Wolves lose to Hawks GDT

[mjs34]

The (statistical) addition was meant to denote that "good" or "bad" based only on stats can be dicey. Young may have given up 83 points defensively, so saying he played a great game only based on stats can be deceiving. I was actually trying to be extra super duper cautious by adding the "statistical" disclaimer. Basically, I was walking on eggshells. Interestingly, I still get called on it...

As for the Wiggins stuff... for the 2,893th time, I simply stated he was playing mediocre or poor basketball at the time. There is NOTHING wrong with that. He's played MUCH much better since. That's been awesome. But I never said he couldn't improve. Nobody did. We simply said he was playing poorly and we hope he gets better. Meh. No big deal.

Look. Right now I'm being called to task for ripping another poster for saying "Fuck you" to another poster? Seriously? That's not what this forum has ever been about. I know we don't have real mods or anything but that's a slippery slope if we go that route. Or, if we keep this "Wiggins thread nonsense" alive and keep throwing it back and forth in people's faces... and skew original statement.s. This forum is on a dicey decline right now. And you know what? It's not because of me or q. Honestly. Go back and read our posts. We don't call people names. I think we both try to show respect to other posters.

Our initial comments about Wiggins have been blown entirely out of proportion. Ripping Thad Young has been blown entirely out of proportion. And Cool was called on it and responded in a very bad way. (I think he was being facetious in saying "fuck you" to me... but I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt with that one.)

I call BS!

Your passive aggressive comments produce the same reactions, as Cool's, and Cam has become famous on this board for getting personal. Cool has for the most part, limited his comments to the performance of wolves players and staff. After repeated call outs by Cam, he has responded. Nothing wrong with that in my eyes.

You stated something to the effect that Wiggins becoming a star would be an "anomaly". That is a little more than saying he was playing poorly. Most pointed out that comparing his 26 games to a full rookie year of other first rounders wasn't a good measuring stick, but you chose to look past that because it didn't fit your narrative.

You went off on a FT rant involving Harden and Wiggins when I suggested that getting some respect from the officials would be enough to push Wiggins' point totals up 4-5. Then a few days later you poked fun at that same ridiculous jump you made where Wiggins would be shooting 7 more FT's per game, and your lap dog Cam jumped on for the ride. That is getting personal, but worse yet it is doing it using something that you suggested rather than me.

Please take the Righteous indignation elsewhere.

[thedoper]

Shouldn't we be more used to losing so it doesn't get personal? Let's all just get along and direct our hate where it belongs... at Glen Taylor ;)

[AbeVigodaLive]

The (statistical) addition was meant to denote that "good" or "bad" based only on stats can be dicey. Young may have given up 83 points defensively, so saying he played a great game only based on stats can be deceiving. I was actually trying to be extra super duper cautious by adding the "statistical" disclaimer. Basically, I was walking on eggshells. Interestingly, I still get called on it...

As for the Wiggins stuff... for the 2,893th time, I simply stated he was playing mediocre or poor basketball at the time. There is NOTHING wrong with that. He's played MUCH much better since. That's been awesome. But I never said he couldn't improve. Nobody did. We simply said he was playing poorly and we hope he gets better. Meh. No big deal.

Look. Right now I'm being called to task for ripping another poster for saying "Fuck you" to another poster? Seriously? That's not what this forum has ever been about. I know we don't have real mods or anything but that's a slippery slope if we go that route. Or, if we keep this "Wiggins thread nonsense" alive and keep throwing it back and forth in people's faces... and skew original statement.s. This forum is on a dicey decline right now. And you know what? It's not because of me or q. Honestly. Go back and read our posts. We don't call people names. I think we both try to show respect to other posters.

Our initial comments about Wiggins have been blown entirely out of proportion. Ripping Thad Young has been blown entirely out of proportion. And Cool was called on it and responded in a very bad way. (I think he was being facetious in saying "fuck you" to me... but I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt with that one.)

I call BS!

Your passive aggressive comments produce the same reactions, as Cool's, and Cam has become famous on this board for getting personal. Cool has for the most part, limited his comments to the performance of wolves players and staff. After repeated call outs by Cam, he has responded. Nothing wrong with that in my eyes.

You stated something to the effect that Wiggins becoming a star would be an "anomaly". That is a little more than saying he was playing poorly. Most pointed out that comparing his 26 games to a full rookie year of other first rounders wasn't a good measuring stick, but you chose to look past that because it didn't fit your narrative.

You went off on a FT rant involving Harden and Wiggins when I suggested that getting some respect from the officials would be enough to push Wiggins' point totals up 4-5. Then a few days later you poked fun at that same ridiculous jump you made where Wiggins would be shooting 7 more FT's per game, and your lap dog Cam jumped on for the ride. That is getting personal, but worse yet it is doing it using something that you suggested rather than me.

Please take the Righteous indignation elsewhere.

Look at what I wrote again.

To summarize: Based on #1 draft picks in recent NBA history (10+ years), Wiggins at the pace he was playing at... would be an anomaly if he ended up as a superstar. None of the other stars had started out that poorly. But there was still time...

And I was clear to mention that I didn't think Wiggins was in the camp of the failed #1 picks.

Was it fair to group Wiggins only with other #1 draft picks? That part can be debated. But that's where the anomaly part came in from in any case. As for the free throw stuff... meh. Whether it's only from free throws or respect from opponents, it's not realistic to expect a rookie to get preferential treatment from officials. I took the post as "it's the refs fault." Personally, I think Wiggins has been officiated pretty fairly. He shoots a ton of mid-range jumpers yet still shoots a pretty solid number of free throws.

In fact, I think shooting 4 attempts already is a great sign. There's so much more opportunity there. I'd like to see him double that total in the next couple of years so he's near the league leaders. As Goldberry's article discusses today, learning what is and what isn't a good shot should help a lot.

[Coolbreeze44]

My "fuck yourself" comment came after the 2nd, not first, reference by this poster. I will take shit to a certain extent, but I AM going to react if you persist. I'm also going to react if you use 36 minutes of basketball to justify an argument that you've been foolishly on someone's jock since the day he signed.

Wait. I was on Thad Young's jock? Link please.

Actually, I was one of the ones who cautioned people that he wasn't the defensive upgrade at PF that others claimed he'd be. And I posted stats to indicate this...



[Note: I am in the camp that Thad Young has been a disappointment. Whether he's just a bad fit, or being asked to do things he's not capable of doing, or simply dogging it to various degrees this season... he has been inconsistent. I'm also in the camp that he's not nearly as bad as some people have made him out to be. He's not a terrible basketball player in every way... we can give him credit for doing some things while ripping him for his deficiencies in other areas.]

Was not referring to you.

[khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]]

There's a monumental difference between being critical of a 7 year veteran simply not playing hard until recently and a 19 year old rookie 26 games into his career. Getting a week of good play from Thad doesn't make him being terrible for a month+ ok. When you're in the league that long making 9 million dollars and you aren't playing hard, you are basically stealing money from the franchise. Then Cam trolling us with his "look, Thad finally had a good game" leads to people attacking him because he has been talking up Thad all year and Thad just hasn't been worth the money and the pick he cost us. Wiggins being bad for that stretch is part of the growing pains of being a rookie, but nobody has ever questioned whether or not he was at least trying on the court. That's the huge difference between the two situations.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

Yeah, I made two very sarcastic comments directed towards the absurd amounts of criticism some (and it's not just Cool) make on here about Thaddeus Young. You can't tell me either of my comments were vicious or even personal (really, sjm? I'm the personal attacker?) because they weren't.

Furthermore, why is it only me, Abe, LST, Q and sometimes world (maybe a few others?) that point out when Thad has a good game? I'm the only one of that group that maintains the stance that Thad Young is a good power forward in the NBA. He's had an up-and-down season with the Wolves, but I've stated that the changing parts around him have had a negative impact on him (and his effort at one stretch). That's besides the point, though. We CAN differ our opinions of Thad. I have no problem with that, but when he plays well, give him some damn credit. It's that part of all of this that is ridiculous to me. It's nothing but 95% hate thrown at the guy like our record is because of him, and it's not.

"Fuck yourself" and "foolishly on his jock"

"and your lap dog Cam"

That's nice. Yet I'm the one who takes things personal and resorts to insults?

Good talk. This was very productive. (more sarcasm)

PS: Thad scored 26 points last night on 11-17 shooting from the field and 4-5 at the line. Dished out 7 assists and grabbed 6 rebounds while recording just one turnover. He guarded Millsap and Carroll for most of the game, and neither had better games then he did. We aren't in that game against the Hawks (best team in the East) without him, just so you know.

Over his last five games, Thad's putting up 19 PPG on 50.6 FG% and has gone 12-13 at the line. That to go along with 5.4 RPG and 4.8 APG.

Sure, it's just five games, but how many positive comments have been made about that string of games, though?

And there's my point.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

Thad is an embarrassment on both ends of the floor

Me: "Thad with an efficient 16/7/5 after 3Qs. Absolutely embarrassing. Lets grab our pitchforks and kill him now."

Me: "What an awful game from Thad. So bad."

Really guys? We're hashing all of this out because of this? Okay.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

There's a monumental difference between being critical of a 7 year veteran simply not playing hard until recently and a 19 year old rookie 26 games into his career. Getting a week of good play from Thad doesn't make him being terrible for a month+ ok. When you're in the league that long making 9 million dollars and you aren't playing hard, you are basically stealing money from the franchise. Then Cam trolling us with his "look, Thad finally had a good game" leads to people attacking him because he has been talking up Thad all year and Thad just hasn't been worth the money and the pick he cost us. Wiggins being bad for that stretch is part of the growing pains of being a rookie, but nobody has ever questioned whether or not he was at least trying on the court. That's the huge difference between the two situations.

Not what I said. Just more misquoting on this board.

Hey, I was 100% on board with trading Bennett instead of the draft pick, but you more-or-less said I was terribly wrong and that we wouldn't get a comparable player of his talent with that pick. That can be found in the "Which would you rather give up?" thread.

And again, I digress.

[mjs34]

Look at what I wrote again.

To summarize: Based on #1 draft picks in recent NBA history (10+ years), Wiggins at the pace he was playing at... would be an anomaly if he ended up as a superstar. None of the other stars had started out that poorly. But there was still time...

And I was clear to mention that I didn't think Wiggins was in the camp of the failed #1 picks.

Was it fair to group Wiggins only with other #1 draft picks? That part can be debated. But that's where the anomaly part came in from in any case. As for the free throw stuff... meh. Whether it's only from free throws or respect from opponents, it's not realistic to expect a rookie to get preferential treatment from officials. I took the post as "it's the refs fault." Personally, I think Wiggins has been officiated pretty fairly. He shoots a ton of mid-range jumpers yet still shoots a pretty solid number of free throws.

In fact, I think shooting 4 attempts already is a great sign. There's so much more opportunity there. I'd like to see him double that total in the next couple of years so he's near the league leaders. As Goldberry's article discusses today, learning what is and what isn't a good shot should help a lot.

That isn't true though. You looked at a full season for those other #1 picks, not their first twenty some games. I remember watching the wolves a game later (believe you stated you went to the game), and Petersen put up a stat that Lebron after 20 games had a fg% of 38 or 39. Some rookies hit the ground running and teams learn to adjust to them, while others need to find their way, and make slow steady progress. Most of us knew that Wiggins was going to be the latter. Bottom line is that all the rookies go through steps during the year, and comparing one guy after 26 games to full seasons for the rest is an unfair comp.

Regardless of how you interpreted my ref bias has no bearing on you making a jump to Wiggins shooting 11 FT's and then in another post poking fun at that jump. You skewed what I said, even after I further explained what I meant, and then had some snarky comment about you will continue to watch the games objectively.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

Cool, if you are going to go single out a comment I made from an old thread and regurgitate it as a "gotcha" post (which I didn't really appreciate, but hopefully responded to in a respectful manner), than you shouldn't get all hot and bothered when Cam makes a couple of snarky comments in the course of a game thread.

Generally this board keeps things respectful. We should try to keep it that way.