Just Win, Baby - Cool - Spurs at Wolves GDT

[Q-is-here]

Great win against a Spurs team that is so much more impressive than last year. The hour delay to repair the court worked out well for us, as we were able to usher family out the door and enjoy the entire game (had to miss the Vikings game though because of the family party!). Really fun game, but not without a lot of frustration. Jim Pete might be considered repetitive in his criticism of the ball stopping, but he's right. It was nothing short of painful to watch Ant slowing the game down after 12 minutes of truly entertaining basketball courtesy of Ju and the 4 bench guys. Did Ant not learn anything watching his teammates moving the ball around and getting open shots?

And that brings me to Randle. He has the reputation of being a ball stopper, but I guess I would call him a "situational ball stopper". Put his out there with the four bench guys, and there is no ball stopping in his game at all...it's run, run, run. But pair him with Ant, and the offense becomes dysfunctional and unwatchable. I can understand the sentiment in the "roster" thread that we have to move Ju because he doesn't work with Ant. But I'm still clinging to hope that Ant can learn to play differently and run and pass like Ju+bench 4 do. Ant is our most talented player, and he should be able to adapt to a more team-oriented style of play. Imagine how much fun it would be to watch this team if our most athletic player was out there playing like the scrubs did at the beginning of the second quarter! Can our most athletic player adapt to a different style of play, or are we going to continue to make the rest of the roster adapt to Ant. I for one am tired of watching 4 guys stand around while Ant dribbles. We fans shouldn't have to celebrate when our highest-scoring player goes to the bench because we know we are going to be entertained. It's an odd situation for us fans.

Ant is who he is and he's not going to become someone we hope him to be. We all love "beautiful basketball" with moving, screening, cutting, and passing without the ball hardly ever being dribbled. But that's never been Ant and never will be Ant. There is absolutely a place for a supremely talented isolation player, but they need great shooters that are perfectly comfortable positioning themselves beyond the 3-point line and being shot-ready at all times.

NAW, Reid, DDV, and Conley are all pretty comfortable spending offensive possessions spread out beyond the arc and are (mostly) capable of hitting the open 3. Randle, Rudy, and Jaden - THREE of our starters! - not so much.

I suspect you're right, Q, that Ant is probably not going to become someone we hope him to be. But I hope we're both wrong about that, because I think a ball stopping Ant significantly lowers the ceiling for this roster. It's more than not being enjoyable to watch...it also ripples through the rest of the roster. Antonio Daniels said it well a few days ago on NBA Radio. Everyone plays better at both ends of the court when everybody touches the ball on most possessions...when everyone is moving and cutting and passing, it carries over to the defensive side of the ball. Movement on the offensive side of the court begets movement on the defensive side. But when 4 players are mostly standing around on offense watching one guy dribble and trying to either penetrate or step back for a 3-pointer for 24 seconds, that inactivity carries over to defense too. The game changed yesterday when all the starters except Ju were benched...everyone was running and touching the ball on offense, and the activity level on defense was terrific. A case in point is Rudy. There was a stat last night that highlighted how good our record is when Rudy gets 7 or more shots, and how bad it is when he doesn't. It's not because Rudy is an offensive machine...it's because his activity level on defense is much higher when he is also involved in the offense. And an active Rudy often leads to victories.

Ant is talented, so I think he is capable of playing a different style of basketball if he wanted. But right now PPG, not passing, is his key to continuing to get as many commercials as he can. Ant needs to decide...does he want to maximize his PPG while his teammates stand idly by, or does he want to win more games. He's now in danger of falling into last place among the 9-man rotation in net rating on basketball reference...he's just one point ahead of Jaden, who is obviously not having a good season, and Divo, who was downright horrible until mid-December. Think about that...our best player and face of the franchise is that close to having the worst net rating in the rotation!

Ant has to change if we're going to challenge for a championship.

FNG, I feel like I have mentioned this to you about a gazillion times over the years, but the b-ball reference Net Rating you are using is not the actual per 100 possession performance of the team while Ant is on the court. Simply scroll down a bit further and you will see how he is actually doing in terms of +/- per 100 possessions and it turns out he is the best among the starters. So it's actually the opposite of the narrative you are trying to create here! You can verify at NBA.com, which may be slightly different, but tells a similar story.

I'm not suggesting that Ant doesn't need to improve as a passer. But he isn't going to fundamentally change who he is as a b-ball player. I think he needs to keep improving AND the front office needs to get the pieces around him that fit better with his strengths and weaknesses. I actually think DDV, NAW, and Reid are three of those pieces and they all come off the bench!

[FNG]

Q, we have discussed ORtg and DRtg on basketball reference several times, but I'm still confused as to why it's not a valid measure. I've read the very complicated explanation of how it is calculated, and it seems to me that any player who ranked high in ORtg and low in DRtg would be a player likely to be a strong contributor to winning. And if you take a sample of players that you conclude are very good players, they are very likely to have a high net rating using this measure (I just randomly picked 10 players I admire, and they all were very strong in net rating). But Ant is definitely an outlier...he invariably shows up very poor in net rating. We all have different measures that we favor in evaluating a player's worth, and when a certain measure correlates strongly with my personal opinion, I tend to gravitate to that measure as one of my go to's.
I would like Ant to measure up to the stars of the league in this rating, and I think his style of play is holding him back. It's okay if you think differently about this though!

I am confused about what you mean when you say I should scroll down in b-ball ref to see the measure that shows him the best of our starters in +/- per 100. Where do I find that, and why do you find that a superior measure to the one I prefer?

[Q-is-here]

Q, we have discussed ORtg and DRtg on basketball reference several times, but I'm still confused as to why it's not a valid measure. I've read the very complicated explanation of how it is calculated, and it seems to me that any player who ranked high in ORtg and low in DRtg would be a player likely to be a strong contributor to winning. And if you take a sample of players that you conclude are very good players, they are very likely to have a high net rating using this measure (I just randomly picked 10 players I admire, and they all were very strong in net rating). But Ant is definitely an outlier...he invariably shows up very poor in net rating. We all have different measures that we favor in evaluating a player's worth, and when a certain measure correlates strongly with my personal opinion, I tend to gravitate to that measure as one of my go to's.
I would like Ant to measure up to the stars of the league in this rating, and I think his style of play is holding him back. It's okay if you think differently about this though!

I am confused about what you mean when you say I should scroll down in b-ball ref to see the measure that shows him the best of our starters in +/- per 100. Where do I find that, and why do you find that a superior measure to the one I prefer?

When folks use the term "net rating", like Dane Moore and other pundits, podcasters, beat writers, etc., they are ALWAYS using the metric of team minus opponent points per 100 possessions while said player is on the court. I respect that you like the b-ball reference Ortg minus Drtg, but it is a misnomer to call that "net rating" when literally no one else ever uses that data set for it.

To get to what I'm referring to in b-ball reference, go to the "Play-by-Play" section under Roster & Stats for the Wolves. You will see a column heading that says +/- Per 100 Poss OnCourt. That's the Net Rating. I get my version of it from NBA.com. Unsurprisingly, our bench leads the way. But among starters, Ant's is the best, albeit not by much.

In NBA.com, go to Player Stats/Advanced Stats and they will display Ortg, Drtg, and Net Rating there as well. It is also based on team vs. opponent points per 100 possessions while the player is on the court.

[Lipoli390]

Ant is who he is and he's not going to become someone we hope him to be. We all love "beautiful basketball" with moving, screening, cutting, and passing without the ball hardly ever being dribbled. But that's never been Ant and never will be Ant. There is absolutely a place for a supremely talented isolation player, but they need great shooters that are perfectly comfortable positioning themselves beyond the 3-point line and being shot-ready at all times.

NAW, Reid, DDV, and Conley are all pretty comfortable spending offensive possessions spread out beyond the arc and are (mostly) capable of hitting the open 3. Randle, Rudy, and Jaden - THREE of our starters! - not so much.

I suspect you're right, Q, that Ant is probably not going to become someone we hope him to be. But I hope we're both wrong about that, because I think a ball stopping Ant significantly lowers the ceiling for this roster. It's more than not being enjoyable to watch...it also ripples through the rest of the roster. Antonio Daniels said it well a few days ago on NBA Radio. Everyone plays better at both ends of the court when everybody touches the ball on most possessions...when everyone is moving and cutting and passing, it carries over to the defensive side of the ball. Movement on the offensive side of the court begets movement on the defensive side. But when 4 players are mostly standing around on offense watching one guy dribble and trying to either penetrate or step back for a 3-pointer for 24 seconds, that inactivity carries over to defense too. The game changed yesterday when all the starters except Ju were benched...everyone was running and touching the ball on offense, and the activity level on defense was terrific. A case in point is Rudy. There was a stat last night that highlighted how good our record is when Rudy gets 7 or more shots, and how bad it is when he doesn't. It's not because Rudy is an offensive machine...it's because his activity level on defense is much higher when he is also involved in the offense. And an active Rudy often leads to victories.

Ant is talented, so I think he is capable of playing a different style of basketball if he wanted. But right now PPG, not passing, is his key to continuing to get as many commercials as he can. Ant needs to decide...does he want to maximize his PPG while his teammates stand idly by, or does he want to win more games. He's now in danger of falling into last place among the 9-man rotation in net rating on basketball reference...he's just one point ahead of Jaden, who is obviously not having a good season, and Divo, who was downright horrible until mid-December. Think about that...our best player and face of the franchise is that close to having the worst net rating in the rotation!

Ant has to change if we're going to challenge for a championship.

FNG, I feel like I have mentioned this to you about a gazillion times over the years, but the b-ball reference Net Rating you are using is not the actual per 100 possession performance of the team while Ant is on the court. Simply scroll down a bit further and you will see how he is actually doing in terms of +/- per 100 possessions and it turns out he is the best among the starters. So it's actually the opposite of the narrative you are trying to create here! You can verify at NBA.com, which may be slightly different, but tells a similar story.

I'm not suggesting that Ant doesn't need to improve as a passer. But he isn't going to fundamentally change who he is as a b-ball player. I think he needs to keep improving AND the front office needs to get the pieces around him that fit better with his strengths and weaknesses. I actually think DDV, NAW, and Reid are three of those pieces and they all come off the bench!

This discussion between the two of you has helped me understand net rating. Q’s explanation is compelling when it comes to evaluating Ant. As Q noted, Ant needs to improve. But the last thing Ant should do is change his focus from scoring to passing. He’s a born scorer. That’s what he does best and that’s what this team needs the most. SGA scored 40 points the other night; that’s what I want to see from Ant. Michael Jordan still holds the all-time record for PPG. He has 6 championship rings. Kobe was all about PPG. Edwards in is the mold of MJ and Kobe. We need him to score points. What we need are the right players around him to optimize his ability to score. We were a title contender last season with the same Ant we have this season. But we had KAT instead of Randle, last season’s Mike Conley instead of this season’s Mike Conley, and a true PG in Kyle Anderson instead of DDV. And yet, even last season’s roster wasn’t optimal.

So yes, Ant needs to improve. But this team’s decline from last season isn’t attributable to Ant. It’s the same Ant as last season. The team around Ant, however, is significantly different.