Who's got the GDT? - Pelicans at Wolves GDT

[FNG]

Brilliant long range shooter, but there was more post-game evidence last night that Ant is the dumbest mind in the Association. He was asked what the problem was with our crunch time offense, and he said (paraphrasing): "there's no problem with our offense at end of games, we just need to get stops". Really? Just moments after he and his team failed to score even one basket in the final three minutes of the game????

Let's review what happened. Down 3 with 3:20 left in the game, Finchie wisely called a timeout. And he designed a brilliant play that had Ant not touching the ball until he moved without the ball around a screen to get an open trey from the right side...which he drained to tie the game. I foolishly said "great, they're finally getting it...when Ant doesn't lead the offense but instead lets his teammates set him up, our offense clicks. We're going to win this game". Which only proves that I might be as dumb as Ant. For the final 3:08 of the game, either Ant or Ju reverted to hero ball one-on-one offense, and the results were what we have seen all year as we continue to execute one of the worst crunch time offenses in the league...3 measly free throws, and NO baskets! Not ONE basket in the final three minutes against the 30th ranked defense in the league!!!
Contrary to Ant's dumb analysis, our defense was not the problem at crunch time...the Pelicans only scored 3 buckets in the final 3 minutes. That's adequate defense to win the game if we had only employed a ball movement offense that might have allowed us to score at least one basket in the final three minutes.

Okay, Ant is dumb...we all know this. But how is Finchie responsible here? He needs to change his coaching philosophy to get more involved at the end of games...otherwise we're going to continue to flail away and lose. Here's what he needs to do:

1) Recognize that he needs to call plays down the stretch, and save enough time outs to be able to do this. Unfortunately, he doesn't have the luxury of using any of his time outs early in the second half, because his players are too stupid to perform without his help.

2) If he sees Ant taking the ball up the court at crunch time and originating the offense, he needs to scream "get the ball to Mike, and start moving without the ball".

3) And if Ant doesn't comply, he simply can't be in the game at crunch time. He is our most effective and prolific scorer when the game is on the line, but how much more evidence does Finchie need that Ant originating the offense at crunch time is a bad strategy.

Come on Finchie, do your job...because we have plenty of evidence that Ant cannot be trusted to run the offense with the game on the line.

They got some good looks but didn't hit them is basically what Finch said during the postgame presser.

You're right that Ant initiating the action is too easy for the defense. Ant wants to shoot it, the other team knows that. Get him coming off a screen so they can't set up and double him. He can attack without a set defense on him.

I think one of the problems is that the flow offense empowers players to make decisions. Well, if you are the star of the team and #1 scorer, it's a lot easier to make that extra pass in the second quarter than with three minutes left. There is almost an assumed "it's my time!" mentality at crunch time for singular players like Ant, which has been the case for NBA stars for as long as I can remember. They want the ball and they want to take the big shots.

The problem is unlike Jordan or Bird or Lillard or [insert name], Ant has a terrible track record at making big shots. He just misses too many of them. Even if they are difficult, going 2-25 or whatever it is to tie or win a game is a TERRIBLE percentage. I mean, even 10-25 would be tons better!

And that's basically a long way of saying I agree with FNG. It's now Finch's problem to own and he has to start getting Ant off the ball and set up structured plays where he is either a weak side floor spacer or comes curling off pindowns to get the ball while on the move. No more isolation B.S. above the 3-point arc. It Does. Not. Work.

Brilliant long range shooter, but there was more post-game evidence last night that Ant is the dumbest mind in the Association. He was asked what the problem was with our crunch time offense, and he said (paraphrasing): "there's no problem with our offense at end of games, we just need to get stops". Really? Just moments after he and his team failed to score even one basket in the final three minutes of the game????

Let's review what happened. Down 3 with 3:20 left in the game, Finchie wisely called a timeout. And he designed a brilliant play that had Ant not touching the ball until he moved without the ball around a screen to get an open trey from the right side...which he drained to tie the game. I foolishly said "great, they're finally getting it...when Ant doesn't lead the offense but instead lets his teammates set him up, our offense clicks. We're going to win this game". Which only proves that I might be as dumb as Ant. For the final 3:08 of the game, either Ant or Ju reverted to hero ball one-on-one offense, and the results were what we have seen all year as we continue to execute one of the worst crunch time offenses in the league...3 measly free throws, and NO baskets! Not ONE basket in the final three minutes against the 30th ranked defense in the league!!!
Contrary to Ant's dumb analysis, our defense was not the problem at crunch time...the Pelicans only scored 3 buckets in the final 3 minutes. That's adequate defense to win the game if we had only employed a ball movement offense that might have allowed us to score at least one basket in the final three minutes.

Okay, Ant is dumb...we all know this. But how is Finchie responsible here? He needs to change his coaching philosophy to get more involved at the end of games...otherwise we're going to continue to flail away and lose. Here's what he needs to do:

1) Recognize that he needs to call plays down the stretch, and save enough time outs to be able to do this. Unfortunately, he doesn't have the luxury of using any of his time outs early in the second half, because his players are too stupid to perform without his help.

2) If he sees Ant taking the ball up the court at crunch time and originating the offense, he needs to scream "get the ball to Mike, and start moving without the ball".

3) And if Ant doesn't comply, he simply can't be in the game at crunch time. He is our most effective and prolific scorer when the game is on the line, but how much more evidence does Finchie need that Ant originating the offense at crunch time is a bad strategy.

Come on Finchie, do your job...because we have plenty of evidence that Ant cannot be trusted to run the offense with the game on the line.

They got some good looks but didn't hit them is basically what Finch said during the postgame presser.

You're right that Ant initiating the action is too easy for the defense. Ant wants to shoot it, the other team knows that. Get him coming off a screen so they can't set up and double him. He can attack without a set defense on him.

I think one of the problems is that the flow offense empowers players to make decisions. Well, if you are the star of the team and #1 scorer, it's a lot easier to make that extra pass in the second quarter than with three minutes left. There is almost an assumed "it's my time!" mentality at crunch time for singular players like Ant, which has been the case for NBA stars for as long as I can remember. They want the ball and they want to take the big shots.

The problem is unlike Jordan or Bird or Lillard or [insert name], Ant has a terrible track record at making big shots. He just misses too many of them. Even if they are difficult, going 2-25 or whatever it is to tie or win a game is a TERRIBLE percentage. I mean, even 10-25 would be tons better!

And that's basically a long way of saying I agree with FNG. It's now Finch's problem to own and he has to start getting Ant off the ball and set up structured plays where he is either a weak side floor spacer or comes curling off pindowns to get the ball while on the move. No more isolation B.S. above the 3-point arc. It Does. Not. Work.

Nope, it doesn't. The Wolves are still going to win some games this season (and maybe in the playoffs) because the non-crunch offense has become very good. Ant is an elite 3-point shooter, and contrary to the prevailing opinion on this board, is getting a very favorable whistle from the refs...he's averaging 9 free throw attempts per game since the beginning of 2025, a rate that only Giannis and SGA are at, two guys who don't rely on treys nearly as much as Ant. And many times last night foul calls he was awarded when he was stripped going to the basket were pretty marginal. So he's going to score when the game is not on the line, and that is going to allow us to win some games with blowouts. But I have no confidence in our ability to win the close ones unless Finchie gets much more involved.

[AbeVigodaLive]

Well... it was impossible to play less disinterested than they did in the 1st half vs. Indiana. But they had no second gear in this one and played "not to lose" again. New Orleans was the more confident team and that's embarrassing.

As for the game... they were punked by Zion Williamson. There were several plays, but I actually watched one play multiple times for the silliness in it. Tied with 8 minutes left in the 3rd, Williamson drove against multiple Timberwolves players... and Julius Randle moved out of his way.

3-point play for Williamson. And message sent loud and clear.





[Note: Crazy stats... Anthony Edwards made 34 free throws over the past two games against really really bad teams... and the Wolves lost both at home. Minnesota was +10 vs. IND and +17 vs. NOP from the line.]

[Coolbreeze44]

Ant has been one of the elite 3 pt shooters this year

Everywhere else has not been great

In restricted area: 61% -- 47th out of 51 players w 230+ att

In paint, non-RA: 40.1% -- 39th out of 41 players with 200+ att

In mid-range: 36.2%, 52nd out of 52 of players with 100+ att

-per Jace Frederick

Brilliant long range shooter, but there was more post-game evidence last night that Ant is the dumbest mind in the Association. He was asked what the problem was with our crunch time offense, and he said (paraphrasing): "there's no problem with our offense at end of games, we just need to get stops". Really? Just moments after he and his team failed to score even one basket in the final three minutes of the game????

Let's review what happened. Down 3 with 3:20 left in the game, Finchie wisely called a timeout. And he designed a brilliant play that had Ant not touching the ball until he moved without the ball around a screen to get an open trey from the right side...which he drained to tie the game. I foolishly said "great, they're finally getting it...when Ant doesn't lead the offense but instead lets his teammates set him up, our offense clicks. We're going to win this game". Which only proves that I might be as dumb as Ant. For the final 3:08 of the game, either Ant or Ju reverted to hero ball one-on-one offense, and the results were what we have seen all year as we continue to execute one of the worst crunch time offenses in the league...3 measly free throws, and NO baskets! Not ONE basket in the final three minutes against the 30th ranked defense in the league!!!
Contrary to Ant's dumb analysis, our defense was not the problem at crunch time...the Pelicans only scored 3 buckets in the final 3 minutes. That's adequate defense to win the game if we had only employed a ball movement offense that might have allowed us to score at least one basket in the final three minutes.

Okay, Ant is dumb...we all know this. But how is Finchie responsible here? He needs to change his coaching philosophy to get more involved at the end of games...otherwise we're going to continue to flail away and lose. Here's what he needs to do:

1) Recognize that he needs to call plays down the stretch, and save enough time outs to be able to do this. Unfortunately, he doesn't have the luxury of using any of his time outs early in the second half, because his players are too stupid to perform without his help.

2) If he sees Ant taking the ball up the court at crunch time and originating the offense, he needs to scream "get the ball to Mike, and start moving without the ball".

3) And if Ant doesn't comply, he simply can't be in the game at crunch time. He is our most effective and prolific scorer when the game is on the line, but how much more evidence does Finchie need that Ant originating the offense at crunch time is a bad strategy.

Come on Finchie, do your job...because we have plenty of evidence that Ant cannot be trusted to run the offense with the game on the line.

Amen brother

[Coolbreeze44]

I'll post a take that is controversial at the time. I'll get flamed and panned for said take relentlessly. I'll occasionally provide reminders of said take. And then eventually the take will get rehashed and presented like it hasn't been made before. Why can't we keep an open mind when I say something that sounds a bit far fetched?

[Q-is-here]

I'll post a take that is controversial at the time. I'll get flamed and panned for said take relentlessly. I'll occasionally provide reminders of said take. And then eventually the take will get rehashed and presented like it hasn't been made before. Why can't we keep an open mind when I say something that sounds a bit far fetched?

What was controversial and far-fetched was your take that his off court behavior sexually equates to low IQ on the court, when there is ample evidence of past sports legends (and world class performers from other professions including your own admission on Elon Musk) that the two things are mutually exclusive. I don't recall anyone actually retorting that Ant's on court IQ was awesome and couldn't use improvement.

The other thing you declared was that he can't be the best player on a title team. That's hardly a bold statement when most NBA players never win titles to begin with. It's a league that has largely been dominated by dynasties over the years and there are plenty of great players that didn't/haven't won a title. Heck, the greatest player in a generation, Nikola Jokic, has only won one title. And the reality is he's the best we've got for right now and no matter what you think, the front office isn't trading him anytime soon.

[Coolbreeze44]

I'll post a take that is controversial at the time. I'll get flamed and panned for said take relentlessly. I'll occasionally provide reminders of said take. And then eventually the take will get rehashed and presented like it hasn't been made before. Why can't we keep an open mind when I say something that sounds a bit far fetched?

What was controversial and far-fetched was your take that his off court behavior sexually equates to low IQ on the court, when there is ample evidence of past sports legends (and world class performers from other professions including your own admission on Elon Musk) that the two things are mutually exclusive. I don't recall anyone actually retorting that Ant's on court IQ was awesome and couldn't use improvement.

The other thing you declared was that he can't be the best player on a title team. That's hardly a bold statement when most NBA players never win titles to begin with. It's a league that has largely been dominated by dynasties over the years and there are plenty of great players that didn't/haven't won a title. Heck, the greatest player in a generation, Nikola Jokic, has only won one title. And the reality is he's the best we've got for right now and no matter what you think, the front office isn't trading him anytime soon.

It's not just the Ant takes you reference. We could talk about my takes on DLO, McDaniels, Clark, Towns, Butler, Mobley, Beverly, Brewer, Crawford, Culver, Dunn, Flynn, Hudson - I mean how many do you want me to name?

I never said the front office was going to trade Ant, just that it SHOULD be on the table. We could have Luka right now but smart guys like you and your paradigms won't allow for such thinking. And for the record, my take on Ant has less to do about his off court activities and more to do with his overall lack of intelligence and self awareness. I don't know exactly what it is, but he's missing something that the true greats possess.

[Q-is-here]

I'll post a take that is controversial at the time. I'll get flamed and panned for said take relentlessly. I'll occasionally provide reminders of said take. And then eventually the take will get rehashed and presented like it hasn't been made before. Why can't we keep an open mind when I say something that sounds a bit far fetched?

What was controversial and far-fetched was your take that his off court behavior sexually equates to low IQ on the court, when there is ample evidence of past sports legends (and world class performers from other professions including your own admission on Elon Musk) that the two things are mutually exclusive. I don't recall anyone actually retorting that Ant's on court IQ was awesome and couldn't use improvement.

The other thing you declared was that he can't be the best player on a title team. That's hardly a bold statement when most NBA players never win titles to begin with. It's a league that has largely been dominated by dynasties over the years and there are plenty of great players that didn't/haven't won a title. Heck, the greatest player in a generation, Nikola Jokic, has only won one title. And the reality is he's the best we've got for right now and no matter what you think, the front office isn't trading him anytime soon.

It's not just the Ant takes you reference. We could talk about my takes on DLO, McDaniels, Clark, Towns, Butler, Mobley, Beverly, Brewer, Crawford, Culver, Dunn, Flynn, Hudson - I mean how many do you want me to name?

I never said the front office was going to trade Ant, just that it SHOULD be on the table. We could have Luka right now but smart guys like you and your paradigms won't allow for such thinking. And for the record, my take on Ant has less to do about his off court activities and more to do with his overall lack of intelligence and self awareness. I don't know exactly what it is, but he's missing something that the true greats possess.

Well, Luka hasn't won a title yet either! Remember how he was relentlessly targeted last year by Boston in the Finals? He's a flawed player as well.

It's hard to detach your takes on Ant's on court decisions without your referencing his off court exploits since you made it very clear how you thought the two were linked.

And my paradigms aren't as fixed as you may think. There are all sorts of things that I might think make sense hypothetically but I don't think are realistic. One of them is trading Ant. I'll be proven wrong if he suddenly gets moved in the next year or two, but I doubt that's going to happen.

And finally, for all the patting yourself on the back you like to do, you get some things really wrong too just like the rest of us.

[KiwiMatt]

It is clearly evident the next step Ant needs to take in his development is decision making and maturity. Both will come with time and (better) 'coaching', both on and off the court.

But what is slowing down the process is a lack of accountability and forced change. This is on Finchy. The end of game situation is bad, like really bad and the blame falls solely on Ant and Finchy.

It's a complex situation though. The NBA has created an environment where the superstar holds all the cards and the coach doesn't want to 'rock the boat' in fear of falling out with players and ultimately losing their jobs. This has manifested into our clutch time conundrums where Ant's hero ball antics are costing us game after game.

[FNG]

I guess I'll chime in on Cool's behalf that I think it's more than the fact that some of us believe Ant can't be the best player on a championship team, it's that his lack of basketball acumen falls so far short of that of other teams' star players. He ranks with the best in the league in terms of pure athleticism, scoring and overall skill, but he ranks far behind in his understanding of what it takes to win. His comments like "there's nothing I can do if they double team me" or his comment last night that there is no problem with our end of game execution are more than just dumb...they demonstrate a lack of understanding of basic basketball strategy that then becomes tragically obvious in clutch situations. There's probably no way that the Wolves would ever consider trading Ant, but I find it far from a preposterous discussion topic. He's remarkably talented and a really exciting player to watch (at times...his top of the key ball hogging is not exciting), and there's always hope that a young player can still develop better court sense, but I have a lagging concern that continuing to go forward with Ant as our star might doom us to a decade of 42-48 win seasons. I hope I'm wrong.

I should add that while I have been enormously frustrated with our offense with games on the line and Ant in particular, as others have pointed out, there were other reasons for our loss last night. I would add to the list Ju's 6 turnovers, Jaden having zero rebounds (and only taking 4 shots), and Finchie only giving Clark 12 minutes when he was obviously someone causing the Pelicans fits at both ends of the court.

[Wolvesfan21]

I guess I'll chime in on Cool's behalf that I think it's more than the fact that some of us believe Ant can't be the best player on a championship team, it's that his lack of basketball acumen falls so far short of that of other teams' star players. He ranks with the best in the league in terms of pure athleticism, scoring and overall skill, but he ranks far behind in his understanding of what it takes to win. His comments like "there's nothing I can do if they double team me" or his comment last night that there is no problem with our end of game execution are more than just dumb...they demonstrate a lack of understanding of basic basketball strategy that then becomes tragically obvious in clutch situations. There's probably no way that the Wolves would ever consider trading Ant, but I find it far from a preposterous discussion topic. He's remarkably talented and a really exciting player to watch (at times...his top of the key ball hogging is not exciting), and there's always hope that a young player can still develop better court sense, but I have a lagging concern that continuing to go forward with Ant as our star might doom us to a decade of 42-48 win seasons. I hope I'm wrong.

I should add that while I have been enormously frustrated with our offense with games on the line and Ant in particular, as others have pointed out, there were other reasons for our loss last night. I would add to the list Ju's 6 turnovers, Jaden having zero rebounds (and only taking 4 shots), and Finchie only giving Clark 12 minutes when he was obviously someone causing the Pelicans fits at both ends of the court.

Finch echoed what Ant said in the presser also though. He said we got good looks and just didn't make them. Ant could also be defending his ego. You're most of the time going to get that reaction when a question threatens a star athletes game.

I will say overall I don't like the hero ball at the end of the games like the rest of you guys. It hasn't proven to work and I think still getting Ant the ball just starting off the ball is probably the smartest coaching step Finch could take. Make the defense work and don't be so predictable.