Kevin Garnett

Report: Garnett, Kobe, Pierce shut down 50/50 talks before deadline on their own


you know, in a way, I’m kind of glad for stuff like this. I mean, the lockout had become downright depressing. Both sides were “miles apart” but “ready to make a deal.” We’ve lost games, good games, which may or may not be rescheduled. Both sides seem more interested in rhetoric than progress, and it’s become about ego as much as it is about money, both of which are pretty disgusting in the times we live in.

But this? This is pretty funny. Not “JaVale McGee said the players were folding to a half-dozen reporters with tape recorders in their hands right in front of his face and then denied it on Twitter before Derek Fisher smacked him down” funny, but it’s pretty funny. And once again it shows that the players, despite being in most people’s minds on the side of right in the dispute, are woefully out of their league.

The first news came out of a Bill Simmons column. Those are typically filled with little nuggets of insider information, particularly about the NBA, nestled in with the reality television and mid-90’s prison break drama movie references, but it’s hard to catch them, so they’re not treated as news, since Simmons isn’t a news reporter or breaker. But it was enough to make people stop and go, “Wait, what?”

From Grantland:

Should someone who’s earned over $300 million (including endorsements) and has deferred paychecks coming really be telling guys who have made 1/100th as much as him to fight the fight and stand strong and not care about getting paid? And what are Garnett’s credentials, exactly? During one of the single biggest meetings (last week, on Tuesday), Hunter had Kobe Bryant, Paul Pierce and Garnett (combined years spent in college: three) negotiate directly with Stern in some sort of misguided “Look how resolved we are, you’re not gonna intimidate us!” ploy that backfired so badly that one of their teams’ owners was summoned into the meeting specifically to calm his player down and undo some of the damage. (I’ll let you guess the player. It’s not hard.) And this helped the situation … how? And we thought this was going to work … why?

via Bill Simmons Avoids a Few Subjects Before Making His Week 6 NFL Picks – Grantland.

Because we’re prideful, Bill. And often times, very dumb with our decision making.

That was going to slip through the cracks, though. A vague reference without naming names in Simmons’ column wasn’t going to penetrate. But this will. From TrueHoop:

As Stern has recounted a dozen times since, not long after what was supposed to have been the hallway conversation that saved the season, something odd and wholly unexpected happened. There was a knock on the door where Stern was selling his owners on the idea. The players wanted to talk.

When they convened, instead of the union’s head, Hunter, or their negotiating committee of Maurice Evans, Matt Bonner, Roger Mason, Theo Ratliff, Etan Thomas and Chris Paul, representing the players were Fisher, Kessler, and three superstars who had been to very few of the meetings at all: Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce and Kobe Bryant.

A bad sign: Pierce was still wearing his backpack.

The players had two pieces of news that shocked the league: 50/50 was not good enough. And there was nothing further to discuss.

via TrueHoop Blog – ESPN.

Abbott goes on to note that those players had not been to every meeting the players were invited to, much less the sessions the two sides had held privately. And that the owners were bewildered by what in the name of Stern just happened.

In essence, you have three veteran players intervening on behalf of the union, shutting down talks when a potential deal was within reach.

Now, some things to remember:

  • 50/50 is not a real compromise. It’s a win for the owners. Saying they started at 46 and compromised at 50 is like if I were to go to a BMW salesman and offer $500 for a brand new car, him giving the list price, and then me claiming that $5,000 was a compromise. It’s not. It’s a win. But the union recognized that this deal would keep most if not all of the essential things they wanted and would let them live to fight another day.
  • Talks didn’t end at this point. There was more to it. A deal could have been salvaged. Who knows, if the owners had said, “Fine, how about 51 percent?” the players might have shaken their hands and walked out the door. But we’ll never know, because it was partially on the owners to respond, and they responded by saying “Well, I guess we’re done here. Guess we’ll go extort the money we want from you via economic siege.”
  • But you know what’s hard for an owner to do? Take you seriously as a bargaining entity when the same four people you’ve been meeting with from two years vanish into a hotel while three players without a law degree between them come in to tell you what’s what. And one of them is Kevin Garnett, who has the emotional temperance of a wolverine jacked up on Red Bull and mescaline. None of the players should have gone in without Hunter or Fisher. None of them would have helped, they would have only hurt. There’s leadership, and there’s a misunderstanding of the negotiation process. And the players plunged into a big pool of the latter.  But if you’re going to go that route, you want the most stable, well-reasoned, cold-blooded guys you can find. Pierce? Sure. Bryant? Absolutely. And Garnett is known for being very personable off the court. But from these reports, it sure seems like he went dog-off-the-chain like it was Game 7 of the Finals. His intentions were noble. His approach was regrettable.
This, combined with the JaVale McGee saga from Friday, paints the picture that the players are out of their depth. Some of the players know what’s going on. Their union is doing the best it can to keep it together. They’re blasting Stern in public while trying to reach a deal to get the players paychecks. Hunter reportedly gave his blessing to the confrontation as a tactic to try and blow the owners back off their hard line, something he’s struggled with. But as it stand, it does not come off as an impressive show of strength. It seems like a Jr. High protest.
The owners waged this lockout, have drug their heels to get the deal they want, have exerted every influence they have to “crush the union” as reports suggested they wanted months ago. But the players? They’re running headlong into the owners’ swing.


Report: Minnesota still talking Tyus Jones trade, Sixers may have interest

TARRYTOWN, NY - AUGUST 08:  Tyus Jones #1 of the Minnesota Timberwolves poses for a portrait during the 2015 NBA rookie photo shoot on August 8, 2015 at the Madison Square Garden Training Facility in Tarrytown, New York. NOTE TO USER: User expressly acknowledges and agrees that, by downloading and or using this photograph, User is consenting to the terms and conditions of the Getty Images License Agreement.   (Photo by Nick Laham/Getty Images)

Tyus Jones has a lot to like — he’s a point guard who makes good decisions, his shot is developing (40 percent from three at Summer League), and he’s got skills. Minnesota won the Summer League championship because of Jones’ leadership — just drafted and highly touted Kris Dunn was out for the title game, that’s where Jones shined.

But Dunn is the future at the point in Minnesota, and Ricky Rubio is still there. So Minnesota is seeing what might be out there for Jones, reports Adrian Wojnarowski of The Vertical at Yahoo Sports.

Minnesota has had talks with Philadelphia, New Orleans, and others about Jones for a while.

Jones is likely a steady backup point guard at the NBA level — he’s a smart passer, knows how to run a team, and as his shot develops he becomes more dangerous. His downside is defense, but as a reserve that’s less of an issue.

For a team like the Sixers — without Jerryd Bayless to start the season — or while New Orleans waits for Jrue Holiday‘s return, Jones makes some sense. The only question is the price going back to Minnesota.

Report: Bucks preparing for Greg Monroe to opt in next summer

Milwaukee Bucks center Greg Monroe, center, drives to the basket against New Orleans Pelicans center Alexis Ajinca, left, and guard Tyreke Evans, right, during the first half of an NBA basketball game Saturday, Jan. 23, 2016, in New Orleans. (AP Photo/Jonathan Bachman)
AP Photo/Jonathan Bachman
Leave a comment

The Bucks got a rude awakening about Greg Monroe‘s value when they tried to sell low on him this offseason – and still got no takers.

Now, Milwaukee seems to have gotten the picture. Monroe – whose agent claimed the center could name his contract terms from multiple teams last year – might opt into the final year of his deal, which would pay $17,884,176.

Zach Lowe of ESPN:

Milwaukee is already preparing for the possibility Monroe opts into his deal for 2017-18, league sources say.

The Bucks indicated this thinking when they extended Giannis Antetokounmpo‘s contract, putting a large 2017-18 salary rather than a relatively low cap hold on the books to begin next offseason. If Monroe opts in, the difference in Antetokounmpo’s initial cap number is far less likely to matter. (Though Antetokounmpo’s extension wasn’t a complete giveaway into Milwaukee’s Monroe expectation, because the Bucks saved over the life of the extension.)

Don’t put it past Monroe to opt out if he believes he can find a better situation. After all, he signed the small qualifying offer to leave a tough basketball fit with Andre Drummond in Detroit. Monroe also took the risk of a shorter detail in Milwaukee. He’s secure enough in himself to at least consider moving on if he’s unhappy.

It’s also possible he finds a satisfying role with the Bucks. They’ll bring him off the bench, which could hide his defensive shortcomings and give him a chance to mash backup bigs. Heck, he could even play well enough to justify opting out.

There’s still a full season before Monroe must decide on his option, and a lot can change by then. But it seems Milwaukee now has a realistic expectation.

Report: NBA increases 2017-18 salary-cap projection to $103 million

AP Money Found

The NBA is reportedly closing in on a new Collective Bargaining Agreement, and the new deal will still call for owners and players to split Basketball Related Income about 50-50.

So, July’s projection of a $102 million salary cap in 2017-18 still carries weight – except it’s been updated.

Brian Windhorst of ESPN:

Why the change?

Perhaps, the shortfall adjustment – which increases the cap when teams don’t spend enough the previous year – is being revised in the new CBA.

More likely, the league anticipates more revenue. These projections tend to start conservative then rise as July nears.

Rip Hamilton says 2004 Pistons would beat 2016 Warriors

CLEVELAND - FEBRUARY 22:  Richard Hamilton #32 of the Detroit Pistons looks up during the game against the Cleveland Cavaliers on February 22, 2009 at the Quicken Loans Arena in Cleveland, Ohio.  The Cavaliers won 99-78.  NOTE TO USER: User expressly acknowledges and agrees that, by downloading and or using this photograph, User is consenting to the terms and conditions of the Getty Images License Agreement.  (Photo by Gregory Shamus/Getty Images)
Getty Images

Add Rip Hamilton to team #getoffmylawn.

The long list of veteran players who somehow feel their legacy is threatened by this era’s Golden State Warriors and their freestyling system has now added one of the key players from the 2004 Pistons title team to their ranks. CBS’ NBA Crossover asked the masked man Rip Hamilton about it, and he thought the vaunted Pistons defense was well designed for dealing with the Warriors.

“It would be no comparison.” Hamilton said on CBS Sports’ NBA Crossover. “We can guard every position. Every guy from our point guard to our five, can guard any position. We were big. We were long.”

Hamilton is right that it would be an interesting defensive matchup. The book on the Warriors — especially when facing the smaller “death lineup” — is to switch everything, and those Pistons would have been well suited to that task. Of course, there are two ends of the court and the Warriors are also a good defensive team going against a Pistons team that had limited offensive options (people underestimate how great Chauncey Billups was playing during that 2004 playoff run, he was elite, but that was not a deep offensive team). The real issue would have been pace — the Warriors want to play fast, the Pistons wanted to grind it out, who won that battle would be huge?

But that last graph talking strategy doesn’t address the biggest question: Whose rules are the games played under? 2016 or 2004?

Those 2004 Pistons were the height of the grabbing/hand-checking on the perimeter era that would be an automatic foul today. (There was a lot more hand checking uncalled in the NBA last season, but not the level of grabbing and holding that was allowed in 2004 and before back into the Jordan era.)

Tayshaun Prince said it well.

“It depends on what the rules are.” Prince said. “Because back when we played, we could play hands-on, physical. As you can see from the Pacers rivalries and all of the rivalries we had back in the day, we were scoring in the high 70s, low 80s. We were physical. So now if you play this style of play, where they’re running and gunning and touch fouls and things like that, all of sudden we would start getting in foul trouble because back when we played, we were very, very aggressive on defense.”

He gets it.

The Warriors are built for this era of basketball, one where the rules encourage space so players to have freedom and can be more creative with their playmaking. The Pistons were built for the 2004 physical games of that era. (And most of you who remember that era fondly do so through rose-colored glasses, there’s a reason ratings were down for those 84-78 slugfests.) It’s possible to have great teams built differently for different eras and say that’s okay.

But it’s the nature of sports fandom to compare things that can’t actually be compared apples to apples. So have at it in the comments (and I expect one person to tell us how Jordan was better than all of them, because somehow people always feel the need to defend his legacy in these debates).