Minnesota Sports Forum

Camden wrote:Towns won't workout for any teams. I would bet Okafor won't either.

Thanks goodness! I hope Okafor follows suit. There is zero motivation for these guys to do a workout given their current draft stock and I certainly don't want a single workout against orange cones and folding chairs to influence who we pick. Remember, this is the final impression these guys will leave on our decision makers. The http://www.alleydog.com/glossary/definition.php?term=Recency%20Effectrecency effect is a real phenomena that should not be underestimated:

Workouts are done for pure psychological reasons by front office types that are naturally insecure in trusting the hoards of video, live game action, and background reports they have already compiled and studied. They just must see these people in person in an empty gym!

There is no evidence that it helps you make the right pick and the strategy absolutely backfired for us when Jonny Flynn came in and had a tremendous workout.

I think Danny Ainge validates this in the article below about Marcus Smart. He sort of minimizes the importance of workouts, yet these guys just can't resist:

http://www.masslive.com/celtics/index.ssf/2015/05/marcus_smarts_1st_pre-draft_wo.html

It sounds like all of them are doing some interviews or whatever so Flip is probably happy enough with that. I'd like to see guys play some 5 on 5 basketball and do workouts against each other but those are limited situations and contrived so you could be swayed too much. There are some guys where a workout probably is good if they played in a different league like Exum or Mudiay or even Prozingis or played a limited role in college or were injured. The reality is though most guys the Wolves have had basketball people watching for literally years. There isn't too many secrets about these guy's game you can unearth in a couple hours of workouts. These picks are a big deal teams put a MASSIVE amout of energy and research into these players because they are investments.

Q12543 wrote:

Camden wrote:Towns won't workout for any teams. I would bet Okafor won't either.

Thanks goodness! I hope Okafor follows suit. There is zero motivation for these guys to do a workout given their current draft stock and I certainly don't want a single workout against orange cones and folding chairs to influence who we pick. Remember, this is the final impression these guys will leave on our decision makers. The http://www.alleydog.com/glossary/definition.php?term=Recency%20Effectrecency effect is a real phenomena that should not be underestimated:

Workouts are done for pure psychological reasons by front office types that are naturally insecure in trusting the hoards of video, live game action, and background reports they have already compiled and studied. They just must see these people in person in an empty gym!

There is no evidence that it helps you make the right pick and the strategy absolutely backfired for us when Jonny Flynn came in and had a tremendous workout.

I think Danny Ainge validates this in the article below about Marcus Smart. He sort of minimizes the importance of workouts, yet these guys just can't resist:

http://www.masslive.com/celtics/index.ssf/2015/05/marcus_smarts_1st_pre-draft_wo.html

Yep. You know I agree here. The game video will be the biggest indicator on who we should take. Perhaps the interview has value in getting to meet your draft pick, but the game video is without a doubt what Flip and co. need to have studied. The workout would have been a minimal factor.

What you have to realize is what those in-house workouts are valuable for. It's not to see if a guy makes 8 out of 10 from behind the arc, or whether he has refined footwork. The true value is in being able to interact with a guy in a controlled setting. Does he bring a good attitude? Does he accept coaching? Can he buy into the overall direction of the team? How would he fit with who is already here?

CoolBreeze44 wrote:What you have to realize is what those in-house workouts are valuable for. It's not to see if a guy makes 8 out of 10 from behind the arc, or whether he has refined footwork. The true value is in being able to interact with a guy in a controlled setting. Does he bring a good attitude? Does he accept coaching? Can he buy into the overall direction of the team? How would he fit with who is already here?

Exactly

TRKO wrote:

CoolBreeze44 wrote:What you have to realize is what those in-house workouts are valuable for. It's not to see if a guy makes 8 out of 10 from behind the arc, or whether he has refined footwork. The true value is in being able to interact with a guy in a controlled setting. Does he bring a good attitude? Does he accept coaching? Can he buy into the overall direction of the team? How would he fit with who is already here?

Exactly

You mean these questions can't be answered through the tons of background checks, discussions with coaches, and individual interview with the player?

Does he bring a good attitude? - Uh, I would certainly hope our staff has gathered data dating back to high school and AAU days on this question. A single workout is not the place to make this assessment.

Does he accept coaching? - Again, how it would be possible not to already have this question answered seems crazy to me. And what are you coaching him to do in a contact-less workout?

Can he buy into the overall direction of the team? - That can be ascertained through an interview and, frankly, at least in the NBA, not many #1 picks have the power to change anything even if they don't buy in.

How would he fit with who is already here? - Again, that question is way better answered through prior scouting. I don't understand how a single workout will add anymore useful data.

Workouts are dangerous because they could lead to decisions made on a tiny sample of information in an artificial environment. It's a terrible way to assess these players.

Q12543 wrote:

TRKO wrote:

CoolBreeze44 wrote:What you have to realize is what those in-house workouts are valuable for. It's not to see if a guy makes 8 out of 10 from behind the arc, or whether he has refined footwork. The true value is in being able to interact with a guy in a controlled setting. Does he bring a good attitude? Does he accept coaching? Can he buy into the overall direction of the team? How would he fit with who is already here?

Exactly

You mean these questions can't be answered through the tons of background checks, discussions with coaches, and individual interview with the player?

Does he bring a good attitude? - Uh, I would certainly hope our staff has gathered data dating back to high school and AAU days on this question. A single workout is not the place to make this assessment.

Does he accept coaching? - Again, how it would be possible not to already have this question answered seems crazy to me. And what are you coaching him to do in a contact-less workout?

Can he buy into the overall direction of the team? - That can be ascertained through an interview and, frankly, at least in the NBA, not many #1 picks have the power to change anything even if they don't buy in.

How would he fit with who is already here? - Again, that question is way better answered through prior scouting. I don't understand how a single workout will add anymore useful data.

Workouts are dangerous because they could lead to decisions made on a tiny sample of information in an artificial environment. It's a terrible way to assess these players.

Ah, you're just playing devil's advocate. You can disagree about the value these in-house workouts have. I'm just telling you what they're for, and it is the truth.

Q12543 wrote:

Camden wrote:Towns won't workout for any teams. I would bet Okafor won't either.

Thanks goodness! I hope Okafor follows suit. There is zero motivation for these guys to do a workout given their current draft stock and I certainly don't want a single workout against orange cones and folding chairs to influence who we pick. Remember, this is the final impression these guys will leave on our decision makers. The http://www.alleydog.com/glossary/definition.php?term=Recency%20Effectrecency effect is a real phenomena that should not be underestimated:

Workouts are done for pure psychological reasons by front office types that are naturally insecure in trusting the hoards of video, live game action, and background reports they have already compiled and studied. They just must see these people in person in an empty gym!

There is no evidence that it helps you make the right pick and the strategy absolutely backfired for us when Jonny Flynn came in and had a tremendous workout.

I think Danny Ainge validates this in the article below about Marcus Smart. He sort of minimizes the importance of workouts, yet these guys just can't resist:

http://www.masslive.com/celtics/index.ssf/2015/05/marcus_smarts_1st_pre-draft_wo.html

Of course...workouts are also the reason that the Wolves fell in love with KGs potential. (granted there was less legitimate tape of KG than there is these guys)

As long as Towns/Okafor/Russell don't refuse to workout for the Wolves but then go workout for the Lakers, I'm not concerned.

Every piece of information matters and workouts are a chance to gather more information. I think it's irresponsible to just take everyone's word when you can easily clear it up with a workout. If Towns is blowing his trainer away with his workouts why would that change with a basic workout with us? However working out for us lets us see it in person and not just taking someone's word for it. If workouts were bad nobody would do them. They'd just interview guys they are targeting and talk to everyone who's involved with that player. The problem with that route is everyone is going to talk up that guy to improve his draft outlook like Cal saying Towns was his best 3pt shooter. You have to be a fucking moron of a coach to tell your best 3pt shooter to not shoot 3's especially when your season is on the line against Wisconsin. That's Cal exaggerating to make Towns a more desirable prospect and that's why you don't just take everyone's word and you make the guy show you in person.