thedoper wrote:There's certain types of players who raise the average to great players up a level. Jokic mans a one star team in my opinion with all respect to Murray. I would even say Gobert too even though Mitchell has gotten so much attention for his play, Conley also changes that now. To me Towns still hasnt found that magic to bring the rest of his team up, hoping we see that this year.
Perhaps, although I think you are not giving enough credit to those other players.
Along with Gobert, I'd argue that Favors, Ingles, and Mitchell gave them three other well-rounded really good players. Not stars, but I'd take all three over Gibson, Wiggins, and Okogie from last year's lineup.
As for Denver, I'd put Milsap, Murray, and even Monte freakin' Morris in that same category. Again I'd swap out any three of our sidekicks to KAT for those three, except for RoCo.
The dropoff from KAT to RoCo is pretty big. But the dropoff from RoCo to pretty much everyone else on the roster might be even bigger. You need multiple good players, not just one superstar, one really good role player, and a collection of mediocrity in the West. KAT can may be will this team to 30 or so wins on his own, but that's not even close to playoff contention.
Let's say KAT wills this team to 36 wins... we're in a world where he'll be dismissed or even ripped... in comparison to a 3rd fiddle who helped a team win 53 games.
That one dunk on Wiggins On the baseline was an offensive foul on Ginannis hooking him but he would have scored anyway. Also disappointing this reel didn't cut off one of those plays where Wiggins missed and ended up getting his own offensive rebound. Jeez be true to the bit. Lol
leado01 wrote:Still waiting for someone to take me bet regarding Wiggins averaging > than 21.4 pts/game come Dec. 10th. I'm taking the over.
Is that his actual line?
Q12543 wrote:
thedoper wrote:There's certain types of players who raise the average to great players up a level. Jokic mans a one star team in my opinion with all respect to Murray. I would even say Gobert too even though Mitchell has gotten so much attention for his play, Conley also changes that now. To me Towns still hasnt found that magic to bring the rest of his team up, hoping we see that this year.
Perhaps, although I think you are not giving enough credit to those other players.
Along with Gobert, I'd argue that Favors, Ingles, and Mitchell gave them three other well-rounded really good players. Not stars, but I'd take all three over Gibson, Wiggins, and Okogie from last year's lineup.
As for Denver, I'd put Milsap, Murray, and even Monte freakin' Morris in that same category. Again I'd swap out any three of our sidekicks to KAT for those three, except for RoCo.
The dropoff from KAT to RoCo is pretty big. But the dropoff from RoCo to pretty much everyone else on the roster might be even bigger. You need multiple good players, not just one superstar, one really good role player, and a collection of mediocrity in the West. KAT can may be will this team to 30 or so wins on his own, but that's not even close to playoff contention.
My point is more that I think Jokic and Gobert are such talents that they up the value of the players around them. I think Roco may be the best number 2 from both Denver and Utah from last year. Yes their overall depth was greater and I agree with that premise. But I also believe if KAT played better team ball or was put in the position to play better team ball, there would be a greater collective effect on the rest of the team. KAT as it stands can will this team to 30, but I think Jokic could will a team to 40 or more.
thedoper wrote:There's certain types of players who raise the average to great players up a level. Jokic mans a one star team in my opinion with all respect to Murray. I would even say Gobert too even though Mitchell has gotten so much attention for his play, Conley also changes that now. To me Towns still hasnt found that magic to bring the rest of his team up, hoping we see that this year.
Perhaps, although I think you are not giving enough credit to those other players.
Along with Gobert, I'd argue that Favors, Ingles, and Mitchell gave them three other well-rounded really good players. Not stars, but I'd take all three over Gibson, Wiggins, and Okogie from last year's lineup.
As for Denver, I'd put Milsap, Murray, and even Monte freakin' Morris in that same category. Again I'd swap out any three of our sidekicks to KAT for those three, except for RoCo.
The dropoff from KAT to RoCo is pretty big. But the dropoff from RoCo to pretty much everyone else on the roster might be even bigger. You need multiple good players, not just one superstar, one really good role player, and a collection of mediocrity in the West. KAT can may be will this team to 30 or so wins on his own, but that's not even close to playoff contention.
Let's say KAT wills this team to 36 wins... we're in a world where he'll be dismissed or even ripped... in comparison to a 3rd fiddle who helped a team win 53 games.
Actually all I ever see on ESPN is them ripping Wiggins, every time the Wolves are brought up they say he is garbage and one of the most overpriced contracts in the league. Him and Wall. Oh and they say he's a Soft Ass Bitch.
leado01 wrote:Still waiting for someone to take me bet regarding Wiggins averaging > than 21.4 pts/game come Dec. 10th. I'm taking the over.
Is that his actual line?
Q12543 wrote:
thedoper wrote:There's certain types of players who raise the average to great players up a level. Jokic mans a one star team in my opinion with all respect to Murray. I would even say Gobert too even though Mitchell has gotten so much attention for his play, Conley also changes that now. To me Towns still hasnt found that magic to bring the rest of his team up, hoping we see that this year.
Perhaps, although I think you are not giving enough credit to those other players.
Along with Gobert, I'd argue that Favors, Ingles, and Mitchell gave them three other well-rounded really good players. Not stars, but I'd take all three over Gibson, Wiggins, and Okogie from last year's lineup.
As for Denver, I'd put Milsap, Murray, and even Monte freakin' Morris in that same category. Again I'd swap out any three of our sidekicks to KAT for those three, except for RoCo.
The dropoff from KAT to RoCo is pretty big. But the dropoff from RoCo to pretty much everyone else on the roster might be even bigger. You need multiple good players, not just one superstar, one really good role player, and a collection of mediocrity in the West. KAT can may be will this team to 30 or so wins on his own, but that's not even close to playoff contention.
My point is more that I think Jokic and Gobert are such talents that they up the value of the players around them. I think Roco may be the best number 2 from both Denver and Utah from last year. Yes their overall depth was greater and I agree with that premise. But I also believe if KAT played better team ball or was put in the position to play better team ball, there would be a greater collective effect on the rest of the team. KAT as it stands can will this team to 30, but I think Jokic could will a team to 40 or more.
Well, there is no way to prove who is right on this. I disagree a guy like Jokic is net 10 wins better than KAT. I just can't see how swapping out KAT for Jokic would suddenly make us a 40-win squad.
I do agree that Gobert is a game-changer defensively and even on offense he knows exactly how to play to his strengths. Still, I have a tough time seeing swapping out KAT for Gobert and getting anything more than 3 or 4 incremental wins out of it.
leado01 wrote:Still waiting for someone to take me bet regarding Wiggins averaging > than 21.4 pts/game come Dec. 10th. I'm taking the over.
Is that his actual line?
Q12543 wrote:
thedoper wrote:There's certain types of players who raise the average to great players up a level. Jokic mans a one star team in my opinion with all respect to Murray. I would even say Gobert too even though Mitchell has gotten so much attention for his play, Conley also changes that now. To me Towns still hasnt found that magic to bring the rest of his team up, hoping we see that this year.
Perhaps, although I think you are not giving enough credit to those other players.
Along with Gobert, I'd argue that Favors, Ingles, and Mitchell gave them three other well-rounded really good players. Not stars, but I'd take all three over Gibson, Wiggins, and Okogie from last year's lineup.
As for Denver, I'd put Milsap, Murray, and even Monte freakin' Morris in that same category. Again I'd swap out any three of our sidekicks to KAT for those three, except for RoCo.
The dropoff from KAT to RoCo is pretty big. But the dropoff from RoCo to pretty much everyone else on the roster might be even bigger. You need multiple good players, not just one superstar, one really good role player, and a collection of mediocrity in the West. KAT can may be will this team to 30 or so wins on his own, but that's not even close to playoff contention.
My point is more that I think Jokic and Gobert are such talents that they up the value of the players around them. I think Roco may be the best number 2 from both Denver and Utah from last year. Yes their overall depth was greater and I agree with that premise. But I also believe if KAT played better team ball or was put in the position to play better team ball, there would be a greater collective effect on the rest of the team. KAT as it stands can will this team to 30, but I think Jokic could will a team to 40 or more.
Well, there is no way to prove who is right on this. I disagree a guy like Jokic is net 10 wins better than KAT. I just can't see how swapping out KAT for Jokic would suddenly make us a 40-win squad.
I do agree that Gobert is a game-changer defensively and even on offense he knows exactly how to play to his strengths. Still, I have a tough time seeing swapping out KAT for Gobert and getting anything more than 3 or 4 incremental wins out of it.
Jokic is a PG at C. He sets up the whole offense to be successful. Towns is a highly efficient scorer, but he does not make other guys better on offense. It's a team style versus a me style. If you can elevate a team on offense or defense you usually are worth a good chunk more wins than a guy who just gets stats.
Our offensive rating was 7.3 points worse with KAT off the court and Denver's was 7.1 points worse with Jokic off the court, so KAT actually had a slightly bigger influence on the Wolves' offense than Jokic did on Denver's.
I don't see the big difference between a guy that is great at setting people up versus a guy that is great at getting baskets efficiently. That isn't just "getting stats". That's actually a skill that does help the team. Now if KAT were a chucker just getting volume points without much efficiency, it would be a different story. As it is, he is by far our best option to shoot and score. We don't have the competent wings Denver has.
Q12543 wrote:Our offensive rating was 7.3 points worse with KAT off the court and Denver's was 7.1 points worse with Jokic off the court, so KAT actually had a slightly bigger influence on the Wolves' offense than Jokic did on Denver's.
I don't see the big difference between a guy that is great at setting people up versus a guy that is great at getting baskets efficiently. That isn't just "getting stats". That's actually a skill that does help the team. Now if KAT were a chucker just getting volume points without much efficiency, it would be a different story. As it is, he is by far our best option to shoot and score. We don't have the competent wings Denver has.
Jokic had a 113.3 offensive rating to Towns' 112.2 (nbadotcom). I'm not sure how measuring the strength of their backups with off-court numbers is a good way to evaluate how good someone is versus measuring the guys behind them more. He also had a 5.8 net rating to Towns' 0.9. Almost everything Towns was putting up offensively was being given back on the other end of the court. Jokic isn't worlds better than Towns but he is better and his play style makes his teammates better as well.
KAT and Gobert are really close, I wouldn't swap KAT for Gobert. Both are avg on one end and elite on the other. KAT does also space the floor maybe better then any other center with his elite 3 point skill. Jokic is elite on the offensive end as well with his passing. I'd say Jokic is a slightly better player then KAT, not 10 wins, maybe 3-5.
