Drunken Orson Action!!!
by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 26, 2010 9:21 PM CST
97 comments
Al Jefferson should not be playing basketball right now. All you needed to see in order to know this was contained in a single minute-long stretch of action during the first quarter. With just over two minutes gone in the game Big Al took the ball in his favorite place on the court, in the low left block. He proceeded to start off his typical bag of trips by dipping his left shoulder, putting the ball on the ground, making a quick pump fake and....instead of rotating into a 2nd move or a counter step to the defender's positioning, Al was unable to get any lift or separation. He just threw the ball up towards the rim.
After the miss he looked completely unable to gather up any speed whatsoever and he was late getting back on defense. After a couple of similar trips up and down the court cumulating in a weak ass block attempt on Kevin Durant in transition where he was unable to turn around quickly enough to make a serious effort on the ball the Wolves' highest paid player was mercifully sent to the bench in favor of their newest player, Darko Milicic.
Aside from their best player either reverting into a useless player or having a much-worse-than-it-is-being-advertised knee problem (or a combination of both), the other elephant in the Wolves' room is the increasingly absurd rotations from Kurt Rambis. The team can only run with the "we're developing our talent" meme for so long. At the end of the day, and no matter how much we may talk about draft picks and cap space, we watch to see our favorite team win and this coaching staff is developing quite the track record of putting out rotations that do not give the squad its best chance at victory. They start their worst player. They hand the majority of their PG minutes to their most ineffective point guard. They do not pair their best paired bigs. They do not run out pairings that have a fairly solid chance at success.
Last night the Wolves put their best available lineup into the game with the score 25-16 after an extended OKC run: Ramon Sessions, Wayne Ellington, Damien Wilkins, Kevin Love, and Darko Milicic. This lineup lasted all of about 50 seconds before Kevin Love was yanked for Al Jefferson, who quickly proceeded to be ineffective on both ends of the court for a minute or two before being yanked early in the 2nd quarter.
What's the point in watching something like this? It's not entertaining. Something clearly is wrong with the product. Do we just continue to roll out draft speculation and talk about the overall improvement of Wayne Ellington, Corey Brewer, and Kevin Love (which, it should be noted, is the only thing that keeps me jumping off the deep end with this coaching staff; they really deserve a lot of credit for this)? What is the take-away from this product when it is clear that the best version of said product is not placed on the floor? Why not Sessions, Ellington, Brewer, Love, and Milicic for extended stretches if Jefferson is hurt or sucky? The only reason it was close for a while was because Jefferson was SOOOO terrible that the team's best lineup eventually had to be out there for a few moments together to keep it interesting....that and OKC sucked it up for long stretches of the game during the first 2 quarters.
Oy.
I'd like to say that I paid a lot of attention to the rest of this game. However, I was sidetracked by comment threads about Orson Welles, Pinky and the Brain, Soju, and an episode of Ghost Whisperer with a lesbian ghost love affair. It also did not help that the League Pass feed from OKC was riddled with the Thunder running a dual audio feed from their production truck. Nothing complements terrible NBA action like behind-the-scenes technical audio spliced together with homerism from the opposing team's announcing crew.
The only other nugget of game action I can remember in the 2nd half was checking the box score midway through the 3rd quarter only to find that Ryan Hollins had played more minutes than either Al Jefferson, Kevin Love, or Darko Milicic. I thought about this for a moment. While the game was on the line, Kurt Rambis played Ryan Hollins, the team's worst player, more than Al Jefferson, Kevin Love, or Darko Milicic. Checking back briefly during the 4th quarter I see that Ryan Hollins was yanked immediately following my 3rd quarter discovery and now that the game is out of hand, Darko, Love, and Big Al now all have more minutes than...well, it's time to go pour a drink. Tonight's Korean Cooking game wrap is simple: get a bottle of soju and pour.
EXTRA DRUNKEN ORSON ACTION...ANIMANIACS STYLE!!!
0 recs |
97 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Love and Milicic
I agree with your take on Jefferson and I’m befuddled as to why this isn’t getting more attention from the beat writers. WTF is he doing out there? Shut the man down and put him and us out of our misery.
Love and Milicic didn’t exactly impress in this game though either. Neither could really stop anyone in the paint and both labor to get back on defense, especially Darko.
The other sobering observation is how much damn better Westbrook and Durant is compared to anything we have. Depressing.
If you were comparing jefferson pre-injury a year ago and Love now, playing together I'd argue the talent is closer.
but its hard to see because of jefferson injury [its hard to remember how good he was on offense last year] and lack of supporting cast……
If we had a healthy Jefferson and minutes divided like this….
jefferon – 36 – Milicic 12
Love – 36 – milicic 12
gomes 36 – brewer 10
ellington30 – brewer 18
Sessions 36 – flynn 12
it would look different….
Some of the crazy rotations are “development”…. and in my opinion some are …that thing that Patton liked to do……….lol…
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Feb 26, 2010 9:48 PM CST up reply actions
So are you advocating for or against the "Al is injured" take here???
I honestly can’t tell…
"I'm gonna make you cry...I'm gonna make you cry and dip my cookie in your tears!!!"
Closer, but not close
Durant is still miles ahead of Jefferson as an offensive force even when Al is 100%. The reason? Efficiency. He is scoring at a high rate – much higher than Al has ever achieved – while at the same time sporting a sparkling 59 TS%. He can hit the three. He can pull-up. He kills you in transition. He gets to the line. He is a flat-out scoring machine and Al will never touch him in this regard. Add to this the fact that his defense has improved to the point of being pretty disruptive (due to his length), then Durant is really on a whole different level compared to Love and Jefferson. Westbrook isn’t quite the offensive force of Durant, but he gets pretty much wherever he wants and is a better defender than anyone on the Wolves.
by Rascal Flatts on Feb 27, 2010 7:23 AM CST up reply actions
TS% is overrated... most of a free throws value is merely another possession.
There is a small incremental amount added over the value of a possession.
A possession is worth roughly 1.1 points
a free throw is worth roughly .75 pts, so 1.5 points per 2 free throws.
Or an incremental gain of 0.4 pts per possession.
Durant’s career effective FG% 49.1%, Jefferson is 50.3% and that is hurt by his performance this year when hurt.
Durant has been surrounded by a much better supporting cast, which helps a player get more less contested shots.
Finally, I posted a few days ago, showing jefferson was one of the top 3 offensive big men under age 23 in history. [He has since been injured.]
People forget so easily.
By the way, I’m NOT saying jefferson is better than Durant. Even when healthy I’d have traded Jefferson for Durant. But when Jefferson is healthy there is not as much difference between them as you imply.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Feb 27, 2010 9:01 AM CST up reply actions
under no circumstances
should you think Al is even close to Durant the player. Durant is a top 3 player. I don’t think this can even be argued right now. The fact that Durant takes more lower percentage shots from outside than Al ever has in tandem with the fact that one injury year out of 6-7 isn’t going to impact your effective rate that much should have been red flags in your analysis.
Durant >>>>>>>Big Al.
The unknown is Westbrook as his supporting cast is better than Love’s. However they have completely different roles as far as what makes them valuable. So I call push. They both need specific types of players around them to make what they do really well greatly exceed what they can’t do.
A Darko Fan since 2010!
by TheEvilProfessor on Feb 27, 2010 9:21 AM CST up reply actions
Its not whether you rate Love as good, better or worse than Westbrook.... its the full, 8 or 9 man rotation you play with...
If jefferson had three or four great 3 point shooters, like a Dwight Howard, that would spread the floor and stop teams from focusing their defense on stopping him so much.
Jefferson has never had that…. the one time he had one great 3 point shooter playing with him… Miller, Miller refused to shoot 3 pointers at a high rate…..
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Feb 27, 2010 9:45 AM CST up reply actions
Why red flags?...see again jefferson vs his peer group of big men.
Jefferson’s career eFG% is higher than Durants… I just just said, it would be higher still without injury….
you are the one who raised the issue of FG% not me.
Again, vs Jefferson’s peer group of big men age 23 and less, on the offensive end, he was #3 ALL TIME according to the stats I’ve shown from Basketball reference.
For ages 24 and 25 jefferson has been recovering from injury.
see the analysis below if you have forgotten.
http://www.canishoopus.com/2010/2/23/1322895/how-do-we-evaluate-individual
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Feb 27, 2010 9:51 AM CST up reply actions
Rascal
noted that Durant is a beast…he quoted TS%. You then responded to him saying that Al’s in only slightly lower and mentioned the injury. Durant is not a post player. His baseline for effective FG% is lower than Al’s because of where he plays.
Question: In a two player draft for Durant and Big Al, who goes first?
Answer: Durant 99.9999999% of the time.
A Darko Fan since 2010!
by TheEvilProfessor on Feb 27, 2010 10:37 AM CST up reply actions
I find it hard to take a person’s opinion about anyone involved in their moniker seriously unless they’ve proven in the past to be without substantial bias.
KLJ, I love the enthusiasm, but I tire of reading the same pro-Jefferson and pro-Love stuff over and over where you completely bend stats to support your view and discredit or ignore things that show the contrary.
And yes, I realize I’m being a grade ‘A’ douche by making this reply, but I’d go insane reading this forum if I left it unsaid.
by Casperkid23 on Feb 27, 2010 11:35 AM CST up reply actions
I said Durant was better - look above, the shooting percentage was brought up initially by someone else.
I was just pointing out TS% is a misleading state and showed Jeffersons career eFG% was better.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Feb 27, 2010 12:32 PM CST up reply actions
Agreed
In his first two years, this could be argued. Not. any. more.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Feb 27, 2010 10:34 AM CST up reply actions
are you assuming that jefferson will never recover and become the player he was before injury?
With ACL injuries they say it takes a year to get back physically and a second year to forget about the injury.
I’d argue that jefferson was getting there in January.. then sprained the other knee.
See jefferson’s monthy stats to better understand.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jeffeal01/splits/2010/
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Feb 27, 2010 12:38 PM CST up reply actions
TS% is overrated?
I don’t entirely understand your criticism of true shooting percentage.
First of all, TS% isn’t completely just another possession. Technical foul shots and “and-1” baskets constitute a percentage of free throws that do not account for a completely separate possession.
Second, even to the extent that TS% reflects the fact that free throws are just another possession, that still doesn’t address the importance of factoring in those possessions into any efficiency comparison between two players. In other words, there is still value in what a player does with a possession where he just shoots free throws.
Take Kevin Durant’s line last night: 25 points on 8-17 shooting and 8-9 shooting from the line. Most studies show that each free throw is worth about .44 possessions, so Durant’s 9 free throws accounted for about 4 possessions. (.44*9=3.96). Durant of course converted 8 points from those 4 possessions, which is effectively like going 4-4 from the field. So while FG% would show that Durant merely shot 47% from the field, if you convert his free throw possessions into standard FG made/FG attempted, he actually went more like 12-21, or 57% from the field.
If we just compared Al and KD on the basis of FG% or EFG%, we would be missing an incredibly important piece of the picture (i.e., what KD did with those other 4 possessions where he shot free throws).
Let me begin by saying, I misunderstood how TS% was calculated... but I think there is still a problem. See the formulas for eFG% and TS% below.
eFG% = (FG + 0.5 * 3P) / FGA
TS% = PTS / (2 * (FGA + 0.44 * FTA))
Effective field goal percentage takes into account both 2 pt and 3 pt Field Goal attempts.
But TS% doesn’t take into account 3 pt field goal attempts. So 3 pt shooters are given an advantage when calculating 3 pts shooting percentage.
I’ll explain this way.
eFG% says, each field goal made divided by 1 two point FG and 1.5 three point field goals.
For TS% each point point scored is divided by 2 FG attempts and 2 Free throw attempts.
But keep in mind that there are 2 pts per two point FGA and 3 pts per 3 point FGA
so attempts are adjusted for 2 pt field goals but not for 3 point FGA or for fouls on three point shots when the shooter gets three free throws.
So while TS% isn’t flawed in the way, I initially believed, it is still flawed because it over values 3 point shooting.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Feb 27, 2010 1:48 PM CST up reply actions
Simple example
If Player A hits 2 out of 6 field goal attempts, and both happen to be 3’s, his TS% is 50% (6 points divided by 12).
If Player B hits 3 out of 6 field goal attempts, and both happen to be 2’s, his TS% is 50% (6 points divided by 12).
Plug in the numbers. Doesn’t sound like 3 pointers are overvalued to me. eFG% will be the same too, as there are more ways to do the calculation. An attempt is an attempt. The fact that sometimes a make counts as 3 instead of 2 is appropriately reflected in the numerator of TS%.
by Rascal Flatts on Feb 27, 2010 3:10 PM CST up reply actions
Let me give you a simpler example... 6 FGA all 3 pointers - MADE all 6.
[numerator] = 6 times 3 pts each = 18 points
[denominator] = 6 times 2 FGA = 12
18/12 = 150%. That shouldn’t happen. At least I don’t think it should.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Feb 27, 2010 3:20 PM CST up reply actions
It results in 150%....
….to reflect the fact that each three point field goal is worth 1.5 times as many points as a made 2-point field goal.
Would you expect somebody who goes 6/6 from 2 to have the same influence on a game as someone who goes 6/6 from 3?
the calculation should reflect the fact that 3 pt field goals are worth more but in sports stats you can't go higher than 100% of anything.
look at eFG%… its adjusts for both 2 pt and 3 pt field goals… so 100% is still max.
something like this needs to be done for TS%.
TS% should have the type of adjustment that eFG% has. 2 point FG are calculated but 3 pt FG are cal separately.
Thats why TS% is not a good stat.
If a guy could shoot
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Feb 27, 2010 3:56 PM CST up reply actions
Check your eFG% math
It maxes out at 150%, too.
You’ve never heard of someone giving 110 percent? In basketball, it’s possible.
while I agree that it would be better for Jefferson to sit until his knee sprain heals (the "other" knee) you can't blame him for the loss tonight...
He was minus 10
Brewer minus 21
Flynn minus 24
Gomes minus 23
Love minus 15
Milicic minus 14
What is most interesting is Sessions – he shot 1 for 7, yet was still plus 7
Thats the advantage of “steady” PG play. Getting the team into the offense. Getting the ball to hot shooters. Being able to make the simple pass. [When is Flynn going to learn how to make an entry pass???] etc..etc…
Surprisingly – Hollins plus 1 [even a broken clock is right twice a day]
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Feb 26, 2010 9:41 PM CST reply actions
Where amazingly bad happens
This game…nobody played well. There is no ray of hope from this tilt—they all sucked.
More beer.
by Eric in Madison on Feb 26, 2010 9:48 PM CST reply actions
So bench Flynn then?
Look I agree that the rotations are frustrating, and believe me I’m not drinking Kahn’s Kool-Aid, but come on, you can’t sacrifice development for meaningless wins at this stage of the process, I don’t watch the team to see them win every game, I’m watching for the player development, and Flynn was your 6th pick. Why bench him for Sessions? To go for 26 wins instead of 21? Better to give Flynn the minutes, see what you have, hope he develops, Sessions is clearly more effective now but Flynn has a higher ceiling.
Has Flynn's game improved... he does have fewer turnovers... than early in the year..
but in terms of creating offense for others, especially big men haven’t seen much.
Being able to make “simple” passes like an entry pass to a big man.. it always seems to be an adventure.
guess, I’m saying flynn’s development seems to have plateaued since late december, so if playing time isn’t making him better, let him earn more of the playing time by improving his game.
Players have to improve individually and as a group… if you don’t play your “best” players together much, the “good” players become discouraged. Its hard to play well, when guys like Hollins & flynn miss defensive rotations.
It would allow guys like Jefferson, Love, Sessions, Brewer, ellington and Gomes to work better together, to improve team defense and offensive “chemistry”… interior passing and the like. These are the guys who have been on the best 5 man units plus minus all season…. you make Flynn and Hollins and others earn playing time….. UNLESS YOU REALLY WANT TO T*%K, then you do the crazy stuff rambis has been doing.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Feb 26, 2010 10:07 PM CST up reply actions
I have no idea...
…what they do. Panic? Worry about Kahn’s ability to handle 3 picks in the upcoming draft? Wonder why the front office hasn’t changed any personnel between the McHale-era draft team and the group that will head into the 2010 Draft? Ignore these questions for a couple six or seven brewskis?
I think the problem with Flynn is what he develops into. It’s not anything this team needs, especially in comparison to what else was on the draft board. If they wanted a scoring point, they royally screwed the pooch by not picking Curry. If they wanted a facilitating point, they had Lawson. If they wanted a combo, they had Jennings. Instead, Kahn made the most McHale-esque pick he possibly could have made: a “character” guy who made his name with late-season heroics on national TV.
It’s not that he can’t or won’t develop; it’s what he’ll develop in to. It’s the type of player he already is. Expecting him to become a point guard (vs. a scoring guard who occasionally passes) is like expecting a guy who makes his living by being a black hole in the low left block to suddenly become Vlade Divac in the pinch post.
OK, enough depressing talk. How about Wayne Ellington!?
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Flynn
Seems like he has regressed lately not improved. So many bad decisions leading to turnovers or forced shots. Takes too long on the entry pass after over-dribbling. I don’t know. More Sessions for sure. Can’t reward bad play. I don’t see how extra practice, in the form of playing time, on bad technique can do much more than hurt his confidence (and the team).
Not that this applies, perhaps, but I have seen games where a player like Kobe will purposely not shoot (or almost not shoot) for the entire first half in order to set up teammates. Maybe get Flynn to do this to force him to focus on setting up teammates. I know this isn’t preseason, but he really needs to work on this skill first and foremost.
by ChicagoViking on Feb 27, 2010 7:34 AM CST up reply actions
Are we really already going down this road?
Stats-wise, Jennings is similar to Flynn. Lawson is two years older than him; I’m not saying it’s the same, but isn’t this at least a little similar to the debate that used to go on in Britt’s 3-pointer comments where people said they screwed up in taking Brewer instead of Al Thornton? Again, I’m only making that comp because of the age difference. As for Curry, as John Hollinger pointed out, it’s difficult to say the Wolves screwed up by not taking him because the Warriors system so obviously plays to Curry’s strengths in ways that the Wolves’ system isn’t yet playing to Flynn’s. If there’s any system that places less of a burden on the point guard to be the sole facilitator, it’s the triangle. I’m more concerned about Flynn’s sometimes-sloppy play and lack of defensive intensity.
Overall, all I’m saying is that no judgment of Flynn can take place until the end of his 3rd year. Think about it; we knew who McCants was after his 3rd year, who Foye was, and are starting to see who Brewer is. If I had bet anyone on this site in Brewer’s rookie year that Brewer would break the franchise record for consecutive games with a 3-pointer, my guess is at least 90% of the posters would’ve bet that he wouldn’t.
This franchise can’t afford to make premature judgments with talented players. The draft is the main way this team will get better, and though drafting is obviously important, so is making sure that they don’t give up on guys too soon. I have no problem with dumping role players who don’t fill their roles (Gomes, Hollins, Pavlovic) and replacing them with guys who bring things to the table almost every night (Wilkins, Darko), but that’s the reason teams cycle role players in and out: if this is all they’ve got and it’s not complementing the team’s best players, it’s time to find some other guys who can complement them. But that’s different than what’s going on here. There are plenty of teams who don’t have their top players in ideal situations but make it work through surrounding them with the appropriate role players. One could say that Orlando should’ve had a Lewis/Turkoglu death match because they were both tall 3s who didn’t defend that well, but they played to their strengths and would’ve kept them together had Turkoglu not wanted to leave.
As for trusting Kahn’s decision-making, it’s a dilemma, to be sure. If this team isn’t at least .500 two years from now, I’ll be on this board after every game posting that Kahn and Rambis have to go, just like I was on Britt’s board last year after every game saying that Wittman and McHale have to be shown the door. But it’s too early to judge.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Feb 27, 2010 11:01 AM CST up reply actions
Well said
Losing and losing ugly gets us all in foul moods. Now, back to the fjords of Norway.
"Never make predictions, especially about the future." Casey Stengel
I know where there are shoals, shoals of Cod there!
Eating frozen peas in the gulf currents!
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
hahal what about the prairie-fed cattle?
the cartoon version of “Rosebud Frozen Peas” is good, too.
“Rosebud frozen peas, full of country goodness and green pea-ness. Wait, that’s terrible. I quit.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH1PJTY9AVA
"Never make predictions, especially about the future." Casey Stengel
Excellent post, PSR
“This franchise can’t afford to make premature judgments with talented players.”
This is what is happening with Jonny Flynn, with all of the hate-filled comments on the game threads and in the game wraps. He’s barely 21, and a rookie point guard in some form of the triangle offense. He wasn’t a Top 3 pick, or somebody who we expected to dominate right away. Why in the world is he bashed so frequently by so many fans?
It has to be impatience, and it’s understandable. The problem is, the same fans who get excited about the draft, and building through that process, turn around and expect instant results from 20-year olds rookies. That’s not usually how it works.
Durant didn’t look nearly as good as a rookie as he does now. Not even close, and I even remember a Britt Robson column that called him out as the most overrated player in the NBA. How is Durant doing now, in his third year? Deron Williams had pedestrian stats as a rookie. Now, he’s arguably the best point in the NBA. Derrick Rose was an instant-impact guy, but he was also the #1 pick in a strong draft.
I don’t know what Flynn will become, and if Rubio comes over, I’m not sure that it matters all that much. But it’s too bad that he’s facing these impatient Wolves fans, this year — tortured or whatever we are, it’s clearly affecting our expectations of young rookies.
Deron's an interesting comparison
As S-n-P says, though, it’s more what Flynn might become. Deron Williams, given his attributes, you could see the future there….
Also Sloan wasn’t at all shy about letting Deron ride the pine during his rookie season. Williams’s role changed a handful of times, even though he was playing alongside quite mediocre (really less than mediocre) veteran points. That’s a contrast to Rambis, here, and one I’m puzzled by. I’ve no idea why we’re being so doctrinaire about Flynn’s role. It almost plays like the Wolves absolutely know they’re dealing Sessions coming up right quick, or something.
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
I'd read it the opposite way.... if we were dealing Sessions, we'd showcase him.
At least let Sessions start, give flynn playing time to develop him, but give Sessions the more prominent role.
It looks like we are showcasing Flynn by starting him and giving him minutes even when not showing much improvement as has been the case the last couple of months.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Feb 27, 2010 2:00 PM CST up reply actions
Recently we had someone (Just a Fan?) saying the Wolves have a couple of deals already,
which they were just waiting on the offseason for. If Sessions was one of those trades, it’d be fine to continue playing him this modest amount.
(Shrug.) One can always read things crazily.
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
Rookie numbers:
Deron: 10.8 ppg 4.5 apg in 28.8 mpg
Flynn: 13.8 ppg 4.3 apg in 29.0 mpg
Deron was 21 when his rookie year started — Flynn turned it in the middle of the season. So age doesn’t really factor in much, here.
but you don't show deron's shooting percentages and ass/to ratio both far better than flynn
in ihis rookie year williams shot 41.2% and 41.6% from 3 point range he also had an ast/to ratio of 2.5 which is good for a rookie
Flynn’s ast/TO ratio of 1.5
williams ast/TO ratio of 2.5
Williams was a much better PG, right from the beginning…
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Feb 27, 2010 2:16 PM CST up reply actions
Deron is, was, and will be a better player. But Flynn isn’t exactly a catastrophe of a draft pick. If Curry’s stats translated to wins, and we didn’t have Rubio’s rights, then a stronger case could be made. That would also assume that Jonny won’t get better – a bold prediction.
But, Deron’s a recent example of a rookie point guard, drafted very high (and ahead of an MVP candidate-PG) who improved a ton after his mediocre rookie year.
But the constant Flynn-bashing is just bitching out of frustration and impatience. Or the Bill Mussellman/Larry Brown philosophy that you player your best players, at all times, and rookie development is not a concern, whatsoever.
we disagree on williams 1st year being mediocre.....
willliams shot 42 % from 3 point range, thats GREAT!
williams also had an assist to Turn Over ratio of 2.5 thats on the upper end for rookie PG. This showed that williams could facilitate at this level.
People who are worried about Flynn, are not worried about his becoming a better scorer. Its whether he will learn to facilitate at a high level. williams showed he had that capability from his rookie year. Flynn really hasn’t shown it yet this year.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Feb 27, 2010 2:33 PM CST up reply actions
If 11 points and 4.5 assists is a great season, then how would you describe the current Deron Williams, who has the same efficiency/turnover numbers, but with way more production?
I don’t think Webster would have a word for it.
The point is, and this is all I’ll say on it, since it’s getting repetitive, Deron is a recent example of a rookie point guard who started off a little slow and had huge improvement through years 2 and 3.
I'd say Williams was a young back up player for old school Sloan who felt younster's earned playing time and shots!
and I’m saying maybe thats what we should do to Flynn also…[if we aren’t using his playing time to tank.]
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Feb 27, 2010 3:03 PM CST up reply actions
Too far down on Flynn?
I get that Flynn hasn’t been running the team well and that it our best chance to win is with Sessions starting, but it seems like you’re a little too far down on Flynn in a few ways.
1. The assumption that there is a 0% chance he becomes a better facilitator. It might not be the most likely outcome, but I think with another camp and pre-season, some lights could come on.
2. The assumption that, should Flynn not become a better facilitator, that he doesn’t bring “anything this team needs”. If you think that Rubio is coming (which you do), we’ve got our starting PG and Flynn could bring some nice spark off the bench. He has speed, he can get to the rim, and his shot isn’t awful.
3. That drafting him was, ex ante, an obviously bad decision. I’ve said that I was surprised we took him and that we should have traded out of the pick, but it’s not clear to me that he was a horrible pick assuming we use it. Curry may be taller, but Flynn actually has a slightly longer wingspan, is quicker, and has a much stronger build. Curry also hadn’t shown that he could play the point effectively. Jennings, at the time, looked like a train wreck waiting to happen. Lawson looked like a product of the system with little upside (3+ inches shorter wingspan than Flynn and a lower vertical).
All of this is my long-winded way of saying two things: I haven’t given up hope on Flynn; and I don’t think choosing Flynn indicates that Kahn is incompetent. Kahn will get the chance to make much bigger mistakes than drafting Flynn in the next year.
by Madison Dan on Feb 27, 2010 11:07 AM CST up reply actions
Fair point
Flynn is as frustrating a player to watch as I can remember, taking bad shots, missing open guys, leading the team in shots, etc.. Ugh, I’m as annoyed as anybody, but you have to play him, and you have to give him crunch time minutes, Ramon Sessions is never going to play PG for a championship Wolves team, he’s a nice player, but he is what he is. Flynn, while annoying, has much greater potential, and you have to try to see what he can become. Ask the Celtics about Chauncey Billups, hell ask the Wolves about Billups. PG’s need time.
No...you don't have to give him minutes...
He needs to earn them…like Kevin Love did last year. That is how you get SUCCESSFUL crunch time minutes…not OOPS I dribbled off my foot again and we lost crunch time minutes.
And as far as using the word “potential” for Flynn. Well, watch the scene in Shawshank Redemption where old Red is up for parole for the final time. Then substitute the word “potential” for “rehabilitated.” It’s a made up word that people use to further their own opinion.
As long as he is our starting PG, and getting a majority of minutes, we will never sniff .500…much less be a playoff team.
"I'm gonna make you cry...I'm gonna make you cry and dip my cookie in your tears!!!"
Yeah, you're right, no rookies get better in subsequent seasons
Thanks for showing me the light! If they don’t cut it in their rookie season, get rid of them!
by pagingstanleyroberts on Feb 27, 2010 12:33 AM CST up reply actions
What does Jonny Flynn do?
That convinces you he is worthy of patience? What skill-set does he possess that is not a pathetic version of Randy Foye? Have you learned nothing from the past?
"I'm gonna make you cry...I'm gonna make you cry and dip my cookie in your tears!!!"
Jonny Flynn gets to the line
at a much, much higher rate than Foye ever did or does. Per 40 minutes, Flynn is one of only 4 rookie guards in the NBA’s top 40 guards in terms of FTA/40 min. Above him are Evans and Harden and right below him is Jennings.
http://www.hoopdata.com/regstats.aspx?team=%25&type=pm&posi=G&yr=2010&gp=20&mins=20
Flynn gets to the line 4.8 times per 40 minutes. Jennings is at 4.4 FTA/40, Foye is at 3.5 FTA/40, Mayo at 3.1 FTA/40, and Curry at 2.6 FTA/40.
I’m not a huge Flynn fan either, but when I want to be a Flynn apologist his ability to draw contact and get the FT line is where I look. For a franchise that has always struggled to get free throw attempts this ability could be key. As he gains more experience his FTA should increase and his other weaknesses should diminish.
This is his strength when compared to guys like Steph Curry.
Much respect...
And I like your takes, but..
Supporting Jonny Flynn because his FT% is slightly better than Foye’s or Curry"s is specious at best, and disengenuous at worst. I’m a great putter in golf (no shit…I really am), so would you choose me over Tiger Woods? Didn’t think so…
Jonny Flynn was and is a 2nd round talent. David Kahn got charmed. I am still waiting for someone to tell me WHY Jonny Flynn will be great. Funny…no one can say a thing without using the term “future potential.”
"I'm gonna make you cry...I'm gonna make you cry and dip my cookie in your tears!!!"
So what you're saying is...
… that no one will convince you the present Flynn isn’t determinative of Flynn 2011-14 all they do is make reference to the future? Maybe a good thing you weren’t in charge of Love’s fate at this point last year, then. Props on the putting, though.
Yes...
I will not be convinced with a simple “he will get better.” I have yet to hear someone tell me why. His lack of improvement in any area so far this year makes me think this. Kevin Love was showing very serious signs of improvement by this point in his rookie season, thus he was being rewarded with more minutes. Jonny has been handed his minutes, has shown no signs of getting better, and continues to start, thus my negative view. It’s on both Jonny and the coaching staff.
And thanks for the putting compliment. It’s the only thing that keeps me at bogey golf. I’m like Jonny. I do one thing very well, and I stink at the rest of the game, but it’s enough to keep the suckers thinking I’m a decent player, and asking me to play in scrambles.
"I'm gonna make you cry...I'm gonna make you cry and dip my cookie in your tears!!!"
The flaw in your golf comparison..
It’s not that Jonny shoots free throws well (though he does). It’s that he GETS to the free throw line well. Which would be like being able to get on the green at a high rate, which is very important to golf.
How do ya like them apples?!
:)
You actually give some ammo to the pro-Flynn camp
As lousy as the rest of your golf game is, you apparently still bring value to a team. I think Flynn will fall into the same category, not great all around, but valuable in the right role.
Also, Flynn is definitely better than 2nd round talent. Top 10 pick, questionable…but he can play for 10 years in some role, that makes him worth more than most picks after the lottery.
no problem
I’m not supporting Flynn. I’m answering your question: what does Jonny Flynn do?
Getting to the line is the one thing that he does at a 1st-round pick level (possibly an elite level if you’re willing to see potential.
But yes, on pretty much everything else (shooting, passing, basketball IQ) curry’s got him beat.
Flynn doesn't map well to Foye
Randy Foye was always a “’tween” guard. He’d never been a point in college; though he saw the ball a ton late in games, he’d never had primary ball-handling responsibility. He came into the league with the ability to get it to the rack, but not much of an outside game; after his microfracture he lost the driving ability and it never came back to the same extent. After his injury, Randy worked like a dog to develop his outside shot. In any case his court vision has always closed down, dramatically, in a way Flynn’s doesn’t show. Jonny’s not good at handing off to bigs, but he does see certain assists a ton better than Randy Foye would have.
I’m not the world’s biggest Flynn booster, not by any means, but the comparison to Foye just doesn’t work that well. If you’re wanting to tear down the temple on Flynn, compare him to T-Hud for us. Now that would get a response.
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
agree on Foye vs. Flynn
Flynn does have better court vision, especially in open court. But we all realize that this isn’t really a compliment.
Notes:
Foye never had microfracture surgery, just a cracked knee cap that needed time to heal.
Also, Foye’s best season at getting to the line was actually last year 2008-2009, where his FTA/40 minutes was 4.4.
flynn’s is already 4.8 FTA/40, as a rookie. As a rookie, Foye was at 4.1.
Question: Can we expect Flynn to improve at what is his only above average skill so that it becomes an elite skill?
I haven’t looked at hoopdata to see if FTA/40 shows an improvement over time for players who are currently at high levels of FTA/40. This would suggest that good players get better at getting to the line rather than are “born” great at getting to the line.
only the bump
at getting calls once you aren’t a rookie. Some players never get the calls and others can get grazed and get the call.
A Darko Fan since 2010!
by TheEvilProfessor on Feb 27, 2010 10:39 AM CST up reply actions
I’d bet anything his FT drawing will increase. He’s almost violent in his quest to draw contact from bigs, and the refs will usually notice guys who have skills like that and start rewarding them if they keep playing that way. Look at Love and the all the foul calls he draws in rebounding scrums. He forced the refs to notice how well he gets position down there and, subjectively, it sure seems like he gets more whistles than he did early last year.
When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.
I saw many of Foye's games
Foye was basically allowed to freelance when he played and still showed no ability to bring the ball up the court against pressure, facilitate for teammates, or consistently get to the line. His game-winners were wild bank shots that went in, and for every wild banker, there were several attempts that got stuffed. There were games where he had no offensive impact. Not to mention that he was a 23-year-old rookie.
Flynn’s much more restricted and looks lost because what he’s always done isn’t what the offense is asking him to do. That’s an issue of building new habits, not talent. And as littleboxes points out, his skills when scoring around the hoop are a level above Foye’s. He’s been able to convert at the rim in the clutch more consistently than Foye. At the very least, he’s always had some offensive impact on the game. And his outside shooting and mid-range game are nowhere near developed. Not to mention that he was 20 when the season started.
I’m not a huge fan of Flynn’s game. But this franchise has to develop their lottery picks for at least 3 seasons, especially if they’re early-entry guys. (I disagree with the take that no one else in the top 10 wanted Flynn, because my guess is at least Milwaukee and probably the Knicks would’ve seriously considered him.) There are so many examples of rookies who didn’t figure it out right away and examples of rookies who produced but never got any better. It’s too early to tell.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Feb 27, 2010 11:21 AM CST up reply actions
As rookies, they are close
Both convert 55% of their “in close” shots according to 82games.com as rookies. I think what Flynn has in explosiveness he gives up in height. I’m also not sure how much of this is a ref thing. I can’t count the number of times Flynn takes it to the hoop and gets his shot blocked or misses and ends up on his ass. On most of those drives I can’t really tell if he’s been fouled or not. My sense is that he’ll get a few more of those calls starting next season, but often times I think it’s his own theatrics in an attempt to get a call.
Another area these two are similar in is their inability to go left and finish. Each are much more comfortable going right and putting up a prayer than going left with a clearer path to the basket. We all thought this was something Foye could improve upon, but he never did. Let’s hope Flynn does.
by Rascal Flatts on Feb 27, 2010 11:39 AM CST up reply actions
I’ve seen Jonny finish with his left hand more this year than I saw Randy do in his tenure with us. You’re right that he prefers to go right, but he’s a much better ambidextrous finisher than Foye was.
Also, I’m curious on the difference in volume of in close shot attempts between the two. Is that listed? It sure seems like Jonny shoots a lot more at the hoop at Randy did, but that’s a purely subjective take.
When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.
The thing I keep telling myself
if Flynn wasn’t drafted to be the long term starting PG on the Wolves, that is Rubio. As long as Rubio is apparently improving and playing against good competition, I will still consider this a good draft. As to Flynn, he is probably a 6th man instant offense guy. Whether he accepts that and sticks with the Wolves is up to him. Unfortunately, those guys usually have to move once or twice before they quit blaming the team and realize what they are.
Yeah, I see him most likely winding up as a Jason Terry type 6th man scorer. The good news is that if he has to go because he sees the writing on the wall in regards to Rubio, at least a 20 year old rook putting up 14/5 should have some solid trade value.
When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.
No difference
Foye took 30% of his shots inside as a rookie and Flynn is at 29%. Interestingly enough, Foye is only taking 13% of his shots inside this year, so he has definitely become more of a jumpshooter over time.
I also agree that Flynn is better going left than Foye, but it’s still a pretty big area of improvement for him.
by Rascal Flatts on Feb 27, 2010 2:44 PM CST up reply actions
I've read in multiple places...
That Milwaukee would definitely have taken him 10th. And Sacramento wanted him, too.
You do almost have to wonder if KLJ isn't a little right
Golden State refuses to win, and something tells me the Wolves desperately want either Wall or Turner.
Lottery system needs to be adjusted. Not something that gives every non-playoff team an equal chance (sorry, a team that misses the playoffs by a game or two is in a different class). However, I think they need to look at something like a three tiered lottery….bottom five teams draw for 1-5, next five draw for 6-10, the other four draw for 11-14. The original lottery was 7 teams, anybody later than that shouldn’t have a shot at #1.
I agree
although in any tiered system you’d have tanking to get the 5th spot instead of the 6th, etc. But as much as I hate tanking I also hate it when teams like Orlando (two years in a row!) or Chicago get the 1st pick when they are clearly close to being playoff teams.
by littleboxes on Feb 26, 2010 10:50 PM CST up reply actions
I hadn't thought of this for a while
I agree with the fact that others will start tanking, but I think it will involve fewer teams because their are fewer teams that will benefit from tanking, and eventually you get to teams that are fighting for a playoff spot, or think they have a good team in place and want to win to set up next season.
I think I actually decided that I would let 1-5 go for the top pick (with the same odds so there is no incentive to tank), then 6-10 would be eligible for the 3rd and later, while 11-14 would not get in the top 5.
Oh thank god
I thought this post was gonna be a sensationalistc TMZ-style revealing of a lost Orson Welles sex tape. shudders
Most of those
Would have occurred before he made the movies with Kane. The guy’s “appetites,” in every sense, from his days in radio were legendary.
So you’d just have the sound.
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
Nothing makes me forget a Twolves loss fater than...
drunk Orson on Orson action.
BetterLaettner
by BetterLaettnerThanRider on Feb 26, 2010 11:06 PM CST reply actions
BTW
That is the funniest youtube clip I’ve seen since keyboard cat.
BetterLaettner
by BetterLaettnerThanRider on Feb 26, 2010 11:10 PM CST up reply actions
Check out the "my dog imitating a drunken Orson Welles" clip
Unless you were referring to the cartoon.
"Never make predictions, especially about the future." Casey Stengel
As an addendum
To my comment from the last Wolves/Thunder tilt. I said Love is a better player than Westbrook. This is still true in a vacuum. However, when it’s Westbrook on the Thunder vs Love on the Wolves, Westbrook is better.
Athleticism.
Every Wolves fan who gripes about overvaluing length and athleticism should be forced to watch OKC on a regular basis. These guys have incredible potential (now a CH swear word?) precisely because they have been able to marry basketball skill to reasonably high athleticism. I know Harden is average (but he’s long) and I know Green is only so-so (but he’s playing out of position); but, for God’s sake, this team should convince us that we won’t compete for anything but first-round exits in the West unless we get significantly more athletic and significantly more skilled. Both are necessary.
It's weird...
….they are more athletic, but they also are super, duper long….with a Jordan-level talent as their best player. That last part helps too. ;) “Above average size” should be worth extra points for the Wolves in any upcoming draft and “undersized” should be an immediate disqualifier.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
There's only one charitable explanation
Rambis could be ignoring advanced stats (or his eyeballs). Or, he could be a bad coach. Or he could be tanking. Or, there could be some other explanation related to development that the front office has not deigned to explain to the fans. I guess I hope it’s development, because I don’t think any of the other ones speak well for the future, more talented wolves.
by aarendsvark on Feb 27, 2010 12:09 PM CST up reply actions
Yes, that is assuming Rambis is sensible coach
Perhaps a bad assumption? Maybe, but my guess is Kahn has pulled Rambis aside and said
" Kurt, we really need to develop our young players, it I don’t mind if we lose this first year *wink/nod/wink….
A good comparison might be Doc Rivers prior to the KG trade, where he was running out 12 man rotations the whole game, and the celtics were “developing young players” … a glorified version of tanking…
Well, I hope it's a good assumption
But Love’s short minutes are tough to explain
Poor Orson Welles. It *was* a wine commercial.
This last week I posted an mp3 somewhere of Orson doing voiceovers for frozen peas, hamburgers, and some other food. He’s a stone-cold pro with vast experience going back to the golden age of radio, and he starts out trying to help the directors time his text to juxtapose nicely with the images…. In the end he winds up storming out, saying he wouldn’t treat a Shakespearean actor the way this pea commercial’s people are jerking him around. “My reading is the correct one.” For a frozen pea commercial.
All of which is to say, I’m glad we don’t have any aging veterans on this roster who’re losing their patience with the Flynns.
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
(Ah. I see now you've already grokked the peas.)
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
Not to sound like the devil's advocate
but was the world ever that civilized in the first place? As to Orson, yes, it is sad seeing him ply fourth-rate California sparkling wine (ah, back in the day they could call it champagne), which he was obviously given unlimited amounts of, ostensibly as part of his contract with Paul Masson.
"Never make predictions, especially about the future." Casey Stengel
He made up for it by playing that planet in Transformers
Now THAT was a commanding performance.
Help me
I cannot stop watching that Orson Welles clip.
“Mwaha, the French….champagne has always been celebrated for its excellence.” Killing me every time.
I can call Charter on your behalf and have them cut off your internet service.
It is quite amusing, and still makes me laugh after a couple years. That couple in the ad is priceless, as is the beginning of the second take where he’s rubbing his eyes before launching into an even better articulation of “mwaahaa, the French…” That’s a good transliteration on your part. +1.
"Never make predictions, especially about the future." Casey Stengel
sorry
that should be take three.
"Never make predictions, especially about the future." Casey Stengel
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.
