kab21

That is only true if you consider Bumgarner a two way player. I won't consider him a two way player unless he is playing in the field or DH'ing on half of his non-pitching days.

What about the Thibs connection and Taj Gibson? It seems that he could be acquired at a reasonable price (not near max contract like Ibaka and Milsap). I was thinking that Gibson might be a better fit than Milsap. Better defense and a competent scorer/shooter but doesn't need as many touches. And he could be sub in for both Dieng and Towns instead of commanding a starting spot. Igoudala peaked my interest also but I wasn't sure if the Warriors would make an attempt to resign him and he would stay to be part of the juggernaut. I assume Washington is planning on matching any contract given to Porter and that is why he isn't a fit.

No, KAT is an elite player with skills that go far, far beyond what I am looking for. The dream pair for me would be Ibaka since he brings great defense to the equation as well. This would give opposing teams fits since all of the starters can shoot from outside (Rubio is the weakest shooter) and they all are very quick. Yet they still have the size to adequately guard larger lineups. By moving KAT to the 4 and playing Aldrich or equivalent you give up most of those matchup advantages. And I am guessing that is why we rarely saw Aldrich this season despite a depleted bench. Thibs repeatedly went smaller with even Bazz playing the 4.

That was my understanding but wanted to make absolute sure before I recommended going over the cap.

Is there also a list that shows the 2017-2018 salary obligations and amounts? I know that even if Lavine and Wiggins sign extensions that it won't affect next year's cap but it would be handy to know just how much money the team has to spend. What are the implications of going over the cap in the future? Luxury tax obviously but does it restrict the Wolves extending Towns next year if it would put them over the cap. For example if they extend Lavine and Wiggins and sign a near max contract does it jeopardize the ability to keep Towns. My understanding is no as long as they are willing to pay any luxury tax.

Changing the logo is rather meaningless. It looks fine but I thought the other logos also looked fine. the problem is winning though.

I just want to be clear about some player situations before making an offseason plan in the other thread. Am I correct that this is the season that Bazz enters RFA? If the Wolves want to retain him then they need to match his offer sheet? Am I correct that there is a team option for Jordan Hill this season? Another item to be discussed this summer will be an early extension for Lavine. I think you do it at reasonable prices (Dieng's for example) even if you trade him later. I see him as an asset and could see the Wolves completely losing him the following year in RFA. The same is true of Andrew Wiggins but I think everyone agrees that you offer the max extension to him and retain him at all costs. Pekovic - I do not care what happens to him. I guess there might be some benefit to this year's salary cap if he agreed to some sort of medical retirement but I don't think the Wolves will hit the salary cap even if they signed a max player. Is there any real benefit to doing anything? Are there any other existing player clarifications that affect any offseason plans?

The role of the rim protecting big man has been reduced so much in the last 5 years that many teams don't even play one. For example the Wolves signed Aldrich to do exactly what you suggested. And Thibs decided that it didn't work and even after Bjelica got hurt they were playing the likes of Payne or Bazz at the 4 instead of putting Aldrich in. Here is what I want the Wolves to do with KAT. Pair him with a stretch 4 type that is fairly quick and can shoot from the outside. He doesn't have to be great but then the opposing classic rim protecting big man (Jordan, Drummond, Howard, etc...) has to chase KAT around on the perimeter where he (De'andre Jordan) isn't effective at all.

Do you think he cares if he loses 100+ million at the beginning of his MLB career if he can get a possible 200-300M contract years earlier? The faster he gets the cost controlled years out of the way the better for his earning power.

I see it happening and worthwhile. He gets his controllable years (and below market value anyway) out of the way earlier and then he can hit on the BIG CONTRACT as a 28 year old. And there is also the possibility that he can get the same clause that IFA have used to reach FA quicker (like Cespedes and several others). That 100+M that he loses will be made up (AND THEN SOME) by gaining service time earlier.

There is a good chance I still have my BYTO shirt in a box at home. I wasn't real happy with the complete closure of BYTO but we were a shrinking forum that was becoming less inviting to any potential new posters that wandered by. Congrats to Nick and Brock that ignored all of the criticism and to all of the others they partnered with like Seth and John and countless others.

Congrats to the Knicks and Kings who won a game at the end of the season and the Wolves up from a 7th place tie in the lottery to a 6th place tie in the lottery. I don't really know what to think of this year. It feels like they took two steps back and then two steps forward and still have TOO many questions for a team on the verge. Positives KAT and Wiggins took over and look like elite and near elite offensive players Rubio was amazing in the 2nd half and has shown that he isn't a drag on the team Neutral Bjelica showed flashes of being a competent big man but got injured again Dieng is a nice player and a decent value on his contract but nothing special. I still don't think he is a great fit as a starter but he is far better than any other current option. Dunn/Jones look like competent players but Dunn didn't match expectations Neither KAT nor Wiggins are average defensive players. Is that totally on them or are they surrounded by other poor defenders and everyone looks bad as a result? Negatives Lavine's injury, his defense and he pushes Wiggins into guarding 3's instead of smaller 2's creating two defensive mismatches. The bench Aldrich just isn't a fit for this team. Not a bad player but he just doesn't fit.

This would be a ballsy move. Trading a potential near elite player (with development) for a similar but unproven #1 overall pick and other good assets. The one thing that makes sense in it is that Lavine is untradeable for a year until teams have seen how he has recovered but Wiggins value is at its highest (so far). This would allow you to solve the undersized wing issue by moving one of them for a pretty good return. the downside is that it seems like a step in the wrong direction and delays the big improvement of the Wolves by making them younger again. It also ignores the benefit that Wiggins could get defensively if he could play the 2 and guard smaller players more often.

I think it is pretty well established that the Wolves need a larger wing (a 3 and D type) and a 3rd big. Do you make a splash in FA going after someone like Ibaka or Otto Porter on a max (or close) contract? This would operate on the assumption that there would be limited cap space several years down the road but that is an issue several years away and I believe the Wolves can continue to resign their own players (like KAT and Wiggins) and just move into luxury tax territory. Lavine and/or Dieng would likely have to go at some point though. The draft has a couple of players that fit the Wolves but there are so many small guards at the top limiting the choices for the Wolves. It is possible that they land a 3/4 that can develop into a role player by his 2nd season with upside for more though.

In fairness it is easy to look smart when you are winning and your pitching staff is dominating. Let's see what he does when he is down a couple of runs for a few games. But I have always liked Molitor and think he is fine. The biggest issue has been a general lack of performance from the players.

Just blew through Around the World in 80 Days. Sort of interesting to read the accounts of almost fantasized places from 100+ years ago. I have never gotten into audio books but I would download some podcasts to listen to. 99% Invisible is a great one.

This version of Rubio is amazing. 16 ppg and 10 apg since the AS break on 43% shooting. Obviously we can't expect these numbers next season (or he is an elite PG) but they might indicate a real change and improvement going forward.

Making an argument that other countries are doing better than the current US system (a trainwreck) isn't the same as disproving a system with some price sensitivity built into it. I live in a country with very affordable single payer national health insurance. I routinely get blasted by pointing out some issues that exist while at the same time heaping praise on it. I would gladly trade deal with these issues compared to the current US system (neither affordable nor accessible but high quality if have good insurance) but I won't pretend that these issues don't exist nor will I think that a better system is impossible.

5/6 games are against playoff teams so they don't finish with a particularly easy schedule. This shouldn't be surprising. They play two small-ish wings that can't guard larger wings and they play two centers. And they have nearly no bench. Hopefully they can get one piece in the draft and one in FA that can bolster their top 8/9 rotation of players. It is likely that the drafted player won't immediately be a factor but possibly the following season.

Some parts of healthcare are certainly elastic. No, this doesn't mean that patients will be arguing with their doctor with regards to treatment but doctors can provide alternative treatments and medications that might be just as effective especially for minor issues (like the scar tissue in my ankle). If it is just covered then people are going to opt for the surgery/whatever no matter the costs. And in many cases the doctors themselves have no idea what the costs are of the exams, drugs and treatment. There are certainly extraneous exams done and medications given because the patient expects something or the doctor is protecting himself from malpractice. Or they recommend certain products/medications instead of cheaper alternatives. As long as insurance is paying and consumers/doctors aren't asking about alternatives medical care in the US will remain expensive. It doesn't matter what kind of system you come up.

This is the one area that the ACA failed and one reason that health care is so expensive. The ACA raised the minimum coverage and no longer allowed insurance companies to offer the catastrophic type insurance that you mention. I was off health insurance for about 2 years a decade ago and was able to purchase a plan that included some basic preventative checkups, the first $500 of expenses covered but nothing else covered until $5000 of expenses. This isn't great coverage but I had the piece of mind that my entire life savings (or complete bankruptcy) would be wiped out if I needed a major (or even a minor) operation. For example, I have heard of appendectomies costing 25,000-35,000. This happens to young and healthy people and you don't have time wait or shop around (if you could shop around). things that need to be addressed for health care costs that neither side really focus on: *transparent pricing so patients can shop around for different operations - almost impossible to find out costs at a certain clinic *Less regulatory paperwork - clinics have far more staff doing paperwork than they have doctors/nurses - Trump is actually going after this *Crack down somehow on trumped up malpractice suits *Reduce the hoops needed to get a generic drug (or all drugs) approved - I can understand something that is new needing to be tightly regulated but it is very expensive (and lengthy) to get generics approved and many generics don't have pricing competition due to this (see martin Skumreli) *more people that are price sensitive (cheaper insurance but with larger copays and less every day coverage) for medical care. This creates a price sensitive market instead of the current 80% that have decent insurance and don't give a ^%$#^$% how much the care they receive costs. They have good insurance and they want to get their money's worth out of it. The ACA and potentially a single payer system made this worse. Of note I live in Taiwan and we have a single payer system here. It is great that everyone has decent coverage and it is one of the better systems in the world from everything that I have read but there are some drawbacks. I wouldn't trade it for the US system though. Even if I didn't have insurance I could still see a doctor without risking 100's of dollars just for a consultation.

Since Trump won the election the GOP has basically given democrats the middle finger in all proposed legislation and executive orders. Democrats shouldn't be gloating about the GOP's failure in this and I don't really like the blatant obstructionism strategy that the democrats are employing (copied from the GOP during Obama who copied it from democrats and so on) but I find it very difficult to place any blame on the democrats for the failure of AHCA. It was drawn up quickly behind closed doors and kept a complete secret until they wanted to hold a vote. The blame lies squarely at the top. Trump repeatedly campaigned on having a plan that included everyone for cheaper costs. These were blatant lies then and that is obvious now. I also think the OP's argument is conveniently deflecting the attention/blame from the GOP. They have made it clear that they have no interest in any input from the democrats. They intend to ram everything that they can through with the House/Senate/POTUS advantage that they hold. The AHCA was too much for even the moderates (and the far right) in the GOP to handle though. It will be interesting to see how tax reform goes. This actually has potential (getting rid of the many ridiculous deductions and loopholes) to be a positive. Yes, there will be tax cuts and I disagree with that but there is a slight chance that some good could come from this. Unfortunately, at the end of the day I think too many politicians (both sides) are invested too deeply in special interests that they block the good and the tax reform bill becomes a travesty also. The democrats should up their game though and stop simply obstructing the process. Whether they like it or not Gorsuch will be confirmed. If not him then someone similar. Whether they like it or not the ACA will be repealed and replaced. The GOP will find a common ground to make it happen at some point. They need to selectively pick their battles and focus their attention.

Now we are starting to see where the loss of Lavine (and later Bjelica) hurts this team. This team has no depth at all. They don't necessarily need Lavine to be starting but they must avoid getting 40+ min/game from Rush/Bazz/Casspi. It will be interesting to see if they can add a solid wing in FA this summer. This player is sorely needed. On a slightly related note - Is this the year that Shabazz becomes a RFA? Do you even consider matching a multi-year off if the Wolves don't already have a wing locked up. Bazz isn't that great but things can get worse for the 2nd team.

It seems that whenever Rubio has a nagging injury he really struggles. Early this season, early last season, the season before. His shooting has been just awful at these times. Like the worst in the league by a huge margin. But 2013, late last season and now he has merely been bad. Let's call it 40%. I still think PG is the #3 need for the Wolves. The key is that bad/injured Rubio has to stop happening. Wolves needs 1) A 20-25 min/gm larger defensive wing allowing the Wolves to split Wiggins and Lavine's minutes and to jettison Bazz during RFA. PJ Tucker? 2) A 20-25 min/gm smaller 4 allowing the Wolves to split Dieng and Towns's minutes. Bjelica continues to show promise but he got injured again. 3) A better starting PG. Tough to find and Dunn likely isn't it. He possesses the same flaws as Rubio.

Light reading for me is just an ordinary novel. Nothing to be learned but something of interest. My normal reading is travel books with a lot of historical research mixed in. Annapurna - Herzog, One Man's Wilderness - Keith/Proenneke - Last Seen in Lhasa - Scobie, Finding George Orwell in a Burmese Teashop - Larkin Heavy reading is a book that has been on my shelf for 4 years. The Ethnic Groups, Languages, and Migration Patterns of the Formosan (Taiwan) Natives - still haven't read this one