Wolves Young Core

[Lipoli390]

We just saw Wiggins dribble the ball of his own foot the end of the 3rd. But I can't get on Andrew for that. He is what he is at this point in his career- a terrible ball handler by NBA wing standards. The issue I have is with Thibs and his stubborn insistence on using Wiggins as a primary ball handler.

I can't believe you went there today. Well, actually I can. You do it after every game. But you picked out the one bad play he had while handling the ball and had to make an issue of it. I wish all of our players could be so perfect that one mistake is worth mentioning.

Goodness gracious this is tired.

I've never seen any poster before so defensive about a single player. That one play illustrated Andrew's poor ball-handling. But note that I didn't blame Wiggins at all for that play, instead putting the onus on Thibs for continuing to put a square peg in a round hole. Having him bring the ball up full court at that point in the game seemed like a bad idea at the time and the result was fairly predictable. I had nothing else bad to say about Wiggins and clearly didn't blame him at all for the loss as you might have noted in the game thread. So you really need to relax. Try Valium.

[Lipoli390]

I think if they are going to be our core three everyone else we sign or put around them have to be amazing one on one and team defenders. I don't the Ricky and G are that although both have merits on the defensive side of the ball.

It will be interesting to see who we end up surrounding our core three with. Ricky and G are still question marks. I think Ricky is the bigger question mark of the two if only because I think Thibs really likes G and may not be as high on Ricky. As long as our core three keep developing this season and next off season, I see good things happening long term for this franchise. Q makes a good point questioning whether Wiggins and LaVine can co-exist long term. I think they can, but I see Q's point.

[thedoper]

I think if they are going to be our core three everyone else we sign or put around them have to be amazing one on one and team defenders. I don't the Ricky and G are that although both have merits on the defensive side of the ball.

It will be interesting to see who we end up surrounding our core three with. Ricky and G are still question marks. I think Ricky is the bigger question mark of the two if only because I think Thibs really likes G and may not be as high on Ricky. As long as our core three keep developing this season and next off season, I see good things happening long term for this franchise. Q makes a good point questioning whether Wiggins and LaVine can co-exist long term. I think they can, but I see Q's point.

I hope they can coexist. They are talented guys. I think G has to stay. I just wish that there was a better role for him. I haven't liked Thibs having him guard centers. He's just not built like a starting center.

[Lipoli390]

We just saw Wiggins dribble the ball of his own foot the end of the 3rd. But I can't get on Andrew for that. He is what he is at this point in his career- a terrible ball handler by NBA wing standards. The issue I have is with Thibs and his stubborn insistence on using Wiggins as a primary ball handler.

I can't believe you went there today. Well, actually I can. You do it after every game. But you picked out the one bad play he had while handling the ball and had to make an issue of it. I wish all of our players could be so perfect that one mistake is worth mentioning.

Goodness gracious this is tired.

Yeah I'll take 4 assists to 2 turnovers any day with Andrew running 20% of the plays. The real question is why did Thibs take the ball out of Wiggins hands in the 4th? No FGA in the 4th for our best 4th quarter scorer. That was strange to me. Force feeding Wiggins was what got it close in the 3rd.

Wiggins will always be divisive here. Just like Rubio. I think it's like falling in or out of love. At first glance many of us loved Rubio and still want those feelings to be true (ie he plays with passion, he is creative, high BBIQ). Those first feelings are powerful, they echo what has been said about Wiggins from the beginning, Wiggins is lazy, has no vision, no handle. As I see it at least Wiggins is improving. If Rubio had half of Wiggins' off season work ethic he may have developed a jumper by now. Rubio keeps getting worse yet elects to ride the pine for Spain every summer rather than really developing strength or a jumper. This season has been strange by all accounts. Things go wrong and we slip into the same narratives.

Here's how I see the season:

Wiggins only slightly improved - This is frustrating based on his core skills
KAT regressed statistically so far - this is frustrating -
Lavine made huge strides offensively but still is an awful defender - this may be the only positive thing so far this year
G is a great glue guy but is not a starter (as I see it) and is definitely not a starting center
Ricky has regressed - This is Ricky's fault not Thibs sorry I can't see it any other way
Our bench needs help

We can't expect to be much better if the improvements of our core three is only slight. One great signing could change this team around. I think that could be our bench but I hope it is in G's spot as a starter. G could play either big in the second unit.

Excellent analysis, Doper. I disagree slightly on G in that I think he can be a starter on this team, but I wouldn't fall on my sword over that. I also disagree on Ricky. I think it's a combination of Ricky and how he's being used. He's been terrific the past couple weeks, looking more like his former self. I think LaVine has improved defensively, but to me that means he's gone from awful to pretty bad. I think part of it with our core three is adjusting to a new head coach. That may have set them back a bit.

I agree with you that the Wolves should have force-fed Wiggins in the 4th. My beef is having him run the offense from the top of the key. It's generally a low percentage approach given where Andrew's skills are at this point in his career. But I definitely want the offensive to find ways to get Wiggins the ball on cuts to the basket, pick and rolls and post ups.

[Lipoli390]

I think if they are going to be our core three everyone else we sign or put around them have to be amazing one on one and team defenders. I don't the Ricky and G are that although both have merits on the defensive side of the ball.

It will be interesting to see who we end up surrounding our core three with. Ricky and G are still question marks. I think Ricky is the bigger question mark of the two if only because I think Thibs really likes G and may not be as high on Ricky. As long as our core three keep developing this season and next off season, I see good things happening long term for this franchise. Q makes a good point questioning whether Wiggins and LaVine can co-exist long term. I think they can, but I see Q's point.

I hope they can coexist. They are talented guys. I think G has to stay. I just wish that there was a better role for him. I haven't liked Thibs having him guard centers. He's just not built like a starting center.

I agree with you completely on G guarding centers. He gets physically dominated.

[Coolbreeze44]

We just saw Wiggins dribble the ball of his own foot the end of the 3rd. But I can't get on Andrew for that. He is what he is at this point in his career- a terrible ball handler by NBA wing standards. The issue I have is with Thibs and his stubborn insistence on using Wiggins as a primary ball handler.

I can't believe you went there today. Well, actually I can. You do it after every game. But you picked out the one bad play he had while handling the ball and had to make an issue of it. I wish all of our players could be so perfect that one mistake is worth mentioning.

Goodness gracious this is tired.

I've never seen any poster before so defensive about a single player. That one play illustrated Andrew's poor ball-handling. But note that I didn't blame Wiggins at all for that play, instead putting the onus on Thibs for continuing to put a square peg in a round hole. Having him bring the ball up full court at that point in the game seemed like a bad idea at the time and the result was fairly predictable. I had nothing else bad to say about Wiggins and clearly didn't blame him at all for the loss as you might have noted in the game thread. So you really need to relax. Try Valium.

Lip, you play that card after every game. It's clear you have an agenda that you go back to time after time. Andrew handled the ball very well today. I'm not sure what's worse, my defending him or you constantly poking the same hole in his game. Just give it a rest. Stop listening to the morons in your section at games.

[60WinTim]

I have seen Britt Robson make this comment a couple of times: "The Big Three are less than the sum of their parts."

Pretty hard to argue against that observation. But the hope is they get there.

[thedoper]

I have seen Britt Robson make this comment a couple of times: "The Big Three are less than the sum of their parts."

Pretty hard to argue against that observation. But the hope is they get there.

This is just it. It's just inconsistency with all of them. The highs are so insanely good that we just want it all now. Patience is a hard thing.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

I have seen Britt Robson make this comment a couple of times: "The Big Three are less than the sum of their parts."

Pretty hard to argue against that observation. But the hope is they get there.

Right, that's part of my point earlier. Can these three become equal to or greater than the sum of their parts?

Take these three hypotheticals:

1. KAT for Rudy Gobert
2. Wiggins for Jimmy Butler
3. LaVine for Otto Porter, Jr.

(I think Wiggins and LaVine are both best played at SG, thus both trades involve getting a SF back).

All of you have one or more of your favorites here and will violently disagree with the trade hypothesized, but considering the fact we are still KEEPING two of the three other "big three", are the guys we get in exchange more complimentary to the other two? I say it's worth pondering, if not actually acting upon.

[thedoper]

I have seen Britt Robson make this comment a couple of times: "The Big Three are less than the sum of their parts."

Pretty hard to argue against that observation. But the hope is they get there.

Right, that's part of my point earlier. Can these three become equal to or greater than the sum of their parts?

Take these three hypotheticals:

1. KAT for Rudy Gobert
2. Wiggins for Jimmy Butler
3. LaVine for Otto Porter, Jr.

(I think Wiggins and LaVine are both best played at SG, thus both trades involve getting a SF back).

All of you have one or more of your favorites here and will violently disagree with the trade hypothesized, but considering the fact we are still KEEPING two of the three other "big three", are the guys we get in exchange more complimentary to the other two? I say it's worth pondering, if not actually acting upon.

This is one option but I think the option of signing some legit vets to play C/PF and pg on this team would accomplish the same outcome of shoring up our D.

Here's one trade I pondered. What about Ricky or G and whatever for Dwight Howard? He could certainly help our D in a multitude of ways. His contract would end right before KATs extension too. I would rather see us fill in the pieces around the 3 but if pressed I'd go for the Porter trade.