Minnesota Sports Forum

monsterpile wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

FNG wrote:I am way down on our fighting Timberwolves after an absurdly bad loss to a terrible Hornets team, but as others have pointed out, the West is weird this year. Despite such a disappointing start to the season, the Wolves are only 2 1/2 games out of first place. Had they gotten the job done in Charlotte, they would have been 11-8 and tied for 3rd place. Instead we fell to 10th.

The Wolves will feel the full sting of these bad losses to far inferior, depleted teams later in the season when they're losing to equal or better teams at full strength a the same time the Wolves start suffering some injuries. That's where it will get ugly and Danny Ainge will start drooling over the prospect of another 2023 lottery pick and perhaps may more lottery picks the the remaining odd years this decade.

The Spurs must be thinking the same thing about Atlanta who lost to the Rockets right?

Yes, the Spurs might be thinking the same thing. I wouldn't be happy if I were a Hawks fan right now. But Hawks fans can feel a bit better about their situation knowing that their 2023 first-round pick in the Murray deal is top 16 protected. Moreover, they didn't give up any of their first-round pick this year or any of their rotation players for Murray. In any event, perhaps what's happened so far this season offers the same lesson for the front offices of both the Hawks and Wolves, i.e., that there are no shortcuts and that mortgaging draft capital for one player who isn't a superstar is probably not the best path. The interesting thing about the Hawks, though, is that they're no worse now than they were the end of last season. The Murray trade hasn't made them significantly better, but they're not playing worse.

If you're not watching the Warriors-Dallas game you should be. Great game. Dallas is up 3 with about a minute left. Luka is fantastic and of course so is Curry. I've noticed that Luka gets away with a lot of fouls that would be called on Towns. Luka often pushes the defender away from him and often does it in plain view but the officials ignore it. When KAT does it he's almost always called for the foul.

I know many of us keep tabs on ex-Wolves, and this really made me unhappy:

Andrew Wiggins went 8-10 beyond the arc last night, and Jarred Vanderbilt was 4-4...they are 45% and 46.2% on the season, respectively).

(Cue Q's reply to this post in 3...2...1)

FNG wrote:I know many of us keep tabs on ex-Wolves, and this really made me unhappy:

Andrew Wiggins went 8-10 beyond the arc last night, and Jarred Vanderbilt was 4-4...they are 45% and 46.2% on the season, respectively).

(Cue Q's reply to this post in 3...2...1)

GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

Wiggins is the one that just kills me. In 6 seasons with the Wolves he was 33% from behind the arc. In 4 seasons with Golden State he's 39%. It's fucking incredible.

And Vando is just a kick of sand in our face on top of what's happened to a suddenly motivated Wiggins. I mean, you can't make this shit up!

Oh, happy holidays everyone!

Q-was-here wrote:

FNG wrote:I know many of us keep tabs on ex-Wolves, and this really made me unhappy:

Andrew Wiggins went 8-10 beyond the arc last night, and Jarred Vanderbilt was 4-4...they are 45% and 46.2% on the season, respectively).

(Cue Q's reply to this post in 3...2...1)

GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

Wiggins is the one that just kills me. In 6 seasons with the Wolves he was 33% from behind the arc. In 4 seasons with Golden State he's 39%. It's fucking incredible.

And Vando is just a kick of sand in our face on top of what's happened to a suddenly motivated Wiggins. I mean, you can't make this shit up!

Oh, happy holidays everyone!

The Wiggins things is understandable. We traded him based on what he was for years here. He ended up in a winning culture and it had a positive impact on him. Vando is another story. What he's doing for Utah is what he was doing for us. To the extent he might be playing marginally better, it's simply a function of the fact that he's a young player who was already improving and who had remaining upside. You make your own luck in life. Luck is the product of smart decisions over time. Dumb decisions over time lead to bad luck.

Speaking of Vando, he had 16 highly efficient points along with 7 rebounds, 4 assists, steals and only 1 turnover last night. Kessler had 8 points on 4-4 shooting, along with 8 rebounds and 3 blocks in only 17 minutes. Again, you make your own luck, good or bad, with the sum total of your decisions, smart or dumb.

lipoli390 wrote:

Q-was-here wrote:

FNG wrote:I know many of us keep tabs on ex-Wolves, and this really made me unhappy:

Andrew Wiggins went 8-10 beyond the arc last night, and Jarred Vanderbilt was 4-4...they are 45% and 46.2% on the season, respectively).

(Cue Q's reply to this post in 3...2...1)

GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

Wiggins is the one that just kills me. In 6 seasons with the Wolves he was 33% from behind the arc. In 4 seasons with Golden State he's 39%. It's fucking incredible.

And Vando is just a kick of sand in our face on top of what's happened to a suddenly motivated Wiggins. I mean, you can't make this shit up!

Oh, happy holidays everyone!

The Wiggins things is understandable. We traded him based on what he was for years here. He ended up in a winning culture and it had a positive impact on him. Vando is another story. What he's doing for Utah is what he was doing for us. To the extent he might be playing marginally better, it's simply a function of the fact that he's a young player who was already improving and who had remaining upside. You make your own luck in life. Luck is the product of smart decisions over time. Dumb decisions over time lead to bad luck.

Speaking of Vando, he had 16 highly efficient points along with 7 rebounds, 4 assists, steals and only 1 turnover last night. Kessler had 8 points on 4-4 shooting, along with 8 rebounds and 3 blocks in only 17 minutes. Again, you make your own luck, good or bad, with the sum total of your decisions, smart or dumb.

Personally I think Vanderbilt last year was not encouraged to do much of anything on offense but roam around looking for passes from teammates setting screens and offensive rebounding. That made sense in the context of the team. Utah...they really don't have anything to lose. Why not have Vanderbilt jack up some 3's? Maybe they will even let him handle the ball for more than 2-3 dribbles. We will see if this leads to more offense/upside or whatever for Vanderbilt or not.

monsterpile wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

Q-was-here wrote:

FNG wrote:I know many of us keep tabs on ex-Wolves, and this really made me unhappy:

Andrew Wiggins went 8-10 beyond the arc last night, and Jarred Vanderbilt was 4-4...they are 45% and 46.2% on the season, respectively).

(Cue Q's reply to this post in 3...2...1)

GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

Wiggins is the one that just kills me. In 6 seasons with the Wolves he was 33% from behind the arc. In 4 seasons with Golden State he's 39%. It's fucking incredible.

And Vando is just a kick of sand in our face on top of what's happened to a suddenly motivated Wiggins. I mean, you can't make this shit up!

Oh, happy holidays everyone!

The Wiggins things is understandable. We traded him based on what he was for years here. He ended up in a winning culture and it had a positive impact on him. Vando is another story. What he's doing for Utah is what he was doing for us. To the extent he might be playing marginally better, it's simply a function of the fact that he's a young player who was already improving and who had remaining upside. You make your own luck in life. Luck is the product of smart decisions over time. Dumb decisions over time lead to bad luck.

Speaking of Vando, he had 16 highly efficient points along with 7 rebounds, 4 assists, steals and only 1 turnover last night. Kessler had 8 points on 4-4 shooting, along with 8 rebounds and 3 blocks in only 17 minutes. Again, you make your own luck, good or bad, with the sum total of your decisions, smart or dumb.

Personally I think Vanderbilt last year was not encouraged to do much of anything on offense but roam around looking for passes from teammates setting screens and offensive rebounding. That made sense in the context of the team. Utah...they really don't have anything to lose. Why not have Vanderbilt jack up some 3's? Maybe they will even let him handle the ball for more than 2-3 dribbles. We will see if this leads to more offense/upside or whatever for Vanderbilt or not.

Vanderbilt did what you described last season for the Wolves - screening and offensive rebounding. But he would also do a lot of cutting and move a lot off the ball, which was helpful in creating opportunities for teammates. He would also not infrequently handle the ball on the break. He's also a good passer. What' sometimes overlooked by some fans is that Vanderbilt has always been a very good ballhandler who came into the League as a projected SF. And of course, he's a terrific, disruptive defender who rebounds on both ends. His perimeter shooting has always been the catch with him being more than a rebounder/defender/energy guy. He was great in the role the Wolves carved out for him last season, but his age, quickness, skills and coordination always suggested he could do more. At a minimum he's been and will continue to be a really good rotation role player as a starter or off the bench. He was a starter last season on a 46-win team and he's a starter again on a surprisingly successful team with very limited talent around him.

lipoli390 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

Q-was-here wrote:

FNG wrote:I know many of us keep tabs on ex-Wolves, and this really made me unhappy:

Andrew Wiggins went 8-10 beyond the arc last night, and Jarred Vanderbilt was 4-4...they are 45% and 46.2% on the season, respectively).

(Cue Q's reply to this post in 3...2...1)

GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

Wiggins is the one that just kills me. In 6 seasons with the Wolves he was 33% from behind the arc. In 4 seasons with Golden State he's 39%. It's fucking incredible.

And Vando is just a kick of sand in our face on top of what's happened to a suddenly motivated Wiggins. I mean, you can't make this shit up!

Oh, happy holidays everyone!

The Wiggins things is understandable. We traded him based on what he was for years here. He ended up in a winning culture and it had a positive impact on him. Vando is another story. What he's doing for Utah is what he was doing for us. To the extent he might be playing marginally better, it's simply a function of the fact that he's a young player who was already improving and who had remaining upside. You make your own luck in life. Luck is the product of smart decisions over time. Dumb decisions over time lead to bad luck.

Speaking of Vando, he had 16 highly efficient points along with 7 rebounds, 4 assists, steals and only 1 turnover last night. Kessler had 8 points on 4-4 shooting, along with 8 rebounds and 3 blocks in only 17 minutes. Again, you make your own luck, good or bad, with the sum total of your decisions, smart or dumb.

Personally I think Vanderbilt last year was not encouraged to do much of anything on offense but roam around looking for passes from teammates setting screens and offensive rebounding. That made sense in the context of the team. Utah...they really don't have anything to lose. Why not have Vanderbilt jack up some 3's? Maybe they will even let him handle the ball for more than 2-3 dribbles. We will see if this leads to more offense/upside or whatever for Vanderbilt or not.

Vanderbilt did what you described last season for the Wolves - screening and offensive rebounding. But he would also do a lot of cutting and move a lot off the ball, which was helpful in creating opportunities for teammates. He would also not infrequently handle the ball on the break. He's also a good passer. What' sometimes overlooked by some fans is that Vanderbilt has always been a very good ballhandler who came into the League as a projected SF. And of course, he's a terrific, disruptive defender who rebounds on both ends. His perimeter shooting has always been the catch with him being more than a rebounder/defender/energy guy. He was great in the role the Wolves carved out for him last season, but his age, quickness, skills and coordination always suggested he could do more. At a minimum he's been and will continue to be a really good rotation role player as a starter or off the bench. He was a starter last season on a 46-win team and he's a starter again on a surprisingly successful team with very limited talent around him.

And with all that said the Jazz have been significantly better with Vando on the bench and the Jazz have been below average team overall when Vando has played

lipoli390 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

Q-was-here wrote:

FNG wrote:I know many of us keep tabs on ex-Wolves, and this really made me unhappy:

Andrew Wiggins went 8-10 beyond the arc last night, and Jarred Vanderbilt was 4-4...they are 45% and 46.2% on the season, respectively).

(Cue Q's reply to this post in 3...2...1)

GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

Wiggins is the one that just kills me. In 6 seasons with the Wolves he was 33% from behind the arc. In 4 seasons with Golden State he's 39%. It's fucking incredible.

And Vando is just a kick of sand in our face on top of what's happened to a suddenly motivated Wiggins. I mean, you can't make this shit up!

Oh, happy holidays everyone!

The Wiggins things is understandable. We traded him based on what he was for years here. He ended up in a winning culture and it had a positive impact on him. Vando is another story. What he's doing for Utah is what he was doing for us. To the extent he might be playing marginally better, it's simply a function of the fact that he's a young player who was already improving and who had remaining upside. You make your own luck in life. Luck is the product of smart decisions over time. Dumb decisions over time lead to bad luck.

Speaking of Vando, he had 16 highly efficient points along with 7 rebounds, 4 assists, steals and only 1 turnover last night. Kessler had 8 points on 4-4 shooting, along with 8 rebounds and 3 blocks in only 17 minutes. Again, you make your own luck, good or bad, with the sum total of your decisions, smart or dumb.

Personally I think Vanderbilt last year was not encouraged to do much of anything on offense but roam around looking for passes from teammates setting screens and offensive rebounding. That made sense in the context of the team. Utah...they really don't have anything to lose. Why not have Vanderbilt jack up some 3's? Maybe they will even let him handle the ball for more than 2-3 dribbles. We will see if this leads to more offense/upside or whatever for Vanderbilt or not.

Vanderbilt did what you described last season for the Wolves - screening and offensive rebounding. But he would also do a lot of cutting and move a lot off the ball, which was helpful in creating opportunities for teammates. He would also not infrequently handle the ball on the break. He's also a good passer. What' sometimes overlooked by some fans is that Vanderbilt has always been a very good ballhandler who came into the League as a projected SF. And of course, he's a terrific, disruptive defender who rebounds on both ends. His perimeter shooting has always been the catch with him being more than a rebounder/defender/energy guy. He was great in the role the Wolves carved out for him last season, but his age, quickness, skills and coordination always suggested he could do more. At a minimum he's been and will continue to be a really good rotation role player as a starter or off the bench. He was a starter last season on a 46-win team and he's a starter again on a surprisingly successful team with very limited talent around him.

First of all we both like Vanderbilt and I think we were both people that had some level of belief he had a bit more to be able to do than what he showed. As I watched more late in the season and in the playoffs I did have to admit others on the board were right about his hands catching and holding onto the ball offensively. It was a real problem.

I agree Vanderbilt did other worthwhile things on offense which you described very well I'm in total agreement with you there. However I disagree with you on his handling the ball. From what I saw very little of his value on offense was with the ball in his hands. He did not handle the ball much last season. There was times he specifically looked like he stopped in his tracks and handed the ball over to someone else (sometimes it was not even a guard) very purposefully when there was an opportunity to attack sometimes even in transition. I thought there were times he could have attacked but also there were times he was wild with the ball and I could see why he likely wasn't allowed to do more. The reality is that we don't know as he didn't get many opportunities for whatever reason. Like I said I think he wasn't given the green light and that probably affected him in that regard. He was a pretty high turnover guy in the G-league as Q can attest to. I agree there is some natural ability as a passer too.

I'll also and that there are some basketball folks out there like Brit Robson that thought Finch had a somewhat short leash (in terms of playing time) for Vanderbilt doing other things on offense. I'm not sure I am on board with that but it was an interesting observation.

Personally I was a bit conflicted on not letting Vanderbilt do more. On one hand I was kinda like let's just get this guy being effective in a small role as the previous season was basically his first one playing any meaningful minutes so that's fine just get him doing the things he did the previous year. Maybe if he had stayed around this season maybe he would have improved his game and been unleashed somewhat. I haven't seen him play a minute of basketball this year so idk how or what he isn't doing other than look at stats. I did think last year his shot looked better/not as broken as it was before his FT shooting certainly looked smoother. It doesn't surprise me that with another team he is taking some more 3's. Let's see if he keeps hitting them at a decent clip.

The other reality is that Vanderbilt is on a value contract right now but it lasts for 1 more season after this year. What is he gonna be worth at that point? Who might pay him? What role will he have reasonably achieved? Of the players (I consider Kessler more of a prospect/draft pick) we moved in that deal I thought Vanderbilt obviously had the most value moving forward. Still as much as a I liked him I also had to wonder...how long was he really gonna stay a Timberwolf? It was a bit of a conundrum.

Meanwhile the Wolves may have drafted his replacement in Minott. He has a long ways to go to become the impact player Vanderbilt was but he also seems to have a much higher upside in being a functional offensive player. Again this is what good teams do continue to find players and having to let other guys go. It's also interesting that really the Wolves other than signing Forbes and Rivers they basically used the roster spots opened from the Gobert trade to add young talent. That's partly why the Wolves haven't seen more significant value from the Gobert trade this year is because there is a lot of young talent on the roster. When Forbes remembers how to shoot he will bro no value and it looks to me from the few games I have seen Rivers has been solid and is deserving some minutes at least until the Wolves have more of their perimeter players healthy. Moore is making a case he deserves minutes which is an excellent development no pun intended. :)

monsterpile wrote:I'll also and that there are some basketball folks out there like Brit Robson that thought Finch had a somewhat short leash (in terms of playing time) for Vanderbilt doing other things on offense. I'm not sure I am on board with that but it was an interesting observation.

Personally I was a bit conflicted on not letting Vanderbilt do more. On one hand I was kinda like let's just get this guy being effective in a small role as the previous season was basically his first one playing any meaningful minutes so that's fine just get him doing the things he did the previous year. Maybe if he had stayed around this season maybe he would have improved his game and been unleashed somewhat. I haven't seen him play a minute of basketball this year so idk how or what he isn't doing other than look at stats. I did think last year his shot looked better/not as broken as it was before his FT shooting certainly looked smoother. It doesn't surprise me that with another team he is taking some more 3's. Let's see if he keeps hitting them at a decent clip.

I seem to recall Vanderbilt had (has?) chronic knee issues and that was at least part of the reason for his limited minutes/role with us last year. Possibly same thing going forward too which is why I was ok letting him go. It's too bad because I did like his overall game.