Minnesota Sports Forum

Camden wrote:I also haven't seen much mention of it, but Anthony Edwards' production/efficiency has dropped considerably since the trade.

54 GP with D'Angelo Russell: 24.8 PPG, 4.5 APG, 3.4 TOV, on 57.4 TS%

8 GP with Mike Conley Jr.: 23.5 PPG, 4.4 APG, 4.3 TOV, on 51.8 TS%

It's safe to say that Edwards is extremely talented and will eventually figure out how to play next to anyone, but it is taking him some time to adjust, which is to be expected. Specifically, he's talked about having to handle more double-teams and make the right reads with teams collapsing on him a lot more. It hasn't been pretty so far, but the more he sees this coverage, the more comfortable he'll be... hopefully.

The idea is that if/when Karl-Anthony Towns returns he will relieve a lot of that defensive pressure, but right now it looks like Edwards is playing a much more difficult [and less effective] game. We need Edwards to get it back into high gear down the final stretch if this team is going to make the playoffs let alone try to win a series.

I think that's a stretch based on a 1.3 PPG drop over an 8 game sample. If you just expand your sample to include the day of the trade (without DLO or Conley), Edward's is averaging 24.3 PPG (without DLO) compared to the 24.8 with DLO. I don't see a half point/game as any sort of concern - especially over only 8 games.

And from a net rating standpoint, Edwards/DLO were not exactly lighting things on fire with -26. So far Edwards/Conley are a +1. It's not much, but at least it's positive. In fact, Conley is positive with Gobert, (+22), Edwards (+1), and McDaniels (+24). The one starter he's negative with is Anderson (-19). That's basically the inverse of Russell:

[table]
[tr]
[th]2 man[/th]
[th]Min[/th]
[th]+/-[/th]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Russell/Gobert[/td]
[td]1103[/td]
[td]+1[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Russell/Edwards[/td]
[td]1379[/td]
[td]-26[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Russell/McDaniels[/td]
[td]1233[/td]
[td]-16[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Russell/Anderson[/td]
[td]770[/td]
[td]+65[/td]
[/tr]
[/table]

Edwards is just fine. One good (or bad) game in such small samples will dramatically change the results. We've just had three tough road games....I'm not sure how that factors into things, but I wouldn't think it would generally be good for your averages.

It's not so much the volume that changes with great scorers, but rather the efficiency.

Anthony Edwards is ultra-talented and Minnesota is dependent on him to score, and he will use as many possessions as he wants. He's going to get his, but if you don't think there's a significant difference between a 57.4 TS% (53.5 eFG%) and 51.8 TS% (47.9 eFG%), then I'm not sure what else to say. That's the difference between being an above average volume scorer and a below average chucker. Edwards himself has noted the difference in defensive attention and how he needs to adjust. He's playing with more defenders focused on him now than before, and his play, at least offensively, has declined a bit because of it. It might not stay that way, and frankly he's too good to not figure it out, but it felt appropriate to mention while we're discussing the uptick in Rudy Gobert's production since the trade. Take that however you want to.

And given that it's a small sample size, these numbers can change even after one game. For instance, the Conley/Edwards duo was a -6 prior to last night's game. The narratives will shift as the schedule plays itself out, but if we're going to make observations about one thing (Gobert) we need to do the same for another (Edwards).

Fun game. Great win.

- Timberwolves had 73.7% TS in this one. I have to assume that's one of the better marks in the history of the franchise. 60% overall... and 20 - 39 on three pointers. Great shooting game.

- Anthony Edwards keeps doing special things. And he keeps doing dumb things. I put A LOT of the blame for the Timberwolves losing most of their 17 point lead on Edwards. Dumb shots when he was in ball-stopping mode. It's probably not a coincidence that the Timberwolves re-created distance when Edwards went back to the bench. Then again, he hit shots late and helped win the game. It's a bit of a roller coaster, but well worth the ride.

- What a great game by Kyle Anderson. Very solid game from many others...

- Only 11 TOs was a welcome, much-needed surprise, especially with the Kings taking care of it so well (only 6 TOs).

- We talk about the bad whistle Edwards gets on offense. And the bad whistle on Towns. And as others have noted... the one on defense for McDaniels seems almost more egregious sometimes. Maybe it's because he does occasionally commit dumb fouls... but mostly because he's usually guarding ball-dominant players on the perimeter (many of who have the most favorable whistles in the league).

- Is Nowell actually hurt... or just being phased out by NAW without making it super obvious that Nowell is essentiall done in MN?

- Next up is Philadelphia with two days rest. Meanwhile, Philly will be in the final game of a 5-game road trip... and on the second night of a back-to-back. AND... they have a decent lead in the battle for #3 seed in the East. Whether Harden and Embiid sit for load management or not, it looks like a more winnable game than it might have on paper.

Camden wrote:It's not so much the volume that changes with great scorers, but rather the efficiency.

Anthony Edwards is ultra-talented and Minnesota is dependent on him to score, and he will use as many possessions as he wants. He's going to get his, but if you don't think there's a significant difference between a 57.4 TS% and 51.8 TS%, then I'm not sure what else to say. That's the difference between being an above average volume scorer and a below average chucker. Edwards himself has noted the difference in defensive attention and how he needs to adjust. He's playing with more defenders focused on him now than before, and his play, at least offensively, has declined a bit because of it. It might not stay that way, and frankly he's too good to not figure it out, but it felt appropriate to mention while we're discussing the uptick in Rudy Gobert's production since the trade. Take that however you want to.

And given that it's a small sample size, these numbers can change even after one game. For instance, the Conley/Edwards duo was a -6 prior to last night's game. The narratives will shift as the schedule plays itself out, but if we're going to make observations about one thing (Gobert) we need to do the same for another (Edwards).

What overall point are you trying to make? Is there a point?

CoolBreeze44 wrote:What overall point are you trying to make? Is there a point?

Refer to my initial comment on this matter.

Camden wrote:

CoolBreeze44 wrote:What overall point are you trying to make? Is there a point?

Refer to my initial comment on this matter.

I don't get it. Is it just a triviality or are you trying to say something?

Camden wrote:It's not so much the volume that changes with great scorers, but rather the efficiency.

Anthony Edwards is ultra-talented and Minnesota is dependent on him to score, and he will use as many possessions as he wants. He's going to get his, but if you don't think there's a significant difference between a 57.4 TS% and 51.8 TS%, then I'm not sure what else to say. That's the difference between being an above average volume scorer and a below average chucker. Edwards himself has noted the difference in defensive attention and how he needs to adjust. He's playing with more defenders focused on him now than before, and his play, at least offensively, has declined a bit because of it. It might not stay that way, and frankly he's too good to not figure it out, but it felt appropriate to mention while we're discussing the uptick in Rudy Gobert's production since the trade. Take that however you want to.

And given that it's a small sample size, these numbers can change even after one game. For instance, the Conley/Edwards duo was a -6 prior to last night's game. The narratives will shift as the schedule plays itself out, but if we're going to make observations about one thing (Gobert) we need to do the same for another (Edwards).

100%. But again (as you indicate at the end of your post), it's all about small samples right now. If I just look at by month, I see for March (the last two games) he's shooting .582 TS%. Is that efficient enough for you? It doesn't seem like it's an issue to me.

Carlos Danger wrote:

Camden wrote:It's not so much the volume that changes with great scorers, but rather the efficiency.

Anthony Edwards is ultra-talented and Minnesota is dependent on him to score, and he will use as many possessions as he wants. He's going to get his, but if you don't think there's a significant difference between a 57.4 TS% and 51.8 TS%, then I'm not sure what else to say. That's the difference between being an above average volume scorer and a below average chucker. Edwards himself has noted the difference in defensive attention and how he needs to adjust. He's playing with more defenders focused on him now than before, and his play, at least offensively, has declined a bit because of it. It might not stay that way, and frankly he's too good to not figure it out, but it felt appropriate to mention while we're discussing the uptick in Rudy Gobert's production since the trade. Take that however you want to.

And given that it's a small sample size, these numbers can change even after one game. For instance, the Conley/Edwards duo was a -6 prior to last night's game. The narratives will shift as the schedule plays itself out, but if we're going to make observations about one thing (Gobert) we need to do the same for another (Edwards).

100%. But again (as you indicate at the end of your post), it's all about small samples right now. If I just look at by month, I see for March (the last two games) he's shooting .582 TS%. Is that efficient enough for you? It doesn't seem like it's an issue to me.

How is that relevant? The eight-game sample size is small and that has been repeatedly acknowledged, but that's what we have to assess because something changed from that point forward. There was a catalyst, if you will. What is the misunderstanding there?

Camden wrote:

Carlos Danger wrote:

Camden wrote:It's not so much the volume that changes with great scorers, but rather the efficiency.

Anthony Edwards is ultra-talented and Minnesota is dependent on him to score, and he will use as many possessions as he wants. He's going to get his, but if you don't think there's a significant difference between a 57.4 TS% and 51.8 TS%, then I'm not sure what else to say. That's the difference between being an above average volume scorer and a below average chucker. Edwards himself has noted the difference in defensive attention and how he needs to adjust. He's playing with more defenders focused on him now than before, and his play, at least offensively, has declined a bit because of it. It might not stay that way, and frankly he's too good to not figure it out, but it felt appropriate to mention while we're discussing the uptick in Rudy Gobert's production since the trade. Take that however you want to.

And given that it's a small sample size, these numbers can change even after one game. For instance, the Conley/Edwards duo was a -6 prior to last night's game. The narratives will shift as the schedule plays itself out, but if we're going to make observations about one thing (Gobert) we need to do the same for another (Edwards).

100%. But again (as you indicate at the end of your post), it's all about small samples right now. If I just look at by month, I see for March (the last two games) he's shooting .582 TS%. Is that efficient enough for you? It doesn't seem like it's an issue to me.

How is that relevant? The eight-game sample size is small and that has been repeatedly acknowledged, but that's what we have to assess because something changed from that point forward. There was a catalyst, if you will. What is the misunderstanding there?

What is your point? I mean I know what it is, I'm just incredulous that this never ends with you. He's gone, WTF difference does it make?

Camden wrote:
How is that relevant? The eight-game sample size is small and that has been repeatedly acknowledged, but that's what we have to assess because something changed from that point forward. There was a catalyst, if you will. What is the misunderstanding there?

You are attempting to show that Edwards game is suffering from the loss of DLO. I'm just pointing out two things:

1.) It's way too early to make that statement
2.) I'm not seeing anything - even in the small samples to be alarmed about

It's just a big nothing burger IMO. Let's just enjoy the fact that we won three in a row.