Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 137 of 238 FirstFirst ... 3787127135136137138139147187237 ... LastLast
Results 2,041 to 2,055 of 3557
  1. #2041
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bushwood Country Club
    Posts
    59,895
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Bigus Dogus View Post
    Outside of curiosity, why do people get worked up about sports writers' opinions of players? Pek is what Pek is, and whether Vescey or Hollinger think well or ill of him doesn't matter even a little bit. Nobody ever won a championship because all the writers loved the team. And I would wager that 90% of writers' opinions are ill-informed and written to create controversy to help them sell product. I got 99 problems but that ain't one.

    Its like season ending awards, I just can't muster any energy to care what other people think of my favorite club.
    The only guy that ever pissed me off back in the day was Charlie Rosen. He always said KG was not a #1, and that he didn't have a killer instinct. At my age, at the time, I didn't have the understanding I have now, so I hated him. Turns out he was right....

    It's always nice for your favorite team's players to get recognition, you can't say otherwise. But yeah, it shouldn't actually upset anyone if a member of the media or the media in general is critical. I read Chad Ford's updated offseason grades today, and he gave us a C. I got a little irked until I realized two things: 1- who cares. 2- I have seen and heard a lot of sports media talk about how great we did this offseason.

    If you want the ultimate, you've got to be willing to pay the ultimate price. It's not tragic to die doing what you love.

  2. #2042
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bushwood Country Club
    Posts
    59,895
    vCash
    1500
    I will say, I do like Hollinger, because he is far more analytical. I have gotten sick of the media's obsession with Kahn-bashing, but at this point, I breeze right over it.

    If you want the ultimate, you've got to be willing to pay the ultimate price. It's not tragic to die doing what you love.

  3. #2043
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    In a Hotel with Your Girl
    Posts
    1,237
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkeye15 View Post
    I will say, I do like Hollinger, because he is far more analytical. I have gotten sick of the media's obsession with Kahn-bashing, but at this point, I breeze right over it.
    Hollinger is definitely not inflammatory, but I find his unwillingness to look beyond his numbers almost as bad at times. But at least he has a consistent and predictable basis for his opinions, rather than just throwing out baseless opinions. Comparing him to Vescey was probably unfair to him.

  4. #2044
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    The Doghouse
    Posts
    10,339
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkeye15 View Post
    The only guy that ever pissed me off back in the day was Charlie Rosen. He always said KG was not a #1, and that he didn't have a killer instinct. At my age, at the time, I didn't have the understanding I have now, so I hated him. Turns out he was right....

    It's always nice for your favorite team's players to get recognition, you can't say otherwise. But yeah, it shouldn't actually upset anyone if a member of the media or the media in general is critical. I read Chad Ford's updated offseason grades today, and he gave us a C. I got a little irked until I realized two things: 1- who cares. 2- I have seen and heard a lot of sports media talk about how great we did this offseason.
    A "C?" Wtf? I feel like it should be a B- to a B+. Kahn solved some serious wing issues and fortified the backcourt. Obviously, there is some risk and some high dollars paid, but too many issues were solved for it to be a "C" or "average."

  5. #2045
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Highlands
    Posts
    766
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by PurpleJesus View Post
    how so? because people think Chandler is better? that is not under rating him...that is just logic.
    no.

    i like chandler as much as the next guy, he would be a great fit here - he and love would be close to the best front court duo in the league.

    i just don't think he (pek) gets enough credit. his numbers in the second half of last season were so good, and his defence is underrated. i cannot think of a single game in the second half of last season where he was outplayed by his direct opponent.

    logic? if we are talking 'logically', then we should be trading for a SG since we only have one on the roster, who has no cartilage in his knees and hasn't played in over 12 months, rather than trading for a position we already have filled.
    Last edited by ellington19; 08-14-2012 at 09:46 PM.

  6. #2046
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    21,344
    vCash
    2500
    Quote Originally Posted by ellington19 View Post
    no.

    i like chandler as much as the next guy, he would be a great fit here - he and love would be close to the best front court duo in the league.

    i just don't think he (pek) gets enough credit. his numbers in the second half of last season were so good, and his defence is underrated. i cannot think of a single game in the second half of last season where he was outplayed by his direct opponent.

    logic? if we are talking 'logically', then we should be trading for a SG since we only have one on the roster, who has no cartilage in his knees and hasn't played in over 12 months, rather than trading for a position we already have filled.
    Absolutely, if we are to trade for something, we go for a SG...but the rumors are we are interested in a C...And yes, Pek is a monster, but when I take all things considered, I would definitely trade Pek + something for Tyson...things considered, are that Tyson is locked up for a couple more year, Pek is not, Pek will command a lot of money in free agency, Tyson is a better fit next to Love, and Tyson is overall the better player.

  7. #2047
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    5,247
    vCash
    1500
    http://www.nba.com/timberwolves/vide...essmp4-2175887

    This just gets me excited for the season, and Roy

  8. #2048
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    In a Hotel with Your Girl
    Posts
    1,237
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by iliketurtles24 View Post
    http://www.nba.com/timberwolves/vide...essmp4-2175887

    This just gets me excited for the season, and Roy
    Watching him limp up the two steps to the podium does the opposite for me.

  9. #2049
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bushwood Country Club
    Posts
    59,895
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Bigus Dogus View Post
    Hollinger is definitely not inflammatory, but I find his unwillingness to look beyond his numbers almost as bad at times. But at least he has a consistent and predictable basis for his opinions, rather than just throwing out baseless opinions. Comparing him to Vescey was probably unfair to him.
    Agreed, but at least he actually evaluates with a set of rules or principals. It seems some "experts" just wing it, as you said.

    If you want the ultimate, you've got to be willing to pay the ultimate price. It's not tragic to die doing what you love.

  10. #2050
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bushwood Country Club
    Posts
    59,895
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by topdog View Post
    A "C?" Wtf? I feel like it should be a B- to a B+. Kahn solved some serious wing issues and fortified the backcourt. Obviously, there is some risk and some high dollars paid, but too many issues were solved for it to be a "C" or "average."
    Key additions: Brandon Roy (FA), Andrei Kirilenko (FA), Chase Budinger (trade), Alexey Shved (FA), Greg Stiemsma (FA), Dante Cunningham (trade), Robbie Hummel (draft)

    Key subtractions: Wesley Johnson, Darko Milicic, Martell Webster, Wayne Ellington, Brad Miller

    The Timberwolves had the right idea in pursuing Blazers free agent Nic Batum. He would be a nice fit at small forward. The $46.5 million price tag is a lot, but Rule 1 of Restricted Free Agency 101 says you have to dramatically overpay to convince a home team not to match. The Wolves didn't overpay enough, and the Blazers, as expected, quickly matched the offer.

    Roy is an interesting pickup; no one knows if his knees will hold up enough to make him worth the $10 million the Wolves are paying. If he's healthy enough to be a contributor, this was a good move.

    Kirilenko is less risky. He played well in Russia and looks like he still has something left in the tank. The Wolves look like they overpaid to get him, but that seems to be GM David Kahn's specialty. How he fits onto a team that primarily needs shooting remains a question mark, but most GMs think his veteran presence will help.

    After Roy and Kirilenko, the Wolves don't have much to show for their offseason other than adding Budinger and Shved -- two shooters who don't bring a lot more to the table.

    The waiving of Milicic via the amnesty clause only highlights how silly their offer was to him two years ago. Ditto for the dumping of Webster. The Wolves gave up a mid-first-round pick for him last year. And giving away both Johnson (the No. 4 pick two years ago) and Ellington points out yet again that, with the exception of Rubio, the Wolves have blown through numerous draft picks will little to show for it.

    Overall, short of Roy having a miraculous recovery or Kirilenko dialing back the clock five years, the improvements this summer have been incremental. Somewhere, Kevin Love is pouting.

    GRADE: C
    Ford gave Houston a better grade than he gave us. Whatever.

    If you want the ultimate, you've got to be willing to pay the ultimate price. It's not tragic to die doing what you love.

  11. #2051
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    The Doghouse
    Posts
    10,339
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkeye15 View Post
    Ford gave Houston a better grade than he gave us. Whatever.
    Thanks for posting that. Ford sounds like an ill-informed douche per usual.

    We all know Webster was 2 years ago, Ellington was a minor trade but wasn't "given away," and how do the last several drafts factor into this years' grade? He brushes off Buddinger and Shved like they aren't most definitely better than what we were getting from Wes and Beasley... I could go on pointlessly.

    Seems like the usual Kahn-bashing. Morey gets the Rockets a good grade off of his name and drafting. If he tries for Dwight, it's a "great move." If Kahn did it, they'd say, "There goes Kahn again. KAAAHHHHNNN!"
    Last edited by topdog; 08-15-2012 at 01:28 PM.

  12. #2052
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    4,396
    vCash
    1500
    Kahn's specialty is overpaying...hahahahaha
    Also Budinger with his athleticism and knowledge of Adelman's system and Shved with his passing ability, really have nothing to offer other than their shooting.

  13. #2053
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    186
    vCash
    1500
    I think a C grade is about right. As much as I hate to say it, but I still have alot of question marks with this team. We are putting alot of eggs into the "Washed up vets find the fountain of youth" basket. If Roy can only play 15 mpg and only 50 games and AK can only play 50 games then our big offseason addition is Chase Budinger, who is a nice player but at the end of the day if he is your big move, your offseason grade deserves probably a D.

    Theres no doubt we made the team better...but there is a huge risk/reward factor. We all know the mothership brushes aside small market teams and especially enjoy ripping on Kahn, but from a completely unbiased perspective I wouldnt say the Wolves had a particularly "great" offseason. I personally would give it a C+ to B- depending on if I'm curving

  14. #2054
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    In a Hotel with Your Girl
    Posts
    1,237
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by biggsohnasty View Post
    I think a C grade is about right. As much as I hate to say it, but I still have alot of question marks with this team. We are putting alot of eggs into the "Washed up vets find the fountain of youth" basket. If Roy can only play 15 mpg and only 50 games and AK can only play 50 games then our big offseason addition is Chase Budinger, who is a nice player but at the end of the day if he is your big move, your offseason grade deserves probably a D.

    Theres no doubt we made the team better...but there is a huge risk/reward factor. We all know the mothership brushes aside small market teams and especially enjoy ripping on Kahn, but from a completely unbiased perspective I wouldnt say the Wolves had a particularly "great" offseason. I personally would give it a C+ to B- depending on if I'm curving
    I'm with you. The Roy deal is totally a Favre-like gamble that may pay big dividends or be a complete bust. Chase and AK are clearly upgrades, but adding almost any NBA player would be an upgrade over Wes last year. The risk with Chase is that he goes off, and we can't afford him. The risk on AK is age and health. All in all, its hard for me to get mad at someone saying that the offseason was a 'C'. Just getting rid of AR, Wes and Darko would have earned a C from me.

    That doesn't mean they won't have a HUGE impact on this team. I have said it so many times that I am tired of it, but if this team simply had competent wing play and perimeter defense (outside of Ricky) they would have been a top 6 team in the west IMO. In my mind they have done that even if Roy and AK struggle.

  15. #2055
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bushwood Country Club
    Posts
    59,895
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by biggsohnasty View Post
    I think a C grade is about right. As much as I hate to say it, but I still have alot of question marks with this team. We are putting alot of eggs into the "Washed up vets find the fountain of youth" basket. If Roy can only play 15 mpg and only 50 games and AK can only play 50 games then our big offseason addition is Chase Budinger, who is a nice player but at the end of the day if he is your big move, your offseason grade deserves probably a D.

    Theres no doubt we made the team better...but there is a huge risk/reward factor. We all know the mothership brushes aside small market teams and especially enjoy ripping on Kahn, but from a completely unbiased perspective I wouldnt say the Wolves had a particularly "great" offseason. I personally would give it a C+ to B- depending on if I'm curving
    I am not as high on the upgrades as some here, but at the very least, our wing/bench situation went from terrible to average. That alone should warrant a B-.

    If you want the ultimate, you've got to be willing to pay the ultimate price. It's not tragic to die doing what you love.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •