Keep Ricky in Minnesota

[petecorcoran [enjin:6658618]]

OK. Makes more sense.

And it leads to this... so Thomas and Lillard and Lowry and Conley and Teague and Irving and Jackson are all playing for .500 teams or better. Some of those teams are considered overachievers.

So just how bad is the rest of the Wolves roster that the Wolves are on pace for only 25 wins (fewer than all of those guys have already)? Or that the team has never been .500 by season's end with Rubio? Or is it all Mitchell's fault?

In all honesty, I don't know. The same questions were asked about Kevin Love a few years ago when he was the only guy in the top 10 for Win Shares in more than 20 seasons from a losing team... and he did it repeatedly... once for a team that lost 65 games which is such an anomaly that I think it knocked basketballreference.com offline for a spell.

I think it's mostly two things (there are other things, but mostly these two). As I mentioned in another post, we really only have 6 rotation players (at best) that should be getting 25+ minutes on a .500 or better team... and good teams have at least 8 solid players. In addition, Sam likes to play 10-11 players and it drives me nuts to see 5 subs out there together while the other team still has two starters on the court.

Long term, the number one issue for this team is game management (i.e. the coach) and number two is getting at least two more solid core players from the draft and/or free agency (like a defensive-minded big and a 3-point bomber).

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

Abe, Yes, his team mates really have been that bad. Just look at last season's team which played mostly without Rubio (he was 13th in total minutes last season due to the injuries). We won only 16 games and had one of the worst defenses in history. We were 7-14 when he played and 9-52 when he didn't play. I'm not sure how you could expect someone like Rubio to take a 9-52 squad and turn them into winners. May be LeBron and Russell Westbrook can do it. But that might be about it.

Now as we go to this year, the top 3 players from last season in minutes played - Wiggins, Dieng, and LaVine - are also major parts of the rotation this season. Have these guys improved? Yes, but not dramatically, and for Wiggins and LaVine, we are still very early in their careers. Hopefully we'll see much more progress, but the bottom line is the 3 top players from the 16-win version are still major rotation guys on this squad. Why should we expect them to suddenly be winners?

And don't forget his rookie year Abe where yes, he did have a winning record before getting hurt. We were 21-20 when he goes down. We then proceed to go 5-20 the rest of the way. Yes, he had Kevin Love and Pek, but he also had Wes Johnson, Luke Ridnour, and Derrick Williams as the next three top guys in terms of minutes played that year. I would characterize those three as less-than-optimal team mates as your 2nd, 3rd, and 4th players in minutes played....and he took them to 21-20, so he was a winner, right?

As for 2013-14, we definitely underachieved versus what we did on paper that year in terms of point differential. It's fair to assign Rubio his fair share of the blame for that horrible streak of close losses. But just what is his "fair share"? How much should be assigned to Love and Pek? What about Adelman sticking with Barea too long? And what about just plain old bad luck? I've said this many times, but for that horrible streak of close losses we had early in the season, we went 6-2 in close games in the second half of the season with Rubio closing out games. What happened?

I personally don't think the "he's not been on a winning team" argument holds water unless we're bickering over his MVP or HoF credentials, in which case I'd agree of course.

[Coolbreeze44]

Question for you all: Haven't you already seen the negative impact Ricky has during end of game situations? I know I have. Forget waiting for the playoffs, these things are evident today. We really struggle to get quality shots when the defense digs in. Invariably the ball ends up in Ricky's hands and he either has to take a low percentage jump shot (every jump shot is for him), or pass to a teammate who is covered because Ricky doesn't pull his defender out far enough. You've seen this many times if you've been paying attention.

My point continues to be that Ricky is a good player with a major flaw. Like him as a strong rotation guy. Don't like him when we need him to orchestrate the offense at crunch time.

[thedoper]

Question for you all: Haven't you already seen the negative impact Ricky has during end of game situations? I know I have. Forget waiting for the playoffs, these things are evident today. We really struggle to get quality shots when the defense digs in. Invariably the ball ends up in Ricky's hands and he either has to take a low percentage jump shot (every jump shot is for him), or pass to a teammate who is covered because Ricky doesn't pull his defender out far enough. You've seen this many times if you've been paying attention.

My point continues to be that Ricky is a good player with a major flaw. Like him as a strong rotation guy. Don't like him when we need him to orchestrate the offense at crunch time.

4th quarter flops seems to have been a reoccurring theme in the Rubio era. I do admit never having confidence we would win the 4th when it matters. Looking at the box scores from this season we only seem to when we are already down by 10 to begin with. I've made plenty of excuses for Rubio and I still and will always love to watch him play. But I don't have confidence we're a winner with him playing such a vital role.

[alexftbl8181 [enjin:6648741]]

How does Conley not make us better? He is clearly better than Rubio. If you mean it doesn't make us better because there is no guarantee to keep him I guess I get it. But if we can get him long term we're better with Conley.

He might be better than Rubio, but the difference isn't to the point where it's really that meaningful. Also, paying Conley $20-24M per year, compared to Rubio at $14M, for that slight improvement just isn't worth it, in my opinion.

I do realize that I'm talking to someone who thinks Conley replacing Rubio makes this team we have right now a .500 ball club... So, in your case, Conley's an MVP candidate and it'd be a no-brainer to acquire him.

I think Conley is the 5th best PG in the league and gets grossly under-appreciated in Memphis. Plus this is the year to sign a top tier FA. Everyone will have cap room but it will precede a second cap jump next year. The rest of the League is going to be making moves this offseason, no reason why we shouldn't spend.

To be fair, everybody and their three-legged dog has cap space and will be paying ridiculous prices this summer with more money than free agents available. Heck, Ryan Anderson might command $20M per year.

Is that the party Wolves fans want to be invited to when the team is still probably at least another season away from the playoffs? Let the teams more desperate to win and without as much of a promising foundation overpay for now.

Figure out where the team stands with a new GM and coach and direction. THEN... make that splash to add pieces in '17.



[Note: Wait. When's the lockout happening? 2017 or 2018? In any event... it IS happening. Definitely. Get ready.]

It's pretty silly to think that paying someone now would somehow make the Wolves say that they won't sign Towns or Wiggins to contacts when they are due.
The downside of that is that you are paying 2017 prices based on an even bigger cap. This would potentially interfere with the younger core contracts. Im fine with being cautious, but a big name free agent wont break the bank if we do it this summer.

[alexftbl8181 [enjin:6648741]]

Abe, Yes, his team mates really have been that bad. Just look at last season's team which played mostly without Rubio (he was 13th in total minutes last season due to the injuries). We won only 16 games and had one of the worst defenses in history. We were 7-14 when he played and 9-52 when he didn't play. I'm not sure how you could expect someone like Rubio to take a 9-52 squad and turn them into winners. May be LeBron and Russell Westbrook can do it. But that might be about it.

Now as we go to this year, the top 3 players from last season in minutes played - Wiggins, Dieng, and LaVine - are also major parts of the rotation this season. Have these guys improved? Yes, but not dramatically, and for Wiggins and LaVine, we are still very early in their careers. Hopefully we'll see much more progress, but the bottom line is the 3 top players from the 16-win version are still major rotation guys on this squad. Why should we expect them to suddenly be winners?

And don't forget his rookie year Abe where yes, he did have a winning record before getting hurt. We were 21-20 when he goes down. We then proceed to go 5-20 the rest of the way. Yes, he had Kevin Love and Pek, but he also had Wes Johnson, Luke Ridnour, and Derrick Williams as the next three top guys in terms of minutes played that year. I would characterize those three as less-than-optimal team mates as your 2nd, 3rd, and 4th players in minutes played....and he took them to 21-20, so he was a winner, right?

As for 2013-14, we definitely underachieved versus what we did on paper that year in terms of point differential. It's fair to assign Rubio his fair share of the blame for that horrible streak of close losses. But just what is his "fair share"? How much should be assigned to Love and Pek? What about Adelman sticking with Barea too long? And what about just plain old bad luck? I've said this many times, but for that horrible streak of close losses we had early in the season, we went 6-2 in close games in the second half of the season with Rubio closing out games. What happened?

I personally don't think the "he's not been on a winning team" argument holds water unless we're bickering over his MVP or HoF credentials, in which case I'd agree of course.

To your first point: Your implying that it was just Rubio who missed time that season and not pretty much every single player on the roster minus Wiggins. So that is clearly incorrect.

To your 2nd point: So they haven't improved from when they didn't play from Ricky, to now playing with Ricky, but the big thing with Ricky is that he makes everybody around him better. Kinda saying two things from that point.

Ah yes the rookie year, we've gotten to the point where it's just assumed were going to the playoffs if Ricky didn't get hurt and it was 100% in the bag. Not the case.

Last point: Rubio shot 18% in the 4th quarters that year. Yes he gets his fair share. Not only the missed shots, but he lost so much confidence, he would flat out refuse to shoot

[alexftbl8181 [enjin:6648741]]

How does Conley not make us better? He is clearly better than Rubio. If you mean it doesn't make us better because there is no guarantee to keep him I guess I get it. But if we can get him long term we're better with Conley.

He might be better than Rubio, but the difference isn't to the point where it's really that meaningful. Also, paying Conley $20-24M per year, compared to Rubio at $14M, for that slight improvement just isn't worth it, in my opinion.

I do realize that I'm talking to someone who thinks Conley replacing Rubio makes this team we have right now a .500 ball club... So, in your case, Conley's an MVP candidate and it'd be a no-brainer to acquire him.

Of course it's a big difference. What are the Wolves saving that money for? A run at Durant? Wolves can go over the cap to sign Wiggins and Towns. We need to save that money so we overpay for some crappy free agent or underachieving draft pick?

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

How does Conley not make us better? He is clearly better than Rubio. If you mean it doesn't make us better because there is no guarantee to keep him I guess I get it. But if we can get him long term we're better with Conley.

He might be better than Rubio, but the difference isn't to the point where it's really that meaningful. Also, paying Conley $20-24M per year, compared to Rubio at $14M, for that slight improvement just isn't worth it, in my opinion.

I do realize that I'm talking to someone who thinks Conley replacing Rubio makes this team we have right now a .500 ball club... So, in your case, Conley's an MVP candidate and it'd be a no-brainer to acquire him.

Of course it's a big difference. What are the Wolves saving that money for? A run at Durant? Wolves can go over the cap to sign Wiggins and Towns. We need to save that money so we overpay for some crappy free agent or underachieving draft pick?

It's not about saving money. It's about value. Rubio age 25/26 at $14M to me and probably a lot of others is better value than Conley at 28/29 at $22M. They aren't that far apart in on-court production, but will have close to $8M difference in yearly salary. That's just... Why would you rather pay that much more for something doesn't move the needle that much? It may not seem like it, but spending wisely is still imperative.

Also, I'm well aware that the Wolves can spend over the cap to re-sign their players coming off rookie contracts. That has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.

[TRKO [enjin:12664595]]

What would fair trade value for Rubio be?

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

Abe, Yes, his team mates really have been that bad. Just look at last season's team which played mostly without Rubio (he was 13th in total minutes last season due to the injuries). We won only 16 games and had one of the worst defenses in history. We were 7-14 when he played and 9-52 when he didn't play. I'm not sure how you could expect someone like Rubio to take a 9-52 squad and turn them into winners. May be LeBron and Russell Westbrook can do it. But that might be about it.

Now as we go to this year, the top 3 players from last season in minutes played - Wiggins, Dieng, and LaVine - are also major parts of the rotation this season. Have these guys improved? Yes, but not dramatically, and for Wiggins and LaVine, we are still very early in their careers. Hopefully we'll see much more progress, but the bottom line is the 3 top players from the 16-win version are still major rotation guys on this squad. Why should we expect them to suddenly be winners?

And don't forget his rookie year Abe where yes, he did have a winning record before getting hurt. We were 21-20 when he goes down. We then proceed to go 5-20 the rest of the way. Yes, he had Kevin Love and Pek, but he also had Wes Johnson, Luke Ridnour, and Derrick Williams as the next three top guys in terms of minutes played that year. I would characterize those three as less-than-optimal team mates as your 2nd, 3rd, and 4th players in minutes played....and he took them to 21-20, so he was a winner, right?

As for 2013-14, we definitely underachieved versus what we did on paper that year in terms of point differential. It's fair to assign Rubio his fair share of the blame for that horrible streak of close losses. But just what is his "fair share"? How much should be assigned to Love and Pek? What about Adelman sticking with Barea too long? And what about just plain old bad luck? I've said this many times, but for that horrible streak of close losses we had early in the season, we went 6-2 in close games in the second half of the season with Rubio closing out games. What happened?

I personally don't think the "he's not been on a winning team" argument holds water unless we're bickering over his MVP or HoF credentials, in which case I'd agree of course.

To your first point: Your implying that it was just Rubio who missed time that season and not pretty much every single player on the roster minus Wiggins. So that is clearly incorrect.

To your 2nd point: So they haven't improved from when they didn't play from Ricky, to now playing with Ricky, but the big thing with Ricky is that he makes everybody around him better. Kinda saying two things from that point.

Ah yes the rookie year, we've gotten to the point where it's just assumed were going to the playoffs if Ricky didn't get hurt and it was 100% in the bag. Not the case.

Last point: Rubio shot 18% in the 4th quarters that year. Yes he gets his fair share. Not only the missed shots, but he lost so much confidence, he would flat out refuse to shoot

Alex, my post was in response to Abe's claim that if Rubio is not the problem, then boy, he must have had some pretty crappy team mates. And my answer is that yes - yes he did have some pretty poor team mates - ESPECIALLY when the better team mates got hurt, like Love and Pek.

As for making other players better, let's not play stupid. Rubio can help a team offense click better, but he's not going to fundamentally transform any individual player into something he's not.

As for his rookie year, I have no clue if they would have made the playoffs or not. Abe claims that Rubio has never had a winning record. That year he guided the team to a 21-20 record before he got hurt. Once he got hurt, they went 5-20. Can you explain why they went 5-20 after he got hurt and how his absence had nothing to do with it?

As for his 18% shooting in 4th quarters that year, I'm not sure where you are getting that number. How was his shooting when we went 6-2 in close games in the second half of the season? Did it even matter?