Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: In Crunch Time, Spurs Don't Change Their Game

An Artist In His Own Words

June 26th, 2009:

First, from a philosophical standpoint, I believe that teams should select players in the top 10 of the NBA Draft who have the chance — and I underline the word chance — to be special later in their careers.  You do not use the fifth and sixth picks to select rotation players, but only players that figure to be starters, if not out-and-out stars.

So, we were committed to taking two players who fit that description, and we were less concerned about the positions they played, assuming they were not power forwards.


Explaining the Flynn/Rubio backcourt in the same letter to the fans:

And I also believe that there is a tendency in the NBA for all of us (myself included) to become too formulaic in our thinking.  If you think of the Detroit Pistons backcourt during their championship run, with Isiah Thomas, Joe Dumars and Vinnie Johnson, or the Celtics with their backcourt of Danny Ainge and Dennis Johnson (and before Ainge there was Gerald Henderson), or the Lakers with Jerry West and Gail Goodrich, or the Knicks with Walt Frazier and Earl Monroe, there are many instances of championship success that is not so paint-by-the-numbers.

It can and will work.

Explaining why he traded away the 18th pick (which was used on Ty Lawson by the Denver Nuggets) for a pick that would later be traded once again along with Ryan Gomes for Martel Webster:

At the 18th pick, we did not believe we could identify a player who would be worthy of that rookie scale slot and become part of our core nucleus, so in an attempt to further stockpile assets, we traded it for a future first-round pick with only modest lottery protection.  This will prove to be valuable.  We also traded one of our two second-round picks for a 2010 second-round pick.

Explaining a 2nd round pick in the same draft:

And, last but not least, we used our remaining second-round pick to take Henk Norel, a teammate of Ricky’s in Spain, who is long and athletic.  

June 6th, 2009:

I don’t think we’ll have everything put together the way I see fit for another 17 months… What I mean by that is, I’m talking about the team and everything. We have a lot of opportunities, starting with this draft, through this summer with free agency, trade deadline, next summer’s draft, next summer’s free agency. We have several windows of opportunity to really transform the team and add some significant pieces.

September 24th, 2010:

At this point, I can safely say that the rebuilding of the Timberwolves roster is, at long last, nearly complete.

…However, if one of our players fails to emerge, we will be prepared to find more talent for our team — and we will seek a singular move rather than a series of moves, as we did these last 14 months.

February 10th, 2011:

Kahn said it’s "likely" the Wolves will make a deal by the NBA’s Feb. 24 trading deadline, but said it’d be a "tactical" and "surgical" move.


"I don’t expect it to be big," he said.

February 17th, 2011:

Kahn on #Timberwolves: "There is no more rebuilding. There are no more wholesale changes. I like a lot of players on the team and I expect them to be here a long time."

Chris Wright from March 24th, 2010:

Obviously, I think how I would characterize that is that David has a position to take advantage of, possibly, the biggest off-season in franchise history.  It is up to him and his staff that the assets we have accumulated are utilized correctly.  The fact that we have a top 5 pick, the fact that we have Utah's and Charlotte's pick and expiring contracts, and that we are positioned well in a massive free agency market, it can be potentially one of the great summers in our franchise.

The Wolves currently sport a roster where 53% of all team minutes played below .000 WP/48, the highest percentage in the NBA , besting Toronto by 8%.  They are 28-110 in the Rambis/Kahn era.  

UPDATE!!! 

The artist clarifies his statement from earlier today:

Kahn wasn't saying the rebuilding job is complete: "We need to remind ourselves it isn't enough yet.  We need to do more." 

How much more

"Sometimes when I talk about this, I think Kurt worries that I expect a finished product or perfection," Kahn said. "No such thing. But the fans, our customers, the community should expect us to have modest, yet significant improvement these last several weeks."

Modest, yet significant improvement. There's no more rebuilding but it's not complete.  They'll be good except when they aren't.  Remember folks, last year didn't really count. 

Comment 223 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

More from Canis Hoopus

Hooray! (?)

Apr 2012 by Stop-n-Pop - 491 comments

2012 Initial Draft Board

Feb 2012 by Stop-n-Pop - 150 comments

Even Steven

Feb 2012 by Stop-n-Pop - 502 comments

Season Preview, 2011-12 Edition

Oct 2011 by Stop-n-Pop - 112 comments

Comments

Display:

I've always suspected

you would really enjoy being a prosecutor.

[deleted after giving it further thought]

by TMiss on Feb 17, 2011 8:08 PM CST reply actions  

If only there were a way to get the lawyer pay...

…for the research geek work.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 17, 2011 8:17 PM CST up reply actions  

Actually, I have plenty of practice with questioning my oldest daughter...

….who turns 13 next week. I’m not so sure I’m going to be a prosecutor. Stupid boys. Anyone know anything about how to get a permit to carry?

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 17, 2011 8:19 PM CST up reply actions  

Careful . . .

 . . . waterboarding is still technically illegal in this country.

Only six more shopping days until the Trading Deadline!

by PoorDick on Feb 17, 2011 11:31 PM CST up reply actions  

"Technically"

I believe Stephen Colbert calls torture “freedom tickling”.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 6:25 AM CST up reply actions  

That's funny

When we had our son, now 9, I told friends the good news was a didn’t have to buy a gun.

by Tangerine dream on Feb 18, 2011 9:35 AM CST up reply actions  

I have to buy 3.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 9:38 AM CST up reply actions  

my daughter is 15 months old...

how long do I have before this gun purchase?

I haven't written an insightful post in years.

by littleboxes on Feb 18, 2011 11:13 AM CST up reply actions  

Well...

…if you have a stand-alone female child, you will not have to buy the gun and learn how to use it until she’s about 10 or 11. If you have multiple female children, the younger ones look up to and want to be like their older sister if the older sister is pre-teen or teenaged. In this case, you will need to buy your second weapon when the middle child is 6.

However, it is always best to develop a non-violent prevention strategy. My strategy is called Operation Dorkify. Math, science, science fiction books, cross country running, and orchestra. If they have glasses, don’t get them contacts. Get them lab coats and ant farms for birthday presents. Your number one goal in life is to make them find anything considered remotely “cool” by a 15-18 year old boy absolutely repulsive. The goal is for them to hit their stride after they finish graduate school with a degree in biology.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 11:22 AM CST up reply actions  

Oooh, I like the name "Operation Dorkify".

I was thinking of a similar strategy, and fortunately they’ve got plenty of nerdiness in the gene pool to work with.

I don’t know whether having twin girls increases or decreases my degree of difficulty. I now cringe at every beer commercial that presents the dream of scoring twins.

by Madison Dan on Feb 18, 2011 11:37 AM CST up reply actions  

Commercials are the devil

Tivos and Netflix are the best way to control the flow of advertising on the boob tube.

A buddy with 3 daughters and I developed this strategy. We tried to identify what we found attractive in women at the age of 30 compared to 18. We then went about trying to figure out how to not develop what worked at 18 but would be around by 30 while not screwing up a young, developing mind.

An interesting side-effect of this strategy is that it made us feel guilty about each and every single conversation and thought we had with/about a girl or woman when we were between the ages of about 12 and 28.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 11:44 AM CST up reply actions  

The other day my kids (who are 4)

were watching TV and said “Daddy, is this a commercial?” It warmed my heart. We have a TiVo and Netflix (and a determination to make them play outside), so they just don’t see them very often.

by Madison Dan on Feb 18, 2011 11:52 AM CST up reply actions  

What happened at 29? A gap year?

"Those things about which we cannot theorize, we must narrate." – Umberto Eco

by feral on Feb 18, 2011 11:54 AM CST up reply actions  

I can't remember

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 11:56 AM CST up reply actions   1 recs

This can result in

making your teenage daughter attractive to desperate 28+ year olds…Gun still needed.

by domesticllama on Feb 18, 2011 12:01 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

My hedge/hope on this..

….is that they will be desperate gainfully employed former nerd 28 year olds.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 12:06 PM CST up reply actions  

But yeah..

….gun still needed.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 12:06 PM CST up reply actions  

On the plus side

Your daughter would be stronger than said 28 year old nerd.

by domesticllama on Feb 18, 2011 12:07 PM CST up reply actions  

That would be awesome.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 12:18 PM CST up reply actions  

HAH!

Only six more shopping days until the Trading Deadline!

by PoorDick on Feb 18, 2011 12:23 PM CST up reply actions  

You guys are geniuses! Geniuses I say.

After all your strategies have done is to make them resent you and try even harder to hide what they are doing, you can write a book! “How to alienate you daughter.”

I say SHONDA you say WOLVES" SHONDA! WOLVES!

by Eric in Madison on Feb 18, 2011 11:46 AM CST up reply actions  

The real evil genius of the plan

is that they won’t know that they should resent us. They’ll be happy little nerds! (I already know that in 10 years this will seem foolish, but for now I’m going to pretend it’s under control.)

by Madison Dan on Feb 18, 2011 11:54 AM CST up reply actions  

That is definitely the #1 thing to watch for with OD

The most senior OD participant in the n-pop household has a bunch of friends who are most certainly not enrolled in OD. They have amazing liberties like cell phones they can take to school and parents who don’t limit computer/tv time. The key seems to be to let them have small victories of rebellion, but you are right, this is OD’s weakest front. I am currently trying to get the ok of Mrs. n-Pop for an experimental strategy. The most important guard against alienation is open communication. How do you get a pre teen or teenaged girl to be interested in talking to their parents? Aside from actually talking to them like they are people and taking interest in the things they do, I think limited swearing might be of use. Of course, the swearing will have to be purposeful, not in public, and not over the top, but…well, I haven’t received the Mrs. n-Pop blessing on this one yet.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 11:55 AM CST up reply actions  

When my (oldest) daughter was five

she was watching Cheetah Girls or something and the dimwits on the show were arguing and screeching at each other. I walked over and shut the TV off, and my daughter looked up at me and said, “Why’d you do that?”

I said, “Honey, those girls are talking to each other in a way that Mommy and I don’t like, and we don’t want you to talk like that.”

She said, “Dad, I hear people say bad things all the time, and I don’t say those things.”

I thought about it for second, said, “You’re right,” and turned the TV back on.

Only six more shopping days until the Trading Deadline!

by PoorDick on Feb 18, 2011 12:28 PM CST up reply actions  

Two Girls One Objective

The parameters of Operation Dorkify are already in operation at the M household. I would add getting magazine subscriptions like Ranger Rick, National Geographic Kids, etc. a must. Also, READ TO THEM.

Not having cable television seems to be a net positive, too. What I have learned is that little girls’ fondness for Disney Princesses is naturally occurring regardless of exposure. Keeping them away from it curbs growth, but it develops anyway.

by Grover M on Feb 18, 2011 11:44 AM CST up reply actions  

Completely agreed on the Disney/Nick bullshit

Although, we have noticed that watching girls like Miley Cirus implode in public is a valuable learning experience. I’m secretly hoping Hannah Montana gets pregnant so I can teach a really good life lesson.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 11:46 AM CST up reply actions  

There's a new book

called Cinderella Ate My Daughter that looks pretty interesting. I don’t have children, but the cold-blooded calculation that went into the current proliferation of princess culture seems instructive in more areas than just child-rearing.

You are a little soul carrying a corpse. --Epictetus

by Cynical Jason on Feb 18, 2011 6:12 PM CST up reply actions  

Danke

And onto the Kindle wish list it goes.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 6:46 PM CST up reply actions  

I'd be interested in reading your take on it

when you get around to reading it. Like I said, it looks really interesting.

You are a little soul carrying a corpse. --Epictetus

by Cynical Jason on Feb 18, 2011 8:31 PM CST up reply actions  

Read to them.

My experience with the Disney Princess, Barbie world doesn’t agree, but the all caps advice is the best.

"Those things about which we cannot theorize, we must narrate." – Umberto Eco

by feral on Feb 18, 2011 11:56 AM CST up reply actions  

Toy dinosaurs

They eat princesses and the ones they don’t eat turn into jungle queens who ride them into battle.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 11:58 AM CST up reply actions  

Wish to goodness I had a kid who liked dinosaurs.

They just never caught on! How can that be?

"Those things about which we cannot theorize, we must narrate." – Umberto Eco

by feral on Feb 18, 2011 12:01 PM CST up reply actions  

I have a really cool model of a triceratops...

….skeleton that I kept up on the mantle place. I’d take it down, act like it was really important and fragile when they were really little. I’d make it seem like it was out of reach and really, really important. When I inevitably caught them trying to climb up to get it, I took them to the Science Museum to see the real thing and buying a dinosaur book in the gift shop. Bam! They were hooked. So far I’m 2-2. Another cool thing to do is to have dinoswearing contests. Bigbuttosaur is a very, very popular joke with 4 year olds. Unibrowdactyl is another good one for an older audience.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 12:11 PM CST up reply actions  

This whole thread has been amazingly genius.

EvilCowtownInc: Screwin Suckaz over since 1985...... On Twitter

No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

If Omri has 12 games with 85+ TS% (20+ mins only) on the season, I will send RikSmits a slice of Cherry Pie with real Californian cheese pasteurized locally in Washington state.

by pookeyguru on Feb 19, 2011 1:46 PM CST up reply actions  

Noted re:Dinosaurs

Unfortunately, one of my daughters is already against dinosaurs.

by Grover M on Feb 18, 2011 2:07 PM CST up reply actions  

For positive role models for young girls

try the Bronte Sisters Power Dolls

The Brontesaurus is pretty cool, too.

"Humor is reason gone mad." Marx (Groucho, for the reason-gone-mad impaired)

by uncle rico on Feb 18, 2011 8:03 PM CST up reply actions  

awesome advice

I haven't written an insightful post in years.

by littleboxes on Feb 18, 2011 11:44 AM CST up reply actions  

On

your wife?

Only six more shopping days until the Trading Deadline!

by PoorDick on Feb 18, 2011 12:30 PM CST up reply actions  

Certainly not on your wife

I say SHONDA you say WOLVES" SHONDA! WOLVES!

by Eric in Madison on Feb 18, 2011 12:39 PM CST up reply actions  

You dog.

No wonder she mentioned heading to Madison. I said, “For the protests?” and she looked puzzled for a moment, and then said, “Oh . . . yeah—the protests! Yes, for them. That’s why I’m going.”

Only six more shopping days until the Trading Deadline!

by PoorDick on Feb 18, 2011 12:56 PM CST up reply actions  

You know, I'm a little miffed at you

I wrote the first comment in a fanpost called “Post-Love Scenario” about a week ago that was just for you, and I got no acknowledgment at all. I thought I meant more to you than that.

I say SHONDA you say WOLVES" SHONDA! WOLVES!

by Eric in Madison on Feb 18, 2011 1:01 PM CST up reply actions  

Do you really think

that I have nothing better to do than sit around and read Canis Hoopus all day???!!

And if you said, “Yes,” then you would be correct. Lots and lots of time.

Hang on a second . . .

Okay, I’m back. I not only read it, but I recked it. You’re in the green.

Say hi to my wife.

Only six more shopping days until the Trading Deadline!

by PoorDick on Feb 18, 2011 3:42 PM CST up reply actions  

I forgive you

and your wife recked it too.

I say SHONDA you say WOLVES" SHONDA! WOLVES!

by Eric in Madison on Feb 18, 2011 5:21 PM CST up reply actions  

This thread

is very funny. You are both earning your CH wages.

You are a little soul carrying a corpse. --Epictetus

by Cynical Jason on Feb 18, 2011 6:09 PM CST up reply actions  

Did it

turn green afterwards?

Only six more shopping days until the Trading Deadline!

by PoorDick on Feb 18, 2011 6:14 PM CST up reply actions  

Damn it. No warning.

I say SHONDA you say WOLVES" SHONDA! WOLVES!

by Eric in Madison on Feb 18, 2011 7:18 PM CST up reply actions  

Boy in the mix

Got two girls and one boy. Any tips om how he might help out? I’ll be packing in a few years time. Should he be packing heat as well? And at what age? (He is one now.)

by lurifax on Feb 18, 2011 12:38 PM CST via mobile up reply actions  

No clue how it works with boys

If I had a boy in the household at this point, my main goal with him would be to train him in deadly martial arts and tell him that his sole purpose in life was to defend his sisters.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 12:44 PM CST up reply actions  

That's my goal

My oldest son, a year younger than my daughter(11 to 10) is already taller than her and outweighs her by a good 10 pounds. I just need to turn him angry and aggressive, but I think puberty will probably do that for me.

by midlife crisis on Feb 18, 2011 12:46 PM CST up reply actions  

I married into a family of giants instead.

So one of my daughters is, pretty literally, off the charts in size. (I’m merely 5’9".) I’m thinking that could come in handy if she keeps it up.

by Madison Dan on Feb 18, 2011 12:47 PM CST up reply actions  

And Im safe

The doctor told us we’re not capable of having another child.
He said you have to have sex first.

by Tangerine dream on Feb 18, 2011 9:38 AM CST up reply actions  

I get lawyer pay. Of course, I am still at work with at least another couple hours left in my workday tonight, so there are trade-offs.

by mnlawyer on Feb 17, 2011 8:44 PM CST up reply actions  

I'm so glad we're done rebuilding

I’m absolutely ecstatic that Kahn’s master plan has finally come to fruition, and we can finally experience the joy of winning 20 games. Oh wait, I’m sorry, the potential of winning 20 games.
Seriously, if this is the roster that Kahn expects to contend for a championship with, he should be kindly shown the door

The cock is our friend------------if the minute hand sweeps faster.-BaylorWest

by thewild_viking_twins on Feb 17, 2011 8:12 PM CST reply actions  

Done rebuilding doesn't mean

Done adding. They still have viable options to strengthen this team.
But again Kahn has said too much publicly and the toungue has gotten him in trouble yet again.
He didn’t say " this is the final roster and Im happy with it," but it comes off that way.
They have cap space, Rubio rights, a high pick, and a bunch of young players some of which improve dramatically.

by Tangerine dream on Feb 18, 2011 9:58 AM CST up reply actions  

Very interesting

It’s basically “full of promise,” not perform and finally “manage expectations going forward.” Rinse repeat.

This post should be preserved for Kahn’s next quote after the deadline. Although there should probably be some unit of measurement next to each quote indicating the team’s performance. Perhaps fresh fruit for the full of promise phase and then the natural deterioration that follows.

by quessa on Feb 17, 2011 8:34 PM CST reply actions  

Thanks....

for reminding me it is ludacris that I get as excited as I do when the wolves play. Thanks for remdining me that in all reality we have a horrible GM/Coach that will keep us in the basement for even more years to come. That is if we are still a franchise. Thus killing all hope to come…I wonder….Is it best you post this to people who love the T’wolves the most? Oh well I guess its best to hold people accountable. I just hope we are not reacting too quickly…we did choose K love over al Jeff(great decision)

Not too long ago I was reading John Hollinger articles on ESPN claiming that the T’wolves have the best young forward talent in the league. That all depends if beasley can “really” kick the drugs he is on and become capable of consistency…Talk about living on the edge…This guy can go either way.

Patience sucks in real time. Just wait for Wes though. If you dont belive me google or youtube Phil Jacksons reaction when talking abou him. You and I have seen the signs of greatness this KID has. I cant help but stay tuned

by Chad Bird on Feb 17, 2011 8:37 PM CST reply actions  

The quotes compilation is nice

But WP/48 is a pretty bad stat.

NBA Draft Fanatic

by Casperkid23 on Feb 17, 2011 8:48 PM CST reply actions  

Fine..

….use PER. The Wolves have 3 players above average. 2 barely so, 1 extremely so, and the rest below or well below average. It’s pretty much the same ratio as WP/48.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 17, 2011 9:00 PM CST up reply actions  

PER is another abused stat. Love has a 24.4 PER but is one of the worst defenders at his position because of his lack of effort. Brewer has a 10.4 PER but his impact on the court is far more positive than Wes who has a similar PER. Same with Tolliver and Pekovic.

I guess I’m just not a fan of declaring something one way or another based on an advanced stat which have significant problems and thus can be very misleading.

NBA Draft Fanatic

by Casperkid23 on Feb 17, 2011 9:18 PM CST up reply actions  

Fine

Run through that list, assign a percentage to Love’s PER, WS, whatever, and compare it to, say Ridnour. Do you think that is a relatively accurate representation of what he brings to the table, production-wise, vs Luke? These stats don’t have “significant problems”. They aren’t the be-all/end-all of anything but they’re just a snapshot of this, that, or the other player.

If I say that I think Ridnour has about 65% of the production value as Kevin Love, is that ridiculous?

I agree that on/off is the way to go if you want to measure how well a team plays, but things like PER and WS are no different than using bating average to give a general sense of where a player stands. Is it as good as OPS? Of course not, but it’s not like you can’t take away the basic point that the Wolves are like a baseball team with a .375 hitter and a bunch of Nick Puntos.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 17, 2011 9:26 PM CST up reply actions  

I'm just being nitpicky and negative towards those two stats

I understand your argument, just don’t like seeing a stat touted when it has severe problems like WP/48 does, and to a lesser extent, PER. Neither have solved the problem they have with overvaluing rebounding.

What you said about Ridnour and Love is reasonable and something good about the stat, but I only know this because I can compare the stat to what I view of the players on the court. I mean, I’m basing how much I value each players stat versus what I see on the court, so then I’m not really using the stat, I’m using my observations.

For example, the WP list off his blog goes:
1-10: Love, Howard, CP3, LeBron, Randolph, Nash, Humphries, Garnett, Chandler, Camby
11-20: Wade, Horford, Odom, Fields, Duncan, Rondo, P. Gasol, Griffin, Ginobili, Iggy
21-30: Bogut, Kidd, Durant, Deron, Kobe, Josh Smith, Nene, Amir, Blair, Foster
31-40: Westbrook, Pierce, Allen, Rose, Okafor, Dunleavy, Kirilenko, Hayes, R. Brewer, T-Mac
41-50: Wallace, A. Miller, Brand, Parker, Calderon, West, Boozer, Noah, Sefalosha, Gortat

I can only scrutinize this list because of what I know of the players. I know Love doesn’t deserve to be the top rated player or “The best player in the league hands down”. I know that Randolph, Humphries, Chandler, and Camby have absolutely no spot in the top-20, let alone the top-10. I know that having Landry Fields over Durant is asinine.

I just can’t stand stats that paint these types of pictures…

NBA Draft Fanatic

by Casperkid23 on Feb 17, 2011 9:43 PM CST up reply actions  

I hear you

I definitely don’t think there’s a really good catch-all single stat. It’s just a useful little snapshot.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 17, 2011 10:02 PM CST up reply actions  

Two simple things.

One, I think Ailuridae and others have succinctly addressed the issue of rebounding below. It’s not that any “One Stat To Rule Them All” (OSTRTA) is somehow going to be the “Player Worth” people mistakenly want ー but I would suggest that the way these stats from the perspective of economics keep “overvaluing” rebounding should at the very least cause even people skeptical about statistics to reconsider the game in those “possessions” terms. There’s a potentially useful way to see the game there, and dismissing it out of hand is probably not that wise. (PER doesn’t value them as high as WS, by the way. It also tends to “like” volume scoring to some extent.)

Second, take a look at the way you started reciting “I know” above. It starts to look almost like a sort of declaration of faith, doesn’t it? You’re offended at the idea of a number affronting your judgments about players. The OSTRTA approach is always going to do that, right? Only there’s a power to that, too. The whole idea of looking a the game through any new lens is to let yourself see past the list of things you feel like you know, absolutely, right? Even if you don’t accept the whole premise, there’s something there. If you were looking at a gathered stat about the number of deflections a player got on defense, you’d take it is as new information without trying to accept or reject it this way.

"Those things about which we cannot theorize, we must narrate." – Umberto Eco

by feral on Feb 18, 2011 7:52 AM CST up reply actions   1 recs

Two simple responses

I understand how valuable rebounding is as a basketball fanatic. I know how important possessions are. However, they are not as important as WP is suggesting – not even close. A recent fanpost did some quick work on correlating certain stats to wins. http://www.canishoopus.com/2011/1/19/1944182/solutions-to-all-our-problems

Rebounding, while important, wasn’t much more important than offensive efficiency, assists, or other basic metrics. Going to Hollinger’s team stats database and looking at top teams shows the same. It’s important, but not that important to give it the type of value that the WP author did. (By the way, I said earlier that PER doesn’t value them as high as WS – but thanks for adding that “PER doesn’t value them as high as WS, by the way” remark.)

Second, I am offended at the idea that his number shows Love at the top player and people are claiming it to be a good stat. I can view something through a new lens and be okay with it – I do it with other stats. However when a stat is this far off a reasonable line, it becomes worthless to me. This stat does not show me something concrete like the number of deflections a player got on defense – it is a stat that collected many stats and tried to throw them together to make sense of everything… and it failed. Yes, it projects wins relatively fine, but when it comes down to a SINGLE player, it fails.

NBA Draft Fanatic

by Casperkid23 on Feb 18, 2011 12:29 PM CST up reply actions  

How about wins and losses?

It all lines up pretty well, regardless if you are using PER, WP, WS, or good old fashioned Ws and Ls.

by Rascal Flatts on Feb 17, 2011 9:31 PM CST up reply actions  

Exactly.

That’s much better and more concise than my rambling on. ;)

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 17, 2011 9:33 PM CST up reply actions  

How do you

calculate those?

Only six more shopping days until the Trading Deadline!

by PoorDick on Feb 17, 2011 9:43 PM CST up reply actions  

Understood

It paints the same picture though. You can use any of those stats and you end up with Kevin Love + one or two other guys (depending on the stat) that come out around average. Everyone else is painfully unproductive.

by Rascal Flatts on Feb 17, 2011 9:57 PM CST up reply actions  

How is it "bad"

Patiently waiting for a new POBO

by Blakeley on Feb 17, 2011 9:08 PM CST up reply actions  

As I pointed out in the other thread this was brought up in...

The stat gives way, way, way to high of value to rebounding. It gives way too high of value to efficiency, regardless of role.

NBA Draft Fanatic

by Casperkid23 on Feb 17, 2011 9:15 PM CST up reply actions  

Based upon what?

Have you done the regression analysis on the relationship between possessions resulting from rebounds or shooting efficiency and winning? Or published a peer reviewed critique of such an analysis? I appreciate your appraisal of prospects, as I get the impression you put significant time and thought into it, but I tend to defer to the economics professor with the peer reviewed publications on these statistical evaluations.

Simply asserting WP overvalues rebounds and efficiency does not get us far. From my simple understanding, WP highly values possessions and efficiency because those stats correlate so highly with winning. If so, how are they over-valued?

The world is made for people who aren't cursed with self-awareness

by Victor Mature on Feb 17, 2011 9:58 PM CST up reply actions  

"As I pointed out in the other thread this was brought up in"

Maybe check there first to see what I pointed out before hitting the reply button.

It’s based on going through and looking at the rankings of the players and comparing them to their respective rebounding % or rebound rate. You don’t need to do regression analyses to make these types of obvious observations. Look through the list of players that starts about 1/3 of the way down this link: http://arturogalletti.wordpress.com/2011/02/16/the-best-player-in-the-league-hands-down/ , tell me which stats you think are overvalued based upon where certain players are ranked.

NBA Draft Fanatic

by Casperkid23 on Feb 17, 2011 10:03 PM CST up reply actions  

You're starting with the conclusion that rebounding isn't terribly important

but wins produced is based on pretty rigorous work that indicates that rebounding is, indeed, terribly important. Same with efficiency.

by Ailuridae on Feb 17, 2011 10:14 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

Apologies

For not knowing what thread you were referring to. Regardless, without actually looking at the list you refer to, because I am lazy and it seems unnecessary, your argument seems to be that the names on the list overly represent good rebounders. Ergo, the measure overvalues rebounds. This is obviously a circular argument and not a real critique of the measure. It seems to me that your critique boils down to “these rebounders cannot be as valuable as the guys I know to be good, so the measure has to be flawed.” But that is not a terribly convincing critique, particularly to those who are statistically inclined.

I am not out to defend WP as the be-all and end-all of stats, but I think if you are going to effectively rebut it, you have to acknowledge it’s basis in statistical analysis and attack it on those terms. It may be harder, as the economist has chosen the battle ground, but if you don’t engage it on it’s own terms, that ivory-towered economist intellectual high-falutin dude can look down his regal nose and disregard you, all of which Berri is accused of regularly, which I find amusing.

Anyway, I’m rambling. I find WP persuasive because, absent any confidence that I can evaluate bball players independently, I like to rely on that statistical regression economist guy, as he seems pretty damn smart and to have spent an awful lot of time figuring this stuff out.

The world is made for people who aren't cursed with self-awareness

by Victor Mature on Feb 17, 2011 10:31 PM CST up reply actions  

Wins Produced is not garbage, but it's far from perfect

And I personally find Dave Berri to be an extremely irritating charlatan. But I think any advanced stat is going to show that the Wolves are insanely bad minus the contributions of an all-star PF.

by aarendsvark on Feb 17, 2011 10:50 PM CST up reply actions  

Ah yes, economics: Home of regal nose-looking-down types.

No, really… WHY THE FRICK IS THAT?

"Those things about which we cannot theorize, we must narrate." – Umberto Eco

by feral on Feb 18, 2011 8:34 AM CST up reply actions  

Dave Berri is one big, big nostril.

"Those things about which we cannot theorize, we must narrate." – Umberto Eco

by feral on Feb 18, 2011 9:08 AM CST up reply actions  

I have a slightly more real answer, too.

Economists are like statisticians who escaped the basement and are allowed to roam freely among the masses. Gary Becker (’92 Nobel Prize at Chicago) played a big part in expanding the field so that you can write about damn near anything and still call it economics, as long as you use some fancy math.

So we, as a profession, stick our big, regal noses in a lot of people’s business. And we don’t pay much attention to related work that has been done in other (math deficient) fields. For example, there are published articles about the economics of divorce or crime, but there’s absolutely no need (in the view of the profession) to pay attention to the work that people in Sociology have done on the same topic.

And we know enough math to argue at a more technical level than most normal people can, which can lead to snooty behavior, or at least the appearance of snootiness to those who don’t get the math. The people who tend to be even better at math (physicists, real mathematicians), and therefore would have the best chance of shooting us down, haven’t been let out of the basement yet (or don’t want to leave it), so we tend to get away with it.

by Madison Dan on Feb 18, 2011 9:24 AM CST up reply actions  

I thought Freaknomics and its sequal were good reads. =)

Everything in the computer need my face on it. Mega Gigabytes, son!

by TimAllen on Feb 18, 2011 9:30 AM CST up reply actions  

They are. You should read "Moneyball," even if you disagree with it.

"Those things about which we cannot theorize, we must narrate." – Umberto Eco

by feral on Feb 18, 2011 9:38 AM CST up reply actions  

I have read it, actually.

I think analytics/sabermetrics/whatever you want to call them are much more effective in baseball than basketball. Of course, this could be because baseball is easier to define in statistical terms or because I don’t know baseball well enough to recognize the flaws in baseball sabermetrics.

But anyway, I thought it was a good read, even though I wouldn’t apply many of this theories to basketball.

Everything in the computer need my face on it. Mega Gigabytes, son!

by TimAllen on Feb 18, 2011 9:42 AM CST up reply actions  

Moneyball is perfect for basketball and the Timberwolves in particular

Billy Beane figured out that walks are tremendously undervalued and as a small market team with a limited budget he bought as much of that as he could in order to make a team that could win. He also had a heck of a pitching staff, which was more luck or development skill than “moneyball” application.

In the NBA scoring is overvalued and rebounding and defense undervalued. Therefore, it makes perfect sense for a team like the Wolves to focus on those and buy them at a discount in order to have an advantage.

The big advantage the T-Wolves have over the A’s is that the NBA has a salary cap, so we should be able to be much better than the A’s…if we had a GM who understood statistical analysis.

Big “if” I realize. :)

But then he wouldn’t have drafted Wes or Jonny.

Us “statniks” might be wrong about Cousins…but it looks like we were right about Wes and Jonny.

by Django Z on Feb 18, 2011 10:42 AM CST up reply actions  

Scoring might be overvalued

and rebounding/defense might be undervalued – although I’d argue that scoring can quickly go from overvalued to undervalued – but I don’t see how statistical analysis is mandatory to arrive at that conclusion. I could tell you that the Wolves need to focus more on rebounding and defense without looking at a single stat.

Everything in the computer need my face on it. Mega Gigabytes, son!

by TimAllen on Feb 18, 2011 10:59 AM CST up reply actions  

It's not mandatory....

…but that type of approach certainly has a very, very strong correlation to success in the NBA. I wish I could find the link of the front office survey from last season of teams that employ at least 1 full-time stats guy. The Wolves are one of the teams that do not, despite the best attempts of some of the people in the organization to make people believe otherwise. I think the last whopper I heard from the team was from a few folks who went to a season ticket holder event where they were told the team had a stats guy locked in the basement, or something like that.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 11:11 AM CST up reply actions  

Yeah they dismissed him as this weird guy who spent tons of time in a small office on his computer or something like that.

by pagingstanleyroberts on Feb 18, 2011 11:17 AM CST up reply actions  

Hoiberg:

Told us they’d had a Dutch (?) guy the previous year, and sort of sniffed that he didn’t watch enough actual footage.

Here’s the old fanpost in which I described those meetings. A handful of us were there. (Andy G and I hung out through the Pistons game after the meeting with Hoibs. Andy was very much taken with John Wall’s speed.)

I immediately asked Fred who, in the front office, was responsible to advocate for “advanced” stats (I mentioned Daryl Morey and used the words “dark arts”) when the Wolves were making decisions.

That answer right now is: Dean Cooper. The Wolves do dedicate a staff position to stats, and that’s who’s doing it right now. Probably others will remember that Cooper was the Houston front office guy who came up to be an assistant coach last year or the year before. Hoiberg described this as a Houston connection, actually, probably because I’d mentioned Morey. He described Cooper poring over his monitor, watching numbers. Then he mentioned the previous guy the Wolves had in that capacity, someone from Holland (I believe?) who was a real stats-first-and-almost-only guy. Fred wondered how often he had even seen basketball games.

"Those things about which we cannot theorize, we must narrate." – Umberto Eco

by feral on Feb 18, 2011 11:24 AM CST up reply actions  

Thanks for the clarification on that

Some of those details were fuzzy. On another note, at least for me, the opportunities like those two games last year have dried up. Same/different for others who got them?

by pagingstanleyroberts on Feb 18, 2011 11:31 AM CST up reply actions  

I got multiple offers to attend a game and then be in the presser afterward.

Never could work out the time. Life is busy.

"Those things about which we cannot theorize, we must narrate." – Umberto Eco

by feral on Feb 18, 2011 11:51 AM CST up reply actions  

I did the presser thing, once.

It was fun, and the seats they gave us were very good.

by Andy G on Feb 18, 2011 12:43 PM CST up reply actions  

From what I've been able to suss out

Cooper brought over some broad non-proprietary metrics from Houston that were used as performance indicators by the team. They were measured with the generic league-provided system called StatsCube, which is not really built for advanced data point analysis. It’s more of something teams use to fill out press releases and the little printouts that are handed to radio and TV folks.

They never dedicated a full time person to what could be described as a modern advanced stats database. Basically, they have very little above and beyond what is available to any of our readers for $30, Synergy password, and a link to Basketball Reference. That’s why the WSJ didn’t include them in the survey as being one of the teams that employs an analyst and they are not involved in anything remotely approaching what can be considered the most current wave of professional sports management.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 11:31 AM CST up reply actions  

what is wrong with Glen Taylor?

does he advocate against basic statistical analysis in his other businesses?

I’m beginning to believe there is no hope or rather that the only hope is blind luck or sale. This organization has been dysfunctional from day one. Ratner and Wolfenson (or whatever) were awful. Trader Jack. McHale at least brought some intelligence, got lucky, and didn’t know what to do with his golden goose.

Was Taylor ever a good owner? Did something happen to him? Has Rob Moor always been in charge? This team is like the Vikings when they had their 12 owners…

I haven't written an insightful post in years.

by littleboxes on Feb 18, 2011 11:51 AM CST up reply actions  

Glen's empire..

…is based on a wedding card empire in the age of computers and wireless printers. He believes in firm handshakes and local bankers.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 12:01 PM CST up reply actions  

he needs to sell

I haven't written an insightful post in years.

by littleboxes on Feb 18, 2011 12:03 PM CST up reply actions  

Unfortunately..

..that’s probably the case if this is ever going to turn around. I don’t want to link to it because he’s kind of a hack, but Souhan’s column today singles out Rob Moor for scorn. Moor is Taylor’s son in law. He’s the guy who hired Kahn. It’s all diseased.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 12:17 PM CST up reply actions  

watch it, buddy

Rob Moor was the best man at my wedding.

just kidding. It is all diseased.

I haven't written an insightful post in years.

by littleboxes on Feb 18, 2011 12:19 PM CST up reply actions  

(And of course you were there too. Duh.)

"Those things about which we cannot theorize, we must narrate." – Umberto Eco

by feral on Feb 18, 2011 11:24 AM CST up reply actions  

wait, this guy?

I haven't written an insightful post in years.

by littleboxes on Feb 18, 2011 11:25 AM CST up reply actions  

You can buy that red stapler.

Swingline made a model to sell to people who’d seen the movie.

"Those things about which we cannot theorize, we must narrate." – Umberto Eco

by feral on Feb 18, 2011 11:27 AM CST up reply actions  

well, that red stapler is so damn beautiful

that I can imagine quite a few people that haven’t seen the movie being interested in making a purchase

I haven't written an insightful post in years.

by littleboxes on Feb 18, 2011 11:47 AM CST up reply actions  

Give it to someone when she gets her first job. Great gift.

"Those things about which we cannot theorize, we must narrate." – Umberto Eco

by feral on Feb 18, 2011 11:57 AM CST up reply actions  

I liked it, too.

I studied Labor Economics, which used to be all about unions but became sort of a catch-all for the Becker-esque work on anything for which you could find data. So I’m drawn to that sort of thing, and they did a good job of presenting it.

I think they did benefit from great marketing, though. “Freakonomics” is a pretty stupid title that has nothing to do with the content of the book, but it really resonated with people. It’s sort of like Spotted Cow beer around these parts. It’s fine (not for me, but I can see the appeal), but I don’t think it’d be 1/10th as popular without the cute name.

by Madison Dan on Feb 18, 2011 9:51 AM CST up reply actions  

I'll admit it. If the book had been called

“Ideas about Labor Economics in the 21st Century” (or something like that), I probably wouldn’t have been nearly as excited about reading it.

Meet the target demographic for “Freakonomics”. =)

Everything in the computer need my face on it. Mega Gigabytes, son!

by TimAllen on Feb 18, 2011 9:53 AM CST up reply actions  

Nice.

Can we extend this work to explain the success of Hootie and the Blowfish?

by Madison Dan on Feb 18, 2011 10:00 AM CST up reply actions  

That's a good question

Typically, poisonous animals do not have large followings. Venomous ones can be used to connote the power of attack and or danger, both of which are attractive qualities in a number of situations, but poisonous critters are just things you don’t want to step on or bump into. Perhaps they have a fitting name.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 10:07 AM CST up reply actions  

I just buy the wine

that the guy at the store tells me to buy.

Everything in the computer need my face on it. Mega Gigabytes, son!

by TimAllen on Feb 18, 2011 10:01 AM CST up reply actions  

If the guy at the store was dressed as Crunch, you'd buy more.

"Those things about which we cannot theorize, we must narrate." – Umberto Eco

by feral on Feb 18, 2011 10:02 AM CST up reply actions  

That's undoubtedly true.

Everything in the computer need my face on it. Mega Gigabytes, son!

by TimAllen on Feb 18, 2011 10:04 AM CST up reply actions  

DiNardo has offered several excellent criticisms of Freakonomics

Levitt thinks they are unfair, but he’s wrong and is being an asshole. DiNardo is one of the most careful and honest empirical economists, but Levitt doesn’t take him seriously. He should.

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jdinardo/Freak/revisionfinale.pdf

I haven't written an insightful post in years.

by littleboxes on Feb 18, 2011 11:33 AM CST up reply actions  

He lost me in the second paragraph

“However, Freakonomics is more about "entertainment” than it is a serious attempt at popularization."

Of course, its about entertainment. Why else would I want to read it?

Everything in the computer need my face on it. Mega Gigabytes, son!

by TimAllen on Feb 18, 2011 11:47 AM CST up reply actions  

Tim

yes, it’s entertainment, but it’s also about abortion and crime (to use one example). So if the book provides misleading, but entertaining, insights into the relationship between abortion and crime, it’s a big problem.

DiNardo’s main issue, I think, is that Levitt and Dubner write the book in a way that implies all of this statistical analysis is so easy and that it always uncovers the “hidden truth.” DiNardo calls bullshit, sort of like you do, I emphasize sort of, with advanced stats.

I haven't written an insightful post in years.

by littleboxes on Feb 18, 2011 11:56 AM CST up reply actions  

also

the discussion on pages 18 and 19 on cheating teachers is insightful. Schools actually use this crap to “catch” teachers cheating. But DiNardo shows how these tests imply false accusations of cheating more than half of the time. Levitt and Dubner have a responsibility to address these issues.

This is serious stuff.

I haven't written an insightful post in years.

by littleboxes on Feb 18, 2011 12:00 PM CST up reply actions  

Well, if people are using Freakonomics

to make actual policy decisions, then I agree with you. But I guess its like, if people read Freakonomics or watch a Michael Moore documentary or read a Bill Simmons basketball book, and then use the info from that book to actually make decisions, then I blame the people who are making those decisions more than the authors.

Everything in the computer need my face on it. Mega Gigabytes, son!

by TimAllen on Feb 18, 2011 12:05 PM CST up reply actions  

I agree with your last sentence

But while I think most people who watch Michael Moore realize it’s entertainment, I worry that many who read Freakonomics let it inform their political views.

As a reference, I assigned this book to my students in an intermediate microeconomics course. They loved it and it changed some of their lives (so they claim) and their viewpoints on social issues. Then I had them read the DiNardo review. Many of the students became angry and refused to believe what DiNardo had written. Others became depressed that they had been misled by Freakonomics. Others remain, to this day, bored out of their minds.

I haven't written an insightful post in years.

by littleboxes on Feb 18, 2011 12:09 PM CST up reply actions  

I loved the last sentence

Heck, the whole thing was great, but that last one really made it.

by aarendsvark on Feb 18, 2011 7:46 PM CST up reply actions  

People know Michael Moore is an entertainer

but Levitt is an academic. He sells himself as non-partisan, just the facts, mam. People buy into that image and read his book, they trust it. He has a responsibility not to abuse that trust.

I haven't written an insightful post in years.

by littleboxes on Feb 18, 2011 12:11 PM CST up reply actions  

I didn't think that it was very well respected in the profession.

But I wasn’t too worried about it when I read it. I wanted to be entertained more than I was worried about absolute truth.

Your example reminds me of an article that my advisor wrote in response to a relatively famous (as these things go) article that argued that increases in the minimum wage could lead to an increase employment. (As I recall, it was based on a feedback argument that most people who earn the minimum wage are teenagers, so you give them more money, which they then spend on stuff that is created/sold/served by other people earning the minimum wage.)

My advisor showed that the whole finding fell apart once you handled the data correctly. But even after that, people kept citing the original paper because it was just more interesting to think it could be true.

by Madison Dan on Feb 18, 2011 11:47 AM CST up reply actions  

are we talking Card and Krueger?

I haven't written an insightful post in years.

by littleboxes on Feb 18, 2011 11:57 AM CST up reply actions  

Yup.

Neumark was my advisor. I may have a biased view of the situation as a result.

by Madison Dan on Feb 18, 2011 12:15 PM CST up reply actions  

I'm from the David Card tree

although he was not my advisor. We should do friendly battle sometime! ;)

I haven't written an insightful post in years.

by littleboxes on Feb 18, 2011 12:17 PM CST up reply actions  

That is a leafier,

longer branched tree. And I’m pretty far removed from labor stuff at this point, so I’m pretty sure I’d be playing Wolves to your, I don’t know, Blazers? (You can pick a team.)

by Madison Dan on Feb 18, 2011 12:26 PM CST up reply actions  

Speaking of labor...

Jesse Jackson has arrived at the capitol, apparently. Senate Dems still out, building and square packed, Feingold marching with firefighters. I like my town.

I say SHONDA you say WOLVES" SHONDA! WOLVES!

by Eric in Madison on Feb 18, 2011 12:29 PM CST up reply actions  

Firefighters are there, too?

Good for them. I was thinking it could get even crazier today — it seems like more and more school districts are closing each day.

by Madison Dan on Feb 18, 2011 12:32 PM CST up reply actions  

Firefighters and police

have been there every day showing support for their fellow workers even though their unions are exempt from the bill. Firefighers have been banging on their bagpipes all week.

 Big, big crowds today. People in from Milwaukee and elsewhere.

I say SHONDA you say WOLVES" SHONDA! WOLVES!

by Eric in Madison on Feb 18, 2011 12:36 PM CST up reply actions  

Cool!

Madison living up to its reputation.

by Madison Dan on Feb 18, 2011 12:44 PM CST up reply actions  

That's going right to the kindle

Hooray for pdfs on ereaders.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 12:02 PM CST up reply actions  

The physicists must never be let out

At least not until the children are hidden away.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 9:34 AM CST up reply actions  

Divorce is a particularly good example. Thanks, I'll remember that one.

"Those things about which we cannot theorize, we must narrate." – Umberto Eco

by feral on Feb 18, 2011 9:41 AM CST up reply actions  

Rebounding and efficiency are overvalued??

I don’t get your argument.

I do agree that it is hard to capture defensive value in statistics, but surely rebounding and efficiency are exactly what is usually undervalued in off-the-top-of-the-head fan analysis. Not that you are, but your “look at the list and see which names are surprising” argument is pretty non-tangible.

So it isn’t surprising that the surprising names on a list like that are people who are efficient or rebound well. Those sorts of players are exactly who is undervalued and will by that definition be “surprising”.

by Django Z on Feb 17, 2011 11:51 PM CST up reply actions  

Landry Fields

Top rebounding guard – coincidence that he’s the 14th rated player, valued as a star, and one of the top guards on his rating?

Kris Humphries, top-5 rebounder out of rotational players. He’s 7th.

Kevin Durant, one of the weaker rebounders at his position… he’s 23rd.

Eddie House, efficient offensive player who is playing a bit role and does little else, he’s 54th.

Stephen Curry, efficient offensive player who is playing a major role, he’s 65th.

I mean, I’m not saying he got these ratings out of thin air, only that the formula is messed up and he needs to correct it in order for it to be truly useful. Right now it’s just a list of names, not something which displays who the best players in the NBA are – as he touts on his header.

NBA Draft Fanatic

by Casperkid23 on Feb 18, 2011 12:22 PM CST up reply actions  

My explanation for how/why WP overly favors rebounding...

I’ve said this before, so I’ll just quote it now…

I believe that Win’s Produced is the most complete of all aggregate advanced statistic. It’s the only statistic that on a team level actually correlates with winning. This is why Dave Berri in the past has done so well at predicting playoff outcomes. That being said, I believe it has one major flaw and it shows itself with players like Kevin Love…

Dave Berri has found that total rebound percentage correlates with winning far more then people previously assumed. Thus he weighs rebounding accordingly in his Individual Win’s Produced statistic. This is why players like Dennis Rodman, Marcus Camby, and Kevin Love so consistently do well by the metric. They have a high rebound percentage. Unfortunately, in doing this I believe that Dave Berri inadequately accounts for individual defense. Playing good defense, and forcing a player to miss a shot may have just as much to do with creating the rebound opportunity as the player that grabs the board. Yet in the Win’s Produced statistic the player that grabs the board is the only one that gets credit. Being that post players (not named Ryan Hollins) are the guys most likely to get rebounds, it makes sense that they often have higher Win’s Produced. So on a team level it still works, as someone is getting credit for the stop of possession, and that’s why it still correlates with actual wins…but on the individual level it’s probably a little skewed towards the rebounder.

Therefor when you see players with a high WP who also play good individual defense (i.e. Iguodala or James) you know they must be really good to great. On the flip side players like Jonny Flynn who have a low WP and are even worse defenders, well they make you wish you had Stephen Curry.

Patiently waiting for a new POBO

by Blakeley on Feb 18, 2011 12:56 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

But I’m also expecting the team to make some modest improvement.
“Sometimes when I talk about this, I think Kurt worries that I expect a finished product or perfection,” Kahn said. “No such thing. But the fans, our customers, the community should expect us to have modest, yet significant improvement these last several weeks.”

I haven't written an insightful post in years.

by littleboxes on Feb 17, 2011 8:57 PM CST up reply actions  

"modest, yet significant"

Oxy.
Moron.

Only six more shopping days until the Trading Deadline!

by PoorDick on Feb 17, 2011 9:00 PM CST up reply actions  

you beat me to it

;)

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 17, 2011 9:02 PM CST up reply actions  

While he sounds like someone making things up

as he goes along, I don’t find that turn of phrase so loathsome.

Fictional example: The U.S. economy posted a 1Q2011 growth of 2.1%. A modest, yet significant increase given that the economy had been shrinking several years in a row.

"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." -- Yogi Berra

by Wile E Coyote on Feb 17, 2011 9:32 PM CST up reply actions  

It's not so much the phrase

as it is the doublespeak. He wants to technically be truthful and remain credible, but still inspire some kind of hope and optimism for the fans, and maybe keep a poker face for any potential trade partners.

In hindsight, it’s exactly what you’d expect from someone wth a media and legal background.

Only six more shopping days until the Trading Deadline!

by PoorDick on Feb 17, 2011 9:55 PM CST up reply actions  

He does have a habit of slightly, perhaps more than is to be expected, overstating while also understating things.

He sounds like someone trained in the law to never state anything definitively, while trying to be clear and “frank” with fans.

by Django Z on Feb 17, 2011 11:53 PM CST up reply actions  

What are you talking about?

I don’t see how that quote elicits such derision. Here is what he said.
 
"Sometimes when I talk about this, I think Kurt worries that I expect a finished product or perfection," Kahn said. "No such thing. But the fans, our customers, the community should expect us to have modest, yet significant improvement these last several weeks."

I get it, you hate Kahn. Everything he says fills your heart with fury. But why? This quote is really quite innocuous. Kahn is saying that the fans should expect the team to get better, and if the team doesn’t he is saying he understand that people are going to be pissed. Where is the outrage or doublespeak as you said? He seems to be speaking pretty straighforwardly.

by wolver on Feb 18, 2011 12:00 AM CST up reply actions  

"Modest" and "significant"

have opposite meanings, so I don’t understand how one could expect them to occur simultaneously.

He’s talking out of his ass, trying to both hedge expectations, and sell hope. He lies when he should tell the truth, and he’s uncomfortably candid when he should just shut up. He thinks he’s smarter than everyone else, and yet comes off as completely tone-deaf and dumb.

I’ll give you credit—if you defend him after today, your unfathomable faith shall never be shaken, no matter how many more days and weeks he is “working harder” for the Timberwolves.

Only six more shopping days until the Trading Deadline!

by PoorDick on Feb 18, 2011 12:19 AM CST up reply actions   1 recs

The most positive motivation

(and therefore the most unlikely) for these latest comments is that he’s signaling to some GM that he’s not budging on a trade offer.

The more likely message is “trying to let fans down easy” when no deals go down at the deadline.

My hope for this is it’s Kahn’s version of Chilly’s “Trade a 3rd round pick for Randy Moss, and then cut him a few weeks later without consulting the owner.” Unless the All Star game or some other trade provides a big distraction, this will be an easy pinata for the media (see Souhan), and the additional embarrassment (combined with the team’s unimproved record) will force Taylor to fire Kahn sooner rather than later. It’s cheaper than trading for a veteran, and would provide at least as much inspiration to renewing season ticket holders.

Maybe Ronzone gets the “interim” title, with the task of “evaluting” Rambis and the players over the last third of the season, plus preparing for the draft. The length of his tenure depends on improvement of the team now, handing of the offseason moves, and how the lockout goes.

Methinks, anyway . . .

Only six more shopping days until the Trading Deadline!

by PoorDick on Feb 18, 2011 7:03 AM CST up reply actions  

Allow me to rise in defense of David Kahn.

He seems to me like a good PR guy. His use of language is perfectly fine by me. “Modest, yet significant” wouldn’t cause me to blink an eye in any given politician’s stump speech.

It’s the problematic thinking Kahn’s language covers for that is the disaster.

I love this paragraph-plus:

First, from a philosophical standpoint, I believe that teams should select players in the top 10 of the NBA Draft who have the chance — and I underline the word chance — to be special later in their careers. You do not use the fifth and sixth picks to select rotation players, but only players that figure to be starters, if not out-and-out stars.

So, we were committed to taking two players who fit that description, and we were less concerned about the positions they played, assuming they were not power forwards.

It’s the guy’s judgment about how to assess which players are potential stars that is, completely, at fault there with me. David Kahn can sign and dance, making “jazz hands,” at every gol’ durned press conference, and unless he uses blackface or something truly offensive I will not take offense that he’s singing out of tune. He can appear on television broadcasts with something hanging from his nostril. Who cares? I can’t stand Pat Riley’s hair, either.

It’s not that he’s applying lipstick and sometimes doing it a little smearily. It’s that he’s putting it on a pig.

"Those things about which we cannot theorize, we must narrate." – Umberto Eco

by feral on Feb 18, 2011 8:43 AM CST up reply actions   2 recs

"'Modest, yet significant'" wouldn’t cause me to blink an eye in any given politician’s stump speech."

Yeah, see, that’s the thing. He’s not a politician making a speech. He’s charged with building a basketball team into a winner, and generating revenue for his owner.

So, giving him credit for being good at PR (I disagree—I think he’s a disaster. But I also fear that you are smarter than me, and therefore I could be wrong) is like saying, “That surgeon is a butcher on the operating table, but he can build a birdhouse that YOU would want to live in!”

Only six more shopping days until the Trading Deadline!

by PoorDick on Feb 18, 2011 9:07 AM CST up reply actions  

Take the Manna from Heaven thing.

Kahn had that blow up on him. Why? It’s not because he prattled on in defense of a player of his, and used a little expression. It’s not because Chris Webber is a “schmuck,” either, though Webber was an unsympathic audience for sure.

It’s because Kahn made a decision to commit “modest, but significant” money to Darko Milicic, so he got to tap-dancing in defense of that decision. It’s because he overrated Darko’s passing ability.

We can list things off and make them look contradictory. The guy’s not exactly lying. He’s just wrong, and in over his head like Stop-n-Pop says, and trying to justify himself.

"Those things about which we cannot theorize, we must narrate." – Umberto Eco

by feral on Feb 18, 2011 9:22 AM CST up reply actions  

It really is amazing to think..

….that a professional basketball team could have hired someone that doesn’t know the first thing about professional basketball. Also, I’m torn between your arguments here. On one hand, Kahn doesn’t know what he’s doing. On the other, he’s also a terrible salesman who thinks he is the smartest guy in the room. I kind of split the difference in the season preview by wishing for this:

My biggest wish for the season is that David Kahn continues to maintain an ultra-low profile. It is in everybody’s best interest that he says as little as possible, as he has a tremendous knack for being either prodigiously condescending or for putting his foot in his mouth. Even when he does something worthwhile, he is really hard to root for. Again, the focus of anything related to this franchise needs to be pointed back on-the-court. In order for this to happen, we need continued radio silence from the POBO.

Here were my goals for the team:

Not perpetrating fraud upon the paying public. I know it’s kind of harsh, but last year was an unmitigated disaster that was not only one of the two or three worst seasons in franchise history, but was also an 82-game washout that became (according to team legend) a testing ground for the long term plans of Coach Rambis and POBO Kahn. I’m sure all of you who paid for a ticket are happy to hear that.

I want competitive and entertaining action on a night-in/night-out basis. This probably means that we’ll need to see some solid coaching and player development. For better or worse (most likely for the sake of addiction), I appear to be the type of fan that is in this thing for the long haul. My goal this year is to not feel like a dupe for following this team. Again, congratulations Timberwolves—low expectations have garnered you another victory.

The team’s strengths:

In theory, this team should control the boards on both ends of the court, play decent defense on the wings, shoot well from beyond the arc, and win 10-15 games simply by showing up and shooting the rock at a general percentage unseen in the post-KG era. In practice, I’ll believe it when I see it. I like what I’ve seen so far this preseason, but the current mixture of this club is volatile and could go south in a hurry. Martell Webster and Wes Johnson are not known as good shot creators off of the dribble, Michael Beasley hasn’t proven he can be a solid gunner, Jonny Flynn is suffering through the 2nd-year Wolves curse, this coaching staff has shown exactly nothing so far, and [insert your own possible blunder here]. When this team is winning games (or losing in a competitive manner) Kahn’s “plan” will seem like it is headed down the right track, as we should see lots of hustle, athleticism, length, passing (especially from the bigs) and good shooting. When this squad is losing games, it will certainly be pitched by the team as a work in progress (and, to be fair, it is), but it will also still be the result of a long-running tradition of horrific front office decisions (both pre and during the Era of Kahn). At the end of the day, this is still a 15 win franchise with an under-performing coaching staff and front office that passed on the BPA with a top 5 pick and was unable to turn additional (and multiple) 1st round draft picks into anything other than Martell Webster. The one thing they have going in their favor is that anything approaching average will be greeted by us die-hards as honest-to-Pete manna from heaven. The soft bigotry of low expectations finally has a home at 600 First Avenue.
Ugh.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 9:31 AM CST up reply actions  

I guess I'm not at all sold on the "terrible salesman" side.

Not really.

Even the “Rubio Bubble” you talk about. If anything, to me, it seems like Kahn has soft-pedaled the Rubio thing for all of two years now. There may be a “bubble” in economic terms – an overvalued area of the market that’s likely to collapse and take things down with it. But David Kahn doesn’t blow hot air into that thing. It’s the judgment underneath that’s the big question.

The “Letters to the Fans” approach is a good one. Kahn writes pretty well. He just has some difficult stuff to defend, about which he’s writing.

(Shrug.) My couple of cents.

"Those things about which we cannot theorize, we must narrate." – Umberto Eco

by feral on Feb 18, 2011 9:37 AM CST up reply actions  

David Kahn is not likeable. He is cocky and irritating, yet has no track record of achievement to warrant the cockiness or compel one to ignore the “irritating” factor. Reading his letters or defending his actions on the internet is infinitely easier than listening to him talk. Even for moves I agree with or am inclined to give the benefit of the doubt (Beasley, Webster), I find myself liking them less the more he addresses them. Compare this to someone like Tony Ronzone whose enthusiasm for hoops is infectious – and by God, has some credibility!

Why make a guy like this the face of your team? I have no idea – it’s astounding.

Salesmen are ultimately judged by how much they sell – from Target Center attendence, he’s not getting it done. You could make the argument that it’s because he’s a lousy basketball exec rather than a lousy salesman – but how does one validate that? (And I think it’s both, by the way.)

by Punisher#8 on Feb 18, 2011 10:24 AM CST up reply actions  

Honestly, Ronzone gives me a classic "jock talk" feeling.

The U’s now-departed football coach did, too.

Look back to when Kahn was hired. Everyone, me included, was livid. What effect did his opening press conference have on that?

"Those things about which we cannot theorize, we must narrate." – Umberto Eco

by feral on Feb 18, 2011 10:51 AM CST up reply actions  

I hear that on Ronzone

and have thought the same thing. And I wouldn’t necessarily be in favor of specifically giving him an administrative role any more than it was a good idea for Brewster. But as the face of the franchise for the front office to fans – what an easy call.

Kahn has received the benefit of the doubt from kindly Minnesotans and those so emotionally invested in the team that there is a rationalization that he must know where he is taking the team. The opening press conference and the aftermath of the Rubio pick are exhibits “A” and “B”. I think he gets that benefit of the doubt in spite of himself.

by Punisher#8 on Feb 18, 2011 11:54 AM CST up reply actions  

Heh--
The guy’s not exactly lying. He’s just wrong,

Only six more shopping days until the Trading Deadline!

by PoorDick on Feb 18, 2011 9:44 AM CST up reply actions  

George Costanza territory.

Maybe there was a day in David Kahn’s past on which he decided to go against his instincts.

"Those things about which we cannot theorize, we must narrate." – Umberto Eco

by feral on Feb 18, 2011 9:47 AM CST up reply actions  

Perhaps...

He was speaking of modest improvement in the win/loss department,but significant improvement in the individual player’s play.

by Tisbee on Feb 18, 2011 11:39 AM CST up reply actions  

I love the title of the column

He expects more from Love. I know he’s talking about leadership and behind the scenes stuff, but lordy, how much more can the guy give Kahn? How much more stable and consistent can players like Webster and Darko get? They’re doing what they’ve always done. And “modest, yet significant”…are you kidding me?

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 17, 2011 9:02 PM CST up reply actions  

blame the best player

it’s what we did with KG, then with Al, and now with Love.

by illwafer on Feb 17, 2011 11:41 PM CST up reply actions  

Blame them..

….and focus on their weaknesses. It seems to be the M.O. I love how they talk about the need for veteran leadership. Last year, they pitched the youth of this team as a selling point while letting Love’s biggest mentor (and locker room glue) Brian Cardinal to walk. If players like that matter behind the scenes, and if they really thought Love would be in a position to lead this year, why was he let go? They’re just making it up as they go along.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 6:45 AM CST up reply actions  

Explain this further

Because I find it hard to believe that, even if the Wolves had offered him a deal, he wouldn’t have taken the Mavs offer. Not that overpaying him would’ve been a bad idea since it would’ve been a modest overpayment, but would he have even taken it, considering how set for life he is from his last deal?

Also, this has been mentioned multiple times by Ric Bucher as coming straight from the mouths of young players regarding older players: “If you can’t play, I’m not listening to you.” The current problem is more that Ridnour isn’t a model of vocal leadership, smart play, or mental toughness.

by pagingstanleyroberts on Feb 18, 2011 11:25 AM CST up reply actions  

Love and Cardinal became friends last year and I remember hearing Cardinal talk about how he wanted to remain in Minny

Don’t forget that they traded Cardinal for Darko and then brought Cardinal back because he was a good influence in the locker room and on Love. They talked about it a lot near the end of the year on the radio broadcasts. Every now and then Cardinal will drop a quote about Love:

Brian Cardinal was changing out of his practice sneakers into his ready-for-snow-and-ice sneakers after the Mavericks’ shootaround this morning at Madison Square Garden when I got a chance to ask him how many games he’d won last season when the calendar hit February.

“Not many,’’ he said.

That led us to reminiscing about his days with the Minnesota Timberwolves last year, a time when the starting forward for the Mavericks (again, tonight against the Knicks) made a good friend in Kevin Love and learned to hate losing even more than he thought he did.

“A while back,‘’ Cardinal said, "I took a picture of the standings and texted it to Love, just to bust his chops,’’ Cardinal said. "He sent me a picture back of a snowdrift.’’

Love and Cardinal remain friends and Cardinal can sympathize with the Timberwolves, who remain at the bottom of the Western Conference standings. But that’s as far as it goes. Being with the Mavericks and being on pace to win 50-plus games is way preferable to losing that many.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 11:37 AM CST up reply actions  

Mark my words:
“He sent me a picture back of a snowdrift.’’

Love is going to leave town for the West Coast. He’s going to do what we were all worried about in OJ Mayo. Meanwhile Mayo will wind up in, oh, Oklahoma City.

"Those things about which we cannot theorize, we must narrate." – Umberto Eco

by feral on Feb 18, 2011 12:00 PM CST up reply actions  

my non-Wolves K-Love fantasy

involves him taking slightly less money to win a title in OKC. What a team!

I haven't written an insightful post in years.

by littleboxes on Feb 18, 2011 12:01 PM CST up reply actions  

Think how much he talks about LA. All the time. Every interview, practically.

"Those things about which we cannot theorize, we must narrate." – Umberto Eco

by feral on Feb 18, 2011 12:03 PM CST up reply actions  

yeah, that's why it's a fantasy

for as much as the dude excels at unglamorous basketball skills, methinks he’s a wee-bit shallow.

I haven't written an insightful post in years.

by littleboxes on Feb 18, 2011 12:05 PM CST up reply actions  

Did you follow his twitter feed?

He was in LA about 45 minutes after the Clipper game ended. He may have snuck himself into their charter’s luggage compartment.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 12:04 PM CST up reply actions  

Is it that simple though?

Clippers or Lakers? Do the Clips need him with Blake, and will the Lakers have the cap to offer him the max? I really do think if he leaves, OKC is the favorite destination — eventually via trade like the current Carmelo to NY scenario.

Team USA connections abound, and his college roommate is there, and in terms of fitting on a roster, that’s about his ideal situation (two high-usage perimeter scorers, not a lot of rebounders down low, a shotblocker to cover for him on D in Ibaka.)

by LoveTo on Feb 18, 2011 1:21 PM CST up reply actions  

Oh Kurt

don’t worry…I am not mad at you…but if you could maybe get a few more wins…I would like to see at least 16 wins to demonstrate to our customers that we have improved.

by PoohRubio on Feb 17, 2011 9:11 PM CST up reply actions  

I like this quote.
I wouldn’t ask you to do something you can’t do.

by PoohRubio on Feb 17, 2011 9:17 PM CST up reply actions  

This sounds like my dad

Disappointed that I couldn’t/wouldn’t help him weld some chiselplow back together.

by aarendsvark on Feb 17, 2011 10:58 PM CST up reply actions  

7 days left and counting........

6 days…….

"a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma."

by BaylorWest on Feb 17, 2011 9:06 PM CST reply actions  

I think it's obvious what's going on here.

Between mostly the Kahn/Rambis incompetence and somewhat the upcoming lockout, Taylor has put Kahn on the “just don’t do anything” notice. This way Kahn can’t make things even worse, or screw things up for the next guy.

The employment of Kahn (and Rambis) if probably tied to some combination of the time it takes to resolve the labor situation, and the team’s success or failure. More wins in the next few months and/or a long, drawn-out lockout bodes well for both of them. Lots of losses and a quick resolution of the labor issues means they’re gone.

Only six more shopping days until the Trading Deadline!

by PoorDick on Feb 17, 2011 9:50 PM CST reply actions   1 recs

I came to a similar conclusion

My take on the spending issue (aka the bold singular move) is that since the team is so bad (i.e. not poised for a playoff run) and the lockout looks rough, Taylor got cold feet and decided not to invest the money in filling up the cap. As in, “What’s the point? It’s not like plopping $5 to $10 million on players is going to net me an equal or greater amount of revenue from tickets/concessions/etc.”

Another note is that since Utah is heading downhill fast, we are realistically looking at only having 2 first round draft picks, and thus no urgency to move one (like the Randolph trade). Which leads is all to? Nothing is going to happen with personnel, coaches, GM until after the lockout.

by Rodman99 on Feb 17, 2011 11:06 PM CST up reply actions  

Here is another spot for Glen Taylor not to wait and see.

Let’s say we’re right about this timing. (It’s seemed right, to me, since early this season sometime, especially when it comes to Kurt Rambis’s contract.)

If you want a new GM to have a fighting chance, should you be drifting along under a “no rudder adjustments” edict from on high for half a season, or a whole one spanning the CBA strife? No. No, you don’t let McHale step down ot the bench only to “see how things go” until it’s too late to hire a POBO with any reasonable time before the draft.

You prepare. And are there signs the Wolves are doing so? We all wish Jim Lynum was a sign of that. We’re all, rightly, skeptical.

"Those things about which we cannot theorize, we must narrate." – Umberto Eco

by feral on Feb 18, 2011 7:33 AM CST up reply actions  

catch 22

a long lockout is great for bottom-dwelling teams…especially young ones like ours.

however, there’s this guy in spain that kahn has built his whole (early) career around. if the lockout is short/nil and he can land rubio, he won’t be looked at as such a clown.

but if the lockout goes a long time and rubio doesn’t come next year (he won’t), then his speculating will come crashing down.

by illwafer on Feb 17, 2011 11:47 PM CST up reply actions  

These guys are not going to get fired.

Don’t you remember how long McHale stayed here? What part of your experience with the TWolves makes you think that they are going to act quickly at any point? They are the slowest and most hesitant team in the league when it comes to FO personnel decisions.

Get used to Kahn and Rambis and 17 win seasons. We are going to be experiencing all three for the next 5 years.

by wolver on Feb 18, 2011 12:03 AM CST up reply actions  

Bill Mussleman won 24 games with this poor excuse for a roster:

http://www.nba.com/timberwolves/history/roster_9091.html and got fired for his efforts after his second season.

Dwayne Casey got fired in the middle of his second season at a time when the team was 20-20.

Just because McFale lasted so long doesnt mean someone else will.

by cha on Feb 18, 2011 12:19 AM CST up reply actions  

29 games

I think Mussleman won 29 games with that team. I fear that if we had Mr Peabody’s Wayback machine and brought this 2011 edition back to play the 1991 team, Pooh Richardson & Tony Cambell would torch the current squad. Flynn & Ridinour could learn a few things from Pooh & Scotty Brooks about how to take care of the basketball.

by O-Train on Feb 18, 2011 8:16 AM CST up reply actions  

yeah you're right

It was 29.

I think part of the reason that team was good at taking care of the basketball was because the coach demanded that of them. He demanded a lot of his teams. If Mussleman was alive and coaching this team today, I’m pretty sure we’d have a lot more wins.

by cha on Feb 18, 2011 9:31 AM CST up reply actions  

Hmmm . .

 . . . so he has experience working with the type of talent currently on the Wolves roster . . .

Only six more shopping days until the Trading Deadline!

by PoorDick on Feb 18, 2011 9:46 AM CST up reply actions  

Bump, set, annnnnnddddd

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 18, 2011 9:47 AM CST up reply actions  

Dunno about the wins.

Muss was not exactly a proponent of playing young talent. He got fired over things like not playing the illustrious Gerald Glass, to develop him.

"Those things about which we cannot theorize, we must narrate." – Umberto Eco

by feral on Feb 18, 2011 9:42 AM CST up reply actions  

So did Zgoda misquote?

Or did Kahn clarify his remarks?

Patiently waiting for a new POBO

by Blakeley on Feb 17, 2011 10:17 PM CST reply actions  

I dunno...

But it’s that latest update that is providing a dollop of ketchup for the lard omelet we got a bit earlier.

Delicious!

by ElliotMRCS on Feb 18, 2011 9:57 AM CST up reply actions  

How long would it take to salvage this team?

I’ve been meaning to do a fanpost on this, but given that Kahn inherrited a broken down car and then hired a blind man to drive it into a burning ditch, how would comptetent management go about returning the team to respectibility?

by aarendsvark on Feb 17, 2011 10:53 PM CST reply actions  

I think that's the multi-million dollar question

I’m not sure it is salvageable if they are unable to put the tail end of the Jefferson deal into action (i.e. using it to get an established player before the trade deadline.) I think they fumble around for a few years before having to trade Love, if he doesn’t risk one year as a RFA to get to UFA status. The cap space becomes increasingly less valuable with each passing deadline. Eventually, they’ll be in a situation where it will have to be used on Love, Beasley, and Rubio and the picks they have on the books. It’s really valuable right now because they can essentially trade for anybody without giving out a similar amount of salary in return.

That's Mr. Downer to you.
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 17, 2011 11:13 PM CST up reply actions  

Here is why it is Rambis' fault.

If you combine the best PER guy in the league with the best rebounder in the league and the best shotblocker in the league and the third best stealer in the league. And you put them on a team that has the third best 3-point shooting percentage in the league. You have to get more than 17 wins. Bad coaching can make a lot of individual talents worse when they are together in a bad scheme. And that is all Rambis.
A great coach could take a bunch of bad players and make them decent. A good coach can cover up for even a bad GM. But a bad coach can make a decent GM look bad.

by wolver on Feb 18, 2011 12:05 AM CST reply actions  

Agreed

But let’s not let Rambis off the hook. This team should not be as terrible at defense as it is. And it took Rambis over half the season to figure out that we’re a decent pick and roll team.

by Vlade on Feb 18, 2011 11:10 AM CST up reply actions  

Here is why it is not "totally" Rambis' fault.

If your POBO gives you three point guards who combined are the worst TOV% and DRtg trio in the league, and you have no choice but to play 48 minutes per game from some combination of the three, then some of the blame lies in the front office. Having said that, Rambis has not shown any indication that he has the ability to “coach up” the players that he has been handed.

by O-Train on Feb 18, 2011 12:07 PM CST up reply actions  

I'd like to think there's more than 100% blame to go around

But the way Sessions stunk here, and has looked good everywhere else does not speak well for Rambis. Not well at all.

by aarendsvark on Feb 18, 2011 7:50 PM CST up reply actions  

Agreed. They both need to go.

by O-Train on Feb 19, 2011 10:59 AM CST up reply actions  

I'm surprised Sessions hasn't come up more in relation to both Rambis AND Kahn

I think Sessions’ play here and elsewhere suggests some really bad things about Rambis’ “system” for point guard production. I also think that Kahn choosing Flynn over Sessions (who is only 24 himself) is a classic example of throwing good money after bad. A Ridnour/Sessions PG rotation in a non-Rambis offense would net us above-average production from the point guard position, something we are getting only from power forward right now. This is one of Kahn’s under-the-radar mistakes, but it’s more evidence that he doesn’t know what the hell he’s doing.

by WolvesFan03 on Feb 19, 2011 2:45 PM CST up reply actions  

Alternative post title: "Portrait of the Artist as a Middle-Aged Idiot"

My big fear is that Kahn has shown… limited GM ability so far and will be in charge of perhaps our last chance for a while to get any momentum going with our assets this offseason.

The Wolves suffer from serious Kahnorrhea.
- SoDakHmr

by Malastare on Feb 18, 2011 3:07 AM CST reply actions  

Glen Taylor may want to save money with a lockout looming....

But he should really fire and/or force to fire Kahn and Rambis.

Kahn doesn’t draft well. With the high picks the Wolves have had, that’s crippling enough to say goodbye. Think the team would be better with Cousins, Curry, and Lawson? Do you trust him to make good choices this year?

The Wolves have terrible, non-improving D and don’t have any go-to plays down the stretch. Enough said on Rambis.

Glen, start over with the GM and coach.

by ChicagoViking on Feb 18, 2011 8:26 AM CST reply actions  

What's really scary...

is that, for all the talk of Kahn having a plan, one of the main reasons this team is just really bad instead of utterly terrible is Michael Beasley — and we basically stole him in a totally unplanned move that only became available because of the Decision and the Heat drama this offseason.

Can you imagine where this team would be without Beasley, which really is where The Plan seemed to be taking us but for some dumb luck?

by Kilrathi on Feb 18, 2011 9:25 AM CST reply actions  

sitting around 15 wins

and knowing whether Wes is an NBA 3?

I love the Beasley trade, because he’s one of our few hopes for future improvement, but on the court this season he’s been inconsistent on his best end of the court, and awful on the other. He’s lucky he’s on a team with the historically bad J Flynn and with fans that don’t have much else to do but hope, because his defense has been disastrous on both the wing and in the post.

by rickyp on Feb 18, 2011 10:00 AM CST up reply actions  

In happier news...

Wes Johnson is going to rock out at the Rookie/Sophomore game tonight.

Everything in the computer need my face on it. Mega Gigabytes, son!

by TimAllen on Feb 18, 2011 9:48 AM CST reply actions  

Should be fun

Will DMC flip out?
Will Wes become bolder?

Plenty of subplots.

Dingus Kahn, it's over

by Flagrant on Feb 18, 2011 9:51 AM CST up reply actions  

I predict...

…poor dribbling, a few smooth shots from beyond 18 ft, lots of standing around, no penetration of the paint.

What’s my prize?

by Django Z on Feb 18, 2011 10:48 AM CST up reply actions  

Wes Johnson for the next ten years in a Wolves jersey.

Now whether that’s on the bench or in the stands I don’t know.

by Magoo12218 on Feb 18, 2011 12:03 PM CST up reply actions  

I always take Kahn on his word

at his contradictions are highly symptomatic.

Dingus Kahn, it's over

by Flagrant on Feb 18, 2011 9:50 AM CST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Canis Hoopus is straight T-Wolves straight from Minnesota.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Rubio_wolfrider_small
Ricky Rubio: Probably not as good as you think...
Small
Around the League: Atlanta Hawks

Recent FanPosts

Small
Possible that Perry Jones = Paul George?
Small
Evan Fournier
557415_10101880206283470_13960869_76835255_1401292386_n_small
Poll: Do the NBA playoffs live up to their potential?
Rubio_wolfrider_small
PA100 Northwest Division
Rubio_wolfrider_small
PA100 Southeastern Division
Rubio_wolfrider_small
PA100 Central Division
Small
A Poem by Rashad McCants
Franklin2_small
Revisiting Rudy Gay (with poll!)

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Canis Hoopus Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Hoopus Features

    HOOPUS FAQ

    Salary Cap Info

    Draft Info

    Player Movement Flow Charts

    Draft Boards

    Former Tag Lines:

    • In desperate need of an epic dose of basketball Viagra
    • Your source of radical left wing politics cleverly disguised as basketball fandom
    • Palin-Free since before statehood
    • Despairy Home Companion
    • The world's leading exporter of small area quickness
    • Sorry…I have no idea who is Joe Mauer
    • Home of the Peja deep douche
    • Vote McGrady!
    • Bork, bork, bork, bork, bork
    • Wir Sind Darko
    • Weird, unhealthy Darko mania
    • les goûts et les couleurs ne se discutent pas
    • Basketball success makes character issues forgivable
    • Building the Boogie Bandwagon
    • Building the Dream....One Power Forward At A Time
    • Kids, Puppy Dogs, And Long Walks In The Park
    • SWITCH THE FLIP!!!
    • Team Red Pill.
    • December is Bunny Month. Survive it with insincerity and Merle Haggard.
    • Like having a really good seat at a beheading.
    • We've got to have rules and obey them. After all, we're not savages. We're Wolves fans, and Wolves fans are best at everything.
    • Getting Real Mythological
    • Trapped in Punxsawawney
    • BIIYYYOOOMMMBOOOOOOO!!!
    • Estoy llevando mi talento a Minnesota
    • Where sharks do battle with giant eagles
    • You don’t put a saddle and reins on a magical unicorn, you bareback it and put faith in nature
    • Toeing the line between nerd and loser
    • If Theo Ratliff’s Expiring Contract could see us now...

    Hoopus Recipe Book

    Let's Settle This:


    Self-Promotion

    BallHype Sports Blog Rankings


    Managers

    Dr wyn

    Journey_small Stop-n-Pop

    Rviy7fbgmhz5ht2dpgo6q0jfu_small TimAllen

    Editors

    Wolveslogo_small Oceanary

    Authors

    Small SG

    Hrbek_small Jon Marthaler