Petrie Identifying team needs (Rim protector!)

Spike

Subsidiary Intermediary
Staff member
#91
Which is a concern. Is he still a major minutes impact guy? (was he ever is a different question).

I saw his name sitting out there too, but at this point its just...underwhelming.

I've seen quite a bit of him here, and he does get after the ball. He'd improve our squad for sure, but then again, we're not exactly holding up a high bar here in Sacto. Smart would likely play him at the 5, anyway.

Edit: There are others I would prefer, to be clear.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#92
Totally agree with the sentiment. And I agree with Baja's and Brick's comments, although with respect to Brick, there are guys who are just naturally more talented at defending at the 3 pt line. Thornton isn't one of them. I was just laying the groundwork for further discussion because if we take Petrie at his word, then HE agrees with Baja and Brick because he didn't mention getting backcourt defenders in his comments. And I totally agree with Mass, because something has got to give: Either these guys are mentally incapable of pick and roll D, or the coaching staff has got to coach them up a LOT more on pick and roll D. Just as an example, I believe it was in the last game against SA it was IT that was getting blind picked like nobody's business. That's the only way Parker was getting clear of IT. IT got slammed repeatedly because nobody was calling out the picks, and the Kings defended the pick and roll terribly. That's an area that needs a ton of improvement for next year.
There's no reason Cuz can't defend the pick and roll. He has pretty good lateral quickness for a big man, so its just a matter of doing it. He's certainly quick enough to show, or push, off the pick and roll. He's as good an athlete as Pollard was, and Pollard would push the PG way beyond the 3 pt line. There are many reasons for poor team defense. One is the obvious one, inexperience. Another is lack of emphasis form the coaching staff. Combine those two, and you double your trouble. But one of the most common, is lack of trust between the players.

Lets face it, if Cuz does the proper show on the pick and roll, he's leaving his man. Someone has to pickup his man, and if no one does, he just might start to shortcut his pick and roll defense to get back to his man. I saw this exact thing happen many times throughout the year, where our big gave an abbreviated show, and then left the other teams guard wide open on the perimeter. Thats usually caused by lack of trust. If you watch Pops coach the Spurs, you'll occasionally see him go ballistic when his team is on defense, and its usually because someone forgot to rotate. He holds his players accountable.

So its the coaches job to help create the atmosphere of trust. In fairness to Smart, he hasn't had a lot of time, and defense is harder to teach to a bunch of youngsters than offense is. Simply because they've all been playing offense since they were able to walk. To many of them, the word defense is a foreign language.
 
#93
I have two names that I think might be acquirable, depending on how circumstances work out: Anthony Morrow and Mike Miller. Morrow if New Jersey loses Deron and has to rebuild. Miller if Miami comes up short again and wants the financial releif while they chase bigs.
I would add Jared Dudley to that list too if the Suns don't keep Nash and decide to blow things up.
 
#95
Which is a concern. Is he still a major minutes impact guy? (was he ever is a different question).

I saw his name sitting out there too, but at this point its just...underwhelming.
Well his per minute production and efficiency hasn't dropped so that's a good sign.

If we don't get Davis (likely) and we resign JT (likely) and we can't offload Hayes (again likely) we don't really have a lot of room for a major minute guys unless someone is totally squashed. 15-20 for Birdman would be meet the rim protector veteran role at a reasonable price. Not a Plan A move, but at least he's the right type of guy.
 
#96
Well his per minute production and efficiency hasn't dropped so that's a good sign.

If we don't get Davis (likely) and we resign JT (likely) and we can't offload Hayes (again likely) we don't really have a lot of room for a major minute guys unless someone is totally squashed. 15-20 for Birdman would be meet the rim protector veteran role at a reasonable price. Not a Plan A move, but at least he's the right type of guy.
If we head into next season with a big 3 rotation of Cousins, Thompson and Hayes again, we better pray for massive improvement from our guards or a huge upgrade at the 3. Frankly, that just isn't that good a 3 man rotation from a standpoint of our current challenges.
 

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#97
Well his per minute production and efficiency hasn't dropped so that's a good sign.

If we don't get Davis (likely) and we resign JT (likely) and we can't offload Hayes (again likely) we don't really have a lot of room for a major minute guys unless someone is totally squashed. 15-20 for Birdman would be meet the rim protector veteran role at a reasonable price. Not a Plan A move, but at least he's the right type of guy.
You squish Hayes and don't even thnk twice about it. Or you do if you're serious about protesting the rim that is. If you're just doing our normal reluctant want to look like we're doing something bit, then sure, you go sign some dude to be our 4th big and get 10-15 mintues a night and say see? We got a shotblocker! But that's not the game. You should be going into this aiming to get your #2 big. #2b to Thompson's #2a at absolute worst. Nobody has ever blocked a shot from the bench.
 

SacTownKid

Hall of Famer
#98
You squish Hayes and don't even thnk twice about it. Or you do if you're serious about protesting the rim that is. If you're just doing our normal reluctant want to look like we're doing something bit, then sure, you go sign some dude to be our 4th big and get 10-15 mintues a night and say see? We got a shotblocker! But that's not the game. You should be going into this aiming to get your #2 big. #2b to Thompson's #2a at absolute worst. Nobody has ever blocked a shot from the bench.
"Squishing" one of the better role playing pick and roll and man defenders in the NBA, surefire way to improve the defense.

That number 2 big depends on need, and I seriously question whether or not this is going to an environment that can extract the kind of production you would realistically want out of a player like Jason Thompson since that's his value to a team. He's not a great defender, man or team, and his value is mostly offense related.
 

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#99
"Squishing" one of the better role playing pick and roll and man defenders in the NBA, surefire way to improve the defense.

That number 2 big depends on need, and I seriously question whether or not this is going to an environment that can extract the kind of production you would realistically want out of a player like Jason Thompson since that's his value to a team. He's not a great defender, man or team, and his value is mostly offense related.
Chuck defends pick and rolls well because he is the same height as a guard.

Nobody bothers to pick and roll Chuck. They just played right over his head inside.
 
You squish Hayes and don't even thnk twice about it. Or you do if you're serious about protesting the rim that is. If you're just doing our normal reluctant want to look like we're doing something bit, then sure, you go sign some dude to be our 4th big and get 10-15 mintues a night and say see? We got a shotblocker! But that's not the game. You should be going into this aiming to get your #2 big. #2b to Thompson's #2a at absolute worst. Nobody has ever blocked a shot from the bench.
I agree here completely. Chuck can be squished with little to no pushback. It's not like he'll get 0 minutes, but he can be more effective when he's used in the right spots, and while he'll be pretty expensive for a 4th big ... he can do well at that spot. In a perfect world, we bring in a guy to start with DMC, have JT play major bench big minutes, and have chuck pick up the 4th big spot (10-14 mins).

I may be alone here, but I think if we want to dump Chuck someone will take him. He has a great reputation around the league. I could see Houston (if they lose Camby and dump Dalembert) or the Twolves make a play for him. I don't think he is hardly as unmovable as Salmons or Garcia.
 
Chuck defends pick and rolls well because he is the same height as a guard.

Nobody bothers to pick and roll Chuck. They just played right over his head inside.

And? He defends it well and better than most players in the NBA, if that's the reason then good luck finding a guard sized pick and roll defender who is also top notch post defender. Didn't see Al Jefferson playing over his head in that one game. Hmmm... wonder why?
 
And? He defends it well and better than most players in the NBA, if that's the reason then good luck finding a guard sized pick and roll defender who is also top notch post defender. Didn't see Al Jefferson playing over his head in that one game. Hmmm... wonder why?
I actually appreciate the fact you are still defending the chuck signing. Many of us stated when it happened that he was a good one-on-one defender against certain types of bigs but that he wasn't a paint protecter, didn't do much for team d outside of your precious pnr, and was an inferior defender/rebounder to dally

Not only did he perform exactly as many of us feared, he apparently took his esteemed professionalism to dinner at burger king, came in out of shape, forgot how to rebound and contributed the occasional nice pass with ground bound drives to our offense.

Yet here you are back at propping chuck's big butt on your shoulders. Slow applause for you and your loyalty.
 
Last edited:
I actually appreciate the fact you are still defending the chuck signing. Many of us stated when it happened that he was a good one-on-one defender against certain types of bigs but that he wasn't a paint protecter, didn't do much for team d outside of your precious pnr, and was an inferior defender/rebounder to dally

Not only did he perform exactly as many of us feared, he apparently took his esteemed professionalism to dinner at burger king, came in out of shape, forgot how to rebound and contributed the occasional nice pass with ground bound drives to our offense.

Yet here you are back at propping chuck's big butt on your shoulders. Slow applause for you and your loyalty.
All hail Dally! All hail Dally!
 
It isn't about dally it's about need. And a player like dally is far more important to this (and most) teams than a player like Hayes.
A player like Dally sure. Gimme Chandler, Ibaka and players who are actually good defenders and I'm in! Shotblocker city baby!

The problem is people thinking you can win with guys like Dally, Haywood etc in starting roles. Those guys are suited to play 20 MPG, block a few shots, and knock some heads around. And that's cool! But I do not want to have to depend on those sort of defenders on a consistent basis. They are NOT good players and their track record of losing shows. Now, if we wanted to bring Dally in for that role, then cool! Let him be the 3rd/4th big and do his thing for 20 minutes.

The only way we're going to improve defensively is if our guys buy into a team defense concept. Meaning guys like Reke and Cousins show up and play defense at a high level every night and we surround them with actual defensive role players. Hayes was use incorrectly the entire year. You cannot expect him to do what he does best when he played the majority of the season with Outlaw, Donte Greene, and Hickson as his PF's. Play him at PF with Cousins/Dally/Davis and let him lock down the other team's best big for 15-20 minutes a night.
 
In general, the Kings get killed by the pick and roll. We simply don't defend it in a way that allows our defense to reset. For the most part, the blame goes on whomever our big is on the defensive side. Can anyone remember back to the days of Scott Pollard. He's one of those guys that didn't do any one thing great, but was great at doing a lot of the little things very well. If I can jog anyone's memory of Scott, remember him defending the pick and roll by coming off and pushing the other teams point guard out as far as he could on the floor, thereby defeating the pass to the roller, and giving his team time to make the appropiate switches. The key is, he stopped the ball from moving for a long enough period of time to defeat the purpose of the pick and roll.

The only player I saw on the Kings that did that on a regular basis was Hayes. On occasion it was Thompson, and every once in a while it was Cousins. In fairness, to Thompson, who defendes the pick and roll pretty well, he was seldom the player involved at the top of the key, and was usually the backdoor protector. Because of a breakdown at the beginning of the play, the other team was going to get one of two things. A clear lane to the basket, or a wide open jumpshot. Too many times we want to blame Tyreke, IT, Thornton, or Fredette for not fighting through the screen. But if a screen is set properly, and the other team knows how to use a screen properly, the screen is going to work. So at that point, its on your big man to step out and push.

Long story short, we didn't defend the pick and roll very well. It caused our defense to breakdown, and more often than not, the other team scored.
I remember them saying we had 2 of the top 5 centers in the league, and I believed it. I remember some of the TNT people (or NBC?) disagreeing but I assume they only were looking at the stats. Pollard was REAL good in the system we had. By real good I mean REAL GOOD. His stats didn't show the whole story though.
 
A player like Dally sure. Gimme Chandler, Ibaka and players who are actually good defenders and I'm in! Shotblocker city baby!

The problem is people thinking you can win with guys like Dally, Haywood etc in starting roles. Those guys are suited to play 20 MPG, block a few shots, and knock some heads around. And that's cool! But I do not want to have to depend on those sort of defenders on a consistent basis. They are NOT good players and their track record of losing shows. Now, if we wanted to bring Dally in for that role, then cool! Let him be the 3rd/4th big and do his thing for 20 minutes.

The only way we're going to improve defensively is if our guys buy into a team defense concept. Meaning guys like Reke and Cousins show up and play defense at a high level every night and we surround them with actual defensive role players. Hayes was use incorrectly the entire year. You cannot expect him to do what he does best when he played the majority of the season with Outlaw, Donte Greene, and Hickson as his PF's. Play him at PF with Cousins/Dally/Davis and let him lock down the other team's best big for 15-20 minutes a night.
Oh Please!

Its not like Hayes had these giants to work with in Houston. He came to defensive prominence when Yao's foot gave way and good ol' Chuck had to battle every night. He got extended minutes out of necessity and he made the most of them by playing to his strengths in a system that suited him. He was always going to struggle out of that system and hence why I believed that his best destination during the FA period would have been Minnesota but with the emergence of Pekovic, he might have been pushed further into the background.

People always make excuses about Chuck's shortcomings this season because of the player he had on the court at the same time with him (Hickson, Outlaw, Greene etc) but the fact is, he has been paired with similar types of players for his last 2 years in Houston and done very well in that setting but flopped in a major way this year with us (as some of us expected it to be the case).

Bottom line Chuck did not need Yao to be effective but apparently here he needs to be played with Cousins or JT and it will work. Might I remind people that his "partner in crime" in Houston was a generously listed 6'8" Luis Scola (a very good player but not great).
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
I agree here completely. Chuck can be squished with little to no pushback. It's not like he'll get 0 minutes, but he can be more effective when he's used in the right spots, and while he'll be pretty expensive for a 4th big ... he can do well at that spot. In a perfect world, we bring in a guy to start with DMC, have JT play major bench big minutes, and have chuck pick up the 4th big spot (10-14 mins).

I may be alone here, but I think if we want to dump Chuck someone will take him. He has a great reputation around the league. I could see Houston (if they lose Camby and dump Dalembert) or the Twolves make a play for him. I don't think he is hardly as unmovable as Salmons or Garcia.
The T Wolves were originally in the running for Hayes. I know Adelman wanted him, so its possible they'd still be interested. The problem is, they'll want to dump an unwanted contract on us. The question is, who? I know they wanted to move Beasley at one time, and certainly have a little logjam at the SF position. Anyway, I agree with you, I think there would be some takers out there for Hayes.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
Oh Please!

Its not like Hayes had these giants to work with in Houston. He came to defensive prominence when Yao's foot gave way and good ol' Chuck had to battle every night. He got extended minutes out of necessity and he made the most of them by playing to his strengths in a system that suited him. He was always going to struggle out of that system and hence why I believed that his best destination during the FA period would have been Minnesota but with the emergence of Pekovic, he might have been pushed further into the background.

People always make excuses about Chuck's shortcomings this season because of the player he had on the court at the same time with him (Hickson, Outlaw, Greene etc) but the fact is, he has been paired with similar types of players for his last 2 years in Houston and done very well in that setting but flopped in a major way this year with us (as some of us expected it to be the case).

Bottom line Chuck did not need Yao to be effective but apparently here he needs to be played with Cousins or JT and it will work. Might I remind people that his "partner in crime" in Houston was a generously listed 6'8" Luis Scola (a very good player but not great).
Scola is a good rebounder though, and thats where chuck really suffered this season, for whatever reason. During the periods where he was paired with JT, he played well. He did come in out of shape, but he did have the heart problem. I'm not sure how that may, or may not have affected his training, but the end result was a 6'6" player out of shape, and then shortly thereafter, suffering a shoulder seperation. So I doubt we saw Hayes at his best this past season.

I think the idea was for Chuck to rub off on Cuz and the rest of the team. I suspect someone didn't rub hard enough.
 
Scola is a good rebounder though, and thats where chuck really suffered this season, for whatever reason. During the periods where he was paired with JT, he played well. He did come in out of shape, but he did have the heart problem. I'm not sure how that may, or may not have affected his training, but the end result was a 6'6" player out of shape, and then shortly thereafter, suffering a shoulder seperation. So I doubt we saw Hayes at his best this past season.

I think the idea was for Chuck to rub off on Cuz and the rest of the team. I suspect someone didn't rub hard enough.
Scola is a good rebounder but then again so is JJ Hickson ;)

Look I generally agree with your view on this but I find it a bit rich that people will point to the players that Hayes played with this year as the reason for his underwhelming season yet continue to ignore that he was at his best in a similar set up in Houston.

I didn't like the signing to start off with as I thought it was too much money for a player that does not significantly improve the team. It was at the expense of a shotblocker too and I liked our length and fit of the 3 big man rotation post Landry trade. We traded those advantages for an undersized, limited C who was a poor rebounder and did nothing to improve our team defence.

I like Chuck in the right environment but as we are currently constructed (with Cousins as our C) he is just not a good fit. Never has been and never will be for as long as Cousins is the centrepiece if this franchise.
 

Kingster

Hall of Famer
There's no reason Cuz can't defend the pick and roll. He has pretty good lateral quickness for a big man, so its just a matter of doing it. He's certainly quick enough to show, or push, off the pick and roll. He's as good an athlete as Pollard was, and Pollard would push the PG way beyond the 3 pt line. There are many reasons for poor team defense. One is the obvious one, inexperience. Another is lack of emphasis form the coaching staff. Combine those two, and you double your trouble. But one of the most common, is lack of trust between the players.

Lets face it, if Cuz does the proper show on the pick and roll, he's leaving his man. Someone has to pickup his man, and if no one does, he just might start to shortcut his pick and roll defense to get back to his man. I saw this exact thing happen many times throughout the year, where our big gave an abbreviated show, and then left the other teams guard wide open on the perimeter. Thats usually caused by lack of trust. If you watch Pops coach the Spurs, you'll occasionally see him go ballistic when his team is on defense, and its usually because someone forgot to rotate. He holds his players accountable.

So its the coaches job to help create the atmosphere of trust. In fairness to Smart, he hasn't had a lot of time, and defense is harder to teach to a bunch of youngsters than offense is. Simply because they've all been playing offense since they were able to walk. To many of them, the word defense is a foreign language.
I agree about Cousins. He does have quick feet and should be very good on pick and roll D. I just hope that we finally see some improvement in this area. The excuse that this team is young is getting old.....
 

Kingster

Hall of Famer
I agree here completely. Chuck can be squished with little to no pushback. It's not like he'll get 0 minutes, but he can be more effective when he's used in the right spots, and while he'll be pretty expensive for a 4th big ... he can do well at that spot. In a perfect world, we bring in a guy to start with DMC, have JT play major bench big minutes, and have chuck pick up the 4th big spot (10-14 mins).

I may be alone here, but I think if we want to dump Chuck someone will take him. He has a great reputation around the league. I could see Houston (if they lose Camby and dump Dalembert) or the Twolves make a play for him. I don't think he is hardly as unmovable as Salmons or Garcia.
But then you're selling him at probably the lowest point of his career.
 

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
But then you're selling him at probably the lowest point of his career.
He had very little value at the peak of his career. Seriously now peeps. We got him for the MLE. There were no other reported suitors. There might or might not be a few teams who thought they could use him, but nobody is fighting over him. You were never, at any point, going to get a significant asset in return for a 6'6" groundbound PF/C.

Here is like the abolute max value I could see us having a chance to get out of him: we might legitimately be able to swap him for Darko, who is rumored to be an amnesty candidate in Minnesota (oddly upon arriving Adelman did not find Darko to be another Vlade). And of course because of Adelman there might be more stomach for a 6'6" big with 3 years left on his contract. I'd be down for that experiment. Not much to lose, and with a big 7 footer on the bench alongside Whiteside, it would give us flexiblity on how we filled the starting shotblocker type role, as well as questions of JT vs. Anderson vs. Ilyasova.
 
Last edited:

Capt. Factorial

ceterum censeo delendum esse Argentum
Staff member
He had very little value at the peak of his career. Seriously now peeps. We got him for the MLE. There were no other reported suitors.
Actually, Minnesota was a reported suitor at the MLE.

Here is like the abolute max value I could see us having a chance to get out of him: we might legitimately be able to swap him for Darko, who is rumored to be an amnesty candidate in Minnesota (oddly upon arriving Adelman did not find Darko to be another Vlade). And of course because of Adelman there might be more stomach for a 6'6" big with 3 years left on his contract. I'd be down for that experiment. Not much to lose, and with a big 7 footer on the bench alongside Whiteside, it would give us flexiblity on how we filled the starting shotblocker type role, as well as questions of JT vs. Anderson vs. Ilyasova.
I suppose it couldn't hurt too much if Minny would do it. I'm hardly after Darko, but that would effectively cut two years off of the Hayes contract. I still think Hayes isn't a huge liability at his contract as a 15-20 minute bench guy (less of a liability that Darko all told), so I'd be more likely to deal him if we bring JT back and pick up another big either in the draft or free agency. Darko probably is only worth garbage-time minutes at this point - I do NOT want him as a #3/#4 big guy.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
He had very little value at the peak of his career. Seriously now peeps. We got him for the MLE. There were no other reported suitors. There might or might not be a few teams who thought they could use him, but nobody is fighting over him. You were never, at any point, going to get a significant asset in return for a 6'6" groundbound PF/C.

Here is like the abolute max value I could see us having a chance to get out of him: we might legitimately be able to swap him for Darko, who is rumored to be an amnesty candidate in Minnesota (oddly upon arriving Adelman did not find Darko to be another Vlade). And of course because of Adelman there might be more stomach for a 6'6" big with 3 years left on his contract. I'd be down for that experiment. Not much to lose, and with a big 7 footer on the bench alongside Whiteside, it would give us flexiblity on how we filled the starting shotblocker type role, as well as questions of JT vs. Anderson vs. Ilyasova.
I think we can safely say, that Hayes gets the most bang for the buck, as a 6'6" center that can't jump, and has an average wingspan. There's absolutely nothing that stands out about him, other than his knowledge of how to play basketball, and execute that knowledge to the best of his abilities. I look as Hayes as a luxury player. Someone that you'd love to have on your bench, if you already have the main pieces in place. I don't look at him as one of the main peices. So from that prespective, it appeared to me that we were putting the cart before the horse.

I think if I had a choice between Beasley and Darko, I'd go with Beasley, simply because of the talent level. But then you're taking on a possible headache. But, lets remember, the same thing was thought about T Will, and there are teams out there that think the same thing about Cuz. Darko would be the safer choice, and he would add height to a mostly undersized team. But hell, why not build a team out of talented malcontents that nobody else wants. They'd have a common bond and goal. To prove the rest of the NBA wrong. Why not become the old Oakland A's of basketball. A team that fought with each other in the lockerroom, and kicked everyone's butt on the field.
 

Glenn

Hall of Famer
I think if I had a choice between Beasley and Darko, I'd go with Beasley, simply because of the talent level. But then you're taking on a possible headache. But, lets remember, the same thing was thought about T Will, and there are teams out there that think the same thing about Cuz. Darko would be the safer choice, and he would add height to a mostly undersized team. But hell, why not build a team out of talented malcontents that nobody else wants. They'd have a common bond and goal. To prove the rest of the NBA wrong. Why not become the old Oakland A's of basketball. A team that fought with each other in the lockerroom, and kicked everyone's butt on the field.
We would have the only team in the NBA that needed to be patted down before they entered the locker room.
 

Kingster

Hall of Famer
He had very little value at the peak of his career. Seriously now peeps. We got him for the MLE. There were no other reported suitors. There might or might not be a few teams who thought they could use him, but nobody is fighting over him. You were never, at any point, going to get a significant asset in return for a 6'6" groundbound PF/C.

Here is like the abolute max value I could see us having a chance to get out of him: we might legitimately be able to swap him for Darko, who is rumored to be an amnesty candidate in Minnesota (oddly upon arriving Adelman did not find Darko to be another Vlade). And of course because of Adelman there might be more stomach for a 6'6" big with 3 years left on his contract. I'd be down for that experiment. Not much to lose, and with a big 7 footer on the bench alongside Whiteside, it would give us flexiblity on how we filled the starting shotblocker type role, as well as questions of JT vs. Anderson vs. Ilyasova.
I really think that to maximize Hayes's value, you get that shoulder healthy, get him tip top shape, and have him make a positive impact on the Kings next year. Hayes was a much better player at Houston.
 
The thing with Hayes is, at least we have options. And ANY direction we decide to go in is ok with me... well, any direction that makes him either the 4th big or off the roster. Like I said before, I don't think we have options (other than amnesty ) for guys like Garcia and Salmons... actually, Garcia is on his last year, so he's tradeable. I can see a deadline deal happening with him when his salary will be low enough for a contender to take on.

Hayes for Darko would be ok with me. People laugh at Darko, but he is better than a lot of rotation bigs around the league. That's not saying a whole lot, but he can be your 4th or 5th big. Just like Hayes, only less years. Plus he has some 'skills' other bigs on our roster don't have. I'd be fine with it.

I can actually see a deal for Beasley happening though. What do we think of ..

Beasley - Darko - Webster (bench 3pt shooting at a position of need (SF)) for Hayes - Jimmer - Outlaw

With the most valuable player in that deal being Jimmer (I actually wonder what type of value Jimmer has around the league right now), and assuming the Wolves just want to dump Beasley .. Which team says no? I'm not sure I'd even do it, because Beasley on this team scares me, and I don't now how Jimmer fits into what the Wolves are doing over there. Actually, I'm sure the Wolves would love to have Thornton .. they'd be a scary team with Rubio-Thornton-Williams-Pek-Love ... but If I'm giving them Thornton, I'm taking Pekovic back. Lots of potential between these two teams though. They have some SF's we could really use. I'm a fan of Webster in the Anthony Morrow type role.
 
I actually appreciate the fact you are still defending the chuck signing. Many of us stated when it happened that he was a good one-on-one defender against certain types of bigs but that he wasn't a paint protecter, didn't do much for team d outside of your precious pnr, and was an inferior defender/rebounder to dally

Not only did he perform exactly as many of us feared, he apparently took his esteemed professionalism to dinner at burger king, came in out of shape, forgot how to rebound and contributed the occasional nice pass with ground bound drives to our offense.

Yet here you are back at propping chuck's big butt on your shoulders. Slow applause for you and your loyalty.
It's because nothing has changed, he wasn't used right so if you want to make an assessment based on misuse, well, I guess you were also one of the people totally stunned as "worthless" JJ Hickson proceeded to finish the season at a 20 and 10 clip on a different team where he was used differently. Still see no correlation huh?

And the entire point is he played out of position and out of the role he was brought in to play. Don't say he didn't have an impact when he did on players when he played them, other games the coach didn't even use him on them so don't wonder why they obliterated the Kings inside for those games, totally Hayes' fault I know. If they brought in Chuck Hayes to lead the team in scoring and rebounding that's a major whoops on them. Not using him as a defensive specialist next to Cousins and instead as a backup center with units in desperate need of a production from that spot is a whoops on whoever thought that was a good idea.

Anytime someone mentions the positives Hayes can bring it's all of a sudden "jocking" the guy. Role players need a role, when not used in that role they are a detriment to themselves and their team. Nobody here is saying that Hayes is anything more than he is, if you want to view it that way or need to in order to substantiate whatever point you're trying to make then that's too bad because this conversation probably won't go far. All I'm saying is use him right, see what happens. Look back at some games where he was and you might see that he's not as useless as you think his height suggests. Which is also funny. Hayes at 6'7" is going to be towered over by a whole 2 inches most nights at PF, wow. Hayes full time at C is a different story and why I like him there as much as you do. Like I said, whoops on whoever thinks that's a good idea.