sjm34 wrote:He has the talent, but his leadership skills are severely lacking. You will never build a contending team without stars if the one you have keeps throwing his teammates under the bus.
Don't totally disagree, although in my opinion that's as much a product of the environment as it is the player in this case.
longstrangetrip wrote:I/m not sure what we mean by being able to lead a team to a title, but to me it would be a great 2-way player with excellent leadership skills, and go-to qualities in the clutch on both ends of the court. Using these criteria, I would include James, Durant and Paul in that group. Westbrook is close, but he has a tendency to make poor decisions offensively at crunch time. Howard is too flaky to lead a team to a title. And the other four, including Love, are clearly talented one-way players who will need a lot of help and a true alpha dog to win a title.
Who was Detroit's true alpha dog in 2004? Who was San Antonio's true alpha dog this season?
I think Love is good enough to be the best player on a title team, but like every team that has won a title, he needs other really, really good players.
Neither Detroit or San Antonio had a max player, and every player on the team embodied the team concept first and foremost. That is not Kevin Love. Kevin Love is a one-on-one player, and at times can be quite the ball stopper. He wants his first and foremost.
Detroit did and San Antonio does have alpha dog leader personalities. Rasheed Wallace, Ben Wallace, and Billups all set the tone for that Detroit team. San Antonio has had that alpha dog for 15 years in Tim Duncan. He may not be fiery, but he is definitely a leader. That whole team takes on his calm demeanor. They rarely crumble or get flustered. The only player we have that is capable of leading on any level is Rubio. I look forward to seeing him orchestrate the offense again, without Love. I almost wish we had kept Derrick Williams, as Rubio and him seemed to have good chemistry when Rubio was last allowed to run the show.
Listen to all of San Antonio's players last night. Many of them said things along the lines of, "When the balls moving, every one is touching it, we all get energized." Everyone builds confidence with that kind of play. That's what we need. Been fun to watch you get your stats Love, but good luck elsewhere. I want to win, and it starts with a team.
Love can still be the best player on a squad that has other strong leaders in the locker room. And I really question your statement about Love being a one-on-one ball stopper. He was our second best passer this season after Rubio and our offense performed much better with him on the floor versus off of it. And if anything, folks have given him grief for NOT being a better one on one player (i.e. the "he can't get his own shot" narrative, which really hasn't been true for a couple years now).
longstrangetrip wrote:I/m not sure what we mean by being able to lead a team to a title, but to me it would be a great 2-way player with excellent leadership skills, and go-to qualities in the clutch on both ends of the court. Using these criteria, I would include James, Durant and Paul in that group. Westbrook is close, but he has a tendency to make poor decisions offensively at crunch time. Howard is too flaky to lead a team to a title. And the other four, including Love, are clearly talented one-way players who will need a lot of help and a true alpha dog to win a title.
Who was Detroit's true alpha dog in 2004? Who was San Antonio's true alpha dog this season?
I think Love is good enough to be the best player on a title team, but like every team that has won a title, he needs other really, really good players.
Neither Detroit or San Antonio had a max player, and every player on the team embodied the team concept first and foremost. That is not Kevin Love. Kevin Love is a one-on-one player, and at times can be quite the ball stopper. He wants his first and foremost.
Detroit did and San Antonio does have alpha dog leader personalities. Rasheed Wallace, Ben Wallace, and Billups all set the tone for that Detroit team. San Antonio has had that alpha dog for 15 years in Tim Duncan. He may not be fiery, but he is definitely a leader. That whole team takes on his calm demeanor. They rarely crumble or get flustered. The only player we have that is capable of leading on any level is Rubio. I look forward to seeing him orchestrate the offense again, without Love. I almost wish we had kept Derrick Williams, as Rubio and him seemed to have good chemistry when Rubio was last allowed to run the show.
Listen to all of San Antonio's players last night. Many of them said things along the lines of, "When the balls moving, every one is touching it, we all get energized." Everyone builds confidence with that kind of play. That's what we need. Been fun to watch you get your stats Love, but good luck elsewhere. I want to win, and it starts with a team.
Kevin Love led all pf in assists!!!!! If he's a ball stopper then that makes every other PF a ball stopper.
lebron
durant
love
paul
melo
harden
howard
westbrook
curry
All those players didn't lead their team to the title. Actually only one on that list has ever won a title.
Where's Paul George on that list? He's as good if not better than several on that list including the one way players. I'd probably take Kawhi ahead of a few of those guys too.
longstrangetrip wrote:I/m not sure what we mean by being able to lead a team to a title, but to me it would be a great 2-way player with excellent leadership skills, and go-to qualities in the clutch on both ends of the court. Using these criteria, I would include James, Durant and Paul in that group. Westbrook is close, but he has a tendency to make poor decisions offensively at crunch time. Howard is too flaky to lead a team to a title. And the other four, including Love, are clearly talented one-way players who will need a lot of help and a true alpha dog to win a title.
Who was Detroit's true alpha dog in 2004? Who was San Antonio's true alpha dog this season?
I think Love is good enough to be the best player on a title team, but like every team that has won a title, he needs other really, really good players.
Q, I don't disagree with that, but the Spurs have one of the deepest teams in the history of the NBA. It's tough to try to put a team together like that because it relies on finding the right random discards like Patty Mills, Boris Diaw, and guys like Gary Neal.
The one thing that Love doesn't have that guys like Duncan have even at this stage of their careers, is defense. If we offered Love for a few of their top young players (Spurs), I think they would turn us down, because though Love has some great offensive game, his lack of defense makes it tougher to win a Championship as the lead dog.
longstrangetrip wrote:I/m not sure what we mean by being able to lead a team to a title, but to me it would be a great 2-way player with excellent leadership skills, and go-to qualities in the clutch on both ends of the court. Using these criteria, I would include James, Durant and Paul in that group. Westbrook is close, but he has a tendency to make poor decisions offensively at crunch time. Howard is too flaky to lead a team to a title. And the other four, including Love, are clearly talented one-way players who will need a lot of help and a true alpha dog to win a title.
Who was Detroit's true alpha dog in 2004? Who was San Antonio's true alpha dog this season?
I think Love is good enough to be the best player on a title team, but like every team that has won a title, he needs other really, really good players.
Neither Detroit or San Antonio had a max player, and every player on the team embodied the team concept first and foremost. That is not Kevin Love. Kevin Love is a one-on-one player, and at times can be quite the ball stopper. He wants his first and foremost.
Detroit did and San Antonio does have alpha dog leader personalities. Rasheed Wallace, Ben Wallace, and Billups all set the tone for that Detroit team. San Antonio has had that alpha dog for 15 years in Tim Duncan. He may not be fiery, but he is definitely a leader. That whole team takes on his calm demeanor. They rarely crumble or get flustered. The only player we have that is capable of leading on any level is Rubio. I look forward to seeing him orchestrate the offense again, without Love. I almost wish we had kept Derrick Williams, as Rubio and him seemed to have good chemistry when Rubio was last allowed to run the show.
Listen to all of San Antonio's players last night. Many of them said things along the lines of, "When the balls moving, every one is touching it, we all get energized." Everyone builds confidence with that kind of play. That's what we need. Been fun to watch you get your stats Love, but good luck elsewhere. I want to win, and it starts with a team.
Kevin Love led all pf in assists!!!!! If he's a ball stopper then that makes every other PF a ball stopper.[/quote]
Something elevated greatly by his outlet passes. I'll give him credit for his vision on those outlet passes, but I don't see the great passing in the half court that everybody else seems to notice. In my eyes, he always looks for the ball right as he passes half court, and then looks for his shot. He was our best offensive player, and at times the only one, but I don't see the emphasis on a team game in him (especially this last year as I believe he was looking toward the exit from MN). Our best offense in recent years starts with Rubio getting everyone involved. It is simply my opinion, but it's what I saw, and what I want to see happen next year. Rubio, Rubio, and more Rubio. He can't shoot (yet), but he knows where to get each player the ball to ensure their best chance of success. I firmly believe that if Love is gone, a great big monkey will climb right off of Rubio's back and we will be better for it. There will be no more pressure to play out of his element, like simply getting the ball to Love or Martin (blame goes to Adelman here). Rubio strikes me as very intelligent, a player who dissects the floor at every point of the game, and see's openings far before any other player does. I believe he can lead a team of good players very far, further than the superstar Love could.
Building around Rubio would be disastrous. The difference between how Rubio was in his rookie year and last year wasn't because Adelman wouldn't let him play his style. The difference was that teams scouted Rubio and just play the passing lanes. Rubio shot 38% this year and that's with teams barely guarding him. So even IF Rubio improves his shooting, he still has to be able to shoot effectively when teams actually try to stop him if he is to be the MAN on the wolves.
Don't get me wrong I love Rubio, but to think that Love was holding him back in anyway is dumb. You still have to have shooters around Rubio and take away Love and you have Martin and maybe Bud. That up and down style also won't work at the end of games
3. Lack of players who could create their own shot and score effectively on dribble penetration (note that Tony Parker, not Duncan, typically leads the Spurs in points in the paint while both Manu and Leonard are no slouches in that department);
4. Lack of quickness and athleticism to present the moving targets that would maximize the value of Ricky's passing ability; and
5. Inadequate three-point shooting.
We can't expect to improve all these areas, but we need to significantly improve two or three. Better coaching should help a bit on defense, but by Flip's own admission, we have two many one-way players, which means significant defensive improvement will require personnel changes. Improving the bench will require personnel changes/additions. A good pick at #13 and good MLE signing would help, but I think we will clearly need a trade to both improve our bench AND improve our defense with better two-way players. Unfortunately we are capped out and don't have any valuable trade assets other than Love. Pek's contract and ankles severely limit his value in the market.
I don't see Love as part of what ailed the Wolves last season. But trading him could be away to improve the team's weaknesses and better position the Wolves for the long run.
