Minnesota Sports Forum

kekgeek1 wrote:

According to NBA.com (with the filter of Gaurds, played 30 games and 30 minutes a game, 51 players qualified)

Dlo ranks
+/-: 13th
PIE: 27th

Vorp and win shares are not used on NBA.com

Thanks for posting. I actually just exported from Baskeball Reference and it wasn't bad. They have him listed as a PG. I did a manual filter for guys over 500 minutes (seemed to be the cutoff for qualified on other sites - but I have no idea). Anyway, after doing that I came up with 74 qualified PGs. Russell ranked as follows:

PER: 23rd overall
Win Shares: 21st overall
VORP: 21st overall.

My data is in line with what you found. I think it's Monster that states "he's a legit starting PG". And I think the data supports that. But based on these rankings, he seems very much middle of the pack starting PG.

Carlos Danger wrote:

kekgeek1 wrote:

According to NBA.com (with the filter of Gaurds, played 30 games and 30 minutes a game, 51 players qualified)

Dlo ranks
+/-: 13th
PIE: 27th

Vorp and win shares are not used on NBA.com

Thanks for posting. I actually just exported from Baskeball Reference and it wasn't bad. They have him listed as a PG. I did a manual filter for guys over 500 minutes (seemed to be the cutoff for qualified on other sites - but I have no idea). Anyway, after doing that I came up with 74 qualified PGs. Russell ranked as follows:

PER: 23rd overall
Win Shares: 21st overall
VORP: 21st overall.

My data is in line with what you found. I think it's Monster that states "he's a legit starting PG". But based on these rankings, he seems very much middle of the pack.

PG is a loaded position but I would say Dlo is a legit starting NBA PG. In no stat that we provided Dlo ranked outside a starter value and he was ranked as a middle of the pack starter (what is hard to find) i just poster 538 Win Above replacement stat Dlo came in at 63rd overall in the while NBA so a high quality #3 option.

I'm torn on the Dlo thing and to me it all comes down to money. I've been hard on Dlo these last 2 months because he wasn't that good, I'm just posting all these stats because I don't want recency bias because his playoffs were really bad outside of the play-in.

To me it all comes down to what he wants for his next contract and if we move on from Dlo in what way are you replacing his production

kekgeek1 wrote:

PG is a loaded position but I would say Dlo is a legit starting NBA PG. In no stat that we provided Dlo ranked outside a starter value and he was ranked as a middle of the pack starter (what is hard to find) i just poster 538 Win Above replacement stat Dlo came in at 63rd overall in the while NBA so a high quality #3 option.

I'm torn on the Dlo thing and to me it all comes down to money. I've been hard on Dlo these last 2 months because he wasn't that good, I'm just posting all these stats because I don't want recency bias because his playoffs were really bad outside of the play-in.

To me it all comes down to what he wants for his next contract and if we move on from Dlo in what way are you replacing his production

I completely agree. I actually edited my post before you quoted me to make it more clear. The data absolutely shows he's a legit starter in the NBA. And I think most everyone agrees he helped the team improve this year. I agree - it all comes down to money. He's been overpaid up to this point based on untapped potential. He's still young - so in theory he could still get even better. But for me, I'm not seeing the baby step improvements to make me want to lock him up. I think what we saw of him this year is who is is. His play was fine this year - but just really overpaid.

So, respectfully, I feel like I've said all the same things or similar as the last few comments here at one point or another (good stuff, by the way) despite being labeled as D'Angelo Russell's top advocate or showing favoritism or whatever the jab may be. His contract demands, either an extension or re-signing him as a free agent, is likely the determining factor on whether or not he has a future in Minnesota. It's widely agreed upon that he's not worth a max contract slot even though by most measures he's a decent player. But it feels like we're still evaluating him as a max player and poking holes or finding criticisms even though we all recognize that he's not that guy nor is he going to get paid to be that guy on his next deal. While I do think he has another level he could ascend to, I'm not willing to pay $160-million to find out.

I guess my question for those willing to [productively] answer is twofold. Are you analyzing the basketball player and his on-court contributions alone or are you indefinitely resentful because his play will never exceed his salary on his current deal? For instance, if Russell made $25-million instead of $30-million this year would your overall view of him be different?

Remember, there are championship teams from the past that had low cost role-player types as their starting PG. Think Mario Chalmers or Derek Fisher or John Paxson. The Laker team that won the bubble year title a couple seasons ago didn't even have a PG in its starting playoff lineup.

The problem is Ant and KAT aren't quite high-level playmakers yet. Both get sloppy with their passes at times or just flat out miss open guys (esp. Ant). So we still need a true PG like DLO and Lil' Mac to orchestrate things. But may be that changes in a year or two?

Q-was-here wrote:Remember, there are championship teams from the past that had low cost role-player types as their starting PG. Think Mario Chalmers or Derek Fisher or John Paxson. The Laker team that won the bubble year title a couple seasons ago didn't even have a PG in its starting playoff lineup.

The problem is Ant and KAT aren't quite high-level playmakers yet. Both get sloppy with their passes at times or just flat out miss open guys (esp. Ant). So we still need a true PG like DLO and Lil' Mac to orchestrate things. But may be that changes in a year or two?

Lebron has always essentially been a PG so unless we expect Edwards to grow into that (or Harden who has basically been a PG for a while) yes we can't expect the Wolves to just slot in a role player to guard the PG position. It's also worth mentioning Rondo played a key role in that Lakers championship run.

Q-was-here wrote:Remember, there are championship teams from the past that had low cost role-player types as their starting PG. Think Mario Chalmers or Derek Fisher or John Paxson. The Laker team that won the bubble year title a couple seasons ago didn't even have a PG in its starting playoff lineup.

The problem is Ant and KAT aren't quite high-level playmakers yet. Both get sloppy with their passes at times or just flat out miss open guys (esp. Ant). So we still need a true PG like DLO and Lil' Mac to orchestrate things. But may be that changes in a year or two?

It all depends on what level of ball-handler and facilitator Anthony Edwards develops into. Currently, he's a secondary playmaker for others. He just doesn't have the acuity to consistently orchestrate the offense or setup his teammates, which is to be expected of a 20-year old. All he knows right now is go, go, go-- get buckets or die trying. Over time you'd hope that he'll become a bit more methodical in his progressions while understanding what matchups are advantageous as well as what shots are good shots and what shots are bad shots. He doesn't have that right now, which is why we can't afford to downgrade at the point guard spot just yet. We can't really plug in that role-playing guard next to him and call it done.

Camden wrote:So, respectfully, I feel like I've said all the same things or similar as the last few comments here at one point or another (good stuff, by the way) despite being labeled as D'Angelo Russell's top advocate or showing favoritism or whatever the jab may be. His contract demands, either an extension or re-signing him as a free agent, is likely the determining factor on whether or not he has a future in Minnesota. It's widely agreed upon that he's not worth a max contract slot even though by most measures he's a decent player. But it feels like we're still evaluating him as a max player and poking holes or finding criticisms even though we all recognize that he's not that guy nor is he going to get paid to be that guy on his next deal. While I do think he has another level he could ascend to, I'm not willing to pay $160-million to find out.

I guess my question for those willing to [productively] answer is twofold. Are you analyzing the basketball player and his on-court contributions alone or are you indefinitely resentful because his play will never exceed his salary on his current deal? For instance, if Russell made $25-million instead of $30-million this year would your overall view of him be different?

I really don't care what he makes. Every team has overpaid players and eventually those contracts run out. What i care about is the inconsistency, the durability, and the lack of 2-way ability. The things that had him sitting on the bench while we went down at home to Memphis. We need to be better. We need a PG who we can afford to put on the opposing teams point guard. It's up to management to find that player, and until then, we have to leverage DLO's strengths while overcoming his weaknesses.

Camden wrote:

Q-was-here wrote:Remember, there are championship teams from the past that had low cost role-player types as their starting PG. Think Mario Chalmers or Derek Fisher or John Paxson. The Laker team that won the bubble year title a couple seasons ago didn't even have a PG in its starting playoff lineup.

The problem is Ant and KAT aren't quite high-level playmakers yet. Both get sloppy with their passes at times or just flat out miss open guys (esp. Ant). So we still need a true PG like DLO and Lil' Mac to orchestrate things. But may be that changes in a year or two?

It all depends on what level of ball-handler and facilitator Anthony Edwards develops into. Currently, he's a secondary playmaker for others. He just doesn't have the acuity to consistently orchestrate the offense or setup his teammates, which is to be expected of a 20-year old. All he knows right now is go, go, go-- get buckets or die trying. Over time you'd hope that he'll become a bit more methodical in his progressions while understanding what matchups are advantageous as well as what shots are good shots and what shots are bad shots. He doesn't have that right now, which is why we can't afford to downgrade at the point guard spot just yet. We can't really plug in that role-playing guard next to him and call it done.

I agree, we are essentially saying the same thing. I'm fine having DLO back next season - in fact I might even prefer it. What I'm not fine with is locking him into a big contract that overpays him again. And that's the sticking point. If they can't come to terms, then I'm perfectly fine having him come back on an expiring deal.

CoolBreeze44 wrote:I really don't care what he makes. Every team has overpaid players and eventually those contracts run out. What i care about is the inconsistency, the durability, and the lack of 2-way ability. The things that had him sitting on the bench while we went down at home to Memphis. We need to be better. We need a PG who we can afford to put on the opposing teams point guard. It's up to management to find that player, and until then, we have to leverage DLO's strengths while overcoming his weaknesses.

Fair enough, but you should also be able to understand and even admit that that player might not be available right now either by trade, free agency, or the draft, and the current alternatives to D'Angelo Russell on the roster are not upgrades in any sense. I'd double down on that considering this was an uncharacteristically poor season for him shooting the basketball.

In my opinion, trade talks concerning Russell have no real legs until there's some kind of reporting concerning the contract demands and negotiations between his side and the Timberwolves' front office. We're essentially just spinning the tires.