Minnesota Sports Forum

monsterpile wrote:Blocks are not the best indication of rim protection. I used to think Tyson chandler was overrated as a defensive player espcially rim protection because his blocks were not very high in number. He opened eyes winning a championship with the Mavs and his play in the olympics was just terrific.

Right now the pairing between Dieng and Towns not being good enough is on Towns not Dieng. If Towns figures it out that could change. It was interesting how Thibs said a few days ago something about how key Belly was to this team.

The reports sound more like they are looking at ways to replace Rubio than Dieng which makes sense as there are probably more options. They could also end up getting a pretty good backup PG or adding another solid wing player and have Butler be the playmaker down the stretch as it has been suggested in other threads.

Exactly right, Monster. The defensive inadequacy of our two bigs is squarely on KAT as further confirmed by the stats in Q's post. I also agree that Rubio's the only starter Thibs is really looking to replace. I don't think he's intent on replacing him as some exaggerated reports might suggest. But he definitely seems to view Ricky as someone to replace if the right guy is gettable. If it were me, I'd resolve to keep Ricky and focus on getting the best 3/D wing and best backup PG I can find who's 30 or under -- Tony Snell, Joe Ingles, Pattie Mills, Darren Collison, etc.

lipoli390 wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:G and Towns don't work together. Their combination is a primary reason we suck so much on defense. Neither protects the rim at even an average level. There's a reason Belly was starting to close out games over G. The defense didn't take a hit and the offense added a better weapon. G is a backup big. 14 million is a little steep for a backup, but he can backup both spots so you can play Towns and whoever 68 minutes and give G the other 28. Then you don't have 30+ minutes of a bad defensive combination in Towns and G. You have about half that which is manageable.

What's the average level of rim protection in the NBA? Between them, Gorgui and KAT average 2.7 blocks per game. Cleveland's Love and Tristen Thompson average about 1 block per game combined. Golden State's trio of Green, Pachulia and McGee last season averaged 2.3 blocks per game. I'd love to have the shot-blocking of a Gobert or D. Jordan on the Wolves. But our starting bigs clearly aren't below average as rim protectors. They're definitely not as good as we need them to be defensively, but that's less a matter of rim protection than it is KAT being more aware and more committed on the defensive end. KAT needs to step it up in defending the pick and roll. He needs to take a charge every now and then. As our cornerstone star, KAT needs to step it up defensively or this team is not going to contend for a championship no matter which free agency you sign this summer to replace Gorgui at PF.

I don't care about blocks when I talk about rim protection. I care about shooting percentage at the rim. We give up way too many buckets at the rim because our protectors don't challenge shots well. G's DFG% less than 6ft is 60.9%. Towns is at 59.3%. That's a terrible tandem.

lipoli390 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:Blocks are not the best indication of rim protection. I used to think Tyson chandler was overrated as a defensive player espcially rim protection because his blocks were not very high in number. He opened eyes winning a championship with the Mavs and his play in the olympics was just terrific.

Right now the pairing between Dieng and Towns not being good enough is on Towns not Dieng. If Towns figures it out that could change. It was interesting how Thibs said a few days ago something about how key Belly was to this team.

The reports sound more like they are looking at ways to replace Rubio than Dieng which makes sense as there are probably more options. They could also end up getting a pretty good backup PG or adding another solid wing player and have Butler be the playmaker down the stretch as it has been suggested in other threads.

Exactly right, Monster. The defensive inadequacy of our two bigs is squarely on KAT as further confirmed by the stats in Q's post. I also agree that Rubio's the only starter Thibs is really looking to replace. I don't think he's intent on replacing him as some exaggerated reports might suggest. But he definitely seems to view Ricky as someone to replace if the right guy is gettable. If it were me, I'd resolve to keep Ricky and focus on getting the best 3/D wing and best backup PG I can find who's 30 or under -- Tony Snell, Joe Ingles, Pattie Mills, Darren Collison, etc.

For some of these reports...if the Wolves call or are called about making a trade who do you think is going to come up? We know who the Wolves aren't giving up. We know there are guys nobody is going to give up much for. Rubio's name is going to come up. The Wolves might even be calling a team like orlando and seeing if they can basically just take DJ Augustine off their hands. That doesn't mean they are getting rid of Rubio.

Thibs Glen and Layden have said plenty of legitimate good things about him (none of those guys seem to be guys they are just saying stuff they don't mean). The also haven't said anything that completely says he is their guy going forward which I am fine with. If there is a nobrainer move to add a better player or one that fits better they will do it. How likely is that to happen which would include a team trading for Rubio for one purpose or another? It's 50/50 at best but I also won't be shocked to see it happen.

I'd like to see Rubio come back. I think some of his improvement is for real. I was just watching some highlights from last season and I think his ball handling and footwork as a scorer were actually improved as the season went on and my guess is that can be credited with Rubio's likely hard work with Ryan Saunders. If that improvement is for real thats going to have (or continue to have) a positive effect on his actual shooting and scoring ability.

I have to say, people on this board read way too much into what Comes front the front office in terms of making statements regarding players on the roster. Because Taylor, Tibs and or Layden make a positive comment about a guy means absolutely nothing! So inferring anything from statements made at a press conference when cliche statements are thrown around is beyond crazy to me.

Duke13 wrote:I have to say, people on this board read way too much into what Comes front the front office in terms of making statements regarding players on the roster. Because Taylor, Tibs and or Layden make a positive comment about a guy means absolutely nothing! So inferring anything from statements made at a press conference when cliche statements are thrown around is beyond crazy to me.

I agree with the premise of your post. However I don't think what they say means nothing. If they praise a guy that means they like him. That doesn't mean they won't like another guy more right? We are crazed fans looking for any indication of what might happen next. On top of that we all have ideas of what we may want to see happen and we look for what we want to see sometimes. I'm as guilty as anyone. Thibs days ago used Dunn as an example of a guy that was coming in working hard to get better etc. I don't think that was hollow but there is no shame in moving him or Dunn being traded in a deal to get a player of Butler's caliber. It's not like he dumped him to open up cap space or something.

The core of the problem, as I see it, is Rubio and Wiggins. Those two can't be on the floor together without a 40% three-point shooter next to them, IMO. And since Wiggins is more important to the future of the franchise, even though Rubio makes a bigger positive impact on the game, Wiggins should start over Rubio. Side note--I'd like to hear a counter-argument that Wiggins should be our 6th man offensive punch off the bench, which I'd maybe be open to). But assuming Wiggins will start, what do we do with Rubio? That's the big question.

We could trade him. But what if there's no good deals out there, and I doubt there will be because nobody's really in the market for starting PGs right now. Is there another option?

Yes. If Rubio is willing to come off the bench.

If so, getting a guy like George Hill or Patty Mills or Patrick Beverley as a starter to spread the floor next to Wiggins and Butler and having Rubio coming off the bench could be a possibility for us. He'd simultaneously make our second unit a better defensive unit, and he'd make sure the offense ran smoothly. Surround him with shooters, including any of those 3 guys above at the 2, and that could be a really great second unit. Slide Butler to the 4 at times with Rubio on the floor to make room for an extra shooter.

Let's say, just for the sake of argument, we somehow add Hill and Ingles, although you could plug in another shooting PG and another shooting wing if you like. The minutes breakdown could look like this (although Thibs will probably overload the starters as usual):

Hill (22)/Rubio (26)
Wiggins (36)/Hill (eight)/Ingles (4)
Butler (28)/Ingles (20)
Dieng (20)/Bjelica (10)/Butler (10)/Ingles (eight)
Towns (36)/Dieng (12)

So you start for a long stretch with: Hill, Wiggins, Butler, Dieng, and Towns.
[list]
[*] That's a pretty balanced and strong starting 5. You've got shooters (Hill, and Butler and Towns to a lesser extent), defenders (Butler and Dieng, and hopefully the other guys), two ball handlers who can pass (Hill and Butler). And of course Wiggins scoring and Towns doing his thing.
[/list]

Maybe you start the substitutions by bringing in Rubio and Ingles at the same time for Hill and Wiggins, Rubio, Butler, Ingles, Dieng, Towns.
[list]
[*] That's a damn good lineup. Ingles replaces some of the shooting lost by sitting Hill and helps make up for Rubio's bad shooting, plus you've got a really good defensive lineup there 1-4 (better than the starters), and three guys (Rubio, Butler, Ingles) who can handle the ball and pass. The strategy here would be trying to keep Hill and Wiggins on the floor at the same time, and Rubio and Ingles together, balancing a shooter at all times with Wiggins and Rubio.
[/list]

Another possibility might be to sub in Rubio for Dieng to go small: Rubio, Hill, Wiggins, Butler, Towns.
[list]
[*] The league is going smaller and smaller, so why not evolve with the innovators? We still have Hill as a shooter, three ball-handlers who can pass, and two great defenders (Rubio and Butler). This would also give Gorgui a rest before coming in to replace Towns at the 5, because I see no point in playing Aldrich and Patton I don't expect to see play until next year.
[/list]

Assuming option B, the next move might be to bring in Ingles and Bjelica for Hill and Wiggins: Rubio, Butler, Ingles, Bjelica, Towns.
[list]
[*] Again, this saves Hill and Wiggins to be on the floor at the same time, and meets the requirement of always keeping Ingles or another shooter on the floor with Rubio. I'd be a little wary about our frontline defense here, but it would be our strongest perimeter defense, and we have a couple shooters out there, and again, plenty of ball handlers and playmakers.
[/list]

Next, bring in Dieng for Towns: Rubio, Butler, Ingles, Bjelica, Dieng.
[list]
[*] That is a very good defensive lineup except for Bjelica, it also has three point shooting (Ingles, Bjelica, and Butler), and arguably 4 playmakers. And it's a long lineup.
[/list]

Bring Hill back in for Rubio and Wiggins for Butler: Hill, Wiggins, Ingles, Bjelica, Dieng.
[list]
[*] That might be our weakest lineup, although it still looks pretty good and balanced.
[/list]

And eventually bring Butler and Towns back in to get back to the starting 5: Hill, Wiggins, Butler, Dieng, Towns.

You could also put 5 shooters on the floor at once: Hill, Ingles, Butler, Bjelica, Towns.
You could put together 5 good or very good defenders at once: Hill, Rubio, Butler, Ingles, Gorgui.

This is just a sketch, but I think if Rubio could be sold on coming off the bench so that Wiggins can start, we could make it work with a guy like Hill or Patty Mills or Beverley sharing point responsibilities with Rubio, IMO, assuming we also get a shooter on the wing like Ingles.

What do you think? And what do you think about the alternative option I mentioned above. Keeping Rubio as the starter but moving Wiggins to the 6th man role?

I would recommend listing to this podcast where they cover The Wolves offseason including some others. Plenty of interesting stuff from guys that I find to be gave a lot of knowledge about the game and around the league.

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/duncdon/2017/06/26/love-to-denver-mindalsac-offseasons

https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/duncd-on-basketball-nba-podcast/id986901174?mt=2&i=1000389090537

Don't we still need a proper big to play next to Towns? Or is everyone satisfied with the Dieng/Belly combo? I'm worried about not having any toughness inside similar to last year. I give credit to Dieng for trying to mix it up last year, but those legs are just too skinny.

SameOldDrew wrote:The core of the problem, as I see it, is Rubio and Wiggins. Those two can't be on the floor together without a 40% three-point shooter next to them, IMO. And since Wiggins is more important to the future of the franchise, even though Rubio makes a bigger positive impact on the game, Wiggins should start over Rubio. Side note--I'd like to hear a counter-argument that Wiggins should be our 6th man offensive punch off the bench, which I'd maybe be open to). But assuming Wiggins will start, what do we do with Rubio? That's the big question.

We could trade him. But what if there's no good deals out there, and I doubt there will be because nobody's really in the market for starting PGs right now. Is there another option?

Yes. If Rubio is willing to come off the bench.

If so, getting a guy like George Hill or Patty Mills or Patrick Beverley as a starter to spread the floor next to Wiggins and Butler and having Rubio coming off the bench could be a possibility for us. He'd simultaneously make our second unit a better defensive unit, and he'd make sure the offense ran smoothly. Surround him with shooters, including any of those 3 guys above at the 2, and that could be a really great second unit. Slide Butler to the 4 at times with Rubio on the floor to make room for an extra shooter.

Let's say, just for the sake of argument, we somehow add Hill and Ingles, although you could plug in another shooting PG and another shooting wing if you like. The minutes breakdown could look like this (although Thibs will probably overload the starters as usual):

Hill (22)/Rubio (26)
Wiggins (36)/Hill (eight)/Ingles (4)
Butler (28)/Ingles (20)
Dieng (20)/Bjelica (10)/Butler (10)/Ingles (eight)
Towns (36)/Dieng (12)

So you start for a long stretch with: Hill, Wiggins, Butler, Dieng, and Towns.
[list]
[*] That's a pretty balanced and strong starting 5. You've got shooters (Hill, and Butler and Towns to a lesser extent), defenders (Butler and Dieng, and hopefully the other guys), two ball handlers who can pass (Hill and Butler). And of course Wiggins scoring and Towns doing his thing.
[/list]

Maybe you start the substitutions by bringing in Rubio and Ingles at the same time for Hill and Wiggins, Rubio, Butler, Ingles, Dieng, Towns.
[list]
[*] That's a damn good lineup. Ingles replaces some of the shooting lost by sitting Hill and helps make up for Rubio's bad shooting, plus you've got a really good defensive lineup there 1-4 (better than the starters), and three guys (Rubio, Butler, Ingles) who can handle the ball and pass. The strategy here would be trying to keep Hill and Wiggins on the floor at the same time, and Rubio and Ingles together, balancing a shooter at all times with Wiggins and Rubio.
[/list]

Another possibility might be to sub in Rubio for Dieng to go small: Rubio, Hill, Wiggins, Butler, Towns.
[list]
[*] The league is going smaller and smaller, so why not evolve with the innovators? We still have Hill as a shooter, three ball-handlers who can pass, and two great defenders (Rubio and Butler). This would also give Gorgui a rest before coming in to replace Towns at the 5, because I see no point in playing Aldrich and Patton I don't expect to see play until next year.
[/list]

Assuming option B, the next move might be to bring in Ingles and Bjelica for Hill and Wiggins: Rubio, Butler, Ingles, Bjelica, Towns.
[list]
[*] Again, this saves Hill and Wiggins to be on the floor at the same time, and meets the requirement of always keeping Ingles or another shooter on the floor with Rubio. I'd be a little wary about our frontline defense here, but it would be our strongest perimeter defense, and we have a couple shooters out there, and again, plenty of ball handlers and playmakers.
[/list]

Next, bring in Dieng for Towns: Rubio, Butler, Ingles, Bjelica, Dieng.
[list]
[*] That is a very good defensive lineup except for Bjelica, it also has three point shooting (Ingles, Bjelica, and Butler), and arguably 4 playmakers. And it's a long lineup.
[/list]

Bring Hill back in for Rubio and Wiggins for Butler: Hill, Wiggins, Ingles, Bjelica, Dieng.
[list]
[*] That might be our weakest lineup, although it still looks pretty good and balanced.
[/list]

And eventually bring Butler and Towns back in to get back to the starting 5: Hill, Wiggins, Butler, Dieng, Towns.

You could also put 5 shooters on the floor at once: Hill, Ingles, Butler, Bjelica, Towns.
You could put together 5 good or very good defenders at once: Hill, Rubio, Butler, Ingles, Gorgui.

This is just a sketch, but I think if Rubio could be sold on coming off the bench so that Wiggins can start, we could make it work with a guy like Hill or Patty Mills or Beverley sharing point responsibilities with Rubio, IMO, assuming we also get a shooter on the wing like Ingles.

What do you think? And what do you think about the alternative option I mentioned above. Keeping Rubio as the starter but moving Wiggins to the 6th man role?

I am actually fond of a scenario like this. If the Sprockets need to make room I would prefer to take on Beverley than spend big on one of the bigger FAs. We all know depth is always good and if you believe the Wolves could afford 20 million on one guy I think they would be better off spending 20 on Rubio and Beverley. Beverley makes 6 if I am not mistaken. That leaves a nice chunk of cap to get another piece or two.

thedoper wrote:Don't we still need a proper big to play next to Towns? Or is everyone satisfied with the Dieng/Belly combo? I'm worried about not having any toughness inside similar to last year. I give credit to Dieng for trying to mix it up last year, but those legs are just too skinny.

I personally thought Dieng playing against true big dudes was much better this year and he was more physical and even got chippy with guys which was great to see. The perimeter and team defense is what the problem is which Towns has plenty of blame there it was a joke he got a vote for first team NBA defensive team. Dieng imo was better guarding on the perimeter than Towns which is...um not good.