Dude Weather Subscribe to Secrets Minneapolis / St. Paul
On the Ball
The Three-Pointer: Net Plus
Photo copyright 2009 NBAE (Photo by David Sherman/NBAE via Getty Images)
Game #74, Home Game #37, Minnesota 108, New Jersey 99
Season Record: 21-53
1. Mike Miller Pulls a Fast One
Whoa! Exactly who was that shaggy-haired gentleman clad in Wolves uni #33 this afternoon? You know, the one looking to take advantage of his gaudy 48.3% shooting by, ah, shooting, and shooting again. And again. Pretty soon, his teammates knew they had a fighting chance in this game despite the absence of Randy Foye as well as Al Jefferson. Pretty soon the opposing New Jersey Nets understood that #33 was actually aiming the ball at the basket and not contorting his body into some corkscrew, no-look whiparound in order to set up an open 28 footer for Bassy Telfair, or engaging in some ankle-spraining, hell-bent-for-leather kamikaze mission through the lane that could yield a bounce pass for Jason Collins. No, #33 was doing stuff James Naismith himself couldn't possibly have imagined: The deadeye shooter was going to shoot! I mean who could have guessed? Who else, in the previous 73 Timberwolves games, ever came up with the idea that, while being a great rebounder, fancy-pants passer, and momentarily energetic defender on occasion (so long as it doesn't involve close-outs on the perimeter), that Mike Miller might actually help this ballclub if he shot it as much as his teammates? That he might spread the floor, open up driving and passing lanes for others, and begin to translate that $9 million salary into a victory or two for his team?
Alright, enough sarcasm. The truth of the matter is that Mike Miller played a hell of a game today, and, coupled with the extreme disinterest in any semblance of defense exhibited by the Nets, was the reason the Wolves triumphed. Yes, it was a rare as well as a marvelous thing. Miller was 8-14 FG. The last time Miller attempted as many as 14 shots in one game was on November 28--over 4 months ago--in Oklahoma City. The Wolves won that game too. Miller finished with a team-high 22 points. The last time Miller scored more points than anyone else on his team this season was, well, never. There was the February 27 game when he tied for team high with Craig Smith (16 apiece), but never once before this afternoon had Miller led the Timberwolves in scoring outright. Think about that for a moment, and shake your head. Maybe that's why Minnesota is last in the NBA in FG%.
On the first play of the game, ex-Wolf Trenton Hassell backed Miller down in the post and then tossed in a lay-up. Perhaps it stung Miller's pride--Hassell is if anything a defensive specialist who has slipped a notch. Whatever the motivation, Miller immediately took it strong to the hole and drew the foul. By the end of the period he had a team high 9 points--more than he'd scored in any one of his previous *6 games*. What's more, perhaps Miller saw that being more aggressive with his own shot opened up passing and assist opportunities he hadn't been getting--his 5 assists today were his highest total in 5 games, and were barely besmirched by one measly turnover. Among the dimes was a beautiful bounce pass from the wing to a cutter on the opposite block for a layup. It is amazing how pretty that kind of play looks when you are not gritting your teeth at all the good shots he's passing up.
People within the Wolves organization couldn't exactly jump up and down with glee at Miller's sudden embrace of team-winning style basketball, but their words left little doubt that they were ready to reinforce this behavior--even if it was a tad late, coming in game #74.
"Mike shot the ball and was aggressive. He's been aggressive all year long as far as rebounding and passing, But this is definitively what we need. When Mike does that it opens things up for everybody else. It makes it easier for everybody when Mike is knocking down shots," coach Kevin McHale said.
"When he plays that type of level it gives us a better opportunity to win games...him being aggressive like that make or miss, he gives us another opportunity for the other team to be worried about another scoring option," says Ryan Gomes. [emphasis added].
2. A Good Day for the Mayo Trade
If smart Wolves fans could have been granted two wishes before today's game, they might have been more shots for Miller and more minutes for Kevin Love. Miller fulfilled his end of the equation in sterling fashion and McHale decided to forego the hook that prematurely yanked Love out of too many 2nd and 4th quarters this season. The rook ended up with a career high 39:58 and frequently found himself up against New Jersey rookie center Brook Lopez. As the teams walked out for the opening tap, I was immediately impressed with the sheer size of Lopez, who is listed at 7 feet but stood at least an inch or two over Minnesota's Jason Collins, who is also listed as a seven-footer. Remembering that ESPN's John Hollinger had recently touted him for rookie of the year consideration (as well as the folks over at canishoopus.com), there was a pang of regret that Minnesota hadn't drafted him over Love.
Then the game began. As the cliche goes, you can't teach height, and Lopez was giving Collins all he could handle en route to 5 points, 2 rebounds and some nice picks laid out in the first quarter. But you also can't teach heart, and, after an admittedly tiny sample of watching Lopez in the flesh for the first time this season (and on TV mostly in highlight clips), I'd say Love plays with more heart. That doesn't mean Love is necessarily better. But the primary reason to covet Lopez's length is for defense, and this afternoon the Wolves were slicing and dicing Lopez's team, which didn't offer up much resistance. Minnesota shot 56.8% in the first half and Lopez played 20:07 of that initial 24 minutes. Granted, a paltry 14 of them were in the paint, and granted, Lopez is way better on defense than the other rookie pivot, Marc Gasol. But Love often got position and held his own on the boards. Each player had one of his team's 3 blocks. Love provided more energy during his time on the court, keeping more balls alive and equalling Lopez in help defense--where both were actually pretty good; it was the face-up stuff that neither played well.
But let's skip the Lopez comparisons for a minute and simply give Love his due. Putbacks are never going to be easy for an undersized paint warrior with no lift who can scrap for the first rebound but have difficulty maximizing the effectiveness of the next step. Love is acquiring the art of drawing the foul--absolutely vital for his skill set--with the clandestine fling back of the body going back up, and the slight hesitation that gets his opponent on his toes if not outright in the air, and susceptible to contact. Love went to the line 14 times today, equaling the total of free throw specialists Devin Harris and Vince Carter. He and Lopez posted identical 4-9 FG lines. Yes it helps when McHale doesn't hang him out to dry with smallball (an unnecessary consideration for Lopez) but let's just consider that in game #74 of his rookie season, Love had more rebounds and more free throws than anyone on the floor, despite being just the 4th-tallest player at the opening tap.
Love surmounted the rookie wall weeks ago. McHale has been careful with his playing time, even in the absence of Jefferson, but it bears noting that Love will have logged more rookie minutes than any Timberwolf since Wally Szczerbiak in 1999-2000, and Love will pass Wally if he averages 38 minuters per game over the last 8 of the season. That would give him more rookie minutes in Minnesota than anyone since Stephon Marbury in 1996-97.
3. Hit and Run
Is Rodney Carney the new barometer. taking over for Ryan Gomes as a harbinger of how the team will fare? Whenever Carney is hot from outside, the Wolves' chances of victory go up appreciably. It does't hurt when he doesn't shirk his defense either. Vince Carter may have racked up 25 points in the second half, but both Carney and Gomes didn't defend him that badly.
Was it coincidence that the ball movement was so fluid this afternoon with Randy Foye and Craig Smith--a couple of ball stoppers supreme--both sidelined with injuries?
Brian Cardinal was a game-best plus +15 in just 16:52 today, making him plus +25 in 726 minutes this season. In the 2851 minutes Cardinal has sat, the team is minus -382.
56 Reader Comments
Britt --
K-Love battled the two Lopez brothers twice last year, so they know one another well.
Looking forward, I'd like to see Carney, Cardinal, Foye, and Bassy with the second unit next year. Somewhere in this unit is a spark or more on any given night.
Of course, this would require getting a supremely talented (which eliminates Heinrich)and adequately sized PG.
Not sure what they do at the 5 although height, athleticism, and defense of the rim would be a significant upgrade.
BallStoppers?
Any mention of such behaviour is remiss if not mentioning Al Jefferson.
It was fun for a change at Target Center yesterday. I'm not sure what was the bigger surprise: a respectable crowd on Elite Eight Sunday or a Wolves team that played an enjoyable, aggressive brand of basketball for the first time in a while.
Pop psych theory on why Mike Miller played like Mike Miller can:
Mike is a family guy - wife, two kids and lots of dogs. Mike's family stayed in Memphis this year while he has toiled for the Wolves. Unlike some NBA guys, he's not used to being apart from his family for months at a time. That could be tough on a guy - even one paid $9 million. Mike's wife was at the game yesterday. I haven't seen her at the other 20 or so games I've attended this season. Perhaps a correlation and a professional mistake not to bring his family here?
Love showed heart - he also did a very sophisticated job of usingt his body for position on rebounds at both ends of the floor yesterday.
NoOnesAdvocate--
There is a difference between a ball-stopper and a primary option. I can't believe after watching this team the past month you'd actually rip Jefferson's offense.
There's a difference between a ball-stopper who can score on double teams and torch one of the best post defenders of the past 20 years (Tim Duncan) and ball-stoppers who have limited benefits. When Al Jefferson is a black hole, at least that black hole is likely to produce two points and maybe a foul.
As for Miller, it's an interesting perspective -- if he plays like this, giving him an extension in the neighborhood of 3 yrs/$16 mil might work for him and be a great bonus for the team. It doesn't have the cap benefits that a trade would, but unless they're getting a franchise cornerstone back, it's arguable that the Memphis Mike (like yesterday's Mike) would be as valuable or more valuable w/a MLE-level deal as someone they'd bring in. The whole family thing falls short, though, when considering that other family members have probably trekked from SD to watch him play several times.
In my book, Mike Miller is now damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. And it's his fault. Watching yesterday's game and seeing just how effective the Wolves can be when Miller is aggressively looking for his shot made me even angrier.
For six weeks, we've watched this team sputter while Miller decided it was his role to get a bunch of sub-mediocre shooting teammates involved. When Al was around having that extra playmaker was cool, but since the Jefferson injury, the plan should have been to get Miller at least 15 quality shots a game.
Now with 8 games left in the season, Miller decides to finally let the PGs be PGs and takes it upon himself to be the go-to scorer. And this is just as much on McHale for not taking a firmer hand with Miller and putting a stop to his selfishness.
I call it selfish because on a championship-caliber team where there are other go-to scorers, a well-rounded game like Miller can bring to the table is ideal. And it looked to me like he was showcasing his array of skills for that purpose instead of giving THIS team what it needed from him.
There are too few games left for his shooting percentage to suffer or for him to miss a big shot in a big spot because there are no big spots for a 21-win team. Nobody is watching anymore. So now he decides to let 'er rip? It's too little too late.
I'm convinced that if there was a guy who could have consistently provided the offense, the Wolves could have still pushed 30. There were just too many games over the last two months where Miller was happy to let Bassy, Love, Carney and Cardinal hold the grenade as it blew up.
PagingStanleyRoberts,
"The whole family thing falls short, though, when considering that other family members have probably trekked from SD to watch him play several times."
I hope you're kidding. You're not actually suggesting that seeing you mom and dad or three of your cousins is the same as living with your wife, kids, and pets, right? I'm thinking I'd rather come home to the wife and kids (or at least have them in town...) than my parents and siblings. I think that there *might* be a qualitative difference in those relationships.
Well, at least the Wolves showed that they can win if nobody plays defense against them.
The theories regarding Mike Miller and his motivations are interesting to ponder. I'm not fallen to SFJ's level of disgust, but I am pretty disappointed in what Mike actually delivered this season. Still, I believe that he's a keeper *if* he is happy here. But certainly, he won't have a chance at any championships if he stays here.
I'm with SFJ on this one. Mike Miller has totally screwed us this year with his style of play. What's more disgusting is that it's masqueraded as being unselfish, when in fact the most unselfish thing he could be doing is shooting the damn ball. Even if his FG% plummeted to the low 40s (highly unlikely given his past body of work) as a result of taking more contested shots, he'd still be more efficient than Telfair, Foye, and Carney - the guys normally stuck with the grenade as a result of him. That may have been fine in the month of January when Foye caught fire, but otherwise, we've desperately needed Miller to jack up more shots. He has been a massive disappointment.
I think Kevin Love is a legitimate player on a champion-caliber team, along with Big Al IF he recovers from his knee injury. Otherwise, I don't see anyone besides Foye being a big piece of the puzzle in the future.
I have to give the Wolves their props though; they seem to have made a good choice with Love. Almost unexpected after so many years of Will Averys and Paul Grants.
Now can they make it two years in a row? If so, they need a scoring 2 guard first and foremost, someone to consistently play like Miller did yesterday on offense, but one that also defends like Corey Brewer. I don't follow college hoops much. Are there players like that in this year's draft?
I didn't say that his family in SD negated having his wife and kids around, but it suggests that just having them around wouldn't have fixed all of the issues he's had this year. That's also a bit ludicrous. It's not like he played this way when the Wolves played in Memphis. I understand that he didn't want to pull his kids out of school, but they're barely school age (4 and 6). It's not like they have a lot of homework or are playing AAU at that age. Also, a guy making $9 mil/year can afford to fly his family in a few times a month.
Timby,
DeMar DeRozan, James Harden, and Evan Turner probably offer the best hope of what you're referring to in a 2-guard. Unfortunately, all have some weaknesses in their game and it's possible none of them ever become as good as Miller himself. This draft offers precious few sure things, so unless we pick Blake Griffin, there is some element of dice rolling with anyone else.
Given This:
"Brian Cardinal was a game-best plus +15 in just 16:52 today, making him plus +25 in 726 minutes this season. In the 2851 minutes Cardinal has sat, the team is minus -382."
Why doesn't Brian Cardinal start and play more minutes? The Houston Rockets realize the value of a good +/- guy (Shane Battier) -- so why don't other teams?
In terms of the draft, and the franchise's view of which players are the cornerstones of the team...
Did everyone see Jim Stacks Pioneer Press interview this weekend?
http://www.twincities.com/timberwolves/ci_12020442
In terms of needs:
"I think there's no question that we need to upgrade our backcourt a little bit," Stack said.
"Adding a guard that we can grow with, and then we need another big guy at the basket, and for that matter another dynamic wing. So those are three areas. I think we've got really nice complementary pieces on our roster right now, but we need to really go out and get a bona fide guy at those other spots."
I find the complementary pieces quote interesting. It seems like he's saying that at the backcourt, wing, and big guy (5) positions, they only have complementary pieces. I think this means they don't see Foye as a "bona fide guy." Which means that they don't view him as a #2 to Big Al. That seems smart.
Britt,
There is a difference between a ball-stopper and a primary option, and Al Jefferson is both. And, since he is ineffective at passing and defense, it is in my mind questionable as to whether he can be a net plus on a winning team.
It is games like this, where the offense flows, and the defense has a sense of purpose, that make me fearful of Al's future with the Wolves. I hope he can prove me wrong.
I couldn't agree more with Stack's comments on the roster. A guard, a wing, and a Center are the needs. We need starters at those positions, because the guys we currently have (Telfair, Foye, Brewer, Carney) are only good as bench/role players. That doesn't they can't start, only that they aren't complete players.
Harden: I live on the west coast, saw him a couple of times in person, lots on Television. I think the wolves need to avoid him. He's too short to guard the 2, too unathletic to guard the point, his strengths are that he is always under control and was a good faciliator of ASU's offense, that being said, I like his skill set if he had the body of a wing but at 2 guard I don't.
This draft seems littered with wing players that are flawed but are good lottery tickets...Henderson, Turner, DeRozan, Evans, Aminu, Clark, Williams, Buddinger.
I think the strategy for the draft has to be Rubio, Thabeet, Griffin (have to trade Al or KLove) if we win a spot in the top 3 or the top rated PG (Jennings, Curry, Teague) if not. Then pick the best wing available with the Heats pick and BPA with the Celtics.
What is the future for Carney in relationship to Brewer? Is he a duplicate of Brewer? Is he better than Brewer? He sure as hecks shoots better than Brewer. Do we keep both or one?
jgale:
I think their skill sets are recundant. Brewer is guaranteed for at least another year, Carney is not. As for what they have both shown, i think either one is equivaelent to current replaceable level tallent at the NBA minimum. Signing Carney after this year is a mistake and would typify more of the same (Hudson, Hassell, Madsen, CSmith) in that you can't over value your own players in Free Agency. Yes they might be good guys, yes they showed flashes of talent, but they are no better than replacement players, will not be part of the core (high paid veterans) of a playoff team. We must let Carney walk.
Carney merely a "replacement level" player?
Well, I disagree (though I'll concede that it might look close). A recent article from John Hollinger backs me up. Hollinger purports that the "replacement level" PER for SG/SFs is 10.5:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&pag...
According to 82games.com, Rodney has a PER of 10.2 at SG and 16.2 at SF. I'm sure we can agree that his overall PER is well above 10.5, eh?
I wouldn't be in such a big hurry to let go of Carney. In my mind, he is less of a question mark than Corey Brewer and has continually improved over the season. And if I'm reading the salary info at Canis Hoopus correctly, Carney is making $1,655,760 this year and the team has his option next year set at $2,539,936.
My understanding is that the wolves had to exercise Carney's option this fall and that they did not.
So, Carney is an unrestricted free agent this summer. Although I agree that Carney is a pleasant surprise I so do not trust this FO to not overpay him.
Sam Young is the wing we need. Johnny Flynn is the point. And if we can get Thabeet, that'd be grand.
Levi:
I'm with Nate on this in that in order to keep Carney's salary on scale with his rookie deal, we would have had to pick up the option prior to this year. We did not, and therefore Carney is an unrestricted free agent this summer. With our collection of draft picks that will take roster spots, as well as veterans with guaranteed contracts that don't play, I think we have to let Carney walk.
Not sure if we need to let Carney walk. I know I'd rather have a guy like him at $2-3mln a season than Mike Miller at $9mln. Of course, you don't overpay him, but I don't think we'd have to...who else do you see bidding on him?
How about Joey Graham? Anybody else a little intrigued by what they saw in the Toronto games? We could really use a tough athlete like him to guard the 2-3.
To be honest, I think the Wolves NEED to get Rubio or Griffin...if only for marketing purposes. This team is on the fast lane towards closing shop, maybe as early as 2010-2011.
It is obvious to me (and apparently even to Jim Stack) that the Wolves can not, will not, keep more than a couple of their draft choices on the roster next year. So, the Wolves have to be looking to move at least one of their 1st round picks, presumably as sweeteners in some deal for a veteran.
Ironic, isn't it, that the Wolves go from having no first round picks, to having too many in a bad year. Sadly, I don't see any likely available draftee who projects to be more than just another "complementary role player".
Thus, to me, any chance of "success" for the Wolves lies in whatever trade(s) they can pull off.
Oh, re Carney -- that's right, I did forget that the Wolves did not pick up his option back in October. I guess it's an open question as to how much other teams might offer him. It seems that he is finally finding his stride in this league.
Carney can have a life as an athletic defensive specialist, but I think he's at the very peak of his offensive skill. I'm not sure I can ever remember him making a midrange jumper, just those corner threes.
Assuming we don't land a top 3 spot in the draft, I think there are plenty of "second tier" players (think Bayless, Randolph, C. Lee from 2008) that we can package some picks to acquire.
Longtime reader of the Trey, finally decided to comment. First off, let me thank Britt for writing this article(I always look forward to it). I'd also like to thank all of the spirited commenters, this is possibly the most intelligent board on the internet.
That being said, the Jim Stack article thoroughly intrigued me. Kevin McHale put this current team together, and seems convinced that a frontcourt duo of Al and KLove can get it done, and he just might be right. But it must say something about the opinion in the front office of McHale, that Stack, the current acting GM, disagrees. He didn't just say they need an ok big man, he said they need a bona fide guy. Doesn't that go against what McHale thinks based on his draft strategy? McHale was the one who chose Love over Lopez. McHale was the one who wanted 2 PF's on the floor, both somewhat undersized for their roles. If Stack wants to go find a big time center, what does say about his opinion of McHale the GM?
Second big thing I took from that interview: Stack doesn't have faith in the long term in MM, Foye, Gomes, Brewer, or Carney. He wants, once again, a bona fide wing player. Maybe he views one of those guys as a starter, but he certainly doesn't think there's a viable candidate in house for the other wing. Once again, I think this is a deliberate jab at McHale.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, he wants to upgrade the backcourt with a guard they can, and I qoute, "grow with". I feel, and am unbelievably excited about this, that Stack is tipping his hand when it comes to the draft. I think they're betting on Rubio coming out. I really believe they're going to bet the house on him. He's young, exciting, and I believe he's in the JKidd mold. I'm salivating right now at the pick-and-rolls he could run with Love. I saw him treat Kidd like a D-Leaguer in the Olympics. I watched this kid spank Chris Paul, arguably the best PG in the league. Rubio can play. Period. He'd be a great fit for a young, and improving team(tough to get worse than this). He's a good sized PG at a hair under 6'4", he wants to come here and succeed, and he would definitely be a guy a team could "grow with". I would bet Stack is going to do whatever it takes to get him, and I can't wait.
Erik Anthony:
I also agree with your enthusiasm for Rubio, I just think, like many other drafts in the past, it's all dependent on the lottry. If, and I think it's 60-40 that he comes, he does come out, I am fairly certain Rubio becomes the consensus #2 pick. And from what I've read about his buyout, he would have to be a top 3 pick to make declaring for the draft financially beneficial to him in the first place.
That being said, unless we get the 1st or 2nd pick in the lottery, I just don't see what we would have to offer to move up. This isn't like the NFL where we can throw in later draft picks or some of superfulous players, we either have to trade comparable talent or eat contract dollars. Foye or Miller + the 5th or 6th pick still doesn't get us up to #2. I don't think we trade Al or KLove at this point.
Centrist Sean:
To your first point, I also think he'll come out this year. In a relatively weak draft, he'll absolutely be a consensus #2 overall. I think he'd be a Top 3 in a good draft. But like I said, I like him that much. In any case, I'm sure he'll be able to make declaring worthwhile with his draft status.
To your second point, I know Miller and the 6th wont't get it done, and we don't know who will be sitting there with the 2nd pick either. However, as it stands right now, the Wizards have the bast chance for that spot. Can you honestly say that the 6th, the late-teens pick from the Heat and Miller for the 2nd and Etan Thomas wouldn't get it done? Miller's contract is comparable and comes off the books after this year. We'd have to eat some salary the year after for a marginal player, but the Wolves have to be used to that by now. I'm willing to bet Stack will get it done.
Regarding Rubio -- I think building an elaborate draft strategy on his coming out this year is a risky business, especially for the Wolves. One huge obstacle is the six-million Euro buyout of his contract with DKV Joventut. NBA teams are limited to $500,000 for foreign buyouts, so Ricky has to finance his own "freedom". Essentially, he'd be playing at least the first year for free.
Plus, I believe he can back out of the draft any time he wants to without affecting his current status.
So, if he declares and somehow the Wolves got all their ducks in a row to insure that they could draft him (and that simply needs to be the #2 overall), what happens when he finds out about Minnesota winters? Do you honestly see him committing 5-10 years playing in Minneapolis for (what is currently) a crappy team -- with at least the first year for free? When all he has to do is say "Oh. Nevermind. CUL8R"?
Risky.
At any rate, I think he'll wait until the draft order is set before actually declaring (or not).
We should pray Rubio comes out. The Wolves probably won't get him, but he bumps everyone else down a spot, and gives them a better shot at Thabeet or Brandon Jennings. Jennings has insane talent from what I've seen on the net.
I'll repeat it, the Wolves need to do whatever it takes to get Griffin or Rubio. It is literally life or death...there won't be a "next season" or consequences to consider if they cannot regain some interest from this community.
Wake up people. Look at this blog...and these are the die hards...how many people are left commenting? Have you seen how many people are at the games? I would guess the tv ratings are on par with a late night infomercial for ginsu knives.
Uh,
I have been predicting the end of the Minnesota Timberwolves since before KG's departure.
This market is 15th largest. Along with Denver we are the smallest with all four major leagues represented. Throw in three major college teams (Gopher football, basketball and hockey) and you have sports saturation per capita more than any market in the country. Hands down.
Then, consider this is not a basketball town. We consistently rank at the very bottom (along with Pittsburgh) in national NBA TV ratings (TNT, ESPN, ABC). Same with the playoffs. Nobody in this town cares about pro ball. When I find an interested party I latch onto them because there are so few of us.
Now throw in the economy, both nationally AND the Twin Cities place in it. Obviously, just about everyone and every company has less disposable income to spend on entertainment generally and sports entertainment specifically. The Twin Cities isn't what it used to be either. Twenty years ago, we were near the top in Fortune 500 HQs per capita. Companies wanted to locate here because of the quality of life. More and more have left or been acquired. We are no longer a "stand out" place to live or locate.
So, if something's gotta give, what gives? The U is not going anywhere, that is for sure. Twins and Wild would be nuts to move. That leaves Vikes and Wolves. The Vikes fill their lousy Dome and have an intense, regional following. Using the threat of departure to try to lever a stadium is as far as I think they will go.
The Wolves? Season and single game ticket sales keep dropping. Giveaways are rampant at Target Center and still the stands are sparsely populated. The CBA is up for re-negotiation and a lock out is not out of the question. The only reed of hope is Glen Taylor and his stated desire to keep the team here. I don't mean to be (too) maudlin, but how is his health?
My prediction - a lock out by the owners would mark the end of the Wolves - in that scenario, they would not return. If a lock out is avoided, they will hang on because of Glen.
AK,
I think you are saying the Wolves folding can't be avoided. Can't say that I disagree, but let's at least go down swinging.
It would be so beyond ridiculous to head into next season with the same roster and a few tweener projects from the draft (i.e. the status quo the last five years). Adding a Mike Miller type vet (eg Heinrich) or a big slow center (eg- Thabeet) is not going to cut it.
AK,
There was a discussion on Canis Hoopus last week about contraction. Some Blazer blog proposed that in these tough economic times the NBA would be smart to consider contraction and listed Minnesota among 6 teams they proposed to dissolve.
Many, including S-n-P, thought this proposal absurd. I made the same point as you about our saturated market. My question to you is, what would Glen do if the NBA and Sterm offered the Wolves a similar deal as the Major Leagues offered Pohlad in, was 99 or 2000? I would think Glen would take the deal in a heartbeat, rather than risk more losses.
The only reason Glen wants to keep the Wolves here is that there is no place else to go and no buyers out there, no?
Uh - I'm not saying its inevitable, but if the Twin Cities sports scene is an overcrowded MASH unit, the one on life support is the one at risk. Its time for invasive surgery - and fast. The market doing triage will not be kind to the Wolves.
APB - The NBA has had good success as the only game in town in third-tier markets - San Antonio, Salt Lake City, Sacramento (until recently), OKC, Portland, Charlotte. The Wolves could be a plug-in to an underserved market. I don't think Glen wants to be the guy to do it, but that would seem to me to be the play. The League office could play bad cop so Glen can save face though.
Perhaps an NBA team in a remaining underserved market (not sure shich market this would be though) would be viable in a good economy, but right now I don't think many cities would be willing to do that until the economy gets going again and that might not be for a long time.
I have a feeling MN won't be the only team that suffers during the current economic downturn and scaling back on teams might be a smart move for the NBA. I would not be surprised if it starts to be discussed in the next year or so.
First, the NBA will not make an offer of "contraction" to any team. Stern is very much against it. Will the Wolves move? I doubt it unless it is to Seattle who just had their team yanked out from under them. I do not see the Wolves leaving or being eliminated. There will be some tough financial times for a number of teams and they will scale back, but that is what any decent business should do when thier cash flow is slowed.
JPFnotJPK - Flynn is a very nice college guard. He is to small and slender for full time NBA work. Yes Iwatched the 6OT Big East game and the following games. I also saw him some in the tourney. He just does not have what it takes, IMO. He does not improve the Wolves, which is what the draft should do.
WiM,
You may be right. But, opinions and stances may change quickly if this economy does not turn around. The NBA is also a business and they will likewise act in their self-interest. IF the accountants see a benefit in contraction, Stern's outlook could change.
Remember Sterns reprimand of McHale and Taylor this season when they started talking how financial conditions could change salary structures and profit levels. Something may well have to give in the NBA and all professional sports just as it has in other industries.
Contraction or, I suppose, a gov't bailout.
WiM,
What do you think Stern is going to say? His role as commissioner is 90% cheerleading, and the fact that he remains publicly positive means absolutely nothing.
How exactly does an NBA team "scale back"? Uglier cheerleaders? Water down the gatorade? Player coaches? OK, I am being a little facetious, but seriously most of their cost structure is fixed...and very, very high.
I don't know exactly how a contraction would play out. Would the league compensate the failed owner at all? Maybe not...I won't pretend to have read the franchise agreements. The only thing I am certain of is there is going to be some significant fallout, and belt tightening is not going to save some of these teams.
If a league in as much trouble as the NHL was a few years ago didn't contract, the NBA's not going to do it, either. Stern's wants to expand to other markets; it's relocation or expansion. It shouldn't be forgotten, also, that the main reason contraction didn't fly in baseball is because the players' union had a huge problem with it. Reducing teams means reducing jobs.
The NBA has ways to save money through changing their salary structure: shorter deals, reduced guarantees in contracts (like the NFL), lower salaries (like the NHL). Would they lock the players out to achieve this? Probably. But a lower-paying job is better than no job, so the players are likely to go for this.
Wolves aren't going anywhere in the foreseeable future. Fans were excited about this season and they'll be excited about next season. Like a lot of other long-standing franchises, their attendance correlates pretty strongly to their win total. Had they started the year with McHale on the sidelines and with a closer to .500 record through 40 games, we wouldn't have had any problem filling a good portion of the arena. The economy will affect the player salaries and the next CBA before it will affect the number of teams in the league. That's my opinion, at least.
This draft will be an interesting one. Blake Griffin is the only guy who looks to be a can't-miss. I like the thought of taking Rubio or Jennings and then taking a mulligan on the DeAndre Disaster by nabbing Mullens if and when he falls past #15 or #20. By the time SmallBall has failed enough to know it's not a good idea, Mullens might have developed into the center we need. Just a thought.
Great stuff and appreciate the coverage. Hopefully the playoffs will rejuvenate the interest level in Minnesota's NBA fans a little bit. It's been hard to watch since Jefferson went down.
Uh - Thabeet ain't slow. I think he's going to be a hell of a player, and the Wolves need badly to get taller. If we got Griffin what kind of trades could we do to get some kind of balanced roster? And Rubio isn't a lock to make it in the NBA. Wouldn't mind getting either of them, don't get me wrong, but I like Andy G's idea of Jennings and Mullens just as well if not better. Would Jennings want to play here? His flashy style would generate a lot of buzz too.
The bad economy makes it hard to move as well. Pro teams are a vanity item for rich guys, and flaunting wealth is out of style these days. Think some paperclip magnate is going to buy the team and move them to Winnipeg? I don't know anything about contraction, but it seems unlikely, and I just don't see anybody looking to buy a team in this economy, not to mention build an arena. And who in Seattle is going to buy a team? Even Microsoft is having layoffs.
Well Big Stan is the only one to have acknowledged the elephant in the room...that we are in the midst of a once in a lifetime-bad economic slowdown that really can't be compared to any other slowdown in the history of modern pro sports. Translation: all bets are off.
Andy G, you must be doing Kool Aid kegstands if you think we could fill a mini van with Twin Cities residents "excited" about this team and the upcoming season.
Really, I don't want to be this negative. I want the Wolves to stay and do well. That is why I feel it is so important that we get honest about how bad the situation really is.
Paging -
The difference between the NHL and the NBA is that in the NHL, individual players are an afterthought in marketing. Same with the NFL and even MLB. Teams are the focal point in all but the NBA. Yankees, Red Sox, Patriots, Cowboys, Red Wings, Flames.
In the NBA? LeBron, CP3, Kobe, The Big 3. The NBA is a player/personality driven marketing machine. That will make contract concessions harder to extract in my view.
Furthermore, think about national TV coverage. What impact would there be on the TV deals if the Timberwolves, Bucks, Grizz, OKC, and Clippers all evaporated tomorrow? It wouldn't mean squat - none of them are on the radar. In the NHL, TV is a thin slice of League revenues - in the NBA its a very big piece of the pie.
AK -
I understand the point about the player-driven nature of the NBA, but marketing them wouldn't necessarily change if their salaries went down. It already happened 10 years ago, and there's no difference in the way the stars back then and the ones now have been marketed. The owners haven't to this point abused their power, but they have the upper hand, and even if the mainstream players don't realize it, the union reps probably understand. Those are usually the vets (like Madsen) who understand that a few concessions in order to avoid a work stoppage like 10 years ago is probably best for everyone.
Also, if concessions would be hard to extract, wouldn't eliminating 12-60 jobs be a huge concession? Remember, the LeBrons and Kobes of the world aren't union reps. The ones who are understand that they have to serve the interests of Bobby Brown as much as Chris Paul.
I don't know that TV coverage makes much of a difference. If anything, the league wouldn't want to eliminate revenue sources like media contracts and local sponsorships.
Maybe the Wolves don't stay. But David Stern has pursued expansion aggressively and has always been able to find relocation spots. There's nothing in his past practices that indicates he wants to reduce the number of teams.
RE: Elephant in the room
Yes, I believe we are in a "once in a lifetime bad economic slow down." There is a possibility that it won't be too bad and the NBA might make its way through it unscathed. But, I don't hear many economists predicting we are going to get out of this recession anytime before next season. THere will be less corporate sponsorship and attendance will feature individuals paying cheap prices when and if the wins start coming for the WOlves.
But, if the economic slowdown is as bad as some are predicting, the structure of the economy will have to change and professional sports will not look the same 10 years from now as it does now. Surely, in a saturated market such as Minneapolis the Wolves are doomed. That's if the economy is as bad as some people say it is and recovery is as far off as they say as well. From where I sit, and from the people I've personal witnessed losing their job, I know I'm not feeling much security and it don't look too pretty from here.
Just look at Britt and the newspaper business. Who would of thought we would see what we see. Will Britt always have an outlet to pursue his passion and write about the Wolves. I think so, but what kind of economic security will he get out of it? THings are changing and its hard to think that the change is going to be painless. For WOlves fans, it could mean a few years down the line that there will be no Wolves. As someone said above, in this economy all bets are off.
Decloaking to post re: contraction
I'm in paging's camp here. I just don't see how contraction makes sense. Are the other owners willing to cough up a quarter-billion dollars (or so) per team to make a couple of them go away, thereby distributing all of those guaranteed contracts back out amongst themselves. Sure, the remaining owners would get a larger chunk of the national pie, but I still don't know how it makes the most sense.
I just think you'll see a quickening pace of relocation among franchises and a modified CBA that will reduce the amount of guaranteed money in future player contracts. The NBA has been able to extract significant concessions from the players in the last two CBAs in far better economic times.
SO,
I'm not looking at their books, so I don't really know. All I know is that corporate sponsorship is going to go down and arenas will start emptying out in many cities around the nation. In addition, the days where franchises can extract money out of cities and states for new arenas will also probably be over. The markets for new cities to expand to will likely decrease and, even, international interest in the NBA will likely decline as the global economic crisis worsens. Its all speculation. I'm just saying that professional sports is likely to restructure as are many current industries. When people don't have jobs, disposable income goes down and luxury items such as season tickets, single game tickets, sports paraphenalia go down. It could play out in a number of ways, but it is possible that an NBA franchise will not be viable in smaller markets or over saturated markets as tehy were in the past. Its possible. How likely, who knows? but more likely right now than it was 6 months or a year ago.
I don't get why the other owners would need to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to Glen Taylor so that he would get rid of his grossly mismanaged team in a marginal location. Taylor would probably just retain the franchise rights and be able to sell them to another prospective owner when and if the economy improves down the road.
The NBA is not the federal government, they can't print money out of thin air to overpay for worthless assets.
Here's the question...Can Glen Taylor, knowing the fixed costs of running an NBA franchise, possibly see this team turning a profit in the next five years? If the answer is no, there is some monetary breaking point where is just makes economic sense to shut it down.
It's really not about the league, or Stern, or relocation. It's the simple fact that you can't keep a money losing business open forever.
Uh,
I think it would be a matter of marketing. What would be better for the NBA? Let teams fold because they cannot make it or contract them and pay off the financially unsound teams.
THere might not be any locations for unsound teams to move to. This is not just a matter of mismanagement. Its mismanagement and a horrible economy. But, again its also speculation. We don't know how bad the economy is going to get. From all of our life experiences, these things eventually turn around in the Long run. But, as John Maynard Keynes so famously said, "In the long run we are all dead." This slowdown, recession, depression may not turn around until the economy is completely restructured and that may take a lot longer than we are used to and it may mean that lifestyles change.
WE just don't know -- that's my point. Saying it can't happen is niave. And saying it will happen is being Chicken Little. At this point we don't really know what will happen because we are in uncharted territory. That is what I am getting from listening to all the economists, pundits and financial experts say anyway. As well as being aware of downsizing, layoffs, deficits, etc.
I'm not suggesting that the league print money to contract teams -- the other owners would have to kick it in.
And I would be willing to bet that the NBA franchise agreement prevents Taylor from just shutting the team down without approval from the league. If Taylor doesn't want to run the team anymore, he's probably got two choices -- sell it to someone else or turn it over to the league (sort of like the Expos/Senators in MLB after they manuevered Loria to Florida). If the league took control of the team, they wouldn't contract it -- they would sell it for as much as they could get (which might very well mean the team would move).
At some point Taylor's ego must come into play as well. If he shuts it down or sells the team out of town, the Twolves go down in history as a doomed team that were only able to survive in this market due to the magical presence of KG, and without him they went poof. But if Taylor can put another respectable, stable team together post KG, he can redeem himself somewhat. He's been a successful businessman for decades, and I'll bet he doesn't want to fail on such a public stage.
If the Wolves start winning again, people will come back and all will be well. The trouble is, they appear hopeless, like the mid 90s and early 80s Twins. Taylor could accelerate the process by investing in new management and players, but apparently he's riding it out, waiting for lottery luck or something.
The NBA will not contract. There's a new unoccupied arena in Kansas City. St. Louis and Anaheim also have modern arenas. And if they were desperate, they could go to Vegas, or back to the arena the Sonics left.
Baseball only resorted to talking contraction because it was clear no other cities were viable. What made that clear was Carl Pohlad's sham threat to move to North Carolina. Brainy Mike Opat and the county caved when there was no reason. Otherwise, perhaps the Twins would have been pressed to pick up more of the bil.
The Vikings don't have much of a hammer, either, until an LA syndicate or a city like Portland builds a stadium. The logistics of pro football, however, make that more likely than in baseball. They could try to make Toronto a threat, but the Bills may have beaten them to it.
Neumms,
You had to bring my Bills going to Toronto into this, didn't you? Just like Marc Stein in today's Weekend Dime,
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dime-090404-05
who opens with a Bills/Braves scenario to speak about the future of Iverson. As someone who's lived through the disappearance of a team (not to mention much of an entire city), let's hope for an offseason that brings some fans back into the seats. And an improved economy to pay for those, too.
Blogs
Sports
Baseball:
Warning Track Power by Alex Halsted
Sports:
On the Ball by Britt Robson
Society
Weather:
Dude Weather by Jimmy Gaines
A&E
Fiction:
Write Now! by Terry Faust
Retired
Hockey:
Spazz Dad by Todd Smith
Style:
Hook & Eye
Misc:
Is This News?
Fiction:
Yo, Ivanhoe by Brad Zellar
Food:
Consider the Egg by Stephanie March
Wine:
Beyond the Cask
Food:
Food Fight!
Media:
To the Slaughter
Misc:
Outrage by Staff
Food:
Chef's Table
Guest Commentary:
Just Passing Through
Humor:
Spazz Dad by Todd Smith
Cars:
Road Rake by Chris Birt
Commentary:
Read Menace by Tom Bartel
Society:
The Adventures of Melinda by Melinda Jacobs
Politics:
Defenestrator by Rich Goldsmith
Food:
Breaking Bread by Jeremy Iggers & Ann Bauer
Books:
Cracking Spines by Max Ross
Music:
Hear, Hear by Staff
Art:
The Vicious Circle by 6 Critics
Secrets:
Secrets of the Day by Kate Iverson
Theater:
Seen in the City by Staff
Film:
Talk About Talkies by Staff
- Contact:
- Secrets Staff
- Write to Editors
- Send Press Release
- Reprint Request
- Work at Secrets of the City
- Our Address:
- Secrets of the City
- PO Box 3690
- Minneapolis, MN 55403
- (651) 356-8714
©2002-2009 Entropy Publishing, LLC. No part of this site may be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Entropy Publishing, LLC. except that an individual may print for personal use and/or forward articles via e-mail to a reasonable number of recipients for personal, non-commercial purposes. Thanks to FAMFAMFAM and Tango Project for their icons.
Media Partners
