They were never getting Giannis,
but they were considering MPJ. I don't know if that happens now. If I'm Brooklyn I want ALL the post Curry draft capital (so anything after 2028-29)
They were never getting Giannis,
You’re right about Donte. But on the other hand, he brings intensity and intangibles every minute he’s on the floor. That’s especially important for this Wolves team, which has by Finch’s admission, lacked consistent intensity. I also agree with you on Randle. I like what Randle brings to this team and we shouldn’t part with him lightly. But our front office should be open to trading him - especially now (or next summer) when his value will probably be at its peak.WildWolf2813 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 19, 2026 7:27 pmthe downside on our end is that we're gonna be super apprehensive to trading Randle even though we should remain open to the idea. Also, DiVincenzo tends to pick really bad times to have bad games. We got him because we thought he had a clutch gene and that hasn't manifested itself yet.Q-is-here wrote: ↑Mon Jan 19, 2026 7:00 pm At the end of last season, the KAT trade looked like a classic win-win type trade where both sides came out feeling good about it without one side clearly feeling better than the other. But lately it feels like we are trending up with two of the guys traded in our starting lineup and producing and KAT starting to go wobbly. Oh, and then there is that young kid named Joan Beringer.
The Thunder are in 1st place with the NBA’s best record (37-9) and best point differential (13.3) after winning the NBA championship last season. The Wolves are in 7th place with a 27-18 record and a 4.9 point differential after getting easily eliminated in the Conference Finals last season. So I’d say the answer to your question is no, we can’t call the Thunder an unserious team after a bad loss. At the same time, I think it’s very fair to reach a different conclusion with respect to the Wolves when you consider both the Wolves’ multiple losses to bad or mediocre teams and the broader context surrounding those losses.AussieWolf3 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 23, 2026 10:05 pm Can we call the Thunder an unserious team cause they lost a bad team or is that only the Wolves?
I was just being a smartass.Lipoli390 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 23, 2026 11:04 pmThe Thunder are in 1st place with the NBA’s best record (37-9) and best point differential (13.3) after winning the NBA championship last season. The Wolves are in 7th place with a 27-18 record and a 4.9 point differential after getting easily eliminated in the Conference Finals last season. So I’d say the answer to your question is no, we can’t call the Thunder an unserious team after a bad loss. At the same time, I think it’s very fair to reach a different conclusion with respect to the Wolves when you consider both the Wolves’ multiple losses to bad or mediocre teams and the broader context surrounding those losses.AussieWolf3 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 23, 2026 10:05 pm Can we call the Thunder an unserious team cause they lost a bad team or is that only the Wolves?
But in the Thunder's defense, they were missing a couple of key guys (Hartenstein and JDub), while the Wolves shit the bed with literally all of their key guys healthy. In fact, we were sort of encouraged by the Houston and San Antonio losses given that we had a couple guys out for those games, but then on the heels of those two losses you just can't lose to Utah and Chicago with a fully healthy starting lineup no matter how lame the bench plays.AussieWolf3 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 24, 2026 7:31 amI was just being a smartass.Lipoli390 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 23, 2026 11:04 pmThe Thunder are in 1st place with the NBA’s best record (37-9) and best point differential (13.3) after winning the NBA championship last season. The Wolves are in 7th place with a 27-18 record and a 4.9 point differential after getting easily eliminated in the Conference Finals last season. So I’d say the answer to your question is no, we can’t call the Thunder an unserious team after a bad loss. At the same time, I think it’s very fair to reach a different conclusion with respect to the Wolves when you consider both the Wolves’ multiple losses to bad or mediocre teams and the broader context surrounding those losses.AussieWolf3 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 23, 2026 10:05 pm Can we call the Thunder an unserious team cause they lost a bad team or is that only the Wolves?
I don't disagree with anything you said, but will add that the Wolves have the 2nd best record against sub .500 teams this year- I don't know where they currently stand- so while the losses have been frustrating they haven't been as frequent as it may seem.
All I was really saying is that bad stretches happen for good teams, even ones as seemingly indomitable as the Thunder.
The Wolves need to figure their shit out. It looked like the Atlanta game was the kick in the rear they needed, but that is very much in doubt right now.
Jake Paynting made a great observation that over the four game skid non Naz bench players have scored 35 total points on 37% shooting. That's a huge problem and in my opinion much more significant than anything going on with the top 6 in the rotation- even if I have concerns or grips with that group as well.