Canis Hoopus: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Around SBN: Interview With UMD Athletic Director, Dr. Debbie Yow

Questions and stories begin to take shape

First of all, let's begin with the obvious: Even though it is early in the season, this team is much, much, much more exciting to watch than what was put out on the floor last season.  The excitement works on many levels.  First, the new up-tempo style means more scoring opportunities that exist outside of the walk-the-ball-up-and-enter-it-into-the-post and NBA-standard pick-and-roll game that we have become so used to seeing.  For better or worse, guys like Corey Brewer, Ramon Sessions, and Jonny Flynn are going to get the ball in situations where they are headed towards the rim at full speed.  As we have already seen with Brewer on numerous occasions, this sort of setting can make even the misses more entertaining than last year's makes. 

Star-divide

Second, the Wolves now have the personnel to trot out reasonable-sized lineups.  While they are not world-beaters by any stretch of the imagination, having two 7-footers on the squad can do wonders on both sides of the ball.  Tonight the Wolves started the White Hole, Oleksiy Pecherov, at the 4 and moved Ryan Gomes over to his more natural position, the 3.  Gomes spent the offseason working on his shot and his dribble drive game and his move away from the paint (to say nothing of the Suns' up-tempo style of play) did wonders for his game, as he ended the contest with 23 points on 10-13 shooting in situations that were more tailored for his style of play. 

Third, the Wolves can run out an athletic lineup.  I cannot tell you how many times last year the team was simply out-athleticized by the other squad.  This year, they can run out Flynn or Sessions at the point, Brewer at the 2, Sasha Pavlovic at the 3, and Hollins in the frontcourt and actually hold their own--if not do some out-athleticizing of their own--in the athleticism department.  It is amazing what a bit of size, length, and athleticism can do for a roster.  Granted, it's not all at the starting spots, and they're still a bit iffy at the 4, but it's a start.  If they could bring in the dynamic wing we've been clamoring for for about 3 years, they'd really be onto something.  Speaking of our campaign to bring in an athletic 3, we've moved from hoping for Josh Smith to Trevor Ariza to Rudy Gay.  Anyone else out there you think we should be keeping an eye on?

Up-tempo, real size, and athleticism: three things that will make for more entertaining viewing no matter how bad the record is.  Here's hoping they can maintain the effort we've seen for three games throughout the long season. 

Getting around to the title of this post, in just three short games we have seen the birth of two of the biggest questions facing the franchise this season.  1: How do you give your best guard Kevin Ollie's minutes? I understand that Jonny Flynn was taken with the 6th pick and that he is viewed as a tremendous asset, but Ramon Sessions is the best guard on this team by a long shot.  How long can Kurt Rambis continue to give Flynn the 30+ mpg while Sessions remains in sub-20 territory?  Last night we saw our first role reversal.  It was aided along by 2 quick fouls from Flynn, but it was a role reversal nonetheless.  If these two guards cannot co-exist, how long will Flynn continue to get the minutes that Sessions deserves and has thus far earned?

Question/story line #2 is the progress of Al Jefferson.  While no one on the team has really grasped the new offense on a level that you can be really excited about (Brewer shows flashes), Jefferson is the one player who you look at and wonder if he's a fit at all.  Forget about the injury.  Big Al has a long injury-free history of showing the world that he is not a very capable low post passer, that the offense has a tendency to grind to a halt when he gets his big mitts on the ball, and that he cannot create a shot on his own.  All three of these things are already known knowns.  It's pretty obvious that Big Al is not running at 100% right now, but it is equally obvious that the Wolves have two different styles of play and pace when Al is on and off the court.  How much of this duality is the result of his injury? How long do you stick with a new system when your best player hasn't even begun to show signs of being able to thrive in it?  Right now, I think Big Al should be viewed through the injury glasses.  He's still the best active player on this team and I am in no way suggesting that the team give up on him.  What I am suggesting is that it's pretty glaring that his style of play, and his history of play, doesn't exactly look like it's a solid fit for the direction the team is trying to go.  The up-tempo, motion-based offense the Wolves are attempting to install depends on having bigs that can pass and run action off the weak side post.  It depends on having a big who can take the hand-off or pass at the key, turn, survey the action and make the appropriate pass or shot.  It's not something where a guard walks the ball up and dumps it into the low block or runs a low pick and roll.  It's not something that will go well when 4 guys are moving and cutting while the big fella has the ball and backs his guy down for a not-so-quick jump hook.  Right now we're grading Big Al on an injury curve but there will come a time where he has to show some greater flexibility or else be viewed as something of a stumbling block rather than a building one. 

As for the game itself, the Wolves played well in the loss.  Let's take a quick look at the Four Factors:

Pace Eff eFG FT/FG OREB% TOr
Minnesota 98.0 114.3 49.0% 17.5 34.8 10.2
Phoenix 122.4 58.5% 29.3 28.6 16.3

 

Those are some pretty lopsided numbers.  The Wolves did well in the turnover and offensive rebounding department, but they were taken apart at the line (to the tune of a -7 FTA) and with eFG (highlighted by the Suns going 14-26 from 3 compared to the Wolves' 5-11).  It's pretty hard to win the shooting battle when your opponent shoots 54% from 3 with that many attempts.  Even with +6 in turnovers and +4 in OReb, that's a lot to make up for, especially when you're not getting to the line. 

All of that being said, the Wolves played a fairly efficient offensive game.  If they can hit roughly 47% of their two point shots on any given night with a nice pace and a low number of turnovers, I think you'd take that number.  The problem the Wolves are going to continue to have in the shooting department are a) Corey Brewer and a hurt Al Jefferson take a lot of shots (i.e. guys who aren't expected to make a ton of shots are getting a lot of attempts) and b) when Jonny Flynn isn't getting to the line, this team has a massive shortage of guys who can get their own.  This is especially problematic when no one seems to be able to get more than 4 assists/game.  The Wolves actually spread the ball around fairly well last night, ending with a season-high 24 assists, but they are still way behind what you would like to see from a motion-based offense (they are currently 29th in the league with only 16 apg...and yes, I know there have been only 3 games; it's still poor enough for a -6/game mark...which isn't very good anyway you look at it and no matter how small the sample size). 

Going forward, here are some things I think we need to pay attention to:

  1. Flynn's minutes vs. Sessions' minutes.  Who gets the starting share if they are unable to play together? Which lineups and situations are more favorable for each guard?  What are the +/- numbers for their individual lineups?  What are their on/off numbers?
  2. Once Big Al gets back up above 90%, what is the team's OE/DE ratio when he is on the court compared to when he is off?  How well does he move the ball out of the post?  How many times does he miss a cutting Brewer or a wide-open Ellington?  Last night he brought the Wolves' offense to a grinding halt on numerous occasions while missing wide open teammates who were doing exactly what they should have been doing.  That's not a good thing for a team leader to be doing, no matter how much he's getting paid.  Again, we're grading him on an injury curve right now, but sooner or later that curve goes away.
  3. Team assists.  I don't think we're going to see anyone on this squad average 6-8 apg, but we could see several games with a bunch of guys getting 3-5 a night.  Against the Suns, the Wolves had 4 players with 4 assists.  That's acceptable as long as they're getting open looks and the OE is at a respectable level.  If not....well, it could get ugly. 

That about does it for the wrap up.  What caught your eye in the game? 

Until later.

0 recs  |  Comment 138 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

More from Canis Hoopus

A real game wrap

Jan 2010 by Stop-n-Pop - 17 comments

Korean game wrap #2

Jan 2010 by Stop-n-Pop - 71 comments

Warts and all

Jan 2010 by Stop-n-Pop - 125 comments

Comments

Display:

"Even the misses are more entertaining"

Perfect line for the marketing department. I love it.

by uncle rico on Nov 2, 2009 1:03 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Well....

For starters, we scored 112 points. That’s a lot for any NBA team to score, much less us. So the offense is there, it just needs to be executed.

I really liked the play of both Brewer and Ellington. Corey had that ugly free throw airball, but his jumper was on, he was hitting his layups, and his defense was great as always. Ellington was strong defensively too, which is something of a surprise from him. He’s just got a very mature game.

Jerry Zgoda feels that Kahn won’t pick up Brewer’s option so we can “maximize our options” this summer. I disagree. I think it’s more likely he picks up Corey’s option and moves Gomes or has an expiring thrown into a future trade to make up the difference. If we don’t, I’m positive now that there will be teams willing to pay him what that option is worth to sign him away from us. Maybe $3mil is a big deal to us when we’re in the free agent "hunt", but that’s pocket change to a team like the Spurs, Magic or Celtics who are looking for nothing but complimentary pieces with the MLE.

I’m a little worried about Al, for the reasons stated. Things like missing cutters and open shooters have nothing to do with his injury. In the opening quarter he was keeping up fine, so I don’t think he’ll have any trouble running with the team. But as mentioned, we slowed to a standstill when he got the ball. He’s still in McHale mode, waiting for clearouts and spending 8-10 seconds backing his man in. I don’t think it’s a problem that he gets the ball and pounds it…he’s our best scoring threat by far….but as Jim and this blog have mentioned, he needs to get a lot better at passing when it’s appropriate to pass.

And of course, still a little worried about the lack of playmaking from the guards. I realize that the point guard is a different role in the triangle, but given that we don’t have the facilitating wing player to really run it the way it’s supposed to be, I would think it wouldn’t be too much to ask for one of our point guards to put up at least 6 assists. Especially against a team that can barely play any defense.

But 4 players did get us 4 assists tonight, including Jefferson. So at least the ball is moving. Rambis was especially pleased with Sessions in the post game interviews, saying he was “exceptional” at running the triangle.

Really, when you equalize all the positives and negatives, it’s pretty easy to see why we lost though. The Suns hit 14 three. We hit 5.

Pecherov obviously did not help against Frye. Half of those threes he made were completely uncontested. I like the idea of getting a 7 footer out there and keeping Gomes at the 3, but I think we’d be better off starting Hollins.

by Oceanary on Nov 2, 2009 3:08 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

I will say this though. ...

If Al and Love were both healthy, I think we would have won this game, and fairly easily at that. If Al shot 13-23 instead of 9-23, we go to overtime. The Al from a year ago would have decimated the Suns inside (which would have made all the talk about him stalling the offense sound a little hollow…)

by Oceanary on Nov 2, 2009 3:12 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

completely agree...

….about brewer vis-a-vis gomes. i think gomes has priced himself out of the future plans of this squad. $4.2 mil is too much for what he brings to the table.

Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 2, 2009 7:01 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

For all of his flaws...

I think Brewer has a lot of value as both a player and (if his option is picked up) a contract. As much as the people on this board focus on his (not neglible) offensive problems and frequent (although less frequent!) lack of control, he has a lot to offer to a team. Particularly to a team that would not require so much of him.

If we’ve actually got such a great coaching staff and the goal is to be a leader in player development, I just don’t get why we would give up on him/give him the “no confidence” vote and not extend. How much of a difference would it really make, financially-speaking?

I understand the team can still sign him, even if they decline his option, but I think he’ll have other, more attractive choices.

Plus, it is sort of ick (just gut feeling-wise), if Kahn declines a reasonable option on such a likable, hard-working kid…particularly when he gutted the team of so many players (not saying I didn’tm agree with his decisions) this summer.

by PDGirl on Nov 2, 2009 7:51 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

solid point..

…about the player development. if they want to show the league it can happen, brewer is their guy.

Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 2, 2009 8:11 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Exactly

Brewer, in my book, is clearly trending up. How do I know? He’s showing up on the court. Is he a finished product? By no means, but is he beginning to show some of the qualities that made him a top ten draft pick? Absolutely.

For all the talk about how poor a player Brewer is, the guy is producing as positive player for us (a .1 win share so far this year). How many young guys need a few years to learn how to play the game and against NBA defenses before their OE goes up? I’ll take Brewer taking his shots and averaging 13.3 points per 36 minutes instead of seeing Pavlovic or Wilkens take those shots. If Brewer’s still taking those shots that tells me that his confidence is improving and that he learning how to score at the pro level. Some wings need time (Ariza) to learn, and once they do they are very good.

Lastly, who else is out there who’s a better investment (talking apples to apples here)? Where’s another 6’6" + wing with crazy athleticism, long arms, good instincts, and a similar ceiling that costs $3.5 million or less, and that we have a better than 25% chance in hell of getting?

I think Brewer is a better prospect than Hollins, and nobody’s complaining about Hollins’ contract.

"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."

by biggity2bit on Nov 2, 2009 1:12 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

This is not purely a yes or no on Brewer

It is also, as all decisions are, a decision about whether to forego other options with the same money. It’s when you start comparing Corey’s potential contract next year with other possibilities using that same money that you recognize what a bad decision that would be….

Like it or not, the option year at rookie salary grade is significantly more than Corey’s production justifies. It’s way more than market value on a player like him. That extra money in space could easily mean the difference between a huge FA year and a mediocre one.

I agree, it’s nice to consider player development. That doesn’t mean you persist in investments that are questionable at their price.

by feral on Nov 2, 2009 1:29 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

They have to play Flynn more than Sessions

He is clearly the guy they are putting their money on to keep fans interested and buying tickets this season. Every time Kahn talks about the Wolves, he steers the conversation back to Jonny. This team gave away free tickets to the season opener… you shouldn’t have to do that, especially for a season opener.

It was kind of a gamble telling fans this would take a while. How do you get fans in the seats when at the same time you tell them we’re going to lose a ton?

I really think not getting Rubio here this year was a major blow for a rebuilding project such as ours. They have to give Jonny as many minutes as they can. He has the charisma and swagger to be a star. Sessions, though better right now, does not. I think that’s how you have to look at it from a business standpoint.

And in the end, if you believe Flynn will be better in the long run anyway, he needs to be out there IMHO.

by tddubb on Nov 2, 2009 5:14 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Agreed.

Sessions is the consensus “best guard on the team” on this blog, and that’s probably true. But Flynn ALREADY has the ability to take over a game 1-on-1. 3 games into his pro career, why do we expect him to be great at “organizing the offense?”

by LoveTo on Nov 2, 2009 11:11 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, I’m surprised he hasn’t been lauded more for his ability to score. It’s a HUGE positive, at least in my eyes, that our 6’ rookie has shown that he can both finish at the rim and draw fouls at an NBA level through 3 games. I was expecting a much rockier start.

When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

by Xand1 on Nov 2, 2009 11:23 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Same.

I don’t know that we’ve had anyone with Flynn’s skill set in a Wolves uniform, ever. I’m extremely pumped up about Jonny, even if he isn’t quite as polished as Sessions.

The thing is, I feel confident that he will eventually learn how to set the offense up and run it as efficiently as Sessions. Do we think he’s a selfish player by nature? I don’t. He’s not necessarily being a “ball-hog,” it’s just that creating offense has always been his strength, and it’s what he does best.

by LoveTo on Nov 2, 2009 12:46 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

He seemed more than capable of setting up a team and dishing nice assists during SL. I’m guessing this is all a result of him learning a new, more complicated system. He seems like a smart guy, and player, so I’m not too worried. The scoring was what I was more concerned about, so I’m very happy about what he’s shown so far.

When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

by Xand1 on Nov 2, 2009 12:54 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

What about Marbury?

"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."

by biggity2bit on Nov 2, 2009 1:14 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

True. Repressed memories, I guess.

by LoveTo on Nov 2, 2009 2:34 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Its early to judge

but I think Jonny will end up being and better utilized as a great back up PG you go to off the bench for 20-25 minutes/night. The first 3 games show me that what someone like Rubio could bring would be valuable to team and Jonny off the bench ala Joe Dumars and Vinnie “the Microwave” Johnson for instant energy and offense could work well.

I still can’t believe that Rambis won’t show Sessions and Flynn on the floor at the same time. That’s another or similar story line — 1 of our top 4 players is getting less than 24 minutes/game and is against the wishes of GM explicitly stated vision of playing them together for short stints. I wonder what that Rambis/Kahn conversations have been like — I’d like someone like Jerry Zgoda ask for Kahn to comment on not experimenting with Flynn and Sessions playing together for a few games.

by PoohRichardson on Nov 2, 2009 1:16 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Steals make for exciting basketball.

Watching the Wolves intercept a pass, go the other way on the break and absolutely botch a chance at a high percentage shot is a lot of fun.

Obviously it’s a sample size of three games, but we are averaging 4 more steals per game. I’d love to see them keep it up.

You were a daydreamer, a sass-mouth, and, not infrequently, a bit of a gigglepuss. Somehow I doubt twenty years of amphetamines and failure have done anything to improve that.

by Kevin Loves McHale's Navy on Nov 2, 2009 6:25 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Al Jefferson

I definitely agree with the pace issues but I think they wont be as much of an issue when Love comes back because he is such a good outlet passer. This allows Flynn, Sessions, Brewer to sprint up the court and try and get a quick bucket. If the transition defense holds, we then fire it into Al in the low post. If we’re really lucky, we might even see Al streaming down the court when he fully recovers!

by easeus on Nov 2, 2009 7:32 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

No comments about the defensive

While talking so much about the offense, and what a little better shooting could have done for us, everyone has neglected the defense. Which, unfortunately, ties into the Big Al too.

Why did the Suns shoot so well from 3? Because they were shooting uncontested 3’s. Why? Because our guys (mainly Brewer on Richardson) had to get so far down low to help Big Al protect the paint that they could not get back out in time to defend the 3. Al could not effective help out the drives into the lane, nor could he handle Amare.

So not only do we have the Big Al offense issues pointed out by SnP, we have an even more serious issue in that our highest paid player simply can’t play effective inside D. Either as an undersized 5 or at 4. I am not sure how Rambis is going to correct this – I see it as a mindset issue – not a physical issue. Unlike Kobe/leBron, I don’t see Big Al making the Olympic team to help change that defense attitude. Big Al will be a huge story to watch this season.

If Kahn does not pick up Brewer’s contract, he is a fool. With the roster as is, Brewer has to play 35+ minutes a night this season. That is a LOT of minutes going to someone who is not in your plans. Not what I call player development at all. Brewer strikes me as a pretty good kid, but I think he would take a not picking up his contract as a big slap. He will go elsewhere for a part of the MLE leaving us with nothing for a season of work.

Finally, is anyone else but me scared about the dice roll for 2010? I still don’t see us getting any prime free agent – expecting that many would take less to join a contending team / better climate. Are we really going to get what we need as a cap “facilitator?” Color me skeptical.

by Just A Fan on Nov 2, 2009 8:50 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

The defense is definitely an issue...

….for the guy. I have been pleasantly surprised with the upgrade in perimeter defense this year and they have actually been turning teams over at a decent clip. The shooting differential will always be problematic, but right now I think it’s more about the Wolves being unable to make shots rather than the other team going nuts…well, at least it was that way in the first two games. You’re right though, Big Al is a black hole of suck on defense.

Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 2, 2009 9:11 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

The perimeter D has been a nice surprise. We’ve shown a propensity for taking time off the shot clock and forcing bad passes, which are easily picked off. I’m dreaming of an athletic wing who can play disruptive D in place of Gomes/Pavs/Wilkens.

Agreed on Al – he looks like Old Shaq out there. Slow off the ground, slow on the ground, slow to recognize.. Ugh. I hope he picks it up, or at least starts producing statistically again so that he’ll garner something valuable if he has to be moved.

When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

by Xand1 on Nov 2, 2009 9:59 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Some of those 3's

also came off trying to cheat on the nash side of the pnr. Frye was just on fire. We just didn’t have the personnel to match up with that combo.

by TheEvilProfessor on Nov 2, 2009 10:06 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I didn't watch the game

Damn DirecTV. But about Jefferson: he’s not the caliber of player as Hakeem Olajuwon, but check out the uptick in assist % during his career and how late that uptick occurred. The question of whether he fits in this system is obviously still there, but it’d be worth looking at how well Shaq fit in the Lakers’ system (his assist % is higher for his career).

Stats-wise, basketball-reference.com’s new clubhouse site for each team tells some good things: 2nd in both TO% and oReb%, average in opponents’ TO%, opp. FT/FGA, and opp eFG%. This leads me to think that the D is better.

As for free agency, I’m not going to be concerned if they don’t add a top guy. Most teams add superstars through the draft or a trade, and the Wolves have plenty of assets and can add even more in the draft. Will they get a superstar by just trading cap space? No. But if their young guys keep developing, why couldn’t they deal 2-3 young assets for a superstar? Just looking at what teams are giving up for All-Stars (Allen, KG, Gasol, Billups) shows that usually a guy like that can be had for 50-75 cents on the dollar. Also, none of the in-their-prime All-Star FAs will take less to sign with a contender (how often does that actually happen?). They’d probably stay with their current teams instead of come here, but that’s partially because their teams can pay them more.

by pagingstanleyroberts on Nov 2, 2009 9:13 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Triangle peg in a pick-and-roll hole?

Here’s another question, possibly related to the concerns about Al: Is the triangle offense a good fit for the personnel? If not, do you abandon it for an offense that is a better fit, or stick with it and change the personnel to fit the system over time?

I keep hearing how great Flynn and Sessions are at the pick and roll, but it doesn’t sound like they get many opportunities to do it.

by Madison Dan on Nov 2, 2009 9:15 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Triangle

Disclaimer – I am really do like the concept of the triangle offense. The premise is very sound – creating great spacing leads to easier baskets.

The problem for me is that, at least in the NBA, it has only proved to be effective for 2 teams (LA & Chicago) who just happened to have 2 of the best wing scores (Jordan and Bryant) in the history of the NBA. It works so well for them because it does create great space – for their shots and drives. And later in their careers, they even started the passing.

But no other NBA team has had much success with the triangle. Further, very few teams have even tried to implement it – in a league where, quite frankly, most team quickly imitate anything that is successful.

So, I was a little unsure about that direction when it was first announced.

by Just A Fan on Nov 2, 2009 9:45 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

True + caveat

What you say is true about the triangle. The truth is that no other team beyond Jackson’s have ever committed to it, either, so that’s always a consideration to keep in mind.

I think most teams feel too much pressure to win now and to keep their athletes happy. It will be interesting to see what happens with the Wolves because Rambis is here for four years. Most of the team is very young and handpicked, roster/trade filler, or playing to prove they belong. If Rambis gives up on the triangle this year, he loses credibility and authority and respect on this team and he might as well leave. However, nobody important (Taylor, Kahn, etc) expects anything but effort and growth from this team, so the Wolves are the ideal place to find out if anyone other than Jackson + superstar wings can be successful with the triangle.

It’s a long time to wait, but the true test of the triangle (and DK and Rambis) will come in 2011-2012 (or year three of the rebuilding process). The Wolves should be well on their way to being able to win 50 games by then. Are they still running the triangle? Who, of today’s core, is still with the team? (quick prediction—Love, JFly, Wellington, and Brewer will still be with the team. Maybe Hollins if he doesn’t price himself out of our range).

"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."

by biggity2bit on Nov 2, 2009 1:23 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

We wil be better once Love comes back and Jefferson can play 35 minutes a game…..I think Jefferson and Love can play together and be effective on a championship level team if we have the right guards on the team. We needs a SF/SG that is top of the line and those are hard to find. Add LeBron, or Carmelo or Wade and we are a contender. Add Joe Johnson and we are a good team, but not a legit contender. Add Rudy Gay we arent a legit contender either….we are missing that alpha dog. (the hardest player to add)

by Bellringer21 on Nov 2, 2009 10:53 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Give BIG AL some time

SNP,

      I think the question about Big Al is how can the Wolves optimize his skills? Running teams need to be able to function in the half court, especially in the playoffs. What Rambis should be teaching Al is passing and defense. Jefferson could put up Garnett like numbers in the assist department in the triangle offense. Even if he is standing still, his cutters are not. He needs to work on his court vision. Most big men go through this phase, I remember when Shaq started becoming a better passer, it was devastating. And yes, I think the closest comparison to Al J at this point in his career is Shaq…

by DR_JPK on Nov 2, 2009 11:16 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

The thing I like about the triangle

is that it forces Al to think through kick-out/handoff options FIRST prior to taking his man one-on-one. In the prior offenses his first option was to score. In his first three games this season he has had 2,3 and 4 assists respectively in fairly limited minutes. Has his court vision and instincts suddenly improved? No, but I’m hoping they will improve since the system is forcing him to think differently about what he does with the ball when he first touches it in the triangle.

Also, Al’s ball-stopping play won’t look so bad once he starts hitting 50% of his shots again!

by Rascal Flatts on Nov 2, 2009 11:30 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

if al was as good of an offensive player...

..as shaq, i wouldn’t complain a bit about his defense or passing. here is a comparison for their first 5 years in the league. as much as i dislike what he’s become, it’s easy to forget just how dominant and unbelievable shaq was at that stage in his career. he was 3, 4, 5, maybe 6 times the player big al was. i get that you’re making a stylistic comparison but shaq was soooooooo far beyond what al brings to the table that his offensive dominance transcended some of the crap that came elsewhere on the court. shaq was a top 5 all-time center at that stage of his career. big al is not a top-5 center in the league right now. i completely agree that he deserves some time but we’re not talking about a dominant player here; certainly not one that can make up for his poor performance in the passing game and on defense.

playing the devil’s advocate, shouldn’t al’s passing be more up to snuff if he is hurt? shouldn’t he be more focused on his teammates if he knows his post game isn’t what it should be because of injury?

Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 2, 2009 11:49 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

He absolutely should be paying more attention to passing, but that’s never been his game. It’s seemed like he’s really been trying to get his legs and court sense back by going hard to the hoop, for better or worse. I’d hope Rambis is hammering it into him that he needs to pay attention to his teammates movement off the ball and be quicker with his passes.

When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

by Xand1 on Nov 2, 2009 11:58 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

So is it far to say SNP

You agree with my assesment that if we could trade Al for a mobile big- giving away scoring while gaining in Defense, and Passing you’d do it tomorrow (Noah, Horford, Varejao)?

by Jose Cordoba on Nov 2, 2009 12:01 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

i'd only trade al..

…if a wing came back the other way. he’s their biggest chip and if they move it they damn sure better get a player that fills their biggest weakness. however, in terms of general philosophy, yes, i’d like to have a mobile big next to love in the frontcourt and 2 athletes around 6’8" on the wing.

i’m secretly hoping for the following trade:

to memphis:

- big al
- charlotte pick and/or pekovic

to minny:

- marc gasol
- rudy gay
- marko jaric

they could go love, gasol, white hole, and hollins in the front court and then hope and pray for aldrich and turner in the draft. the team i have in my head 2 years down the road is this:

rubio/sessions
evan turner/brewer/ellington
rudy gay/brewer/turner
love/hakim warrick/hollins
aldrich/gasol/hollins

length and/or athleticism pretty much across the board except for love and gasol…both of whom make up for it with grit and a solid all-around game.

Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 2, 2009 12:37 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Ugg

I’d sure hope we could get more than that for Jefferson and a valuable first round pick…. replace marko with OJ mayo and then that’d be interesting…

by DR_JPK on Nov 2, 2009 12:41 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Really?

I thought it was kind of a rip off from Minny’s perspective and that Memphis would never consider it.

Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 2, 2009 12:54 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Spot on SnP

That trade would not be kind to Memphis and would not be considered.

My biggest regret was when Noah was in Skiles doghouse early in his rookie year, and the Bulls clamoring for an off the bench inside scorer, that McHale did not serious pursue the Noah for Rhino + filler trade. It was there – and we blew it by not taking advantage of Chicago.

by Just A Fan on Nov 2, 2009 1:36 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Agreed

The Rhino trade for Noah would have been a coup for Minnesota. Just like Noah for Jefferson would be a coup for Chicago now…

by DR_JPK on Nov 2, 2009 2:02 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

So we cut Flynn?

Kidding. Kidding. Not bad, assuming we flipped Flynn and our other picks into something better than Warrick. It is encouraging to think about our assets though, especially when a team like that hasn’t even used them all.

All right, brain. You don't like me and I don't like you, but let's just do this and I can get back to killing you with beer.
Homer

by CaliWolf on Nov 2, 2009 12:44 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Flynn?

What happens to Flynn on the team in your head?

by Madison Dan on Nov 2, 2009 12:44 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Flynn..

…was never part of that team ;) I think he’s the PG that ultimately gets moved. Sessions, Rubio, or Flynn…one of them doesn’t stick around, maybe two. My money is on Flynn being moved. I thought it would be Sessions at first but I’m going to roll with Flynn.

Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 2, 2009 12:49 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

One PG may have to go...

just to be able to land Aldrich AND Turner, as I’d think both are top-10 (or top-5?) picks next year. I’m a little surprised you think it’s Flynn that will go, though. I’ve given up on Rubio playing for the Wolves. That way I’ll be pleasantly surprised if it ever happens.

by Madison Dan on Nov 2, 2009 12:53 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I feel pretty confident in saying..

….that they aren’t moving Rubio. I heard enough in pre season to believe that they view him as their superstar A1 sort of player and they’re not giving up on that. I know that’s the big rumor with guys like Sid, Charlie Walters, Reusse, etc, but I think the team views this kid as being a star and they aren’t going to let him go.

Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 2, 2009 12:56 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I really hope that’s the case. I can’t dream up a scenario where a team actually gives us enough in return to make up for losing out on Ricky’s potential..

When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

by Xand1 on Nov 2, 2009 12:59 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Me think

that Rubio never comes to the Twolves. My hope is that someone else over values him and trades us a superstar wing.

by Just A Fan on Nov 2, 2009 1:39 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I just know..

…from what I’ve heard about draft night (and what has been confirmed with the video they showed during the game the other night) is that they thought they’d end up with Evans and Flynn and they were shocked that Rubio fell in their laps and that they have every intention of bringing him over. I’m pretty confident in saying they had him at the top of the board with Griffin.

Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 2, 2009 2:19 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

After my fantasy of a long lunch with Eva Mendes

comes true, I’ll start working on my Trade for DWade, where Rubio, a pick, and a starter are enough to convince Miami that it’s their best option going forward.

And no comments on which one is less likely to occur, thankyouverymuch.

by PoorDick on Nov 2, 2009 5:36 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Not even your great one liner

equating S n P’s remark about Corey Brewer to your college days?

by uncle rico on Nov 3, 2009 5:38 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Really?

I’ve always been under the impression that Kahn was absolutely enamored with Flynn. I would say he’s the least likely to be moved. Of the two here right now, Kahn talks about Flynn being the face of the franchise. Sessions seemed to be a good-value, trade-chip signing to me. And between Flynn and Rubio, Flynn has the upper hand on staying with the team because he gets a chance to prove himself first.

If Flynn shows potential, promise, and production in these two seasons, it would be a massive gamble to trade him away and start Rubio, the great unknown, at point guard.

by LoveTo on Nov 2, 2009 12:56 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Too early

for this discussion. 3 games does not a season predict.

Having said that, I think Sessions gets moved this winter in the right deal, (e.g. in the trade that gives us the guys we really wanted but didn’t think we’d be able to get). Otherwise I think it’s game on between Flynn and Sessions. From what little I’ve seen my guess is that they’ll start depending on matchups, with Flynn trending towards becoming the stellar sixth man scoring spark.

Having said all that, I think that (assuming we don’t trade Sessions) the question boils down to which player has more value? Does Sessions become a great player for facilitating the triangle but not the potential star Flynn could be? Or does Flynn’s scoring, leadership, and star power/charisma over the next season or two trump Sessions? Perhaps the biggest question, as SnP is asking, is how does the keeping or trading of Big Al change which guard you keep-or does it?

"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."

by biggity2bit on Nov 2, 2009 1:36 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Love that team. In a fast-paced system with tons of off-ball movement and fast breaks at every opportunity, those players would be incredibly entertaining.

When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

by Xand1 on Nov 2, 2009 12:57 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Wings

It will be interesting to see what we do about the wing positions. The successful triangle teams of the past have had Jordan and Kobe — arguably the best two guards to ever play. The Wolves tandem of Brewer and Wilkins is probably the worst in the NBA, right now. Making matters worse is that the ‘10 Draft is not going to be wing-heavy at the top. Other than John Wall, a point guard, it’s looking like a draft filled with big men.

So, this trade deadline will be big, and I agree that Memphis is a team to consider. I’d rather get OJ Mayo than Rudy Gay, but either would be a fantastic addition. Only, I’d rather send them Sessions or Flynn as the main piece than Big Al. Jefferson might be in recovery mode for many more months, but he’ll get it back. When he does, he’s more valuable than Rudy Gay.

by Andy G on Nov 2, 2009 1:14 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Evan Turner!

When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

by Xand1 on Nov 2, 2009 2:55 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

We’ll see — I didn’t see much of him last year, but I’m going mostly off the ESPN projections and whatnot. Turner’s name doesn’t usually come up near the projected top of the lottery. Since we need somebody with star potential or talent with our high draft pick (as opposed to a guy like Wayne Ellington, who is solid but will never be great) I have a feeling we will not be drafting an off guard in next year’s lottery.

Who knows, though — the college season hasn’t even started yet. I’m just basing this off Chad Ford’s early predictions/analysis.

by Andy G on Nov 2, 2009 3:01 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

We’ll see. I have a hunch the draft sites will are enamored with the athleticism of th incoming freshmen, probably to the point of overlooking a smooth upperclassman like Turner Alls I know is that legit 6’7 SG’s who can defend, create off the dribble and get to the line are a valuable commodity, at least in my eyes. Keep an eye on him this year.

When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

by Xand1 on Nov 2, 2009 3:10 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

DX has him sitting at the 7 spot now, with willie warren the only other wing in the top 10 (he’s at 3). i like turner a lot more than warren based on what i’ve seen, but there’s a ton of time to figure out how this draft is going to shake out. as of right now, though, i’d have my fingers crossed for turner, too.

heart of a champion, will of the warrior.

by cap'n hack on Nov 2, 2009 5:40 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Warren seems eerily similar to Foye, so much so that it makes me want to have nothing to do with him. Let’s see: 6’3.5 guard who isn’t a natural point, but has nice athleticism (not elite), a solid handle and good range.. Not sure why he’s so high this early, but I’ll take the 6’7 two-way SG, thankyouverymuch.

When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

by Xand1 on Nov 2, 2009 6:32 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

totally agree

i think he’s probably up there because he was highly rated when they thought he was coming out last year. it’s easier to just slide a guy up a few slots than to try to figure out where he falls in comparison to this year’s class. watch him drop as the season progresses.

heart of a champion, will of the warrior.

by cap'n hack on Nov 2, 2009 7:10 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

You hit the nail on the head about trading Al for a wing

I have believed for almost a year that ultimately either Al or Love would be leaving, mainly because I don’t think the two fit together on the court on a contending team. I now believe Al will be the one who is moved because he is better suited to the type of offense the Wolves ran next year, and Rambis/triangle is here at least three years. Al may ultimately be a valuable asset in getting one of the prime free agents nobody thinks the Wolves can get. By including Al and his contract in a sign and trade, the other team doesn’t see a player walk away for nothing, and the free agent gets the max deal he wants. He could also be used to get a player from a team with cap problems since they will be able to use Al and their cap space to solve another teams money problems. The Gay idea certainly makes sense, though there may be other options for Kahn to pursue that we haven’t heard. Of course depending on how this college season plays out, and thus next years draft, Al could also be moved for a seven footer who plays great defense and can handle the triangle.

Gomes is probably gone, Brewer will probably be extended, though I won’t be shocked if he isn’t.

I really believe Kahn doesn’t have a preference between Rubio and Flynn at this time, if he did I think he would have chosen one at the draft and then selected another player at a different position. Right now he feels like the princess getting to choose between several suitors, but will take his time and let the best player win over the next couple years.

by Rumblebee on Nov 2, 2009 1:34 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Not a Fan

of picking up Marc Gasol either. He’s less mobile and a worse Defender than Al. Although Rudy Gay’s upside somewhat offsets it. Although I’m made my thoughts clear on him before. If we could end up with Favors then trade Al for a wing that can shoot- then we might have something down the line.

by Jose Cordoba on Nov 2, 2009 2:26 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

So

Are you saying you would trade Al for one of those guys straight up? I think you and SNP should go spend some time with Isiah…

by DR_JPK on Nov 2, 2009 1:11 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Really? Varejao for Al?

by museum on Nov 2, 2009 4:51 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Varejao

Is an Elite Defensive Player who is effective without the ball. He’d be an awesome fit with Kevin Love. Varejao’s value can be seen in Cleveland’s 19 win increase from 2007-2008 to 2008-2009 with Varejao’s health playing a factor.

by Jose Cordoba on Nov 2, 2009 5:15 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I wouldn't argue any of that, I like him

I just can’t fathom trading a guy of Al’s talent for nothing more than that. Even if Varejao would be good on our team.

by museum on Nov 2, 2009 5:28 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

It’s just that he should have more value than that on the trade market, even if you don’t think he’s worth a damn. You should absolutely be able to get more for him. Kahn would be DESTROYED nationally like never before if he did that, with good reason. In my opinion.

This is all predicated on his being healthy and playing better than he has so far, of course.

by museum on Nov 2, 2009 5:38 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Just Remember

Philly got destroyed for Trading AI for Andre Miller. The reason being AI’s Bulk Scoring was more valued than Miller’s all-around game.

by Jose Cordoba on Nov 2, 2009 5:52 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

They got destroyed, if I remember right, for not getting young talent with star potential back for Iverson. Most people were wondering why they’d take a guy who was past his prime for Allen. And even though I like Varejao, I think it’d be the same with us. And the backlash might be worse for us, Andre could put the ball in the whole a bit. I know you love guys who do the little things, but I think we’d have to get more. Could always add a third team to get Varejao and someone else, maybe.

I wonder if CLE would do this. Maybe I’ll ask their site.

by museum on Nov 2, 2009 6:06 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Marcus Camby, KG and Duncan in their primes were elite defensive players. Varejao might be good, but I think elite is stretching it. Still disagree 100% with this idea.

When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

by Xand1 on Nov 2, 2009 6:33 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Three Points

1. I wouldn’t do this if I was Cleveland. Playing Al with Shaq would be a diseaster. On D- You’d get killed in transition and against Perimeter Oriented Bigs. On Offense- You’d have to play Al away from the Basket. This is where he operates the best. Cleveland would then become a vastly worse defensive team.

2. My Point about the AI trade was in hindsight- Philly won in a route. Although I guess it could be argued if you factor the subsequent Billups trade. The reason-Philly improved even though they traded an Elite Scorer is because Miller helped do the little things.

3. As far as Varejao not being elite- Here’s John Hollinger on Varejao’s D-
 
“Varejao’s flopping gets everyone talking, but the rest of his defense is the real story. He’s an ELITE defender who deserved All-Defense honors, as he can guard 4s on the perimeter or defend the post with equal effectiveness. He defends pick-and-rolls, he gets back quickly in transition, and he hustles like crazy to get loose balls. He’s not a leaper, but at 6-foot-11 and 260 pounds he possesses unusual mobility for a player of his size. "

by Jose Cordoba on Nov 2, 2009 6:49 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

You wouldn't do that if you were Cleveland?

They could turn right around and flip Jefferson for someone much more highly valued than Varejao. Or trade Shaq in a massive salary dump.

Jefferson is a good #2 player on a contender. LeBron-Jefferson for the next several years would rival Kobe-Gasol. And a Jefferson-for-Varejao swap would be equivalent to the Memphis-L.A. deal that pissed everyone off so much.

by LoveTo on Nov 2, 2009 6:53 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I think you both have points

Shaq and Al together would not work, and if it was just Al and LeBron, that would make a great combination. But they’d have to get rid of Shaq to reap the benefits.

by museum on Nov 2, 2009 7:11 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

yeah, i’m not sure if that deal helps either team, but i do believe that varejao is undervalued and jefferson is overvalued. al isn’t worlds better than varejao.

heart of a champion, will of the warrior.

by cap'n hack on Nov 2, 2009 7:13 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Great, but Cleveland would.

When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

by Xand1 on Nov 2, 2009 7:06 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Well, I put a poll up on Fear The Sword, but judging by the amount of replies they get on the average thread, not sure it’ll get much of a response.

by museum on Nov 2, 2009 7:19 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Clevelanders seem to think we’d be nuts to do it, by and large. Though they have some questions about chemistry adding another new guy.

http://www.fearthesword.com/2009/11/2/1111996/would-you-trade-varejao-for-al

by museum on Nov 3, 2009 5:43 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

When was that from, the 07/08 season before reps stopped buying into his crazy Euro flops? Now you’re just cherry picking years to support your argument. I never said he’s not a good defender or a guy I wouldn’t want on my team, but he’s not “elite” in anyone’s book except Hollinger’s from that one season.

My point this whole time is that you don’t trade down in value because you want a guy who’s a better fit, and Varejao is a clear downgrade in value any way you look at it. If Al has to go, we could do better.

When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

by Xand1 on Nov 2, 2009 7:13 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

i guess it comes down to what you want to call an “elite defender”. you listed 3 guys with the specification “in their primes”. i’d say the list is longer than that and it’s a bit suspicious that the only guys you listed had a fair amount of offensive game. varejao is one of the 10 best post defenders in the league and rebounds well. he might not have al’s post game, but considering how much better varejao is on D, how clear the downgrade is seems debateable.

heart of a champion, will of the warrior.

by cap'n hack on Nov 2, 2009 7:17 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Come on

5 times the player big al is? No way. Look at the 2 years before Al got hurt and compare to Shaq’s stats. I agree with you that Shaq is more dominant, no question about it. I would argue that Jefferson is more skilled. And if Shaq became a good passer, Jefferson can certainly become a good passer because he is more skilled.

Also, I think Al will be more apt to become a passer as he feels his health returning and when he feels he can score whenever he wants to.

by DR_JPK on Nov 2, 2009 12:37 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I debated...

…whether or not to go 10 times better ;)

Shaq entered his prime at the age Jefferson is at right now. Same age and same service time. At Big Al’s age, Shaq put up over 28 ppg, 10+ FTA/game, a usage rate over 30 and a PER over 25. He improved on all of this in the years beyond. Here’s a historical comparison for players that have scored that much, gotten to the line as much, factored in on as many possessions, and have done so with as much overall offensive effectiveness.

Jordan, David Robinson, Karl Malone, LeBron, Kobe, and Shaq. That’s the class of player he was at that point in his career. Big Al is down amongst the Amare Stoudemires. It’s a completely different stratosphere that Shaq was in.

Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 2, 2009 12:47 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Not debating Al > Shaq

My point is, compare AL’s 2007-08 season with Shaq’s at the same age … 1997 or something like that. Sure, Shaq is more dominant, but there are similarities. Now throw in that Al is starting to learn the triangle, and Shaq started around the same time. If you have a better comparison for the triangle analogy let me know.

by DR_JPK on Nov 2, 2009 12:57 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Shaq seems 6-10 times bigger

And I have my doubts that Al Jefferson will grow 3 inches and add 70 pounds to his frame while still being an effective player.

by aarendsvark on Nov 2, 2009 1:40 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I don't think there is..

…a good historical comparison for the type of player Al is and this particular offense. I get what you’re going at but I just think that Shaq is so far and away a better player his greatness (at the time) transcends the system and stylistic comparisons. Dude was amazing. He made it work because he was so dominant. Without that dominance, I think the comparison falls apart. To me, it’s like comparing Flynn to CP3.

Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 2, 2009 2:13 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Ok

Yeah, that was what I was going for. Perhaps it is wishful thinking to compare to such an all time great. For Flynn, I actually see him more in the Allen Iverson mode.

by DR_JPK on Nov 2, 2009 2:20 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

To give Flynn some praise..

…(because he really deserves it; I admit I’m a bit on the negative side so far) he has shown some signs of being a more efficient scorer than AI. Iverson averaged over 20 shots a game for his career and for a while he led the league in shots attempted (and missed). In college and a very limited pro career, Flynn seems like a 10-15 shot per game kind of guy with a ton of trips to the line. He seems like he could get many more points per shot than AI and that’s a very encouraging thing.

Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 2, 2009 2:30 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

That is high praise

The way Flynn gets to the line just reminds me a lot of AI over the years.

by DR_JPK on Nov 2, 2009 2:33 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I have been a little surprised by your negativity about Flynn, S-n-P.

Say what you want, but the guy looks good. I just feel like we’ve had an extra gear when he’s on the court.

by LoveTo on Nov 2, 2009 2:46 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I'll just say..

…that I get why Kahn took him but I’ll never agree that he was the right pick. I thought Lawson and Curry were better point guards and I would have even considered Brandon Jennings before taking Flynn.

http://www.canishoopus.com/2009/6/23/921766/random-shots-while-continuing-the

I had him and Jrue Holiday listed waaaayyyyy down the draft list and I don’t get how he got in the conversation for that pick. Fantastic guy, great professional…I’ll just never be a fan compared to guys like Lawson, Curry, and even Jennings. That being said, Kahn couldn’t have walked away from picks 5 and 6 without a starting point and I completely understand why he took him. It’s also not like there aren’t parts of his game to like.

Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 2, 2009 2:57 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Fair enough.

I like Flynn a lot, and did pre-draft. At the very least, he’s an interesting test case in the statistical revolution, because apparently his advanced stats are much less impressive than his intangibles and the aesthetic quality of his quick, low-to-the-ground penetration.

by LoveTo on Nov 2, 2009 3:17 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

"character" guy

The pre-draft workout reactions made it sound like Kahn thought the entire PG class was fairly even, but Flynn had the leadership and selflessness that others lacked.

Even if Lawson, Curry, and Jennings are better players (still waaay too early), we ended up with a pick who seems like a sure thing for on- and off-court leadership.

I’m not saying Lawson, Curry, and Jennings are NOT character guys; but it’s hard to see Flynn complaining about minutes or touches, or having off-court maturity lapses. I think this is what got him so high on Kahn’s draft board.

by losDelFuego on Nov 2, 2009 3:50 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Same take on Flynn

but different view on Holiday. At the time I wasn’t high on Flynn, but did not really object to the pick. In hindsight, with the Wolves grabbing Sessions I wish they had picked Holiday. Holiday would not be fighting for minutes now, but has a much higher ceiling than Flynn. A development guy who would be on the same timetable as Rubio. I wouldn’t mind Sessions running the team right now with what seems to be a steady hand as everyone tries to learn a new offense. I also would not have had the courage to take Curry, but I was probably flat out wrong about that, and would be very happy with him based on what he’s shown at the point so far. I think all the top PGs are going to pan out well, and Flynn will be solid but not the cream of the crop.

by dropstep on Nov 2, 2009 4:45 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

NEVER be a fan?

Interesting way to put it a week into his and their first years. He’s been great so far, from what I’ve seen. I thought you were wrong to put him so far down your draft board, and I still disagree today.

by museum on Nov 2, 2009 4:49 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

here's hoping..

…i’m wrong.

Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 2, 2009 5:12 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Well it appears after a week that I was incorrect about Jennings and Curry (expected less than they’ve been showing), so I hope you can join me in my incorrectability.

by museum on Nov 2, 2009 5:32 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

If that reads like it’s a shot, it shouldn’t.

by museum on Nov 2, 2009 5:39 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

it didn't...

…no worries.

Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 2, 2009 8:35 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I'll keep repeating it until I'm blue in the face

Shaq is not just some 300lb+ behemoth that overpowers people with size. That helps, but he was far more athletic than Jefferson has ever been and was just as skilled. His post moves and footwork were just as good as Al’s if not even better. To say that Al is more skilled than Shaq is simply not true. Add in the aforementioned size and athleticism and you have the most dominant center of this era.

Stat-wise, I doubt Al will ever approach a season average of 30 points, 3 blocks, 3+ assists, or even 60%-ish shooting, let alone doing that in any one of those categories. The only thing Al has on young Shaq is FT shooting, at which Shaq got way more opportunities anyway. Shaq pre-decline is better than Al’s likely prime, and it won’t even be close.

The closest parallel to Shaq these days is (rightfully) Dwight Howard. If you add more size and some actual moves and skill minus a little athleticism, that’s young Shaq. I doubt anyone considers Al even in Dwight’s class let alone young Shaq’s. Who knows if Dwight will even be as good as Shaq once was? I love Al and I think he’s one of the best low-post players in the game. But he’s not an MVP and he’s orders of magnitude behind Shaq and I doubt he’ll ever even get close. Shaq’s a historical figure, Al’s an All-Star.

by nja700 on Nov 2, 2009 4:08 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Dwight Howard

nja,

    Good post. I agree that Dwight Howard is a closer match physically to a young Shaq. My comparison was more to do with the triangle offense and comparing the development of Shaq’s and Big Al’s skills in that offense. The key point that you make is that Shaq and Big Al are both skilled big men. Whereas Dwight Howard is an athletic freak, but isn’t very skilled. Shaq’s passing really improved within that offense, and I’m optimistic that Al could show a similar improvement. Granted Al will never be in the same category as Shaq…but could be a 5 time all-star.

    I like your comparison of Shaq and Al. What I don’t understand is why so many people on this site want to trade Al…

by DR_JPK on Nov 2, 2009 5:04 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

What I don’t understand is why so many people on this site want to trade Al…

he plays no defense and is overrated on the offensive end. i like al as a player, but he’s not the best player on a good team, much less a contender and (i’m going to fire this one out there) by the end of this season, i suspect love will surpass him as “best timberwolf”.

heart of a champion, will of the warrior.

by cap'n hack on Nov 2, 2009 5:45 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

I doubt

Love will ever have the low post game that Al has. Certainly Love could be better defensively than Al. I’d like to see them play together for at least the rest of this season before making any trades (unless the trade is a steal for the wolves)….

by DR_JPK on Nov 2, 2009 6:07 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Why not?

Is there some reason that Love couldn’t have Jefferson’s low post game? It’s not based on quickness or explosiveness. Jefferson does have some length on him, but mostly it’s just practiced technique. Love scores as well or better now than Jefferson at a comparable age. For a guy who scores almost exclusively in the low post, Jefferson is not an efficient shooter, so the bar might not be as high as it seems from some of the great moves we’ve seen him score with.

More to the point, does anyone want Love to have Jefferson’s low post game? I’d prefer that Love have a more varied game, with low post skills. Paired with a low post center he’d be better served by having a mixed inside/outside attack.

by dropstep on Nov 2, 2009 7:01 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

It’s based on quickness and length as much as anything. Have you seen Love post up? He’s not terrible, but he can’t get a shot away like Al can, especially not when doubled or covered the way Al is. Al’s ability to create shots in the post, i.e. get himself 2 pts, is elite.

When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

by Xand1 on Nov 2, 2009 7:14 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

he creates shots well, but he doesn’t put them in very efficiently. he’s only ever hit the league average in that regard twice. in his rookie year and in his last year with boston. i know he’s never had a great team around him, but he did have paul pierce both those years and for such supposedly great offensive player, he just barely surpassed the average. his TS% makes me wonder how elite he really is offensively.

heart of a champion, will of the warrior.

by cap'n hack on Nov 2, 2009 7:19 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Maybe the fact that he hit that mark in Boston

says that he puts up more bad shots here because he feels like he has to, and therefore his numbers suffer? He was never The Man in Boston, here he was expected to be immediately. Frankly, I’d argue that him putting up bad shots was our best option quite a lot. Hopefully that isn’t the case this year.

by museum on Nov 2, 2009 7:25 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

i definitely think that not being The Man would do him a lot of good, but even when he had paul pierce around, he was barely an average scorer.

for comparison, in his last full season in memphis, paul gasol’s TS% was .594. last year in LA, his TS% was .617. anything over .600 is usually my benchmark for “whoa, that guy can score”. al’s last season in boston he put up a remarkably average .547 TS% (.54 is about the average for all positions, and it’s just a little higher for bigs). in his minnesota years, his TS% dropped to .535 and .532.

truly great post scorers put the ball in the hoop more efficiently than jefferson does. he’s useful and there’s a lot of teams that would love to have him, but he’s not nearly as good of a scorer as a lot of people would have you think.

heart of a champion, will of the warrior.

by cap'n hack on Nov 2, 2009 7:33 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

whoops, pau’s name is not paul. i should show a player of his caliber a bit more respect.

heart of a champion, will of the warrior.

by cap'n hack on Nov 2, 2009 7:34 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Exactly

No question the guy has tremondous moves in the post, but he is not an efficient scorer down low. Way too many variables to consider with respect to commanding double teams and so on, but the bar might not be as high for a low post replacement on the Wolves, be it Love or someone else, as folks seem to think. They might not get their shots as consistently, but I’d trade that for ball movement and more high percentage shots.

by dropstep on Nov 2, 2009 8:11 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I’d trade that for ball movement and more high percentage shots.

and that sounds exactly like the sort of offense kevin love is built for. swapping out jefferson for an athletic defensive minded center who runs the pick and roll well would probably do the wolves a ton of good. how to go get that guy is another question entirely, but with love’s passing from the post and flynn and sessions running the point, that’s what the wolves need (and talent at the wings, that one’s big too).

heart of a champion, will of the warrior.

by cap'n hack on Nov 2, 2009 8:31 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree

in that Al is his own worst enemy when it comes to efficiency. In a pinch post, he and his teammate should be scoring at a very high rate. If he actually passed the ball back, the runner is either open to the hoop or Al has a clean look to the hoop and get get the ball passed back to him on his way in. Every time I see Al in the pinch post…he never passes.

This more than any other one of his flaws annoys me. Love would be a much more willing pass partner and will have more range than Al if the defender collapse on the runner.

by TheEvilProfessor on Nov 3, 2009 8:44 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Wolves played well last night

The Suns shot the lights out from 3 and the Wolves were within 4 points with about 2 minutes to play. You can definitely tell that the team is still getting the feel of playing together, especially with the many different combinations of lineups that Rambis throws out there. When Love gets back the lineups and minute distribution will be more set.

Side note – I watched the Suns feed of the game with League Pass and the Suns commentators absolutely loved Pecherov. The guy mentioned how many shots Pech made in warm-ups about 8 times. It was very funny.

by Funkle Jesse on Nov 2, 2009 11:21 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

They also loved Gomes

It’s amazing how your perception can be impacted by one game. To them Gomes could be a big-time addition off the bench for a team looking to contend. I don’t buy it. Gomes disappears far, far, far more often than he makes his presence known.

by Rascal Flatts on Nov 2, 2009 11:33 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

And Flynn got some love, too.

by LoveTo on Nov 2, 2009 12:59 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Gomes off the bench

Sounds pretty sweet to me. He’d be awesome in that role for a team because he executes and he’s versatile. It’s Gomes as a starter that’s the issue.

"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."

by biggity2bit on Nov 2, 2009 1:38 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Just to expand

on the Shaq comparison. Go back and review Shaq’s development once he picked up the triangle offense. His passing skills really blossomed as he played more in that system. It will be interesting to see if Big Al goes through a similar development phase.

by DR_JPK on Nov 2, 2009 11:21 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

He’s going to have to work extra hard at finding cutters, though. He’s not a natural passer at all (unlike say, KG), so he has to make sure he keeps his head up and pays attention to his teammates when he starts making a move. There were at least two occasions yesterday where a simple dump off/shovel pass would resulted in an open layup, but Al tried to push through 2 or 3 guys instead of recognizing it.

That said, he has been looking to pass more, which is great. Hopefully it can help him see the game differently and shed the blinders as Rascal notes above.

When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

by Xand1 on Nov 2, 2009 11:34 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

He'll learn..

..I hope. The advantage to the triangle is that the cutters are consistently coming from the same places. Hopefully, with time he’ll be taught the patterns and learn to see it happen. If not…well, boy can he score :)

All right, brain. You don't like me and I don't like you, but let's just do this and I can get back to killing you with beer.
Homer

by CaliWolf on Nov 2, 2009 12:07 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Hard to separate

that Shaq’s passing improvement came almost exactly at the same point that Kobe exploded into superstardom on wing. I don’t think we have that on our roster.

by Just A Fan on Nov 2, 2009 1:41 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

True

Which is why the wolves need to get a wing, but they shouldn’t trade Al. Sessions or Flynn make more sense for a quality wing player.

by DR_JPK on Nov 2, 2009 2:00 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

That's a good point...

…and I would love to see them get the wing without giving up Jefferson. That being said, I don’t know if they can pull that one off.

Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 2, 2009 2:14 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Would you trade Rubio...

For an awesome wing? (assuming Flynn or Session wasn’t enough to close the deal)

by DR_JPK on Nov 2, 2009 2:17 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Me personally?

I don’t know anymore. Rubio is putting up some silly numbers this year and if he grows an inch or two you’re looking at a 6’5-6’6" point guard with a 6’9" wingspan who puts up Kidd/Magic type facilitation numbers. I really don’t know enough about him to say one way or another at this point. If you had asked me over the summer I would have definitely said yes. However, if he continues to improve like he has and he comes over with more size at age 21 or 22, that’s pretty hard to turn down. I’m glad that’s a decision I don’t have to make. The guy has major boom/bust potential and I just have access to EL stat sheets and YouTube. I think they keep him and that they’re all-in on the kid.

Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 2, 2009 2:23 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Yes

In a heartbeat. But not a potential “superstar wing” but a 22-24 year old wing already averaging 14+ pts, 4 reb, 3 assist, 6’6" or taller.

by Just A Fan on Nov 2, 2009 2:30 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Nah

I was thinking more along the lines of the 98-99 Kobe

98-99 37.9 min 5.3 reb 3.8 assists 19.9 pts

Someone who is generally recognized as a scorer but not yet hit the peak.

by Just A Fan on Nov 2, 2009 3:18 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Sessions/Flynn

I was a little concerned about playing time with these guys, as they are both young good PG’s. My question is, since Rambis doesn’t want to play them together to often, do we sacrifice Flynn’s development to (possibly) gain some wins this season playing Sessions more, or do we risk a disgruntled Sessions while Flynn plays out his mistakes. Don’t get me wrong, I think the Sessions pickup was a GREAT deal, but I just wonder why Rambus doesn’t play them more together. Surely having two slashers out there can’t hurt, right??

As for free agency, I don’t think we’ll be big players, but facilitators. No, we won’t get who we want DIRECTLY through facilitating, but indirectly through draft picks, or future cap space to add that “Alpha Dog”. I know it’s only three games into the season, but so far it has gone as I expected, except for Love. I won’t complain about that.

Timberwolves - NBA champs 2013!
(used with permission - Wolf in MO)

by frankenhoops on Nov 2, 2009 11:53 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

They saw the court for 4 or 5 minutes during last night’s game, and things seemed to run pretty well during that time. I’d hope that’s a trend that continues, at least if matchups allow it. Speaking of which, a Telfair/Gordon back court could certainly be handled by Flynn/Sessions.

When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

by Xand1 on Nov 2, 2009 11:59 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

here's their stint at popcorn machine

http://popcornmachine.net/cgi-bin/gameflow.cgi?date=20091101&game=MINPHO

2:02 together according to popcorn

Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 2, 2009 12:02 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Sessions played the point

Flynn didn’t do much except turn it over and jack up a 20+ footer at the top of the key. He was promptly yanked. However, we weren’t used on D by any stretch. I want to see more. Jonny is taking too many ‘LeBrons’ – dribble, dribble, dribble, pull up 20+ footer. To be fair he is hitting enough of them to not kill us, but that is not the offense we want from him in his first few games.

All right, brain. You don't like me and I don't like you, but let's just do this and I can get back to killing you with beer.
Homer

by CaliWolf on Nov 2, 2009 12:11 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I think that they also

let sessions start for a couple of games, since he is better at facilitating the triangle so Rambis can point out to Flynn what Sessions is doing. Then let Flynn run the point for a couple of games to try to implement the same things. Rinse and repeat. Probably the best learning curve. Helps to prevent letting Flynn develop bad habits just to stay competetive in games.

by TheEvilProfessor on Nov 2, 2009 3:37 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Another game, another swipe at big Al

Another loss. Again, a high percentage of posters concentrate on how our, admittedly best player does not fit ‘the master plan’. When Love returns, I fully expect people to admit that he, also, is a square peg, in the running-triangle offense hole. So this is where it stands. Our new GM has traded or cut 70+% of the old team to wind up with inconsistent, flawed young players and a couple of veterans who really don’t fit either the GM’s image of a running team, or the new coach’s vision of a triangle-offense team. Perhaps entertaining to the die-hard, but that doesn’t keep Glen Taylor as owner very long. It makes me unhappy to see so many who don’t appreciate Al’s position and what he brings to the table. There are so many teams where their biggest star is an ass. Here, the grass is always greener and there is always a greater reward waiting if we just get that “other” player, whoever that may be. If you missed KG, you may come to miss big Al at some point in the future as well.

by ogishkemuncie on Nov 2, 2009 12:18 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

I can’t speak for others, but I certainly appreciate what Big Al does. There’s no reason you can’t appreciate him while simultaneously wondering if he’s the guy you want to go forward with given where this team is going. It seems a bit knee-jerk to respond in such a way to a reasonable discussion about whether or not he fits when all the obvious disclosures have been made time after time (he’s still recovering, give him time etc. etc.).

When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

by Xand1 on Nov 2, 2009 1:12 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Finally

Someone who doesn’t want to trade Al for a bag of popcorn and some peanuts…

by DR_JPK on Nov 2, 2009 1:15 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Of course, without Al the wolves were 7-25 last year

So yeah, if the T-wolves goal is to win less than 20 games they should trade Al

by DR_JPK on Nov 2, 2009 1:56 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Perimeter D and Flynn/Sessions

It seemed to my non-stats based eye that in both the Cleveland game and the Phoenix game, the Wolves gave up a lot of un-to-under-contested 3’s. Both teams didi a good jobs of getting their shooters in comfortable spots with feet set and too many times it seemed to me the Wolves D got there late or not at all. Steals have been a nice surprise, but coverage not so much. If someone can enlighten me, please do so!

Friday I devoted a lot of my yelling towards Coach Rambis to sitting Flynn in favor of Sessions. The offense flowed so much better with Sessions at the helm. It was nice to see him get more run last night.

by A.K. Agikamik on Nov 2, 2009 12:58 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Zgoda: Brew and Love options exercised, not Pech's

Congrats to Brew. He will hopefully become our poster child for being the Player Development Franchise.

by Rascal Flatts on Nov 2, 2009 2:22 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Indeed.

Given the amount of time he has missed it is the right choice.

Judd: "...I've since watched some Steven Seagal movies and I realise that pressure points are no laughing matter.".

by Auswolf on Nov 2, 2009 2:50 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

One thing from the article

About Al not being able to create his own shot – I disagree. For a post guy, I think he does it quite well. That’s why the offense grinds to a halt, teammates toss him the ball and for better or worse the next several seconds are often Al creating a shot. Not saying he’s right for the system, that I wouldn’t trade him in the right deal, or that he’s a future HOF’er or even that he’ll make an All Star team. But I’ve watched him plenty, and I feel confident in saying that he can create his own shot. Maybe it’s not always the right shot, but he can do it.

by museum on Nov 2, 2009 4:58 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, that didn't seem right to me either

If it read, “Can’t create a shot for his teammate,” or “Can’t create a shot that he hits more than 30% of the time in the first three games,” then I’d agree.

by aarendsvark on Nov 2, 2009 6:24 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I’d imagine this was the intended phrasing. Al is without a doubt one of the best in the league at creating his own shot, so good, in, fact that I think it detracts from his overall effectiveness. I can recall plenty of times where he’ll spin around a guy for a hook shot instead of just using his ridiculous pump fake skills to get a guy in the and air and go up into him for the foul.

When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

by Xand1 on Nov 2, 2009 6:38 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Canis Hoopus is straight T-Wolves straight from Minnesota.
Start posting about the Timberwolves »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Small
Comparison of PER's for draftees for 2010 and 2009 (top 25 for each yr)
Small
Wolves Draft History: Stats people please help?
Small
An Attempt to Clarify the Argument
Small
Are argument to get Rubio here next season! the new CBA could reduce salaries and guaranteed money for rookies.
3358_small
Vote Corey over MJ NOW!!!!
Wolfen_small
The Point Guard Conundrum
Dsc00186_small
Kahn: Kevin Martin NOT coming to Wolves, in so many words!
Wolveslogo_small
Prowling the NBA: Feb 7 - BOOM SHAKALAKA
Small
Rookie Comparison
Small
I've got to know

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Canis Hoopus Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Hoopus Features

    Salary Cap Info

    Draft Info

    EuroWatch

    Stats

    Draft Boards

    Former Tag Lines:

    • In desperate need of an epic dose of basketball Viagra
    • Your source of radical left wing politics cleverly disguised as basketball fandom
    • Palin-Free since before statehood
    • The world's leading exporter of small area quickness
    • Sorry…I have no idea who is Joe Mauer
    • Home of the Peja deep douche
    • Vote McGrady!

    Misc:

     

    Self-Promotion

    BallHype Sports Blog Rankings

    SPONSORS


    Managers

    Dr wyn

    Img_2487_small Stop-n-Pop