alexftbl8181 wrote:Man Rubio is such a difference maker, such a winner. Since Rubio came into the league only 4 teams have missed the playoffs in that time. So pretty much every team and every point guard has made the playoffs except him.
Oh but you want a "pass first" point guard to put with these young guys and not take shots. You know why Rubio is considered a "pass first" point guard, even though he's 5th in assists behind so called "shoot first" point guards? Because "pass first" is a polite way of saying a point guard who can't shoot.
Oh but it's not his "role" to shoot. His job is to pass and set up guys. You know why that's his "role"? It's because he can't shoot. If he could shoot, we wouldn't even be talking about his "role". It would be the same as saying Kevin Love is ok playing bad defense because his "role" is to shoot and to rebound.
Sorry but you can't be the best player/most important player/the most valuable player/the biggest X factor, or whatever Rubio has been described as, and not have to shoulder any blame for a team that hasn't even sniffed .500, much less make the playoffs which is pretty hard to do, going on 5 years now.
But yea of course, he should be Jason Kidd someday, because he was a guy who couldn't like shoot, then kinda learned how to shoot at the tail end of his career, as a role player, and won a championship, even though Rubio has yet to show improvement at all since his rookie year. But yea sure he's going to be Jason Kidd.
But hey I'm sure I'm wasting my time, people will just say "OH MAN how can you think Rubio is the ONLY reason why the Wolves stink?"
Chris Paul is a pass first PG and he was is a damn efficient scorer. So was Steve Nash So was John Stockton. It's a mindset and Rubio has it to a fault and sure he doesn't have the ability to score but that's not why he is labeled a pass first PG. No Rubio isn't anywhere new the level of those HOF players but the fact that he doesn't score is not why he is labeled a pass first PG. Is Rubio's passing overrated? I'd be interested in that discussion but it's also somewhat nifty that he is able to make as many plays as he does despite being the worst scoring option on the floor for either team a high percentage of the time. Nash drew guys to him and set up guys because he was a significant offensive threat. If you didn't guard him he could go for 30. Rubio doesn't have that to his game but still somehow seems to do a pretty good job finding guys and has continued to do that while cutting down his TO's almost every year.
CoolbBreeze, what makes you think the Celtics winning was an aberration? They earned that championship and he was a key contributor. They would_not_have won without him.
I don't buy into your "go back in history and find all the PGs who were similar to Ricky that won championships" because even if there were only a few of them, the truth of the matter is, Ricky is a rare breed of PG. There's very few PGs in the NBA with a skill set as defined as his. What separates guys like Ricky and Rondo are that they do everything else at an elite level.
They asked a couple former players not long ago (including Chris Webber) who were asked if you can win a championship with Ricky Rubio as your PG. They both, without hesitation, said yes. Webber, as most of us Wolves fans know, isn't one to sugar coat things.
Again, end-game situations the top teams give it to their closer. We haven't always had one, but now we want Wiggins to be that. That's who should have the ball at the end of games. Look at Boston during their Championship year with Rondo. They did what they always did in Boston, give it to Paul Pierce at the end of games to close it out. That's why we have Wiggins.
Shumway wrote:Alright, I've got a genuine question for everyone. Cool, I'd be particularly interested in your response given your coaching background and your view that you cannot win consistently (in the playoffs) with a primary ballhandler who is not a threat to score.
And this is a genuine question because I don't know the answer. It's not a leading question where I'm implying that Ricky's flaws are not an issue.
How does Ricky generate Free Throws at a moderate rate given that he's such a poor shooter and a poor finisher at the rim? I can really understand the theory that in late game situations, opposition coaches should be forcing Rubio to beat us with outside shooting. But surely opposition teams should be instructed not to foul Ricky, because it gets him out of jail. With his ballhandling, is he just able to get to such dangerous spots more consistently, that the defence is forced to treat him as a threat? Is that sufficient to keep the defence honest and offset his poor shooting (at least to a large degree)? Or is it something that gets coached and prepared for during a 7 game series?
Quite a few questions in there in the end.
Ricky is very good at drawing fouls. It's a skill he has developed very well. But one thing you should look at is his 3 point play opportunities per shooting foul drawn. And then compare that to what Wiggins does, and you will see part of the problem. Also keep in mind that at the end of games officials tend to swallow their whistles a little bit. What was a foul in the middle of the 2nd quarter often isn't a foul in the 4th quarter when the refs want the players to decide the game. But trust me, in a 7 game series NBA coaches are going to force Ricky to beat them from the outside. If he can't develop the ability to make clutch outside shots, it is going to be very difficult to have him on the floor.
I know it was a long time ago but how does Rubio compare to Avery Johnson in 1999 where I remember the Wolves and every other team in the playoffs basically dared him to shoot in the playoffs and he hit enough of them for the Spurs to win a title?
That was a very different era. Heck, you can go back to 1987 and see teams daring Dennis Johnson to shoot from 17 feet. It's actually pretty remarkable to see the transformation in how the game is played.
Rondo in the 2008 (and 2010?) Finals is a more recent example though.
[Note: I remember watching those Avery Johnson teams and screaming for Avery Johnson to "just shoot it!" Avery was a career 48% shooter... and shot 49% in that playoff run. He averaged 17 ppg on 60% fg the previous postseason.]
I just don't see Rondo as a good comparison. While he clearly isn't a good distance shooter, he has a career FG% of 47%. He can score at the rim, and has also shown the ability to score in bunches when necessary....this is something Rubio just can't do. Heck, he has averaged over 19ppg in a playoff series several times in his career, including his 21ppg series against Mia in 2011 where he had a 44 point game. So while they are comparably bad long-distance shooters, Rondo has been able to contribute to his team as a scorer in a major way throughout his career. Heck, Rondo probably had more 20 point games in that one series with Miami than Rubio has had in his career.
I was referring specifically to how LA guarded him with Kobe Bryant in the 2008 Finals. Bryant backed way off and dared Rondo to shoot, much like teams did to Avery Johnson.
My point bringing up Acery Johnson was teams dared him to shoot it and at times he did and made enough shots. I didn't search to hard but I didn't find the data for where he took his shots till after that title season but based on his poor FT shooting and poor 3 point shot my guess is that he didnt take a lot of shots outside of the paint and the ones he did he generally shot a poor percentage like the data showed that I found. So teams may back off Rubio and dare him to shoot. Can he make enough of those shots or still make the plays needed? That's THE issue with Rubio right? Of course Rondo and Avery Johnson were playing with multiple future hall of famers. And other than making a reasonable jump to thinking Towns will be one of those guys...we have quite a ways to go before Rubio is the problem right?
People always point to Memphis and Tony Allen. Let's really look at that team for a minute when it comes to talent. Who was the other wing next to Allen? Who on that team is a sure fire HOFer? Was Tony Allen's inability to hit shots the only reason that team didn't advance? It sure was a part of it but I think every basketball mind and fan has said that Memphis was always that one player short of being a true contender and credit to them and make no mistake they are Avery good and talented team who has guys willing to make sacrifices to be a winning team but I would argue they lacked a little in the talent dept.
Questioning Rubio as the answer at PG is perfectly reasonable for basically all the reasons that are put forth but I also think it's quite possible you can win when it really matters with a guy that isn't a scorer. If Towns ends up as the starting C on this team and the rest of the lineup is competent in that regard Towns ridiculously versatile offensive game for a center could go a very long way to mitigate Rubio's weakness there especially since Towns seems to be a guy that literally score from anywhere on the floor and he is a 20 year old rookie.
So all the Wolves need is a HOF player or two next to Rubio to win...?
A bit facetious, but back to my original point: If the advanced stats have merit (and I'm sure they do to varying degrees), and Rubio is an above average PG... I ask again... just how fucking terrible is the rest of the team? And how bad has it been in the past?
The Wolves have been a bad team with Rubio as the PG. The one season they were at least close to average, 4th quarter ineptitude led to the team underachieving. Rubio was part of the reason with awful drops in production and efficiency.
That's all we have to go by. Can Rubio be a starter on a good team? Maybe. Is he a guy who helps you win? Dunno. Maybe. It's conjecture. I'm cool with those who think Rubio will be able to do those things.
I'm not cool with blanket statements about Rubio having the intangibles that proves he wins games. It just hasn't happened yet with any sort of regularity. That's simply wishful thinking at this point.
mrhockey89 wrote:CoolbBreeze, what makes you think the Celtics winning was an aberration? They earned that championship and he was a key contributor. They would_not_have won without him.
I don't buy into your "go back in history and find all the PGs who were similar to Ricky that won championships" because even if there were only a few of them, the truth of the matter is, Ricky is a rare breed of PG. There's very few PGs in the NBA with a skill set as defined as his. What separates guys like Ricky and Rondo are that they do everything else at an elite level.
They asked a couple former players not long ago (including Chris Webber) who were asked if you can win a championship with Ricky Rubio as your PG. They both, without hesitation, said yes. Webber, as most of us Wolves fans know, isn't one to sugar coat things.
Again, end-game situations the top teams give it to their closer. We haven't always had one, but now we want Wiggins to be that. That's who should have the ball at the end of games. Look at Boston during their Championship year with Rondo. They did what they always did in Boston, give it to Paul Pierce at the end of games to close it out. That's why we have Wiggins.
The Celtics winning wasn't an aberration, the fact they won with a poor shooting point guard was. And you're right, they wouldn't have won it without him, but name me one champion who won without their starting point guard?
Shumway wrote:Alright, I've got a genuine question for everyone. Cool, I'd be particularly interested in your response given your coaching background and your view that you cannot win consistently (in the playoffs) with a primary ballhandler who is not a threat to score.
And this is a genuine question because I don't know the answer. It's not a leading question where I'm implying that Ricky's flaws are not an issue.
How does Ricky generate Free Throws at a moderate rate given that he's such a poor shooter and a poor finisher at the rim? I can really understand the theory that in late game situations, opposition coaches should be forcing Rubio to beat us with outside shooting. But surely opposition teams should be instructed not to foul Ricky, because it gets him out of jail. With his ballhandling, is he just able to get to such dangerous spots more consistently, that the defence is forced to treat him as a threat? Is that sufficient to keep the defence honest and offset his poor shooting (at least to a large degree)? Or is it something that gets coached and prepared for during a 7 game series?
Quite a few questions in there in the end.
Ricky is very good at drawing fouls. It's a skill he has developed very well. But one thing you should look at is his 3 point play opportunities per shooting foul drawn. And then compare that to what Wiggins does, and you will see part of the problem. Also keep in mind that at the end of games officials tend to swallow their whistles a little bit. What was a foul in the middle of the 2nd quarter often isn't a foul in the 4th quarter when the refs want the players to decide the game. But trust me, in a 7 game series NBA coaches are going to force Ricky to beat them from the outside. If he can't develop the ability to make clutch outside shots, it is going to be very difficult to have him on the floor.
I know it was a long time ago but how does Rubio compare to Avery Johnson in 1999 where I remember the Wolves and every other team in the playoffs basically dared him to shoot in the playoffs and he hit enough of them for the Spurs to win a title?
That was a very different era. Heck, you can go back to 1987 and see teams daring Dennis Johnson to shoot from 17 feet. It's actually pretty remarkable to see the transformation in how the game is played.
Rondo in the 2008 (and 2010?) Finals is a more recent example though.
[Note: I remember watching those Avery Johnson teams and screaming for Avery Johnson to "just shoot it!" Avery was a career 48% shooter... and shot 49% in that playoff run. He averaged 17 ppg on 60% fg the previous postseason.]
I just don't see Rondo as a good comparison. While he clearly isn't a good distance shooter, he has a career FG% of 47%. He can score at the rim, and has also shown the ability to score in bunches when necessary....this is something Rubio just can't do. Heck, he has averaged over 19ppg in a playoff series several times in his career, including his 21ppg series against Mia in 2011 where he had a 44 point game. So while they are comparably bad long-distance shooters, Rondo has been able to contribute to his team as a scorer in a major way throughout his career. Heck, Rondo probably had more 20 point games in that one series with Miami than Rubio has had in his career.
I was referring specifically to how LA guarded him with Kobe Bryant in the 2008 Finals. Bryant backed way off and dared Rondo to shoot, much like teams did to Avery Johnson.
My point bringing up Acery Johnson was teams dared him to shoot it and at times he did and made enough shots. I didn't search to hard but I didn't find the data for where he took his shots till after that title season but based on his poor FT shooting and poor 3 point shot my guess is that he didnt take a lot of shots outside of the paint and the ones he did he generally shot a poor percentage like the data showed that I found. So teams may back off Rubio and dare him to shoot. Can he make enough of those shots or still make the plays needed? That's THE issue with Rubio right? Of course Rondo and Avery Johnson were playing with multiple future hall of famers. And other than making a reasonable jump to thinking Towns will be one of those guys...we have quite a ways to go before Rubio is the problem right?
People always point to Memphis and Tony Allen. Let's really look at that team for a minute when it comes to talent. Who was the other wing next to Allen? Who on that team is a sure fire HOFer? Was Tony Allen's inability to hit shots the only reason that team didn't advance? It sure was a part of it but I think every basketball mind and fan has said that Memphis was always that one player short of being a true contender and credit to them and make no mistake they are Avery good and talented team who has guys willing to make sacrifices to be a winning team but I would argue they lacked a little in the talent dept.
Questioning Rubio as the answer at PG is perfectly reasonable for basically all the reasons that are put forth but I also think it's quite possible you can win when it really matters with a guy that isn't a scorer. If Towns ends up as the starting C on this team and the rest of the lineup is competent in that regard Towns ridiculously versatile offensive game for a center could go a very long way to mitigate Rubio's weakness there especially since Towns seems to be a guy that literally score from anywhere on the floor and he is a 20 year old rookie.
So all the Wolves need is a HOF player or two next to Rubio to win...?
A bit facetious, but back to my original point: If the advanced stats have merit (and I'm sure they do to varying degrees), and Rubio is an above average PG... I ask again... just how fucking terrible is the rest of the team? And how bad has it been in the past?
The Wolves have been a bad team with Rubio as the PG. The one season they were at least close to average, 4th quarter ineptitude led to the team underachieving. Rubio was part of the reason with awful drops in production and efficiency.
That's all we have to go by. Can Rubio be a starter on a good team? Maybe. Is he a guy who helps you win? Dunno. Maybe. It's conjecture. I'm cool with those who think Rubio will be able to do those things.
I'm not cool with blanket statements about Rubio having the intangibles that proves he wins games. It just hasn't happened yet with any sort of regularity. That's simply wishful thinking at this point.
I agree with what you said here. I actually think we feel pretty close to the same way about Rubio. I tend to try and find ways to build him up a bit but not get too crazy.
alexftbl8181 wrote:Man Rubio is such a difference maker, such a winner. Since Rubio came into the league only 4 teams have missed the playoffs in that time. So pretty much every team and every point guard has made the playoffs except him.
So unless Rubio is worse than all of those point guards this is a great example of how team supersedes individual play. Since advance stats tell us that Ricky is a plus, we should strive to add more pluses to him and make a real run at this thing. I like where you are going with this.
Question is, how are you going to put more pluses around him. If you think your going to package Martin and Payne for some plus piece, your living in a fantasy. The Wolves have also never been big players in free agency.
It comes to a point where it looks like you've gone as far as you can with Rubio. I think everyone can agree there isn't some great leap Rubio has left in his potential. Maybe another PG somewhere else would thrive in this system playing with the Wolves players compared to where they are now, even if they aren't a "pass first point guard"
