What are you looking for in filling the two remaining roster slots? Give the Colonel your wisdom here.

[AHF]

1 hour ago, sturt said:

True... or even more salient to your point, "better than the 5 guys you think you'll be able to attract  to your training camp."

A bit redundant with the "think" already in there but we are on the same page!  Decision has to be made today and you look at the available free agents and the history of the talent level that is available at training camp time and decide whether the flexibility is worth passing on the most desirable free agents currently on the market.

[sturt]

26 minutes ago, AHF said:

A bit redundant with the "think" already in there but we are on the same page!  Decision has to be made today and you look at the available free agents and the history of the talent level that is available at training camp time and decide whether the flexibility is worth passing on the most desirable free agents currently on the market.

We are on the same page, and as you more-or-less say, it's a Let's Make A Deal thing--take home the cash in your hand, or... do you want what's behind Door Number 1? (... ie, since you can't know it yet, and thus it's a matter of the talent level of the guys you... think... you're going to be able to attract. Salient point being, of course, if you knew it rather than just having to guess, it would be an easier decision to make.)

[AHF]

I'd bet on the present if I saw someone I wanted and would be willing to cut them if I found someone at camp who I thought deserved to make the team.  I wouldn't wait unless there was just no one I would care about another team scooping up.

[Buzzard]

Ian Clark is still looking for a deal that is over the minimum the Timberwolves can offer him; since they gave their MLE to Crawford. Don't we have about 4.5 in cap left?

Is there something wrong with this guy? In a weak FA PG market, most people thought he would have no problem at all getting 4 - 5 million a year in a new deal.

Edited July 29, 2017 by Buzzard

[sturt]

To @Buzzard's post, I can only say in general that there's just got to be some really interesting sports economics journal articles waiting to be written based on how the salary pendulum has swung back so strikingly far this off-season. I know @AHF had written extensively that he perceived last off-season's FA shopping spree to be a one-off due to the large spike, and it's turned out that the results this year have mainly supported that. But in the same breath, I would wonder if even he might say he didn't expect things to retrench back quite this far. (I bet I won't have to wonder long... hehe).

[Buzzard]

23 minutes ago, sturt said:

To @Buzzard's post, I can only say in general that there's just got to be some really interesting sports economics journal articles waiting to be written based on how the salary pendulum has swung back so strikingly far this off-season. I know @AHF had written extensively that he perceived last off-season's FA shopping spree to be a one-off due to the large spike, and it's turned out that the results this year have mainly supported that. But in the same breath, I would wonder if even he might say he didn't expect things to retrench back quite this far. (I bet I won't have to wonder long... hehe).

Quite honestly I think a lot of teams, ours included, has accepted the fact we cannot compete. If we can't compete, keep cost as low as possible and therefore reap as much money from the pool as possible. This is a horrible business model for fans; but it works out fine for owners who know they have no chance in hell to beat Cleveland, much less Golden State.

It is like there are four to six teams who think they have a chance; and the other twenty four need to keep payroll low and therefore profits will be higher.

We went from being the mouse on the wheel in the playoffs; to being the mouse on the wheel in the lottery. Things can change in one season for the better or for the worse. I think it is more of a two year to three year plan; but no guarantees. We could on on this wheel for five to ten years if things do not go right.

Edited August 5, 2017 by Buzzard

[sturt]

 

 

 

 

Would seem that we're still waiting on that third point guard.

However, in retrospect, Schlenk's "bigs" comment seemingly must have been not counting signings that had already been reported, but not yet actually executed.... and/but even so, one has to wonder if he was already figuring into that the subtraction of Stone.

As I said in another post since yesterday's Babbitt pick-up, interesting that since July 10 when Schlenk said this, he's signed (1) Brussino, who is ordinarily regarded as a wing, but who could play some PG... and now (2) Babbitt who is ordinarily regarded as a wing, but who indeed probably will play some if not a lot of PF.

So are we to assume that Brussino and Babbitt fulfilled the shopping list now?

I mean, at this point, there are six bigs... if you count Babbitt as a big. 

And at this point, there is a third PG.... if you count Brussino as a PG. There's been nothing self-evident that would have kept Schlenk from signing Cook or Weber or any of the vet PGs.

 

 

[Buzzard]

18 minutes ago, sturt said:

 

 

 

 

Would seem that we're still waiting on that third point guard.

However, in retrospect, Schlenk's "bigs" comment seemingly must have been not counting signings that had already been reported, but not yet actually executed.... and/but even so, one has to wonder if he was already figuring into that the subtraction of Stone.

As I said in another post since yesterday's Babbitt pick-up, interesting that since July 10 when Schlenk said this, he's signed (1) Brussino, who is ordinarily regarded as a wing, but who could play some PG... and now (2) Babbitt who is ordinarily regarded as a wing, but who indeed probably will play some if not a lot of PF.

So are we to assume that Brussino and Babbitt fulfilled the shopping list now?

I mean, at this point, there are six bigs... if you count Babbitt as a big. 

And at this point, there is a third PG.... if you count Brussino as a PG. There's been nothing self-evident that would have kept Schlenk from signing Cook or Weber or any of the vet PGs.

 

 

That CV cite is so old, I would not give it any credence. From what I can tell, after releasing Stone and signing Babbitt, we have 15 players under contract. I don't know what Schlenk plans are from here on out. I do think Dennis will be in the top ten for minutes played by a PG; and he could be in the top five.

Edited August 5, 2017 by Buzzard

[sturt]

2 hours ago, Buzzard said:

That CV cite is so old, I would not give it any credence.

Yeah, I maybe didn't say it explicitly, but I was essentially offering my version of skepticism as well.

But... 14 by my count, or am I missing someone?...

 

 

[Buzzard]

3 minutes ago, sturt said:

Yeah, I maybe didn't say it explicitly, but I was essentially offering my version of skepticism as well.

But... 14 by my count, or am I missing someone?...

 

 

Site I am using has Tyler Cavanaugh but he is not to be seen as a regular roster player. So your count is right.

[TheFuzz]

Bembry and Brussino can fulfill some PG duties I think, we're not looking to compete too hard anyway.

[sturt]

Still wrestling with a couple of factoids here, though, where it concerns the 15th roster slot...

a) Babbitt could have been signed as the #15--there was no evident necessity for slicing Stone off and swallowing that salary;

b) and yet, based on the evidence, there also is no apparent interest in the primary suspects Cook and Weber, otherwise something seemingly should have already occurred.

So... still... again... what's up with this? Why the urgency in cutting a guaranteed salaried young developmental player?

 

[TheNorthCydeRises]

At this point, I wish I could just simulate the next 10 months of life, and jump straight to June 2018 . . draft night.

Schlenk obviously isn't trying to field some ultra competitive team.  He's basically just signing fodder for the slaughter.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if they've already told Dennis that he's going to play 55 - 60 games next season, no matter what.  Play as well as you can, but we're only playing you 65% - 75% of the season.  If you're not hurt, we'll make up some injuries to have you sitting out 2 - 3 weeks at a time . . and may give you all of April off.

[sturt]

Quote

At this point, I wish I could just simulate the next 10 months of life, and jump straight to June 2018 . . draft night

 

Not me. I embrace the journey. Think it makes arriving at the destination that much sweeter.

[sturt]

Looking forward to an interesting week, after Friday's Babbitt signing.

If that 15th domino (ie, acquisition to fill the 15th roster slot) doesn't fall today or tomorrow, it suggests to me that Schlenk is waiting out the Kyrie and Melo discussions to see what, if anything, develops for our purposes either as a direct or indirect consequence of those expected trades.