CoolBreeze44 wrote:I have always been a big Zach supporter, but I didn't see his game the way most of you did last night. I thought he was generally poor on both ends of the floor. What did I miss?
Jim Pete... is that you?
I don't think you missed anything Cool. I don't think it was one of Zach's best games that's for sure. I don't know if he was terrible on either end, but he wasn't good overall imo.
CoolBreeze44 wrote:I have always been a big Zach supporter, but I didn't see his game the way most of you did last night. I thought he was generally poor on both ends of the floor. What did I miss?
Jim Pete... is that you?
I don't think you missed anything Cool. I don't think it was one of Zach's best games that's for sure. I don't know if he was terrible on either end, but he wasn't good overall imo.
Agreed. He was somewhat of a fringe player last night.
But it gets back to my concern with both Wiggins and LaVine (and to some extent KAT as well). When they aren't scoring, what are they doing for us? Are they shutting people down? Taking charges? Getting to the line?
When you have three guys - any one of which is capable of dropping 30 on any given night - the other two may sometimes find themselves "out of the loop" so to speak. So they need to contribute in other ways. Wiggins did his part by keeping 'Melo in check. Would love to see more of that from these guys when things aren't happening offensively!
It really was our bench that let us down last night.
CoolBreeze44 wrote:I have always been a big Zach supporter, but I didn't see his game the way most of you did last night. I thought he was generally poor on both ends of the floor. What did I miss?
Jim Pete... is that you?
I don't think you missed anything Cool. I don't think it was one of Zach's best games that's for sure. I don't know if he was terrible on either end, but he wasn't good overall imo.
Agreed. He was somewhat of a fringe player last night.
But it gets back to my concern with both Wiggins and LaVine (and to some extent KAT as well). When they aren't scoring, what are they doing for us? Are they shutting people down? Taking charges? Getting to the line?
When you have three guys - any one of which is capable of dropping 30 on any given night - the other two may sometimes find themselves "out of the loop" so to speak. So they need to contribute in other ways. Wiggins did his part by keeping 'Melo in check. Would love to see more of that from these guys when things aren't happening offensively!
It really was our bench that let us down last night.
Lavine's floating can be a good thing in a way although obviously it has a downside. He seems willing to defer at times and then has that ability to explode at anytime. Its like doesn't seem to HAVE to get a ton of shots throughout the game to end up putting up his points. He kinda reminds me a bit of Klay Thompson in this regard. Wiggins I think is having a tough time knowing when to defer and when to take over and get his. It is a hard thing to figure out.
The Wolves are in a strange situation where despite struggling I don't see any realistic starting lineup changes that could help much (e.g. swapping a starter for a bench player).
Swapping Belly and Dieng is a different look, but Belly is really inconsistent and is not going to help with the poor defense and rebounding (at times) that has been hurting us.
Swapping Belly and Zach sits one of our 3 best guys and best outside shooter and puts Belly in a position of having to guard SFs (good luck).
I would definitely not consider trading any of the Wolves big 3. All have a ton of talent and get along together . Most teams would love to 3 guys with All-Star ceilings.
Wolves need to seriously consider trading anyone outside those three to improve the roster. Otherwise I don't see too much changing.
Steve McPherson suggested potentially trading Rubio for Patty Mills or Brandon Knight. I like Mills but he is the point-guard-in-waiting in SAN and a free agent this summer. As I mentioned previously, I think Knight is a good option (and still only 24).
He also suggested trying to get Taj Gibson or James Johnson at PF. I'd be cool with either one, but Gibson would be a huge pickup. He'd instantly know all of Thibs' schemes and give the Wolves a boost of experience and toughness. Unfortunately Mirotic and Porter have not been playing well at PF for CHI, so I doubt they'd give up Taj - especially to Thibs.
Trading one of our top young guys would be incredibly premature. We need to exhaust every conceivable way to make these guys work as a unit. I think there is still a ton of time for that.
Wile E Coyote wrote:The Wolves are in a strange situation where despite struggling I don't see any realistic starting lineup changes that could help much (e.g. swapping a starter for a bench player).
Swapping Belly and Dieng is a different look, but Belly is really inconsistent and is not going to help with the poor defense and rebounding (at times) that has been hurting us.
Swapping Belly and Zach sits one of our 3 best guys and best outside shooter and puts Belly in a position of having to guard SFs (good luck).
I would definitely not consider trading any of the Wolves big 3. All have a ton of talent and get along together . Most teams would love to 3 guys with All-Star ceilings.
Wolves need to seriously consider trading anyone outside those three to improve the roster. Otherwise I don't see too much changing.
Steve McPherson suggested potentially trading Rubio for Patty Mills or Brandon Knight. I like Mills but he is the point-guard-in-waiting in SAN and a free agent this summer. As I mentioned previously, I think Knight is a good option (and still only 24).
He also suggested trying to get Taj Gibson or James Johnson at PF. I'd be cool with either one, but Gibson would be a huge pickup. He'd instantly know all of Thibs' schemes and give the Wolves a boost of experience and toughness. Unfortunately Mirotic and Porter have not been playing well at PF for CHI, so I doubt they'd give up Taj - especially to Thibs.
Here's why trading for Knight makes the Wolves worse:
He's another iso guy in a long line of iso guys on this team. Ball movement is by far the weakest aspect of the starting lineup. Knight doesn't improve that.
As for Gibson, if the idea is for Thibs to pursue every Bulls retread, he was the wrong hire.
I think Zach simply looked different last night in person. It was definitely not one of his better games. But he played well defensively, keeping Jennings in check after Ricky had been struggling. His shooting was off, but he still scored 17 points, including a clutch 3 pointer and got to the line 6 times hitting all 6. Again, a subpar game for Zach but not bad. And encouraging that he again showed the ability and desire to attached the basket in the half court and draw contact. He remains the one guy on this team in whom I have faith every time he launches a three-pointer. Wiggins also had a subpar game, but he played well defensively guarding Melo.
I'll take what Zach and Wiggins game us last night except for the dumb 2-pointers Andrew took early in the shot clock. As most of us agree, the problem last night was our bench. The more general problem so far this season can't be tied to any one player -- starter or bench player. This season so far has been a collective failure.
WildWolf2813 wrote:
Here's why trading for Knight makes the Wolves worse:
He's another iso guy in a long line of iso guys on this team. Ball movement is by far the weakest aspect of the starting lineup. Knight doesn't improve that.
As for Gibson, if the idea is for Thibs to pursue every Bulls retread, he was the wrong hire.
I agree that Knight would make team worse even tough I don't think that he is isolation scorer. Most of his scoring plays have come this and last season from pick and roll plays, spot ups and transition. During his stint in Milwaukee, he was also decent defender at point guard position. In theory he could be OK fit in offense next to Lavine, Wiggins and Towns since he can play also off the ball. But Knight as a point guard would put all the pressure for Wiggins, Lavine and Towns to make plays to others, since Knight is pretty horrible in running pick and roll.
But the main reason why I think he would be bad fit is that Knight is also about as far from 'do shit type' point guard as there is. Since Lavine and WIggins are not getting rebounds and steals, I think it would be good that we would get them at least from point guard position.
