Minnesota Sports Forum

It's also not just that Edwards is inconsistent getting off the ball vs. the blitz.

Gobert is definitely not Draymond Green. (Or even Mason Plumlee)
Jaden McDaniels has poor playmaking chops and limited shooting chops.
Randle is a ballstopper and not one to move the ball quickly.
Reid is not a playmaker for others.
Conley is alas cooked.

So DDV and NAW are the ones to take advantage of the blitzing? Meh. Not enough.

Fair point. Whether Ant's struggles against doubles are due more to the players around him or his own inconsistency is certainly a valid discussion. Sure, Steph often has Draymond out there with him, and that is a huge benefit. But Wednesday the Warriors started Schroder, Wiggins, Santos and Jackson-Davis next to him...not exactly a space creating group! And he went 31 and 8 with only one turnover. Not having a great supporting cast next to him was irrelevant...he just made the correct read depending on whether we ran two at him or not. Now I know we can't expect Ant to be Steph, but it seems to me that the true NBA stars are effective regardless of who is playing next to them. I guess that's why the "spacing" argument employed so often by Ant apologists escapes me. Jaden may only be hitting 33% of his threes this season, but a quick pass to him when he's wide open beyond the arc is generally going to be a better option than dribbling into 2 or 3 guys. Ant is immensely talented, and I want to hold him to a higher standard than many of his supporters do. I hope our coaching staff is also.

Humans learn from failure and the will to get better is what creates great players. Ant has had ups and downs this year, but is still the Wolves best player. Every double team, every junk defense, every play of every game he is getting experienced. These experiences will help him as he gets older.
How long did it take Jordan to win his first ring?
Kobe?
LeBron?
Shaq?
And the list goes on and on.

FNG wrote: ↑Fri Jan 17, 2025 1:03 pm Fair point. Whether Ant's struggles against doubles are due more to the players around him or his own inconsistency is certainly a valid discussion. Sure, Steph often has Draymond out there with him, and that is a huge benefit. But Wednesday the Warriors started Schroder, Wiggins, Santos and Jackson-Davis next to him...not exactly a space creating group! And he went 31 and 8 with only one turnover. Not having a great supporting cast next to him was irrelevant...he just made the correct read depending on whether we ran two at him or not. Now I know we can't expect Ant to be Steph, but it seems to me that the true NBA stars are effective regardless of who is playing next to them. I guess that's why the "spacing" argument employed so often by Ant apologists escapes me. Jaden may only be hitting 33% of his threes this season, but a quick pass to him when he's wide open beyond the arc is generally going to be a better option than dribbling into 2 or 3 guys. Ant is immensely talented, and I want to hold him to a higher standard than many of his supporters do. I hope our coaching staff is also.

To be fair... I was being very specific about one single topic... blitzing and why teams are doing more vs. Edwards than any other player in the league. You're using a one-game sample for Steph Curry. Seems like a disconnect. Besides, I could pick-and-choose specific games for Edwards too and claim "Where's the problem?!?!?"

For what it's worth... Steph Curry shot 40% from the field in December as the team went 4 - 9... amid rampant rumors that his teammates were simply not good enough.

I'm no Edwards apologist. But when the statistics coming out seem to support the eye test that spacing is a problem and opposing teams are employing strategies that suggest that they know the Wolves spacing is a problem... there might be a problem with spacing... even if Edwards is compounding those issues with a series of mistakes of his own doing.

Six days ago I said I was off the "Randle doesn't fit" bandwagon. Well, that was short lived. I didn't fully appreciate the toxicity surrounding the team at that time. But it sure seems to be out there now.

John Collins seems like one of the better options out there that ought fit well on this team, whether it's starting or coming off the bench. Randle straight up for Collins works salary-wise, but would likely require the Detroit pick thrown in. I am at the point I would do that trade. So it winds up being KAT for DDV and Collins. Assuming Collins can be re-signed at a reasonable contract in the offseason, I am okay with that deal.

That Detroit pick looks good now, but any hiccups (e.g. Cade injury), could mean the pick does not convey next year. Selling high may not be a bad idea...

60WinTim wrote: ↑Fri Jan 17, 2025 4:22 pm Six days ago I said I was off the "Randle doesn't fit" bandwagon. Well, that was short lived. I didn't fully appreciate the toxicity surrounding the team at that time. But it sure seems to be out there now.

John Collins seems like one of the better options out there that ought fit well on this team, whether it's starting or coming off the bench. Randle straight up for Collins works salary-wise, but would likely require the Detroit pick thrown in. I am at the point I would do that trade. So it winds up being KAT for DDV and Collins. Assuming Collins can be re-signed at a reasonable contract in the offseason, I am okay with that deal.

That Detroit pick looks good now, but any hiccups (e.g. Cade injury), could mean the pick does not convey next year. Selling high may not be a bad idea...

Collins has a player option next year also. What would not be good for the wolves

kekgeek wrote: ↑Fri Jan 17, 2025 4:58 pm

60WinTim wrote: ↑Fri Jan 17, 2025 4:22 pm Six days ago I said I was off the "Randle doesn't fit" bandwagon. Well, that was short lived. I didn't fully appreciate the toxicity surrounding the team at that time. But it sure seems to be out there now.

John Collins seems like one of the better options out there that ought fit well on this team, whether it's starting or coming off the bench. Randle straight up for Collins works salary-wise, but would likely require the Detroit pick thrown in. I am at the point I would do that trade. So it winds up being KAT for DDV and Collins. Assuming Collins can be re-signed at a reasonable contract in the offseason, I am okay with that deal.

That Detroit pick looks good now, but any hiccups (e.g. Cade injury), could mean the pick does not convey next year. Selling high may not be a bad idea...

Collins has a player option next year also. What would not be good for the wolves

Yeah, but the player option at 26.58 mil is not unreasonable, and would probably allow re-signing NAZ. That would be a reason for not including the Detroit pick.

Maybe the Jazz would add in Kessler for that Detroit pick...

John Collins! Lip will finally get his man if that happens!

I thought Collins was a bit of a flaky player/locker room presence, no?

Could the Pistons pick been a necessity for the Wolves in order to move Julius all along?


I want to try and guess the Julius trade:

Julius and Pistons pick to Brooklyn for Cam Johnson and Ziare Williams (exp). This would cut about 10 million off next years salary going from Julius to Cam. Not sure if that helps the Wolves keep Naz and NAW if that is the goal.

Julius and Jazz pick to Chicago for Lonzo Ball and Jalen Smith. Cuts about 20 million off next years salary. Smith solid backup big. With 2 more seasons.

Julius and Pistons pick to Detroit for Tim Hardaway Jr and Isaiah Stewart. Shaves about 14 million off next year. Stewart has a flat salary of 15 per year for 3 more years. In a rising cap environment could be very valuable. Solid backup big that can start when needed.

Julius and Pistons pick to Toronto for Bruce Brown and Davion Mitchell. This is 100% salary savings.

Julius and Jazz pick to Washington for Malcolm Brogdon and Jonas Valaciunas. Shaves about 20 million.

Julius and Pistons pick to Portland for Deni Avdija and Robert Williams III. This only saves a few million next year but Williams could probably be moved again fairly easily with one year left. This is a good talent trade, however. Avdija could be NAW replacement.

Julius and Pistons pick to San Antonio for Harrison Barnes and Chris Paul. Saves about 10 million.

The Wolves could probably get a 2nd in one of these but I just didn't look into that.

If Houston or either LA team thought Julius would help them win there are machinations but I dont think they would. Interestingly, Utah has no expirings of note and is hard capped at the first apron so there'd be no savings.

60WinTim wrote: ↑Fri Jan 17, 2025 5:08 pm

kekgeek wrote: ↑Fri Jan 17, 2025 4:58 pm

60WinTim wrote: ↑Fri Jan 17, 2025 4:22 pm Six days ago I said I was off the "Randle doesn't fit" bandwagon. Well, that was short lived. I didn't fully appreciate the toxicity surrounding the team at that time. But it sure seems to be out there now.

John Collins seems like one of the better options out there that ought fit well on this team, whether it's starting or coming off the bench. Randle straight up for Collins works salary-wise, but would likely require the Detroit pick thrown in. I am at the point I would do that trade. So it winds up being KAT for DDV and Collins. Assuming Collins can be re-signed at a reasonable contract in the offseason, I am okay with that deal.

That Detroit pick looks good now, but any hiccups (e.g. Cade injury), could mean the pick does not convey next year. Selling high may not be a bad idea...

Collins has a player option next year also. What would not be good for the wolves

Yeah, but the player option at 26.58 mil is not unreasonable, and would probably allow re-signing NAZ. That would be a reason for not including the Detroit pick.

Maybe the Jazz would add in Kessler for that Detroit pick...

John Collins simply isn't a better player than Randle and solves nothing on the court in dealing for him. I'm not including any asset unless it's like a random 2nd or something to make that deal happen certainly not a future 1st. Landing him in a shuffling the deck type move dealing Randle would be fine especially with the angle of saving some salary room.