did flynn play 1,000 minutes?
ESPN noted that the Wolves SG position was the worst (or one of) the worst positions in the NBA last season. Worse than their PG spot.

idk if he did or not.

Here's what someone posted about Flynn's rookie year (his "good" year) stats:

Let’s look at Jonny’s rookie year so we don’t have to bring his injury into the discussion. Here are his rankings for various stats, using players who logged more than 1,000 minutes:

Offensive rating: 247 / 252
Offensive win shares: 250 / 252
True shooting %: 212 / 252
PER: 172 / 252 (his A/TO was better this year, which must be driving this comparatively good ranking)
Win shares: 249 / 252

Whatever points Flynn has been scoring, he hasn’t been scoring them efficiently. Even in his “good” year, Flynn was bad.


Ridnour probably saved our PG position from being numerically one of the worst - he was decent at least - he had a good shooting year anyways. The more I think about our PG position, the more I like it, as long as both Rubio & Ridnour are healthy.

And Kahn just got a #1 for Flynn. Not a bad GM imo.

Seriously, guys are busts all the time.

None have been bigger busts in Wolves history, and he didnt exactly get a #1 for Flynn. There was a lot more to that trade.

We moved down 3 spots in this years draft (20 to 23) and gave up Flynn and wound up giving up an additional #2 (that happened after the initial trade) for B Miller, a heavily protected #1 in 2013 and a #2 this year.

Keep in mind we picked Flynn with #6 and we passed on a lot of good players (including several point guards) to do so. Flynn was considered a reach at the time by everyone except Kahn.

Kahn did a good job in this year's draft imo.

Then he goes & extends the contracts of two of the league's worst players who have basically no upside yesterday. The more I think of that, the more it pisses me off.

When Kahn came here, one of the things I liked was he cleaned house - getting rid of a lot of bad contracts. Now he's collecting bad players on bad contracts. No they're not in as bad of shape as McFale had the as far as bad contracts go, but he's building up to that.

No, the worst draft pick in history was the first, taking Pooh Richardson over Tim Hardaway (or Sean Kemp in retrospect).

Paul Grant was the #20 pick and scored a total of 4 points in the NBA.

Will Avery at #14 was pretty terrible.

Corey Brewer #7

This franchise has screwed the pooch on every pick and trade except for KG and future HOFer Rubio.

You forgot the worst player in Twolves history - Ndi Ebi. All those guys sucked, but Brewer & Pooh had some positive attributes and all the rest were picked much later than Flynn.

We have had a horrible draft history.

I like to go back & look at who we could have/should have picked instead of who we did pick:

Pooh/Hardaway
Avery/Artest, Posey
Brewer/Noah
Ebi/Josh Howard, K Perkins, L Barbosa
McCant/Granger, Kirilenko
Wally/R Hamilton, Andre Miller, Marion, J Terry (at least Wally was productive for a while)
Flynn/Curry, Jennings, Lawson, Holiday, Teague, Collison (that's just some of the better PGs)

OY

Paul Grant - there were no clearly superior players available imo. Several drafted after him were productive, but none were all that great imo. He was a bad player, but nowhere near the worst draft choice by us ever.

Good picks:

KG (one of best picks in NBA history because it was considered by some to be a reach at the time)
Love (trade)
Rubio (obvious pick imo)
Rasho

Looked great at the time:

Marbury (trade)

How different would history be without that Marbury trade? Ray Allen is a perfect complement to KG. Marbury needed the ball in his hands all the time which meant you couldn't properly run the offense through Garnett in the post. Ray Allen runs off screens and is a catch and shoot shooter.

I strongly advocated taking Steve Nash instead which got me mocked plenty when Marbury was better as a rookie; I look smart now. Also, Kobe Bryant was available.

Bryant would have been a reach at the time, and who knows if he would have demanded a trade.... But that could have been a lot of fun - KG & Kobe, wow what a team that could have been.

Also in hindsight, Allen would have been a great compliment to KG here.

I might be botching this a little, but we had interest in Nash. I think what I heard was that if we couldn't have made the Marbury deal, we were considering taking Nash instead of Allen.

At the time we got Marbury, and up until the ******* decided he didnt want to play here anymore, I thought we had done the right thing. He would have been awesome with KG if he wasnt such a knucklehead imo.

This is a Youtube highlight video of the Wolves first win over Jordan & the Bulls: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TsW92vKpyA

That team was so much fun until Marbury ****ed it all up.

Remember where I was watching that game, at my best bud's place both sitting on his bed since he didn't have any other seating. Man, remember how exciting it was having an up-and-coming team and a couple of future superstars?? Anything was possible. Contrast that with the total hopelessness of late.

Here's the high water mark as a franchise: Game 7 vs the Kings. KG goes for 32 and 21. People don't think KG was great? We got the 1-seed in the far better conference with a starting five of Cassell, Hassell, Spreewell, KG, and Ervin Johnson*. And that King's team sure was fun to watch pass the ball.

32pts 21reb 5blk 4stl

32 in a 83-80 game.

*Bench of Wally, Hoiberg, Madsen, and Gary Trent. Yikes.

yeah, if Cassell would have stayed healthy in the playoffs, we'd have an NBA title imo. Hoiberg & KG were playing PG that series vs the Lakers.

imo, KG was the best player in basketball for ~4 or 5 years straight, but he never got the recognition of Duncan because we didn't win any titles, because we surrounded him with scrubs. If you look at his head to head stats vs Duncan, and consider the thing KG did that didn't show up in the box score (defense and passes that didn't get counted as assists), KG was clearly a better player imo. I'd like to see an advanced stats guy break down his numbers over that stretch of his career.

I'm hoping we now have a core of players that we can look forward to watching get better. We probably dont have any MVP type guys like KG on the roster, but we do have a higher number of guys with untapped potential than we've ever had. Two major obstacles - the lockout and Rambis.

At the risk of being "that guy" who pimps his own blog, I happened to review the history of T-Wolves drafts a couple months ago. You can find it here:

http://victoryisinsight.wordpress.co...e-early-years/

http://victoryisinsight.wordpress.co...ure-continues/

http://www.twincities.com/timberwolv...nclick_check=1
Kahn is such a dumbass sometimes. This is his stupidest idea ever imo.

So is Beasley. It sounds like he'll possibly be suspended for 5 games whenever the next season starts.

Meanwhile, D Williams is working on finishing his degree. Work ethic difference? I hope he's the opening game starter and stays as the starter at the 3 (or 4 if Love is playing C) permanently.

Beasley can be a nice 6th man scoring option imo. Or low value trade bait.

Link doesn't work for me.

me either, pretty sure he is linking a story where Kahn wants Rambis in the front office

i dunno. i guess i don't get what the big deal is. if you are going to pay him i think it's reasonable for him to have to work. obv if he'd rather coach he can quit.

i hear a lot of people saying they feel bad for him and i don't get that at all.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slu...twolves_070611

Hopefully that link works.

Its a dumb idea to try to get anything productive from someone who is being demoted imo. Especially from this guy. I want him to have zero affect on this team anymore.

I dont feel the least bit bad for Rambis; although, I think we should have made a clean break with him immediately after (or maybe even before) Kahn's "show of hands" press conference.

Kahn wants to get rid of him, Taylor won't fire him before the lockout ends for financial reasons.

That's one theory that may or may not be correct.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/0...28Daily+Kos%29

Its hard to feel much sympathy for the owners after reading that.

sympathy has nothing to do with anything.

it's just like any other negotiation where both sides want to get the best possible deal for themselves. and lol at anyone who thinks the owners should just be happy with ~$6m per team and stand down. i mean veteran players average more profit than the owners. i would try to get a bigger piece too.

and obv the players have a lot of leverage too and it's reasonable of them to get as much as they can also.

It is also based on numbers that are incorrect.

http://blogs.forbes.com/sportsmoney/...st-five-years/

These figures are probably wrong as well because as an owner you can always shuffle around money between different related businesses so that profits and losses appear where you want them to.

yeah, I've seen two other stories that look credible that says they actually showed a profit..... Who really knows what is correct?

All I really know is I was looking forward to this season & the ****ers are probably going to ruin it.

A long lock out seems like a big favourite at the moment, I'd be incredibly surprised if we get more than 1/2 a season played.

Its going to screw us up badly whatever happens with a new coach and 2 new starters having a couple of weeks to get up to speed before the games start.

yeah, I'm not too worries about losing games early if we do have a season. I'm anxious to get a new coach and see Rubio & D Williams play & watch the whole team improve.