Un-freaking-believable. I've criticized this organization, but apparently not enough. The BS streaming out of 600 First Avenue North is almost at record levels.

Yeah, BAJ is a nice player and probably a future All-Star many times over. But, how can anyone have any confidence that the rebuilding process will yield anything other than the same type of mess that we got after "building" around an All-Timer? This organization is owned by an arrogant fool and is run by an arrogant fool. The future is dark, my friend. Dark.

You're exactly right. There is no reason why anyone should have the slightest bit of confidence in believing that these clowns know what they're doing. If they do build a winner, it will be completely by accident; they'll back into something that will turn out aces. I wonder how Toine is feeling this morning now that Ratliff is gone and he'll have increased minutes (according to Witt's take on the situation) on a 12-win squad?

I really was all set to write a post about how good this franchise has been this year. I have the damn thing saved in drafts. From the Heat deal (a steal) to the development of Bassy and Gomes to the hustle still being exhibited to the potential of the glue guys on the squad....and so on and so forth. This is especially nice considering the Wild just brought on an honest-to-God criminal, the Vikings feature a bouncer-beating joker at left tackle and the Twins sold off the best players on their team for a box of cracker jacks (to say nothing of them getting a tax-funded stadium with a ground breaking ceremony that was scheduled to happen the day after the bridge collapse...which is probably the main reason--the stadium--why they didn't move Hunter for something before the trading deadline). Oh, and between steroids, hgh, spygate, etc, Tim Donohue doesn't seem quite as bad anymore.

The NBA is back to putting an exciting product on the floor. From monster teams out West to a possible Celtics/Lakers final to Lebron to the dunk contest, this is as good as it has been in a long time and compared to the garbage coming out of some of the other sports, it's been a good year...except in Wolves land. Maybe they'll up and move the team to OKC. My wife is from the area and we've talked about moving back. Perhaps they can beat Clay Bennet's rush to get the Sonics in town. It's really pathetic. I've joked for a while that if the club didn't move Ratliff, I'd officially move into apathy territory with the club. I had no idea they could go this far above and beyond simply letting the guy's contract expire. Thankfully, not many people are paying attention and no one really cares about the garbage coming out of 600 First Avenue except for a handful of bloggers and the diehards who still show up to the game and listen to/watch the action at home (which is damn near impossible outstate).

By your outrage over this move, I don't think you've thought the Ratliff buy-out through.

First, the wolves do not lose the value of his expiring contract, which we need to have the flexibility to resign our restricted free agents Craig Smith, Telfair, and Ryan Gomes. So after the trade deadline, no loss there.

Second, this deal creates not only financial wiggle-room under the lux, but an additional roster spot. Minnesota can now audition a young player that may become truly a part of their future in 2009.

Third, this reiterates the front office's willingness to treat players with respect. The Wolves front office is not going to screw players over -- even players that are leaving the organization. That can only help when we are negotiating further contracts with our own players or with potential free agents. However, I'll let Juwon Howard express it better, with his public quotes:

Howard expressed his thanks to Wolves owner Glen Taylor, vice president of basketball operations Kevin McHale and coach Randy Whitman, and called the organization “first class.”

“They understood my situation and did whatever was possible to make me happy,” Howard said. “You don’t find it too often in this league when an organization will respect a player.”

Keep in mind, we're playing for the 2008-09 season. I'm anxious to see who the Wolves will audition. I'm happy to see our esteem raised in the league, before we go into negotiations to get players to come to icy Minnesota. I don't see this deal hurting us in the draft either. Yes, it might have been fun to see a few games with Al playing with a big center behind him, but for these benefits, I can be patient and wait until this fall .. when the games really count.

I think I've thought it through plenty. Your first point has been addressed on this site several times in the past. If the club wants to take the $11 million and spend it on the status quo for an 12 win team, then so be it. I have been very clear about where I think the value lies in Ratliff's deal.

Your second point flies right in the face of your first point. If the Wolves do not lose the value of the contract and they spend it on players they already have where does the wiggle-room come from? Bassy, Gomes, and Smith are all restricted free agents and the team could have brought them all back with Ratliff's deal off the books or let them go in favor of players brought in by trading Ratliff's deal. There never was any wiggle room...with or without the deal, unless Ratliff's contract was traded. What young player can the Wolves now take a look at that they couldn't have before? That's a nonsense point. Smith and Richard could have been getting 20 minutes apiece this year and the team's record wouldn't be any different.

Your third point is a fair one and if it weren't for the Wolves making shiite up as they go along (first Ratliff's deal gave the team additional options, then it allowed the club to re-sign its own players, then he was useful to see if Big Al could play next to a shot blocker, and finally it was cast away). My complaints have nothing to do with Theo being on or off the court and everything to do with the way this franchise treats it's fans and the way certain media outlets are uncritical of the boobery that takes place at 600 First Avenue.

This team has no league-wide esteem. If treating players well mattered more than money, Toine would have left the $9 mil on the table and went to a winning team. It's nice that those players give kooshy quotes to the Strib but let's not forget that Howard, Toine, and Ratliff wouldn't come back here if given the chance. Let's ask Toine how first class he thinks the organization is when he is told his minutes will decline to nothing to make way for Ratliff's return only to have Ratliff get his contract bought out and the owner of the team say that he didn't know Toine wanted out until he read it in the paper. The games count now. They'll count next year when we'll hear the same line again and again about how rebuilding is tough. We'll hear it in 2009-10 when the squad won't be able to bring on any free agents and they played just well enough to lose their top pick to the Clippers.

Just who do you think the team will audition in the last 20 something games?

If the club wants to take the $11 million and spend it on the status quo for an 12 win team, then so be it. I have been very clear about where I think the value lies in Ratliff's deal.

These are young players, and expecting that they stay the "status quo," "12 win team," is a little insulting. Ryan Gomes and Craig Smith haven't been in the NBA for two full years. Might it not be conceivable they may improve? Perhaps they might even get better playing with some of the others on the team, and develop more chemistry? Or are these players doomed for their "status quo" "12 win" destinies?

If the Wolves do not lose the value of the contract and they spend it on players they already have where does the wiggle-room come from?

My discussion was on the creation of a ROSTER SPACE and financial wiggle room. Those things are created THIS season. We can use it to audition another player this season, and we have the finances if necessary to sign a number of 10-day contracts. I disagree with your statement strongly that "there was never any wiggle room unless Ratliff was traded." TRADING Ratliff means that the salary is locked up in some other players next year. Adding longer guaranteed contracts is the opposite of having financial wiggle room. Letting Ratliff expire or be bought out creates an additional $11.7 mil of wiggle room this Summer under the lux for resigning our free agents. Expecting Glen Taylor, or any NBA owner, to go way over the lux for a team that is nowhere close to a championship is simply unrealistic. Most of the contending teams are not over the lux!

Your third point is a fair one and if it weren't for the Wolves making shiite up as they go along

Suppose Ratliff and his agent came to Glen Taylor on Thursday and said, "You know, this is my last season in the NBA, and I'd really like to have a chance for a ring. I've been a good vet here, kept my mouth shut, worked hard, and I'd be willing to take a pay cut in a buy-out. Can you do anything for me?"

Would your response be, "No way! I just told the fans that you're staying, so screw you Theo! You're finishing your career as a Wolf!"

This team has no league-wide esteem.

I found nothing in your paragraph that supports this position.

Just who do you think the team will audition in the last 20 something games?

I don't know, but are you willing to bet me they won't spend the money and use the roster spot for an audition? I'll even say we have someone in Ratliff's roster spot within the next seven days. Care to bet me they won't?

How is stating the obvious insulting? Ryan Gomes is a nice player and he should be kept around but that could have been done with or without Ratliff's money on the books. It may have taken $2-4 mil hit on the luxury mark once you add in a draft pick or 2, but again, this team needed (and deserved) a 1 year trip through salary cap hell. These players just didn't show up on their own. Smith is an undersized backup. Where ever will the club find another one of those?

I find your second point absolutely baffling. I have no idea if they'll use the roster spot for another audition, but let's say they will: care to bet me it won't be someone from the D-Leauge? Ohhhhh....D-League action, it's fantastic. I hope they bring in a center from the Mad Ants. I have no idea who that is, but hey, it's roster wiggle room so let's roll with it. So yes, I'll take your bet as long as you take mine that it's a D-League player....which kind of makes the whole flexible audition thing ridiculous from the get go. 19As for the salary cap wiggle room, either you take the $11 million and spend it on re-signing your own 12-win players to 3-4 year deals (plus maybe a mid-level exception for a front court player) or you pay a 2 year 15-25% premium on 2 players with 2 year deals plus a pick. This team is at $65+ no matter what. Let's say they adopt your idea of flexibility and maintain the status quo. They're already at $51 mil with 8 active contracts + the 2 buyouts. I'll go with WD's predictions for possible re-signings:

-Gomes: $5 mil/5 (I personally think they'll be lucky to get him under 6)
-Bassy: $4 mil/4 (with escalators to around 18-20 overall)
-Smith: $5 mil/3

Those are pretty realistic numbers comparing to other NBA contracts in similar situations. That's 12 years and $52 million. Add in a top 1st rounder ($4 mil), 2 top 2nd rounders or a trade up to the mid 1st (which Glen kind of sounded like he wanted to do in the 1/2 time interview last night): $2 mil and voilla, you're over $70 mil. The money always was, is, and will be out the door. The only flexibility with Ratliff's deal was to sub players like Bassy, Smith and Gomes for overpaid contracts with 2 years left and gain a pick. Cardinal + Darko + Lowry = $15/year for 2 more years. Gomes + Bassy + Smith = $14/year for 3-5 years. If they got a pick out of it it would be even more worthwhile. No matter what happens with the current status quo, between 3 re-signings and 3 new players the team is looking at $20+ million out the door for each of the next 3-4 years. This says nothing of re-upping players like Shaddy or Foye or (please Lord) Beasley.

RE: League-wide esteem...my evidence = your evidence at this point. From listening to TNT's half time show to ESPN's NBA game night show, I think I've heard enough about what other teams think of the squad. A lack of good free agents coming here in the past would be another.

As for Theo, yes, I would tell him that he's finishing out his year here. It's a business and he's been well compensated for sitting on the bench and mentoring the younger players. $11 million is a lot of money and I'm not going to get all blurry eyed about the fact that someone who has been nothing but cap filler for the past 3-4 years of his career wants to end it all happily ever after with another team. Unless there is some insurance kicker that would cover his salary (and I've suspected there is), then he's staying here. He's a walking business decision with very little on-court use. If the players don't like being treated this way, then they should tell their union to petition against guaranteed salaries. Until then, I'll feel just as sorry for Theo as I will for Toine who couldn't find it in his heart to help the Wolves out and walk away for scraps compared to what is left on his contract. Toine is right not to leave $9+ mil on the table and the Wolves would have been just as right to tell Theo to stick with the plan here in Minny. It's all a business and these guys understand it.

After reading some of your other posts, I think I understand why you feel so strongly about these issues.

You seem to feel you have the right to spend Glen Taylor's money, and make him pay double for guys you want over the luxury tax -- despite evidence that the vast majority of GM's stay under the lux.

Strangely, you think other owners in bigger markets are so financially sensitive that they would trade their 2007 lottery pick to save money, in your dreams where Chicago trades Tyrus Thomas + Ben Wallace for Walker, Buckner, Craig Smith. Why does Chicago care so much about erasing one year of Ben Wallace's deal that they'd trade their 1st and 2nd string centers? Would you trade Corey Brewer to get rid of two of the last three years of Jaric?

Now I suppose if I believed that deals like this could come true, heck, maybe I'd want to trade Ratliff too. If I believed MIN was immune to salary issues, while other teams were so sensitive to it that they give away lottery picks to shave a year off a contract, I guess I'd be upset that Ratliff wasn't traded as well. However, I think you're coming from a completely unsupportable position.

Hows this? Put your position to the test. Post your deal on a neutral, non-Wolves site like the Trades and Transactions board at RealGM

http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewforum.php?f=2

.. and see if this was a legitimate hope for what Ratliff could bring. If the majority of posters who are fans of independent teams agree with you, I'll admit that you are right, and that Ratliff should have been traded. If they disagree, then can you admit that this type of return in trade for Theo Ratliff is a little far-fetched, and perhaps its causing you to over-react to the buy-out? Does having a third neutral third party weigh in on this seem like a fair way to arrive at a conclusion?

Excuse me .. I typed Tyrus Thomas and meant Joaquim Noah

Your trade was:

Noah + Ben Wallace for Walker + Buckner + Craig Smith

http://www.canishoopus.com/blogs/stopnpop/2008/01/04/tradeabulls

First of all get your facts straight. I've had a running thread on this blog called Mega Deal Monday and they're all listed under the tag "Fantasy GM". You can read another one about the Bulls here:

http://www.canishoopus.com/blogs/stopnpop/2008/02/04/moving-forward

To the Bulls

* Theo Ratliff
* Craig Smith
* Rashad McCants
* 2009 first round considerations; either the Miami pick or the Bulls take the higher of the teams' top picks

To the Wolves

* Joakim Noah
* Ben Wallace

Not only were they listed and clearly marked as "Fantasy GM" but I wrote over and over again that the purpose of the feature was to show examples of ways that Theo's deal could be used. Some over the cap, some under. Some with the Bulls, some with Memphis, some with the Nets. The point was always clear and marked.

As for yet another one of your ideas, yes, let me post some trade ideas after the trade deadline. Let me get right on it. Just for kicks and giggles, I did happen to post a few of the ideas on other sites. Here's the only link I can remember:

http://www.blogabull.com/story/2008/2/2/2051/49900

This latest round of Ratliff posts has nothing to do with him not getting moved and everything to do with an arrogant front office that continually insults the intelligence of their fans...like with the Ratliff bait and switch.

On the link listed above the Bulls fans didn't like the idea of moving Noah so I moved on to an idea with Memphis...the point always being that there were plenty of ideas that could be tried to show how Theo's deal could be moved to help the team.

Finally, give me a break on the spending Glen's money BS. This is a frickin' blog for a 12 win team. I don't presume much...least of all that I have the right to spend other people's money when I'm classifying posts under "Fantasy GM". I know the internets is a tough place to gauge intent, but I'm really not all that pissed about this stuff. Stop-n-pop is a character and...well, I guess I need to tone it down to reflect how I really feel about the situation.

BTW: where are you getting the stuff about teams just giving away lottery picks for Ratliff?

Listing lots of bad deals under the heading "Fantasy GM" does not demonstrate ways Theo's contract could be used realistically -- it just shows that you can make a lot of unrealistic deals.

Can I try? Here's my "fantasy GM" deal: Ratliff for Oden, Aldridge and Roy. Hey - if I make enough deals, does it prove something, as long as I write "fantasy" in front of it?

As for your question where I got "lottery picks for Ratliff ".. Noah was a lottery pick. Same with Oden, Aldridge and Roy, and also unrealistic that you're going to pluck some other team's lottery pick for cap relief.

I continue to be amazed at your demands that Glen Taylor seemed to owe you a Ratliff trade, not a buy-out, because the Wolves have only 12 wins. The Wolves are REBUILDING. If wins are your yardstick, Ratliff trade would not have made us a contender this season, or probably the next. 25 of 30 rich NBA owners don't go over the lux, and they have far more reason .. realistic play-off ambitions right now. However, you seem to think that the Wolves poor record is evidence that Taylor SHOULD go over the lux? I could see using Walker and Buckner's contracts next season for a trade, when a big contract is financially supportable under the lux, but using Ratliff now would mean paying a big chunk of doubled money next season. Unless you're getting the value of some imaginary "fantasy trade," you really think that's a good way to run an organization financially?

Finally, I think its a complete double standard for you to think that Ratliff's expiring is so valuable financially that you can make fantasy trades where somebody else's team would deal a lottery pick player like Noah to save money, but the Wolves are completely opposite -- immune to finances so that they should be paying double. That is truly being a fantasy gm.