Minnesota Sports Forum

Playing .500 or slightly better over a long period without Karl-Anthony Towns probably shouldn't be dismissed or seen as floundering, especially when there's a very real chance that Minnesota won't be able to maintain anything close to .500 after the deadline. They're already 1-3 with more expected losses on the horizon.

It's also worth noting yet again that the Timberwolves were 13-7 over their last 20 games before trade news. They had the 10th-best net rating in the NBA over that time. Even without Karl-Anthony Towns this team (with D'Angelo Russell) was finding ways to win games consistently despite dropping the occasional stinker.

If the Timberwolves suck the rest of the way and eventually miss the playoffs, will we look at that trade any differently? Or will we continue to act like it had no real effect?

Camden wrote:It's also worth noting yet again that the Timberwolves were 13-7 over their last 20 games before trade news. They had the 10th-best net rating in the NBA over that time. Even without Karl-Anthony Towns this team (with D'Angelo Russell) was finding ways to win games consistently despite dropping the occasional stinker.

If the Timberwolves suck the rest of the way and eventually miss the playoffs, will we look at that trade any differently? Or will we continue to act like it had no real effect?

Obviously, the trade will impact this season (IF Towns doesn't return very very soon.) Russell was on the hottest shooting streak of his career. So I don't think any reasonable person can say Conley > Russell this season (especially considering it's not always seamless when a new PG joins a team).

But we all also know that the trade wasn't meant just for this season. The Timberwolves were stuck in a bad spot with Russell and his looming contract. If he demanded too much (seems likely) or simply said he didn't want to return... we can all see more of a reason for the trade.

The team is probably better off next season... and they could at least hope it would work well enough this season... so that had to be part of the reasoning.


[Note: What's sad is that Connelly had to have known this Russell thing was going to happen before he overpaid for Gobert AND painted the team into a corner with Russell. I hated ear-wax-eating Kahn more than is probably healthy... but Tim Connelly has been a trainwreck as a GM thus far. I simply don't see how that's indisputable at this point.]

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Camden wrote:It's also worth noting yet again that the Timberwolves were 13-7 over their last 20 games before trade news. They had the 10th-best net rating in the NBA over that time. Even without Karl-Anthony Towns this team (with D'Angelo Russell) was finding ways to win games consistently despite dropping the occasional stinker.

If the Timberwolves suck the rest of the way and eventually miss the playoffs, will we look at that trade any differently? Or will we continue to act like it had no real effect?

Obviously, the trade will impact this season (IF Towns doesn't return very very soon.) Russell was on the hottest shooting streak of his career. So I don't think any reasonable person can say Conley > Russell this season (especially considering it's not always seamless when a new PG joins a team).


But we all also know that the trade wasn't meant just for this season. The Timberwolves were stuck in a bad spot with Russell and his looming contract. If he demanded too much (seems likely) or simply said he didn't want to return... we can all see more of a reason for the trade.

The team is probably better off next season... and they could at least hope it would work well enough this season... so that had to be part of the reasoning.


[Note: What's sad is that Connelly had to have known this Russell thing was going to happen before he overpaid for Gobert AND painted the team into a corner with Russell. I hated ear-wax-eating Kahn more than is probably healthy... but Tim Connelly has been a trainwreck as a GM thus far. I simply don't see how that's indisputable at this point.]

In a simplified manner, I would agree that Russell>Conley this season. And I think the components of the trade reflect that (the Wolves gave up Russell, and got back Conley, NAW and picks). 2022-23 VORP also supports this conclusion. But of course "fit" must be considered also, and to do that I break the comparison into component parts, and I think most knowledgeable NBA fans would agree with this analysis:

Scoring and shooting: Russell
Distributing and protecting the ball: Conley
Defense: Conley
Age (i.e. prime of career): Russell
On/off record: Conley
Durability: Russell (although he missed the last game with an ankle, and is doubtful tonight)
Familiarity with the roster: Russell
Leadership and young player development skills: Conley

So while the stats show the Russell has clearly had the better season, I don't know that Russell>Conley
for the Wolves at this time. I'm leaving the contract stuff aside, and merely looking at who has the best chance to help the Wolves this season and next (obviously there were contract implications to the deal, but that's not part of this discussion). Time will tell of course, but I think the answer is whether one thinks the Wolves need a PG who is a better shooter/scorer and in the prime of his career, or an aging PG who is a better distributor, defender and developer (although that one is more subjective of course). I lean toward the latter, but that's just because those are the qualities I value higher in a PG. But I get that probably more than half of NBA fans will value scoring and shooting over defense and distributing. And frankly, the importance of scoring might be elevated until KAT returns. My love of the trade is influenced by my belief that KAT returns before 3/15.

My biggest concern right now is that the two things Conley has shown his entire career (and this year for that matter)...distributing and defense...were not very evident Friday night.

Defense: Other than Rudy's paint presence and Ant's on-ball defense against Ball late in the game, the defense was exceptionally poor. NAW is an athletic fun guy to watch, but he looked lost on defense much of the game...he needs to be better if he is going to take the minutes the mysterious absence of Prince creates. SloMo looked hurt to me...he was wearing a back brace on the bench, and moving very gingerly when he sat down...and had a terrible game at both ends of the court. And how do you explain Jaden being so ineffective on defense regardless of whom he was guarding? Is any of this on Conley? Maybe...we'll have to see.

Ball movement and distributing: Again, I found the Wolves very poor in this important area, regardless of whether JMac or Conley was in. Finchie blamed it on Ant dominating the ball and playing hero style, but I think a veteran like Conley needs to assert himself and take over. He didn't.

Sorry about the long post, but the Wolves are at a critical juncture of the season, and how the trade works out will have much to do with our chances of post-season...and post-season success. I know that we voted 22-2 here in favor of the trade, but that might have had more to do with the draft picks and NAW than an upgrade at PG. But despite a poor game on Friday, put me solidly in the camp of the trade giving us a better chance of success the rest of the season. But if the defense and ball movement don't show some marked improvement over Friday, I'll change my mind pretty quickly.

As you note FNG... it's ALL about Towns.

IF Towns returns to the court very quickly, there's a chance Conley is a better fit.

IF Towns does not return until there's only about 10 or games left (or not at all), I think Conley is a terrible fit for this team compared to Russell. They simply don't have any dynamic scorers beyond Edwards. Conley is incapable of giving them that.




[Note: The next five games could very well end the Wolves season. And the Wolves are going into them with one above average scorer on its entire team.]

Camden wrote:It's also worth noting yet again that the Timberwolves were 13-7 over their last 20 games before trade news. They had the 10th-best net rating in the NBA over that time. Even without Karl-Anthony Towns this team (with D'Angelo Russell) was finding ways to win games consistently despite dropping the occasional stinker.

If the Timberwolves suck the rest of the way and eventually miss the playoffs, will we look at that trade any differently? Or will we continue to act like it had no real effect?

Yes, 13-7 over that 20 game run leading up to the trade. But how/why did you pick 20 games as cut off for your sample? What happens if you expand that to say...the last 25 games before DLO trade instead of last 20? (Spoiler alert, the Wolves lost 6 in a row right before that 20 game run you are using as your sample).

That 20 games was a nice run, but their overall record accurately reflects what they are - a team just can't get it going long term. You could say "well, they were just hitting their stride - why break up the band at that point?". But I'm not sure I'd trust that either because they were only 2-3 in their last five games of that streak.

Carlos Danger wrote:

Camden wrote:It's also worth noting yet again that the Timberwolves were 13-7 over their last 20 games before trade news. They had the 10th-best net rating in the NBA over that time. Even without Karl-Anthony Towns this team (with D'Angelo Russell) was finding ways to win games consistently despite dropping the occasional stinker.

If the Timberwolves suck the rest of the way and eventually miss the playoffs, will we look at that trade any differently? Or will we continue to act like it had no real effect?

Yes, 13-7 over that 20 game run leading up to the trade. But how/why did you pick 20 games as cut off for your sample? What happens if you expand that to say...the last 25 games before DLO trade instead of last 20? (Spoiler alert, the Wolves lost 6 in a row right before that 20 game run you are using as your sample).

That 20 games was a nice run, but their overall record accurately reflects what they are - a team just can't get it going long term. You could say "well, they were just hitting their stride - why break up the band at that point?". But I'm not sure I'd trust that either because they were only 2-3 in their last five games of that streak.

Well, 20 games went back to the start of January -- where they were tied for third in the NBA with an 11-5 record for the month. It was also after the player meeting where team issues were apparently aired out.

Expand the sample size to 25 games, if you wish. Expand it to 58 games. Any way you slice it the team was winning and playing much better overall than they have since swapping point guards -- offensively, defensively, doesn't matter. They've been worse on both ends and in the win-loss column, and will likely continue to be worse, and it comes at a terrible time in the season.