CoolBreeze44 wrote:Safe to say our depth leaves a little to be desired?
Yup, that's where things fall apart. Although it seems like a more solve-able problem than landing stars in the draft or via trade, which requires a lot of moxie and luck. Flip The GM seemed to get that part mostly right.
No question
What will be key for the short term is finding some guys that fit into how this team wants to play and to a certain extent I am not sure that's been established and it be honest it's understandable. Can Milt find some guys that Sam or whoever else is coaching find their role and succeed? I think bench players even in the NBA matters of fit for the system or how you play and with the players. It shouldn't be to hard to improve on a couple guys but...we say that every year right? :)
Considering that Ricky had missed 2 years due to injury, maybe he is hitting the stride that many star players hit in year 3. I believe Ricky is going to rock and roll from now on and we will all be grateful that he wasn't traded. This is what I was expecting when the Wolves drafted him.
khans2k5 wrote:Slow your roll everybody. He's playing out of his mind and we're still a .500 team. He has to both keep up this level of play and we have to start winning more games or frankly it doesn't matter. He can't be called elite until he starts winning us games because frankly that's what all elite players do.
Slow your roll, khans. The "youngblood" starting five, including Rubio, is beating opposing teams' starting fives night after night. Our bench is putrid and the head coach isn't necessarily helping things. We're still collecting losses, but again, it's not something Rubio's directly contributing to.
I think you're the only one calling him elite. I can't recall a single poster or media pundit that made that claim. Why you keep bringing it up is beyond me.
There is actually one version of the starting lineup that did better than the youngblood one: The oldblood one. KG-Prince-KAT-Wiggins-Rubio had a better point differential than the youngblood one. And it's for the exact opposite reason - defense.
So the Rubio-KAT-Wiggins trio has been the constant in both cases. Insert Dieng and LaVine and we become a run-and-gun offensive powerhouse. Insert KG and Prince and we're a grind-it-out defensive juggernaut. It's actually kind of weird how by simply changing out two guys we get completely different results...both good, but for very different reasons.
It's also funny how Khans is moving the goal posts on his view of Ricky. Now if we don't have a winning record, we can't call him elite. Gasp! We can't call him elite, oh no! Do we have permission to call him "good", "solid", or may be even "very good"? Because those are generally the things many of us have been calling him all along.
Q - Interesting observation about the two different starting lineups and the two very different ways of succeeding each one represents. But I'm not sure we won as much with the blended early lineup as we have with the current young lineup. In any event, the early lineup clearly had no possible future beyond this season and ended up having an even shorter lifespan. I have to give credit to Sam for finally going with the young lineup, although KG's knees and constant losing really left him no viable choice. Another positive about the young lineup is the potential for growth defensively. Zach, Dieng and Towns all have the physical tools and competitive fire to improve a lot defensively. Wiggins has the tools and has already shown he can be a lock-down defender.
khans2k5 wrote:Slow your roll everybody. He's playing out of his mind and we're still a .500 team. He has to both keep up this level of play and we have to start winning more games or frankly it doesn't matter. He can't be called elite until he starts winning us games because frankly that's what all elite players do.
Slow your roll, khans. The "youngblood" starting five, including Rubio, is beating opposing teams' starting fives night after night. Our bench is putrid and the head coach isn't necessarily helping things. We're still collecting losses, but again, it's not something Rubio's directly contributing to.
I think you're the only one calling him elite. I can't recall a single poster or media pundit that made that claim. Why you keep bringing it up is beyond me.
A quote from Lip on the first page.
"I think Ricky will end up at 42% and 36% the rest of his career. If so, combined with his other talents, he'll be an elite PG."
I'm not the one saying it. Since he's above those percentages for the last month does that not make him elite in the eyes of a poster? I thought according to you I'm the only one saying that. I guess you were fucking wrong.
Phenom's_Revenge wrote:Considering that Ricky had missed 2 years due to injury, maybe he is hitting the stride that many star players hit in year 3. I believe Ricky is going to rock and roll from now on and we will all be grateful that he wasn't traded. This is what I was expecting when the Wolves drafted him.
I agree, Phenom. I've always thought Ricky could at least become a decent shooter given his consistent 80+% free throw shooting and the inmate talent underlying his pin-point passing. So it shouldn't be a a complete surprise to see Ricky's shot improve subapstantially late this season now that he's had extended playing time without injury coupled with his dedicated effort to improve his shot with help from a top shooting coach. I don't expect his March shooting numbers to continue throughout his career. But a 40%/35% career going forward would be a reasonable prediction for Ricky. And that would be enough.
khans2k5 wrote:Slow your roll everybody. He's playing out of his mind and we're still a .500 team. He has to both keep up this level of play and we have to start winning more games or frankly it doesn't matter. He can't be called elite until he starts winning us games because frankly that's what all elite players do.
Slow your roll, khans. The "youngblood" starting five, including Rubio, is beating opposing teams' starting fives night after night. Our bench is putrid and the head coach isn't necessarily helping things. We're still collecting losses, but again, it's not something Rubio's directly contributing to.
I think you're the only one calling him elite. I can't recall a single poster or media pundit that made that claim. Why you keep bringing it up is beyond me.
A quote from Lip on the first page.
"I think Ricky will end up at 42% and 36% the rest of his career. If so, combined with his other talents, he'll be an elite PG."
I'm not the one saying it. Since he's above those percentages for the last month does that not make him elite in the eyes of a poster? I thought according to you I'm the only one saying that. I guess you were fucking wrong.
Oh, wow... Your proof that someone called Rubio elite is Lipoli who was speaking about the rest of Rubio's career? He even said that in his original post. You realize that means future production, right? Come on, man. You're getting worked up over nothing. The wins will come next year, assuming the bench isn't a complete joke like it has been since LaVine and Dieng became starters. If Rubio is actually putting up those percentages and the Wolves are winning, and THEN Lip calls Rubio elite... Well, he might have a case. For now, you're still the only one pushing that "elite" label on Rubio and then criticizing him for having that same label. Yeesh.
khans2k5 wrote:Slow your roll everybody. He's playing out of his mind and we're still a .500 team. He has to both keep up this level of play and we have to start winning more games or frankly it doesn't matter. He can't be called elite until he starts winning us games because frankly that's what all elite players do.
Since Lavine was inserted into the starting lineup the Wolves starters have the biggest point differential in the NBA for any starting unit including the Warriors.
Where this information is got? I checked 5 man lineups from NBA.com and Wolves starting five would be ranked either 4th (behind Golden State, Oklahoma and Charlotte) or 7th (behind Golden State, Oklahoma, Charlotte, San Antonio, Atlanta and Utah) depending on whether games are selected from the point Lavine was first inserted to starting five (with Rubio, Wiggins, Dieng and Towns) or from the the point he got permanent starting role. Still that has been pretty impressive considering Wolves have lost more than half of those games.
If we look net rating, Wolves starting five won't rank even that high during that time period because they have played together way more minutes than any other starting five. Still they have had impressive +8.6 pts per 100 possessions net rating after Lavine got his first start. That would rank them only behind starting fives of Oklahoma, Golden State, San Antonio, Clippers (after Pierce replaced injured Griffin) and Cleveland this season.
Phenom's_Revenge wrote:Considering that Ricky had missed 2 years due to injury, maybe he is hitting the stride that many star players hit in year 3. I believe Ricky is going to rock and roll from now on and we will all be grateful that he wasn't traded. This is what I was expecting when the Wolves drafted him.
I was thinking same. His best season in terms of shooting prior this season was 2013-14 when he was healthy whole season. I think that current starting five complements even better Ricky's abilities than 2013-14 group. That could at least partially explain the improvement that we have seen in Ricky's shooting.
Phenom's_Revenge wrote:Considering that Ricky had missed 2 years due to injury, maybe he is hitting the stride that many star players hit in year 3. I believe Ricky is going to rock and roll from now on and we will all be grateful that he wasn't traded. This is what I was expecting when the Wolves drafted him.
I was thinking same. His best season in terms of shooting prior this season was 2013-14 when he was healthy whole season. I think that current starting five complements even better Ricky's abilities than 2013-14 group. That could at least partially explain the improvement that we have seen in Ricky's shooting.
One interesting point about these two healthy seasons... he finished strong in both of them. We know his stats for this season... but Rubio shot 42.5% in March of '14 and 41.3% in April of that season... while averaging 14 ppg.
To be fair, fg% can't be used for Rubio. We made the switch to TS% months or even years ago. Right?
Abe, I think FG% is still a valid number - especially from various spots on the floor - because it helps determine where a player's strengths and vulnerabilities are as an offensive threat. So 3 pt FG% is a hugely important number for Rubio in my opinion. It helps us understand the risk equation of an opposing defense collapsing on a Wiggins drive or doubling-up KAT in the low post. Do they concede the open Rubio 3 in order to get the ball out of KAT or Wiggins' hands on a 2-point shot? If Rubio is knocking down his open 3's at a decent rate, doubling up on KAT or Wiggins becomes a very shaky proposition. If that in turn leads to a defender staying home on Rubio, all the more room is available to operate for the others. The defense will have to pick their poison.
I like TS% as a comprehensive scoring efficiency metric, but by itself, it won't help answer the type of question I mentioned above.
(by the way, to your earlier point on Rubio's numbers in March and April of 2014, those were his two best months in TS% too. So there is definitely something to be said about the correlation between sustained health and shooting efficiency with Rubio).
