Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 112 of 112 FirstFirst ... 1262102110111112
Results 1,666 to 1,678 of 1678
  1. #1666
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    12,664
    I donít love it but I donít care a ton either I guess. It feels kinda similar to bringing Rubio in to me. Itís a off court or culture move more than an on court impact move. Heís 33 and been declining so I donít expect tons (maybe 20 mpg?)but we need some attitude/defense I guess so it fits.

    Culver wasnít showing anything and juancho isnít special so itís not a big deal. I donít think anyone values culver like a recent high pick, even if it is a bit early to sell like this.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  2. #1667
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Highlands
    Posts
    1,525
    I really like this move - Bev will actually play a role, and is at least a better fit than Rubio was (better fit, not necessarily a better player). He can also step in a play a huge leadership role - someone said the next oldest is Layman at 27/28(!).

    Also like the room it makes for other moves.

    As I understand it, we can now sign all of Bolmaro, McLaughlin & Vanderbilt (assuming they sign for what we expect to be low salaries) - as well as room for one more vet signing.

    For that vet signing, are we able to use the MLE? If so, I'd love to get Milsap. I know he's aged and has slowed right down, but I think he'd be great in the locker room and would offer at least 15-20 solid minutes a night.

  3. #1668
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bushwood Country Club
    Posts
    80,297
    Quote Originally Posted by mngopher35 View Post
    I donít love it but I donít care a ton either I guess. It feels kinda similar to bringing Rubio in to me. Itís a off court or culture move more than an on court impact move. Heís 33 and been declining so I donít expect tons (maybe 20 mpg?)but we need some attitude/defense I guess so it fits.

    Culver wasnít showing anything and juancho isnít special so itís not a big deal. I donít think anyone values culver like a recent high pick, even if it is a bit early to sell like this.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Health is the only concern. Ant was controlling the ball in PnR a lot as the season progressed, and Bev is a much stronger floor spacer, better defender, and cheaper than Rubio.
    Culver has no place here at this point. Value for him was entirely based on what team is looking at him. Reminds me of when Kahn traded for.lioe 7 players in the span of 2 years that were just like Culver (under 25, higher picks that didn't pan out, looking to see if anyone bloomed late).

  4. #1669
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    12,664
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkeye15 View Post
    Health is the only concern. Ant was controlling the ball in PnR a lot as the season progressed, and Bev is a much stronger floor spacer, better defender, and cheaper than Rubio.
    Culver has no place here at this point. Value for him was entirely based on what team is looking at him. Reminds me of when Kahn traded for.lioe 7 players in the span of 2 years that were just like Culver (under 25, higher picks that didn't pan out, looking to see if anyone bloomed late).
    Beverly fits a bit better than Rubio on our team but generally speaking they are similar impact players is my point. If healthy it should be a very slight upgrade but again it seems like the better/bigger aspect is off court or mentality like I was getting at than any on court production. Neither one is a gamechanger on the court but both provide other pluses as veterans which was my main point for the comparison. When we moved Rubio one of the bigger things mentioned was his relationships and being a mentor not that we lost something hard to replace on the court.

    The only bad thing about moving Culver is how low the value is for a recent high pick. I agree though he has no place here and probably needed a change of scenery either way. He was pitiful for us when he got time the last 2 seasons. The team option for him is coming up and I think moving him before it may have been a goal for Rosas.

    In the end we basically traded two guys who maybe wouldn't crack the rotation for one who very likely will. On top of that player fitting some of our needs like spacing/defense/aggressive mentality from vet.

  5. #1670
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bushwood Country Club
    Posts
    80,297
    Quote Originally Posted by mngopher35 View Post
    Beverly fits a bit better than Rubio on our team but generally speaking they are similar impact players is my point. If healthy it should be a very slight upgrade but again it seems like the better/bigger aspect is off court or mentality like I was getting at than any on court production. Neither one is a gamechanger on the court but both provide other pluses as veterans which was my main point for the comparison. When we moved Rubio one of the bigger things mentioned was his relationships and being a mentor not that we lost something hard to replace on the court.

    The only bad thing about moving Culver is how low the value is for a recent high pick. I agree though he has no place here and probably needed a change of scenery either way. He was pitiful for us when he got time the last 2 seasons. The team option for him is coming up and I think moving him before it may have been a goal for Rosas.

    In the end we basically traded two guys who maybe wouldn't crack the rotation for one who very likely will. On top of that player fitting some of our needs like spacing/defense/aggressive mentality from vet.
    Incremental improvements matter though. Rubio as a spacer is ridic.

    Culver just sucked unfortunately. No need to.compound a mistake by refusing to admit he was a terrible pick at 6. I mean, you are totally right in these moves don't impact the win column much. Just modest tweaks.

  6. #1671
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Maple Grove, MN
    Posts
    7,710
    Quote Originally Posted by mngopher35 View Post
    Beverly fits a bit better than Rubio on our team but generally speaking they are similar impact players is my point. If healthy it should be a very slight upgrade but again it seems like the better/bigger aspect is off court or mentality like I was getting at than any on court production. Neither one is a gamechanger on the court but both provide other pluses as veterans which was my main point for the comparison. When we moved Rubio one of the bigger things mentioned was his relationships and being a mentor not that we lost something hard to replace on the court.

    The only bad thing about moving Culver is how low the value is for a recent high pick. I agree though he has no place here and probably needed a change of scenery either way. He was pitiful for us when he got time the last 2 seasons. The team option for him is coming up and I think moving him before it may have been a goal for Rosas.

    In the end we basically traded two guys who maybe wouldn't crack the rotation for one who very likely will. On top of that player fitting some of our needs like spacing/defense/aggressive mentality from vet.
    I 1000% disagree with the above highlighted statement. Rubio has much more impact and is a significantly better player overall than Beverley, if used to his strengths. I agree he was not a good fit(in how we used him) and he had serious conditioning/health issues stemming from Covid/no pre-season. He will be a ton better this season, whoever he plays for. Looking at any and all advanced metrics, Rubio, at this point in his career is still a good starting-caliber PG, Beverley is not. However, Beverley is a better fit than Rubio with this particular roster and style of play.


    PSD Grammar Lesson #1:

    a) their - stands for "belonging to them"
    b) there - means "over there" as in location
    c) they're - short for "they are"

  7. #1672
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    12,664
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkeye15 View Post
    Incremental improvements matter though. Rubio as a spacer is ridic.

    Culver just sucked unfortunately. No need to.compound a mistake by refusing to admit he was a terrible pick at 6. I mean, you are totally right in these moves don't impact the win column much. Just modest tweaks.
    Ya, the incremental improvement comes from the better fit. I think we expected Rubio to have the ball a little more as a playmaker before Ant showed out. Like you get at near the end we have mostly made modest tweaks.

    It's not bad, we have a better fitting roster with Beverly/Prince compared to Rubio/Culver/Juancho. There is some value there at least.

    I still hope we are trying for a larger move the needle type move. Between draft/FA we were probably the least active team (no picks or cap so makes sense but still that's tough for a team in our spot). If not at least we have better fitting role players.

  8. #1673
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    12,664
    Quote Originally Posted by Oefarmy2005 View Post
    I 1000% disagree with the above highlighted statement. Rubio has much more impact and is a significantly better player overall than Beverley, if used to his strengths. I agree he was not a good fit(in how we used him) and he had serious conditioning/health issues stemming from Covid/no pre-season. He will be a ton better this season, whoever he plays for. Looking at any and all advanced metrics, Rubio, at this point in his career is still a good starting-caliber PG, Beverley is not. However, Beverley is a better fit than Rubio with this particular roster and style of play.
    I was talking about for this team they are similar impact types. Rubio might do better elsewhere but for this team I noted he wouldn't be a gamechanger when we got him and that was pretty evident last season. He can do better elsewhere but it would take a great fit and tbh I don't think good teams value him that highly. Beverly is the better fit for us though as you note so impact wise should be somewhat similar even if not as good overall. For both additions my point has been on court neither will change too much for us but both provide other benefits as vets etc. as well.

    When Rubio left there was little talk about how it hurt us on the court, if anything I heard more about his vet presence/mentor and relationship with Ant. Beverly is going to be similar where the on court impact may not be a ton but with his fit and grind mentality he still has some value outside that.
    Last edited by mngopher35; 08-18-2021 at 05:08 PM.

  9. #1674
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bushwood Country Club
    Posts
    80,297
    Quote Originally Posted by Oefarmy2005 View Post
    I 1000% disagree with the above highlighted statement. Rubio has much more impact and is a significantly better player overall than Beverley, if used to his strengths. I agree he was not a good fit(in how we used him) and he had serious conditioning/health issues stemming from Covid/no pre-season. He will be a ton better this season, whoever he plays for. Looking at any and all advanced metrics, Rubio, at this point in his career is still a good starting-caliber PG, Beverley is not. However, Beverley is a better fit than Rubio with this particular roster and style of play.
    well, you state your opinion here, but then also state why Beverley is the better fit. In a vacuum, of course Rubio is the better player. For our needs, Beverley is more valuable (defender at point of attack, spot up shooter off the ball). We weren't using any of Rubio's strengths basketball wise, and at the end of the day, Bev is a better fit.

    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. #1675
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Maple Grove, MN
    Posts
    7,710
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkeye15 View Post
    well, you state your opinion here, but then also state why Beverley is the better fit. In a vacuum, of course Rubio is the better player. For our needs, Beverley is more valuable (defender at point of attack, spot up shooter off the ball). We weren't using any of Rubio's strengths basketball wise, and at the end of the day, Bev is a better fit.
    Lol, that's the point I was trying to make. In a vacuum, Rubio is a higher impact player than Beverly. I just went the long winded way about stating as much.


    PSD Grammar Lesson #1:

    a) their - stands for "belonging to them"
    b) there - means "over there" as in location
    c) they're - short for "they are"

  11. #1676
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Maple Grove, MN
    Posts
    7,710
    I feel like we still need another forward to fill out the roster and B'Easy is available. I know he is not ideal(i.e. he fits right in with no defense) but he would be a nice bucket getter fort the second unit.


    PSD Grammar Lesson #1:

    a) their - stands for "belonging to them"
    b) there - means "over there" as in location
    c) they're - short for "they are"

  12. #1677
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    12,664
    We resigned Jmac and Vandy for 3 years it looks like (6.5 mil and 13.8 mil over the 3 years)

  13. #1678
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Maple Grove, MN
    Posts
    7,710
    Quote Originally Posted by mngopher35 View Post
    We resigned Jmac and Vandy for 3 years it looks like (6.5 mil and 13.8 mil over the 3 years)
    Definitely a steal for Vando and a team friendly contract for Jmac.


    PSD Grammar Lesson #1:

    a) their - stands for "belonging to them"
    b) there - means "over there" as in location
    c) they're - short for "they are"

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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