Minnesota Sports Forum

lipoli390 wrote:

Yes, it's maddening to say the least. As you might recall, I hated the "we're too young" narrative last season. The Thunder weren't too young when they won 50 games with a 3rd year player in Durant, a 2nd year player in Westbrook and a rookie named Harden before he was anything like he is today. I didn't expect the Wolves to make the playoffs last season, but I expected improvement and we saw very little if any. So this season, our record is significantly better with the addition of veterans Butler, Taj and Crawford, but we still have a bottom 5 defense and a stagnant office, which I maintain is part of why we have a poor defense. Yes, it says a lot about our two #1 picks and our head coach.

sjm34 wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

Yes, it's maddening to say the least. As you might recall, I hated the "we're too young" narrative last season. The Thunder weren't too young when they won 50 games with a 3rd year player in Durant, a 2nd year player in Westbrook and a rookie named Harden before he was anything like he is today. I didn't expect the Wolves to make the playoffs last season, but I expected improvement and we saw very little if any. So this season, our record is significantly better with the addition of veterans Butler, Taj and Crawford, but we still have a bottom 5 defense and a stagnant office, which I maintain is part of why we have a poor defense. Yes, it says a lot about our two #1 picks and our head coach.

Are looking for Thibs or Layden to throw on a uniform and protect the paint! :o


I was reading an article that was covering George Hill, and how he doesn't seem to be a good fit in SAC. He signed a 3 year/57 mil deal similar to Teague's, but he doesn't have the PO at the end. I would love to see the wolves offer to swap Teague for him. That would certainly help our D, and he is a good 3pt shooter as well. SAC likely does it to reduce the contract term to 2 years, because they are developing Fox, and are already giving him significant minutes at PG.

monsterpile wrote:

sjm34 wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

Yes, it's maddening to say the least. As you might recall, I hated the "we're too young" narrative last season. The Thunder weren't too young when they won 50 games with a 3rd year player in Durant, a 2nd year player in Westbrook and a rookie named Harden before he was anything like he is today. I didn't expect the Wolves to make the playoffs last season, but I expected improvement and we saw very little if any. So this season, our record is significantly better with the addition of veterans Butler, Taj and Crawford, but we still have a bottom 5 defense and a stagnant office, which I maintain is part of why we have a poor defense. Yes, it says a lot about our two #1 picks and our head coach.

Are looking for Thibs or Layden to throw on a uniform and protect the paint! :o


I was reading an article that was covering George Hill, and how he doesn't seem to be a good fit in SAC. He signed a 3 year/57 mil deal similar to Teague's, but he doesn't have the PO at the end. I would love to see the wolves offer to swap Teague for him. That would certainly help our D, and he is a good 3pt shooter as well. SAC likely does it to reduce the contract term to 2 years, because they are developing Fox, and are already giving him significant minutes at PG.

The last year of Hill's contract is only guaranteed for 1 million. In addition he fits better next to Fox if the play together better than Teague would.

sjm34 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

sjm34 wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

Yes, it's maddening to say the least. As you might recall, I hated the "we're too young" narrative last season. The Thunder weren't too young when they won 50 games with a 3rd year player in Durant, a 2nd year player in Westbrook and a rookie named Harden before he was anything like he is today. I didn't expect the Wolves to make the playoffs last season, but I expected improvement and we saw very little if any. So this season, our record is significantly better with the addition of veterans Butler, Taj and Crawford, but we still have a bottom 5 defense and a stagnant office, which I maintain is part of why we have a poor defense. Yes, it says a lot about our two #1 picks and our head coach.

Are looking for Thibs or Layden to throw on a uniform and protect the paint! :o


I was reading an article that was covering George Hill, and how he doesn't seem to be a good fit in SAC. He signed a 3 year/57 mil deal similar to Teague's, but he doesn't have the PO at the end. I would love to see the wolves offer to swap Teague for him. That would certainly help our D, and he is a good 3pt shooter as well. SAC likely does it to reduce the contract term to 2 years, because they are developing Fox, and are already giving him significant minutes at PG.

The last year of Hill's contract is only guaranteed for 1 million. In addition he fits better next to Fox if the play together better than Teague would.

Where did you see that Monster? That would substantially reduce any reason for the trade.

Hill is almost exactly 2 years and 1 month older Cam, but is also a much more aggressive defender than Teague.

monsterpile wrote:

sjm34 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

sjm34 wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

Yes, it's maddening to say the least. As you might recall, I hated the "we're too young" narrative last season. The Thunder weren't too young when they won 50 games with a 3rd year player in Durant, a 2nd year player in Westbrook and a rookie named Harden before he was anything like he is today. I didn't expect the Wolves to make the playoffs last season, but I expected improvement and we saw very little if any. So this season, our record is significantly better with the addition of veterans Butler, Taj and Crawford, but we still have a bottom 5 defense and a stagnant office, which I maintain is part of why we have a poor defense. Yes, it says a lot about our two #1 picks and our head coach.

Are looking for Thibs or Layden to throw on a uniform and protect the paint! :o


I was reading an article that was covering George Hill, and how he doesn't seem to be a good fit in SAC. He signed a 3 year/57 mil deal similar to Teague's, but he doesn't have the PO at the end. I would love to see the wolves offer to swap Teague for him. That would certainly help our D, and he is a good 3pt shooter as well. SAC likely does it to reduce the contract term to 2 years, because they are developing Fox, and are already giving him significant minutes at PG.

The last year of Hill's contract is only guaranteed for 1 million. In addition he fits better next to Fox if the play together better than Teague would.

Where did you see that Monster? That would substantially reduce any reason for the trade.

Hill is almost exactly 2 years and 1 month older Cam, but is also a much more aggressive defender than Teague.

https://www.google.com/amp/nba.nbcsports.com/2017/07/11/report-final-season-of-george-hills-kings-contract-just-1-million-guaranteed/amp/

It was also reported that he had no interest in coming here this summer.

sjm34 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

sjm34 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

sjm34 wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

Yes, it's maddening to say the least. As you might recall, I hated the "we're too young" narrative last season. The Thunder weren't too young when they won 50 games with a 3rd year player in Durant, a 2nd year player in Westbrook and a rookie named Harden before he was anything like he is today. I didn't expect the Wolves to make the playoffs last season, but I expected improvement and we saw very little if any. So this season, our record is significantly better with the addition of veterans Butler, Taj and Crawford, but we still have a bottom 5 defense and a stagnant office, which I maintain is part of why we have a poor defense. Yes, it says a lot about our two #1 picks and our head coach.

Are looking for Thibs or Layden to throw on a uniform and protect the paint! :o


I was reading an article that was covering George Hill, and how he doesn't seem to be a good fit in SAC. He signed a 3 year/57 mil deal similar to Teague's, but he doesn't have the PO at the end. I would love to see the wolves offer to swap Teague for him. That would certainly help our D, and he is a good 3pt shooter as well. SAC likely does it to reduce the contract term to 2 years, because they are developing Fox, and are already giving him significant minutes at PG.

The last year of Hill's contract is only guaranteed for 1 million. In addition he fits better next to Fox if the play together better than Teague would.

Where did you see that Monster? That would substantially reduce any reason for the trade.

Hill is almost exactly 2 years and 1 month older Cam, but is also a much more aggressive defender than Teague.

https://www.google.com/amp/nba.nbcsports.com/2017/07/11/report-final-season-of-george-hills-kings-contract-just-1-million-guaranteed/amp/

It was also reported that he had no interest in coming here this summer.

Too bad, I am already tired of watching Teague float around guarding nobody. We already have two soft defenders in our lineup, we didn't need a third.

thedoper wrote:The Pacers are a fun team. It's too bad Lance couldn't work out for us. I guess he was just meant to play for the Pacers.

monsterpile wrote:

thedoper wrote:The Pacers are a fun team. It's too bad Lance couldn't work out for us. I guess he was just meant to play for the Pacers.

I watched about the last half of the 4th quarter of that game before going to the Wolves game. Lyles had a heck of a game and Dipo was ballin. Good to see another eastern Conf team win. That Paul George trade keeps looking pretty solid with Dipo and Sabonis looking like nice players.