How bad is bad?
by Stop-n-Pop on Mar 12, 2010 8:00 AM CST
Email
PrintBelow the fold is a handy-dandy chart comparing this year's squad to some of the lesser outfits of Wolves seasons past. I hope you enjoy.
In terms of overall suckitude, there are two golden standards for Wolvesdom: the 94/95 team led by Isaiah Rider and the 92/93 team led by Doug West and coached by Jimmy Rodgers and Sidney Lowe. Unfortunately for current fans of the team, this year's squad is making a strong claim to the 2nd worst Wolves roster of all time and it may even have a chance to end the season as the lowest of low in Wolves history.
What makes this year's team so historically bad is its efficiency score relation to the rest of the league. Were it not for the New Jersey Nets, the Wolves would have a legitimate shot at having the league's worst offensive and defensive ratings along with a league-low SRS and Pythagorean W-L record. They are also pushing the 94/95 squad for the worst efficiency differential in team history, which is primarily aided by a franchise low in eFG% differential.
The driving force in this year's low results is the team's awful offense. It is the worst offense in team history. That's not exactly a resounding endorsement of Kurt Rambis' new system and no matter how long it may take for the players to adjust to a new way of playing ball, there simply isn't much in the way of saying that whatever they are doing on that end of the court, they aren't doing it well and it is a significant drop-off from last year's campaign (101.4 from 106.1). Did I mention that this year's team has a franchise record eFG% differential?
Compounding the all-time franchise worst offense is the fact that the team's defense is only marginally improved from last season's 111.4 defensive rating. This year's team gives up an average of 110.4 points/100 possessions; hardly enough to make up for the nearly 5 point loss in offensive efficiency over a similar span of possessions.
Taking a look at the chart, I have inserted a few additional scores to give you a sense of just how poorly this year's team has performed. The Hoopus Suck Score is a combination of offensive efficiency, defensive efficiency, and SRS rankings for the entire league. The best a team could do is a combined score of 3/90. This year's squad posts an 85/90 and is pushing the 94/95 and 92/93 teams for Hoopus Suck Score percentage supremacy with a .944 average (compared to .975 for the Rider team and .95 for the Rodgers/Lowe mess).
To give you an idea of how this stacks up to the class of the league, Cleveland has a Hoopus Suck Score of 12 out of 90, or a .137 percentage.
The other score I put in the chart is a combined league ranking of the team's Four Factor success. On this front, this year's team is doing a bit better compared to awful seasons past; coming in 4th place instead of 2nd to the 94/95 team.
Of course the hope for this season is that the team is able to build on some of its player development (see Corey Brewer, Wayne Ellington, and Kevin Love) and that its historically awful performance leads to some success in the lottery/draft. Will one of the 2 or 3 worst seasons in team history be worth it if they land the number 1 pick in the draft? Is John Wall or Evan Turner worth 82 games of relatively awful performance? We'll just have to wait and see.
What say you?
34 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Truly awful, and I guess this is what reall frustrates me
We knew they would be bad, but…what these numbers help reinforce for me is just how far away this team is. The idea that one or two more players will turn everything around seems dubious.
My concern is that it’s possible that there are ZERO players currently on the roster who are capable of being starters on a good, contending team. It might be that there are, but the evidence for it isn’t clear to me.
by Eric in Madison on Mar 12, 2010 8:18 AM CST reply actions
Your concerns are justified
But since many/most of the contending teams have some weak spots, it’s more likely that none of the current players can be the #1 guy on a contender.
I'd like to see a month by month breakdown of ORtg and DRtg
I have a suspicion that rather than being the worst offense in the team’s history, the last two/three months they have been merely bad (i.e., more in line with what they were the past two years). I mean, the Wolves were probably worse than New Jersey in November. That has to be pulling the numbers down.
Player Development and Kurt Rambis...
I’m somewhat wary of how much we can attribute the development of our players to the coaching staff. I’ll use these examples…
Kevin Love: His play doesn’t seem much different then how it was at the end of the year last year. I Mean it’s not like he ADDED the 3point shot this year, he just lost it last year because of Wittman taking away his confidence. If anything, Rambis hasn’t allowed him to be the borderline all-star most of us believe he can be. Development Grade: D-
Corey Brewer: He’s slowed down and is shooting better, but from what I’ve read most of this has come from David Thorpe (before the season) and Hoiberg (shooting instruction halfway through this year). I can’t imagine Kurt Rambis has had anything to do with Corey’s shooting. How many coaches take the time out of practice to teach specific players how to shoot? Plus Rambis sucked at shooting. Development Grade: B+, Development Grade because of Rambis: C-
Wayne Ellington: How much better has Wayne Ellington even gotten? His shooting percentages have risen, but that’s only because they were really low at the beginning of the year. Now they’re right about where we could have expected them to be. Development Grade: C
Jonny Flynn: I’ve argued this before, but Jonny Flynn has actually gotten worse as the year has gone along. He was much better during the pre-season. Development Grade: F
Ramon Sessions: He’s worse then he was last year as well. The system we have is terrible for him. He essentially has wasted a full season of development, and his only purpose to Rambis is as a “tool” to use with Jonny Flynn. Development Grade F-
Al Jefferson: Low Post D has gotten better, but he’s been injured all season so it’s tough to tell for him. Development Grade: Incomplete.
Yes and no
I take your point to be a slightly broader one – you credit one guy (usually) for a player’s development/improvement, although it’s easier to credit one guy for limiting a player’s development. What I give Rambis props for is creating and sustaining an atmosphere and attitude for skills progression, both on and off the court. Now we may disagree with what tactics he thinks is best for facilitating skills progression (see: Flynn, Jonny and Sessions, Ramon), but I’m certainly not going to thumb my nose at him having faith and patience in Brewer’s shot, or at him pushing Love hard to give consistent effort (honestly, Love could be even better and sometimes he comes across as a little snot nosed kid used to getting his way and being adored for what he does on the floor. Well Kevin, that’s great if you only want to win a max of 20 games a year. I’d love to see Love become the guy we think he could be, not just the guy we see now).
And as for Thorpe and Brewer’s shot – that’s an awful lot of credit for the changes a guy made to Brew’s shot months before it started taking effect. I’m not saying it didn’t help or give him a solid foundation (because I just don’t know). I sure hope Freddy’s helping him, because Brew with a consistent three is a very nice player.
My bigger question is what can this team do if you upgraded (to league average) Hollins, Stewie, and Pavs? What could this team do if you upgraded the starting unit with one or two players and shifted Wilkens, Gomes (if he’s around), and even kept Love on the bench? KG’s arrival had a huge effect on the guts of that 94/95 team. It’s within reason that Wall/Turner and Rubio could have a similar effect on the guts of this team.
Growing my own "Darko-stache" since last Monday.
Exactly...
I don’t think that it’d take all that much to make a profound shift in this squad. Now, I don’t mean the addition of some averae talent. I have a feeling that had we walked away from the last draft with Tyreke Evans, and everything else was the same, this team would have a different feel to it… and Rambis’ offense would look better.
So, would Evans plus another impact rookie, and a general upgrade of talent shift the fortune and direction of this team? I certainly think so.
by Krotz the Wall on Mar 12, 2010 9:55 AM CST up reply actions
How well could we actually do with our current team if minutes were divided differently...
Let’s use Win’s Produced (a favorite of Biggity’s!) to find out…
First of all, let’s pretend Ryan Hollins lost an arm in a farming accident, and was unable to play all season. What if Rambis decided to divide playing time like this…
Jefferson: 36 mins
Love: 36 mins
Wilkins: 24 mins
Flynn: 30 mins
Sessions: 40 mins
Brewer: 25 mins
Gomes: 25 mins
Ellington: 14 mins
Jawai: 8 mins
Tucker: 1 min
Pecherov: 1 min
If we did that then we could expect to go 32-32 in Love’s 64 games and 4-14 with Love out for a total record of 36-46. Now obviously this might illicit a strong discussion about the statistic “Win’s produced”, but if you believe in the statistic (like I do) then this should give you some hope for the future of this team.
Yes,
this is most likely true.
And next year, I’m guessing and hoping that you’ll be able to insert Evan Turner in for 30 minutes instead of Wilkins , and maybe an improved shooting guard in for, say, 25-30 of the 95 minutes you have for Flynn, Sessions, and Brewer.
It makes sense too...
Last year post Wittman and pre Al Jefferson injury we were 13-18. Over 82 games that’s about 34 wins. From that team, we’ve essentially switched:
Miller
Foye
Telfair
C. Smith
for
Sessions
Flynn
Wilkins
Ellington
Brewer
Not a bad deal
lost an arm in a farming accident, you say?
hmmm…why hasn’t anyone thought of this before? Maybe they could reattach the arm with someone else’s hand on it?
by highpockets on Mar 12, 2010 10:45 AM CST up reply actions
Agreed. Better rotations and time to gel and develop an identity would lead to a much better team than the one we’re seeing now. Not great, probably in the 30-35 win range, but far from historically bad. If you add a legit above-average wing and Rubio alone, I think the ceiling of the team goes up drastically. Add to that another solid contributor via FA, let’s just say a Josh Childress level player, and this team could go from a 30-35 win ceiling to 50+ pretty quickly.
So yeah, I think one or two players could have a very significant effect on this team because we aren’t truly as bad as we’re seeing right now.
When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.
This is the likely distribution of playing time
If Rambis didn’t get that 4 year guaranteed contract. We can all bitch and complain about the product on the floor this season and the chart aboves proves just how terrible that product is, but it shows how desperately this team needs talent. Kahn gets one chance to make this GM gig work and adding a minimum of a Top 5 pick in a 4 player draft is likely a necessity for his plan. He said when hiring Rambis that he would “develop” players at the expense of wins. We just didn’t understand that meant the worse you play, the more you would get “developed.”
What is this 4 player draft you speak of
I see it as
1.) Wall
2.) Turner
3.) Favors
I would not be surprised if any of them were stars in this league. After that, who am I missing? I readily admit I don’t watch enough college ball to have a grasp of who’ll do well.
Without any doubt Cousins
What he is doing, one of the best PER’s in College Basketball in the last 10 years, as a freshman, with his frame, to me he could be in the mix for the Wolves before Wall. If Wall could shoot and turned it over less, I’d be just as excited about his athletic skills. Cousins is similar to Al Jefferson with his scoring moves in the low post and is taller and longer with a more muscular frame. Big Al is now in his mid 20’s and is not learning how to play D, why not draft a younger version of him offensively and hope Cousins can actually develop the passion and skills to play D. Love and Cousins could immediately play together on Offense.
For me, when the entire student body at Mississippi State distributed his phone number and fans were calling him all week leaving messages on his personal cell phone talking trash leading up to the game, it’s only competitive nature to give the call phone taunt after scoring a bucket against them. That isn’t a trouble maker to me, that is funny. He may be a terrible person or a terrible guy, and hopefully you can figure that out in a pre-draft interview to make a stupid mistake, but his overall skill package, size and frame make him undoubtedly in the Top 4 and possibly even #1 for a team with that specific need and may be set at PG or Wing.
Head Coaches developing players
What head coach in the league DOES work hands on with all the players to help them impove? On almost every team player development is worked on with the assistant coaches. Rambis isn’t any different than Phil Jackson, Pat Riley, or Gregg Popovich. The coaching staff as a whole has to be graded on players improving not the head coach.
I’d add that I think you are way off on Love not improving his range and shooting. I think he has made great strides in his shooting. Not just because he is taking more 3 pointers.
Right...
Assistant Coaches should be included as well. My argument was more against the narrative that “Rambis has been an integral part of the improvement of our young players” which I just don’t believe to be true…
As for Love…
Love’s efg in College: .59
Love’s efg in 2008/09: .46
Love’s efg in 2009/10: .49
Love’s True Shooting Percentage in College: .65
Love’s True Shooting Percentage in 2008/09: .53
Love’s True Shooting Percentage in 2009/10: .56
Like I’ve said, he’s improved over last year..but Love has always projected to be a good shooter in the pro’s.
Anyone else believe Reggie Theus was a better candidate than Rambis...
… for the head job? I liked how Theus’ Kings teams played (their style and effort more than their W-L record) and thought he got an unfair shake when he was fired. Of the candidates Kahn interviewed, Elston Turner was my favorite, with Rambis second and Mark Jackson third. The only reason Rambis wasn’t on the bottom of my list is because Mark Jackson’s commentary on television makes him sound like, well, like he has a “low BBIQ”, and that’s not something I look for in a coaching candidate. Rambis was in over his head when he was interim coach of the Lakers, and I had no reason to believe he’d succeed in this position. Smelling Phil Jackson’s incense every night after games might help on the margins, but Phil isn’t known for spinning off assistants who become great coaches. So, we don’t have any evidence that Kurt is a good coach, but the evidence is starting to accumulate that he’s a bad one, at least in terms of “in-game” coaching (rotations, offensive sets that still don’t run smoothly, a lack of flexibility and imagination, etc). As others have said, we have to hope that the reason for the apparent incompetence is that he has orders from on high to tank—the triangle would look a lot better with John Wall running it—but we don’t know that for sure, and he and Kahn would certainly deny it. Granted, the talent level he’s working with is abysmal—only Jefferson and Love are legit NBA starters—but he’s used what he has incredibly poorly. Here’s praying for Wall/Turner in 2010!
Maybe...
it’s pretty hard to say at this point. I think Rambis should, and will be judged on the progress the Wolves make from season to season. The same goes for Kahn. They have been given a full season to basically throw away for W/L purposes. That won’t be acceptable to fans, next year. We’ll want to see improvement, even if it means 27 wins instead of 17. The basketball needs to look better — Flynn needs to look better. The losses need to be closer.
For more on this, please see Poor Dick’s Plan for Gradual Improvement On the Way to a Championship (PDPFGIOTWTAC).
The great thing is, if they don’t improve next year nobody will go to games, not like any do now, but it will be much worse, then Taylor will have to decide where to go from there, sell, move the team? This is our last chance to make progress or it’s complete irrelevancy forever. I agree, drafting Flynn over Curry is not the end of the world, neither are superstars, but we must get Rubio over in two years, and if that’s to happen we must show progress next season. I expect 30 wins next year and you all should too.
by AnotherDraftPickBitesTheDust on Mar 12, 2010 2:44 PM CST up reply actions
No Bill Mussellman teams?
Well that’s a ringing endorsement of ol’ Muss, if I’ve ever heard one. Those early TWolves teams had waay less talent than any of the squads on this list.
Muss was a great coach...
… of teams with little/no talent. I don’t know if he would’ve fared well with the big-talent egos that populate good teams’ rosters, but he could squeeze every ounce of competitiveness out of borderline talent. Those South Alabama teams were incredibly fun to watch because of the ferocity with which Muss had them playing. I wonder what Eric Muss is doing these days? (Rhetorical question—I know about that thing called “Google”).
What about the idea of our team being "Fast Paced"
Kahn talks a lot about wanting players that fit with a fast-paced “running” team, but we dont’ seem especially “fast paced” now. Does anyone else see it?
Nope...
… and the triangle seems to slow down the pace because players are thinking about getting to their spots on the floor rather than running and filling lanes. I know the triangle and “fast pace basketball” aren’t mutually exclusive, but I don’t think they’re natural complements either.
Depends on personnel
Jackson’s Bulls were consistently in the bottom 10 of the league in pace, but his Lakers teams have consistently been in the top 10.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Mar 12, 2010 2:18 PM CST up reply actions
We are one of the faster paced teams in the league
but we are no Phoenix/GSW.
IMO, there was a drastic difference in the pace of the game when Al was out for those 2 games. And I also thought this same thing about the preseason games. He just seems to slow us down and clog up the lane more for cutters.
Currently we have the 3rd highest "Pace"
You can view it at this link.
I think that’s a misnomer though. For one we have the highest Turnover rate, which leads to an increased number of possessions. For another, we have the 3rd highest Offensive Rebound Rate (and I believe that also leads to an increased number of possessions, but I’m not positive).
If you account for that, I think our pace compared to other teams in the league goes down dramatically.
"Dramatically"? Nah.
Pace Factor (available since the 1973-74 season in the NBA); the formula is 48 * ((Tm Poss + Opp Poss) / (2 * (Tm MP / 5))). Pace factor is an estimate of the number of possessions per 48 minutes by a team.
You’d need to add in a whole lot of turnovers and boards to skew that result down from 3rd in the league much.
I get what you’re saying, but there’s no real way around the fact that the team currently is pushing the ball a lot more than last year. If anything Rambis is force-feeding the pace thing with personnel that doesn’t suit it, and the resulting spate of turnovers from Flynn and company reflects that.
This year’s pace: 3rd in league.
Last year’s: 15th.
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
Agreed
Questioning of Rambis and Kahn may be warranted, but it can’t be denied that both said this would be an uptempo team and they are. They’re at least getting a look at how the current players fit into such a system.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Mar 12, 2010 3:56 PM CST up reply actions
Shows the difference between quantity and quality...
… the Wolves’ pace doesn’t seem very fast because they’re so poor at running the break. To the watcher of games, they’d never be mistaken for a fast-break team, but the stats say otherwise. I’ve actually come around re: the usefulness of advanced stats, but this is another illustration of the ways in which they can reveal very little about what actually matters.
The 2009 draft
I am curious how everone would grade the Wolves results in the last draft? A, B, C D or F?
too early to tell
The Wolves’ Big Event in the 09 draft was picking Rubio. Until we see how that plays out, and how much of a factor he or the pieces he brings us are, there’s no way to judge the draft.
If we pretend the there was no #5 pick and just look at the Flynn and Ellington picks and the Lawson pick/trade, I think they get a C. No busts, but no clairvoyance, either.
Are they really trying
Statistically I didn’t think this team would be so bad as this. Al is less than I thought he would be at this point but I didn/t think Flynn would be very good, and Sessions is a little less than he was for the Bucks and I had better hopes for Hollins and Pech. I wonder after the start we got did they just give up or decide just to experiment and forget about winning. I hope its not going to be just due to lousy coaching. However I do think they should be only -5 or so.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Canis Hoopus
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
