Rick Carlisle on the modern NBA

[Q-is-here]

Good stuff here from Rick:

"The NBA game has now become a play hard league. It's not just being top heavy with stars. Roster construction is changing... It's become more important to have more good players than be top heavy with two or three great players that get all the touches."

Obviously the Pacers are a perfect example of this. Haliburton is a great player, but not really in the conversation of MVP and he certainly doesn't take tons of shots. And their "second star", Pascal Siakim, doesn't stand out as being that much better than a lot of other team's second best players.

I would argue the Celtics from two seasons ago was also a team that had great depth and a super high floor. Tatum is also a great player, but not MVP-caliber. And it was Brown that actually won the Finals MVP that year!

The point being is that while it would be great for Ant to keep making strides toward becoming a top 5 player (I'd argue he's somewhere in the top 10-15 range right now), he doesn't HAVE to be that good for the Wolves to be a legit contender that can make the Finals.

[SameOldNudityDrew]

Good points. I love where the league's at right now. You really do need to put together 8 very good to great players at a minimum (and you should really have another 2 or 3 good ones just in case), everybody on your team has to play consistently hard, and your stars have to fit in with the rest of the roster. You can't just cobble together big names and assume it'll work out. There's been some good parity in recent years, and we've got continuing stars like Jokic, Giannis, and Luka and upcoming stars like Wembanyama to replace Steph, KD, and LeBron as they age out. If Ant can join Wemby as a star on that level, great. But even if not (and I think Wemby is going to be dominant soon), I do think there's still a chance to win it all with a great roster.

[Monster]

Good stuff here from Rick:

"The NBA game has now become a play hard league. It's not just being top heavy with stars. Roster construction is changing... It's become more important to have more good players than be top heavy with two or three great players that get all the touches."

Obviously the Pacers are a perfect example of this. Haliburton is a great player, but not really in the conversation of MVP and he certainly doesn't take tons of shots. And their "second star", Pascal Siakim, doesn't stand out as being that much better than a lot of other team's second best players.

I would argue the Celtics from two seasons ago was also a team that had great depth and a super high floor. Tatum is also a great player, but not MVP-caliber. And it was Brown that actually won the Finals MVP that year!

The point being is that while it would be great for Ant to keep making strides toward becoming a top 5 player (I'd argue he's somewhere in the top 10-15 range right now), he doesn't HAVE to be that good for the Wolves to be a legit contender that can make the Finals.

Boston was mentioned later in the article as a similar type team.

Carlisle knows that he is talking about. He coached the Mavs to their last title and that team kinda fit this model as well. That was the best TEAM in the NBA that year. They beat 3 HOFers in the finals. They weren't as deep as some of these other teams but the concept of the way they played was pretty similar.

This just shows how there are multiple ways to build out a roster. It's not just about adding the most talent whether it's high end or good starters or depth guys but you have to have talent. Can you get that talent to mesh and can you acquire guys that fit.

[Q-is-here]

Good stuff here from Rick:

"The NBA game has now become a play hard league. It's not just being top heavy with stars. Roster construction is changing... It's become more important to have more good players than be top heavy with two or three great players that get all the touches."

Obviously the Pacers are a perfect example of this. Haliburton is a great player, but not really in the conversation of MVP and he certainly doesn't take tons of shots. And their "second star", Pascal Siakim, doesn't stand out as being that much better than a lot of other team's second best players.

I would argue the Celtics from two seasons ago was also a team that had great depth and a super high floor. Tatum is also a great player, but not MVP-caliber. And it was Brown that actually won the Finals MVP that year!

The point being is that while it would be great for Ant to keep making strides toward becoming a top 5 player (I'd argue he's somewhere in the top 10-15 range right now), he doesn't HAVE to be that good for the Wolves to be a legit contender that can make the Finals.

Boston was mentioned later in the article as a similar type team.

Carlisle knows that he is talking about. He coached the Mavs to their last title and that team kinda fit this model as well. That was the best TEAM in the NBA that year. They beat 3 HOFers in the finals. They weren't as deep as some of these other teams but the concept of the way they played was pretty similar.

This just shows how there are multiple ways to build out a roster. It's not just about adding the most talent whether it's high end or good starters or depth guys but you have to have talent. Can you get that talent to mesh and can you acquire guys that fit.

Exactly. It certainly helps if you have a top 3 or 4 player like Jokic or SGA. But it's not an absolute requirement.

Fortunately the Wolves still have two paths available to get to another level. The first is Ant truly does become an MVP-caliber player. The second is he gets to no higher than a top 5-10 player, but then is surrounded by an elite and deep supporting cast that all fits together. I guess a third path is that both of those things happen, in which case more than one title may be in store ala Golden State. But I would be fine with just one at this point!

[Monster]

Good stuff here from Rick:

"The NBA game has now become a play hard league. It's not just being top heavy with stars. Roster construction is changing... It's become more important to have more good players than be top heavy with two or three great players that get all the touches."

Obviously the Pacers are a perfect example of this. Haliburton is a great player, but not really in the conversation of MVP and he certainly doesn't take tons of shots. And their "second star", Pascal Siakim, doesn't stand out as being that much better than a lot of other team's second best players.

I would argue the Celtics from two seasons ago was also a team that had great depth and a super high floor. Tatum is also a great player, but not MVP-caliber. And it was Brown that actually won the Finals MVP that year!

The point being is that while it would be great for Ant to keep making strides toward becoming a top 5 player (I'd argue he's somewhere in the top 10-15 range right now), he doesn't HAVE to be that good for the Wolves to be a legit contender that can make the Finals.

Boston was mentioned later in the article as a similar type team.

Carlisle knows that he is talking about. He coached the Mavs to their last title and that team kinda fit this model as well. That was the best TEAM in the NBA that year. They beat 3 HOFers in the finals. They weren't as deep as some of these other teams but the concept of the way they played was pretty similar.

This just shows how there are multiple ways to build out a roster. It's not just about adding the most talent whether it's high end or good starters or depth guys but you have to have talent. Can you get that talent to mesh and can you acquire guys that fit.

Exactly. It certainly helps if you have a top 3 or 4 player like Jokic or SGA. But it's not an absolute requirement.

Fortunately the Wolves still have two paths available to get to another level. The first is Ant truly does become an MVP-caliber player. The second is he gets to no higher than a top 5-10 player, but then is surrounded by an elite and deep supporting cast that all fits together. I guess a third path is that both of those things happen, in which case more than one title may be in store ala Golden State. But I would be fine with just one at this point!

I feel like the Wolves last year was a version of the OKC Indiana model. Where they have a pretty deep and talented team. The thing is that the Wolves weren't there yet. Both of those rosters had more continuity going for them and players had more experience than the Wolves 3 rookies. NAW was definitely like one of the guys those teams played legit minutes in the playoffs but now he has moved on and the Wolves need other guys to step up and there are signs other guys will be up to the task.

I'll add that FNG has mentioned numerous times Conley wasn't healthy last offseason. Apparently he didn't just have the wrist issue he took a while to get his lower leg injury right also so basically last offseason he didn't really work on his game or his body much. This offseason he is fully healthy and should be ready to go. He has also had time to play with Randle and likely has a better sense of how that dynamic works. We might actually see a bit of a bounce back season from Conley instead of one where he looks worse. If he can hit his 2 point shots again that will help even though I Dont expect him to take all that many.

[Q-is-here]

Boston was mentioned later in the article as a similar type team.

Carlisle knows that he is talking about. He coached the Mavs to their last title and that team kinda fit this model as well. That was the best TEAM in the NBA that year. They beat 3 HOFers in the finals. They weren't as deep as some of these other teams but the concept of the way they played was pretty similar.

This just shows how there are multiple ways to build out a roster. It's not just about adding the most talent whether it's high end or good starters or depth guys but you have to have talent. Can you get that talent to mesh and can you acquire guys that fit.

Exactly. It certainly helps if you have a top 3 or 4 player like Jokic or SGA. But it's not an absolute requirement.

Fortunately the Wolves still have two paths available to get to another level. The first is Ant truly does become an MVP-caliber player. The second is he gets to no higher than a top 5-10 player, but then is surrounded by an elite and deep supporting cast that all fits together. I guess a third path is that both of those things happen, in which case more than one title may be in store ala Golden State. But I would be fine with just one at this point!

I feel like the Wolves last year was a version of the OKC Indiana model. Where they have a pretty deep and talented team. The thing is that the Wolves weren't there yet. Both of those rosters had more continuity going for them and players had more experience than the Wolves 3 rookies. NAW was definitely like one of the guys those teams played legit minutes in the playoffs but now he has moved on and the Wolves need other guys to step up and there are signs other guys will be up to the task.

I'll add that FNG has mentioned numerous times Conley wasn't healthy last offseason. Apparently he didn't just have the wrist issue he took a while to get his lower leg injury right also so basically last offseason he didn't really work on his game or his body much. This offseason he is fully healthy and should be ready to go. He has also had time to play with Randle and likely has a better sense of how that dynamic works. We might actually see a bit of a bounce back season from Conley instead of one where he looks worse. If he can hit his 2 point shots again that will help even though I Dont expect him to take all that many.

I think the Wolves were more like the Knicks than Indiana or OKC. Ant is a star somewhere on the Brunson tier (may be a little higher) and we tended to stick with a very tight rotation just like New York. The difference is that the Wolves actually had the talent available to expand the rotation, but Finch chose not to do it.

Now as we enter the 2025-26 season, it's pretty clear that Finch will expand the rotation to at least 9 guys. I'm hoping he dabbles with 10, as I think a guy like Clark can be very effective in limited minutes.

[Monster]

Exactly. It certainly helps if you have a top 3 or 4 player like Jokic or SGA. But it's not an absolute requirement.

Fortunately the Wolves still have two paths available to get to another level. The first is Ant truly does become an MVP-caliber player. The second is he gets to no higher than a top 5-10 player, but then is surrounded by an elite and deep supporting cast that all fits together. I guess a third path is that both of those things happen, in which case more than one title may be in store ala Golden State. But I would be fine with just one at this point!

I feel like the Wolves last year was a version of the OKC Indiana model. Where they have a pretty deep and talented team. The thing is that the Wolves weren't there yet. Both of those rosters had more continuity going for them and players had more experience than the Wolves 3 rookies. NAW was definitely like one of the guys those teams played legit minutes in the playoffs but now he has moved on and the Wolves need other guys to step up and there are signs other guys will be up to the task.

I'll add that FNG has mentioned numerous times Conley wasn't healthy last offseason. Apparently he didn't just have the wrist issue he took a while to get his lower leg injury right also so basically last offseason he didn't really work on his game or his body much. This offseason he is fully healthy and should be ready to go. He has also had time to play with Randle and likely has a better sense of how that dynamic works. We might actually see a bit of a bounce back season from Conley instead of one where he looks worse. If he can hit his 2 point shots again that will help even though I Dont expect him to take all that many.

I think the Wolves were more like the Knicks than Indiana or OKC. Ant is a star somewhere on the Brunson tier (may be a little higher) and we tended to stick with a very tight rotation just like New York. The difference is that the Wolves actually had the talent available to expand the rotation, but Finch chose not to do it.

Now as we enter the 2025-26 season, it's pretty clear that Finch will expand the rotation to at least 9 guys. I'm hoping he dabbles with 10, as I think a guy like Clark can be very effective in limited minutes.

The Knicks played their starters way more minutes than the Wolves did. Towns played the 5th least minutes per game at 35.5. The Wolves only had 3 guys play over 30mpg Randle played 35.5 minutes. That's a reasonably big difference. The Knicks really only played 7 guys every game and the Wolves had a legit 8 man rotation. Maybe like the Wolves the Knicks had the talent to play a deeper roster but they absolutely didn't and that's likely a big reason why Thibs was let go.

[Q-is-here]

I feel like the Wolves last year was a version of the OKC Indiana model. Where they have a pretty deep and talented team. The thing is that the Wolves weren't there yet. Both of those rosters had more continuity going for them and players had more experience than the Wolves 3 rookies. NAW was definitely like one of the guys those teams played legit minutes in the playoffs but now he has moved on and the Wolves need other guys to step up and there are signs other guys will be up to the task.

I'll add that FNG has mentioned numerous times Conley wasn't healthy last offseason. Apparently he didn't just have the wrist issue he took a while to get his lower leg injury right also so basically last offseason he didn't really work on his game or his body much. This offseason he is fully healthy and should be ready to go. He has also had time to play with Randle and likely has a better sense of how that dynamic works. We might actually see a bit of a bounce back season from Conley instead of one where he looks worse. If he can hit his 2 point shots again that will help even though I Dont expect him to take all that many.

I think the Wolves were more like the Knicks than Indiana or OKC. Ant is a star somewhere on the Brunson tier (may be a little higher) and we tended to stick with a very tight rotation just like New York. The difference is that the Wolves actually had the talent available to expand the rotation, but Finch chose not to do it.

Now as we enter the 2025-26 season, it's pretty clear that Finch will expand the rotation to at least 9 guys. I'm hoping he dabbles with 10, as I think a guy like Clark can be very effective in limited minutes.

The Knicks played their starters way more minutes than the Wolves did. Towns played the 5th least minutes per game at 35.5. The Wolves only had 3 guys play over 30mpg Randle played 35.5 minutes. That's a reasonably big difference. The Knicks really only played 7 guys every game and the Wolves had a legit 8 man rotation. Maybe like the Wolves the Knicks had the talent to play a deeper roster but they absolutely didn't and that's likely a big reason why Thibs was let go.

Right, I understand the Knicks were pretty extreme, but I'm just saying the Wolves were closer to that end of the spectrum than the OKC end.

[60WinTim]

I feel like the Wolves last year was a version of the OKC Indiana model. Where they have a pretty deep and talented team. The thing is that the Wolves weren't there yet. Both of those rosters had more continuity going for them and players had more experience than the Wolves 3 rookies. NAW was definitely like one of the guys those teams played legit minutes in the playoffs but now he has moved on and the Wolves need other guys to step up and there are signs other guys will be up to the task.

I'll add that FNG has mentioned numerous times Conley wasn't healthy last offseason. Apparently he didn't just have the wrist issue he took a while to get his lower leg injury right also so basically last offseason he didn't really work on his game or his body much. This offseason he is fully healthy and should be ready to go. He has also had time to play with Randle and likely has a better sense of how that dynamic works. We might actually see a bit of a bounce back season from Conley instead of one where he looks worse. If he can hit his 2 point shots again that will help even though I Dont expect him to take all that many.

I think the Wolves were more like the Knicks than Indiana or OKC. Ant is a star somewhere on the Brunson tier (may be a little higher) and we tended to stick with a very tight rotation just like New York. The difference is that the Wolves actually had the talent available to expand the rotation, but Finch chose not to do it.

Now as we enter the 2025-26 season, it's pretty clear that Finch will expand the rotation to at least 9 guys. I'm hoping he dabbles with 10, as I think a guy like Clark can be very effective in limited minutes.

The Knicks played their starters way more minutes than the Wolves did. Towns played the 5th least minutes per game at 35.5. The Wolves only had 3 guys play over 30mpg Randle played 35.5 minutes. That's a reasonably big difference. The Knicks really only played 7 guys every game and the Wolves had a legit 8 man rotation. Maybe like the Wolves the Knicks had the talent to play a deeper roster but they absolutely didn't and that's likely a big reason why Thibs was let go.

I think Finch deserves a little pass on his tight rotation last year:

- Randle and Donte were new pieces at the start of training camp that took a LONG time to figure out how to blend in and play well.
- The 3 guys we wished played more -- Dilly, Shannon and Clark -- were all rookies, and rookies rarely contribute to winning.
- In addition to Donte's and Randle's early struggles, Conley and Jaden both got off to terrible starts.
- And in a super-competitive Western Conference, the Wolves were struggling to stay afloat for more than half the season -- there was little opportunity to try and develop rookies while also trying to win.
- Finch did try to find 9th man minutes, start with Minott. It just didn't work out very well.

All those things combined to put Finch in a tough spot -- he was desperate for wins.

This season should be different. Continuity for the Wolves should help them start the season strong, which will loosen the reigns for Finch's rotation. The 3 rookies are no longer rookies and have established a base line for what Finch can expect from them. I expect the Wolves to be a top-4 team in the West all season long.

[LongGame]

I think Carlisle is spot on with respect to roster construction in today's NBA. I think it is becoming harder and harder to win with multiple max players as you need to spread the cap deeper through the roster (unless you are a destination team where veterans go to graze looking for a championship). OKC will obviously be very good next year and for the foreseeable future, but it will be interesting to see what happens to their roster and overall success as they get deeper into an era with three max players (only one of which would likely ever be considered an MVP candidate). This may bode well for more NBA-ready, older draft picks (ala Shannon) to fill out roster spots on reasonable 4 year rookie contracts.