John kruk vs kat

Any And All Things T-Wolves Related
User avatar
Camden [enjin:6601484]
Posts: 18065
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:00 am

Re: John kruk vs kat

Post by Camden [enjin:6601484] »

This team has really missed Jeff Teague and Shabazz Napier this past week -- Teague more so than Napier, but still.
User avatar
Papalrep
Posts: 1070
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 12:00 am

Re: John kruk vs kat

Post by Papalrep »

Really who could we use more, Herro or Culver?
User avatar
AbeVigodaLive
Posts: 10272
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 12:00 am

Re: John kruk vs kat

Post by AbeVigodaLive »

I'm so sick of the Wolves. Game after game after game, the opponent makes more 3s. Only 6 tonight for the Wolves? That's embarrassing. They gotta get more attempts up.

I'm done with this team.

Let me know when they start hitting 10 three pointers per game like everybody else.*




* Or, 80 three point attempts... whichever comes first.
User avatar
thedoper
Posts: 11008
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2013 12:00 am

Re: John kruk vs kat

Post by thedoper »

Camden0916 wrote:This team has really missed Jeff Teague and Shabazz Napier this past week -- Teague more so than Napier, but still.


Yeah, Culver and Wiggins have tried, but the spacing is not great without legit PG play.
User avatar
Camden [enjin:6601484]
Posts: 18065
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:00 am

Re: John kruk vs kat

Post by Camden [enjin:6601484] »

There's no way to tiptoe around this. Robert Covington was a complete non-factor in this game and one of the many reasons why the Wolves lost. We just collectively don't like to point the finger at him for some reason -- probably because he's super likable and supposed to be the second-best player on the team. These kinds of games remind you just now limited his impact can be some nights. When you're still trying to find your stars to build around, you have to remember that this is the reality with 3/D players being considered building blocks. It's more dream than reality. They are 100-percent movable if you feel that you can get a star player, period.
User avatar
thedoper
Posts: 11008
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2013 12:00 am

Re: John kruk vs kat

Post by thedoper »

Camden0916 wrote:There's no way to tiptoe around this. Robert Covington was a complete non-factor in this game and one of the many reasons why the Wolves lost. We just collectively don't like to point the finger at him for some reason -- probably because he's super likable and supposed to be the second-best player on the team. These kinds of games remind you just now limited his impact can be some nights. When you're still trying to find your stars to build around, you have to remember that this is the reality with 3/D players being considered building blocks. It's more dream than reality. They are 100-percent movable if you feel that you can get a star player, period.


I agree with this 100%. Roco is great but if he cant contribute on offense we suffer.
User avatar
Wolvesfan21
Posts: 4115
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2017 12:00 am

Re: John kruk vs kat

Post by Wolvesfan21 »

Camden wrote:There's no way to tiptoe around this. Robert Covington was a complete non-factor in this game and one of the many reasons why the Wolves lost. We just collectively don't like to point the finger at him for some reason -- probably because he's super likable and supposed to be the second-best player on the team. These kinds of games remind you just now limited his impact can be some nights. When you're still trying to find your stars to build around, you have to remember that this is the reality with 3/D players being considered building blocks. It's more dream than reality. They are 100-percent movable if you feel that you can get a star player, period.


Shooting 6 for 45 from 3 point land lost this game. Period. Placing blame on any one player is silly. The fact that they even had a chance to win was a miracle in itself. If you shoot the ball that bad you should always lose.
User avatar
Wolvesfan21
Posts: 4115
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2017 12:00 am

Re: John kruk vs kat

Post by Wolvesfan21 »

thedoper wrote:
Camden0916 wrote:There's no way to tiptoe around this. Robert Covington was a complete non-factor in this game and one of the many reasons why the Wolves lost. We just collectively don't like to point the finger at him for some reason -- probably because he's super likable and supposed to be the second-best player on the team. These kinds of games remind you just now limited his impact can be some nights. When you're still trying to find your stars to build around, you have to remember that this is the reality with 3/D players being considered building blocks. It's more dream than reality. They are 100-percent movable if you feel that you can get a star player, period.


I agree with this 100%. Roco is great but if he cant contribute on offense we suffer.


Isn't KAT and Wiggins suppose to create offense? Maybe Culver? Missing Teague also hurts as as much as we think he is overpaid, he's a still solid at distributing.

Still, the Wolves just shot the ball terribly. I doubt they shoot 13% from 3 or worse the rest of the season. It was just poor shooting. Blame anyone that went o-fer from 3 if you want I guess. I thought most of the 3 looks were acceptable. When you live by the 3 you can die by the 3.

I guess the point is, you will not get better by trading away your best defense and shooters, when that is your problem. Unless you get better defenders and shooting back. We can't shoot 3's so lets get rid of our 2nd best one.

We need more players like RoCo not less.
User avatar
Lipoli390
Posts: 16262
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 12:00 am

Re: John kruk vs kat

Post by Lipoli390 »

Camden wrote:There's no way to tiptoe around this. Robert Covington was a complete non-factor in this game and one of the many reasons why the Wolves lost. We just collectively don't like to point the finger at him for some reason -- probably because he's super likable and supposed to be the second-best player on the team. These kinds of games remind you just now limited his impact can be some nights. When you're still trying to find your stars to build around, you have to remember that this is the reality with 3/D players being considered building blocks. It's more dream than reality. They are 100-percent movable if you feel that you can get a star player, period.


I disagree that RoCo was a complete non-factor against Denver. He made some big defensive plays and pulled down some big rebounds. His hustle and overall defense were definitely positive factors for the Wolves. He and Okogie, along with KAT, are the only two players on this team who can positively contribute overall even in a game when their shooting is terrible. That said, I agree with you completely that RoCo's play last night illustrates the inherent limits of 3/D players and that they are 100% moveable if trading them can help land a star player.
User avatar
Q12543 [enjin:6621299]
Posts: 13844
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 12:00 am

Re: John kruk vs kat

Post by Q12543 [enjin:6621299] »

RoCo is an elite role player whose value to a team grows in proportion to both the # of stars on the team and how those stars are playing. RoCo is the EXACT kind of player a team with a couple of stars desperately covets.

If we want to blame anyone for yesterday's loss, the first two people we should discuss are KAT and Wiggins. They were 4-20 from 3 and needed 45 shots to create 50 points. They are the ones paid the big bucks to carry the offense and that simply wasn't good enough.
Post Reply