What to watch for: a list to cobble up.
by feral on Sep 7, 2010 9:03 AM CDT
Email
Print(Edit: This thread is a little bit of an experiment I didn't quite know I was making at the time. We're building a list of the questions we're asking about each Timberwolf player. It started with maybe half of the text it has now, and I'm adding or editing things as people suggest them in the comments.)
Latest additions: Beasley as go-to scorer? Can Jonny be the perimeter create-your-own guy while playing a real PG? Will Webster jack up threes, or expand his offensive game? Pekovic as intimidating "enforcer" type against NBA backups? Corey's role now 6th man energy guy? Question about Love's being a leader or not.
––––
Predictions aren't as fun for me as figuring out what to watch for in a given player, or team. (How interesting is it to look back in January or February and say "Boy, I really thought they'd win 27 games this year"? You were right, or you were wrong. Even with your own prediction, there's not much more to say.)
Anyone want to help slap together the list of stuff to ask about the Wolves roster as it stands today?
Kevin Love, PFWhen he "launches" a shoe, they take him to the Parthenon. |
|
| Reasonably Well-Known | Questions |
|
Rebound-seeking instincts. Attention-seeking instincts. |
Starter('s minutes)? Continued 6th-man friction? Is he now a team leader, or still half in Rambis's doghouse? Is he defensively at home? Playing team defense, or individual defense? Do pairings with Beasley still push him into awkward matchups? "Usage"/shots – how do they look on a team where he gets a lot more minutes? (He's been possession-dominant on team USA, when he's in.) How central is he to the offense? Does the ball go through Love now? Outside shot developing? He's said this was a summer goal (again). Is he more aggressive with the outlets now that there are wings to take advantage? (Is this Kelly Dwyer's "derring-do"?) Better alongside Darko (well-rounded play from both?) or Pekovic (where he's got a solid post scorer to play off of)? The perception that his shot's blocked a ton (not particularly borne out in terms of the rate at which it happens, 9.5%, next to elite post players in the game) – how does that hold up if he's central to the offense? |
Michael Beasley, PF/SFI considered removing the "launch" from this.... Nah. |
|
| Reasonably Well-Known | Questions |
|
Tattoos. Potential scoring explosions.
|
Will he ever become that go-to scorer? Three or four, on either end of the floor? Fit in the trike? Fits alongside Love, Darko, Pekovic? Consistent enough as a scorer to demand floor time? What sort of relationship will he have with Rambis? Does playing time cause friction? Did he tell Kahn the truth about smokin' reefer?
|
Jonny Flynn, PGHe got the call here.... In college. |
|
| Reasonably Well-Known | Questions |
|
Ability to dribble. Hops, if healthy, and winning smile either way. |
Is he a victim of THE CURSE? ALREADY? Dang. "He simply, I think, can become one of the best on the ball defenders among point guards in the league." - D.Kahn Health? Setting up bigs (or anyone else) in the (pinch-)post? Improved finishing – that teardrop he talked about? Improved trips to the line now that the rookie label's gone? Will PGs ever get decent assist rates in Rambis's offense? Has Jonny's role changed in year two, or does Rambis continue to pare things down and watch Flynn pound his dribble? Does his PG role become narrower this year now that we have wings? Is he basically another wing scoring option now, and is that his role on a team with Rubio anyway? Can Jonny be the team's perimeter player creating his own while playing his point role? |
Darko Milicic, C/PF |
|
| Reasonably Well-Known | Questions |
|
Good passing from high post to cutters, so-so in other situations. (Thanks, nbaplaybook.) (Rather poor [offensive] rebounding for a center.) |
How does playing time work out between Darko and Pekovic? How much does his defensive presence matter in the context of the current roster? Is he willing to play a "garbage center" role as needed? (Same question about rotation among bigs.) Offensively, is an in-shape and up-to-speed Milicic a significant asset within the tricycle offense? |
Martell Webster, SF(/SG?)It's hard to attach a goofy picture to someone who seems like such a nice guy. (Is he a little too nice and a little not-enough-fire?) |
|
| Reasonably Well-Known | Questions |
|
Will be used as a defensive mark for other teams' dominant wings, presumably. Range shooting. |
Is he really a defensive stopper, or is that just the way he was used some in Portland? Is he prepared to emerge, at his age, on an uptempo team? Or will his offense be limited to jacking threes? Given the handle question marks elsewhere among our wings, does Martell get a chance to definitively prove where he's at with his? Does he suit the pinch post thing well in that way? Can he play the SG, really? (Does SG/SF matter in Rambis's offense at all anyway?) Was his position a matter of Roy's being there? He hasn't played many minutes there at all. The whole minutes-production correlation: complete illusion? Causality exactly the opposite of what we'd prefer? Is he the kind of veteran presence the team needs? |
Nikola Pekovic, C/PF |
|
| Reasonably Well-Known | Questions |
|
Hard-nosed inside play on offense Reasonably adept at filling holes on break, trailing, etc.
|
Fouls – particularly offensive ones, given his seeking contact as much as he does? Basic defensive questions. Will his physical play in any way intimidate NBA backups? Can he in any sense be a bench "enforcer" type? |
Luke Ridnour, PG/(spot SG?)The ring-bearing rotation's thinner than we'd imagined, but Frodo's in front for now. |
|
| Reasonably Well-Known | Questions |
|
|
Was that a salary drive we saw last season, or has he figured something out? |
Wes Johnson, SF/(SG?) |
|
| Reasonably Well-Known | Questions |
|
Going to give us some eye-popping dunks in transition. Great kid. (Not as much of a kid as we'd like, however.) |
Ball-handling. Position. Can he guard twos? Even great-shooting wings often have wild swings as rookies. Wes? Can he learn to get his shot at all, or is he going to be fading in and out much as he did in college? |
Corey Brewer, SG/SFThe goat, at least, has put on bulk. |
|
| Reasonably Well-Known | Questions |
|
Never the same river twice. "Disruptive." Probably not going to learn to dribble at this point. |
Will his new role be as a 6th man energy player? Okay, so which shot are we going to see this time Corey? K = Eint/a^2, where K is the spring constant and the other variables are expressions of Corey Brewer's "motor." Our question is about "a" – "displacement." How far is his spring stretched if he has a new role? Can he ever bulk up enough to match up on threes who aren't Kevin Durant skinny? To rebound and not get blown around like a dry leaf?
|
Anthony Tolliver, F |
|
| Reasonably Well-Known | Questions |
|
D-league type who's probably going to bust his hump. Sense of humor seems to be intact. |
I don't know much about his defense. Does his Target Center magic continue? (The guy absolutely went off here late last year.) What position can he force some PT in? Natural four, probably, and played the center some in G.S., but only the barest spot duty as a three last year. Is he some sort of specialty "shooting big" for tactical situations now? |
Wayne Ellington, SG |
|
| Reasonably Well-Known | Questions |
|
Range shot. Ellington was actually an okay defender last year, for a 6'4-5"-ish rookie off guard with a so-so defensive rep. |
When Jonny went down for that last night of the year, Wayne played significant PG minutes, and he actually set up the bigs better than our starting point. Is this a role he can step into in real spot minutes over the course of the year? Does he represent a possible ideal "trike" PG, in Ron Harper-esque mold? (Will he have worked on the necessary skills to do that over the summer?) Ability to drive. He did show this at times last season. How does he stand for PT on the new roster, which actually has wing talent? |
Lazar Hayward, SG |
|
| Reasonably Well-Known | Questions |
|
A hard working defensive sub sort would be his first role. |
What was the nature of this pick? What did Rambis & Kahn think they were spending a guaranteed deal on, here? Is there a contribution he can make offensively – perhaps from three, where he shot well in his Sophomore year anyway – to encourage PT? Might he be an example of the Wolves thinking about players to develop in (and establish a hard-nosed defensive style in) the D-league? |
Kurt Rambis, Head Coach |
|
| Reasonably Well-Known | Questions |
|
Appears rather determined to put in the "trike": his "flow," remedial version of the triangle. |
Just what is the trike? Players talk about the triangle, Kahn is frustrated to even have it come up because that's supposedly not who the Wolves are. Are the wing spots in this offense completely interchangeable? (Do wings need more handle than the Wolves can put in play with people like Webster and Brewer?) Can we extend "wings" to basically include the PG stable too? Do PGs ever stand a chance to get decent assist rates? Is the PG slot now going to lose emphasis in the context of a team with actual wings that's running the whatever-it-is? Are PGs essentially a better-ball-handling wing type in this offense? (How does that play into courting Ricky Rubio?) How will Rambis distribute minutes to the numerous guys who are deserving or need developing? Does he water everyone down or shaft 3-4 players for a viable minutes rotation? Do the players with starter’s talent actually get starter’s minutes? Specifically Love v. Beasley, Beasley v. SF’s, Wes v. Beasley, Wes v. SG’s, Wes v. actually being a starting level talent, Darko v. Pek, Ridnour v. Flynn. Can Rambis handle the egos (Love), expectations, (Webster), development (flynn, Wes) and head cases (Beasley) that arrive from the inevitable decisions on minutes and starting? When does the Zen facade crumble, if it does? |
(Edit: Added Rambis with questions, removed excuses.)
Tell me what else is missing, or wrong. (The correct answer to "What's missing?" probably isn't Greg Stiemsma, though I'm willing to write out the question "Are you a body to bang in training camp?" if someone wants to see it in virtual ink....) Suggest new pictures. Anything.
161 comments
|
6 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
"The trike!"
I like it…
It’s like the triangle, but faster. Like the trike my neighbor had made from a Harley.
You know what this list (for some reason) brought to my attention?
Lazar Hayward. He’s not on it, and presumably because he won’t see any minutes with the team this year. He may even end up in the D-League.
This makes an already confusing pick even more irritating. If we’re going to spend this pick on a guy who we know won’t have a place on this year’s roster, isn’t the logical thing to spend it on a high-upside developmental project? Lazar is 23, and by all accounts basically is what he is. Why take a player like that unless you want contributions right away?
If you’re going to essentially stash a guy with that 30th pick, I am baffled as to why it wouldn’t be Hassan Whiteside. The guy has lottery talent, would actually benefit greatly from some D-League time, and fits perfectly what the team needs.
I realize this is an old argument, but I’m just having a “Holy Crap” moment in realizing that Hayward really isn’t going to see the light of day on this roster, and thinking that makes the obvious-at-the-time pick (Whiteside) even more obvious now.
time will bear that one out
At least they didn’t take Stephenson. I am guessing it had more to do with a philosophy of competition and hustle doing more for player development than having another Boom Bust player spending his time in the D league. But that is just speculation on my part.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 7, 2010 10:45 AM CDT up reply actions
Agreed
It’s also partially about emergency situations: if injuries were to hit, Hayward should be more prepared to step in than other guys. If he can play as well as Wesley Matthews (not a completely unrealistic proposition), then he’s that type of player for 5 years instead of 1 or 2. The other thing to factor in here: Rambis coached under Phil Jackson, a guy who always went for strength/size with his bigs so they could effectively play 1v1 post defense. Maybe they look at Whiteside as a guy who ultimately will always get pushed around.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Sep 7, 2010 12:58 PM CDT up reply actions
If Rambis wants strength/size with his bigs,
then the pick should have been Dexter Pittman out of Texas. The guy is a behemoth who would spend most of his time in the D-league the first year or two but may prove useful for defending true centers down the road. Miami will be happy that they drafted him if they end up playing Orlando in the Playoffs.
With that being said, I agree with your assessment of Hayward’s fit here – a guy that isn’t going to see much playing time but will be able to fill in seamlessly when an injury occurs on the wing.
Sam Cassell for Marko Jaric? That's ridiculous! I would never have traded Sam Cassell for Marko Jaric.
- Sam Cassell on McHale's decisions while running the Timberwolves.
I'll take that as at least a partial "Missing" vote
Cheerios can only fuel so much brain activity, and I’m crunching on some ways to extract bone marrow.
I’ll add him in a second, here.
The way I took this was to ask the very big question:
What were they thinking, and do we see it out on the court AT ALL?
(Or is he maybe a sign of some intention in the D-league? Hmm.)
I don't understand how you write off a player...
…until you give him a chance to prove himself in the NBA. A year ago, what would your predictions have been for fellow Marquette alum Wes Matthews? He wasn’t even drafted but he did more than ‘see the light of day’ on a really good team. It is very difficult to tell how a player reacts to the NBA. The teams have multimillion dollar scouting machines in place and they still get it wrong a lot of the time. Some guys who were superstars in college can’t deal with being a role-player, while some role-players fit seamlessly into the NBA, or even excel in that environment. Some guys let the new found fame and fortune go to their heads, some guys take full advantage of the developmental resources this brings them to improve their game.
I’m saying this because, while initially confused, I like the pick a lot now. I think teams are realizing that while there are some big success stories in drafting the raw player with a lot of upside, the amount of investment and cost in terms of devoting resources, namely playing time, does not always warrant the limited or risky returns. In this case, I think five (?) consecutive losing seasons and the impending loss of a first round draft pick next year are reasons enough to want immediate contributions, however small they are.
I think there is a lot to like about Lazar that he definitely brings to the table. Defense. Hustle. BBIQ. Heart. Flexibility. Selflessness. Teamwork. And then there is the ‘upside’ which you contend isn’t there, the most intriguing being shooting. His 3pt% in his last two years was unimpressive, but in his sophomore year he shot 45%. A fluke? Perhaps. But, what if the coaching staff thought they had a way to help him return to that level of shooting? It’s no more of a stretch than transforming Whiteside’s entire game into NBA-capable. A defensive hustle guy who can shoot over 40% from downtown, that’s worth taking a gamble on. And since when do people reach their peak at 23?
The wolves are full of top ten lottery guys who haven’t achieved their full potential, eight guys (counting Pek who would have) and counting (Rubio makes nine) to be exact. How much more ‘lottery potential’ do you want to add to that mix? How many more egos do you want to fight for playing time? Lazar is a class act. He’ll do what’s asked of him for the better of the team and won’t complain. At the very least he’s a locker room guy, practice motivator, and good interview. I predict he’ll be a fan favorite within a year.
As far as playing time, I think you’ll be surprised. Rambis has always been a deep rotation guy, rarely using just eight guys and playing to individual match ups, much to the consternation of armchair gms. I put him in Pavs’ territory, approximately number 10-12 in terms of rotation, and even he got 12 minutes a game. And then there are the inevitable injuries.
Whiteside is certainly intriguing and time will tell if that was a mistake, but the Wolves weren’t the only team that took a miss on him, that guy fell like a rock. I’m guessing there was some fatal flaw in his game that a lot of teams didn’t like.
by kiteman on Sep 7, 2010 1:54 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Hrm. So if I was to boil that down to "Questions to look for in Lazar"....
I’m scratching my head, granted mostly with fatigue, and wondering what specific stuff to put in the clumsy little table up there.
All that’s more of a general statement about young talent than it is a comment on Hayward specifically. He fits the general type of “low pick hustler,” probably moreso because he was projected in most places to go in the mid-second and the Wolves picked him up on the last guaranteed slot. I do root for players like this, but honestly I’m not sure what to look for. “Can he make the floor on a team that suddenly has wings around?”
I’ll add something about his shooting, but then, that’s kind of the generic question about guys in this tier: “Can he contribute something offensively?”
(The general question of what Rambis’s and Kahn’s intentions were still seems pretty fair to me.)
Also: I must have suppressed the fact that Sasha P got 12 minutes in 71 games.
Man alive were we thin at the wing last season. Even so, my memory said he got maybe half that on average. (Shudder.)
Some Rambis Questions...
1 – How will Rambis distribute minutes to the numerous guys who are deserving or need developing?
PG – Ridnour/Flynn (eventually) Not really a problem here at PG
SG – Webster, Brewer, Ellington, Johnson
SF – Beasley, Webster, Johnson, Brewer, Hayward, Tolliver (7 guys for 2 positions…)
PF – Love, Beasley, Tolliver, Pek
C – Darko, Pek
This suggests a 13 man rotation – does Rambis water everyone down or shaft 3-4 players for a viable minutes rotation? (My guess in order of likely shaftiness, 1 – Hayward, 2 – Ellington, 3 – Tolliver 4 – Brewer, 5 – Webster)
2 – Do the players with starter’s talent actually get starter’s minutes? Specifically Love v. Beasley, Beasley v. SF’s, Wes v. Beasley, Wes v. SG’s, Wes v. actually being a starting level talent, Darko v. Pek, Ridnour v. Flynn.
3 – Can Rambis handle the egos (Love), expectations, (Webster), development (flynn, Wes) and head cases (Beasley) that arrive from the inevitable decisions on minutes and starting?
I think...
Webster and Ellington get almost totally shafted — meaning like consistent DNP-CD’s shafted. Tolliver probably gets semi-shafted in that I bet we see maybe ten minutes a game from him split between the 3 and 4.
I don't think you see Tolliver at the 3 at all to be quite honest.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 7, 2010 12:27 PM CDT up reply actions
Ellington gets shafted
at the 2, Lazar at the 3 (no Tolliver there either). The majority of the mintues at the 2/3 will go to Beasley (3 only), Brewer, Wes and Webster (all 2/3s). I am not even sure that Rambis will let Brewer play SF due to his size. I think Rambis would much rather have someone that long and light at the 2.
I think Beasley and Webster start out getting the lions share of the minutes early in the season and Wes and Brewer start eating away at those minutes if they earn them over the starters. I don’t really even consider Brewer to be here long term as I am not convinced that Ramis wants a ill fitting SG who can’t shoot consistently. Doesn’t seem to be his MO.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 7, 2010 12:32 PM CDT up reply actions
Just remember that Rambis actively
pushed Kahn to get Webster. He will not get shafted.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 7, 2010 12:32 PM CDT up reply actions
Exactly
Webster plays a lot. He’s a vet, a good defender, and willtake and make a lot of threes. He’s this squad’s Gomes, and Gomes got a lot of burn last year.
For me the question isn’t who gets shafted but who gets traded. We’ve got Wes, Webster, Brewer, Ellington, Lazar, Beasley, and a bunch of cap space at the 2/3. Love, Darko, Pek, and Tolliver round out the 4/5 well enough while still leaving room for maybe one more backup/developmental big. To me the writing is clear – if we make a trade it’s most likely for a 2/3 hybrid/combo guy, and to do it means coughing up a Brewer and Ellington (or picks) plus cap space. In other words, we’re seeing a stockpile of moveable and replaceable assets at the 2/3. At best it’s something like Iggy at the two with Webster backing him up and Beasley at the three with Wes backing him up. Something like that.
The interesting thing is whether Ellington gets any burn as a backup PG. In a sense he’s a perfect trike backup PG – great off the ball, solid defender (smart and savvy) with good size and length, and a killer shooter. He’s got good vision and ok handles. Can Bassy show enough, or is this how Rambis tinkers with getting Wayne more minutes? I think at least two of Corey, Jonny, and Wayne get offered in trade talks this winter.
"Styx might be the mullet of bands."
by biggity2bit on Sep 7, 2010 11:57 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
Ellington as PG
Sorry – forgot to add this. If you consider Ellington your potential backup PG, then imagine how good a backcourt of him and Bjelly at the 1/2 would be against other backups. You’d have great length and defensive smarts on D, and a terrific ballhandler and creator mismatched against other 2’s and an outstanding shooter and cutter in Wayne to capitalize on Bjelly on offense. Starts to look almost Phil like in the combination of skillsets, smarts, size and roles, don’t you think?
"Styx might be the mullet of bands."
by biggity2bit on Sep 8, 2010 12:04 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
Bjelly
Nemanja Bjelica, a second rounder (35) this year for the Wolves, via trade.
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Nemanja-Bjelica-5510/
He comes from Serbia. He’ll f@cking murder ya.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKI83Yvktzc&feature=related
If you are reading this, you are the resistance
Good points about W. Ellington.
Maybe that aspect of him at PG should get some play up there…. done.
I'm so happy
that my dreams of Ellington as our backup PG are finally catching some steam. He really is perfect for it and he has shown an ever increasing ability to handle the ball well. Now he just has to learn to do so under pressure defense. Something I’m quite convinced he should be able to handle with some practice.
You're not letting natural selection take its course! You're like the guy who invented the seatbelt...
I kind of wonder
if Bassy gets a short leash from Rambis to start the season. It seems as though Rambis requires his players to have at least two of the following – good size, good strength, or good athleticism, and Bassy really only has one of those (athleticism/quickness), right? But even more damning for Bassy is that he needs to be an amazing passer and defender in order to offset his shooting inability. In other words, what is that one calling card skill that Bassy brings to the table for Rambis? He’s caught in a no man’s land where he does some things nicely, but not outstandingly, and he’s just not big enough or good enough as a defender to help offset it. In terms of leadership he could perhaps bring something to the table, but that’s why Ridnour is already here. Basically Bassy is competing with Ridnour for the backup PG position, with (and this is purely my speculation) Wayne in the running for third PG/three point specialist.
The beginning of this season is the perfect time to get Wayne out there at PG. He’s got the size, the smarts, is better at D than expected, and going against backups poses a great offensive mismatch with his three point shooting and driving skills. In just about any other system Ellington could never be a PG, but in the trike – and alongside other good passers/ball movers – he might be alright. It really comes down to his passing ability
In a sense, especially if you include his college production, he’s almost like a SG Kevin Love in the sense that he’s very productive (and efficient) with whatever touches he gets. This quote from DX sounds ideal for a backup PG in Rambis’ system, especially one who may be playing with most likely high usage guys (and most likely the ones selected for iso plays) such as Pek, Wes/Webster/Brewer – guys who would benefit from a legit deep threat with the intelligence to know when to pass and when to shoot (and where to be to collect the bailout pass):
Ellington indeed ended up being one of the most efficient shooting guards in this draft, ranking first in field goal percentage (48%) and third in points per possession (1.04).
Because of how well Ellington was able to pick and choose his spots, he ends up looking excellent in a host of different categories. He for example ranks 3rd in his ability to finish around the basket, behind James Harden and Jermaine Taylor, 3rd in catch and shoot jumpers, behind K.C. Rivers and Jack McClinton, third in pull-up jumpers, behind Jack McClinton and Jodie Meeks and first in points per possession in transition opportunities.
Ellington’s short-comings lie in his inability to create offense for himself, as he ranks third worst in isolation possessions generated behind two very poor ball-handlers in Paul Harris and K.C. Rivers, and his very related inability to draw fouls—which he did on just 9% of his used possessions.
Furthermore, this comment from Wayne himself this summer leads me to wonder if there might be more fire to this idea than I initially thought. I remember reading it when it came out and sort of wondering why he would be focusing on this stuff and simply chalked it up to normal athlete-speak about getting better, blah blah blah. But now I am wondering if Rambis might not have a little mad scientist in him as well.
“I’m trying to get better at putting the ball on the floor and getting to the basket,” Ellington said, adding that he’s also put a lot of effort into “creating for my teammates and getting more consistent with my shot.”
I’m not entirely sure where Jonny Flynn fits into all of this. If he’s not expected to be THE primary play creator than I think he’s got a great role on this team as a co-leader and scorer type. I guess for me the deal with Jonny comes down to his defense – if he can play D (or show significant progress there) this year, than I think he offers more than enough other stuff to convince Rambis to keep him around and find a role for him, be it as a starter or backup. If not, and if Wayne shows any chops at all as a backup trike PG, then I wonder if Jonny gets mentioned in potential trades as soon as this winter.
"Styx might be the mullet of bands."
point blank
is that Flynn may not be rambis’s kind of point. He will get plenty of burn and if Ricky comes over I would not be suprised to see him moved if Ellington can effectively play backup PG and spot backup SG. I have said many times that Rambis comes from Phil Jackson’s school of you can’t teach size and will want average to better size at each position. 6-4 is slight for a SG…excellent for a PG.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 8, 2010 12:53 PM CDT up reply actions
Don't forget
we also saw him used once, I believe, last year as the PG and quite a bit during summer league play. He was usually on the floor with another PG, but he still brought the ball up the floor about half of the time.
I’d love it if Wayne could become somewhat of a Steve Kerr type player (great 3pt shooter in somewhat limited attempts because he usually defers to his teammates).
You're not letting natural selection take its course! You're like the guy who invented the seatbelt...
Last game of the year, Ellington was the backup PG to Sessions.
Andy G and I sat together – it was one of those freebie games where Fred Hoiberg* talked to us and the team comped the tickets – and we were shaking our heads over how much better Ellington was at simply setting up the bigs than, oh, our starting PG for the entire year prior to that.
(* How long ago does that feel now? Good gravy!)
Yeah
I was psyched when about 1 month after I suggested they try it he came out as our PG. And I was significantly happier about his performance in those short minutes than some of the other people who commented. He has some work to do, but for his first few minutes, he did great.
I think Barnes would be our best bet to play next to him if we are playing Wayne at PG (then again I’m not sure of Barnes’ ability to put the ball on the floor), but I can’t really think of any extremely realistic options… Monta? I hate that I just suggested that. Michael Redd? Wow our options are really weak. But I certainly wouldn’t mind Michael Redd as a $6M/yr 6th man SG…
You're not letting natural selection take its course! You're like the guy who invented the seatbelt...
Rambis would feel how about Redd?
“Short for position” and “plays shoddy defense” seem to be what he’s running away from in last year’s edition. Emphasis on the defense.
I really think that’s what a lot of this summer’s been about for Kahn. It all comes back to his judgment of talent – Wes Johnson as a supposed Marion defensive type? – but deals like Webster, drafting Lazar, dealing Al Jefferson, and then the remarks by Glen when he surfaced a while ago:
Rambis had no problem with the effort. But he needed players who played his style, which is passing and defense. So immediately after the season, he went to president of basketball operations David Kahn and requested (a) different type of players.
Kahn obliged and continues to do so. Team owner Glen Taylor got involved, too, after seeking reasons for Rambis’ request for more athletic players.
“Kurt said they were really good kids, but that he just couldn’t get them to play the defense he wanted,” Taylor said Tuesday night.
So Kahn and Rambis and Taylor are trying something else.
Am I to take from this
that part of the reason we had some of the guys we did is because Taylor like them? I mean, let’s be honest here, Randy Foye and Ryan Gomes are not KG. This just makes me wonder again if the biggest problem with the Timberwolves is not David Kahn, Kurt Rambis, Jonny Flynn, or Kevin McHale, but rather Glen Taylor.
"Styx might be the mullet of bands."
by biggity2bit on Sep 10, 2010 10:55 AM CDT up reply actions
Not sure how current the personnel worry is.
Glen seemed to be a big factor with Joe Smith and Troy Hudson, but more recently, I dunno. That reads like he’s just watching Kahn make those choices.
Keep the dream alive Mplax
…keep the dream alive.
PG – Ellington
SG – Brewer
SF – Wes Johnson
PF – Tolliver or Beasley
C – Pekovic
That could be a pretty potent bench. It’s the dribbling part that may pose a problem, but hey, my old BAA coach told me that a ball that is passed can travel much faster than a human that is running.
by Rascal Flatts on Sep 8, 2010 8:49 PM CDT up reply actions
My dream
off the bench, some mix of…
‘PG’ – Wayne
‘SG’ – Bjelly
SF – Brewer
PF – Tolliver or B-Easy
C – Pekovic
That’s a group that can defend AND put up a bunch of points.
"Styx might be the mullet of bands."
Wayne Ellington the PG to OJ Mayo the SG:
“Eat your heart out baby!”
by Rascal Flatts on Sep 8, 2010 8:53 PM CDT up reply actions
You're probably right, he didn't play there for Golden State.
82 games has his breakdown as:
PF 24%
C 11%
SF 0%
(Those being %s of the Warriors’ minutes he took up while on the roster, of course.)
So I have a new question about whether he gets his few minutes in some sort of specialty “shooting 4-5” role, or what….
I would guess that Tolliver
gives us the ability to always put a “stretch” 4 out there at all times. Someone to create driving space and provide for cutting and so forth. That is exactly the kind of guy you would want to pair with Pek in the Paint. Or Beasley and Pek for stretches.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 7, 2010 12:59 PM CDT up reply actions
I don't think Webster will get shafted
He has the “stopper” label (whatever you want to make from that) I think when we line up against teams with good wings he is going to see big minutes maybe not in the starting lineup but definitively trying to at least slow down Kobe/Durant types
by running with Twolves (and scissors) on Sep 7, 2010 12:33 PM CDT up reply actions
I definitely have that as one of the "known knowns," Rumsfeld-style, above.
Given Rambis’s use of Gomes against a lot of other teams’ better offensive wings rather than Corey, and especially given the stuff Glen Tayor said about Rambis thinking he just didn’t have the horses to play defense, we may well assume Corey Brewer’s crazy mad frenetic defense is not high on Kurt’s list.
EvilProfessor’s observation above that Rambis pushed for Webster, too…. It seems to fit that we intende him as our stopper.
Is the stopper label for Webster fair?
I understand he had a game or two last season where he really made Kobe work hard for his offense, but day in and day out was he really that good of a defender or did he just have a couple of good nights that created this halo effect when it comes to his defense?
by Rascal Flatts on Sep 7, 2010 2:58 PM CDT up reply actions
I agree
where are the stat heads on this one?
by NorthernLights666 on Sep 7, 2010 3:31 PM CDT up reply actions
This is one of those good questions....
We know he was used that way, or at least we have quotes from Kahn and Rambis about that (as well as from Monty Williams, who’s in the picture with him up there I think).
His opponent counterpart numbers on 82games are where I glance for a thumbnail, and there, well…. Take a look. Talk about your small samples at SG and PF. (Yes, they have him playing a smidge of PF.) I don’t even know how 82games would track the sort of matchups Webster was looking at, playing alongside Brandon Roy.
Maybe I’ll qualify my table listing to something about being used that way, and Rambis thinking he’s gonna try that.
There's no way Webster doesn't get 30 minutes of PT a night
The FO is high on him to the point Kahn said Webster is much more productive when given 30 minutes of PT a game.
Distribution of Minutes:
PG: Flynn – 30 / Ridnour – 18
SG: Webster – 25 / Johnson – 15 / Brewer – 8
SF: Beasley – 25 / Johnson – 10 / Brewer – 7 / Webster – 6
PF: Love – 25 / Tolliver – 13 / Beasley – 10
C: Darko – 25 / Pekovic – 15 / Love – 5 / Tolliver – 3
by NorthernLights666 on Sep 7, 2010 2:29 PM CDT up reply actions
Distribution of Minutes when everyone is healthy
Beasley – 35
Webster – 31
Love – 30
Flynn – 30
Darko – 25
Johnson – 25
Ridnour – 18
Tolliver – 16
Brewer – 15
Pekovic – 15
by NorthernLights666 on Sep 7, 2010 2:32 PM CDT up reply actions
that sounds about right to me
I think Brewer is the one who really gets the shaft vs last year by getting his minutes halfed. Ellington too, but he will be best used in spot situations anyways. If he is hot he will play, if not, he won’t kind of thing.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 7, 2010 2:38 PM CDT up reply actions
Will he accept and relish that role
or will he sulk? Either way I think he’s gone by next season’s Trade Deadline, didn’t the FO try to move Brewer and the 16th to the Clippers so they could select Gordon Hayward? I also heard they were trying to move him to any team that was willing to give them an additional Top 20 pick. Wouldn’t you rather have Lazar (high energy, athletic, defensive minded player) for 1/5 the money than what Corey will make when he’s an RFA?
by NorthernLights666 on Sep 7, 2010 2:48 PM CDT up reply actions
If Kahn tried to get Gordon Hayward
Then the whole notion of the wolves being a running team is a marketing hype. Hayward, Love and Darko as you front line.!!!! We would have the slowest front court in the NBA and in the D League as well.
In his younger days you don't think Mike Dunleavy Jr. could play in a Fast Break offense?
That’s what Hayward is, but tougher and a better defender. He’s crafty, don’t take that away from him, running a fast break offense isn’t always about what your times are in the 3/4 sprint. He would’ve been a fine addition to the team. To think, we’d actually have a 2/3 that has an above average handle! You’re all in in regards to measuring a player’s ability by their quickness, huh? Paul Pierce anyone? Evan Turner isn’t exactly the quickest either. I think you’re overestimating quickness, yes, K Love is an exception to the crafty-quick paradox, but players like Pierce, Turner, James Harden, and even Hayward aren’t that far off in terms of quickness, we don’t need all Corey Brewers running the 2/3 for us.
by NorthernLights666 on Sep 7, 2010 3:26 PM CDT up reply actions
No I think so the game has changed too much. Pierce is an exception not the rule
with the rule changes and how Michel Jordan’s shadow is over the game of basketball most GM’s want that athletic 2/3 player. with that being said guys like Turner, and Harden are going to be role players. Tuner looked like garbage in summer league and Harden was the 3 pick overall and yet he cant beat out Thabo Sefolosha. People on this site underestimate how important athleticism is for a “running team”
Don't be too quick to guage
a player’s potential based on Summer League or Rookie Season play where the player wasn’t given a ton of freedom. Especially a guy like Harden who wasn’t given a ton of PT to flourish, I’d still rather have him than Flynn. Sefolosha is one of the best perimeter defenders in the L, pretty hard to unseat him as a Rookie, especially when you’re team is winning. Athleticism is much more than quickness and leaping ability, you’re always going to need guys that have a high BBIQ/craftiness and skill. Just because Hayward doesn’t have the best 3/4 sprint or one of the highest vertical leaps means he’s unathletic. In K-Love’s case, yes, that is correct, but like I said above, Hayward really isn’t far off in terms of quickness/leaping ability and more than makes up for it with his BBIQ/craftiness and skill.
by NorthernLights666 on Sep 7, 2010 4:23 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I will agree with your point about Harden not getting time
But if a player cant play at least OK in summer league something is wrong. I cant remember any player that played 3 years in college play bad in summer league and end up being a good NBA player. Maybe you know some so educate me.
I think players like Gordan, Babbitt are going to players of the past. They are only going to be used in special situations Like the steve Kerr’s of the world. BBIQ/craftiness and skill can only get you so far in the nba. If this were truly the case the nba would filled with Euro’s who know how to play the game “the right way”
Summer league: highly misleading.
Last year Warriors fans were wringing their hands over how tentative Stephen Curry had looked in summer ball.
Two years ago Portland gave Bayless a green light to score and he looked like a worldbeater; last year they told him to work on his overall game and Blazers fans were pretty down on him in the hot months; then he had some pretty strong regular season performances.
A lot of the time you really don’t even know what players are working on. Chris Bosh came to a summer league here in Minneapolis when they had it, and spent the entire time floating around the perimeter working on his long-distance shot.
True I agree
I just say play ok in summer league. I was amp up by the play of Flynn and Love during there stint in summer league play. But during the season not so much.
I ran a statistical test to determine
with what accuracy I can say that you categorize players based off of race and it came out true with 95% confidence.
You're not letting natural selection take its course! You're like the guy who invented the seatbelt...
You need to stop it righ now with this bullshit
When I talk about players its in the context of a running team. So if the site would talk about players who could run and are white like David lee Joe Alexander, Chris Anderson Kris Humphries Rudy Fernandez Andrew Bogut Louis Amundson . I would have no problems with these types of white ball players on the wolves. So Klove Gordon Hayward are not the type of players you need if you are trying to run. Its an easy point that I have tried to make over and over again but too few understand.
Go ahead and list off six or eight white players that you "like"
but don’t act like it’s some kind of proof that you see black and white players equally. This is a favorite tactic of bigots, who love to list off a handful of people (usually entertainers) of another race that they “like” and then go around saying: “See? I’m not a racist!”
It is hard to believe that you “like” Joe Alexander but think Love is a bad fit for a running team. KLove is a world-class rebounder/ outlet passer and Joe Alexander sucks. Either your “I like Joe Alexander” talk is a weak cover that you thought up really quickly or you know a lot less about basketball than you think.
Its not about who I like its about who fits.
When Kahn talks about the wolves he says he wants !a team that want to run b. an team athletic team. c a passing team in a half court. Love fits only one of these. David Lee fits all three. Joe Alexander fits 2 of these. so you and lot of fools on this sight are so quick to get mad you loose sight of what I am trying to say. Plus how can I be a bigot of my own kind.? Do you know me or my family?
Nobody called you a bigot. I said you use a bigot's favorite tactic for deflecting criticism.
More importantly, I am saying that your race-baiting gets really old. You interject race into conversations where it has no place:
“Name me one good white forward in the last ten years.”
“babbit=reddick=walton=dunleavy”
And your favorite statement, which you repeat again and again, apropos of nothing: “K Love is not the next Larry Bird” (what does this even mean?)
Nearly everybody else on this site offers evidence- statistical or anecdotal- to support their assertions. You reject both and insist that you are a basketball genius while everybody else is a “fool” or a “fanboy.”
Then you go and say things like this- I want players like Amundson, Humphries and Alexander on my team (but Love doesn’t deserve to start.)
Who is the fool here, Chuck? Who needs to watch more ballgames?
You missed the point
I guess you don’t even read my posts. All you do is key on one word and repeat this in your angry rants Answer this how would David Lee not be a better fit then klove? David lee Can run rebound and pass. I named guys like Amundson, Humphries and Alexander because you brought up race. and these are white guys that have the traits to fit on a running team. The best out of this bunch is David lee. He fits more than any body. More so then Klove. This is why you wont answer the Klove vs David lee. Because you know If you take off your damn fan glasses you would see that I am right.
ps I have never said anything like Name me one good white forward in the last ten years."
"babbit=reddick=walton=dunleavy" now you are just making shit up.
You never said anything like this?
ps I have never said anything like Name me one good white forward in the last ten years."
“babbit=reddick=walton=dunleavy” now you are just making shit up.
Quotes that can easily be found by searching your user activity for the word “white” include:
I don’t want another white small forward that cant defend.
+
There is only a few things that makes him stand out and those are the fact that he is the slow white and nonathletic one that talks to damn much.
+
So no I don’t think scouts and GM’s will look for slow nonathletic white guys with high basketball IQ’s any time soon.
+
I’d say this is 1 part Kahn hate, 1 part Love on team USA, 1 part Great White Hope and 1 part sports news organizations feeling they need to balance out their Kahn hate.
+
Rick Kamla is embarrassing
He is one of those white guys that try to sound like he is down with the hood.
+
me across as some type of whiner it’s bad for his brand as the "clean cut hard working white guy".
+
The only thing good about (Joe Alexander) is he might have a chance to become another great white hype.
+
Baseball and Hockey (have) predominantly white players
so coming to Mn is not big of deal.
(To which it was immediately observed in response that baseball certainly doesn’t have mostly white guys in it, but whatever.)
You mention race pretty often. That’s from the first of three pages of results. Follow the link there, you can read ’em.
by feral on Sep 9, 2010 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Page two, all you:
who the hell is this white dude
All white front line I thought we are trying to be LA in 80’s Not the great white nope in 2010.
dont take my word for it Larry bird a person that runs a nba team said it best the nba needs good white players. I also will add (w)hite players from the usa. I hope one day that a white player is good like…
This is one of the reasons why the NFLs dominates the NBA they have a built in position for white guys. Think about it Peyton manning can throw a football but I think all the white guys in the NBA…
A white boy In minny that can hoop sign me up
I am going to say this again name a american white SF in the past 15 years that has been any good. that is why the trade for webster is not bad
unless Babbit is the 2nd coming of Larry brid there is no reason to draft anothr slow white SF. we have seen this movie before in minny the shit dont work!!!
I dont think this was a bad trade either name one good usa born white small forward in nba in the last 10 years.
by feral on Sep 9, 2010 2:11 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
You are right I need to be more PC
In the way that I express my opinions. I have to remind my self that not every body comes from a multi racial family. so every body cannot deal with the truth. When I say things like The nba needs white stars. My white grandmother who is a big sports fan said the same thing. Then the most famous white basketball player Larry bird says the same thing. there must be a some truth to that statement. why for example the NBA players have the worst image as compared to NFL players. Both of their players get into trouble when they are not playing so what gives????
Wow
“I have to remind my self that not every body comes from a multi racial family. so every body cannot deal with the truth.” What does this even mean, that you can be a bigot because you’re from a multi-racial family? Man, are you conceited or what? For the sake of your ego, you’re right, you’re right, you’re right, are you happy? Maybe you should get the venerable Tim Allen in here to defend you again.
by NorthernLights666 on Sep 9, 2010 4:41 PM CDT up reply actions
Let's get this straight:
1) You have shown that we can’t expect you to stand by statements you make, because you will flat out deny them and accuse others of “making shit up”
2) You are willing to contradict yourself (like the fact that you recently went from saying J. Alexander is worthless to saying you want him on your team) to weasel out of a straightforward observation about your racially charged posts.
3) You have an unhealthy preoccupation with white players in the NBA, even as you assert that it’s everybody else (or at least those who are not from a multiracial family) who cannot deal with the truth.
How about toning down the self-righteousness a couple of notches? A lot of posters have showed support for you and your ideas, but not everybody wants to keep reading the same old angry Chuck posts on every thread.
Tangent: I think "PC" has become a vague enough term that it should be retired
As a way of deflecting criticism – which is all that it ever is, any more, because I don’t think anyone’s used it positively in 25 years – it’s gotten used and used and used until, recently, someone suggested to me they weren’t tipping more than 10% because it wasn’t politically correct and they were proud of that.
Overuse has stretched that particular sweater out.
people default to trying to be "PC"
when they don’t want to make very specific statements and prefer broad generalizations. Generalization tend to insult a lot of people and people who want to make that type of comment but don’t want to deal with the hurt feelings have developed a couple of catch phrases to use in place of other words to deflect any negative attention.
Example. People used to use the word “retard” to describe people who mental functions didn’t work as efficiently as they should for various reasons. It was descriptive and accurate…but snobby bastards used it as an insult and so it became non PC because people had hurt feelings. It isn’t the words, but rather the intent. writting just makes it harder to clarify your tone and imply respect versus seeing disrespect in the same message.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 10, 2010 9:40 AM CDT up reply actions
PC is not what you think it is
Political correctness originated in Stalin’s Soviet Union. It resurfaced in the late ’60s/early ’70s when lefties used it to put down Maoists and other extreme hard left types who tried to shanghai the anti-war movement with lose/lose strategies.
It was then revived by Rush Limbaugh and friends who flat out invented a previously non-existent form of PC to denigrate. Modern political correctness is a rightwing fabrication used solely to slander others while pushing a “patriotically correct” line.
This may seem convoluted, but it only gets worse if you realize that most of the pro-Iraq War rhetoric came from the philosophical descendants of Leon Trotsky via Leo Strauss.
Sorry, I just get very peeved everytime I see someone reference PC. I may not know advanced bb stats, but I know political jargon inside and out.
No autopsy, no foul.
by TMiss on Sep 10, 2010 1:18 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I understand that the origination of the word
is long and complex. However, the manner in which my generation has used that phrase indicates something else entirely. And the manner in which a word is used shapes what it currently is.
Much like the term Faggot has been used to describe cigarettes, bundle of stick and gays over the course of time. Once a word reaches the level of insult versus descriptive, the conotation of the word as it is being used tends to supplant the history that came before it for use in the every day vernacular. “PC” has now come to represent (at least to me) saying things in a particular manner as to avoid addressing edgy topics or hurting someone’s delicate feelings. Right or wrong that is the context in which I hear the word used.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 10, 2010 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions
Wow, a reference to Leo Strauss
on the CH board. I continue to be surprised at the makeup of the board.
My fleeting knowledge of Strauss is that he coopted Trotsky’s theories to provide intellectual cover to justify outright lying as a means of getting your way politically.
Specifically, it was Strauss’s students who become the neocons that lied us into the Iraq war — knowingly lied to the public, by coopting the press and politicians.
These are not nice people. And probably not hoops fans either, but they would say they are in order to get their way.
In addition to some great hoops analysis
there are many very bright and well-informed netizens here (as I’m sure you know). Some very wicked humor as well (though I haven’t seen PD for some time). Add on top of that a sense of equanimity among many fans and Wolves basketball is actually quite tolerable.
"Silence is golden but duct tape is silver." ---Anon.
Define athleticism
Either you a) counted it twice with running team b) consider it just your ability to jump high or c) Love is a pretty damn good athlete
You're not letting natural selection take its course! You're like the guy who invented the seatbelt...
You say...
…“Its an easy point that I have tried to make over and over again but too few understand.”
Besides being broadly insulting as usual, it isn’t that we don’t understand. You keep ‘trying’ which amounts to you ‘saying it’ over and over. We don’t ‘get it’ because it’s wrong.
What is the best way to start a successful fast break? In the entire world, who is better at that particular thing than our own personal, whiny, fat, doughy, unathletic diva? Do you understand?
Also, how many fast breaks has Love finished for the US? I’ve seen a few. He can run, it is a complete myth that only sprinters get the layups – the sprinters are usually covered, the big guys often just have to beat the other big guys. Do you understand?
Getting so sick of this relentless attitude. Treat this site like a pub where we discuss things with civility and respect over a beer instead of the Jim Rome show where the most aggressive put downs and brashest anonymous caller wins and we’ll all enjoy it a hell of a lot more. Believe it or not (clearly you don’t) people who know basketball quite well can have an opinion different than yours that isn’t ‘bullshit’ and they don’t hold that opinion because they ’don’t understand’ your grand, unsupported proclamations.
>Caliwolf steps off soap box<
Sorry. Been a long offseason and seeing the same arguments with the same relentless negativity is wearing incredibly thin (not just you chuck, please stick around, but please treat the community with some respect).
If you are reading this, you are the resistance
by CaliWolf on Sep 8, 2010 8:38 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
You should have not gotten on the soap box in the 1st place
Because you are trying to be condescending while making up things about your favorite player. I have not seen love finish too many fast breaks while on team usa this is because he is too busy rebounding to finsh any kind of fast break. Now like I said before I would rather have David Lee than Kevin love on a running team. The reason is If wes or Webster gets the rebound our fast break attack is dead because Kevin love will not get down the court fast enough to be apart of it. Coach K calls Kevin he best in the trailing the fast break. You know what that means that means that he is too slow to finish with the other guys on the floor. Take off you fan boy glasses and you will see what I am talking about.
wrong again
do you even watch basketball? Do you know what “trailing the fast break means?” Often it means the big guy beat his opposite big guy down the court for any easy lay in over a guard. Apparently, according to you, Love is great at this, but also terrible at this exact thing.
Wow. Watch a game or two, Love has definitely finished on the break. I’m being condescending solely to match your arrogant tone, with which you persist, to demonstrate how friggin annoying and useless it is. I guess it worked since you did what you always do – nothing but repeat yourself in an arrogant insulting way.
Educate yourself, for example:
http://nbaplaybook.com/2010/08/05/nba-how-to-running-the-fast-break/
I can see, yet again, you don’t bother refuting the argument placed before you. I mean why would you? You know hoops, I’m stupid and have Kevin Love posters above my bed, right?
If there is a rebound, Love is, by the numbers not fan boy (or hater) glasses, statistically one of the most likely players on Earth to corral it. Coincidentally, he is also an epic outlet passer, by all accounts. This is a huge factor in a fast break. To claim Lover sucks on a running team if somebody else grabs the board is largely a paper tiger since the fast break isn’t an option on most possessions anyway, and he can absolutely contribute regardless. Love maximizes the chances to have a chance to break, and is extremely good at getting the pass out quickly and accurately. Might Lee get out better if Monta grabs a board? Yeah, maybe. But how many more, and better, chances does Love provide, team-wide (via pass or breaking out), than Lee? You apparently live in an ESPN world where the guy dunking is more important than the guy grabbing a board in traffic and firing a 40 foot pass instantly to the guy who gives it to the guy who dunks. But, whatever, you know hoops, right?
So, continue being an ass, call me another name, pretend you’re smarter than everybody, etc. etc. On the other hand, thanks, I am now free to skip past your posts knowing I’m missing absolutely nothing.
If you are reading this, you are the resistance
See?
Is this fun? Is it fun when somebody responds to you the way you respond (although honestly, I support my arguments a lot better :) )?
No. It sucks. I’ll say it again, this is not talk radio. Let’s just talk hoops without insults. Let’s make an argument and support it. Let’s refute the opposing argument rationally without insult. Let’s accept that others can have a different opinion than you and not be an idiot.
Be civil. Respect the community. Sometimes, just let it go and agree that there is no common ground.
So, yes Love is not the fastest guy. Yet, I argue his skill set is perfect for a running team. Further, for a big, anticipation and effort, which he has shown in FIBA play (but admittedly was sluggish last year), are often enough to get ahead of your defender for an easy hoop on a drop off after the initial break stalls. At this moment, I see no valid argument against these points. If you have one, I’ll listen. If you couch it the way you usually do – without support but with the assumption that I am obviously too stupid to not have accepted your point as law years ago, well, I’m not going to be convinced. Get it?
We all want to discuss, debate, and argue. We also all want to be treated with a modicum of respect. Too often, in my opinion, you post from the position that you feel you are so obviously right is is beyond ignorant to even debate. That does not fly here. It never will.
So again, please, respect the community. I am pretty sure if you continue on your current path you won’t be taken seriously, if you still are. And, I think you actually do provide an original take at times. Just actually support your position with something other than the certainty it’s correct because it’s yours and consider what others are saying. I think we’ll all be better for it.
And for the love of Rubio shat bunnies hopping around making rainbows and bacon, let’s have another bourbon. On me. Good god, it’s hoops. What are we going to be like during a 6 game losing streak?
If you are reading this, you are the resistance
The support for my argument is simple.
If love does not get 85-90% of the rebounds while he is on the floor. the fast break attack will be none existent. we have too many guys on the court that will not have the athletic advantage to out run their opponents. Beasley is an above average athlete as power forward but not as small forward. Ridnour average to below average athlete. Webster, Johnson, are above average athletes. Love is a Below average athlete. Where is the advantage for wolves?? Good fast-break teams force mismatches. Remember the Suns They ran with Amare at the center and the Matrix at the 4. That is why they were league leaders in Fast break points.
Sorry I blasted you in my last post but I just get tried of all bull shit that I get. I love this site. but some people get on my damn nerves just because I have an opinion based on what I have seen in the NBA and not some cute stat. a stat will not tell you what players fit and don’t fit. it only can judge one players production. A stat will not tell you not how much a layer effects a teams scheme.
This really is a valid point.
I share the opinion with you that Beasley, Love, and Darko may be too plodding a frontcourt to become a good fast-break team.
Where we differ, though, is that I think Love’s rebounding and outlet passing is an important enough asset to keep him on the court.
I’d solve the problem by bringing Beasley off the bench as a change of pace scorer, at least until he’s proven that he’s more than that. Webster and Wes on the wings, with Rubio eventually running the break, is fast enough to be an up-tempo team.
Me too.
He fits into the starting line-up better, in my opinion.
And Beasley really should have to prove he’s worth a starting spot before we’re sacrificing better fit for him.
But shouldn't Wes Johnson prove it too?
On paper, Wes might be a better fit, but that doesn’t mean he’s the better player. Let them fight it out in camp.
My own take is that Beasley needs a massive vote of confidence from Rambis and he should have the words “Go To Scorer” imprinted on his forehead. Bringing him off the bench means he competes for shots with Flynn and Pekovic (assuming Ridnour wrests the starting PG position away from Flynn, which could very well happen).
You put him out there with Ridnour, Webster, Love, and Darko in the starting lineup and he is the clearcut #1 option. Flynn and Pekovic bring offensive punch off the bench.
by Rascal Flatts on Sep 9, 2010 4:10 PM CDT up reply actions
Then our model should be
Jogging with the wolves instead of running with the wolves.
That’s probably closer to true than anything else. They don’t have the roster to be a true out and out running team.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
I seem to recall UNC
winning a championship a couple years ago (granted it’s college, not the NBA). They weren’t particularly fast, but they still were a running team. And like all Roy Williams coached teams, the secondary break was a point of emphasis for them. The secondary break is every bit as important to a running team as the primary break. With team USA K-Love has shown an ability to score pretty well as part of the secondary break. I think we’ll be just fine as a running team. And I think K-Love will fit just fine with a running team.
Sam Cassell for Marko Jaric? That's ridiculous! I would never have traded Sam Cassell for Marko Jaric.
- Sam Cassell on McHale's decisions while running the Timberwolves.
To pile on a bit here, you don’t always have to beat your man down the court for a fast break to be successfull. Ideally you just want a simply numbers game x v. less than x however with moderately decent athletes (Webster/Wes/Beasly) the offense should win a 2v2 more often than they win a 5v5 just by virtue of the extra space.
You mean the difference
between being a running team or not is the fact that Beasley starts at SF and Wes Johnson comes off the bench? Seems like we’re splitting hairs here. Wes is still going to get plenty of time at SF and Beasley plenty of time at PF, just not to start the 1st and 3rd quarters.
Also, I’m interested in being a winning team and could care less if that means our starting lineup happens to be a bit slower paced than our bench lineup.
by Rascal Flatts on Sep 9, 2010 6:51 PM CDT up reply actions
What would Dwyane Casey's index card read like for Beas??
If I could have gotten the clunky interface here to let me use BG images on the tables, that might have been a nice little conceit: each player’s entry could be one of Casey’s old “Your Role” cards, defining what a player was supposed to contribute to the team.
I love this approach
A simple statement that summarizes that player’s primary role and purpose (albeit not to the exclusion of everything else):
Beasley – Go to scorer
Darko – Defensive anchor
Love – Team Co-Captain
Webster – Perimeter lockdown defender
Brewer – 6th man energizer
Ridnour – Team Co-Captain
Flynn – Playmaker
Pekovic – Interior enforcer and scorer
Wes Johnson – Defense and lane runner
by Rascal Flatts on Sep 10, 2010 12:14 PM CDT up reply actions
Can I add on?
Webster – three point jacker
Flynn – perimeter ‘create his own shot’ guy
Pekovic – dude with huge Nordic looking sword guy tattoo intimidating the hell out of NBA backups
"Styx might be the mullet of bands."
by biggity2bit on Sep 13, 2010 10:29 PM CDT up reply actions
Cool
Thanks. Sorry for being an ass. Accumulated frustration about many threads focused unfairly on you.
I see your point. I think Love is capable of beating a lot of 4s, and most 5s down the court if he doesn’t grab the board. Seriously, in FIBA play he is hustling up and down like I have never seen. Hope he keeps it up.
Also, if Nash can run the break…Ridnour can. Not so important for the PG to beat his guy since he’s usually throwing it ahead to a wing anyway. I think if we have two of Corey, Wes, Martell on the floor with Love we’re good to go. I honestly don’t know what to think of Beasley on the break, but my gut says if he smells a bucket he’ll magically run faster :) Just seems like that type of guy.
Thanks for a reasoned supported response. Please keep posting with this tone, even if it gets contentious. And take in the stats and try to have a reasonable dialogue with the stat heads.
If you are reading this, you are the resistance
try to have a reasonable dialogue with the stat heads
Note that this is impossible with some of them. Not all. But some.
85 to 90% is ~2.8 times as good as Rodman at his best, incidentally.
Here’s the list of all players who have ever over a season boarded at more than 25%:
Dennis R. tearing down a rebounding rate just under 30% is the best the league has seen from a real big-minutes player over a season.
You’re sort of comparing apples to oranges here. Rodman had a rebounding rate of close to 30 for that season, yes. But what percentage of the rebounds that his team actually got were attributable to him that year? In other words, out of the hypothetical 2500 rebounds that his team collected that season, how many did he get? If he hypothetically got roughly 1500 that season, then he was responsible for 60% of his team’s rebounds.
I realize that is not exactly what he said, but I think from the context it is clearly what he meant to say. After all it makes little sense to talk about a rebound the opposing team came down with as a fast break opportunity that was lost due to K-Love’s (alleged) lack of foot speed.
Sam Cassell for Marko Jaric? That's ridiculous! I would never have traded Sam Cassell for Marko Jaric.
- Sam Cassell on McHale's decisions while running the Timberwolves.
Um, "clearly what he meant to say"?
Obviously the general idea – that Love would have to be a great rebounder – is there, we all know that.
The % rebounding stat is much more sensitive to things like playing time than share of team totals, but as long as you’re tossing out estimates based on the latter:
Dennis Rodman’s highest % defensive rebounding year (we’re talking about starting breaks, right?) was 94-95 with the Spurs. That season he got 549 of his team’s 2661 defensive rebounds, or 20.6% of the team’s total. (David Robinson had more.)
Rodman’s best year with Chicago was 95-6, when he got 596 of 2411 Bulls defensive rebounds, or 24.7% of the team total. Both of those were amazing rebounding years, and still nowhere near 85%, or 60%, of any pie we want to slice.
Basically I would describe this as a nice little example of how, going strictly “by eye,” a reasonably up-on-it fan like chuck or either one of us could come away with a distorted idea of how often certain things happen on the court, and therefore a muddled idea of how important those things are. The fact that he’s tossing out a rate that would be more than twice the historical high is telling in that way.
Another small example with Love would be the rate at which he gets blocked. Hollins was blocked on a higher percentage of his shots last year. Love has that happen to him, but in order to know if it’s a big problem, you sort of have to have a clear idea of how often it happens to other players. “By eye” doesn’t cut that bread for us.
I'm with you on this.
If the best rebounder in the game (to date) had at best roughly 25% of his team’s defensive rebounds over the course of a season (albeit even with that number we don’t know how many of the rest of the team’s defensive rebounds came while Rodman wasn’t in the game and thereby don’t effect his rebounding percentage), then to claim that Love would have to get 3 times that in order to be an effective member of a running team is pretty ridiculous.
Sam Cassell for Marko Jaric? That's ridiculous! I would never have traded Sam Cassell for Marko Jaric.
- Sam Cassell on McHale's decisions while running the Timberwolves.
David Lee vs Love for a running team is an edge for Lee because not only does he rebound the heck out of the basketball and pass it well, he can finish breaks, too. He’s the whole package for a running team. Love’s not perfect, but he will start more fast breaks than nearly any player on the planet, Lee included. He can also trail the break very well. Both power forwards who will see major minutes on this roster can be a huge part of a running team (not counting Tolliver because he doesn’t rebound or pass or sprint particularly well). It isn’t Kevin Love that’s going to keep this team from running—it’s the point guard spot. I don’t trust Flynn or Ridnour on the break at all. With that in mind, a passer like Love is going to be a huge asset, because he can just heave it to Wes and let Wes finish.
And yeah, it’s not ideal if someone besides Love gets the rebound, but it’s not that common for a fast break to feature everyone and Kevin Love will rip down a huge percentage of the rebounds for the Wolves. Maybe Love’s inability to outrun Amare costs the Wolves a couple fast break opportunities, but replacing him with Beasley will cost the team even more because Love is going to get so many more boards than Beasley and be so much more effective at starting the break. Fast breaks need guys who can start them, and finish them. Love possibly the best player in the NBA at getting them started. That’s an asset to a running team.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Thanks for bringing up the suns
Amare is a Terrible rebounder and he played center while Marion was just as bad as an under sized power forward. But yet the suns teams thay they played for was one of the league leaders in fast break points. This is why I have been saying all summer long rebounding is one of the most over rated aspects of the fast break. For the stat guys http://www.82games.com/fastbreakpoints.htm
The Suns rebound the ball really well from the backcourt, though. If the Wolves can do that, it wouldn’t really be an issue. I’m not confident in that, though. Given that Darko is a worse rebounder than Amare and Marion (in his SSOL Suns years) is about Beasley’s equal as a rebounder, the Wolves’ backcourt would need to be better than the Suns’ as rebounders. I don’t see it happening.
Point remains. Good fastbreaking teams start and finish breaks. Without Love, the Wolves won’t start many. And regardless of whose on the floor, they won’t be Phoenix. They’ll either field a weak rebounding team, or a team that won’t outrun everyone. Like you said in a previous thread, and I totally agree, this team will play something like a Euro team in the halfcourt, and try to run whenever possible. We just differ about how often it’s even capable of running and what Kevin Love brings to that equation.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
I don't think the suns back court rebounded well
Nash and Raja Bell were never good rebounders for that team. Nash had 3.5 per game and Bell had 3.2. Not what you would call a beast on the boards. Plus stats are not static numbers. Darko with more playing time and better coaching will put up better numbers across the board.
So My point prevails. Rebounding is one of the most over rated aspects of the fast break.
If you want to say “So My point prevails” make sure it’s actually true. The Suns were never a bad rebounding team. Ever. They were always at least near average, and were spectacular some years. In 04-05, they were the best rebounding team in the NBA.
And rebounding rate is a really, really static stat. No stat is more consistent. Darko might see improvement, because his confidence seems to affect his game so much, and even his rebound numbers fluctuate significantly, but until we see that improvement, bet on him being at least a bad rebounder and possibly a terrible rebounder.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Sep 9, 2010 4:22 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I guess it depends on whether
your differentiate between pushing the pace and outlet style fastbreak. In pushing the pace where you get the ball after a basket most of the time, then having an athletic PF is a major boon and need. If you are talking outlet style like the kind that lead to wide open layups and slams, then it isn’t necessary to run like a gazelle.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 9, 2010 11:14 PM CDT up reply actions
Can somebody find a stat
That says one outlet pass leads to a fast break point. I have watched a lot of games I don’t recall Klove using it 10-15 times a game. If he would connect this high of a percentage of outlets then yes his lack of athleticism can be masked by his outlets and his rebounding.
This year will be a much better test of that than last year. Even if Love had grabbed 100% of the defensive rebounds and been looking for an outlet, last year’s team would have been a crappy running team. Jonny Flynn running a 3 man break with Sasha Pavlovic and Damien Wilkins inspires fear in the hearts of no men. Ridnour, Webster and Wes is a better group of horses to run with, and replacing Ridnour with Rubio will help even more. In the next couple years, we’ll not only see how much they run, but what their running identity is. How will these breaks be organized, from start to finish? These are questions we don’t have answers to just yet.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
agreed
I shudder at the thought of a Pavs/Wilkins break. Ugh.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 10, 2010 7:25 AM CDT up reply actions
First, Darko and Beasley are barely worse rebounders than Amare and are nearly identical when it comes to DREB%, the rebounding stat that matters most when it comes to fast breaks. Second, whether guards rebound is largely a function of where the shots are coming from. Without knowing where those shots are coming from, the rebounding ability of those players can’t evaluated with certainty.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Sep 10, 2010 8:53 AM CDT up reply actions
As a follow-up...
Steve Nash’s career numbers indicate that his DREB% numbers are at least partially a function of the Suns’ system.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Sep 10, 2010 8:58 AM CDT up reply actions
There is nothing about Steve Nash’s career arc that makes sense to me. He’s a crazy outlier in most ways. He seems to have totally reinvented himself as the years have gone by. Guys like Bell, Richardson and Hill didn’t get a bump from the system. Nash’s jump in rebounding production may just be a weird Steve Nash thing and not a weird Phoenix Suns thing.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Fair enough
I have no rebuttal to either of your points.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Sep 12, 2010 10:56 PM CDT up reply actions
Which would explain why Steve Nash and Chauncey Billups are the examples everyone uses.
When you’ve got a young player who’s not quite putting it together, you can always point to the two of them and suggest that anything can happen.
And why I have to routinely point out on GSoM that it’s unlikely that Steph Curry will be the next Steve Nash, even though there are some similarities in their games. Nash might be the most skilled offensive basketball player to ever lace ‘em up. Your team’s point guard is not going to be Steve Nash in 6 years, no matter how much their rookie stats look alike. Steve Nash is the Horatio Alger of basketball.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
What is: Horatio Alger?
Answer: 19th century American author whose novels epitomized the American Dream, often featuring underdog protagonists achieving success in a ‘rags to riches’ style plot.
Example – Steve Nash was a middle first round pick and initially failed to live up to expectations. Cast off to another team, he later grew into “the most skilled offensive basketball player to ever lace ’em up”, eventually triumphantly returning to his original team to lead them to unexpected success.
"Styx might be the mullet of bands."
by biggity2bit on Sep 13, 2010 10:35 PM CDT up reply actions
Horatio Alger isn't what he used to be
Scholars have updated his story a bit: http://tinyurl.com/2wt6u65
Unsurprisingly it turns out that the guy who wrote nothing but stories about young lads being mentored by successful capitalists has a decidedly altar boy twist to it.
But Alger’s also been criticized in recent decades because if you actually read his stuff, you learn that ALL of his heroes catch a break, usually in the form of being “sponsored” by some wealthy guy.
That’s fairly appropriate because a lot of NBA players got to where they are today because of help from sports boosters when they were young. It’s just too bad that our effed up amateurism rules have turned that help into such a cess pool of rules violations.
No autopsy, no foul.
We're not suggesting Nash is a
pedofile*, I hope.
"Silence is golden but duct tape is silver." ---Anon.
Darko and Beasley v Amare is a totally fair point. It’s not as bad as I made it out to be. Good catch on the correction.
Rebounding rates are generally pretty dang consistent over years. I’m not sure how much stock I’d put in assuming that guards’ rebounding rates are more random than bigs’. I’d want to see some data on that.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Agree on Webster
They traded for him with the bet that he’ll thrive in more of a featured role with bigger minutes (I don’t necessarily agree with this take by the way).
However, don’t count Brewer out. I have a feeling that he is going to thrive in a role coming off the bench and may eventually eat into Webster’s minutes. He is a big-time competitor that has the potential to be a better all-around player than Webster.
by Rascal Flatts on Sep 7, 2010 2:51 PM CDT up reply actions
Better All-Around Player?
I don’t know, I just don’t see it. At least Webster can shoot, albeit not the greatest selection and is an average ball handler, I’m not sure last season for Brewer’s shooting was anything other than an aberration, not sure if it’s the motion of his shot or the fact that he always just looks out of control, plus he doesn’t even have a below average handle. Call me a Webster fan, I think he breaks out this year. Plus, will Corey ever even have below average strength? I’ll have to side with Webster, bigger wingspan, as athletic, much more mature body, better shooting (Not selection, just overall mechanics), at least has the ability to dribble. I don’t get the Corey Brewer homerism, guess I’m just not a fan, I think he’s gone by next year’s deadline.
by NorthernLights666 on Sep 7, 2010 3:20 PM CDT up reply actions
Brewer
I know he works his tail off, and I commend him on that, I just don’t think, at least at this time in our team’s development we need to invest in something like that. I have a feeling that he’s going to get a contract in the $5M per range from a playoff contender and I don’t think we should match, if Lazar shows he can do a lot of the same things Brewer can, then I don’t see us matching his contract for that amount of money, are we ready to invest in Corey? For the money he’s going to get on the open Market I don’t see us making that kind of investment, especially if we figure out we have his replacement at 1/5 the cost.
by NorthernLights666 on Sep 7, 2010 3:30 PM CDT up reply actions
Unless he shows considerable improvement this season, I think the absolute biggest contract the Wolves should give Brewer in FA is a 3-year, $8M deal, with incentives that would allow him to make an additional $4M over that span. Anything more than that seems like overspending to me. I understand that he is great in the community and is a wonderful role model for kids and NBA players alike, but in a league with a salary cap if you’re going to pay him $5M per season, then he needs to at least be worth $3M per season for his on-the-court contributions to the franchise if you want your team to win games.
Sam Cassell for Marko Jaric? That's ridiculous! I would never have traded Sam Cassell for Marko Jaric.
- Sam Cassell on McHale's decisions while running the Timberwolves.
If Lazar can show he can be that type of high energy/defensive disrupter like Corey
then he will stay for 1/3 or up to 1/6 the price of Brewer.
by NorthernLights666 on Sep 7, 2010 10:55 PM CDT up reply actions
(Which only throws us back to last summer at this time, and the Brewer option year.)
Corey’s a great kid, but for the player he is…. Well, that player is more of a late-first Lazar Hayward sort.
These guys were pretty much even in terms of Production last year
Brewer had a better 2-point %, more FTAs per minute, more assists, and more steals. Webster was the better 3-point shooter and rebounder, although we know from past experience that Brewer can rebound well when playing SF in a halfcourt oriented system. Webster also turned it over less than Brewer, but when your job is to scurry to the corner on offense to space the floor and let Brandon Roy do all the ball-handling in a methodical offense, you simply aren’t going to turn it over that much. Brewer was asked to play a featured role in an offense that demands a lot of its wings and plays at a fast pace. As a result, he turned the ball over a fair amount as he struggled to create more off the dribble than a guy like Webster was ever asked to do. We’ll see how Martell reacts this year in a role that will put him in the spotlight more.
By the way, I agree we need to give Martell first crack at SG and see what he can do. But my gut tells me Webster gives us similar production numbers to last year while Brewer still has more upside to his game. I’m just not ready to write off Brewer. If that’s being a homer, than so be it.
by Rascal Flatts on Sep 7, 2010 4:23 PM CDT up reply actions
How many more shots did Corey take than Martell last season?
We’ll see what Martell does this year when he takes 1000 shots compared to 600-700 last season. Especially in a system that’s more conducive to his abilities, less methodial, more fast paced. He’s never been given that opportunity, so we’ll see if he can pass the excellent PER of 13 Corey put up last year with that many shots. Martell has never been given that opportunity but Corey has, and put up that PER of 13, so only time will tell. Webster has never had a good PER in limited minutes too so I can’t predict what he’ll do next season, but he at least has that smoothness to his game, his drives to the hoop look natural, his jump shoot looks natural, he passes eye test in his physical profile and game, what a prototypical, athletic 2/3 looks like. When I look at Corey’s game I guess I just don’t see where you guys think this guy has potential left. I do think his BBIQ is very good, but the guy just flat out lacks skill, I can’t see past the unnerving, reckless drives to the hoop where my heart stops and I pray it goes in. Besides last season his shot (mechanics, consistency) was completely broken, Webster has always had a shot (not the best of selection, but the mechanics were always there), a pro body, and at least a semblance of a handle, Brewer, besides his shooting last season has had none of those. His basketball moves are just so unnatrual that I have to assume he will never have that smoothness to his game, and that I think is what causes him to be what he is now, a great defensive disrrupter, energy guy off the bench, Trevor Ariza lite, but that’s it. For our sake I pray we find out Lazar is the same player so we don’t have to pay Corey $5M per. Is it just me or are their others that see Corey’s completely unorthodox game and think he’ll never be more than an energy guy off the bench, time for you to break the stereotype Corey, I guess if Shawn Marion and his unorthodox game can make it, well…. Oh that’s right, Marion is a complete freak of an athlete and is one of the best defenders in the last 10 years, it’s going to take a lot for Corey to be considered even a starter. If I’m wrong it’s a good thing, we’ll take all the players we can get that are willing to work their tail off to get better, for Corey though, his game speaks volumes to me, just unorthodox as hell and he doesn’t have the skill/length to make up for it.
by NorthernLights666 on Sep 7, 2010 4:57 PM CDT up reply actions
Larger question
Are there really that many players, outside of battered slow-of-foot veterans like Sabonis when he finally got over here, who suit one pace of play and not others? We all think there are, but are there really?
Anecdotally, even: Examples of players who were like Webster – "meant to run," but playing on one of the slower-paced teams around – and who moved somewhere else and blew up don’t readily come to mind. And how about Kevin Loves: where are the supposedly pokey players who shift from Phoenix to the Pat Riley Knicks and suddenly look great?
I’d like to see some career arcs like that. The shorthand version of a look at that might be a fast coach moving to a formerly sluggish team: Nelly to the Knicks?
Steve Nash
When he with phoenix the first time around they played a faster pace but not one that Dallas and later Steve Nash led Phoenix played at.
Hrm.
I’m not sure whether to take out my Swiss Army Knife of ways people refer to Steve Nash and check that against some of the others, or what….
You’re right about that Suns team’s running game in most of the ways I can check. Phoenix in Steve’s first year (“pace”: 10th in the league) had Jason Kidd, Kevin Johnson, and Steve Nash(!) on the roster, but they weren’t running as much. Nash was basically developing. That’s the usual way he comes up – “Our point guard doesn’t look so good yet, but it took Nash a while.”
I guess in outline we could make a “Nellyball let him bloom” argument. Unfortunately he didn’t really come out until he’d been in Dallas a while, either. By most ways of looking at things, he really looked like a mediocrity for two full years there too.
Another team example: Late 80s Denver Nuggets
They were first in the league for pace for several years running, apparently. Before my time, but in theory you’d think certain players who moved to Denver would emerge, and others (the K-Loves) would move away and be happier walking it up.
Unfortunately they just seem like an example of stat inflation. Michael Adams: 26 1/2 a night from their PG spot, just running mad for Paul Westhead in 90-91. The numbers are empty as can be.
I would also include when new coaching philosophies are brought to a franchise
I can’t name any off hand, but there’s got to be plenty, I’m not saying Webster is going to be infinitely better than Corey, just that our FO has seen what Corey can do, look at the freedom they gave him last year, and are now trying out Martell. I’m not saying that Martell will light the League on fire, but he’s a 6’7" 230 lb (Pro Body-Good Strength) SG/SF with a 7’ wingspan that is at least an above average man to man defender, has legit range, a handle that was underutilized (will be especially effective in the Pinch Post, dude can rise up and assorb contact, can Corey?) due to Portland’s methodial Brandon Roy grind it out offense and good to great athleticism. He’s the prototypical slasher/shooter for the Triangle, plus he can get out and run. My worry for him is that he’s just an underachiever, if he doesn’t have competitive fire, something Corey has. For me Corey just doesn’t have a very orthodox offensive game in that he really has little to no ball handling ability, his offensive isolation ability even off the pinch post looks absolutely out of control and most times results in a turnover, the ones that do go in look so ridiculous you have to assume it was luck and not skill, all I see is flailing arms and a shot with a weird spin going in, I suppose it does go in. A broken shot up until last season. yes, Webster has never had great percentages, his shot selection is from far perfect, but his mechanics have always been near flawless – ala Glen Rice, something Corey has just recently developed this last season with the PT he got, imagine what Martell can do when he gets the looks/PT Corey got last year?
by NorthernLights666 on Sep 7, 2010 10:46 PM CDT up reply actions
Added a bit about Martell's handle above.
He seems to have a chance to prove how good he is, given that Corey and Wes J. are a “No” and a big question mark in that area. If he’s out there soaking up minutes, Webster’s going to be handling it a lot.
(Competitive fire mentioned, too.)
side note
NL666 – I love your input, but if you throw in a couple paragraph breaks, it’ll make it so much easier to read!
Next thing you know, they'll take my thoughts away.
The only thing that wouldn't be similar to last year would be the position.
When you go look at Martell’s history, he’s had almost no time at shooting guard. Last year’s 82games count, for example, called him the SG in a whopping 1% of Portland’s minutes. Two years before that (the last time he really played): 4%.
We’re sort of hoping that the lack of evidence is good evidence at some point. He was being kept out of position. Yeah, yeah. That’s it.
In the triangle small forwards and shooting guards are the same.
The way the triangle works depends on what side of the floor a "wing " player is on. That 82games does not apply on the wolves. so one play a SG can be a "SF " on one play a SG on the next. .
Well, if we want to say the trike offense redefines every position,
I’m not sure what to do with the argument that Webster’s probably going to produce much like last year that way, either. As a system it definitely seems to have more influence on production from specific spots than almost anything else, with maybe PGs in a Princeton offense being a close second….
I'm adding something to Rambis about whether the wings play at all differently.
The bigger question is what the heck offense he’s really running. Kahn openly denies it’s the triangle, at length.
Also a bit about how much Jonny’s role evolves in his second year. Supposedly they pared down options for him.
I think by mid-year the guys getting regular minutes will be
PG: Ridnour/Flynn
SG: Webster/Johnson/Brewer
SF: Beasley/Johnson/Brewer
PF: Love/Beasley/Tolliver
C: Darko/Pek/Love
So guys lucky to get any minutes will be Hayward, Ellington, Telfair, Koufos, and Stiemsma. Brewer will likely have a much reduced role from last year, and Wayne may end up taking his minutes. Tolliver will need to outplay Beasley to get many minutes.
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." -- Yogi Berra
by Wile E Coyote on Sep 7, 2010 12:54 PM CDT up reply actions
If Tolliver was to bust his butt defensively,
he could play his way into some tactical “We need a three here” spots that might cheese Beasley off a bit. “You’re pulling me for the hard working bench guy right here, coach?”
Missing items:
Sebastian Telfair: Will he stay? Will he play? Will he Mark Blount?
Cap space: Rent it out? Use it up to help a team start over?
Ricky Rubio: Will the team win enough to entice him to come next year?
The NBA: Will there be a lockout, thus keeping Rubio from us for one more year?
The Lottery: Will we break the streak?
Jonny Flynn: Will he break the curse? Has he already succumbed to it?
David Kahn (too many options for pictures): Will he prove them wrong?
Brian Cardinal: Will he return?
Henk Norel: Will he ever stop dominating?
You're not letting natural selection take its course! You're like the guy who invented the seatbelt...
Will have to think on some of those when I'm not smelling of ammonia.
Some of them I’m a little…. clearer…. on.
Isn't that kind of funny?
He’s a relatively major free-agent signing, for four years, and will start at point guard for at least the first two months.
And I haven’t thought about him at all. Must be Rubio’s FIBA performance that has us all dreaming of better point guard days. But I think this team is going to be really, really hamstrung by its point guard play this year. Maybe an underrated story-line.
It ain't going to be underrated if the national media sniff out that angle early on.
“They spent all those picks on point guards, and it’s still a big hole in their roster. That crazy David Kahn!”
Point Guard Play
will be de-emphasized for the Wolves this year, so I’m not sure how much of a problem it will really be. Don’t get me wrong, on the defensive end it will still be a major storyline. However, Ridnour will look just fine on the offensive end. As will Ellington; the thought of which makes me cringe – not because I have anything against Ellington but because it just means that everyone’s going to look back at last year’s draft and add to the total number of point guards we drafted. I don’t think there’s much else to say about Ridnour at this point.
Sam Cassell for Marko Jaric? That's ridiculous! I would never have traded Sam Cassell for Marko Jaric.
- Sam Cassell on McHale's decisions while running the Timberwolves.
Hmm. Seems like a broad set of questions to ask about Rambis....
I’m gonna put something clearer in there about de-emphasizing PG play now that we have, you know, one or two wings on the team.
Do PGs ever stand a chance to get decent assist rates? Is the PG slot now going to lose emphasis in the context of a team with actual wings that’s running the whatever-it-is? (How does that play into courting Ricky Rubio?)
(And under Flynn a little something more too.)
To clarify,
when I say that point guard play will be de-emphasized what I mean is that I don’t believe Rambis is seeking to use that position in the traditional sense. What I think they’re going for is to have the PG position act more as a third wing. Obviously they want all of their wings to be able to dribble the ball up the court on the fast break and to be able to make a decent pass on the break; so I see that part of the traditional point guard duties being shared across the entire wing corp, not just by the designated PG. Then in the half-court we’re going to avoid running a lot of pick-and-roll type plays in favor of the read-and-react, motion offense that Rambis brought over from the Lakers (a.k.a. the Triangle/Trike). If we do that, then PG isn’t anything more than another smallish player that needs to be able to shoot 3’s and slash to the basket at times.
Sam Cassell for Marko Jaric? That's ridiculous! I would never have traded Sam Cassell for Marko Jaric.
- Sam Cassell on McHale's decisions while running the Timberwolves.
All of which reads, again, like "Rambis is really running the triangle, all protestations notwithstanding.
Maybe it’s just early today, but all I can think to do is add a bit about PGs being interchangeable with wings up there….
I like Frodo
It’s just that, it’s tough to get excited about him. He impressed the hell out of me last year after a career of me thinking that he’d be better if only given more pt/license to create/better teammates. I hope he can keep up what looks like a statistical blip.
He played a big role in Milwaukee's winning, seemed like to me.
Brandon J. was the quintessential “high usage” rookie point, but Ridnour behind him made a great change of gear.
Hey, a new nickname -- for Martell Webster
This moniker is inspired by your writeup on Martell, where you said:
“Will be used as a defensive mark for other teams’ dominant wings, presumably.”
So, if he is the cure for the potential damage that dominant wings can do, how about we call him:
“The Antidote”
As in: Kobe scored 30 last time he played us? No problem, now we have “The Antidote” for that.
Best antidote for that...
…pass the test, then you should be inoculated.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Next Game
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Roy Hibbert tap-dances to Maine
- Grizzlies Valentine’s Day cards are the key to love
- Kevin Love would like the NBA to take the MLB’s approach on All-Star games
- Kobe Bryant fires a few hilarious salvos at Jeremy Lin
- Brandon Jennings states the obvious regarding his 2014 free agency, everyone goes nuts
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.
