Professional and College Basketball Forums banner
1 - 20 of 61 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,299 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Looks like Minny is finding out about how frustrating Marcus can be with is inconsistent play and what a stone around their neck old Stone Hands can be. As much as I love Ricky, he is also inconsistent and not any better than Wally at defense. Danny definitely got the best of this one.

Wolves need to rid themselves of dead wood

Those of us who figured getting rid of Wally Szczerbiak and his inflated contract for four players with a chance to contribute was a wise move have been proven incorrect.

When we endorsed the deal, it was based on the belief Ricky Davis was a better all-around player than Szczerbiak. He's not. Ricky's not an outside shooter, he doesn't get to the basket often, and, shockingly, he's not much better defensively than Szczerbiak.

Marcus Banks has gotten what amounts to a 30-game shot at point guard -- and the mistakes he makes in late March come with the same frequency as they did in late January.

Mark Blount is what the Boston people said he was: a 7-foot jump shooter, with many more years of contract left than Michael Olowokandi. The only guy better than advertised is forward Justin Reed, and that's as a 10-minute reserve.

It gets worse: If the Wolves want to bet that Banks will get better, they will have to use much of their mid-level exception on him, since he's a free agent. And there would go the best chance to bring in one of those veterans Kevin Garnett wants as a teammate for next season.

What Kevin McHale's big trade has done is create more dead wood on a dead team.
An NBA coach familiar with the Wolves' situation (no more hints) looked at all those contracts when the trade was made and said: "This is their team for the next four years."

There's nothing worse you could say to those dwindling numbers of Timberwolves followers -- that the team they have been watching since late January is the team they will be watching in the foreseeable future.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,241 Posts
I thought this trade was ludicrous when we pulled it off. Now, not quite as much. However:

1) Banks is still young, hard enough to believe - he's still gonna make mistakes. Although troubling he isn't learning from them, he has earned rave reviews from most Minnesota fans.

2) Slick hasn't played that well in a T-Pups uni. That's a given. The Wolves needed Wally's outside shooting to spread it for Garnett.

3) Blount sucks. We all knew this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,241 Posts
13-16 after the trade, 17-26 before. I'd say that's significantly better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
564 Posts
We win on Kandi's expiring contract for Blount's long term deal alone. Does anyone really believe that Marcus Banks is any more now than he was when he came into the league? And maybe it's my imagination, but Paul seems a lot happier with Wally on the court and on the bench than with Ricky. Maybe it's that Wally's game fits better, maybe it's that Ricky's history of a negative personality has gotten better but isn't gone and that had an effect on Pierce. I'm not the world's biggest Ainge fan, but I like this deal better all the time. And I'm not sure, but I think the TWolves winning percentage has dropped since the deal while ours improved.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
26,981 Posts
P-Dub34 said:
13-16 after the trade, 17-26 before. I'd say that's significantly better.
Except that the improvement all came in Pierce's two week Superman act (when the team went 5-2). Outside that they've been every bit as bad as they were before the trade. It's a move that hasn't really helped either team. Also the 'Wolves lost 15/22 coming into the trade, so technically speaking their 11-20 mark since represents an improvement. The article writer is wrong about something else, I believe. Bird rights are transferrable, so as a three year player the 'Wolves won't have to use any of their MLE to sign Banks. Irrelevant ultimately as they're finishing the demolition job this offseason.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
564 Posts
It helps the old argument when you pick out a set of games, but the fact is that the Wolves were 19-21 before the trade. Add the fact that we played most of the time without Perkins and Jefferson while the Wolves were healthy and I still say we got the best of the deal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,299 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
km109 said:
It helps the old argument when you pick out a set of games, but the fact is that the Wolves were 19-21 before the trade. Add the fact that we played most of the time without Perkins and Jefferson while the Wolves were healthy and I still say we got the best of the deal.
Agreed and I would add that Wally has been a positive influence all around on Pierce.
 

·
The Invisible Iron Fist
Joined
·
1,253 Posts
Based on getting rid of Blount and aquiring Wally alone, this trade was a success. Banks may develop into a serviceable PG, but the key word in that statement is "may." Right now, he's a project waiting to take shape.

Another lense through which to view this situation is the happiness of the team superstar:

KG's team has no direction and no plan, and seems lost.

PP's team has a positive attitude, seems to be working hard, and has a plan to develop through youth.

Which situation would choose?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
683 Posts
P-Dub34 said:
13-16 after the trade, 17-26 before. I'd say that's significantly better.
it was actually 17-25 before, 13-17 after...not a noteworthy improvement

and a lot of that has to do with ryan gomes's emergence...in the period after the trade before gomes entered the starting lineup the C's went 1-6

also paul pierce's superman act (as eh already pointed) has helped the team post trade
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
683 Posts
Causeway said:
Actually trades are always evaluated on how both (or all) teams are effected.

And this trade did make us better in the short and long term.
as far as who got the better end of the deal goes.

as far as whether the GM deserves props goes, not quite so much. if the wolves finished the season 0-42 while the celtics finished 4-36, i wouldn't be giving danny props despite the fact that they did finish stronger than minny.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,175 Posts
That's all well and good claiming that the Celtics got the better end of the deal, but let's NOT FORGET who drafted Banks in the first place and signed Mark Blount to that huge deal:

Danny Ainge


He passed on Howard, Planninic, Barbosa, and my favorite, Travis Outlaw (who is going to become a good player, mark my words)

While I like the deal, let's not forget that Ainge put us in that position in the first place. He's back at Zero as far as I'm concerned regarding that specific deal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,619 Posts
uh...Marcus Banks is averaging 11.4 points (on 48.4% shooting) and 4.6 assists in Minnesota. I wouldn't say he's a project and I would say that he is more than a servicable point guard that is finally getting a decent shot.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
683 Posts
PatBateman said:
That's all well and good claiming that the Celtics got the better end of the deal, but let's NOT FORGET who drafted Banks in the first place and signed Mark Blount to that huge deal:

Danny Ainge


He passed on Howard, Planninic, Barbosa, and my favorite, Travis Outlaw (who is going to become a good player, mark my words)

While I like the deal, let's not forget that Ainge put us in that position in the first place. He's back at Zero as far as I'm concerned regarding that specific deal.
the mark blount deal wasn't huge...he was getting paid 6th/7th man money, which was pretty much market value for him.

Josh Howard was 16 picks after Marcus, it woulda been a stretch to take him at 13.

Are we supposed to regret not having planinic, barbosa, or outlaw? because for some reason, i'm really not that upset that ainge didn't grab them.

Banks wasn't a good pick, but given what was available, he certainly wasn't a bad one.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
26,981 Posts
km109 said:
It helps the old argument when you pick out a set of games, but the fact is that the Wolves were 19-21 before the trade.
I see, so the fact that the Wolves 7-15 in no way indicates that they were a sub .500 team? Must have been the unlucky bounces, eh? :laugh:

Seth said:
KG's team has no direction and no plan, and seems lost. PP's team has a positive attitude, seems to be working hard, and has a plan to develop through youth.
As both will probably be playing elsewhere next year this rates a "meh". Pierce's negative attitude pre-trade didn't develop until the race trolls began trumpeting Wally's "positive influence". Because prior to the trade Pierce rated kudos around the NBA for his settling into Rivers' offense and his leadership. No doubt, though, that Wally's tendency try and take his man off the dribble and go lumbering into the lane and either a) get stripped from behind by his defender, b) blocked from behind by his defender, c) blocked by a post defender, or d) turn the ball over on a pass, and all at an alarming clip, has contributed to the "new positive attitude".

Delonte's Herpes said:
and a lot of that has to do with ryan gomes's emergence...in the period after the trade before gomes entered the starting lineup the C's went 1-6
Good call, yes, Gomes' emergence (briefly) as a primo garbage scorer was the other igniter on Pierce's two week tear through the NBA. Now that teams have game-planned for him and Gomes has cooled off, they're playing .400 ball again.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,241 Posts
Once again, I'm not a huge advocate of the trade, but it wasn't as bad as I thought. By the way, Pierce never had a "superman act" of that magnitude with Blount and Davis in the lineup. Hmmm.

Pierce has been happier and playing at an elevated level with Wally Szczerbiak in the lineup. Fact. Team has been playing better since the trade. Fact. Everybody on the team loves playing with Szczerbiak. Fact. Everybody loves having Blount and his contract gone. Fact. Banks was never going to get a chance to blossom in Boston. Fact.

Of course, people like ehmunro and #1AWF never elected to even give Wally a chance, so I'm really barking up the wrong tree. This isn't a slam on either of those guys; they're terrific posters in their own right, but it was clear upon the trade neither were content to even give Wally a chance (who, by the way, has elevated his game as of late and is rounding into form.) I like Pierce/Wally as a duo, and they both must be in DA's long term plans (otherwise the trade, indeed, would be a retarded arrangement.)

Pierce's negative attitude pre-trade didn't develop until the race trolls began trumpeting Wally's "positive influence".
If you're including me in this "race troll" group, then frankly, I am offended. Pierce had a terrific attitude pre-trade and Wally has earned rave reviews from everybody. It has nothing to do with him being white.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
26,981 Posts
P-Dub34 said:
By the way, Pierce never had a "superman act" of that magnitude with Blount and Davis in the lineup. Hmmm.
Pierce has never had a two week stretch where he shot lights out in the final minutes of games? That's news to me and everyone else that's watched him over the years. Pierce's scoring numbers went up because he was asked to do what both LeBron James and Kobe Bryant do, run the offense as the primary scoring option, which meant that he took more shots than ever before (17.2 FGA and 21.5 poss./g pre-trade to 20.9 FGA & 25.8 poss/g post-trade). During February (you know, the month where he put on the Superman act? The month where Wally was "still adjusting to the offense"?) Pierce averaged 23.5 FGA/g and 29 poss/g (!). Care to guess why he suddenly put up those numbers? If Pierce took that many shots and used up that many possessions every game he'd score 33.5 p/g. Interestingly enough, ever since Wally "stepped up his game" Pierce has gone back to being the player he always was, and suddenly Boston's a mediocre team again. But I suppose that's just a coincidence. :bsmile:

P-Dub34 said:
If you're including me in this "race troll" group, then frankly, I am offended. Pierce had a terrific attitude pre-trade and Wally has earned rave reviews from everybody. It has nothing to do with him being white.
Did you, after the trade, claim that Pierce was "unhappy" and "moping"? No? So I guess you aren't included, are you?
 
1 - 20 of 61 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top