Derrick Rose to the Timberwolves?

[Porckchop]

I'm probably one of Rubio's biggest defenders around here because of a very simple fact: When he plays, we are a dramatically better team than when he doesn't play, and that's under a variety of circumstances and lineups over a period of multiple years. It's just that simple.

If the team stays healthy and his numbers remain the same and the w/l numbers stay relatively the same where does he stand with you? I know it's a loaded questions but I'm curious how big of an impact you guys think he'll have on a healthy team.

I'm not sure I understand your question or hypothetical here....I'm not sure how it's possible we win only 16 games with a healthy roster. If that happened, the coach should be fired by the POBO immediately. Oh, wait....

If the team stays healthy, and say they win only 20-25 games ? Isn't Ricky paid to be a difference maker? Yeah the team plays better when he's on the court but it hasn't translated to a lot more W'a and zero playoff berths . Plus I can't think of one player that had one of his best years playing along side him . Love was gonna get his on this team no matter what.
I mean we all deal in hypotheticals here. U all just assume with a healthy roster this team would've been something decent. Hypothetical aside, this team has lost alot,Ricky hasn't really improved, and no one significant has been able to stay healthy. How can we assume that if it all fell into place that a Ricky led team would be a winner?

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

I'm probably one of Rubio's biggest defenders around here because of a very simple fact: When he plays, we are a dramatically better team than when he doesn't play, and that's under a variety of circumstances and lineups over a period of multiple years. It's just that simple.

If the team stays healthy and his numbers remain the same and the w/l numbers stay relatively the same where does he stand with you? I know it's a loaded questions but I'm curious how big of an impact you guys think he'll have on a healthy team.

I'm not sure I understand your question or hypothetical here....I'm not sure how it's possible we win only 16 games with a healthy roster. If that happened, the coach should be fired by the POBO immediately. Oh, wait....

If the team stays healthy, and say they win only 20-25 games ? Isn't Ricky paid to be a difference maker? Yeah the team plays better when he's on the court but it hasn't translated to a lot more W'a and zero playoff berths . Plus I can't think of one player that had one of his best years playing along side him . Love was gonna get his on this team no matter what.

How am I supposed to respond to a hypothetical whose sole purpose is to create a scenario (and an unrealistic one at that) to validate your theory on Rubio? You are correct; it is a loaded question.

Off the top of my head, I can think of three players that have had career years playing alongside Rubio: Nikola Pekovic, Corey Brewer, and Kevin Love.

[Porckchop]

I'm probably one of Rubio's biggest defenders around here because of a very simple fact: When he plays, we are a dramatically better team than when he doesn't play, and that's under a variety of circumstances and lineups over a period of multiple years. It's just that simple.

If the team stays healthy and his numbers remain the same and the w/l numbers stay relatively the same where does he stand with you? I know it's a loaded questions but I'm curious how big of an impact you guys think he'll have on a healthy team.

I'm not sure I understand your question or hypothetical here....I'm not sure how it's possible we win only 16 games with a healthy roster. If that happened, the coach should be fired by the POBO immediately. Oh, wait....

If the team stays healthy, and say they win only 20-25 games ? Isn't Ricky paid to be a difference maker? Yeah the team plays better when he's on the court but it hasn't translated to a lot more W'a and zero playoff berths . Plus I can't think of one player that had one of his best years playing along side him . Love was gonna get his on this team no matter what.

How am I supposed to respond to a hypothetical whose sole purpose is to create a scenario (and an unrealistic one at that) to validate your theory on Rubio? You are correct; it is a loaded question.

Off the top of my head, I can think of three players that have had career years playing alongside Rubio: Nikola Pekovic, Corey Brewer, and Kevin Love.

I really don't seek validation for my opinions on Ricky. His numbers show he hasn't gotten much better since his rookie year, and his games missed proves he's injury prone. The Rubio fans should validate their opinions of him. Sayin that if everything played out perfectly this team would be better off becuz of him doesn't make sense to me. That's a hypothetical.
And by better off I mean winning .

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

Pork chop, It's not a hypothetical that the team would be better because of him when it's actually happened!

He's had two separate and distinct injuries separated by a couple of seasons, and in one of those seasons he played all 82 games!

I don't know what the future holds for him in terms of injuries. All I know is that he makes a significant positive impact to team performance when he's on the court. The burden of proof is on you to show that he doesn't make a positive impact while playing. Good luck with that.

[Lipoli390]

Pork chop, It's not a hypothetical that the team would be better because of him when it's actually happened!

He's had two separate and distinct injuries separated by a couple of seasons, and in one of those seasons he played all 82 games!

I don't know what the future holds for him in terms of injuries. All I know is that he makes a significant positive impact to team performance when he's on the court. The burden of proof is on you to show that he doesn't make a positive impact while playing. Good luck with that.

Absolutely right.

[khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]]

I'm probably one of Rubio's biggest defenders around here because of a very simple fact: When he plays, we are a dramatically better team than when he doesn't play, and that's under a variety of circumstances and lineups over a period of multiple years. It's just that simple.

If the team stays healthy and his numbers remain the same and the w/l numbers stay relatively the same where does he stand with you? I know it's a loaded questions but I'm curious how big of an impact you guys think he'll have on a healthy team.

I'm not sure I understand your question or hypothetical here....I'm not sure how it's possible we win only 16 games with a healthy roster. If that happened, the coach should be fired by the POBO immediately. Oh, wait....

If the team stays healthy, and say they win only 20-25 games ? Isn't Ricky paid to be a difference maker? Yeah the team plays better when he's on the court but it hasn't translated to a lot more W'a and zero playoff berths . Plus I can't think of one player that had one of his best years playing along side him . Love was gonna get his on this team no matter what.
I mean we all deal in hypotheticals here. U all just assume with a healthy roster this team would've been something decent. Hypothetical aside, this team has lost alot,Ricky hasn't really improved, and no one significant has been able to stay healthy. How can we assume that if it all fell into place that a Ricky led team would be a winner?

We were in prime position during the lockout shortened season to make the playoffs until Ricky went down and it all fell apart. His last full season we were 40-42 which is the best we've been in a while. He's not a star who's going to carry a team, but he's not paid like one either. He's paid at a good starter level and when he's been healthy the team has played it's best basketball since the KG era. We would have been a playoff team in 13-14 if you put any rim protecting C in the league next to Love and Ricky instead of Pek. The Pek/Love frontcourt just wasn't the right combo of offense and defense. It was all offense and no defense which cost us the playoff spot. Pek was a good player, but he clearly wasn't the right fit next to Love and that cost us the ability to ever be a truly good overall team. It's worked out fine for us since, but any basketball expert could have told you a Pek/Love frontcourt never had a chance of being a top 4 team in the West.

[AbeVigodaLive]

Somebody noted that

Can u be called an elite defender when not once have u made 1st 2nd or 3rd team all defense? Elite shouldn't be thrown around so lightly. Rubio gets tagged with that word on here quite often .

He's only played enough games in one season to even qualify for those kind of accolades, let alone win one and there are better PG defenders out there. Nobody is saying Ricky is a top 3 defender in the league. That award goes to 3 PG's total in the league. There are more than 3 elite defending PG's in the league. He's played most of his career with Love and Pek as his help defenders in the PnR. Rose has played with the likes of Noah and Gibson. Gee, I wonder which set of bigs is better. Rose has played with Butler, Deng, Noah, Gibson, etc. Those guys are the reason they've been a top defending team in the league. Noah has been a consistent candidate for DPOY. How many of those has Ricky played with? Bigs just have a much bigger effect on a team's defensive effectiveness than guards same as guards have a bigger effect on team offense through their penetration and dishing.

You forgot about Carlos Boozer.

[AbeVigodaLive]

For me the question has never been whether the Wolves are better with Rubio on/off the court. Just like that was never the question when Kevin Love was here.

The question is whether there are other PGs who could make that kind of difference... or an even greater difference.

I don't know. And that's odd after four years. Rubio is an enigma in this way. Because he does some things so well and other things so poorly... it's only natural that he's polarizing to some degree. I'm actually surprised he hasn't been more polarizing. Then again... I think this is the year (I think I said the same thing last season) where the organization has to figure out if Rubio has any growth in him.

Basically, it's been the longest basketball honeymoon I can remember.

[MikkeMan]

For me the question has never been whether the Wolves are better with Rubio on/off the court. Just like that was never the question when Kevin Love was here.

The question is whether there are other PGs who could make that kind of difference... or an even greater difference.

I don't know. And that's odd after four years. Rubio is an enigma in this way. Because he does some things so well and other things so poorly... it's only natural that he's polarizing to some degree. I'm actually surprised he hasn't been more polarizing. Then again... I think this is the year (I think I said the same thing last season) where the organization has to figure out if Rubio has any growth in him.

Basically, it's been the longest basketball honeymoon I can remember.

We can try to do some guesses based on how Rubio's backups have performed in other teams.

Rubio had 14-15 Net rating -0.6
Mo had 14-15 Net rating -5.7 in Minnesota

Kemba had 14-15 Net rating -5.1
Mo had 14-15 Net rating +0.1 in Charlotte

Lillard had 13-14 Net rating +5.5
Mo had 13-14 Net rating +1.3 in Portland

Chris Paul had 11-12 Net rating +7.3
Mo had 11-12 Net rating -1.2 in Clippers

So if we assume that Mo's performance level has been roughly same during last 4 years, (maybe not totally valid since he has got older but based on PER last year was his best since 09-10), we can use that as a basis when comparing to another point guards.

Clearly it looks like that Rubio is much better than Kemba Walker whose team performed much better with Mo as their PG. Also it seems that difference between 11-12 CP3 and Mo was clearly bigger than difference between Rubio and Mo. But difference of 13-14 Lillard and Mo was pretty similar than difference between Rubio and Mo.

Since last year Rubio played so few minutes, it is maybe better to use previous year for comparing his performance.

Rubio had 13-14 Net rating +6.6
Barea had 13-14 Net rating -3.4 in Minnesota

Rondo had 14-15 Net rating -1.3 in Dallas
Barea had 14-15 Net rating +4.9 in Dallas

Based on this I would say that Rondo is currently clearly worse than Rubio. He was pretty bad fit for Dallas team, so maybe we should take comparison from some other year.

Kidd had 10-11 Net rating +3.1 in Dallas
Barea had 10-11 Net rating +5.8 in Dallas

I would say based on above numbers that it looks like Rubio is probably also better than 37 year old Kidd.

[Monster]

For me the question has never been whether the Wolves are better with Rubio on/off the court. Just like that was never the question when Kevin Love was here.

The question is whether there are other PGs who could make that kind of difference... or an even greater difference.

I don't know. And that's odd after four years. Rubio is an enigma in this way. Because he does some things so well and other things so poorly... it's only natural that he's polarizing to some degree. I'm actually surprised he hasn't been more polarizing. Then again... I think this is the year (I think I said the same thing last season) where the organization has to figure out if Rubio has any growth in him.

Basically, it's been the longest basketball honeymoon I can remember.

We can try to do some guesses based on how Rubio's backups have performed in other teams.

Rubio had 14-15 Net rating -0.6
Mo had 14-15 Net rating -5.7 in Minnesota

Kemba had 14-15 Net rating -5.1
Mo had 14-15 Net rating +0.1 in Charlotte

Lillard had 13-14 Net rating +5.5
Mo had 13-14 Net rating +1.3 in Portland

Chris Paul had 11-12 Net rating +7.3
Mo had 11-12 Net rating -1.2 in Clippers

So if we assume that Mo's performance level has been roughly same during last 4 years, (maybe not totally valid since he has got older but based on PER last year was his best since 09-10), we can use that as a basis when comparing to another point guards.

Clearly it looks like that Rubio is much better than Kemba Walker whose team performed much better with Mo as their PG. Also it seems that difference between 11-12 CP3 and Mo was clearly bigger than difference between Rubio and Mo. But difference of 13-14 Lillard and Mo was pretty similar than difference between Rubio and Mo.

Since last year Rubio played so few minutes, it is maybe better to use previous year for comparing his performance.

Rubio had 13-14 Net rating +6.6
Barea had 13-14 Net rating -3.4 in Minnesota

Rondo had 14-15 Net rating -1.3 in Dallas
Barea had 14-15 Net rating +4.9 in Dallas

Based on this I would say that Rondo is currently clearly worse than Rubio. He was pretty bad fit for Dallas team, so maybe we should take comparison from some other year.

Kidd had 10-11 Net rating +3.1 in Dallas
Barea had 10-11 Net rating +5.8 in Dallas

I would say based on above numbers that it looks like Rubio is probably also better than 37 year old Kidd.

That was an interesting way to look at things. Thanks for that post.