Minnesota Sports Forum

Q12543 wrote:LST, I think the Jazz and Clippers foursomes are easily better than ours to go along with the Pelicans. The Spurs are less talented on paper but they have one of the greatest coaches in history, so guys that would be in the G-league or end of bench with the Wolves end up being productive 8th men on the Spurs.

The Kings might be the one team up there we have a leg up on. I kind of think they are playing with house money and might falter soon.

I'll grant you your point on Pop and the spurs and agree that you can make a case for Utah being better if it's last year's version of Mitchell, but I see the clippers core as substantially weaker than ours. Here's how I look at it:

KAT far superior to Harrell.

Covington superior to Harris (look at their stats...RoCo a much better defender, and Harris only slightly better on offense)

Rose superior to Williams (Q, you who love EFG% have to agree on this one, especially since Williams is also a terrible defender like Rose)

Galinari superior to Gibson (but not by much)

You might be able to find a stat or two to refute the Wolves' superiority over the Clippers, but I can find several more than support my conclusion. The Clippers' success this season has a lot to do with coaching IMO...Rivers is underrated.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:WAIT... HOLD ON A MINUTE...

Are we saying that our max contract $150M player NEARING HIS PRIME is not one of the top 4 players on a sub .500 team?

WAIT... HOLD ON A MINUTE...

He's at least top 5. Right? RIGHT?!?!?!

Ha, sorry Abe, I have the much-maligned Jeff Teague as #5!

But Wig, as overpaid as he is, is another reason our supporting cast is so strong...he's not bad for a #6, just not what we want him to be.

longstrangetrip wrote:

Q12543 wrote:LST, I think the Jazz and Clippers foursomes are easily better than ours to go along with the Pelicans. The Spurs are less talented on paper but they have one of the greatest coaches in history, so guys that would be in the G-league or end of bench with the Wolves end up being productive 8th men on the Spurs.

The Kings might be the one team up there we have a leg up on. I kind of think they are playing with house money and might falter soon.

I'll grant you your point on Pop and the spurs and agree that you can make a case for Utah being better if it's last year's version of Mitchell, but I see the clippers core as substantially weaker than ours. Here's how I look at it:

KAT far superior to Harrell.

Covington superior to Harris (look at their stats...RoCo a much better defender, and Harris only slightly better on offense)

Rose superior to Williams (Q, you who love EFG% have to agree on this one, especially since Williams is also a terrible defender like Rose)

Galinari superior to Gibson (but not by much)

You might be able to find a stat or two to refute the Wolves' superiority over the Clippers, but I can find several more than support my conclusion. The Clippers' success this season has a lot to do with coaching IMO...Rivers is underrated.

I guess I value Gallo and Tobias more because they can carry a team's scoring load if necessary. Neither Taj or RoCo are capable of that. I realize pure scoring can be overrated in the absence of efficiency (Exhibit A: Andrew Wiggins), but it can also be underrated by some of the advanced stats. A lot of these high-impact role players that just kill it in things like RPM and Net Rating are able to stay in their lane because there is someone else that takes all the tough shots when all else breaks down. Taj and RoCo really aren't ever asked to go do this. And if they were, their efficiency and energy levels to do everything else would plummet.

longstrangetrip wrote:

Q12543 wrote:LST, I think the Jazz and Clippers foursomes are easily better than ours to go along with the Pelicans. The Spurs are less talented on paper but they have one of the greatest coaches in history, so guys that would be in the G-league or end of bench with the Wolves end up being productive 8th men on the Spurs.

The Kings might be the one team up there we have a leg up on. I kind of think they are playing with house money and might falter soon.

I'll grant you your point on Pop and the spurs and agree that you can make a case for Utah being better if it's last year's version of Mitchell, but I see the clippers core as substantially weaker than ours. Here's how I look at it:

KAT far superior to Harrell.

Covington superior to Harris (look at their stats...RoCo a much better defender, and Harris only slightly better on offense)

Rose superior to Williams (Q, you who love EFG% have to agree on this one, especially since Williams is also a terrible defender like Rose)

Galinari superior to Gibson (but not by much)

You might be able to find a stat or two to refute the Wolves' superiority over the Clippers, but I can find several more than support my conclusion. The Clippers' success this season has a lot to do with coaching IMO...Rivers is underrated.

I think you're woefully undervaluing both Galinari and Harris.

Harris only slightly better on offense?

Covington: 13.3 ppg / 5.5 reb / 1.3 apg / 43.1% fg / 37.8% 3fg / 77.3% ft
Harris: 21.0 ppg / 8.0 reb / 2.4 apg / 50.2% fg / 44.3% 3fg / 87.6% ft

Harris is near 50/40/90 territory for efficiency... that's crazy good. And he's another guy who KEEPS improving year after year. Will it continue after he lands a near-max contract? Conversely, Covington is good at what he is... but there's not even a skylight in that lower ceiling.

And what's crazy is that advanced stat geek stuff digs Galinari even more offensively. In part, because he shoots even better from behind the arc and free throw line on more attempts.

Lou Williams and Derrick Rose are largely interchangeable in my view. Both are mercurial scoring guards, ideal off the bench, who can set up teammates sometimes. They're both near the very top of the list for guys in that role this season. Williams has proven capable of a repeat performance. Is Rose?

Obviously, for as shockingly good Harrell has been... KAT is better and may swing the entire debate on his talent alone.

We're just a different defensive team when Roco is on the court and frankly Rose and Towns is really all you need offensively when you can hold the other team to around 100. Without Roco we don't have the offensive firepower to keep up in high pace/high volume games, but with him our defense is good enough that we don't need as much offensively to win. He brings balance to the team even if he isn't an offensive stud himself because we don't need multiple guys to go off to score 120+ as a team. I don't think we are a playoff team because of his injury and that'll happen when a DPOY candidate misses significant time during the season.

khans2k5 wrote:We're just a different defensive team when Roco is on the court and frankly Rose and Towns is really all you need offensively when you can hold the other team to around 100. Without Roco we don't have the offensive firepower to keep up in high pace/high volume games, but with him our defense is good enough that we don't need as much offensively to win. He brings balance to the team even if he isn't an offensive stud himself because we don't need multiple guys to go off to score 120+ as a team. I don't think we are a playoff team because of his injury and that'll happen when a DPOY candidate misses significant time during the season.

I couldn't agree more, Khans. The drop off we experience in replacing Rob with Okogie in the starting lineup is startling, and I would argue it is almost as significant on offense as the obvious defensive drop off. Rob is a legitimate 3-point threat and, uncharacteristic of this team, completely willing to let it fly...opposing defenses have to respect this, and it leaves much more room for KAT, Wig and Taj to operate in the paint. In contrast opposing defenses sag off of Josh because they don't respect his shooting, leaving one more set of hands in the paint to knock the ball away from Wig. We desperately need Rob to return, and the frustrating thing is there isn't even a rough timetable.

Not sure if this was brought up already but do we have data on how we do when, albeit rarely, shoot more 3s than our opponent?

BizarroJerry wrote:Not sure if this was brought up already but do we have data on how we do when, albeit rarely, shoot more 3s than our opponent?

Based upon your post I'll go out on a limb and say you're part of we does not have that data... nor do I. ;)

TheSP wrote:

BizarroJerry wrote:Not sure if this was brought up already but do we have data on how we do when, albeit rarely, shoot more 3s than our opponent?

Based upon your post I'll go out on a limb and say you're part of we does not have that data... nor do I. ;)

Yes. I'm very lazy.

khans2k5 wrote:We're just a different defensive team when Roco is on the court and frankly Rose and Towns is really all you need offensively when you can hold the other team to around 100. Without Roco we don't have the offensive firepower to keep up in high pace/high volume games, but with him our defense is good enough that we don't need as much offensively to win but with him our defense is good enough that we don't need as much offensively to win. He brings balance to the team even if he isn't an offensive stud himself because we don't need multiple guys to go off to score 120+ as a team. I don't think we are a playoff team because of his injury and that'll happen when a DPOY candidate misses significant time during the season.

I think we need to see more before drawing this conclusion. Yes, we were a completely different defensive team for the first 10 games or so after the trade, but then things began to settle down and we weren't so great anymore.

Don't get me wrong, I like RoCo and I thought he may have helped ignite the whole team defensively. But after the initial spark, things faded quite a bit. And he does get torched at times mano a mano. It's his team defense that is really good.