Minnesota Sports Forum

monsterpile wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Q12543 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Q12543 wrote:

WolvesFan21 wrote:

Q12543 wrote:Yeah, makes me jealous watching how Tatum, Brown, and Rozier are three of the four major catalysts (with Horford being the other) of a contending team. Unbelievable. How many lottery picks do we burn through before finding even one guy that is as good as any of these three? Meanwhile they draft three players over the course of three drafts and hit pay dirt on every single one of them. And two are wings for God's sake, which are supposed to be the hardest thing on the planet to find!

Now, how much of this is Stevens' coaching magic and putting them in a position to be successful and how much of it is through Ainge's ability to spot NBA talent? Probably some combination of both, but it's amazing how much each of these three have improved since their rookie year (or in Tatum's case, throughout his rookie year since he's still a freakin' rookie!!!).

Kyries defensive rating went from crap on Cleveland to great on the Celtics. I'm going to say it's mostly Stevens. Throw KAT or Wiggins in and they wouldn't miss a step. He could make both of them good.

If I were Thibs, I'd go talk to Stevens or Pop this off season and ask them how they would get the most out of Wiggins, because he clearly doesn't know the answer!

As for KAT, he's a natural offensively. Defensively, he's the opposite. I'm not sure how much Stevens could coach a big man up defensively. Having Al Horford makes a big difference since he makes everyone else's job a little easier. He's not a great shot blocker, but he is sooooo good at positioning and can switch on nearly anyone.

Eventually... it MUST be on the player.

Wiggins has had three coaches. And we're still blaming the coach and not the player?

That's where Ainge + Stevens + team culture + vet leaders all probably come into play. Maybe the Celtics see something in Wiggins or Towns or even Butler that makes them doubt they'd be a fit there... so they don't even bother?

I agree. Truly great players will be great no matter who they play for or where they play. However, there is one important similarity with Wiggins' carousel of three coaches: None of them ever held him accountable for lazy play. Same with KAT. Both were gifted tons of minutes from the start and groomed as offensive players first and foremost, defensive/hustle players a distant second priority. I think that hurt their development big time.

That's the rub though.

How many great players needed to be benched for a lack of energy or aggression or poor play or whatever... even early in their careers?

Either potentially great players have that drive to be great (the best) or they "settle." It's really that simple. And I don't think we should ignore the money part of this. I've mentioned him before, but Glenn Robinson is a prime example.

He was a good player. But he never became great. He didn't need to be in his mind, apparently. Remember he got paid like he was great as a rookie before proving he could be. And even though it's not his rookie deal, Wiggins is getting paid like he's great before he actually is.

Some players are driven more by money than anything else.


[Note: I'm not saying we know definitively either way with Wiggins. Only that it wouldn't be unprecedented at all if he basically plateaus for the rest of his career ala Robinson and many many others. Likewise, others can point to guys who "got it" after a few years and excelled. The Wolves, who have much more intel than we do, are banking on Wiggins. Let's hope they're right.]

I think Towns and Wiggins should have been benched at times for their poor play but I think there are some legit or situational reasons why they weren't.

1. Talent and young talent. Flip Sam and then Thibs wanted to see these guys out on the court not other random dudes that may or may not (most likely not) be part of the future. I think you could have played these guys plenty while sending a message here and there. I think all their coaches have been swayed by their talent and potential. If you listen to Sam Mitchell the guy will gush about Wiggins and say he is gonna figure out other parts of his game when he gets stronger etc. Sam might not be the smartest basketball mind but he isn't an idiot either. He is probably been the guy that's given as much insight into Wiggins psyche as anyone as well.

2. Towns and Wiggins seem like good dudes and also I've never heard much of any chatter about these guys not putting in the work trying to get better. In other words I don't think these guys give you too many more reasons to not play them.

3. At different times of their careers who did you want to play instead of those guys? Bazz? Maybe. What Big do you play instead of Towns? I think there have been guys you could throw in there and...if you want to make a point who cares to some extent (especially when wins might not matter as much) if it brings about a more desired effect. It might be worth mentioning that Mitchell was a guy that was keeping Towns from playing as much earlier in the season that year and was getting ripped for it bigtime. Eventually he played him about as much as anyone has played him the 2nd half of that season including Thibs.

I think Towns gets it to some extent. How much does he get it? Idk but he plays hard except running the floor for the most part and at times actually plays too hard. Wiggins is a bigger question and he hasn't shown the ability as one of the most versatile scorers in the league like Towns. Is the effort and more rugged play we saw later in the season and 3 of the 5 playoff games a sign of things to come or mostly just another Tease? We will find out. It will be interesting to see if Thibs and Layden can add some guys that Thibs will throw in games if someone isn't playing well. I have hope that MGH will be more ready this year but again only time will tell. Wiggins and Towns need to take a leap this season though.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Q12543 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Q12543 wrote:

WolvesFan21 wrote:

Q12543 wrote:Yeah, makes me jealous watching how Tatum, Brown, and Rozier are three of the four major catalysts (with Horford being the other) of a contending team. Unbelievable. How many lottery picks do we burn through before finding even one guy that is as good as any of these three? Meanwhile they draft three players over the course of three drafts and hit pay dirt on every single one of them. And two are wings for God's sake, which are supposed to be the hardest thing on the planet to find!

Now, how much of this is Stevens' coaching magic and putting them in a position to be successful and how much of it is through Ainge's ability to spot NBA talent? Probably some combination of both, but it's amazing how much each of these three have improved since their rookie year (or in Tatum's case, throughout his rookie year since he's still a freakin' rookie!!!).

Kyries defensive rating went from crap on Cleveland to great on the Celtics. I'm going to say it's mostly Stevens. Throw KAT or Wiggins in and they wouldn't miss a step. He could make both of them good.

If I were Thibs, I'd go talk to Stevens or Pop this off season and ask them how they would get the most out of Wiggins, because he clearly doesn't know the answer!

As for KAT, he's a natural offensively. Defensively, he's the opposite. I'm not sure how much Stevens could coach a big man up defensively. Having Al Horford makes a big difference since he makes everyone else's job a little easier. He's not a great shot blocker, but he is sooooo good at positioning and can switch on nearly anyone.

Eventually... it MUST be on the player.

Wiggins has had three coaches. And we're still blaming the coach and not the player?

That's where Ainge + Stevens + team culture + vet leaders all probably come into play. Maybe the Celtics see something in Wiggins or Towns or even Butler that makes them doubt they'd be a fit there... so they don't even bother?

I agree. Truly great players will be great no matter who they play for or where they play. However, there is one important similarity with Wiggins' carousel of three coaches: None of them ever held him accountable for lazy play. Same with KAT. Both were gifted tons of minutes from the start and groomed as offensive players first and foremost, defensive/hustle players a distant second priority. I think that hurt their development big time.

That's the rub though.

How many great players needed to be benched for a lack of energy or aggression or poor play or whatever... even early in their careers?

Either potentially great players have that drive to be great (the best) or they "settle." It's really that simple. And I don't think we should ignore the money part of this. I've mentioned him before, but Glenn Robinson is a prime example.

He was a good player. But he never became great. He didn't need to be in his mind, apparently. Remember he got paid like he was great as a rookie before proving he could be. And even though it's not his rookie deal, Wiggins is getting paid like he's great before he actually is.

Some players are driven more by money than anything else.


[Note: I'm not saying we know definitively either way with Wiggins. Only that it wouldn't be unprecedented at all if he basically plateaus for the rest of his career ala Robinson and many many others. Likewise, others can point to guys who "got it" after a few years and excelled. The Wolves, who have much more intel than we do, are banking on Wiggins. Let's hope they're right.]

I think Towns and Wiggins should have been benched at times for their poor play but I think there are some legit or situational reasons why they weren't.

1. Talent and young talent. Flip Sam and then Thibs wanted to see these guys out on the court not other random dudes that may or may not (most likely not) be part of the future. I think you could have played these guys plenty while sending a message here and there. I think all their coaches have been swayed by their talent and potential. If you listen to Sam Mitchell the guy will gush about Wiggins and say he is gonna figure out other parts of his game when he gets stronger etc. Sam might not be the smartest basketball mind but he isn't an idiot either. He is probably been the guy that's given as much insight into Wiggins psyche as anyone as well.

2. Towns and Wiggins seem like good dudes and also I've never heard much of any chatter about these guys not putting in the work trying to get better. In other words I don't think these guys give you too many more reasons to not play them.

3. At different times of their careers who did you want to play instead of those guys? Bazz? Maybe. What Big do you play instead of Towns? I think there have been guys you could throw in there and...if you want to make a point who cares to some extent (especially when wins might not matter as much) if it brings about a more desired effect. It might be worth mentioning that Mitchell was a guy that was keeping Towns from playing as much earlier in the season that year and was getting ripped for it bigtime. Eventually he played him about as much as anyone has played him the 2nd half of that season including Thibs.

I think Towns gets it to some extent. How much does he get it? Idk but he plays hard except running the floor for the most part and at times actually plays too hard. Wiggins is a bigger question and he hasn't shown the ability as one of the most versatile scorers in the league like Towns. Is the effort and more rugged play we saw later in the season and 3 of the 5 playoff games a sign of things to come or mostly just another Tease? We will find out. It will be interesting to see if Thibs and Layden can add some guys that Thibs will throw in games if someone isn't playing well. I have hope that MGH will be more ready this year but again only time will tell. Wiggins and Towns need to take a leap this season though.

All fair points. I guess my biggest concern is that in Year 5 and Year 4... either of the Wolves potential stars would give a coach even a glimmer of a reason to bench them.

We should be far beyond that by this point. If these guys are going to be reach their potential as guys we thought could be "superstars", we should be seeing consistency and tangible improvement.

Personally, I have more hope for one of them than the other... and the stats (and eye test) back up my take.

monsterpile wrote:Last time Lebron was down 0-2 in the east was against Boston in 2008. That's something. The Celtics are just fun to watch. Tough gritty talented play their butts off etc etc etc. Who needs Kyrie when you have Rozier. I'm not even joking around at this point. Oh wait you know who could use him? The Cavs.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

monsterpile wrote:Last time Lebron was down 0-2 in the east was against Boston in 2008. That's something. The Celtics are just fun to watch. Tough gritty talented play their butts off etc etc etc. Who needs Kyrie when you have Rozier. I'm not even joking around at this point. Oh wait you know who could use him? The Cavs.

Maybe.

I don't know if he'd be empowered to be the guy he is with Boston in Cleveland. That's the rub with guys like James, Harden and Westbrook...

They're obviously their respective team's best player and best option with the ball in his hands. But what happens is that the other four guys can become passive participants. They're just standing around waiting for their chance.

Some guys can do well in this role. Other guys? I can see where they can get completely out of rhythm in that type of role. Heck, Kevin Love was a triple-double machine by the end of his run in Minnesota. He is one of the best passers at his position in the NBA. His assists are down to 1.4 in the playoffs and go down every year as those all-around skills are largely ignored in Cleveland.

One of the reasons it seems like Boston has so many better basketball players is because they're given more chances to make basketball plays. Look at last night as an example...

1st quarter: Jaylen Brown keeps them in it with 13 points?
2nd quarter: Jayson Tatum scores 11 points?
3rd quarter: Terry Rozier scores 14 points?
4th quarter: Al Horford.

Each of those guys is empowered and encouraged unlike what happens on a team dominated by an obvious best player.

Q12543 wrote:Yeah, LeBron was more than willing to share the spotlight with Kyrie. It was basically those two taking turns trying to exploit mis-matches on switched PnR coverages. It's similar to what Harden and Paul have been doing throughout the playoffs. LeBron simply doesn't have anyone of that caliber playing next to him and their defense isn't good enough to make up for it.

As for Love, I think he peaked in Minnesota. He was on the front end of the "stretch 4" revolution and also had the ability to post up and grab a ton of offensive rebounds. It didn't hurt that he played a lot of games next to Pekovic, who occupied a lot of space and attention. NBA bigs are now much more adept at guarding players like Love, especially with his limited length/athleticism. He's still a very good player, but he just can't create offense in the same way a Kyrie Irving can.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:Speaking of being empowered:

Aron Baynes is 31 years old. He was 4 - 28 on three pointers in his entire NBA career.
He's 10 - 20 on three pointers in these playoffs.

Wait... what? And it's not like he was known as a knockdown mid-range shooter either where this means he's just moving back a foot or two. It's completely out of left-field...

Q12543 wrote:Yeah, LeBron was more than willing to share the spotlight with Kyrie. It was basically those two taking turns trying to exploit mis-matches on switched PnR coverages. It's similar to what Harden and Paul have been doing throughout the playoffs. LeBron simply doesn't have anyone of that caliber playing next to him and their defense isn't good enough to make up for it.

As for Love, I think he peaked in Minnesota. He was on the front end of the "stretch 4" revolution and also had the ability to post up and grab a ton of offensive rebounds. It didn't hurt that he played a lot of games next to Pekovic, who occupied a lot of space and attention. NBA bigs are now much more adept at guarding players like Love, especially with his limited length/athleticism. He's still a very good player, but he just can't create offense in the same way a Kyrie Irving can.