# Twolves keeping Hassell



## twolvesguy (Jan 16, 2004)

Was just reported here in the Twin Ciities on their radio affiliate. Detail to follow! 

Very happy day!


----------



## MJG (Jun 29, 2003)

Blazers luck out in my opinion. Hassell would've been a solid player, but that contract is just too much for what he gives: very good (not great) defense and nothing else. Not worth the $4.5 million per over the next six years.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

if true, it's too bad. I was kind of hoping we might actually have a solid, smart perimeter defender on our team. 

oh well. it may cost us four or five wins, but it's not like he was going to make us a home court team in the playoffs.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

Yep..the Blazers really lucked out that now
another player has slipped through their fingers..

 

As it sits right now..uggh


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

People People People. Wait until its confirmed. Don't listen to a Wolves fan. No offense, I would just like a source, a written source, Not you supposedly hearing it on the radio.



BFreak.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

LOL here is your source

T'Wolves site



> "We're pleased to have re-signed Trenton and have him in the fold for the next few years," McHale said. "Trenton played a key role in what our team was able to accomplish last season. He works tremendously hard on both ends of the court and will provide depth at the shooting guard and small forward positions."


----------



## twolvesguy (Jan 16, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>MJG</b>!
> Blazers luck out in my opinion. Hassell would've been a solid player, but that contract is just too much for what he gives: very good (not great) defense and nothing else. Not worth the $4.5 million per over the next six years.


Well, everyone is entitled to their opinion. No matter how wrong that opinion is.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

this sucks


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

I'm 99% sure we could have gotten Hassell IF we would have agreed to take Wally and Olowakandi off their hands for Shareef. They would have agreed to not match the offer if we'd have agreed to take on those contracts. 

In light of that, it's a good move to just let him go. We don't need Hassell THAT badly.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

Good thing we had that press conference!!


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>BEER&BASKETBALL</b>!
> Good thing we had that press conference!!




ha ha... I was just going to mention that.. I guess it was just a PR move.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

So, are the Wolves going to have a press conference too? Trenton Hassell's appeared at more press conferences than our sitting president.

And don't the Blazers look like complete tools now for _their_ press conference? The Wolves should just show footage of the Blazers announcing signing Hassell, and then just play Nelson-from-the-Simpsons going "Ha Ha" really loud over the tannoy.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

Can we sign Monia now?


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor (Aug 2, 2004)

http://www.nba.com/timberwolves/news/hassell_040804.html

heres the link


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor (Aug 2, 2004)

well, at least we drove up the price...minny is in our division now. I wonder if McHale is trying to force our hands into taking Wally?


----------



## RipCity9 (Jan 30, 2004)

Good, I wasn't sold on his acquisition to begin with.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

Crap, crap, crap, crap, CRAP!!!

I was really hoping to land Hassell, even at that price. He would have helped prop up our pathetic perimeter defense.

God I hope Nash isn't seriously considering that SAR/Wally+ deal...

PBF


----------



## Captain Obvious (Jun 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>twolvesguy</b>!
> 
> 
> Well, everyone is entitled to their opinion. No matter how wrong that opinion is.


LOL! I agree with everything MJG said.


----------



## MrWonderful (May 18, 2003)

*Yeah, big deal*

We still have Ruben, and I like him better anyhow.


----------



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ProudBFan</b>!
> 
> God I hope Nash isn't seriously considering that SAR/Wally+ deal...
> 
> PBF


I agree with that assertion that this (Minny signing Hassell) is in response to Nash *not* accepting that particular offer. (Thank God!)


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

Meh, if we kept him great, if we lost him no big deal to me. So we lost him, it doesn't make or break my outlook on this team. I had always thought that giving him 6 years was just too long of a deal. Sure he plays good D, but like someone else said we already have a strictly defensive minded player in Ruben, not too mention that DMiles can guard the 2's pretty well.. At least Q can get some minutes behind DA now. The only thing that suffers from this loss is the lack of depth.


I feel bad for Hassell though, I mean he had to sign with a team that wasn't his first choice. I bet Minny feels real great knowing that too


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

*Re: Yeah, big deal*



> Originally posted by <b>MrWonderful</b>!
> We still have Ruben, and I like him better anyhow.


Ruben failed to stop Kobe during the last game of the season... TWICE!

PBF


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ABM</b>!
> 
> I agree with that assertion that this (Minny signing Hassell) is in response to Nash *not* accepting that particular offer. (Thank God!)


I hope you're right, ABM. But I actually see McHale matching to keep Hassell - especially with nearly a week left to go until the 15-day deadline - as an indication that the SAR/Wally+ deal is even more likely to happen.

With all the back-court players they have right now, do they need - and can they find minutes for - _both_ Hassell AND Wally?

PBF


----------



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ProudBFan</b>!
> 
> 
> I hope you're right, ABM. But I actually see McHale matching to keep Hassell - especially with nearly a week left to go until the 15-day deadline - as an indication that the SAR/Wally+ deal is even more likely to happen.
> ...


A little bird told me that Nash said fooey on them.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

I'm kind of disappointed, I thought he'd be a solid contributor. However, this means that a SAR deal is more likely to happen sooner than later now. Woo Hoo!


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ABM</b>!
> 
> A little bird told me that Nash said fooey on them.


I hate when we have to be so cryptic around here. Thanks, ABM. That helps put me at ease...

I think...

PBF


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

Maybe Nash can call another press conference.


----------



## twolvesguy (Jan 16, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>MAS RipCity</b>!
> I feel bad for Hassell though, I mean he had to sign with a team that wasn't his first choice. I bet Minny feels real great knowing that too


LOL!! 

I always wondered if anyone ever fell for that crap. :laugh:


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

> _"I'm happy to be staying in Minnesota and I can't wait for the start of the season to hit the court and get back to work," Hassell said. "I'm excited about where we are going as a team, after the things we accomplished last season." _


And what did he say at our press conference??? :whoknows:


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

PBF, I'm not sure why you're so opposed to a trade of SAR for Wally & Kandi or Johnson. It shores up our perimeter shooting and gives us a decent backup center, which are our two biggest needs. No, Wally isn't a good defender, but then neither is SAR so you're not really giving up much on the defensive end and you're gaining a lot of offensive fire power.

The way I see it, if this deal happened, the Blazers would still look to re-sign Miles as the starter at SF, they'd dump Patterson (probably the Witherspoon deal), and they'd play Wally as a backup at both SF and SG. All-in-all, I don't see this as such a bad trade.


----------



## kaydow (Apr 6, 2004)

Wally S. is a good (not great) player. Sure, he had a run-in with KG and he has missed some time over the last two years. Blazer fans, we all need to accept we aren't going to get R. Allen, VC, or even J. Kidd for SAR (at least not at this time) The sooner we all accept this, the better. WS is a career 50% shooter--that is unheard of for a guy who lives on the perimeter. Plus, he wants the ball in his hands--He's a competator. He'll never be all NBA defensive team, but neither is VC or R. Allen. We need a shooter and a b/u Center, and SAR is going to be a handfull if he isn't traded. I say make the deal. I didn't like the deal when Miles was in there, but if we can package SAR with DA or RP for WS & Olawacandyass, IMO our team is better and you get rid of a couple of guys that don't want to be here--I bet WS would love a fresh start and more shots.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

I'm starting to feel used and abused by Minny. Remember two years ago when Flip Saunders talked to Portland about their coaching vacancy, then went back home and signed a big new contract? Now Hassell has done the same thing (i.e., forced the T-Wolves to pay him a lot more money). Makes you wonder if the Minny guys aren't playing us for chumps.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

Hmm...perhaps this deal will still be made later, after Portland resigns Miles. Hassle, Kandi, and Wally for SAR, Miles, Woods


----------



## Swoosh (May 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Yega1979</b>!
> Hmm...perhaps this deal will still be made later, after Portland resigns Miles. Hassle, Kandi, and Wally for SAR, Miles, Woods


Since Hassell signed an offer sheet with the Blazers, he cannot be traded to PDX for one full year.


----------



## Blazerfan024 (Aug 15, 2003)

very dissapointed...but what can ya do


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

I'm kind of glad they matched.

Hassel is not that great of a player. Put it this way, if he is playing major minutes every game then we are not going to be contenders so whats the point of having him?

I thought it was way to big of a contract.


----------



## kaydow (Apr 6, 2004)

> Hassel is not that great of a player. Put it this way, if he is playing major minutes every game then we are not going to be contenders so whats the point of having him?



I don't think that's a fair comparion. San Antonio won championships with guys like Bruce Bowen and Avery Johnson getting major minutes. Who would have thought Chauncy Billips would ever be a NBA Finals MVP?? Role players are necessary for any team hoping to compete. I agree that if you ask a guy like Hassel to get you double figure points everynight than you are probably in trouble, but I don't agree with you about the minutes theory. TH will get extended minutes in Minny this year, and will probably be a consistant contributer on a good team. We would have been lucky to have had him.


----------



## twolvesguy (Jan 16, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Draco</b>!
> I'm kind of glad they matched.
> 
> Hassel is not that great of a player. Put it this way, if he is playing major minutes every game then we are not going to be contenders so whats the point of having him?
> ...


First of all, his average yearly salary in this contract is less than the NBA Average salary. 

Hassell started nearly 70 games last season for the Twolves. He averaged about 30 minutes a game. The Twolves had the best record in the West, and went to the Western Conference Finals.

To sum things up, you're wrong.


----------



## twolvesguy (Jan 16, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>kaydow</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think that's a fair comparion. San Antonio won championships with guys like Bruce Bowen and Avery Johnson getting major minutes. Who would have thought Chauncy Billips would ever be a NBA Finals MVP?? Role players are necessary for any team hoping to compete. I agree that if you ask a guy like Hassel to get you double figure points everynight than you are probably in trouble, but I don't agree with you about the minutes theory. TH will get extended minutes in Minny this year, and will probably be a consistant contributer on a good team. We would have been lucky to have had him.


Well said.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

I am sad at losing Trenton. I was thinking about beyond this year and he and Telfair in the near future. I also think anytime a team can add a decent piece for the MLE its usually a good deal.

Too bad - but time to move on.

Do the Wally/Olowakandi deal!


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

So, let's see: we lose out on the player who essentially replaced Szerbiak in Minny last year (how many games did Wally W. play?), when they had their best record ever, and to make up for it we want to give up our main trading piece for an injury-prone, one-dimensional bigmouth with a humungous contract, whose best position (to make up for slow feet) is at SF, our most loaded position?

Just trying to get clear on that.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>meru</b>!
> So, let's see: we lose out on the player who essentially replaced Szerbiak in Minny last year (how many games did Wally W. play?), when they had their best record ever, and to make up for it we want to give up our main trading piece for an injury-prone, one-dimensional bigmouth with a humungous contract, whose best position (to make up for slow feet) is at SF, our most loaded position?
> 
> Just trying to get clear on that.


That juuuuust about covers it.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

http://www.nba.com/blazers/news/Timberwolves_Match_Hassell_Con-115551-41.html


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Too bad for Nash and company... I think that this could have been a good addition, but I'm not losing any sleep over it.

It appears, though, that this might be another time that Nash has miscalculated.

Ed O.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Fork</b>!
> That juuuuust about covers it.


I find it interesting that each of Wally's deficiency's are intolerable to some of you. However, those same deficiency's in Kidd or Allen are somehow excused! Fine....trade for the old guys.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RedHot&Rolling</b>!
> 
> I find it interesting that each of Wally's deficiency's are intolerable to some of you. However, those same deficiency's in Kidd or Allen are somehow excused! Fine....trade for the old guys.


Kidd is a HoF-level PG. A guy who can't shoot very well, but does everything else on the court well.

Ray Allen is a borderline HoF-level SG. A guy who doesn't defend very well, but does everything else on the court well.

Wally Szczerbiak is a borderline all-star-level SF. A guy who shoots well, but does everything else on the court poorly.

If you honestly can't see the difference between those types of players, then I don't know what to say.

Ed O.


----------



## Leroy131 (Mar 11, 2004)

I agree with Ed O. that it could have been a good signing, even though we were having to overpay a bit in order to steal him away. At any rate, I'm hardly surprised that the Wolves matched and I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. 

As has been said before, Wally Szczerbiak is essentially the Allan Houston of small forwards. If you can live with his enermous contract and propensity to get injured for the one skill he brings (albeit a very good one), then he's your guy...


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> 
> Kidd is a HoF-level PG. A guy who can't shoot very well, but does everything else on the court well.
> ...


a post so good it deserves quoting. I have nothing to add.


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor (Aug 2, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> 
> Kidd is a HoF-level PG. A guy who can't shoot very well, but does everything else on the court well.
> ...


I agree 100% - Wally is a big step below Allen and Kidd. The sad thing that people need to realize is that Allen and (probably) Kidd are simply out of our league. If nash could get one of these guys for SAR and change, he would. If wally is the best we can get (sigh) then wally is the best we can get.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Great news! I'm very glad that the Timberwolves will waste that money on a good but overrated defender who can't do anything else well.

I have no doubt Timberwolves fans value him, as a peice of a team that did very well. But, removing emotion from it, Hassell was one of the least important parts of it.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> 
> Kidd is a HoF-level PG. A guy who can't shoot very well, but does everything else on the court well.
> ...



A HOF post indeed :woot:


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mr. Chuck Taylor</b>!
> 
> 
> I agree 100% - Wally is a big step below Allen and Kidd. The sad thing that people need to realize is that Allen and (probably) Kidd are simply out of our league. If nash could get one of these guys for SAR and change, he would. If wally is the best we can get (sigh) then wally is the best we can get.


I'm not ready to say that either Allen or Kidd (or T-Mac or Shaq, for that matter) are "simply out of our league." It's all what's brought to the table. If SAR is the main piece and it's not something silly like SAR, Miles, Theo, Damon, Telfair *and* Monia then sure, we're not likely to land players like Allen or Kidd. However, if management is willing to use Zach....


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> Kidd is a HoF-level PG. A guy who can't shoot very well, but does everything else on the court well.
> 
> Ray Allen is a borderline HoF-level SG. A guy who doesn't defend very well, but does everything else on the court well.
> ...


You guys are so mean!! Ganging up on me like this. I'm not going to take it anymore.

Seriously, Ed O - I'll give you that Kidd and Allen have had better careers than Wally so far. However, I think you're stretching the Silly Putty too far to claim they are HOF material. Please! Kidd doesn't have the stats or wins to qualify. Allen has nice stats but has never won consistently either.

Your statement is just too strong, yet was received well and got good reaction.

Keep in mind - the Blazers need a younger sharp shooter. He fits the bill.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>RedHot&Rolling</b>!
> 
> 
> You guys are so mean!! Ganging up on me like this. I'm not going to take it anymore.
> ...


I don't think anyone was intending to be mean. If you look at the stats, Kidd nearly averages a double double and I suspect averages more rebounds than any other starting point guard in the league. Sure he's not had the luck to be on a team that's won it all. Neither have a lot of other good players (such as Stockton and Malone). That won't keep him from entering the Hall Of Fame.

Allen is admittedly not the sure Hall Of Fame bet that Kidd is but again, he's certainly better rounded than Wally.

You're absolutely right that this Blazer team needs shooting and that *is* Wally's specialty so it might not be a bad match. Still, he's not *that* much better a player than Person and he's a *lot* more expensive for a *lot* longer. I've always enjoyed Wally as a player and, as I've said elsewhere recently, I can't quite bring myself to root for him to become a Blazer, though I won't be too disappointed if it happens. But if you give me a choice among Kidd, Allen, and Wally, Wally comes in an easy third at this point.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

I had trouble finding anyone with as weak of stats in the Hall of Fame as Kidd would have right now. He is an assist superstar 9.4apg - and his rebounding is good for a guard (6.4rpg) - but his shooting (career 40%FG) stinks. He's never led his team in that catagory and his team has NEVER won a championship. The only HOF guys with no RINGS are super scorers for their career. Put into perspective: Terry Porter has better stats for the HOF than Kidd does.

Allen has a better chance of HOF because he's led his team in scoring his whole career. But no RINGS.

I say neither gets there without a Championship!

Here is the link: 
http://www.hoophall.com/halloffamers/Catagory.htm


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RedHot&Rolling</b>!
> I had trouble finding anyone with as weak of stats in the Hall of Fame as Kidd would have right now. He is an assist superstar 9.4apg - and his rebounding is good for a guard (6.4rpg) - but his shooting (career 40%FG) stinks. He's never led his team in that catagory and his team has NEVER won a championship. The only HOF guys with no RINGS are super scorers for their career. Put into perspective: Terry Porter has better stats for the HOF than Kidd does.
> 
> Allen has a better chance of HOF because he's led his team in scoring his whole career. But no RINGS.


Hall of Fame is for individual greatness, not whether you had a GM good enough to put enough talent around you to win a championship.

The best Hall of Fame measurement I've seen is BasketballReference.com's Hall of Fame monitor. Here's what it says about the players in question:

Jason Kidd
HOF Monitor: 191 (Likely HOFer > 135)

Ray Allen
HOF Monitor: 97 (Likely HOFer > 135)

Terry Porter
HOF Monitor: 113 (Likely HOFer > 135)

Wally Szczerbiak
HOF Monitor: 51 (Likely HOFer > 135)

About HOF Monitor scores 

Based on this, I'd say that Kidd is already a lock Hall of Famer, Ray Allen has a shot of reaching the Hall of Fame depending on how the rest of his career unfolds, Terry Porter isn't a Hall Of Famer and Szczerbiak really doesn't have much chance of being a Hall of Famer.


----------



## Bwatcher (Dec 31, 2002)

I'm with Porterin2004. I would rather have W.Person than Wally for the way the present team is structured. Person doesn't drive as well as Wally, and he cannot play as many minutes, but his contract will not at all be an albatross on the team for years in the future. Besides, why help Minny remove an expensive neutral/negative for a potentially very positive PF in Rahim. Rahim would make them a stronger team, and removing Wally helps team unity and financial balance (currently too much money on the backcourt). I don't see Wally helping the Blazers that much more that someone like WPerson.

If our scouting staff is as good as they have been in recent years, then at least one of the Russians is going to be good in 2-3 years. Person's age and contract fit that sort of development path well. Wally's contract doesn't. Another way to think about it is, is Wally worth paying the luxury tax for? It might not ever come to that, but I think the clear answer is no, he is not worth paying a luxury tax for.

Thank you ABM for that tid-bit. I will sleep better.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Yeah but the problem is we can't get Ray Allen and we most likely cannot get Jason Kidd either.

Wally Szczerbiak is one of the best "shooters" in the NBA. Yeah his defense is not good, but I think several people here are missing how a player like Wally, if used right , could fit into POR and the players we have on our team right now. 

I like Jason Kidd and sure I would love to have him, but the risks involved in trading for him (age, injuries) and how he would fit in with the players on our team at present, don't necessarily IMO make him a better fit in POR. He would be what, 36? when his contract expired? Wally would be 32.

Is Jason Kidd at age 32-36 better than Wally at age 27-32? I'm not so sure about that one, particularly after watching guys like Steve Smith, Mitch Ritchmond & (present day) Allen Housten skills severely diminish during that age timeframe.

IF we acquired Kidd, then we HAVE to IMO, become a running team, b\c unless other moves are made to acquire a shooter, and guys 37yr old Wesley Person is NOT the answer to our shooting woes. we would SUFFER in the halfcourt, as teams would sag down and force us to shoot, just like they did last year, oh joy another year where our fortunes are tied to whether or not Damon and\or DA can hit a flippin open outside jumper. :uhoh: 

Wally COULD, if used correctly fit well with the pieces we already have in place. Here is a guy that can DEFINITELY bury an open jumper, as teams who collapsed on Zach would find out, and his presence IMO would open up the lane for Miles to drive to the hoop (which he excels at). Then if our illustrious coaching staff can run him off some picks every now and then, he could be a greast mid\long range threat. HE doesn't NEED to be a great passer, he doesn't NEED to be a great defender (really now what great shooters are? Allen? Peja?). 

All Wally needs to do is stick the open jumper, make teams pay for trying to double Zach, make defenders mark him closely, allowing Miles (or DA for that matter) drive to the hoop more effectively. IF he does that he will be WELL worth his contract IMO.

Defensively, his weakness in this are can be offset by Theo in the middle, but more improtantly by Miles, who could take the tougher defensive assignment b\t the opposing SG\SF. 

I just don't see his acquisiton as a bad deal at all, I think many posters here are greatly overstating his negatives and conveniently forgetting the GREATLY NEEDED positives he would bring to our team.


----------



## quick (Feb 13, 2004)

No big loss we will get to see more pt for telfair


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> Yeah but the problem is we can't get Ray Allen and we most likely cannot get Jason Kidd either.
> 
> ....and guys 37yr old Wesley Person is NOT the answer to our shooting woes. we would SUFFER in the halfcourt, as teams would sag down and force us to shoot, just like they did last year, oh joy another year where our fortunes are tied to whether or not Damon and\or DA can hit a flippin open outside jumper. :uhoh:


Why can't we get Allen or Kidd? Do you know something Nash does not? :rofl: Just because it has not been done YET, or not rumored does not mean its not possible.

And why not Person? ... yeah he only shot about 48 2FG%, and 47 3FG%... really bad shooter for a half court set.

Wally does not shoot any better.


trouble is, he plays the same kind of D Wally does at 20-30% of the cost of Wally without committing long term to him. Its a 1-2 year deal at probably the vet minimum at best.

Wes would do just fine as a role player for 1-2 years until Monia is ready to go.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

> trouble is, he plays the same kind of D Wally does at 20-30% of the cost of Wally without committing long term to him. Its a 1-2 year deal at probably the vet minimum at best.


Well you & I disagree then, as I think Wally Szczerbiak is just a "tad" better than Wesley Person is (six years younger too). 

As for the "long term" commitment, what is the big deal here? Have we not come to the conclusion that POR will not have significant cap space to pursue a FA in 05'? 

Is losing Damon, SAR, Theo and possibly Miles to net what?, $8mil in cap space and (hopefully) sign whatever FA we could lure from that BETTER than acquiring Wally Szczerbiak AND either Olowokandi or Johnson? and then (hopefully) retaining Theo & Miles? b\c I don't think so at all.

Wesley Person is a nice bench player, but I think comparing him to Szczerbiak is quite a stretch.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Well Kmurph, I am not so sure we entriely disagree. I could be a bit more specific to clear it up. I think bringing in Wally and Kandi/EJ for Rahim is an interesting scenario. But its unclear to me I guess if DA or Miles will start ahead of him. My first instinct is to make Waly a backup SG to DA. 

My concerns with Wally are much like every one elses. His contract is pretty high at $9 mil, and my rant has been you compare that to Sheed at $9.1 mil and its not even close talent wise for the buck. He also has health problems, and some have said attitude as well. So these weigh in the back of my mind. There is no doubt Wally is a gifted shooter.

If Wally is a starter in this league then the $9 mil is maybe a bit high, but not bad when you compare DA to him at $8.4 mil. I am not sure Wally even beats DA out for a starting gig. Thus he should mabe be around $7 mil or so IMHO.. but that neither here nor there, he is signed at $9 mil

If we move DA and/or Miles and possibly Patterson and Rahim... a total makeover.... putting Wally in the starting SF or SG spot makes sense. But if Wally is coming off the bench at $9 mil I wonder if he is worth it at that price tag. Wally as a $9 mil backup is expensive. If Patterson is moved and Wally backs up both DA and Miles, then its more palatable. It seems if we do get this Minny package, other moves are in store for us as the summer progresses. Possibly moving DA, Miles, Patterson and Rahim.

We know what an effect Wes had when he came off the bench last year and was dropping them down. It was a positive thing that soon avanished when he left the team, thus us relying on Damon or DA having a good day of shooting to balance things out. If Wally can do the same thing Wes did then we gain, and become more balanced offensively. Wes can do the same thing for only about 1-2 years for limited minutes but at a lot less money. As you say Wally is a lot younger, but if you do not play due to injury, that $9 mil becomes a boat anchor for the team salary, whether you are under or over the hard cap or not.

Wally (outside shooting) and EJ/Kandi (role playing PF/C) are what we need theoretically. But perhaps there are still other offers out there. THey seem to be getting better as the summer goes on.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Trader Bob</b>!
> Wally (outside shooting) and EJ/Kandi (role playing PF/C) are what we need theoretically. But perhaps there are still other offers out there. THey seem to be getting better as the summer goes on.


Some say "you must strike while the iron's hot". I hope you're right that something better comes along, but I think this is a good deal if its being offered. I think its better than playing roulette next summer with FA.


----------

