Not in the face!
by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 9, 2009 11:58 PM CST
95 comments
OK, this is something of a game-wrap record for me. I'm writing this with the score 106-73 in favor of the 1-6 Warriors with roughly 1:50 left to go in the 3rd quarter. Hanny has just said something about the season not being about wins and losses and he's even moved on to the hustle award for the night.
When I fired up the post editor Golden State had an astounding 48% oReb rate: 11 offensive rebounds on 23 misses. Awesome? I know. Flash forwarding to Stephen Curry's buzzer-beating 3 pointer to end the 3rd quarter and this is what the Four Factors look like:
| Pace (Poss) | Eff | eFG | FT/FG | OREB% | TOr | |
| Minnesota | 105.4 (79) | 97.5 | 47.8% | 19.4 | 33.3 | 22.8 |
| Golden State | 140.5 | 61.1% | 31.9 | 33.3 | 10.1 |
I suppose you could take something of a moral victory away from the fact that the Wolves have pulled even in the oReb% category but keep in mind that the Warriors have a significantly smaller number of misses to fool around with.
Let's try something different for tonight's post. Let's talk about the positives. First and foremost is Corey Brewer. Here's what True Hoop's Henry Abbott had to say about Brew after the Portland game:
In the last few weeks, I have heard Corey Brewer mentioned three or four times as the butt of jokes. It's getting to be time for that to stop. He and Andre Miller both dared each other to shoot all night, but Brewer did it with purpose -- and was an effective help defender helping to keep Roy (who had one of his worst games as a professional) at bay. He's no All-Star at this point, but there's no doubt he's vastly improved. He's among the team's leaders in steals, assists, blocks and free throws attempted -- and his defensive talents and efforts are constant and not to be overlooked. When he hits a couple of 3s, like last night, he's hard to miss.
In tonight's game, Brewer got out in transition, was disruptive in the open court, and for the first time I can remember he d'd up an opposing wing with superior size (Stephen Jackson) without getting physically abused. I know what I am about to write doesn't seem like a big deal, but for those of us who have watched the Wolves over the past 2+ years, it is: Corey Brewer is an NBA rotation player. For a while there his game was pretty dicey and I wasn't sure I would ever write that. Yet, there it is. Hooray!
Hey, look at that: Oleksiy Pecherov finally got into the game! Can he trigger a 28 point comeback? That would be a gigantic positive.
Another positive is that we got our first extended look at Jonny Flynn and Ramon Sessions in the same backcourt. We'll have to wait for the PopcornMachine GameFlow to really break it down, but I believe the tally from the first stint was a +2 against the similarly undersized Warrior backcourt.
Did the Warriors really have a 66-33 run? Sorry, I have to get back to the positives. AC Law is making his 3rd appearance of the year. Good for him. See, another positive.
OK...more positives. (crickets)
Let's have some random thoughts to bring this thing on home:
- This game will hurt the ol' defensive efficency ranking. It will also hurt the less-mentioned Pride Index.
- It seems that the preseason optimism concerning free throws was both short-lived and ill-conceived. Getting Kevin Love back will help a bit but this team is generating zero offense going at the rim. This is problematic when you are not a jump shooting squad. With just over 5 minutes remaining in the 4th quarter the Warriors have taken 4 more threes than the Wolves have FTAs.
- The Wolves aren't a very good team but their offense has faaaarrrr outpaced their defense in terms of ineptitude. Here are their Four Factor stats heading into the GSW game:
| Team Four Factors | ||||||||||||||
| PACE | OFFENSE | DEFENSE | ||||||||||||
|
TYPE
|
||||||||||||||
|
STAT
|
94.3 | 96.8 | 45.1 | 16.2 | 27.2 | 17.0 | 106.8 | 49.6 | 17.6 | 29.2 | 24.6 | |||
|
RANK
|
9 | 27 | 27 | 18 | 9 | 29 | 16 | 18 | 8 | 27 | 15 | |||
This team simply can't put the little orange ball in the bucket. Again, when you can't get to the line when you are not a jump shooting team, this is a tad problematic.
- OK, AC Law just got a breakaway dunk. Really?
- Nathan Jawai followed up his career performance in garbage time against the Blazers by getting worked on the offensive glass by Anthony Randolph.
OK, that about does it. The score is now 129-89 with Anthony Randolph at the line. Corey Brewer is still the only player out there who looks like this bothers him enough to do something about it. The problem here is that there is far too much to do and Mr. Brewer lacks the tools to do a lot of it. There is no other way to put this one other than it is the most embarrassing and frustrating loss since Dwane Casey's Revenge last year against Dallas. Who doesn't remember that classic tilt in which Minnesota built a 29 point lead shortly after the half only to watch the Casey-led Mavs claw their way back to not just a win, but a win where Minnesota conceded a 5 point game with 45 seconds to go. I think Kevin McHale's post game comments were something along the lines of "our guys had had enough by that point."
It's now 144-99 and I'm going to bed.
Until later.
UPDATE: The FSN studio crew has just told me that the Wolves have equalled the worst loss in franchise history as well as the most points given up. Now that's a positive!! A record setting performance!! Who wants to talk about cap space!!??
1 recs |
95 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
I kind of want to do something to get fired at my job
so I don’t have to keep my season tickets anymore for this season. I don’t know how much of these kinds of games I can take…
by TimAllen on Nov 10, 2009 12:21 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Well so much for the Wolves remembering to hold a grudge against the Blazers for the other night when they follow it up with this.
by shralpster on Nov 10, 2009 12:23 AM CST reply actions 2 recs
Troll troll troll troll, troll troll troll troll. Trrrrrollll, Trrrrollll, Trrrolllllllllllllllllll.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Nov 10, 2009 12:25 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Really.
Why even come to this site? I don’t understand how this Blazer fan infestation happened overnight. It’s annoying.
by LoveTo on Nov 10, 2009 12:36 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
This was the gauntlet
we’re just here to remind you of our point of view that was sooooooooo irrational and incorrect then.
n we reallllllly love the internet :)
The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out, burns out farms, and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.
"New Man Law: If you don't show up for the draft you don't get to come later if you're picked. If you believe in yourself, show up and sit there. If nobody else believes in you, take it and cry like a man...in front of the cameras."
-Dave
by faith on Nov 10, 2009 2:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
How do you get such good wifi
under your bridge?
by uncle rico on Nov 10, 2009 3:44 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
more of a hobbit honestly.
Clear…. serves alllllll of the portland metro area … it’s a nice service :)
The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out, burns out farms, and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.
"New Man Law: If you don't show up for the draft you don't get to come later if you're picked. If you believe in yourself, show up and sit there. If nobody else believes in you, take it and cry like a man...in front of the cameras."
-Dave
by faith on Nov 10, 2009 8:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Bad hobbits are hard to break.
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 10, 2009 10:01 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Wretched Basketball Abortion
To paraphrase Pecherov’s doppelganger. I’ve never seen a game in which every turnover was converted into dunks and layups became 3 point plays almost as often as they didn’t. At least Pavlovic knocked someone on their ass (and got a ridiculous Flagrant 1 for it). At least the fans can look forward to the inevitable 20-point beatdown of the Warriors at home some point this season where Captain Jack goes 1-11 on 3s and Corey Maggette commits 4 offensive fouls. No way around it: the Warriors shot great but there was a serious lack of effort.
On another note: is it just me or does it seem like back-to-back West Coast road games in consecutive weeks is a major scheduling negative for the Wolves? What happened to the 3 or 4 game trips? This will piss me off even more when the Wolves go through their annual stretch of 4 days between 2 home games.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Nov 10, 2009 12:25 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
There is some really cool...
…schedule analysis at this site:
http://www.nbastuffer.com/2009-2010_NBA_Schedule_Rest_Days_Analysis.html
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 10, 2009 6:21 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Cool, thanks
So they’ve got it alright. Hopefully, they take advantage of the times when the schedule favors them. I’d like to see one that measures miles traveled per season.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Nov 10, 2009 1:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
NBA scheduling really is ridiculous
I could almost see this if the intent was to have Friday/Saturday games scheduled for the home teams. But a Sunday/Monday back to back on the road is nuts, especially on such a short trip.
Does anyone have stats on what the road teams record is in game 2 of a back to back. It must be a huge advantage for the home team. Almost like the NBA wants to help home teams win rather than provide fair competition. David Stern wouldn’t ENDORSE this, would he??
by Rumblebee on Nov 10, 2009 1:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The worst part about this game was 99% of it was our own fault
That’s what really gets me about this one. Seemingly every single offensive possession was a turnover. Seemingly every single defensive possession was a wide open three or an And-1.
We gave up 47 points off turnovers. That’s basically the difference in the score. 10 Turnovers leading to just 15 points? We probably win this one.
We scored 101 points. That’s a lot for an NBA game. Hopefully people will realize now that, while we’re imbalanced on offense, it’s out DEFENSE that is the real problem that needs to be addressed. This goes way beyond just waiting for Kevin Love to get back.
by Oceanary on Nov 10, 2009 12:49 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure that we have a "biggest" problem.
I know that it’s nice to organize our craptitude into priorities, but we suck on both sides of the ball right now. Suck. Both offense and defense are “real” problems and they are problems in ways that most professional sports teams don’t have problems. I love these guys as much as the next fan, but the idea that we are anywhere close to competent in any game-related respect right now is, in a word, pootastic.
by TheH on Nov 10, 2009 1:04 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
everybody needs to calm down.
we are basically an ENTIRELY new team running an ENTIRELY new offensive system. the season is fewer than 10 games old. jefferson is still recovering and love is hurt. it’s not going to be a great season, we all know it, but stuff will turn around. ya gotta have faith.
yeah, it sucks to be a t-wolves fan right now, but good things are brewing.
i’m optimistic.
by davechisholm on Nov 10, 2009 1:09 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, I'm very optimistic
And 100% behind the current plan, because it was easy to see McHale’s plan had a low ceiling on its potential.
I just like to prioritize our needs because it makes it easier to determine the next step. I feel our three big weaknesses are defense, shooting, and lack of a go to scorer on the wings.
I suppose defense is an overarching issue, since every player should be able to defend, regardless of what they bring offensively.
I guess I think along these terms because I’ve never been a fan of just getting the best talent you can. Every player brought in should serve a specific purpose and fit what we have (which in this case isn’t so much an established roster as it is a proven system). So I feel by categorizing our needs, we narrow the field of possible acquisitions from just “who’s the most talented” to “who fits what we’re looking for”, which to me is the smart way to build a team.
by Oceanary on Nov 10, 2009 1:15 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I have no problem with the PLAN
and sticking to it, in fact I have endorsed it for several months. What concerns me is that through 10% of the season the only positive I have really seen is Corey Brewer, and that is just because as SNP said he is looking like a rotation player, not that he will be an impact player. Obviously Al is still rehabbing, Love is out, and they are learning a new system, but WOW. Take out the last five minutes of game 1 and this team has no wins with a few blow out losses already. I had low expectations going in (22 wins on record), but they may not reach that if things don’t turn around soon.
I really need to see one or two other guys look like they have it figured out soon. I think Flynn will, maybe Love will really fix some issues when he gets back. At this point I see four guys who are on this team a year from now (assuming Rambis and the triangle are still here).
by Rumblebee on Nov 10, 2009 1:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Let me clarify
Brewer is the only CONSISTENT positive I have seen. Several other here and there good signs, just very inconsistent.
by Rumblebee on Nov 10, 2009 1:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Let's not forget
We were beating the Celtics for most of that game and only lost to arguably the best team in the league by 2 points.
by nja700 on Nov 10, 2009 5:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, and speaking of needing a shooter who can be a go-to scorer on the wings...
Sounds an awful lot like OJ Mayo, doesn’t it?
Thanks McHale….
by Oceanary on Nov 10, 2009 1:16 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Reserve judgement
Think I’m gonna keep KLove on that one… so far.
by Boss10 on Nov 10, 2009 1:49 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Mayo?
What is he doing again to help Memphis win? I realize he is a volume shooter but did not realize he had acheived the label of “go-to scorer” in this league.
by dropstep on Nov 10, 2009 10:28 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
http://dimemag.com/2009/09/the-nbas-30-best-go-to-players-26-oj-mayo/
Some think he has.
by Andy G on Nov 10, 2009 11:13 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I just looked and realized that Flynn is putting up better #‘s than Mayo. That’s funny.
When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.
by Xand1 on Nov 10, 2009 11:23 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree....
….that good things are a’brewin’ but the problem I think I misunderestimated at the beginning of the year (and one that I think the team’s front office did as well) is how do you make it through a period of intensely bad basketball without people giving up on the product. So far, the only narrative the casual fan sees is that a new guy came in, traded 2 starters for a pick that stayed in Europe, and that they are getting blown out. It’s a long year. Big Al is at (maybe) 75%. Kevin Love isn’t playing. Jonny Flynn’s head is spinning. Are there reasons to give them some slack? Of course, but ugly ball is still ugly ball and last night’s loss was ugly ball.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 10, 2009 6:15 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
This has been my bitch all year
Frankly, I am paying really good money for 1/2 season tickets in the prime lower bowl area. (As I have done for a large number of years) Kahn blew up a roster that, while certainly not championship contending, had the ability to compete and make it fun to be at the games. That is far from where we are now.
People underestimate the Randy Wittman effect. Wittman was incapable of meshing vets while developing young talent. It was that way in Cleveland, it was that way in MN. I wanted to see the NEW COACH have a chance to sort that roster out. To see what could have been developed.
But Kahn choose not to give the new coach a chance with the existing players. So, we have a coach and a philosophy that is mismatched with our best offensive player. We have too many young players playing and still have no interior defense ability. All this will breed a lack of confidence and a losing attitude.
As either you or Wyn previously pointed out, the cap space created by all Kahn’s moves created only a few million dollars of additional the cap space than we still would have had if we had stayed the course until the trade deadline/end of season. I will still always believe that the value for Foye, Miller, Jefferson, or others. would have been far great at the trade deadline this year. Yet we choose to decimate out talent level prematurely.
Finally, that cap space is going to be worth far less to us than what people believe. We are not going to get a top tier player nor even a 2nd tier. There is so much money in the NBA that players finally have realized that taken 20% less and having fun on a winning team is better than the max in a dismal situation. LeBron was just quoted on that yesterday. I wish Kahn the best in getting that perception changed.
Sorry for the rant. I just feel I have been used this year and not at all happy that I have several thousands tied up in tickets for this “product”.
by Just A Fan on Nov 10, 2009 9:19 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
While I don't know that I would go as far as Just A Fan
I appreciate the spirit of the post. I’m not unhappy that they unloaded players, but I warned several times that this team could be historically awful, and that we shouldn’t be happy about that if it turned out to be true.
It’s way too early to make that judgment, but these back-to-back blowouts are exactly what I feared. It isn’t good for development to be this bad, and frankly, it occurs to me watching: who, exactly are they trying to develop? Other than Flynn, who on this roster is a) likely to be an integral part of the next good Wolves team, and b) isn’t already established (namely, Al Jefferson)?
Hollins? Jawai? I doubt they will ever play a major role on a good team, though they aren’t bad guys to take a flyer on. Brewer? I guess maybe. He’s certainly getting his development opportunity right now. They need to get Love back and working.
It’s painful, though, to have no choice but to play guys like Wilkins, Pavlovic, Pecherov, et. al. heavy minutes. And get blown out.
by Eric in Madison on Nov 10, 2009 9:43 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
JAF
I understand and agree with some of your points, but I think you’re underestimating the effect of Love and Jefferson’s injuries.
Even if we had Mike Miller and Randy Foye, I think the Wolves would be really bad with a 75% Jefferson and sidelined Love. The early part of the NBA season is always brutal for the bad teams. The top dogs win almost every game, and the other playoff teams are in a mad scramble to position themselves for a run. The weak teams get pummeled, as they’re facing the best effort of their opponents, before the fatigue, and for lack of a better word, disinterest, of some veterans sets in.
We would be better with Foye and Miller, but I still think our record would be very close to the same. Those guys are doing a lot of losing in Washington (albeit with injury problems of their own) as well.
It was a really bad break that this team could hardly afford when Jefferson tore his ACL. When Love broke his hand, we knew it was going to be downright ugly. I don’t think that it’ll be this way all year. My guess is that we win quite a few more games after the All-Star break, when we are healthier, Flynn and Ellington have more experience, and other teams slide into classic tank-mode. Worst case, we’ll win around 20 games.
by Andy G on Nov 10, 2009 10:23 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
With Foye and Miller we would have lost by 25 instead of whatever it was. Oh boy!
When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.
by Xand1 on Nov 10, 2009 10:32 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Frustration is understandable
It’s why I don’t go to a lot of games. But I think this conversation has occurred before between us, JAF: cap space acts just like an expiring contract and is probably more valuable than one, which means that better players (maybe not the best ones but better ones) can be added through trades. Also, most top players who get dealt get moved for 50-75 cents on the dollar, so cap space and young players can make an enticing package. The Miller/Foye thing will just have to be an agree to disagree thing, but I just doubt they would’ve received anything as valuable as the #5 pick because history indicates otherwise.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Nov 10, 2009 1:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
From a bargaining perspective
you are correct. But a poor performance by Foye or Miller could have translated into lesser value, too. Even decent performances probably would have only led to marginally better prospects.
If you’re going to blow up a team, which I am entirely in favor of, then detonate all at once and sooner rather than later. For too long it was always a piecemeal approach, tinkering here or there. Not much ever came of that. There’s not guarantee this will work either. But bigger risk, bigger potential reward.
I’m glad Kahn pulled the trigger and used a Thompson machine rather than McHale’s Blunderbuss.
by uncle rico on Nov 10, 2009 3:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
My question still is
What is going on with the defense? I have only been able to watch one game this year, so I need the insight of those who have watched this team. Reading through the stats, though, and it’s pretty brutal. The only general defensive stat I know of is basketball-ref’s Drtg (points allowed per 100 possessions). So far this year our defensive leader is…Damien Wilkins!! Yup, a Drtg of 107 pts/100 poss is the best on our hometown squad (for reference the best defensive rating each year is usually in the upper 80’s to low 90’s).
The putrid list:
Wilkins, 107
Al Jeff, 109
Brewer, 109
Stewie, 110
Flynn, 111
Gomes, 111
Hollins, 111
Ellington, 112
Sasha, 113
Sessions, 113
Jawai, 114
Cardinal, 115
That’s an average of 111 pts allowed per 100 possessions. What is going on?!! With numbers this bad I’m assuming that there is a schematic component to it-guys missing assignments or rotations or not collapsing at the right time. Any insight into this, or are we really simply not competing on this end?
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Nov 10, 2009 9:20 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
A combination of things
1. The players aren’t executing the scheme very well and are allowing too many easy hoops
2. Opponents have just shot well (the Warriors hit 5 more 3s than they normally do per game)
3. There’s a lack of effort at times (not getting back on defense gave the Warriors about 15 points)
4. They rely on Brewer too much for energy and hustle
5. Their bigs aren’t fundamentally sound and don’t rotate as well as they should or give hard fouls to prevent layups
by pagingstanleyroberts on Nov 10, 2009 1:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
My Answer
To play good defense you need good defensive players. We have:
Flynn — tries, but is about 5’10" in bare feet.
Brewer — is actually an above average defender, is tall for his position and has long arms, but he can be beaten up inside because he is so thin
Gomes — undersized as a 4, too heavy and clunky as a 3
Al — would be a sub-par defender as a 4, but we play him at a 5 where he is a particularly bad defender — doesn’t get good position, not an explosive leaper, playing against guys 3 inches taller and quicker afoot
Pecherov — actually about the right height as a 4 defender (7’), he will be an average defender because he is tall and has long arms, but he lacks strength and explosion.
What you need to be a great defensive club:
— big tough physical guards who can switch on defense, pressure the ball, and who are hard to shoot over
— rangy and fast wings who are at least 6’8" with long arms
— a 4 man like Garnett : big, rangy, tough, great at help defense
— a center who is 6’11" or above and who weighs at least 260 pounds (or, alternatively, a thinner or shorter center who is capable of blocking 3 shots a game)
So, we have small guards, a chunky non-rangy 3, a guy who wouldn’t make a good 4 defender (playing 5) and two guys who are about 50% of what you need from defenders.
And our bench is worse. So why exactly are you surprised? A coach can get guys to try harder on defense, but if you physically are outsized, outquicked and outweighed, you are never going to be an above-average defensive club.
by Hoops Maven on Nov 11, 2009 3:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
that may be true
but you are using top of the head height…need to use standing reach. D is all about being able to cover the most area while maintaining your position. Last time I checked a 3 foot forehead didn’t help your game. :) Now, ape like arms may help…if it doesn’t hinder your shot that is.
by TheEvilProfessor on Nov 11, 2009 3:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well
That is the Kevin McHale “sure Rashad McCants and Bracey Wright are 6’2” but each has SUPER long arms" proposition. You would have to be a freak of nature to make up for the lack of height. But that said, Kevin Love would be below average on both height and standing reach as would Jonny Flynn as would Al if you are going to play him at the 5 as would Gomes if you are going to play him at the 4. Use any standard you want, we are undersized and not very athletic. Watching Portland play MN last night was like watching a 7th grade team play against a 6th grade team.
by Hoops Maven on Nov 12, 2009 10:28 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
McCants 6’11 reach allowed him to check pretty much any SG, and some SF’s out there. His defensive issues were never from lack of size, they were all mental. Wingpsn and reach are way more impotant than height.
When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.
by Xand1 on Nov 13, 2009 10:45 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
And I mean 6’11 wingspan.
When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.
by Xand1 on Nov 13, 2009 10:45 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Agree about the "give up" issue
Although I am more concerned about the players than the fans. I expected losses, as I’m sure many of the players did, However, these types of losses will get to the players, and my fear is they either give up, act out, or tune out the coach. None of these helps the long term plans.
by Rumblebee on Nov 10, 2009 1:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Also, to the point about Corey Brewer
He is an island out there defensively. Get the guy some help. All night he was running around like crazy, trying to cover two guys because no one was rotating to open shooters. And whenever he forced a guy left or right as he took the ball into the paint, none of our bigs stepped up to cut off driving lanes.
I clearly remember a play where Corey forced Monta Ellis baseline on a drive, almost behind the backboard, and Ellis got a free layup anyway because Al couldn’t be bother to take an extra step to his left. One step to the left and Monta has to jump out of bounds to avoid a charge. That’s the kind of stuff that breaks a team defensively.
by Oceanary on Nov 10, 2009 1:29 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Echo
I noticed that too. It’s like all the bigs (Al, Pech, Hollins and Jawai) seem awed by Corey, because they certainly don’t step up on help-side or rotations. Cardinal and Gomes are the only ones that have assisted marginally.
While on that note, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a string of NBA games with so many completely uncontested 3-point shots. Our defense is completely confused by the second pass. Make a third pass to the angle, block or corner = wide open shot.
Lastly, the only positive on offense I’ve seen this season that left a lasting impact, was when Flynn took over in the 4th quarter against the Nets – and pulled up or drove to the hoop on every possession. It was rather ridiculous to even have the other four on the floor at the time, but he lead the comeback that lead to the eventual win. It might not be a bad idea to let the boys run some (fast-break, pick-and-roll, motion), at least until Love gets back and AlJeff is feeling better – then go back to the triangle. All of these losses piling up have to be disheartening. And I’m not sure anyone, besides Brewer, is showing signs of improvement.
by Boss10 on Nov 10, 2009 1:59 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Very solid point..
….he’s really having to leave his man a bunch to make up for the bad defense with the rest of his teammates.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 10, 2009 6:20 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Did anyone else play soccer in kindergarten or first grade?
Cuz if you did, and you remember what it was like… it pretty much sums up our defense:
Everyone runs straight to the ball. I swear everyone who touched the ball was double teamed… then they would make the easy pass to the open guy on the perimeter and two people would run at him causing him to pass it to one of the other two guys on the perimeter who were open. Once we learn how to rotate, we will be SO much better off. Inside and outside. Big Al will ABSOLUTELY HAVE to learn how to rotate to the cutting guard without giving up an easy pass to his guy.
Although I did like Hollins’ version of closing out on a perimeter player. He realized that he was long enough to contest a shot without having to jump past the guy so he closed out while never getting out of position.
by Mplax on Nov 10, 2009 5:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
excellent post
It might not be a bad idea to let the boys run some (fast-break, pick-and-roll, motion), at least until Love gets back and AlJeff is feeling better – then go back to the triangle. All of these losses piling up have to be disheartening. And I’m not sure anyone, besides Brewer, is showing signs of improvement
I love this point. It’s easy for us to say “awww, no problem, didn’t expect the team to win this season, thank the Lord we almost pulled even on %OREB”.
But if you are a competitive young NBA player it can break you if you are trying your hardest and lose by 39 to a very mediocre team. Adjustments have to be made to at least make sure we’re not setting records for futility
by Son of Gerald Green on Nov 10, 2009 6:37 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
pathetic
Please, less talk, if any, about draft picks, cap space, evolving triangle offense, master plans, or +/- stats about part time players. This team is not competitive and not entertaining. We are quite likely the worst team in the league right now. That it seems to have been planned to be that way is the most depressing. Watching them is a form of self-abuse. If McHale had orchestrated these moves, and not Kahn or if McHale was shoehorning players into an offense they seem ill-fitted to follow, how much support would he have on these boards? Other than the Jordan-led Bulls, or the Kobe-led Lakers, which other teams employ the triangle? I thought the NBA copies successful programs. Unless, of course, the key to the success of those teams were the players at the top and not the offense itself. I think Rambis is getting a pass because, well, he’s Kurt Rambis, and some sort of Laker aura surrounds him. When he was chosen many said he was the right guy for the job and a great choice. Based on what, exactly? He may become a great coach, but his resume, sans his playing name, was not out of line with others. Again, I plead for this team to at least get up to the level where some casual fans (not people here) could become interested again. A team without fans cannot stand.
by ogishkemuncie on Nov 10, 2009 7:12 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
yes but
when you start winning…fans just magically appear. Hence my suggested slogan for this year…“Embrace the Suck!” They needed to clean house. They need to make smarter draft decisions than the McHale era. They just need talented players. Yes, they NEEEED to play with more effort. Hell, they played better to open the season then they are playing right now. The hardest part for them is going to be regaining that focus level and trying to maintain it for the entire year.
by TheEvilProfessor on Nov 10, 2009 8:57 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
when does constant rebuilding become entrenched and insurmountable dysfunction?
I agree with your contention that the casual fan will respond to winning, and certainly we all agree that more talent is needed on this ballclub. And FWIW, the Wolves do have enormous flexibility with draft picks and finances in the coming years. However, I’m not at all convinced that they’ll do a good job managing/investing these assets. I’d say the jury is out on just how astute a judge of talent either Kahn or Rambis is.
Perhaps just as worrisome, Taylor is going to lose money again this year. I read some interview with him recently that blamed this largely on gate receipts - that advertising and corporate sponsorship was holding up, but that ticket sales are worse than they’ve ever been. I wonder if maintaining some baseline of respectability whilst trying to rebuild (even if this had meant slightly less flexibility) might have been a more prudent approach then “embracing the suck?”. Might have allowed us to retain at least some portion of casual fan-dom. And frankly, if you were Glen Taylor, would you invest the cap space that will surely be needed to bring in the requisite talent to compete, or might you be tempted to go with a minimal payroll and cut your losses? I’m starting to think that there’s as much chance of the Wolves becoming a Donald Sterling Clippers franchise as there is that they’ll be a playoff participant with a revitalized fan base.
On a similar note, the latest ad campaign basically owning up to their institutional incompetence (“we’ve made mistakes….. we’re re-re-re-re-re-building”) is rather curious. On the one hand it seems honest; on the other hand, it seems disingenuous. I for one am sick to death of plans, blueprints, and now a “manifesto”. After another 20-25 win season (if we’re fortunate), what’s the slogan going to be next year?
by miami91 on Nov 10, 2009 9:36 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
"How 'bout them Lakers!"
They’re originally from Minnesota.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Nov 10, 2009 9:47 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
embrace the past
Maybe in a nod to the Mpls Lakers, the Wolves should move their home games to the Armory. They likely still wouldn’t sell out, but at least it wouldn’t seem quite as empty. Concessions couldn’t possibly be any worse either.
by miami91 on Nov 10, 2009 9:50 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
at the end of the day
this is a business for Taylor. He will get his sterling like luxury tax payment this year already. If he wanted to do the full sterling thing, he could have had a much different offseason. He would have never signed Sessions or Hollins. He would have just kept some more of his expirings that were used in trades. HIs gate receipt problem was of his own design. Either he has faith in Kahn (assumption) and it works out or it doesn’t.
Hell, he could have sold more of his draft picks for cash too. But they didn’t. There won’t be any fan patience after this years draft and FA period. I will simply wait and see. IF it looks like more shuffling, I will stop rooting for the franchise. If it looks like they can actually get some pieces and something starts to take shape…count me in. Let’s not jump the gun though.
by TheEvilProfessor on Nov 10, 2009 11:01 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't like the slogan either.
Kind of scary that someone in the marketing department approved that one. I wonder how many additional tickets they forecasted to sell with the ad buy.
by Punisher#8 on Nov 10, 2009 12:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It really is kind of a weird slogan...
…and I’ve been trying to figure out what I think about it.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 10, 2009 3:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I let it sit for a few weeks.
And can’t figure out what they were thinking. I know I don’t like it. If you want to show appreciation for those of us that have suffered through the worst, there are other ways to do it.
As an ad campaign, playing up the mediocrity from the past won’t sell more tickets for games. Plus it costs money to print up the signs and post the posters and billboards I see around downtown.
by Punisher#8 on Nov 10, 2009 7:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I just wonder what they tell lower bowl season ticket holders
I don’t think I like it either.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 10, 2009 10:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The glorious 5 year plan to strengthen the Timberwolves begins!
by aarendsvark on Nov 10, 2009 1:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, we shall take the grain of the peasants and feed it into the machinery of heavy industry.
by oblivionspocket on Nov 10, 2009 3:39 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
+1
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
by timbo on Nov 11, 2009 12:02 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
by timbo on Nov 11, 2009 12:09 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Nice poster
comrade! Rosie the Riveter meets John Ford.
by uncle rico on Nov 11, 2009 12:36 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I had a Kulak in my Kolkhoz once. Not fun.
When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.
by Xand1 on Nov 11, 2009 10:13 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It's the Midwestern
Great Leap Forward!!
by uncle rico on Nov 10, 2009 3:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
So you're trying to tell me Kahn is going to die of a stroke?
I eagerly await the gulags his successor will bring to the land.
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 10, 2009 7:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Please
Yes, they suck, but constantly questioning the bigger picture is seriously overlooking contingent factors (Love is injured, Jefferson’s not healthy, rookie PG, new coach, system that takes a while to learn). Bottom line: people aren’t questioning Rambis or Kahn not because they think they’ve made all the correct moves but because they’re not going anywhere and because those evaluations are best made with more time.
As for the triangle, three things: most accounts have them running it about half the time at most, so it’s not their only option; second, systems are adjusted to fit the talent around them, and those adjustments are made with time; third, Jackson would’ve been 2 for 2 in taking non-Jordan-led Bulls teams to the playoffs with the triangle (they would’ve made it in ‘95 if he hadn’t come back) and was 2 for 2 in taking the pre-Gasol Lakers to the postseason. So it’s not like it isn’t successful with even mediocre talent (which the post-Jordan Bulls and pre-Gasol Lakers would qualify as).
by pagingstanleyroberts on Nov 10, 2009 1:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The Triangle -- Not a Good Fit
A team without Jordan, Pippen, Shaq or Kobe on the roster has tried to run the Triangle Offense as its primary offense twice.
1) Jim Cleamons decided to run it in Dallas — result, 28 wins, 70 losses, fired, never got another head coaching job.
2) Tim Floyd ran it in Chicago — result, 49 wins, 190 losses, fired. Scrapped the Triangle in New Orleans and was a .500 coach for one year..
The Bulls were defending NBA champions the one year they made the playoffs without Jordan, and they had Pippen who was first-team all-NBA and 3rd in the MVP balloting, plus Horace Grant, B.J. Armstrong and Toni Kukoc. So your definition of “mediocre talent” is different than mine.
The Lakers had Kobe and Lamar Odom both years “pre-Gasol” and added Andrew Bynum one year. Kobe was top 5 in the MVP balloting each year and still each team was barely above .500 and got eliminated in the first round. So if we add a better center (Al is a 4) than any we have, a better small forward than any we have and a first-team all-NBA shooting guard, we too can run the Triangle and finish barely above .500.
The Triangle is best used with teams who have good stand-still shooters and a bail out guy who can get the ball with 4 seconds left and get his own shot. It is not an offense for true point guards (Ron Harper, Brian Shaw, Derek Fisher, B.J. Armstrong, Steve Kerr). In the triangle, you get the ball over half court and then your PG flips it to the wing or the post and often never sees it again.
We have a GM who has drafted 2 PGs and signed another as a free agent, and a coach who insists on running an offense where Wayne Ellington might be a better PG choice than any of the other three guys (he is bigger and a better defender). Al Jeff is neither a passer nor a shooter, so the offense does not favor him, and we have 3 off guards currently shooting under 38%.
by Hoops Maven on Nov 10, 2009 2:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
I am not ready to give up on it just yet, but for all these reasons, let’s just say I am extremely wary of the triangle, and hoping that Rambis is flexible with it.
Unless this entire roster, including its few core guys, is going to be scrapped (would that be so bad?) then the triangle as it’s currently constructed will NEVER be the best way to maximize our talent.
by LoveTo on Nov 10, 2009 3:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
This is being blown out of proportion
They don’t use it as much as has been publicized and the main issue is having enough talent, not whether the system fits the talent. Every system is modified to fit the talent at hand, and the reason they’re having trouble scoring is not because of the triangle; it’s because their facilitator on offense is injured and they need to draw more FT attempts. Rambis is combining things he learned from Jackson and Riley in his offensive philosophy, not just starting with page 1 of Tex Winter’s playbook and running everything in it. The team as constructed won’t be making the playoffs or winning a title in any system.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Nov 10, 2009 5:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
It’s worth pointing out that the triangle is not our primary offense. It’s just one of the many offenses we run. Also, we’re running an adjusted version of the triangle that Lakers tried implementing last year called “Live Ball” where more emphasis is placed on and options are given to PGs, which does work to our advantage more than the traditional triangle. Check out my fanshot linking to the Sports Illustrated article on our running of the triangle.
by nja700 on Nov 10, 2009 5:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Don't remember where I saw this (probably somewhere on this site)
But Rambis said that the more the guys started understanding the triangle, the less he would probably use it. It’ just one of those things to teach guys how to move without the ball as that is the basic premise of the triangle. Ball movement and angles are always a good thing to learn.
On the flip side of this coin, I would have to believe that this is also what he is doing on the defensive end: Telling guys to double team and forcing them to learn how to rotate as a team or get destroyed by the longball.
I don’t know for sure if this is the plan, but I sure as hell hope we are only experimenting right now… Kind of a learning by mistakes and succeeding through failure:
“I’ve failed over and over and over again in my life and that is why I succeed.” -Michael Jordan
by Mplax on Nov 10, 2009 5:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
ESPN Future Power Rankings
Ford/Hollinger don’t seem to be too impressed with the Wolves future prospects. Based on (perceived) potential for the years 2010-11 through 2012-13, they have us ranked 22nd.
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=FuturePowerRankings-1-091110
If you’re not an ESPN Insider, you won’t be able to read the article. They rank all 30 teams on five factors: Players, Management, Money, Market, and Draft. Our Woofies are in the top half of their rankings only in money and draft.
by miami91 on Nov 10, 2009 9:57 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Talent gap
Sure, the warriors are highly unlikely to be a playoff team, which is what makes the big blowout loss especially painful. But the talent discrepency between the clubs is pretty large, which points out a few issues. First, the difference between the Warriors last night and the Ws who have been stinking up the league this season (apart from the competition) is that they played with flow and cohesion last night. Normally they play like the Wolves, who can attribute a lot of the problem to a new system and low chemistry among new faces. Yes, the Warrios had a lot of uncontested 3s, but it was due as much to excellent ball movement as to poor rotation on D. Jackson set a career mark for assists mostly due to playing smart ball as an undersized, facilitating PF. While the Wolves have no where near the outside shooting, they could get a lot more open shots once they devleop flow in Rambis’ system. So, the good news is that without changing personnel, you can be a much better team when you play with flow.
The bad news is that the non-playoff Warriors are more talented everywhere. If you merged the teams, how many Wolves would you keep on the 12 man roster? How many would start? I’d keep Jefferson starting over Biedrins, but in the right offense Biedrins is probably more valuable. I’m a big Love fan, but would I be building around Love or Randolph? I won’t even discuss the wing situation except to say that Brewer would become a niche role player. There could be argument, but I’d be playing Curry over Flynn, with the long term decision left to be decided.
So, I understand that rebuilding is a step at a time. Last year the biggest offensive deficiencies were at running the offense to set up the other players and having no outside shooting. This past offseason was about shoring up the PG spot. Check. Ellington was a good pick up, but doesn’t look like he’s a Morrow, a guy who is an instant outside threat as a rookie. The pieces really are not yet in place, so we won’t get it all solved, but I think the talent gap will narrow by next season, and I think the flow will be much better well before that. I definitely think Love will help more than many realize, but I may be overly optimistic about what his outside shot will look like this year.
by dropstep on Nov 10, 2009 10:50 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
agreed
The Warriors have good players and played extremely well last night. The problems are chemistry-based more than anything. I’ve never seen a player as fast on the court as Monta Ellis.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Nov 10, 2009 1:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s really going to be rough until these guys learn to embrace their roles and someone emerges as a primary option other than Jefferson. Logic and observation would say that guy should be Flynn, because he’s obviously the most talented perimeter scorer we have on this team.
IMO we really should be developing him as such, but putting the ball in his hands and letting him pound it like Jennings doesn’t seem to fit well into this system. I’m hoping it only seems that way because Rambis isn’t letting Flynn loose and is stressing that he learn the system, and that we’ll eventually see Jonny take on a bigger role as the season progresses.
When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.
by Xand1 on Nov 10, 2009 11:28 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Live in the Bay Area
Watched the game last night on HD with GS announcers….
1. Al Jefferson made the young bigs on Golden State look foolish. He isn’t 100%, but even at 75% he is still one of the best scoring big men in the league. The Golden State announcers were positively drooling over Big Al’s game and they also really like Sessions.
2. Pavlovic earned his money last night. After that hard foul, the Warriors stopped going to the basket. Someone on the wolves needed to send that message in the first quarter, rather than the 4th.
3. It’s apparent that this team is sorely lacking veteren leadership.
4. Golden State has an abundance of athletic young guards/wings. They would make an interesting trade partner.
5. I’d like to see more Sessions and Flynn (playing together) driving and kicking much like the golden state guards did last night.
6. Corey Brewer was the only wolf playing defense last night until after Pavlovic’s hard foul.
7. Kevin Love’s toughness and rebounding are sorely missed right now.
by DR_JPK on Nov 10, 2009 11:41 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Wings
Agree with all your takes, especially about trading for Warrior wings. What makes it possible is that they have a logjam there, and they definitely need something to improve their competitive position. But I can’t figure out what they need or what the Wolves have that they’d want. Any ideas on how the Wolves get Kelenna (without taking on Cap’n Jack)?
by dropstep on Nov 10, 2009 12:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Trades with Warriors
-Agreed, I like Azubuike. I’m not sure what GS would want for him though. I have no idea what goes through the mind of Don Nelson. Also, Brandan Wright might be available, he’d fit in with our plan to have injured bigs.
by aarendsvark on Nov 10, 2009 1:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
He's RFA after this year
But I don’t think he’s more than a good bench player. He had a good night shooting but most scouting reports have him as a guy who can’t create his own shot and is productive because he fits the Warriors’ system. He’d be as good an offensive wing as Gomes but not much more than that.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Nov 10, 2009 1:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Don't say anything on GSoM about it
you won’t get anything except offers of Jackson and Maggette for cap space and a pick. Not worth it as far as I am concerned. We would basically be writing the Maggette mistake off the books for them and Jackson wouldn’t want to be here. Apart from that, they are in love with every player on their team no matter how bad they might be.
Anyways, my point is, while discussion is nice, don’t bring it to them. Let the GMs deal with that because they lost Belinelli for nothing in reality and they wouldn’t even consider Belinelli for anyone but Flynn or Love from what it sounded like when I asked.
by Mplax on Nov 10, 2009 6:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
And a Grizz fan over on the ESPN boards suggested they only move Rudy Gay if it brought in a Devin Harris type of player. This is why fans, thankfully, don’t run NBA teams.
When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.
by Xand1 on Nov 10, 2009 7:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
HAHA
I am probably one of the biggest Gay-supporters around here…. ummm…. anyways…. But I can’t put Gay anywhere near Harris in terms of trade-value OR talent. He is an athletic FREAK with a high upside that will probably go untapped until he signs a contract with a contender and gets his sh!t beat by the vets.
by Mplax on Nov 11, 2009 12:34 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed on the hard foul..
…and I can’t believe it took them so long to do it. Rambis talked about their toughness and scrappyness in the post-game interview and how it has been lacking. You can’t just stand there and watch guys hit layup after layup without a hard foul or two to make them think twice about it.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 10, 2009 3:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Crap; that was bad… Started out OK but man…
Also, I’ve noticed we don’t make any runs, at all…
Official Kahn/Rambis band-wagon rider since 2009
by Wim (Belgium) on Nov 10, 2009 1:43 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
tough loss.
The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out, burns out farms, and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.
"New Man Law: If you don't show up for the draft you don't get to come later if you're picked. If you believe in yourself, show up and sit there. If nobody else believes in you, take it and cry like a man...in front of the cameras."
-Dave
by faith on Nov 10, 2009 2:33 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
My thoughts:
- I got the sense that Golden State was doing all that damage without even really running any plays. They’d fan out along the perimeter, and all four defenders off the ball were sagging into the lane before a pass or drive even happened. Sometimes, finding an open 3 point shooter was as simple as crossing midcourt and saying “Oh look, there he is!”
-Big Al abused poor Anthony Randolph. He’s so fun to watch when he thinks he can get to the rim for dunks and layups versus settling for jumpers and hook-shots.
-Corey Maggette has such an ugly game. He literally just drives right-handed straight into his defender as fast and as hard as he can. How is that even legal?
-I’m worried that people are starting to figure out how to defend Jonny Flynn. His drives are too out of control, and his finishing ability isn’t not enough to overcome the height differential. Last night, they were able to contest without fouling, and then started jumping his kickout passes.
-Curry looked really good, though that’s to be expected when his team is dominating.
-Pavlovic and Ellington are just terrible. Every game, both of them make the type of dumb plays that give the opposing team free points and are completely their fault. At least Ellington has an excuse.
-Hanny and Pete are better to listen to when we’re losing so badly that Hanny’s homerism is crushed, and J-Pete gets to make actual insights.
by John Doe on Nov 10, 2009 2:47 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Prediction
We will start competing regularly when:
-Brewer’s shot starts falling (meaning he starts converting more of his layups)
-Once Kevin Love comes back.
Just went and visited 82games and looked at the stats for our squad by position. We’re getting killed at SG and PF. I think those two guys will make or break the year for us.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Nov 10, 2009 5:14 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Statistical oddity
Thanks for the relating the breakdown from 82games. I checked out 82 games and saw where the opponent PER at SG and SF are 17.5 and 14.1, which are higher than the Wolves output but still low compared to the PF and C spots. MAkes sense when your best defender is a wing. However, when I looked at Brewers individual stats, his opponent PER is 24.9 at SG and 29.9 at the SF. I understand that he is not always matched up against the equivalent position on the floor, but those numbers are crazy high, well beyond the team numbers at the same position. Am I statistically illiterate, or is there some other explanation. Ellington’s opponent at the 2 has a PER of 11, Gomes opposing 3 is at a 6. Can Brewer’s penchant for leaving his man for help defense possibly have that big an effect?
by dropstep on Nov 10, 2009 7:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
This is where
Not being able to watch games is hurting me right now. From everything I gather Brewer is playing rather well on the defensive end, especially when he’s played at the 2. For the season he’s played perhaps 40% of his minutes there and is only 5 in +/, whereas he’s -58 when he’s at the 3. I think the PER differential is because of the absurdly high eFG% everyone has against us, but especially the shooting guards and small forwards we’ve been facing. If Brewer has been rotating on defense but not receiving help from the bigs, as has been stated here before, then his guy may be knocking down those shots and it gets chalked up as Brewer’s fault in these stats.
That’s why I think Love’s return will help make a huge difference. He’s one of those guys that’s not afraid to get in the scrum and knock balls, and he’s also one of those guys who appears to make the game easier or more straightforward for everyone else. I know on the IM teams that I’ve played on there are always those players that, when they’re on your team, it just seems so much easier to know where you’re supposed to be and what you’re supposed to be doing. Don’t know what it is, but Love is one of those guys. Now I’m not predicting a wholesale turnaround on defense, but I do think we’ll see a bit more attitude, better rotations and spacing, and hopefully someone who’s not afraid to get in his own teammate’s faces from time to time.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Nov 10, 2009 9:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I think Brewer's issue so far has been
rotation. He was guarding Roy and Roy didn’t do anything, but I believe he was playing as a 2-guard that game so his PER-matchup would have been either Blake or Miller (both of whom had a good game). Last night he was defending Jackson for most of the game and he did pretty well against him, but his PER-matchup would have been Azubuike at the 3 and…well… let’s not talk about that. Don’t really remember before that, but I think Brewer is a victim of the system here.
by Mplax on Nov 11, 2009 12:38 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, who do they match him up with?
They started Curry, Ellis, Azubuike, and Jackson. It’s not clear which one is the 3 and which is the 4.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Nov 11, 2009 2:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Jackson played the 4
His PER would likely be based on matching up against Azubuike. If Brewer was guarding Jackson, I’m not sure why, since Gomes seems like a better fit against him than vs. Azubuike. If he was guarding Jackson (that game was such a blur on the Warriors end of the court) I don’t think you can say he played well. I’d think giving up 10 pts, 5 or 6 rebs and 14 or so assists in 31 minutes would add up to a pretty big PER itself.
It could all be misinformation based on him guarding players he is not “matched against” but those numbers are so huge it’s hard to see how they get there. Small sample size to be sure, but if the opposing wing is not scoring against him, could the wing being guarded by Ellington or whoever really be lighting up so much at the same time he’s on the court?
by dropstep on Nov 11, 2009 4:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Never use
the defensive PER numbers. They are horrible. They don’t track enough defensive stats to adequately create a numerical score. Your best bet is adjusted +/- coupled with offensive PER to see how much of the +/- is determined by offense (good or poor).
by TheEvilProfessor on Nov 12, 2009 7:44 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I think the huge -58
Is partially because of Monday’s game (small sample size, moved to 3 as Ellington played 2).
by pagingstanleyroberts on Nov 11, 2009 2:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
