Wolves@Brooklyn - GDT

[AbeVigodaLive]

So will Boston be our first strong, healthy team we've faced?

Sorta. Remember, they're missing their All Star wing, Gordan Hayward.

[Lipoli390]

Sure the Nets hit a lot more 3'a than the Wolves and the Wolves didn't have many assists. Why didn't there Wolves have more assists? Well I'm the first half they just didn't make a lot of shots. In some cases throughout the game they shot a FT instead of recording an assist. In the basics fomula the Wolves played their game pretty well. Don't turn the ball over turn the other team over get to the FT like and make your FTs. They did that and lost. Why? They missed shots and didn't score enough points and the Nets made some shots. There were some defensive breakdowns but I didn't think it was a bad performance I've seen plenty of those on that end this year and in year's past. It wasn't good enough to win but it wasn't bad. In other game the Wolves took off Towns made some 3's. Tonight he was 0-4.

Your analysis is good, Monster. I particularly agree with a couple points you made. I agree that this game wasn't really what I'd call a bad performance by the Wolves. I've witnessed some of those -- like the home loss to Miami. I also agree that missing shots we normally make cost us the game. For example, if KAT had hit only 1 of his 4 three-pointer the Wolves would have one even though 1-4 would have still be under KAT's average.

What I like most about your post is that it does a nice job reflecting one of two different general takes on the Wolves expressed on this Board -- both of them legitimate and supportable.

Your take (shared by others on this Board) is that the Wolves offensive style may not be pretty and doesn't involve a lot of threes, but it's effective because it minimizes turnovers and gets a lot of points at the line. That's a reasonable assessment. It worked for Thibs in Chicago and it's arguably working for the Wolves so far this season as reflected in the fact that they are 9 games over .500.

My take falls in line with Cool, Abe and some others. Our take is that this team's talent would be maximized and the team would be even better with more pace and ball-movement in the offense. Even though you're right that hitting just a few more shots that we normally make would have been enough to beat the Nets, our take is that we would have won the game with more open shots through much better ball movement. Our take is that, over the long haul, it will be harder to win with Thibs' style as the season wears on and we head to the tougher part of our schedule.

This is a debate that will probably persist all season with good arguments on both sides. And that's what makes this Board fun.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

I'm not so sure we have the personnel to run. And I'm talking about stylistically, not athletically.

When has Butler ever been a guy that sprints down the court? Very rare. He's a grinder in every sense of the word. He is very methodical, which can actually be frustrating at times as it seems like plays take too long to develop and he's often the guy that is behind it all. But part of his success is his patience. It's just who he is and I don't see how that is going to change.

Teague....I think he's capable of pushing the pace, but it's not really his M.O. Only a couple of seasons he's been on a squad that has been upper half in pace of play. And he's the starting PG!

Wiggins....He's a loper, not a sprinter. He's very tough to stop when he is going down hill on the fast break, but the guy rarely puts out the effort to go full bore.

KAT....he could definitely thrive in an uptempo offense, but since he doesn't handle the ball and is usually the guy getting the defensive rebound, he can't do much himself to change the tempo.

Gibson.....He's a grinder, like Butler.

We aren't designed to be a pace and space team. That's not to say we shouldn't try to push it (and in fact I often hear Thibs bellowing, "Go! Go! Go!" off defensive rebounds), but I just don't think it's a fundamental habit ingrained in most of our players' games.

[Monster]

Q you nailed it on your last 2 posts.

I think what some of us that point out thebsuccess of the offense aren't really looking at the absolute sustainability of this style but we see it as a way to get farther toward the goal. This is a team that needs to learn how to win. To me I think what Thins ultimately wants is a team that is pretty positionless and therefore difficult to defend and that means lots of guys can do different things. We have seen some positive games where this team really moved the ball pretty well but for whatever reason that wasn't happening quite as much although like I said they got some good shots. That idea of players being interchangeable is gonna take time to put together.

You parsed out well the challenges of the pace and space because of the roster. Jon K said the same thing the other day on his podcast in addition he said this team defends poorly in transition they would be in trouble at times getting up and down the floor. Ultimately this team needs to develop more shooting. It also would have more pace if it would actually play some top 10 defense. Can Thibs Layden and the Wolves indentify and develop guys that can fit in especially giving us more shooting? We will see. Thibs talks all the time about utilizing your strengths and covering up your weaknesses. I think in some ways he is doing that well this year with the roster he assembled.

One last thing is that if you actually move and screen to attack matchups well it's tough to defend. It feels like the Wolves including Butler* don't do quite enough of this to get the best matchups. It takes time to get this all to work and then even then sometimes it just doesn't cause that's life.

*Lets keep in mind that even MVP type players of Harden and Lebron look silly at times doing ISO stuff or taking bad shots. Butler isn't at their level but he is really good especially when you consider his effort and his defensive game on the other end.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

Yeah, while I don't think the team is designed to be "pace and space", I do think the iso-heavy 4th quarters are still a bit of a problem. They often run some fairly creative half-court sets in the first half that starts off with the ball pinging off of a few guys before the actual scoring part of the set takes place. I don't see why they completely abandon this at the end of games. Butler is good, but like you said, he is NOT at the level of Durant, Harden, or LeBron in isolation.

[Monster]

Yeah, while I don't think the team is designed to be "pace and space", I do think the iso-heavy 4th quarters are still a bit of a problem. They often run some fairly creative half-court sets in the first half that starts off with the ball pinging off of a few guys before the actual scoring part of the set takes place. I don't see why they completely abandon this at the end of games. Butler is good, but like you said, he is NOT at the level of Durant, Harden, or LeBron in isolation.

I agree with what you are saying Q. They aren't the only basketball team ever that has fallen victim to doing similar iso stuff. My big issue is not getting a screen early and getting favorable matchup. I bet against most teams (GS not as much depending on who they have on the floor) they can get Butler on a guy or 2 that he can beat a very high percentage of the time...or even Crawford if he is in. I think at times they should even be spacing out for Teague and letting him take his guy. Maybe not the last possession of the game but there are guys that can't guard him off the dribble including some defensive wings. Like you said straight up iso against 1 dude is a problem. I don't like that at all. Excecute the play to get your matchup and in general attack don't setting for very long 2's. Attack and end up with a 17 footer type shot...I probably would be able to live with that especially if it's butler that's getting those where he can bank them in.

Butler is methodical. It's both what makes him good and maddening. I think Wiggins is also a guy that is methodical in a way too. He seems to be thinking about what to do istead of just acting. Jimmy does obviously go out there and play on both ends he is clearly calculating plus obviously a more skilled and accomplished player. It's an interesting wing duo and while some of their strengths (even at where Wiggins at in the league right now) overlap it has potential to be a pretty difficult pair to defend if Wiggins makes some strides. Defensively I think we are seeing more where they can compliment each other. I actually think Wiggins seems better as a forward defensively (except his rebounding) now than against some guards. It's an interesting shift from where I saw him only a few months ago. If you can get 2 wing players together that have length and defense AND both can be fairly versatile scorers...that's tantalizing. Wiggins has quite a ways to go obviously.

Meanwhile they have Towns who can score from anywhere and with this team utilizing him on one area of the floor basically wastes his talents. It feels like he needs to be part of the answer to the lack of shooting issues. But...even in this new NBA I don't think you want him just shooting 3's and running around getting open for jumpers. If this team ever had/signed/developed a legit nba starting mobile PF that was an average 3 point shooter. It would be really interesting to see how that brought along the offense. Taj does a pretty good job taking advantage of the defense doing what he does but imagine if he was taking even 3 threes a game and making 35% of them. Yeah. At least Dieng has the green light to shoot them and actually does so.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

I agree that Butler and Wiggins are a "tantalizing" pair, which is what I think Thibs thought to. But Wiggins is miserably inefficient. I mean, seriously, he is so far behind where he needs to be in terms of his shot selection and overall accuracy that it's just hard for me to be confident in these two thriving as a big time two-way pair.

KAT is the other dilemma. The reason we brought Taj in is precisely because KAT and Dieng lacked toughness and defensive consistency on the interior. The tradeoff is that he really doesn't stretch the floor. So now we have two wings and a PF that all prefer to operate from mid-range to the paint, leaving KAT as easily the best shooter on the floor among the starting 5. Teague is solid too I guess, but even he would much rather put the ball on the floor.

It is not a perfectly designed starting lineup, but they do well at their strengths: Drawing tons of fouls, O-rebounding, and limiting turnovers.

[TAFKASP]

One thing that's been interesting about Butler is seeing a Wolves player getting those ghost calls. Wolve's player never get those superstar calls unless they go against them... until Butler showed up!

[Lipoli390]

I'm not so sure we have the personnel to run. And I'm talking about stylistically, not athletically.

When has Butler ever been a guy that sprints down the court? Very rare. He's a grinder in every sense of the word. He is very methodical, which can actually be frustrating at times as it seems like plays take too long to develop and he's often the guy that is behind it all. But part of his success is his patience. It's just who he is and I don't see how that is going to change.

Teague....I think he's capable of pushing the pace, but it's not really his M.O. Only a couple of seasons he's been on a squad that has been upper half in pace of play. And he's the starting PG!

Wiggins....He's a loper, not a sprinter. He's very tough to stop when he is going down hill on the fast break, but the guy rarely puts out the effort to go full bore.

KAT....he could definitely thrive in an uptempo offense, but since he doesn't handle the ball and is usually the guy getting the defensive rebound, he can't do much himself to change the tempo.

Gibson.....He's a grinder, like Butler.

We aren't designed to be a pace and space team. That's not to say we shouldn't try to push it (and in fact I often hear Thibs bellowing, "Go! Go! Go!" off defensive rebounds), but I just don't think it's a fundamental habit ingrained in most of our players' games.

Q -- You might be right that we don't have the personnel to run. But we have the personnel to move with and without the ball in the half court far more than we have been. The stationary isolation style we play seems intentional as the style Thibs coaches. As for pace, I still think we can get up the court faster than we do and that we'd be far more effective if we did. But my main issue with with the lack of movement in our half-court offense.

[Lipoli390]

Yeah, while I don't think the team is designed to be "pace and space", I do think the iso-heavy 4th quarters are still a bit of a problem. They often run some fairly creative half-court sets in the first half that starts off with the ball pinging off of a few guys before the actual scoring part of the set takes place. I don't see why they completely abandon this at the end of games. Butler is good, but like you said, he is NOT at the level of Durant, Harden, or LeBron in isolation.

I agree. That's my frustration with the way this team is being coached.