Minnesota Sports Forum

On DeRozan....Yes, he struggled with efficiency as well and then he suddenly popped up to a decent level (around league average) by his 7th freakin' season. But his On/Off numbers are somewhat disturbing. There has been only one season in his entire career where his team has done better with him ON the court versus OFF of it. I realize he's played for some deep, well coached teams in Toronto and now San Antonio, but that says a lot about him.

On Mitchell....I watched a bit of the Utah game last night. Wow, now he takes some tough shots. Wiggins-esque in the number of long two's and mid-range toughies he tried. McHale made a great point. It's not that he's become a bad shooter, it's that he's taking bad shots.

On "just a few tweaks" with Wiggins to get him to be more efficient....I kind of agree here, but keep in mind that he's been through three coaches and he's only gotten worse. Pop is not a good example since he can take a random player from the Y and turn him into an NBA rotation player. He's a freakin' legend. Rudy Gay and something called Bertans are the latest examples.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

sjm34 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:DeMar DeRozan has been used as a Wiggins comp in the past... Wiggins isn't near that level.

DeRozan is averaging 22.9 ppg for Popovich... interestingly, DeRozan has continued to improve as a passer. He's averaging 6.3 apg... vs. only 2.4 TOs.

Here are both players first four seasons -

https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.fcgi?request=1&sum=1&player_id1_hint=Andrew+Wiggins&player_id1_select=Andrew+Wiggins&y1=2018&player_id1=wiggian01&idx=players&player_id2_hint=DeMar+DeRozan&player_id2_select=DeMar+DeRozan&y2=2013&player_id2=derozde01&idx=players

DeRozan remains the "best case" comp for Wiggins because he's one of the few star players who weren't always on a steady upward climb. For example, he seemed to regress a bit in Year 3. But when we look back at his career in full... we can definitely see how he improved his game along the way. Even as an anomaly... he separates himself from Wiggins by getting off that plateau.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/d/derozde01.html

By the way, DeRozan is currently making less than Wiggins... and is ostracized/undervalued among the nerdiest NBA analytic wonks.

I actually think Wiggins may be better than DeRozan defensively and I don't think Wiggins is very good defensively. Offensively, DeRozan is the far superior player, BUT he doesn't space the floor well and he still does need a fair amount of shots to get his points. The On/Off numbers sort of jump out at you too which is where the analytics folks take pause I think.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

sjm34 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:DeMar DeRozan has been used as a Wiggins comp in the past... Wiggins isn't near that level.

DeRozan is averaging 22.9 ppg for Popovich... interestingly, DeRozan has continued to improve as a passer. He's averaging 6.3 apg... vs. only 2.4 TOs.

Here are both players first four seasons -

https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.fcgi?request=1&sum=1&player_id1_hint=Andrew+Wiggins&player_id1_select=Andrew+Wiggins&y1=2018&player_id1=wiggian01&idx=players&player_id2_hint=DeMar+DeRozan&player_id2_select=DeMar+DeRozan&y2=2013&player_id2=derozde01&idx=players

DeRozan remains the "best case" comp for Wiggins because he's one of the few star players who weren't always on a steady upward climb. For example, he seemed to regress a bit in Year 3. But when we look back at his career in full... we can definitely see how he improved his game along the way. Even as an anomaly... he separates himself from Wiggins by getting off that plateau.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/d/derozde01.html

By the way, DeRozan is currently making less than Wiggins... and is ostracized/undervalued among the nerdiest NBA analytic wonks.

Hoopshype shows DD making a couple mil more.

DD has improved his game, but he is 6 years older than Wig. Does Wig get that same opportunity?

I agree with Q that WIg is a better defensive player, but offensively DD has learned how to draw contact, and that is literally the only difference imo. Get Wig a new coach that actually takes control of his play on the court, and I think we would see a big difference. I am not saying it does anything to increase Wig's energy level, but I don't think it would take much to get WIg into the mid 50's for TS%.

sjm34 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

sjm34 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:DeMar DeRozan has been used as a Wiggins comp in the past... Wiggins isn't near that level.

DeRozan is averaging 22.9 ppg for Popovich... interestingly, DeRozan has continued to improve as a passer. He's averaging 6.3 apg... vs. only 2.4 TOs.

Here are both players first four seasons -

https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.fcgi?request=1&sum=1&player_id1_hint=Andrew+Wiggins&player_id1_select=Andrew+Wiggins&y1=2018&player_id1=wiggian01&idx=players&player_id2_hint=DeMar+DeRozan&player_id2_select=DeMar+DeRozan&y2=2013&player_id2=derozde01&idx=players

DeRozan remains the "best case" comp for Wiggins because he's one of the few star players who weren't always on a steady upward climb. For example, he seemed to regress a bit in Year 3. But when we look back at his career in full... we can definitely see how he improved his game along the way. Even as an anomaly... he separates himself from Wiggins by getting off that plateau.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/d/derozde01.html

By the way, DeRozan is currently making less than Wiggins... and is ostracized/undervalued among the nerdiest NBA analytic wonks.

Hoopshype shows DD making a couple mil more.

DD has improved his game, but he is 6 years older than Wig. Does Wig get that same opportunity?

I agree with Q that WIg is a better defensive player, but offensively DD has learned how to draw contact, and that is literally the only difference imo. Get Wig a new coach that actually takes control of his play on the court, and I think we would see a big difference. I am not saying it does anything to increase Wig's energy level, but I don't think it would take much to get WIg into the mid 50's for TS%.

I just pointed out how DeRozan is averaging 6.3 apg.

Wiggins averages 2.2 apg.

DeRozan is also a better rebounder. And... for the first time in his career, he has a positive DBPM... barely. How much of that is because of a new scheme? I dunno. Wiggins is at -1.2.

But this is what I do know... despite some shaky On-Off numbers, DeRozan has made the playoffs for five straight seasons as the #1 or #1a guy on his team. And this season... he's in a new place and despite a slow start and a lot of expectations that the Spurs run was finally over...

They're 21 - 17 with a roster that starts Bryn Forbes, Dante Cunningham/Derrick White and Rudy Gay alongside him and Aldridge.
Meanwhile, Minnesota is 17 - 20 with KAT, Teague, Gibson and Covington.

I'd keep Wiggins. No one is worth what he's getting paid, but we've seen his defense improve by leaps and bounds in the last 2 years and I still think he can give you 22-25 game when he's not the 4th option.

I'd dump Thibs before Wiggins. Get a coach in that knows how to leverage his athleticism.

(but Flip . . .but Mitchell etc . . .he was 20).

I'll admit that statistically, Wiggins may not be as bad as I portray him for two reasons. 1) He plays with no motor and no heart and I've never had much patience for guys like that, especially with a lot of physical gifts. 2) I was down on Wiggins years ago and caught a lot of criticism from some people on the board for it until last year, so I may be holding that against Andrew and painting him in a negative light.

That said, I still think he's largely empty calories. I like that he's shooting 3s a bit better, but he's generally an inefficient scorer who regularly settles for low percentage shots doesn't move the ball or play well off the ball. He's had a couple nice defensive plays at times but he's still a passive, non-impact defender. He doesn't bring anything else to the table really (certainly not floor vision or court awareness), and he's been regressing, if anything. And again, the fact that he plays with no heart or motor is still a huge limitation, even if his physical gifts are able to help him score some big points some nights.

BUT the bigger reason why I'm skeptical of our ability to trade Wiggins is because of the contract. The player we are describing is not a guy you want to rely on too much on the floor, but it's much, MUCH worse to have a max contract tied up with that. That's the main issue. A team could take Wiggins and try to narrow his role on the court a bit more to help him develop and be more efficient. But you can't narrow that salary. It handicaps a team financially for the next several years, and the gap between that cost and the value you get from Wiggins as a player is one of the biggest in the league, I'd argue.

It was touched on earlier... and it shouldn't be dismissed... but NBA players do care about the amount of money (and the number of minutes) other guys (even teammates) get.

Just ask Jimmy Butler.

leado01 wrote:I'd keep Wiggins. No one is worth what he's getting paid, but we've seen his defense improve by leaps and bounds in the last 2 years and I still think he can give you 22-25 game when he's not the 4th option.

I'd dump Thibs before Wiggins. Get a coach in that knows how to leverage his athleticism.

(but Flip . . .but Mitchell etc . . .he was 20).

His defense hasn't improved by leaps and bounds. Sorry, it just hasn't. If it had, we would not still be ranked as a bottom 10 defense these last couple years given the number of minutes he's played on the wing. I do think it's improved, but in small increments here and there.

And yes, I think most fans agree that Thibs needs to go no matter what happens to Wiggins.

SameOldNudityDrew wrote:I'll admit that statistically, Wiggins may not be as bad as I portray him for two reasons. 1) He plays with no motor and no heart and I've never had much patience for guys like that, especially with a lot of physical gifts. 2) I was down on Wiggins years ago and caught a lot of criticism from some people on the board for it until last year, so I may be holding that against Andrew and painting him in a negative light.

That said, I still think he's largely empty calories. I like that he's shooting 3s a bit better, but he's generally an inefficient scorer who regularly settles for low percentage shots doesn't move the ball or play well off the ball. He's had a couple nice defensive plays at times but he's still a passive, non-impact defender. He doesn't bring anything else to the table really (certainly not floor vision or court awareness), and he's been regressing, if anything. And again, the fact that he plays with no heart or motor is still a huge limitation, even if his physical gifts are able to help him score some big points some nights.

BUT the bigger reason why I'm skeptical of our ability to trade Wiggins is because of the contract. The player we are describing is not a guy you want to rely on too much on the floor, but it's much, MUCH worse to have a max contract tied up with that. That's the main issue. A team could take Wiggins and try to narrow his role on the court a bit more to help him develop and be more efficient. But you can't narrow that salary. It handicaps a team financially for the next several years, and the gap between that cost and the value you get from Wiggins as a player is one of the biggest in the league, I'd argue.

Last year was a good tryout to see if Wiggins would be more efficient in a narrower role since Butler and KAT were clearly the top two options, with Teague also capable of scoring more than Rubio. In theory, this would lead to better, more efficient shots for Wiggins. Nope. Still inefficient and largely a neutral on-court impact.

I honestly don't know what the answer is to "fix" him, which is why I ultimately agree with your conclusion: We need to trade him.

SameOldNudityDrew wrote:

BUT the bigger reason why I'm skeptical of our ability to trade Wiggins is because of the contract. The player we are describing is not a guy you want to rely on too much on the floor, but it's much, MUCH worse to have a max contract tied up with that. That's the main issue. A team could take Wiggins and try to narrow his role on the court a bit more to help him develop and be more efficient. But you can't narrow that salary. It handicaps a team financially for the next several years, and the gap between that cost and the value you get from Wiggins as a player is one of the biggest in the league, I'd argue.

You are correct that trading him may be an issue. Although, guys I think are untradeable get moved every year. Take George Hill this year. Decent player....but at $18MM this year and next year? Who would have thought the Cavs could unload him with his injury history and that price tag? The Cavs had to take back Delly, but they got Henson and both a first and second round pick as well. I would say Wiggins, even with his contract, should carry this type of value....no? We may have to take back similar contracts, but perhaps guys that are a better fit? I won't claim to know who those players are, but I am sure they are out there.