8-8, are the Wolves playing their best yet?

[TAFKASP]

Yes, Yes. But I don't think our bench is our strength. Our starters are performing better. If you look at the plus minus stats, the best players are the starters and the worst players are the bench guys. So maybe the bench guys outscore other benches, but they give up more points too.

Isn't that what you're looking for? Many teams have a starting five that can give fits to opponents, but rarely do they have a bench that can do the same, on a regular bases to their opponents bench. If your bench regularly outscores their counterparts then you win against weaker opponents going away, and at least have a chance against the better teams.

I was responding to the contention that our bench is #1. I just think the Spurs, Bulls, Raptors, Rockets and some other teams have better playing benches. They just play less minutes than ours.

Why are they playing less? If you have a better bench why wouldn't you use them this early in the season and keep everybody fresh?

And I didn't suggest no other team had great depth, but it is pretty rare.

[TheGrey08]

Mitchell has been doing a very good job and the record reflects that. He's not over thinking anything like coaches of the past. KAT made the starting lineup immediately as he should have. Prince and KG as a defensive pair to set tempo at start of games a nice move. LaVine was playing poorly to start the season so he lost his "verbal" starting spot a sign of a coach that knows when to correct his own mistake.

KMart has not been hurting us too bad (even though his play is poor) so I feel Sam will continue to play him to get him going so he can A - help the team down the stretch or B - trade him. I agree the right move is to keep playing Kmart so we dont wreck the value he has for the bigger picture.

A lot of people wont like it but my prediction is that Sam and Newt Milton will be running this team for at least the next 3-4 years.......

He's been doing well certainly, but he's also made some poor decisions too like overplaying Martin down the stretch, sitting KAT too much late in some games, granted it was warranted a time or 2, keeping starters on the bench too long while the other team goes on a long run, etc. Overall he's done a decent job, however that doesn't mean I necessarily want him long term. I do think he's of value on the bench though.

[TAFKASP]

Mitchell has been doing a very good job and the record reflects that. He's not over thinking anything like coaches of the past. KAT made the starting lineup immediately as he should have. Prince and KG as a defensive pair to set tempo at start of games a nice move. LaVine was playing poorly to start the season so he lost his "verbal" starting spot a sign of a coach that knows when to correct his own mistake.

KMart has not been hurting us too bad (even though his play is poor) so I feel Sam will continue to play him to get him going so he can A - help the team down the stretch or B - trade him. I agree the right move is to keep playing Kmart so we dont wreck the value he has for the bigger picture.

A lot of people wont like it but my prediction is that Sam and Newt Milton will be running this team for at least the next 3-4 years.......

He's been doing well certainly, but he's also made some poor decisions too like overplaying Martin down the stretch, sitting KAT too much late in some games, granted it was warranted a time or 2, keeping starters on the bench too long while the other team goes on a long run, etc. Overall he's done a decent job, however that doesn't mean I necessarily want him long term. I do think he's of value on the bench though.

I'll defend him on the bolded because we have young players both in the starting lineup and coming off the bench so there is a need for all of them to learn to work through poor runs. This is a learning year, if they do well in terms of wins also great, but all the young guys need minutes in varying circumstances.

[Shumway]

I keep reading posts that assume KMart is a lost cause. Doesn't anyone else think he will revert to the mean? He isn't this bad. He just needs to correct his shooting form, which isn't right. I think he will be an integral piece down the stretch.

Sorry Phenom, Reversion to the mean can be a real fallacy when things are changing rather than remaining steady state. I work in investment markets and it's a mistake that so many people seem to make - previous performance was good, so current poor performance is due to correct shortly. But if something is trading below its fair value, is it more likely that the price increases back to its fair value, or is it more likely that the fair value is will be adjusted down to reflect the poor performance?

In Martin's case, when you've got declining performance coinciding with aging, the longer it goes, the longer it's likely to suggest a trend or a change. In fact, the longer it goes, the less likely we are to see the performance revert to the mean and the more likely we are to see the mean move towards the current data.

Disclaimer - Martin may break out of his slump and revert to the mean, but I think the balance of probabilities suggest that is becoming less and less likely.

[Coolbreeze44]

I keep reading posts that assume KMart is a lost cause. Doesn't anyone else think he will revert to the mean? He isn't this bad. He just needs to correct his shooting form, which isn't right. I think he will be an integral piece down the stretch.

Sorry Phenom, Reversion to the mean can be a real fallacy when things are changing rather than remaining steady state. I work in investment markets and it's a mistake that so many people seem to make - previous performance was good, so current poor performance is due to correct shortly. But if something is trading below its fair value, is it more likely that the price increases back to its fair value, or is it more likely that the fair value is will be adjusted down to reflect the poor performance?

In Martin's case, when you've got declining performance coinciding with aging, the longer it goes, the longer it's likely to suggest a trend or a change. In fact, the longer it goes, the less likely we are to see the performance revert to the mean and the more likely we are to see the mean move towards the current data.

Disclaimer - Martin may break out of his slump and revert to the mean, but I think the balance of probabilities suggest that is becoming less and less likely.

My argument would be that Martin's "mean" isn't all that good to begin with. Certainly not starting caliber SG on a contender.

[Phenom]

I don't see a parallel right now. If you watch Martins shot right now, he is dipping down more on his windup, for lack of a better term. He isn't confident right now and he thinking too much and compensating as a result. It really won't matter how old he gets. He will able to hit a jumpshot for a long time from now. He will be fine.

[Phenom]

I keep reading posts that assume KMart is a lost cause. Doesn't anyone else think he will revert to the mean? He isn't this bad. He just needs to correct his shooting form, which isn't right. I think he will be an integral piece down the stretch.

Sorry Phenom, Reversion to the mean can be a real fallacy when things are changing rather than remaining steady state. I work in investment markets and it's a mistake that so many people seem to make - previous performance was good, so current poor performance is due to correct shortly. But if something is trading below its fair value, is it more likely that the price increases back to its fair value, or is it more likely that the fair value is will be adjusted down to reflect the poor performance?

In Martin's case, when you've got declining performance coinciding with aging, the longer it goes, the longer it's likely to suggest a trend or a change. In fact, the longer it goes, the less likely we are to see the performance revert to the mean and the more likely we are to see the mean move towards the current data.

Disclaimer - Martin may break out of his slump and revert to the mean, but I think the balance of probabilities suggest that is becoming less and less likely.

My argument would be that Martin's "mean" isn't all that good to begin with. Certainly not starting caliber SG on a contender.

It's a hollow argument to make it about starting or not. That isn't the issue. People just plain don't want him on the floor and that's a mistake. He can be a superb supplemental piece to our playoff run.

[Coolbreeze44]

I keep reading posts that assume KMart is a lost cause. Doesn't anyone else think he will revert to the mean? He isn't this bad. He just needs to correct his shooting form, which isn't right. I think he will be an integral piece down the stretch.

Sorry Phenom, Reversion to the mean can be a real fallacy when things are changing rather than remaining steady state. I work in investment markets and it's a mistake that so many people seem to make - previous performance was good, so current poor performance is due to correct shortly. But if something is trading below its fair value, is it more likely that the price increases back to its fair value, or is it more likely that the fair value is will be adjusted down to reflect the poor performance?

In Martin's case, when you've got declining performance coinciding with aging, the longer it goes, the longer it's likely to suggest a trend or a change. In fact, the longer it goes, the less likely we are to see the performance revert to the mean and the more likely we are to see the mean move towards the current data.

Disclaimer - Martin may break out of his slump and revert to the mean, but I think the balance of probabilities suggest that is becoming less and less likely.

My argument would be that Martin's "mean" isn't all that good to begin with. Certainly not starting caliber SG on a contender.

It's a hollow argument to make it about starting or not. That isn't the issue. People just plain don't want him on the floor and that's a mistake. He can be a superb supplemental piece to our playoff run.

When we're counting on him to start, and he's playing starters minutes, it certainly is an issue. He's not good enough.

[Carlos Danger]

I keep reading posts that assume KMart is a lost cause. Doesn't anyone else think he will revert to the mean? He isn't this bad. He just needs to correct his shooting form, which isn't right. I think he will be an integral piece down the stretch.

Sorry Phenom, Reversion to the mean can be a real fallacy when things are changing rather than remaining steady state. I work in investment markets and it's a mistake that so many people seem to make - previous performance was good, so current poor performance is due to correct shortly. But if something is trading below its fair value, is it more likely that the price increases back to its fair value, or is it more likely that the fair value is will be adjusted down to reflect the poor performance?

In Martin's case, when you've got declining performance coinciding with aging, the longer it goes, the longer it's likely to suggest a trend or a change. In fact, the longer it goes, the less likely we are to see the performance revert to the mean and the more likely we are to see the mean move towards the current data.

Disclaimer - Martin may break out of his slump and revert to the mean, but I think the balance of probabilities suggest that is becoming less and less likely.

I think it's a little of both. In terms of his decline, if you look at Win Shares and VORP, this is the third year in a row that he's slid in those categories. That said - it's pretty clear that he's in a slump and I have to believe he will perform somewhat better for two reasons: First - I think he'll benefit from playing with Rubio vs. LaVine as Rubio is just better at getting the ball to guys at the time time/at their spots. Second, I think Martin was shot hunting more than ever with the second unit because he was pissed he got demoted. I don't know that. It's just my opinion. But I know at the start of camp he went on record that he considered himself the starter and I doubt anything changed.

[Phenom]

I keep reading posts that assume KMart is a lost cause. Doesn't anyone else think he will revert to the mean? He isn't this bad. He just needs to correct his shooting form, which isn't right. I think he will be an integral piece down the stretch.

Sorry Phenom, Reversion to the mean can be a real fallacy when things are changing rather than remaining steady state. I work in investment markets and it's a mistake that so many people seem to make - previous performance was good, so current poor performance is due to correct shortly. But if something is trading below its fair value, is it more likely that the price increases back to its fair value, or is it more likely that the fair value is will be adjusted down to reflect the poor performance?

In Martin's case, when you've got declining performance coinciding with aging, the longer it goes, the longer it's likely to suggest a trend or a change. In fact, the longer it goes, the less likely we are to see the performance revert to the mean and the more likely we are to see the mean move towards the current data.

Disclaimer - Martin may break out of his slump and revert to the mean, but I think the balance of probabilities suggest that is becoming less and less likely.

My argument would be that Martin's "mean" isn't all that good to begin with. Certainly not starting caliber SG on a contender.

It's a hollow argument to make it about starting or not. That isn't the issue. People just plain don't want him on the floor and that's a mistake. He can be a superb supplemental piece to our playoff run.

When we're counting on him to start, and he's playing starters minutes, it certainly is an issue. He's not good enough.

I'm not counting on him to start. I'm counting on him to contribute. Tossing him aside is foolish and something we need to stop expecting as Wolves fans.