen and the investors can make $ in real estate,stocks,etc. The point of owning a team is to at some point-WIN. A loser is an expensive hobby and not the same kind of fun. Once this team is among the elite,THEN,some budget moves can be done. Then we know what some of these guys will do,because they are nearer their prime