Rudy Gobert to the Timberwolves

[D-Mac [enjin:19736340]]

I'm a little shocked at how much guys here are lamenting the loss of these late first rounders. Let's look back at franchise history and go see how many of those late firsts turned into plus-level rotation players. Two? Three? Four may be? Certainly no stars.

And if we have to do a rebuild in three years because this experiment doesn't work, we'll have a massive expiring deal in Gobert, a still highly valued asset in KAT, plus Ant and Jaden. No one thinks we couldn't deal our way into replenishing those firsts and then some if we tore it down to the studs?

Gobert is a defensive superstar. Literally one of the best paint protectors to ever play the game. And durable (unlike Durant!).

I have my own doubts and trepidation about the trade, but I think some folks are making way too big a deal of losing these firsts. This isn't the NFL.

I'm a little shocked at how everyone just assumes that the 2027 and 2029 picks (and even 2025 for that matter) will be late picks. A lot can change in 5 years and often does. I totaling get why you and others say this, because it's hard to stomach this trade without taking an optimistic outlook, but things don't always work out best case scenario.

[D-Mac [enjin:19736340]]

First let me toss some kudos to the naysayers here. Your take (that we got fleeced by Utah) is much more in line with the national media than perhaps the more biased positive take of an excited rube like me. So those like me who love this deal have to acknowledge there is a good chance your opinion will prove to be right.

But if you're in the naysayer group, take the time to answer two questions for me. The homers who love this deal like me are welcome to answer too.

1) What would have been your predicted win total for the Wolves prior to the Gobert deal, and what is it now? (For me, probably 45 before, and 55 after)

2) What percentage chance did you give the Wolves of winning an NBA championship in the next 4 years before the Gobert deal, and what percentage chance do you give it now? (For me, 1% before, 50% now).

I recognize these are difficult questions, because injuries, other deals, salary cap etc. have to be considered. But this is how I evaluate a deal. Does it make us significantly better for the upcoming season, and does it significantly increase our chances of being in the championship conversation in a short period of time. And I give a resounding yes to both questions.

Great questions. I'll ignore door #3 (sign a young Pf like Jalen smith or trade for someone like capela)

If we ran it back as is, I'd say 42 next year, now I'll say 52 (if we can trade Dlo for an upgrade at ball boy or water boy, I'll bump this up to 55) :)

I'd go 10% previously and now I'd say 30%. Problem is I think there were a lot of other cheaper moves that could have got it to 25%.

[Coolbreeze44]

I will say it again because it helps me understand it the best. Wolves add a multi time All NBA guy and a top 2 defender in the NBA and didn't have to give up their top 3 assets or their top 4 talented players. Also returning 8 of their top 11 rotation pieces from last year

Yes, we are going to be a lot to handle. How does Golden State beat us? I don't think they can.

They have a Wiggins, the Wolves don't, that is how!

You got me SP!

[Coolbreeze44]

Rudy Gobert converted on 95 alley-oops last season

The Wolves' 2 highest usage roll-men last season, KAT and Naz Reid, converted on 5 alley-oops... COMBINED

I don't know if it's been mentioned yet. But D'Angelo Russell and Rudy gobert together might be awesome.

Dude, there is literally nothing in the known universe that when combined with Dlo equals awesome. Nothing. Will we be a lot better? Yes. Will it be because of Dlo? No. Every GM in the league except Rosas agrees with me... just sayin

When you're right, you're right. I laughed at this post.

[Monster]

Jazz fan from Australia here, and big Rudy fan. You guys have certainly pushed all your chips in, it's a gamble that has a high variability of outcome. I think it depends on the chemistry that your guys can mesh with. Couple of things to point out, as far as the rivalry between KAT and Rudy there was a similar scenario with Rudy and Whiteside this season and they got on like a house on fire, no problem there at all.

Rudy is all about winning and until you watch him a lot you don't realise exactly how many little things he does that contribute to winning. He's actually a lot better perimeter defender than he's given credit for, i can absolutely say the Jazz's problems against small ball teams were our guards perimeter defense was garbage and Rudy was trying to cover the whole team allowing penetration way too easily.

I'll be watching the Wolves next season, should be fascinating to see how it works but if the coach figures out how to utilize all the pieces you'll win 55 games and be in the top 4 in the West

Hey thanks for your post! It's fun to have someone with a new perspective especially on Gobert.

[Monster]

Everyone knows I don't like the Gobert deal. I'm not going to get into the Ayton debate in any detail, except to say that we could have obviously gotten him, a much younger player on a much more team-friendly contract, for significantly less than we gave up for Gobert. I would have preferred that. And we could have gotten Dejounte Murray for less than we gave up for Gobert and I would have preferred that as well. I say that while fully acknowledging that Gobert is better than either one.

But even though I'm not fond of the Gobert deal, I'm a little tired of national media blowhards spewing false or grossly distorted narratives related to the deal as they try to create an analytical basis for a pre-determined conclusion. Zach Harper's article in The Athletic is a good example of what I'm referring to. He gave the Wolves a C+ for the deal. That's arguably a fair grade given all the risks we've discussed. But grade aside, he cobbled together justifications for his grade that have little if any basis in fact. Here's an excerpt from his article:

Last reason for this being a risk? Chemistry matters. If the Wolves end up trading Russell after this move, how does KAT process that? Towns and Gobert haven't exactly loved and respected each other on the court over the years, and both players have a history of some chemistry questions involving them in their respective locker rooms. Now they're sharing a locker room, and that has the potential to be volatile. Everything here is a big expensive risk.

Any Wolves fan who understands anything about the NBA knows how ridiculous this is. The fact that Towns and Gobert haven't gotten along as adversaries should be expected unless they're Wes Johnson types who don't give a shit. Of course they didn't get along on the court. They are both highly competitive centers playing for division rivals and going head to head repeatedly in the rough-and-tumble NBA paint. That doesn't even remotely suggest they won't get along as teammates. In fact, quite the opposite. Highly competitive rivals who don't get along playing against one another tend to get along especially well if they become teammates. Zach is simply attempting to create something out of nothing and ends up just flat wrong. Then Zach goes on to say that both players "have a history of some chemistry questions involve in them in their respective locker rooms." I can't speak to any chemistry issues Gobert might have had. But what in the hell is he talking about when it comes to Towns?? We all know KAT's weaknesses like whining on the court, but he's always been known as a good teammate in the locker room. If Harper is referring to the Butler situation, then he's engaging in a gross distortion. KAT's issue with Butler was an anomaly. It was a 21-year old somewhat thin-skinned KAT who didn't take well to the bullying he was getting from the 28-year old Butler, who to that point had a history of not getting along with young players. The issue with KAT resulted when Butler crossed a line into the personal realm, threatening to sleep with KAT's girlfriend.

There are real risks associated with this trade. They've already been discussed ad nauseum. But the national media frenzy, animated by false narratives and gross distortions, is driving me nuts. The Gobert deal was a high-risk maneuver, but it was a calculated risk. Connelly gave up too much in my opinion, but he did not strip the cupboard bare. We still have a fairly deep team of bona fide NBA talent including allstar KAT, budding superstar Ant, potential all-star McDaniels a number of solid NBA players in Prince, Anderson, Forbes, McLaughlin, Naz Reid and Nowell. We also have a couple of talented rookies in Moore and the more developmental project Minott. We have an intriguing Euro-stash player in Spagnolo. There's more work to be done, but this Wolves team has the potential to be a title contender for the next four years. It's not the situation I wanted because I believe we could have gotten to the same place a bit more slowly and with a lot less risk. Nevertheless, it's not a bad situation at all. If the national media are looking for a franchise to ridicule they should look to the Nation's two largest cities - New York (aka Brooklyn Nets and LA (aka LA Lakers). Those are a couple organizations fully deserving of ridicule. And you can criticize them without having to make anything up.

I'm glad you had that reaction too Lip. I didn't think it was a particularly good article I was expecting better.

[SameOldNudityDrew]

Ok, I've got a minute, so I'll start brainstorming possible opponent "5 out" lineups.

Dallas
Luka
Dinwiddie
Bertans
Finney-Smith
Wood or Kleber

Golden State
Curry
Poole
Thompson
Wiggins
Porter Jr.

Denver
Murray
Bones Hyland
KCP
Porter Jr. or Gordon
Jokic

Clippers
Kennard or Norman Powell or Mann
Paul George
Kawhi
Covington
Batum or Marcus Morris

(man, the Clippers have a TON of outside shooters)

Portland
Dame
Simons
Gary Payton II or Shaedon Sharpe
Josh Hart or Nassir Little
Grant

(some question marks there, but you gotta imagine they'll add a stretch 4 at some point)

New Orleans
CJ
Troy Murphy III
Ingram (not a great outside shooter)
Zion (not a great outside shooter)
Valanciunas

(ok, that's a team that would have a really tough time going 5 out against us)

Memphis
Ja Morant
Tyus Jones or Zaire Williams (he'll get better this next year)
Brooks
Bane
JJJ

(Brooks and Ja are just average from deep, but that's still a good 5 man lineup)



At any rate, looking at those outside-shooting focused "5 out" lineups, what do you guys think about how we would match up against them with Rudy and KAT on the floor defensively? And on offense, how would you try to maximize our size advantage to punish them?

Well, I think this is the real soft spot and what critics of the trade will point to. How do KAT and Gobert defend these kind of "lineups of death" in the playoffs?

First off, we can potentially field our own 5-out lineup that ain't too shabby:
KAT
SloMo
McDaniels
Ant
DLO or whoever our PG will be

I realize that lineup doesn't include Rudy, but that's the beauty of having KAT, SloMo, and McDaniels. That's still a lot of length and ranginess that can do a bunch of switching and shot contesting. And then if Edwards can keep himself mentally dialed in, he really has the chance to be an elite two-way wing that can be really, really good defensively guarding 1-4.

Similarly, if Memphis decides to throw JJJ and Clarke out there, now we CAN play KAT and Gobert at the same time and keep those dudes off the glass. We have the size to go up against JoVal, Zion, and Ingram as well.

Yes, Q, I agree we can go 5 out, and I do think if teams go small against us, we should definitely suffocate them on the glass. There were some posts on pages 16 and 17 on which we were trying to constructively plan out how we would respond to teams going small in general, and I'm curious what you think about some of the ideas there.

I listed all these small lineups so we could get a better idea of how to game plan for specific teams. I don't have much fear of big teams obviously now that we have KAT and Rudy. The key question is when teams go small, how do we respond most effectively 1) on defense, and 2) on offense?

Defensively, I like that you mention Memphis, because if they go small with Clarke, I think that's not so much a problem because he's not really an outside threat UNLESS they start repeatedly running PNRs with Clarke and Morant (see more on that below). Otherwise, you just put Rudy on Clarke and let him sag off toward the paint if Clarke stays out by the 3 point line. I think that they might be more of a threat offensively if they roll with Bane at the 4 because they'll all be able to shoot out there (I confused Tyus and Tre there!). In a case like that, would you put Rudy on their "worst" outside shooter, regardless of size (probably Brooks)? Would you go to a zone? And offensively, how could we punish them for having Bane as their second longest guy on the floor?

As for Golden State, I just heard Otto Porter Jr. left Golden State (I missed that when I made that list), so they'll have a tougher time putting out 5 outside shooters (unless they'll sign someone else, which they probably will). They could go small with Draymond, but he can't really shoot any more, so if they do go small with Draymond (which they did a lot this year) I think actually we could leave Rudy on him defensively and let him sag a bit. Actually, if they try to go small without Draymond, that's still a win because we'll have forced Draymond off the floor.

I'm actually not that worried about New Orleans in part because they can't really stretch the floor with Ingram and Zion that well. We can outsize them and outrebound them, and I don't think they'll really be able to stretch the floor against us well. Maybe if Ingram develops a better outside shot and the point-Zion thing returns. Although he can't really shoot from outside, so he's not much of a threat to shoot from the perimeter, Zion's quicker than Draymond, so I think it'd be tougher for Rudy to try to guard him on the perimeter, but I do think Ant and McDaniels could probably do it. If they try Jonas setting a bunch of picks for Zion, I think you could just have Gobert switch onto Zion because he's almost always going to the rim. In that case, I'd want to put McDaniels on Zion to start because if he switches off onto Jonas for the pick and pop, he's got the length to give him problems. I'll take long contested 2s with McDaniels on D.

I think the main team I'd be concerned about is the Clippers.

The more I think about it, the more I suspect that when teams go small, they'll try to relentlessly target Rudy in PNRs with the guy he's defending setting the picks, hoping to use their quickness to scramble our defense and either sneak past him to the rim (good luck), get a dump pass to the roll man (more likely) or (most likely), kicking it out to a perimeter shooter if the defense collapses. I hope we practice A LOT of defending pick and rolls from the perimeter with Rudy as the guy defending the dude setting the pick. It could be good offensive practice for some bench guys too. I can see JMac, Nowell, or Moore offensively initiating the pick and roll with KAT, Naz, or Minott (who could be a nice rim-crashing lob threat) to create a lot of practice opportunities for Rudy and DLO or Rudy and Ant or Rudy and McDaniels to defend the PNR together, just to help those guys develop the communication skills and instincts to defend that action when teams go smaller and quicker. They should also probably do that a lot in 5 on 5 scenarios so the rest of the defense learns to defend against the kickout for the perimeter shot as well.

[Q-is-here]

First let me toss some kudos to the naysayers here. Your take (that we got fleeced by Utah) is much more in line with the national media than perhaps the more biased positive take of an excited rube like me. So those like me who love this deal have to acknowledge there is a good chance your opinion will prove to be right.

But if you're in the naysayer group, take the time to answer two questions for me. The homers who love this deal like me are welcome to answer too.

1) What would have been your predicted win total for the Wolves prior to the Gobert deal, and what is it now? (For me, probably 45 before, and 55 after)

2) What percentage chance did you give the Wolves of winning an NBA championship in the next 4 years before the Gobert deal, and what percentage chance do you give it now? (For me, 1% before, 50% now).

I recognize these are difficult questions, because injuries, other deals, salary cap etc. have to be considered. But this is how I evaluate a deal. Does it make us significantly better for the upcoming season, and does it significantly increase our chances of being in the championship conversation in a short period of time. And I give a resounding yes to both questions.

Great questions. I'll ignore door #3 (sign a young Pf like Jalen smith or trade for someone like capela)

If we ran it back as is, I'd say 42 next year, now I'll say 52 (if we can trade Dlo for an upgrade at ball boy or water boy, I'll bump this up to 55) :)

I'd go 10% previously and now I'd say 30%. Problem is I think there were a lot of other cheaper moves that could have got it to 25%

That's not illogical from an owner's perspective. But why does that matter to you so much as a fan? If I were to go tell a bunch of fans that we now have a 30% chance at a title instead of 10% with the possibility of may be getting that up to 25%, what choice do you think most of them make?

[Q-is-here]

Drew, I think throwing the occasional zone coverage out there with our collective length will definitely be in the plans. I could also see Gobert playing some high wall coverages. Why not? I know he's a drop guy, but part of the plan needs to be defensive diversity and throwing different looks at teams during the playoffs.

At the end of the day, we have to get better at the point of attack. DLO is a soft spot here obviously. Nowell is too. So is McLaughlin. Those are three guys in our 10-man rotation that are problematic defensively. I wouldn't mind us going out and trying to find another POA defender at the guard position. Moore Jr. could be that guy eventually.

[Jordan Pushedoff [enjin:20966048]]

no worries mate. Happy to give my insight. I will add he's been incredibly durable and has a motor on a 7 footer i've not seen before, so even though i've heard he'll slow your running game down i doubt that very much. Dude can run all night.