Minneapolis - The Three-Pointer: Boston C Party

Blogs

RSS Feeds

National Features >

Village Voice
The Great Walls of Chinatown
With the exception of the electric rice cookers, this Bowery tenement could have come straight from the Nineteenth Century.
By Elizabeth Dwoskin
Houston Press
Getting Off
DUI attorney Tyler Flood wins 80 percent of his trials--even if his clients were 100 percent drunk.
By Mike Giglio
Miami New Times
Park or Die Tryin'
From the homeless parking mafia to the meter fairy, finding a spot in Miami has taken a turn toward the surreal.
By Gus Garcia-Roberts

« Previous Post | Main | Next Post »

The Three-Pointer: Boston C Party

Filed under: Timberwolves

Housekeeping prelude: Skip down to Point 1 if you're not interested. My apologies for this tardy trey pointer after not posting after the San Antonio tilt. From now on, beginning after Wednesday night's game, I will set up this site to receive your feedback after every game, whether I have been able to post my complete thoughts on the game or not.

(I can always go back and add mine later.) This is done in acknowledgment of and appreciation for the smart, passionate contributors to this space. That said, I'll still play God if I have to. Some of the posts in the last thread began to creep toward those dreaded, intimate pissing matches. I (and hopefully most of you) are not interested in opinions only, but informed opinions that go broader than one-on-one arguments. Don't post what you think without giving evidence why you think it. Keep the pejorative, smart-alecky stuff to a minimum. Stuff like Brauer's salary cap explainers, Levi's popcorn link and analysis, and Weinhold's contrarian but well-considered broadsides are just three of dozens of elements contained in your feedback that get me excited to read my own blog. (Beyond hanging on my own every word, that is.)

Last but not least: No running commentary while the games are in process and no dashed-off one-liners or retorts. I'll just doink them. And eat your peas before they get cold!

1. Jets at the point
Kevin McHale looked smart five or six different ways during last night's 25-point thrashing of the Boston Celtics, but the play of point guard Marcus Banks was the largest eye-opener. When McHale's new sidekick Rex Chapman referred to Banks as "the key" to the seven-player, three draft-pick swap with the Celtics last week, it seemed like primping, if not pimping. More than two years (180 games) into his career, Banks' shooting percentage is a doleful 40.4, and his assist to turnover ratio is a fairly wretched 2-to-1.26. Yeah, the rep was that his D was strong, but that made him sound like a younger Anthony Carter. Why was he the Celts *3rd* string point guard? For that matter, why were the Wolves adding a 4th point guard to their roster? When the post-trade rumor mill had Banks merely pivoting in Minnesota and heading to Seattle for another swap, involving Reggie Evans and/or Flip Murray, it made sense.

But in a scant 21:21 of playing time, Banks capsized any pat assumptions people had for his future. Credit McHale and Chapman for admiring and then acquiring his jitterbug quickness, but not even the guy's biggest boosters could have anticipated him going off for 20 points on only eight shots from the field (he added 7-9 from the free throw line), and six assists. At once cool and jubilant, he tromped on the throttle with zipped downcourt shovel passes off the dribble that would have been called for two-line offsides in hockey. And once in the half-court, he had his defenders bobble-heading their entire bodies in response to his deft hesitation dribbles, downshifts presaging his peeled rubber toward the hoop or his sudden, and on this night deadly, rise up for a jumper. Hell, defense was the worst part of his game.

We'll know in the next three weeks (trading deadline is February 23) whether the Wolves really do regard Banks as a keeper or bait for bigger fish. When I asked coach Dwane Casey after the game about the glut in the backcourt (nine of the 15 players on the current roster are listed as guards), he acknowledged that it was "out of balance." As of last night if not before, Banks and his relatively puny ($1.7 million) salary, which expires this year, was the most tradeable among Minnesota's quartet at the point--and he matches up with Evans and Murray (a combined $2 million, also expiring this year).

On the basis of one game, the idea of trading Banks is idiotic...almost as idiotic as making the decision based on one game. Now that Michael Olowokandi has taken his tortured rationalizations for underachievement to another town, Troy Hudson is the presiding albatross on the roster, and if McHale can coax another squad into eating the $25 million or so that Huddy is still owed between now and 2010, the Big Gopher's Lazarus-like renaissance will trend toward the miraculous. Marko Jaric is more intriguing all the way around--even at $33 million through 2011, his unique skill set makes it so perhaps he could be moved. But Banks needs another handful of quality outings before such a notion should be seriously entertained.

Bottom line, Banks had fans and media alike buzzing on Monday. In the locker, after it was noted how Ricky Davis and Mark Blount complement his game and relieve some of the pressure on his multi-tasking, Kevin Garnett himself cited Banks as another positive, and commented on his "explosiveness" saying that the ability of his point guard to "drive and drop it off" (imagine that) makes me a lot more fresh" at the end of games. Here's hoping that the squat (no way he's 6-2; try 6-1 or six feet even), muscular kid out of UNLV is indeed the steal of this deal.

2. Perspective
I honestly don't begrudge McHale a single endorphin of the satisfaction he must feel from rebutting people like me, who called him a Lame Duck a couple weeks ago, or Sid Hartman, who railed against swapping his beloved Szczerbiak for "four ordinary players" and dubbed the Boston deal the worst trade in history.

Because even if this deal turns sour in a hurry, and even if it was set up with a couple of nasty kickers on the back end--Blount's contract, which costs about $30 million between now and 2010, when Blount will be 34; and the apparently ritual sacrifice of another first-round draft pick--the players the Wolves acquired have already demonstrated why McHale liked them in the first place.

Calling Ricky Davis a good defensive player was one of the few false bills of goods McHale peddled when justifying this swap, but almost everything else about Davis thus far makes him a better fit, if not exactly or always a better player, than Szczerbiak for this ballclub. The ability to create his own shot even against a quality defender is the most obvious upgrade, but what has pleased me most is Davis's court instincts and vision. Given his fairly gaudy scoring average (a hair under 20 points per game) and his misguided lust for that triple-double a few years back (he tried to rig a rebound off his own shot at his own basket, a classless dabble in infamy), I figured the guy would be just a bit of a ball hog. But where Szczerbiak's assists were as deliberately rendered as a schoolboy learning penmanship, Davis seems intuitively aware of the flow and pitch of the game, and heeds that physical intelligence when dishing the ball. Against the Celts on Monday, he had three assists so smooth and subtle that Hudson should have been taking notes. He's a gamer--getting 26 about 24 hours after the trade, and playing through a nasty forearm from ex-teammate Kendrick Perkins on Monday are exhibits A and B of that. He wants to be here. And whatever baggage he carries (the triple-double embarrassment is probably the worst of it) is a tote bag compared to the overblown KG-versus-Wally soap opera generated by one scuffle and one ESPN the Magazine article that a lazy national media neglects to update in order to retain their stereotype of Szczerbiak.

Casey is already giving Justin Reed Ronnie Dupree's minutes, those hopefully-brief moments when you need some jacked-up athleticism as a finger in the dike while your stars get a blow. An added bonus is that Reed is an enforcer, willing to punish penetrators in the paint with hard fouls, taking to the role better than anyone on the Wolves since Tom Hammonds decided to fold his 6-9 built-like-a-brick-outhouse frame behind the wheel of a racing car. And unlike Dupree, he can hit a jump shot once every three or four tries.

We've already gushed about Banks. That leaves Mark Blount, the seven-footer whose best trait is nailing 16-foot jumpers. When your teammate is Kevin Garnett, that's not such a bad thing. Not since way back at the beginning of last season when Eddie Griffin was sinking three-pointers, has a big man compelled opponents to think twice about double-teaming Garnett in the low block. "We'll see how the different defensive schemes change up," KG said in the locker room Monday night, in reference to how opponents deal with Blount and him in the high-low post sets. "Because if they don't [change the way they're doing it now], he's going to get 18 every night."

The old Szczerbiak Rule should apply to Blount--don't, under any circumstances, dribble the ball!--and his copious blocks against his old squad Monday didn't impress me nearly as much as Stromile Swift making him look slow and confused down in Houston. But then again, I'm prejudiced against Blount, because I fear he'll take precious developmental minutes away from Eddie Griffin, a player to whom Casey doles out less love per valuable service rendered than anyone on the team.

Perhaps Casey would call it tough love. How else to describe making Blount the first man off the bench Monday, despite the fact that Griffin, in the wake of a 1-for-14 brick-tossing in the previous two games, had gone 5-for-6 from the field, and was leading the Wolves in points, rebounds, and blocks at the time en route to the team's 23-19 advantage? For that he earned a whopping 7:47 seconds of play and the first starter's slot on the pine. Yes, Blount came in a racked up 10 points, four rebounds, and three blocks his own damn self in the first half, and, yes, perhaps there are enough minutes to go around. It bears repeating, however, that in less than two years Griffin will have the option of whether to leave or stay, much as Chauncey Billups did a few years back. As much as we can bemoan his lack of consistency, consider that he is younger than Marcus Banks, younger than Justin Reed, less than 18 months older than Rashad McCants, and more than six years younger than Mark Blount.

Before we stray too far from the point: All four of the players McHale acquired from Boston have demonstrated their value, and complementary value at that, to the composition of this team. Monday night's blow-out gave everyone permission to get giddy for a minute. But now for the perspective: Before the trade, the Wolves figured to have to scrap to earn a playoff berth. Even if the trade continues to pay such high dividends, that will still be the situation between now and the end of April. Davis, Blount, Banks, and Reed are not going to propel this squad into the first echelon of the Western Conference. But they do seem to enhance the chance to bag a seventh or eighth seed (thereby forfeiting our first round pick to the Clippers as a contingency of the Jaric trade), and almost inevitably suffer a first-round loss in the playoffs. Depending upon your perspective, it's a no-win or a no-lose situation.

3. Hit and run observations

*The first priority of any Minnesota Timberwolves trade should be, How does Kevin Garnett feel about it? And Kevin Garnett likes this trade.

* Amid all the hoopla over the new guys, Trenton Hassell continues to bedevil Paul Pierce at both ends of the court, limiting Pierce to 7-of-23 from the field while going 6-of-9 himself, with most of his baskets coming from backing Pierce down in the left block and then lofting short turnaround jumpers a la Garnett.

* Marko Jaric chose a bad night to open the second half with a couple of unforced turnovers and register no points and no assists in eight third quarter minutes. For me, Jaric is the great uniter--I agree (and disagree) with almost every positive and negative thing said about him. How does one of the least reliable performers lead the team in plus/minus points scored during the time he is on the court?

* My lonely campaign to point out that Ricky Davis can't guard strong small forwards or shooting guards was borne out by his matchup with Szczerbiak, who would have had 30 points if he'd had his usual shooting eye. (Small stressors like a trade and the birth of his daughter and second child earlier that day probably contributed to Wally's lack of concentration and rhythm.) Granted, Boston is one of the few teams with two potent swingmen who play together. But there are others. For instance, who does Hassell guard on Wednesday night--Hamilton or Prince (or maybe even Billups)? The other will give Davis fits.

* I rip on Troy Hudson all the time--nothing personal, I just don't like his game that much. But in all the uproar about the arrival of the Beantown crew, Huddy has been relentlessly upbeat, even after Banks's performance (and Blount's and Davis's performances before it) likely doomed him to mucho pine time in the coming days and perhaps weeks. Along with Anthony Carter, T-Hud's lack of complaint over his diminished role is classy.

Posted by Britt Robson at January 31, 2006 11:22 AM

« The Three-Pointer: Houston Allows The Win | Main | The Three-Pointer: Reality Bites »

Comments

What I liked specifically about Banks was not Banks himself, but what he represented: a point guard that will drive the lane, take punishment, distribute or get fouled. The successful point guards in this league are strong (Billips), crafty (Nash), have great vision (Kidd), incredibly quick (Paul, Ford), or a combination of the above. Banks represented some of those qualities, something the Wolves have not had since Stephon. Whether he becomes that consistently is anyone's guess, but if the club is to be taken seriously again, it's a critical piece of the puzzle. It's clear the other PG's don't have it.

What the trade has done is put dour and contrarian fans like myself back into wait and see mode. Of course, I love basketball, so it doesn't take much to get me going, but it's great to find new angles to dissect instead of beating to death the usual ones: McHale's incompetence, Hudson's lack of playmaking conscience, Jaric's underachieving, Garnett's inability to be a closer, Griffin's...ack, the list could go on!

If we go at least 2-2 on the road, and the newbies play well, that might continue the buzz. Chemistry, after all, takes time. But if they stink up the joint, as they did before the trade, then I think people will again focus on the potential long-term, structural problems of the trade, and the fact we don't have much else to offer other teams to continue to rebuild the team.

Bring on the Pistons!

Posted by: Peter Weinhold at January 31, 2006 11:36 PM

Great Post, Britt. Thank you!

Regarding Banks. I think one game might be enough.

Scoring: Anthony Carter's career scoring high is 21 points and that was in a game against Orlando in 1999 (when he was with the heat). Obviously, Banks can score just as well as Carter and hopefully he will be consistent this year or prove to be consistent next year.

Speed: I used to think AC was fast. Banks makes the man look old. I haven't seen any Minnesota player get to the basket like that since Marbury. Just that ability alone means we should keep him for the rest of the season.

Defense: he's young, but from what I've been reading his defense is likely just as good as ACs and he is probably stronger and certainly younger.

We've had AC all year, why not hold onto Banks? If Flip Murray and Reggie Evans are what we get in return I would hesitate to trade Banks. Even if he reaches a career peak of being an inconsistent point guard who plays consistently good defense and is able to get to the basket (even somewhat consistently) it makes sense to keep him. It sure would be nice to have Evans rebounding but hopefully KG and an improving Griffin can fill that role.

I'm trying not to get too excited, but I just think we've got to give him a chance. If we really want Evans, maybe we hope that when he becomes a free agent this summer that he'll want to sign with the T-wolves for the mid-level or less.

I still hope we miss the playoffs this year so we can hang on to that draft pick. But that will likely mean that we don't play too well the rest of the year and that would be a major bummer. Hopefully we'll play well but someone else will get hot and this will prevent us from getting to the playoffs. I guess we cheer for the Hornets to play amazing basketball the last half of the season.

Posted by: Nate at January 31, 2006 11:40 PM

I was really enthused by Banks performance, and marvelled that he had that kind of game at point with zero practice. His speed, change of direction were awesome. Someone in a Timberwolf Uniform doing that.

On the way to work that night I stopped at Rogers in St Louis Park for coffee, and mentioned the game to the clerk, and an old guy in his 70's perked up and slugged me in the arm. "How about that Banks kid? Made me very hopeful."

"Me too."

Posted by: Andy at February 1, 2006 2:43 AM

Casey's lack of regard/respect for EG is not encouraging. I'm starting to think he's a bit without a clue.

Posted by: Sean at February 1, 2006 9:19 AM

I agree with Peter's optimistic view of having hope. A strong disclaimer to the following optimism - my thoughts are based on one game.

Many of Banks heroics - I call them that because we haven't seen that type of basketball skill for years - came in the second half of a blowout. Yet, he still showcased basketball skills that Troy, Marko and AC have not. I tuned in late and was explaining the value of Ricky Davis to my wife. I started pointing at the fastest player on the Court saying, "see, look how he can slash to the basket, require the defense to adjust, and break down his man." Then I say to her, "that's not Davis, who is that?" Of course, it was Banks and we both watched the game real close. If KG can get excited after one game, so can I. My only hope is that we give this kid a meaningful chance.

Reed reminded me of Jack Carlson and Willi Plett of the Northstars years ago. He can play and his opponent will wake up sore the next day. I hope they coach him up and focus him on this type of role.

Blount clearly has a role, even as a back-up. 20-30 minutes a night, a few rebounds, but a talented scorer that should free up KG and others. Bad attitude? The Boston papers have been writing that he and Doc Rivers did not like each other and that Blount wanted out (as did Banks).

Nothing really needs to be said of Davis. Even seriously considering the errors of his youth, every player given the chance to be KG's sidekick has flourished and he'll be no different.

We'll definitely benefit from the change of scenery desired by Banks and Blount - and to a certain extent the others as well. But what has me excited is Banks. If he doesn't pan out and we have to rely on our current three headed monster, then we'll be stuck in mediocrity. Remember, Detroit didn't blossom until Billups understood his role as point guard on that team.

I don't like Marko as a starter, but I'd use him like the Clippers did. Sixth man, ten points a game, and another ball handler on the floor. I hope they keep him and trade Troy.

I expect a loss tonight, but there are a lot of reasons to watch. We'll see how good of a coach we have in Casey.

Posted by: gp at February 1, 2006 9:50 AM

Re Defensive Assignments vs Detroit

It would seem at first glance, that Jaric should match up well against Billups. Unfortunately, this is not the case, despite lacking real quickness, Chauncey penetrates on Marko with the greatest of ease - and tears him up in post-up situations. And so, the dominos begin to fall.

It would be a great test to see if Davis has the grit and determination to stay with Hamilton as Rip runs his defender through a marathon of screens and cutbacks without the ball. Alas, methinks only Trenton is up to it. But perhaps Billups is the real threat - recall that Popovich put Bowen on him when the Spus neeed a stop badly.

Maybe Davis guards Billups, while Marko goes down to monitor Prince - who is not a real scoring threat if you deny him the ball, especially in transition situations. Or is that too much to ask too soon for guys still getting to know each other?

Posted by: levi at February 1, 2006 10:50 AM

As the Sunny Pessimist, I have to note some quick-hit things:

1. Blount and Banks both cheat off their man too much on D. Banks perhaps has the excuse of his speed, but he's no AC. We'll see if he has any luck on Chauncey, the supreme test.

2. Bill Simmons was right about Davis's feet. Wally abused Ricky's lack of balance. Dwane can earn his dough teaching Ricky the finer points of defensive footwork.

3. For an interesting take on these and other matters, see a good FoxSports.com review of the game at: http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/5294042. (Note the comments about Blount's lack of self- and team awareness.)

4. The paradox of Banks is that if he's good, there will be a bidding war (with us likely to overpay a la Thud) and if he's not, losing his expiring salary won't help us much. He should still be very much trade bait. The good news is that he's playing for his next contract, and unlike Kandi, actually seems to give a shit about that.

5. Despite the long-term costs of the trade, Glen saves $1 million this year on it. (Wolves shed $16.3 million in salaries for $14.4 from the C's. Half-season prorated equals $1 mil, or about 20,000 $50 seats. They save more dough next year.) Wolves payroll has slid from a hair over $70 million last year to around $58 mil this year.

6. I'm still checking, but I overthought how the trade exception came about. It equals the difference between Wally's (pre-trade) salary and Davis's salary. The overall deal is well within the 125% matching rule, so I need to figure out how the Wolves got the exception from two guys within the deal. Wonky, but perhaps educational.

7. I'm vaguely disturbed that Blount wouldn't talk to reporters after the game, as is his wont. I think the guy's attitude is a legit long-term concern.

8. Then again, Blount had the top plus-minus and "help value" (thanks popcornmachine) in the C's game. (Help value is rebounds + assists + blocks + steals - turnovers.)

9. Then again, Blount had four turnovers.

10. Then again, his outside shot is a thing of attractiveness, if not beauty.

11. So is his backward skipping.

12. Any outside shots Eddie shoots is now officially too many. If Blount can't dribble, Eddie needs to not shoot 3s. It's consistently a bad decision.

13. Anyone else get the feeling Dupree is the next Skita, roster-wise?

14. Jaric may be best suited in a rotation with Hassell - with Trenton getting the key minutes. Would still like to use Marko more in obvious post-up situations.

15. I'm a fan of Jim Pete and Hanny, but "RD" is a reviled nickname for Twins fans, and we need no reminder - especially one as forced as this - when we enjoy a Wolves contest.

Posted by: David Brauer at February 1, 2006 11:21 AM

A few random thoughts -

First of all, you're not alone in your comparison of Reed to Hammonds. I was thinking the same thing when I woke up this morning - I can't remember WHY I thought that, I just did. Now I don't feel crazy.

Also, I completely agree with the gp's comment, there's a difference between playing point guard and being a ballhandler. Marko can "handle" the ball just fine, but can't play point. Use him in situations where we need another person to be out on the perimeter as a threat to pass or shoot.

Actually, come to think of it, Troy isn't a point guard either, just a shooter who happens to be a good ballhandler. But I feel like I always rip on Troy, so I'll stop by saying that AC and Banks are currently the only PGs on our roster.

As for that Flip/Evans for Banks deal, I hope it doesn't happen. While I haven't seen Evans play too much, I don't care for Murray's game - he's like a slightly more polished, less talented Rashad - not quite a PG, not really a guy I'd want to give many minutes to, especially because it would cut into Hassell's time.

And I know I'm excited that we're playing the Pistons tonight, but now that our team has been together a bit longer, keep your eyes on the turnover numbers from the new guys (esp. Banks and Blount). These two guys in particular can't be coughing up the ball if we expect to play like we did in the first half against them earlier.

Tonight's key: just say NO to Chauncey. If he starts getting hot, you have to throw the kitchen sink at him (Banks, AC, and Trenton). Don't let Jaric get burned out there - he can guard Rip or Prince just as easily as he can Billups, if you REALLY want to keep him on the floor for some unfathomable reason.

Other things I'll also be watching closely:

- how long it takes to pull Marko and/or Eddie.
- will Ricky try to force it against a great perimeter defender like Tayshaun?
- is Reed going to keep getting minutes?

And levi, I think having Davis and Marko on the floor at the same time too much is setting yourself up for failure (tonight, at least). There are just too many exploitable mismatches for the Pistons. I'd like to see AC or Banks guard Chauncey, while Trenton runs around with Rip, and Davis/Jaric get to guard Tayshaun.

Posted by: antonymous at February 1, 2006 11:27 AM

Here's where I'm at with this team:
I had been in favor of blowing up this roster since about a month before last season's trade deadline. I had figured out a way to get rid of everybody besides KG, Hassell, Hoibs and vet minimum contracts, while getting far enough under the cap to sign one Max type player or a couple of guys in the 6-7 million dollar range. It looked incredibly promising after the season we were going through.

The deadline came and went and Glen sat on Spreewell's expiring deal.

We drafted McCants, a scorer with a relatively one-dimensional understanding of the game of basketball and a history of sulking. I was furious we left Danny Granger on the board, the hardworking versatile SF.

Then we traded away the the team's second best player for an unproven combo guard/defender with very little in the realm of natural PG skills. I was furious, and I cancelled my season tickets. It was my opinion that we traded the best player in the deal and had to give up a pick to get a player that was and is a complete unknown in Jaric. We also overpaid for ANOTHER unproven and injury prone PG. I wanted to slit my wrists.

The trade improved our defense but left us without enough offensive options, and without a player willing and able to take the pressure off of KG in the 4th quarter. The single MOST important aspect of our 03-04 run.

I sat for months while fans were telling me that Wally would fill this role with his gaudy percentages and shoddy defense (improved while hidden with Hassell and Jaric on the floor), I wasn't buying it. Some fans took Wally's seemingly improved play so ecstatically that I wondered if they cared that the team was floating under.500. Wally's great play didn't translate to team wins...again.

Here is my perception of the trade.

I didn't like it initially because of Blount's salary, losing the pick and losing Jones. That said I thought the talent was a relative wash.

-Ricky for Wally is a wash, with Ricky potentially being a better complement to KG. He's a more versatile player, more athletic, better defender, and seems like relishes playing with KG. Wally's the better shooter, and likely the better scorer, does it translate to wins? Boston might be one of the worst defensive teams in the L with he and Pierce at the 2/3.

-Blount > Kandi. Blount has plenty of warts, but just for the fact he can run the court like a gazelle makes him a substantially better player that Kandi. He has post moves, boxes out, and he's long. I expect him to have games like last night pretty infrequently, but anything is better than a hungover Kandi.

-Banks, I've liked him for a while, and have suggested trying to get him for the better part of a year since he started having his falling out with Doc. I'm not going to get overly excited by one game, but that starting PG job is ripe for the picking if Banks wants it. Give me 10 and 5 with that kind of defense, ball-handling, athleticism and speed and I'll take it.

I liked what I saw from Reed last night, if nothing else he's another piece that we could move in a trade, but he could also be our tough guy off the bench ala Gary Trent, with more athleticism.

I really like the athleticism and the mystery of potential that this team now carries, it is just soooo much different than past Wolves teams and it seems like it's really going to help the games of Hassell and McCants. I know Banks and Blount aren't going to play like they did last night everynight, and both of them could realistically fall off the face of the earth, but this team is different and it seems to have the guys playing harder.

Next move: Run Banks ragged to see if he's got what it takes as a big minute guard. If he doesn't, do everything in your power to get another starting caliber PG in here that can run with these guys and move Marko as the 1st guard off the bench. marko will likley help McCant's game and won't be as pressured (and relied on) to perform with the starting unit.

Posted by: Casey at February 1, 2006 11:30 AM

Britt,

Thanks for the quality comments. I can't say I am as knowledgable a Twolf fan as you and family obligations generally keep me from watching too much of the Wolfies. Generally, it is analysis from people like you that have informed me for most of my opinions.

I have also enjoyed many of the other commenters at this site.

I won't take up too much of anyones time. I love the trade, but I don't want to see the Wolves lose the lottery pick this year. Fortunately I don't think this trade will give them that much of an immediate boost.

As far as Hassell/Jaric deal that I might have started. I think Hassell is a good player. I do want him on the Wolves, but I think labeling him as one of the best defensive specialists in the league is slightly overdoing it. I'd take Bowen or Tyrone Prince over him because the offense they bring. Hassel is a luxury you can afford when you have Three huge scorers on the team--like Cassel, Spreewell, KG, but when you only have Davis, KG, you need someone who brings more than Hassell does.

Banks looks promising, but we do need to see more from him. When Britt asks:

"How does one of the least reliable performers lead the team in plus/minus points scored during the time he is on the court?"

I think the easy answer is Marko is on the floor when KG is on and Off when he is off and also during the fourth quarter when the Wolves have been horrible this year. The question is why. I wonder if Marko is a little fatigued--both mentally and physically. I was worried after we traded for him and he was playing for his national team and all the pressure he had over last summer. I am hoping he is a different player next year with some rest over the summer and a comfort level with learning to play with KG and others on the wolves. He needs a role--to figure how how he can best help this team.

I hope they don't trade him, yet. But, then again, I wasn't quite ready for them to trade wally either.

Posted by: Peaches at February 1, 2006 12:19 PM

David Brauer wrote:

> 13. Anyone else get the feeling Dupree is the next Skita, roster-wise?

Ayup. Proudly, publicly, predicted by yours truly 1/31/06 at 9:26 AM in the thread entitled "Still Doubting The Trade?"

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.basketball.nba.mn-wolves

And Antonymous asks:
- will Ricky try to force it against a great perimeter defender like Tayshaun?

I will answer let us hope so. Then let us also fervently hope that he will dish the rock to Trenton (my 1st choice because Hamilton would be guarding him), Blount (can he really do it vs Wallace**2?) or KG.

But prepare yourself for at least a few minutes of the Jarics/Davis combo - they're still listed as the probable starting backcourt in today's Media Notes file. Remember the Wolves' coaching mantra: Big salaries play, little salaries stay (on the bench).

Posted by: levi at February 1, 2006 3:25 PM

David Brauer wrote:

> 13. Anyone else get the feeling Dupree is the next Skita, roster-wise?

Ayup. Proudly, publicly, predicted by yours truly 1/31/06 at 9:26 AM in the thread entitled "Still Doubting The Trade?"

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.basketball.nba.mn-wolves

And Antonymous asks:
- will Ricky try to force it against a great perimeter defender like Tayshaun?

Posted by: levi at February 1, 2006 3:26 PM

David Brauer wrote:

> 13. Anyone else get the feeling Dupree is the next Skita, roster-wise?

Ayup. Proudly, publicly, predicted by yours truly 1/31/06 at 9:26 AM in the thread entitled "Still Doubting The Trade?"

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.basketball.nba.mn-wolves

And Antonymous asks:
- will Ricky try to force it against a great perimeter defender like Tayshaun?

Posted by: levi at February 1, 2006 3:26 PM