Minnesota Sports Forum

I just realized that the Nuggets and Lakers are in the WCF. I could look, but who beat the Clippers?

bleedspeed177 wrote:I just realized that the Nuggets and Lakers are in the WCF. I could look, but who beat the Clippers?

The Clippers beat themselves if we're being totally honest, but the Nuggets showed up and got the job done.

khans2k5 wrote:

Camden0916 wrote:I'm sure this won't be agreed with, but I think Towns is better than Jokic and Russell is better than Murray, but everything else sides with the Nuggets over the Wolves. From the rest of the roster to the head coach and up through the front office. Minnesota could follow Denver's blueprint and theoretically become a contender in the same mold if they wanted to, or they could venture off and create their own style/advantage.

I think Towns and Russell can be as good a good as Murray and Jokic which is why I brought up the comparison of Russell to Murray. For some reason our duo has no chance to contend on this board even though we are seeing a similar duo do it for Denver.

Sure... those two could be as good or nearly as good... or possibly even better. Fair enough.

But what about the rest of the mix?

I mean the Wolves are debating making Beasley potentially 3rd on the pecking order on the court and at the bank. And he was jettisoned from Denver because he was largely irrelevant to the team's 10 man rotation.

He'd basically be PJ Dozier (who?) for Denver in the playoffs... and that's with Barton out of action. My point is that a team has to have more than just those two guys hit. Even take a guy like Millsap. He's largely overlooked but we've all see his impact for years. Just a steady player who can do the right things to help teams win. How many of those guys ever landed in Minnesota?

Taj Gibson comes to mind... but I don't even think he was as good or versatile as Millsap. Those guys are gems when you can find them. Then, there are promising guys like Porter. While we're gushing over Vanderbilt or McLaughlin or a guy who shoots 46% from the line... Porter is actually making critical shots in key playoff games.

The Wolves are just so very far behind the Nuggets... and the vast majority of it happens after we remove the top two guys from each squad.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:

Camden0916 wrote:I'm sure this won't be agreed with, but I think Towns is better than Jokic and Russell is better than Murray, but everything else sides with the Nuggets over the Wolves. From the rest of the roster to the head coach and up through the front office. Minnesota could follow Denver's blueprint and theoretically become a contender in the same mold if they wanted to, or they could venture off and create their own style/advantage.

I think Towns and Russell can be as good a good as Murray and Jokic which is why I brought up the comparison of Russell to Murray. For some reason our duo has no chance to contend on this board even though we are seeing a similar duo do it for Denver.

Sure... those two could be as good or nearly as good... or possibly even better. Fair enough.

But what about the rest of the mix?

I mean the Wolves are debating making Beasley potentially 3rd on the pecking order on the court and at the bank. And he was jettisoned from Denver because he was largely irrelevant to the team's 10 man rotation.

He'd basically be PJ Dozier (who?) for Denver in the playoffs... and that's with Barton out of action. My point is that a team has to have more than just those two guys hit. Even take a guy like Millsap. He's largely overlooked but we've all see his impact for years. Just a steady player who can do the right things to help teams win. How many of those guys ever landed in Minnesota?

Taj Gibson comes to mind... but I don't even think he was as good or versatile as Millsap. Those guys are gems when you can find them. Then, there are promising guys like Porter. While we're gushing over Vanderbilt or McLaughlin or a guy who shoots 46% from the line... Porter is actually making critical shots in key playoff games.

The Wolves are just so very far behind the Nuggets... and the vast majority of it happens after we remove the top two guys from each squad.

We should be able to get a better player than Porter Jr. with the number 1 pick whether that be Wiseman or Edwards. Then it comes down to how Culver or Okogie develop and if one of them can become similar to Gary Harris. They both have the defensive chops, but will their offense get to his level I don't know.

Murray
Harris
Porter Jr/Barton
Millsap/Grant
Jokic/Bol

DLo/Beasley
Culver/Okogie
Don't know yet/Layman
Towns/Johnson/Vanderbuilt
Wiseman/Reid

It's really not that far off. We are certainly behind them, but we aren't significantly far behind. Also I would argue our star power is higher in that scenario than theirs which is really what matters at the end of the day because you can get role players a lot easier than stars.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:

Camden0916 wrote:I'm sure this won't be agreed with, but I think Towns is better than Jokic and Russell is better than Murray, but everything else sides with the Nuggets over the Wolves. From the rest of the roster to the head coach and up through the front office. Minnesota could follow Denver's blueprint and theoretically become a contender in the same mold if they wanted to, or they could venture off and create their own style/advantage.

I think Towns and Russell can be as good a good as Murray and Jokic which is why I brought up the comparison of Russell to Murray. For some reason our duo has no chance to contend on this board even though we are seeing a similar duo do it for Denver.

Sure... those two could be as good or nearly as good... or possibly even better. Fair enough.

But what about the rest of the mix?

I mean the Wolves are debating making Beasley potentially 3rd on the pecking order on the court and at the bank. And he was jettisoned from Denver because he was largely irrelevant to the team's 10 man rotation.

He'd basically be PJ Dozier (who?) for Denver in the playoffs... and that's with Barton out of action. My point is that a team has to have more than just those two guys hit. Even take a guy like Millsap. He's largely overlooked but we've all see his impact for years. Just a steady player who can do the right things to help teams win. How many of those guys ever landed in Minnesota?

Taj Gibson comes to mind... but I don't even think he was as good or versatile as Millsap. Those guys are gems when you can find them. Then, there are promising guys like Porter. While we're gushing over Vanderbilt or McLaughlin or a guy who shoots 46% from the line... Porter is actually making critical shots in key playoff games.

The Wolves are just so very far behind the Nuggets... and the vast majority of it happens after we remove the top two guys from each squad.

I agree, Abe. But I wouldn't put McLaughlin and Vanderbilt in the same bucket. McLaughlin had significant productive minutes with the Wolves last season and was a key player in the Team's two most impressive wins last season. I'm not sure what Vanderbilt accomplished in the NBA before coming here, but he did nothing in his short time with the Wolves. Neither one has yet proven to be a consistently positive rotation player on a playoff team. But I'd say that McLaughlin has shown a lot of promise well beyond what Vanderbilt has shown to date. I'll add that Rosas obviously acquired Beasley based on his potential. Note also that Denver didn't believe they needed Beasley, which doesn't mean they didn't think highly of him. I see a lot of upside in him at 23 years of age. But again, he's still an unknown. I think he'll be a highly valuable rotation player for the Wolves.

Denver thought highly enough of Malik Beasley to offer him $10-million a year before last season. He was also shipped away for a first-round pick -- not peanuts. I think he's a limited player, but a nice one to have on the roster nonetheless.

Didn't we pass on Gary Harris too? Damn we should be the Nuggets. Jimmy Butler in the ECF too.

Tell me again why I should follow this team?

I will argue that Jokic is > than KAT for now as an all-around player even though KAT is clearly the more gifted pure scorer. Jokic does stuff to help on both offense and defense that don't show up in the box score that KAT doesn't do. His screening is probably as critical as his passing and his big body also helps clog up the lane defensively. KAT is a horrible screener and is definitely worse defensively. This type of nuance matters with bigs and KAT is great at the sexy stuff, but not so great at the little, subtle things that can help make an offense and defense tick.

BizarroJerry wrote:Didn't we pass on Gary Harris too? Damn we should be the Nuggets. Jimmy Butler in the ECF too.

Tell me again why I should follow this team?

I mean we took lavine with that pick

kekgeek1 wrote:

BizarroJerry wrote:Didn't we pass on Gary Harris too? Damn we should be the Nuggets. Jimmy Butler in the ECF too.

Tell me again why I should follow this team?

I mean we took lavine with that pick

So we can blame Lavine for this. We took him over Harris to then trade for Butler and look where they are now.