Ivan's Kevin Love Fantasy

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
Chris Mannix on WEEI right now.  Laying out a potential scenario for Boston to get Kevin Love.  I don't think it's really very likely, but my goodness, I want to discuss this.
 
The plan:
 
1.  Draft Wiggins or Parker.
2.  Trade the other 2014 #1, and both 2015 #1s, plus Sullinger (and Wallace or whatever works salary-cap-wise), for Love.  
3.  Sign Love to a long-term max deal.
4.  Go to war with Rondo, Wiggins/Parker, and Love, and fill in around the three of them.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
Sullinger:  27.4 minutes, 13.4 points, 8.3 rebounds, .440 fg%, 17.3 PER
Love:  36.3 minutes, 25.7 points, 13.3 rebounds, .454 fg%, 27.4 PER
 
It's a pretty big difference.
 

The X Man Cometh

New Member
Dec 13, 2013
390
ivanvamp said:
Chris Mannix on WEEI right now.  Laying out a potential scenario for Boston to get Kevin Love.  I don't think it's really very likely, but my goodness, I want to discuss this.
 
The plan:
 
1.  Draft Wiggins or Parker.
2.  Trade the other 2014 #1, and both 2015 #1s, plus Sullinger (and Wallace or whatever works salary-cap-wise), for Love.  
3.  Sign Love to a long-term max deal.
4.  Go to war with Rondo, Wiggins/Parker, and Love, and fill in around the three of them.
 
I heard that, and have given some thought to pretty much that exact scenario before (just with our lotto pick in the trade).
 
1. Calling it a "plan" when step one is to draft Wiggins or Parker (uphill climb right now unfortunately) and assume they turn out to be as advertised, is generous. Its not really a plan its a pipe dream. I think we'd have to include some of those '16-'18 Brooklyn picks which I don't want to part with. Otherwise we have to give Minny our lotto pick on draft day or something.
 
2. I'm not a big fan of Love (just like I'm not a fan of Melo, he's a fantastic talent but I think his statistical impact dwarfs his real impact). I think that pairing him with Rondo would bring out the best in both players on offense and would generally be a synergetic combo. Love brings spacing and Rondo gets him the ball in his spots.
 
Overall, I'd be down for the trade definitely. No brainer. Even if Rondo-Love don't win a title they'd make for some great television for the next five years. At the same time I can understand if Ainge doesn't want to commit his resources to two individual players who have brilliance but also VERY glaring flaws (Rondo's scoring, Love's defense). 
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
Well that's why I think you have to keep that lottery pick for this year.  Have to add one of the top players in this year's draft to go with Love and Rondo.  
 

The X Man Cometh

New Member
Dec 13, 2013
390
ivanvamp said:
Well that's why I think you have to keep that lottery pick for this year.  Have to add one of the top players in this year's draft to go with Love and Rondo.  
But if you keep the lottery pick you don't get the trade done. Minnesota isn't going to let us dump Wallace on them for the privilege of having their franchise player.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
If you notice, I am thinking Boston's second #1 this year, both #1s next year, plus a really good player in Sullinger.  That's a lot of stuff in return, especially if they don't think they'll be able to keep Love when his contract runs out.
 
EDIT:  I realize that there's a vanishingly small chance that the Celtics actually end up with Love.  This is all just fantasizing on my part.
 

The X Man Cometh

New Member
Dec 13, 2013
390
ivanvamp said:
If you notice, I am thinking Boston's second #1 this year, both #1s next year, plus a really good player in Sullinger.  That's a lot of stuff in return, especially if they don't think they'll be able to keep Love when his contract runs out.
 
Yeah I don't think that's a particularly great trade for Minnesota.
Gerald Wallace, three 1st round picks that will all be in the 20-30 range, and Sullinger. That's a big negative asset in Wallace, a potential building block in Sully, and some picks that might turn into journeymen. The Suns could offer them the Okafor expiring and more valuable picks if they wanted.
 
Or 3 first rounders in the 20-30 range, a young player with value (Plumlee) and no anchor contract
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
They could, I guess.  But would they?  I mean, what I threw out there could possibly be the best offer Minnesota gets.
 

The X Man Cometh

New Member
Dec 13, 2013
390
ivanvamp said:
They could, I guess.  But would they?  I mean, what I threw out there could possibly be the best offer Minnesota gets.
 
I think if we offered the following to Minny we'd get it done. Humphries, Bradley, Sullinger, 2014 ATL 1st, 2015 LAC 1st, 2015 BOS 1st. Humphries and Bradley expire, they get a test drive of Bradley in case they want to keep him, Sullinger and some picks. And then the problem is we still have Wallace, Bass, and Green under contract and are trying to build a competitive team.
 
 
The problem with trading is you have to overpay. With a player like Love, the other party will stick to their guns on the off chance that they don't leave, rather than take a "something is better than nothing" deal. I'm going to stick to pinning my hopes on Wiggins/Parker/Embiid for now.
 

Brickowski

Banned
Feb 15, 2011
3,755
Sullinger:  27.4 minutes, 13.4 points, 8.3 rebounds, .440 fg%, 17.3 PER
Love:  36.3 minutes, 25.7 points, 13.3 rebounds, .454 fg%, 27.4 PER
 
It's a pretty big difference.
1. Love is 4 years older and Sullinger has barely played one full year in the NBA. You may want to revisit these numbers a year or two from now.
2. You may also want to go over and read the comments on Love in the basketball analytics thread, particularly Bowiac's posts. Love may be one of those guys like Iverson who are less effective on the court than traditional metrics might suggest.

On top of that, the conventional wisdom is that Love will be playing in SoCal as soon as he can opt out of his current deal. The chances of signing him long term are slim, even slimmer than the Celtics' chances of getting Wiggins or Parker.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
Right.  Makes sense.  But the Celtics have so many chips to use right now that overpaying is no problem.  It's kind of how they're set up to operate - blow your chips on that one superstar, which Love is.  
 
You could maybe trade one or two of Bass, Wallace, and Green in separate deals - especially Bass and Green.  But if not, that's fine.  They'd be ok guys to have coming off the bench, even if they're too expensive. 
 
As for the deal you outline, I'd do it.  Let's say they're able to snag a top-5 guy - let's say Parker.  You then deal a 2015 2nd rounder, a 2016 1st rounder, Bogans, and Wallace to Phoenix for Okafor.  And I don't know what the salary cap situation would be like at that point, but you either keep Okafor to play C or you let him go (expiring contract) and use that money to add a shooting guard.  (preferable)
 
You then have this core:  Rondo, Green, Love, Parker, Olynyk
 
I think that's a solid group, especially the first four.  And maybe Green gets dealt for a shooting guard (if they can't add a free agent one).  
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
Brickowski said:
1. Love is 4 years older and Sullinger has barely played one full year in the NBA. You may want to revisit these numbers a year or two from now.
2. You may also want to go over and read the comments on Love in the basketball analytics thread, particularly Bowiac's posts. Love may be one of those guys like Iverson who are less effective on the court than traditional metrics might suggest.

On top of that, the conventional wisdom is that Love will be playing in SoCal as soon as he can opt out of his current deal. The chances of signing him long term are slim, even slimmer than the Celtics' chances of getting Wiggins or Parker.
 
Right, well like I said, I don't think it's going to happen anyway.  
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,470
Somewhere
I think a more likely deal would involve the Celtics not lucking into Wiggins or Parker, and thus feeling inclined to move that pick. This would also require Minnesota falling in love with a player at that spot. That would be the "easy" part. The harder part would be getting the right talent around Love, starting with a great defensive center who can cover for (some of) Love's deficiencies.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
Devizier said:
I think a more likely deal would involve the Celtics not lucking into Wiggins or Parker, and thus feeling inclined to move that pick. This would also require Minnesota falling in love with a player at that spot. That would be the "easy" part. The harder part would be getting the right talent around Love, starting with a great defensive center who can cover for (some of) Love's deficiencies.
 
Green + something for Asik?  
 

MakMan44

stole corsi's dream
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2009
19,363
As a Wolves fan this has actually been fascinating to read. Of the proposed trades, I think X's would have the Wolves the most interested this season but I just don't see them being interesting in moving Love this year. Sure, it would maximize their return but they haven't particularly well run lately anyway and they probably think they have chance at resigning him if they make the playoffs next season. 
 

Brickowski

Banned
Feb 15, 2011
3,755
I'm not a big fan of Asik. He's limited offensively and can't make his free throws. I'd rather go after a player like Meyers Leonard, whose minutes are way down this year because Robin Lopez has played so well. He has legitimate center size, blocks shots and can shoot free throws. I wonder what it would take to pry him loose from the Blazers, who would still have Joel Freeland to back up Lopez.
 

Grin&MartyBarret

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 2, 2007
4,932
East Village, NYC
Brickowski said:
I'm not a big fan of Asik. He's limited offensively and can't make his free throws. I'd rather go after a player like Meyers Leonard, whose minutes are way down this year because Robin Lopez has played so well. He has legitimate center size, blocks shots and can shoot free throws. I wonder what it would take to pry him loose from the Blazers, who would still have Joel Freeland to back up Lopez.
 
Freeland's out up to 8 weeks, as of this morning.
 

The X Man Cometh

New Member
Dec 13, 2013
390
Brickowski said:
I'm not a big fan of Asik. He's limited offensively and can't make his free throws. I'd rather go after a player like Meyers Leonard, whose minutes are way down this year because Robin Lopez has played so well. He has legitimate center size, blocks shots and can shoot free throws. I wonder what it would take to pry him loose from the Blazers, who would still have Joel Freeland to back up Lopez.
 
Bass for Robinson and Meyers Leonard?
 

Brickowski

Banned
Feb 15, 2011
3,755
Bass for Robinson and Meyers Leonard?
I doubt if Portland does that. I was thinking more along the lines of Avery Bradley straight up for Leonard, which gets Portland out of any long term financial commitments and gives them a good backcourt defender for the playoffs (if the deal were to happen before Feb. 20).

Now that Freeland is hurt, maybe the Celtics offer Bradley and Joel Anthony for Freeland, Victor Claver and fodder (e.g., Will Barton). Alternatively, the Celtics could offer Bradley and Faverani for Freeland and Claver, but I'm guessing Portland would prefer a veteran backup C with finals experience to Faverani.

The multiplayer options are less attractive for Boston, and Ainge might not think highly enough of Leonard to also take on Claver, who has two more years left on his deal.

As for trading Bradley, I'm not as negative about him as some others here, but the emergence of Chris Johnson and the acquisition of Bayless (who has looked better on defense that I thought he would) make Bradley very expendible IMHO.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
ivanvamp said:
Green + something for Asik?
Asik doesn't work. He's not mobile enough to cover for Love. I don't think you understand just how bad Love is defensively. To win with Love I think you need a team like the Nash/Amar'e/Matrix Suns. Problem is that Boston has no chance of assembling that squad around Love even if they could deal for him.
 

The X Man Cometh

New Member
Dec 13, 2013
390
Brickowski said:
I doubt if Portland does that. I was thinking more along the lines of Avery Bradley straight up for Leonard, which gets Portland out of any long term financial commitments and gives them a good backcourt defender for the playoffs (if the deal were to happen before Feb. 20).

Now that Freeland is hurt, maybe the Celtics offer Bradley and Joel Anthony for Freeland, Victor Claver and fodder (e.g., Will Barton). Alternatively, the Celtics could offer Bradley and Faverani for Freeland and Claver, but I'm guessing Portland would prefer a veteran backup C with finals experience to Faverani.

The multiplayer options are less attractive for Boston, and Ainge might not think highly enough of Leonard to also take on Claver, who has two more years left on his deal.

As for trading Bradley, I'm not as negative about him as some others here, but the emergence of Chris Johnson and the acquisition of Bayless (who has looked better on defense that I thought he would) make Bradley very expendible IMHO.
 
I assume you meant Bradley/Anthony for Leonard/Claver?
 
I'd do that I guess. I like Bradley but don't want to get invested in him, and it helps the tank while grabbing us an upside play in Meyers Leonard.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
32,620
You guys want to give up three firsts and Sully for Kevin love? What's the upside? The three seed in the east? No thanks. I'd rather keep sully on cheaper money and upgrade at the 5 and 3
 

swingin val

New Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,162
Minneapolis
Brickowski said:
On top of that, the conventional wisdom is that Love will be playing in SoCal as soon as he can opt out of his current deal.
I am not sure why this is still an ongoing rumor. Love has never mentioned this as far as I can tell. The dude has spent a grand total if 2 years of his life in southern California.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
nighthob said:
Asik doesn't work. He's not mobile enough to cover for Love. I don't think you understand just how bad Love is defensively. To win with Love I think you need a team like the Nash/Amar'e/Matrix Suns. Problem is that Boston has no chance of assembling that squad around Love even if they could deal for him.
 
I'm quite sure you're right about that bolded part.  Still want him.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,345
Philadelphia
luckiestman said:
You guys want to give up three firsts and Sully for Kevin love? What's the upside? The three seed in the east? No thanks. I'd rather keep sully on cheaper money and upgrade at the 5 and 3
 
My thoughts too.
 
-Serious questions about his overall value due to atrocious defense and stunning record of losing games.
-Inability to stay on the court (>73 games once in his NBA career).
-Bad timing: Celtics haven't yet collected enough assets for even a real star to push them over the top.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
ivanvamp said:
I'm quite sure you're right about that bolded part.  Still want him.
I'd rather watch a contender than a defensively challenged offensive team that doesn't even score all that well.

swingin val said:
I am not sure why this is still an ongoing rumor. Love has never mentioned this as far as I can tell. The dude has spent a grand total if 2 years of his life in southern California.
Well, he was born in Santa Monica, lives in Los Angeles, played his AAU ball in southern California, played high school ball for a team named the Lakers, and went to UCLA. So you can see why people make the connection (before getting into the rumors that his going to LA when he hits free agency is a foregone conclusion)
 

Brickowski

Banned
Feb 15, 2011
3,755
I assume you meant Bradley/Anthony for Leonard/Claver?
 
I'd do that I guess. I like Bradley but don't want to get invested in him, and it helps the tank while grabbing us an upside play in Meyers Leonard.
Yes, that's what I meant. But the salaries don't quite match, so Portland has to throw it a little extra fodder.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
nighthob said:
I'd rather watch a contender than a defensively challenged offensive team that doesn't even score all that well.
 
So if my plan worked out, and the Celtics ended up with Rondo, Parker, Love, a good wing scorer, and a good defensive center (even if limited offensively), you don't think that would be a fun team to watch?  They wouldn't be a potential contender?  That's one star in Love, a potential star in Parker, and, when healthy, one of the best point guards in the NBA in Rondo, plus a few other pretty good pieces.  
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
Well, for one the odds are that they're not getting Parker. This is like one of those comical Barry Hughart plans that always start "First we amass a large fortune".

EDIT: Forgot #2, Parker's not much of a defender at the 3, either. So with defensive liabilities at four of the five spots they'd need to be generating 120 p/g. Just not seeing it.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
Ok.  So…….what's your plan for the Celtics then?  I think getting a top 3 player (HOPEFULLY!! - that has to be everyone here's wish) and then adding a superstar (there just aren't that many out there that are available) gives the C's three potential stars.  You build around that.
 
But I'm cool if people don't want Kevin Love and his 25 points and 13 and a half rebounds a game.  Just give me what your plan is.
 

The X Man Cometh

New Member
Dec 13, 2013
390
ivanvamp said:
Ok.  So…….what's your plan for the Celtics then?  I think getting a top 3 player (HOPEFULLY!! - that has to be everyone here's wish) and then adding a superstar (there just aren't that many out there that are available) gives the C's three potential stars.  You build around that.
 
But I'm cool if people don't want Kevin Love and his 25 points and 13 and a half rebounds a game.  Just give me what your plan is.
 
His point is that there isn't really a plan. Just keep your options open and wait for the man to show up. When that happens we can talk.
 

wutang112878

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2007
6,066
I'd be intrigued by the Rondo/Parker/Love nucleus. I do think Love could be better defensively playing away from Minny and in a winning situation. Hopefully Parker would turn into your #1 superstar. IMO Rondo and Love are both in the "might not be good enough to be your 2nd best player on a title team, but certainly good enough to be your 3rd". Now maybe you find out that you need an upgrade from Love or Rondo to really contend. Or maybe you realize that the 3 of them just dont work well together on the court. But if you get to that point and the team needs a tweak or a major trade to get them over the top, thats really not that bad, those are high class problems.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
I can't see Danny acquiring all these picks to use them all.  I think he's looking to deal for a star.  There just aren't that many available.  If you can acquire one without giving up your 2014 lottery pick, you go for it.  For all his defensive warts, Love's PER of over 27 is tremendous.  I know PER isn't the end-all of stats, but like WAR, it does tell a significant story.  Right now Love is #3 in the entire NBA in PER (behind only Durant and LeBron) at 27.3.  Dude is a great basketball player.  Moreover, he's just 25, so it's not like they'd be adding a guy in his late 20's or early 30's.  
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
FWIW, here are some other advanced metrics (http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2014_advanced.html), and where Love ranks:
 
- Win Shares:  #3, at 9.6, trailing only Durant and LeBron
- Offensive Win Shares:  #3, at 7.1, trailing only Durant and LeBron
- Defensive Win Shares:  #17, at 2.6, better than Drummond, Aldridge, Cousins, A. Davis, K. Leonard, Iguodala, LeBron, Paul, Bosh, and obviously a ton of other guys
- Win Shares per 48:  #5, at .260 (really he's at #4, because the #2 guy on the list only has played in 2 games)
 
So the advanced metrics tell us what the basic stats (points, rebounds, etc.) tell us:  that Love is a terrific player.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
Brickowski said:
Everyone's looking for the "big splash" as in 2007, but you can also rebuild by steady accretion. Add one or two pieces this year, two more next year, etc.

I wouldn't trade Sullinger for Love. Love isn't KG, and Sullinger is better now than Al Jefferson was in 2007.
 
You wouldn't trade Sullinger for Love straight up?  (assume the money works out)
 

Brickowski

Banned
Feb 15, 2011
3,755
You wouldn't trade Sullinger for Love straight up?  (assume the money works out)
Oh, straight up, sure, but not with all of those picks as well, and also assuming that Love were willing to sign an extension as a contingency of the trade.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
Brickowski said:
Oh, straight up, sure, but not with all of those picks as well, and also assuming that Love were willing to sign an extension as a contingency of the trade.
 
Oh ok.  Heh.  I think it's totally reasonable to not like the whole deal I proposed, but here I am thinking that you wouldn't do it straight up, which, IMO would be insanity.  
 
Glad you're not insane.   :p
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,095
Brickowski said:
But the other sides of the coin is Love vs KG, who was (and probably still is) light years ahead of Love defensively).
 
Yep, Love likely will never be as good as KG was.  But it's worth noting that 2014-15 Love will be 5 years younger than KG was his first year in Boston.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
FWIW, the KG trade has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with a potential Love trade.  
 

Brickowski

Banned
Feb 15, 2011
3,755
Love and Rondo won't win squat together without a good center to put beside Love, a wing scorer and 3-4 more good players. Hell, in MN he's got a decent center and Rubio and he still can't win.

Keep Sullinger and use the other assets you were willing to expend to get Love on a center. Or trade Rondo for a center and draft a quality point guard. IMHO you'll get into championship contention quicker.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
Brickowski said:
Love and Rondo won't win squat together without a good center to put beside Love, a wing scorer and 3-4 more good players. Hell, in MN he's got a decent center and Rubio and he still can't win.Keep Sullinger and use the other assets you were willing to expend to get Love on a center. Or trade Rondo for a center and draft a quality point guard. IMHO you'll get into championship contention quicker.
Like who though?
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,470
Somewhere
Brickowski said:
Love and Rondo won't win squat together without a good center to put beside Love, a wing scorer and 3-4 more good players. Hell, in MN he's got a decent center and Rubio and he still can't win.
 
Pekovic doesn't really bring the skillset you need next to Love (if you want decent defense out of that position). He's not an oaf, but he's far from agile, and he's pretty vulnerable against the pick and roll.  He's also not a great interior defender, either. The guy can score, and he can rebound, but you already get that with Love. That said, you could build a winning team -- and the Wolves probably should be one right now -- with those two.
 
Rubio's a pretty great defender but he's still kind of a terrible shooter. I suppose you could say that about a younger Rondo, who current Rondo looks like a faint impression of.
 
The real problem with Minnesota is that their bench is fucking terrible. Like worst in a long time terrible. A lot of those guys don't even belong in the NBDL, much less the NBA.
 
caveat: my impression of Minnesota is from having to watch a handful of their games during family holidays.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
Well it would simply be great if they get Wiggins in the draft and he becomes the next great wing player, or Embiid and he becomes the next Olajuwan, and then with the second 1st rounder they add a guy who turns out to be a solid NBA starter.  But that the C's aren't very good next year either, and then they repeat the same process in the 2015 draft.  Then we can be talking about titles in 2018 or 2019 without having to make a big trade.
 
But…..well, let's just say that's no more realistic than trading for Kevin Love.
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
8,848
NYC
Another problem with the Wolves is that they've been really unlucky. They're #7 in the West by point differential -- +3.3, only a point per game behind the Blazers.
 
It should go without saying that Love is not remotely to blame for their mediocrity this year. The Wolves have been 9.5 points per 100 possessions better than their opponents with Love on the floor -- and 8.6 points worse with him on the bench, for a gaudy +18.1.
 
25.7 ppg on .585 ts, 13.3 rebounds, 3.9 assists.
 
And he's only 25.
 
I'd argue that he's the 5th best player in the league right now after James, Durant, George, and Paul, or maybe 6th after those guys and Curry. Anthony Davis is the only under 25-er who I can see knocking him down that list in the foreseeable future (3-4 years), barring injury.
 
As a Warriors fan, I'd give up anyone the Wolves wanted for Love other than Curry and Bogut (Thompson + Barnes  + Lee works in the trade machine!). As a sometime Cs fan, I'd give up anything ... full stop. No to Sullinger plus three first round picks? Really?
 

Brickowski

Banned
Feb 15, 2011
3,755
As a sometime Cs fan, I'd give up anything ... full stop. No to Sullinger plus three first round picks? Really?
Really, and the Wolves illustrate why. Their bench sucks. Those three picks could be used by the Celtics to build a bench. It takes 8-9 guys to be a legitimate contender. Three guys won't do it unless one of them is LeBron James.
 

wutang112878

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2007
6,066
You need your 5 starters, and probably a 6th man and then the rest you can fill in very easily.  Whats most important is getting those top 3 guys and getting the right guys, you want to spend your resources on that.  Then wherever the cupboard is bare you can overspend in an MLE or sign and trade or take on a bad deal, etc.  If you have those top 3 guys in place most of the GMs are capable of doing the rest
 

Brickowski

Banned
Feb 15, 2011
3,755
You need your 5 starters, and probably a 6th man and then the rest you can fill in very easily.  Whats most important is getting those top 3 guys and getting the right guys, you want to spend your resources on that.  Then wherever the cupboard is bare you can overspend in an MLE or sign and trade or take on a bad deal, etc.  If you have those top 3 guys in place most of the GMs are capable of doing the rest
Would a Love-Rondo duo have the stature to attract players like James Posey, P.J. Brown and Sam Cassell, without whom there probably would not have been a championship in 2008?
 

bowiac

Caveat: I know nothing about what I speak
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
12,945
New York, NY
Sam Ray Not said:
Another problem with the Wolves is that they've been really unlucky. They're #7 in the West by point differential -- +3.3, only a point per game behind the Blazers.
The Timberwolves has underperformed their pythag literally every year of Kevin Love's career. Point differential is super important in basketball just like baseball, but there's other stuff going on as well.