Minnesota Sports Forum

TRKO wrote:

LloydBraun wrote:Scotty Brooks available. Is he a country club guy?

I would pass on him. He has had more talent than anybody the last few years and not much to show for it.

OKC has also been probably the second most injury ravaged team over the past couple years; especially in the playoffs, right behind our timberpuppies

Rondo used to be one of my favorite players and I loved his grit and determination when the Celtics were fighting for championships. His personality is fine and sometimes even great when the team is winning, see the 2012 ECF when he almost single handedly beat the Heat, but when the team is losing that grit and determination turns to extreme stubbornness and isolation. ESPN the Mag wrote a great article in their recent point guard issue on him and it basically said he is a genius, but a genius who thinks there is absolutely no one smarter than him, including his coaches.
In summary Rondo is a dink, but in the right situation he's a max worthy player and in the wrong scenario, he's not worth the MLE.

northernhoops wrote:Rondo used to be one of my favorite players and I loved his grit and determination when the Celtics were fighting for championships. His personality is fine and sometimes even great when the team is winning, see the 2012 ECF when he almost single handedly beat the Heat, but when the team is losing that grit and determination turns to extreme stubbornness and isolation. ESPN the Mag wrote a great article in their recent point guard issue on him and it basically said he is a genius, but a genius who thinks there is absolutely no one smarter than him, including his coaches.
In summary Rondo is a dink, but in the right situation he's a max worthy player and in the wrong scenario, he's not worth the MLE.

I generally agree; I used to love Rondo's unique game and quirks. But he's not the same player anymore and really hasn't been for a few years now. He's one of these guys that kind of peaked early and then fizzled out.

Add him to the list of curious cases whereby his offense dropped off a cliff after some decent early years. Check out Andris Biedrans and Ronnie Brewer as well - two guys that had decent, efficient offensive skills early in their career and then suddenly dropped off a cliff at relatively young ages. I mean, these guys couldn't even make a free throw eventually.

The Grizz have been awesome. They were blasted by lots of media because frankly they are a team that trends against the new style of ball. They shot the second fewest 3s this year and win by ball control, solid d, and dominating inside. Oddly enough Flip wanted their coach. All of the analytics guys in the media were ripping them for their mini slump before the playoffs and now I think there isn't a team out there that wants to play them.

I find it very interesting that Hollinger has a major voice on this team. It really lends itself to the argument that good analytics is not about jacking up more 3s and just making your team mimic the warriors (which frankly is impossible), but it is about how to get to the best point differential possible. Combing high % offense and tough nose D. Yes they did take 16 3s last night, but they only take them within the natural flow of their offense and if it isn't there they go inside.


Love the grizz this year and hope they keep winning, would also like to see us go this route with how we build out the rest of our squad. Dominant inside game with great wing defense. Would not surprise me at all if the Grizz come out of the west.

Doper, Memphis has established a clear identity and perfected the grind-it-out style they personify. However, the Grizz do some things that even the analytics folks would endorse. For example, they are 8th in the NBA in terms of the % of shots they take within 3-feet of the rim (the Wolves are 20th for comparison's sake). Those are good shots to take. They are 14th in the NBA in % of long 2's they take, so for a team that doesn't shoot a lot of 3's, they are middle of the pack on long 2s attempted (the Wolves are 2nd by the way). What's incredibly maddening for us Wolves fans is how we can be dead last in 3PTAs, yet second in long 2's attempted.

Oh, and a great defense covers a LOT of flaws in an offense.

Q12543 wrote:Doper, Memphis has established a clear identity and perfected the grind-it-out style they personify. However, the Grizz do some things that even the analytics folks would endorse. For example, they are 8th in the NBA in terms of the % of shots they take within 3-feet of the rim (the Wolves are 20th for comparison's sake). Those are good shots to take. They are 14th in the NBA in % of long 2's they take, so for a team that doesn't shoot a lot of 3's, they are middle of the pack on long 2s attempted (the Wolves are 2nd by the way). What's incredibly maddening for us Wolves fans is how we can be dead last in 3PTAs, yet second in long 2's attempted.

Oh, and a great defense covers a LOT of flaws in an offense.

I am not trying to single anyone out, and particularly not you. I think you are really good at getting to the heart of matters both from the eye test and data.

But simply criticizing Flip for not taking enough 3s (which is something that has happened here) is not even close to the whole picture. The reductionist argument that 3s are better than 2s and therefore you need to have more 3 pt shooters on a team occurs regularly amongst many people who claim to use analytics as analysis. I think it should be equally maddening that our main options for easy shots, Pek, completely shit the bed this year even when he was on the floor. When that fell through, we really had no options for an efficient offence.

You are pointing out that there are a variety of ways to get there. Obviously the combination didn't work this year, but I see that really because of the horses we were running than exclusively systems based.

I lean towards Okafor in this draft because I think that Rubio and him could get us to a great % of shots within 3ft which could be the bread and butter of a great offense especially with Okafor being a good passer. Also freeing up great open looks from 3. Basically I see us sooo far away from becoming the Warriors. But see us very close to becoming memphis, which is equally appealing to me.

Right, great talent is always the first order of business and then taking those ingredients and stitching an identity and consistency together is the second order of business. Memphis has been very successful in doing this in a small market context.

That being said, I don't see anyone that harps on Flip suggesting that we can become the Warriors or the Rockets. We don't have Steph Curry, Klay Thompson, or James Harden. We have a poor man's version in Kevin Martin, but that's about it.

What I harp on and others from across the blogosphere harp on is the contradictory approach by Flip of being dead last in 3-pt attempts because we supposedly lack the personnel, while being 2nd in the NBA in long 2 point attempts. Both are jump shots! Why is the one worth 33% fewer points so much more valued by Flip!?

doper---I lean towards Okafor in this draft because I think that Rubio and him could get us to a great % of shots within 3ft which could be the bread and butter of a great offense especially with Okafor being a good passer. Also freeing up great open looks from 3. Basically I see us sooo far away from becoming the Warriors. But see us very close to becoming memphis, which is equally appealing to me.

Good points. I lean towards Okafor as well for the things you say, and the fact that he will help is now. We are the worst team in the league. We need help now. Towns may prove to be great in 2 - 3 seasons, or maybe he wont. Okafor is a safer bet.

We didn't play it safe with LaVine at 13... We also arguably didn't play it safe with Wiggins (assuming CLE called for Flip's opinion)... MIN had both guys rated super high (1 & 7). I have to believe Flip has Towns No. 1 and rightfully so.

Anyone noticing how well Barea and Brewer are playing in this series?