Author Topic: No Love for Love  (Read 7939 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: No Love for Love
« Reply #15 on: January 28, 2009, 07:32:57 PM »

Offline winsomme

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6058
  • Tommy Points: 255
Love should be a candidate for RoY but he isn't.

Not surprising he didn't get selected for the rookie game at All Star weekend. He hasn't been getting credit for his good play all season.



Trading Mayo for Love was a mammoth sized error by McHale.

No, it was a mammoth sized error by Wallace.  Love is a winner.  Mayo is a selfish gunner who will put up individual numbers but never win anything until he learns about sharing the ball.

And that's why MN is winning and Memphis is losing, losing, losing.  And don't tell me that MN has more talent.  It doesn't.  Sure, the Wolves have Jefferson, but the Grizz have Rudy Gay, plus THREE point guards who are better than Telfair.


I respectfully disagree with all the points you made. Regardless of position, Mayo is a better player than Love will ever be.

  A 20 year old rookie that's a top 5 rebounder in the league is nothing to sneeze at, especially considering that he spends most of his time playing with another strong rebounder (Jefferson). People are writing him off awfully early.


yeah, that whole team is putting it together. I'm actually kinda excited to see them on Sun...

early on it looked like the Love swap might have been a mistake, but with Foye coming on and Love now getting it going, I think they made the right move (still very early)...

but they also got Mike Miller in that deal and while he is having a down year, he's still a good player and a valuable chip...

i actually like the direction MN is heading...

they have something like 3 or 4 1st round picks this year...including ours...

Re: No Love for Love
« Reply #16 on: January 28, 2009, 07:40:49 PM »

Offline Big Ticket

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2356
  • Tommy Points: 561
  • The good ole days.
Wow... I'm actually pretty surprised by this.  I wasn't aware he was left off.

Love was absolutely terrible for a decent stretch a month ago (or longer)... specifically with shooting/scoring.

But he has been there best offensive rebounder in the entire league this year, as a rookie.  And not a bad defensive rebounder.  And he's been a key player in the Wolves 2009 resurgence.

Kudos to a solid rookie class that made this even a discussion, but he should've been there anyways.


"It ain't about me.  It's about us."  - KG, interview with John Thompson, 2005 All Star Game.

Re: No Love for Love
« Reply #17 on: January 28, 2009, 07:51:24 PM »

Offline moiso

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7677
  • Tommy Points: 447
The trade shouldn't be referred to as Love for Mayo because Miller was big part of it.

Re: No Love for Love
« Reply #18 on: January 28, 2009, 07:53:30 PM »

Offline moiso

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7677
  • Tommy Points: 447
And potential aside, I kind of agree that so far Mayo has shown selfish gunner potential in the mold of AI and Marbury etc...guys that put up big numbers on bad teams.  But obviously this could change.


Re: No Love for Love
« Reply #20 on: January 31, 2009, 05:16:28 PM »

Offline cornbreadsmart

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1706
  • Tommy Points: 106
i don't know if anyone else saw it byut cherl miller was hammering mchale bad because kevin made a comment saying love not being picked was ridiculous or somethin'. cheryl was going nuts saying how it was their fault they did'nt play him enough. she was very animated making this point yelling "come on, kevin mchale!"
 being amchale fan was hoping this was'nt valid but rick kamla(huge wolves fan) said she was echoing his thought snad that the twolves have had this twisted organizational outlook about young players having to really work hard to get court time,bringing guys along slowly etc. he said they pulled the same stuff even with garnett and that randy foye would hgave been doing this a couple years ago if he had gotten the time like he should have. i don't see enough of the wolves to know but it was interesting. kevin,kevin,kevin.. sigh.

Re: No Love for Love
« Reply #21 on: January 31, 2009, 06:30:58 PM »

Offline drza44

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 749
  • Tommy Points: 187
A blog opining that both Wolves (Big Al and Love) got snubbed...

http://www.rotosynthesis.com/default.asp?Display=594

Re: No Love for Love
« Reply #22 on: February 01, 2009, 05:01:30 PM »

Offline Fafnir

  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30863
  • Tommy Points: 1330
A blog opining that both Wolves (Big Al and Love) got snubbed...

http://www.rotosynthesis.com/default.asp?Display=594
They did get snubbed. Love is a beastly rebounder as the Celtics discovered today.

Re: No Love for Love
« Reply #23 on: February 01, 2009, 05:24:19 PM »

Offline SShorefan 3.0

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 633
  • Tommy Points: 202
Doc raved about Love during his press conference today. 

I really like Doc and his approach.
I love my kids - Call me a sap, but it's true.

Re: No Love for Love
« Reply #24 on: February 02, 2009, 09:45:26 AM »

Offline TatteredOnMySleeve

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1942
  • Tommy Points: 107
Love for rookie of the year? I mean cmon..yes he should make the rookie/soph game, but he has absolutly NO buissness winning rookie of the year...kinda weird he didnt make the game, he was one one of the bigger names coming out of college
When you got it going, you got it going. I just keep my focus down the stretch. That's when I want the ball. I'm just not afraid to fail."-PaulPierce

Re: No Love for Love
« Reply #25 on: February 02, 2009, 09:52:15 AM »

Offline Redz

  • Punner
  • Global Moderator
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31739
  • Tommy Points: 3845
  • Yup
Love for rookie of the year? I mean cmon..yes he should make the rookie/soph game, but he has absolutly NO buissness winning rookie of the year...kinda weird he didnt make the game, he was one one of the bigger names coming out of college

And he's leading all rookies in rebounding
Yup