# Great interview with David Kahn (audio)



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

http://espn.go.com/espnradio/player?rd=1#/podcente r/?id=6701395&autoplay=1&callsign=ESPNRADI O


To summarize a few points for those who don't want to listen to it (it's 1/2 hour long or so)

He said that Love has never, on his son's life, been discussed in trades, and he sees him being there for a long long time. Says he is the best outlet passer since Wes Unseld, which on an uptempo team (which they're planning on implementing now) is huge, and he's a great big-man trailer on the break due to his 3-point shooting. 

He mentions Randolph getting minutes at the 5.

Discusses a former trade rumor that didn't happen. Steve Kerr called him, and asked if he'd trade Jefferson for Amare. He said he didn't think it was the right time for either player to be moved. Then it got reported that the Wolves had called the Suns and offered #6 and Jefferson for Amare, and the Suns said no lol. He had just had a discussion with Jefferson right before Kerr called him, discussing his future in MN (keeping him), and Jefferson's agent called him thinking that he had misled Jefferson when he heard the rumor. Gotta love the rumor mill.

Talks about Williams, Beasley, Randolph, Love all liking to shoot, so Rubio being a passer to a fault is a good fit with that.

Said that he told Rambis that he wanted an uptempo team, and Rambis wanted to use the triangle at times, but instead used it too much. Flynn didn't fit it, and got hurt. He didn't see a way for Flynn to raise his stock with Rubio and Ridnour on the team, so sold him cheap basically. He expects Flynn to be a very good PG in the NBA still lol.

He says the team needs to get older. Wants to add more veterans besides Brad Miller for the locker room. Reading between the lines, I think he's wanting to trade some young guys for vets, but I hope they don't. Usually get lesser talent back in those type of trades IMO.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Idk what the deal is with the link. Since I can't seem to get that one to work, here's a link to the board where I saw the link initially. If this is against the rules, feel free to delete the link here:

http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=63&f=1554&t=7625416


----------



## Porn Player (Apr 24, 2003)

Thanks for the recap. Always interesting to see what GMs think. For the main part you've got to like what he's saying and it all seems classy. 

What I will say is, I don't like when a GM tries to tell a head coach how the game should be ran. 

Beasley to be traded? I wonder what value he would command these days.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Porn Player said:


> Thanks for the recap. Always interesting to see what GMs think. For the main part you've got to like what he's saying and it all seems classy.
> 
> *What I will say is, I don't like when a GM tries to tell a head coach how the game should be ran. *
> 
> Beasley to be traded? I wonder what value he would command these days.


Well he did make a point to say that he didn't want to interfere too much. But the GM is putting together a roster that requires uptempo, open court stuff, and the coach agrees with it when he interviewed him (said how he liked playing that way, etc) and then when it comes time to actually install a game plan, goes against what they had agreed upon in the interview. He talks about that in there as well. 

So in the interview to hire Rambis, Kahn had told him he wanted a running team, because that would make Minnesota more desirable to players. As he said, he's never heard a player say they want a grind it out, 82-81 game. Player want to run. So basically, installing an uptempo offense is part of what they had agreed on, and part of why he got the job.


----------



## Porn Player (Apr 24, 2003)

Ahh well the clarification makes for a whole different ball game.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Yet, the team still has won 32 games in two years. Hope they can win 25 this year.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

They were a good team in the middle of this year. Then Love got hurt, and they just flat-lined to end the season.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

No, they won 17 games. They were an awful team all year. There is no good in a 17-65 year.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

You obviously didn't see them all year. I saw them play some really good basketball last year. They just weren't a complete or experienced team, to sustain the good play.


----------



## tr1986 (Nov 6, 2008)

I don't know why Kerr would have ever called up to inquire about Jefferson for Amare, or why Kahn ended up trading Jefferson after saying he wouldn't.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

tr1986 said:


> I don't know why Kerr would have ever called up to inquire about Jefferson for Amare, or why Kahn ended up trading Jefferson after saying he wouldn't.


That was discussed in further detail in the interview. Jefferson was coming off the microfracture, and Amare off the eye injury. Amare wasn't happy in Phoenix for quite a while and there were rumors all the time about him leaving (the last sentence here wasn't mentioned in the interview, but it was common knowledge). 

As for why Jefferson got traded, it was because he and Love were "bumping into eachother" on the court, and it was stunting the superior/younger player's growth. So they got rid of the older/inferior Big Al. Idk the details after that. What I said there was what he said, although idk if he really said much about Love being the superior player...he did say it was stunting his growth and he thinks he'll get even better than he is now.


----------



## VCHighFly (May 7, 2004)

This really was a great interview. I still don't buy his reasoning for following up the Rubio pick with Flynn. He basically said he didn't think Stephen Curry could be a PG, he didn't think Rubio was going to play in the NBA for a couple years, and he knew he needed a PG to run his up-tempo style until Rubio got here. In other words, Flynn was a stop-gap solution. Really? Was he really trying to win immediately with that roster? Wouldn't it have been a better idea to take Curry as a SG (since he didn't have one of those either at the time) and pick up a free agent PG on the cheap since he was just going to be a placeholder for Rubio? His logic there just seems very flawed, still.


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

DaBabyBullz said:


> You obviously didn't see them all year. I saw them play some really good basketball last year. They just weren't a complete or experienced team, to sustain the good play.


Yeah they played really good basketball.

Who could forget that two-game miracle run in early February over New Orleans and Houston. I heard ESPN has already begun production on its next _30 for 30_ commemorating that Cinderella story.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

VCHighFly said:


> This really was a great interview. I still don't buy his reasoning for following up the Rubio pick with Flynn. He basically said he didn't think Stephen Curry could be a PG, he didn't think Rubio was going to play in the NBA for a couple years, and he knew he needed a PG to run his up-tempo style until Rubio got here. In other words, Flynn was a stop-gap solution. Really? Was he really trying to win immediately with that roster? Wouldn't it have been a better idea to take Curry as a SG (since he didn't have one of those either at the time) and pick up a free agent PG on the cheap since he was just going to be a placeholder for Rubio? His logic there just seems very flawed, still.


That's what I thought. You don't burn a #6 pick on a stop-gap solution at what is becoming the most important position in the NBA. That was asinine, at best lol. Curry was one of the few players I actually liked in that draft, and he passed on him twice lol.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Cinco de Mayo said:


> Yeah they played really good basketball.
> 
> Who could forget that two-game miracle run in early February over New Orleans and Houston. I heard ESPN has already began production on its next _30 for 30_ commemorating that Cinderella story.


I didn't say it was consistent, but they showed the ability to play good ball. Problem was they couldn't be consistent with it. They competed in every game I watched, until their collapse in the last 1/4 of the season, which also coincided with Love being dinged up. My point was they had talent and showed that they could compete at a high level.


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

DaBabyBullz said:


> I didn't say it was consistent, but they showed the ability to play good ball. Problem was they couldn't be consistent with it. They competed in every game I watched, until their collapse in the last 1/4 of the season, which also coincided with Love being dinged up. My point was they had talent and showed that they could compete at a high level.


They were absolutely consistent. They played one-and-a-half good quarters followed by 26 bad ones. If that's not consistency, then Memphis is in the Eastern Conference.

But before that 15-game losing streak at the end of the season, the TWolves were at the top of their game, blowing out two juggernauts - Indiana and Utah - at home and most certainly quelling any skepticism over getting an All-Star berth.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

I'm not going to argue with someone as ignorant and condescending as you are. You're a waste of the air you breath, and not worth my time, to put it nicely.


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

DaBabyBullz said:


> I'm not going to argue with someone as ignorant and condescending as you are. You're a waste of the air you breath, and not worth my time, to put it nicely.


You mad, brah?


----------



## Porn Player (Apr 24, 2003)

You Keaf, brah?


----------



## BobStackhouse42 (Oct 7, 2010)

I loved that interview. Very candid stuff from a still active GM. Seems like to nice of a guy to be in his position.


----------

