CoolBreeze44 wrote:Let me ask a question about this debate, and I'll be blunt. Why is the reason for Ricky's malaise at the beginning of the season important now?
Because people are using Covid as a potential excuse for his poor play and Cam is citing information that counters that narrative, maintaining instead that it was simply him coming into camp out of shape. And if that's the case, we are paying an awful lot of money to someone brought in to mentor the younger guys, only to show up out of shape and kill the team with poor play for two whole months.
The good news is that RIcky has gone back to his (mostly) old self and is helping the team and recovered some value as a potential trade asset.
CoolBreeze44 wrote:Let me ask a question about this debate, and I'll be blunt. Why is the reason for Ricky's malaise at the beginning of the season important now?
Because people are using Covid as a potential excuse for his poor play and Cam is citing information that counters that narrative, maintaining instead that it was simply him coming into camp out of shape. And if that's the case, we are paying an awful lot of money to someone brought in to mentor the younger guys, only to show up out of shape and kill the team with poor play for two whole months.
The good news is that RIcky has gone back to his (mostly) old self and is helping the team and recovered some value as a potential trade asset.
You encapsulated that well. But my question remains, why is it important now? Do we need to be wary of this the next time we look to sign Ricky for 2 years at $34 million?
Ricky has been positively streaky before. How many times did people use 10 to 20 game stretches to show just how valuable Ricky is? I think the most disappointing aspect of Ricky is simply you cant rely on him when it counts. I dont think its any surprise that this positive stretch of games came with the fact that we had absolutely no pressure. Ricky plays loose, when the pressure ramps up he constantly gets desperate. Its too late to even matter, any trade we make with him we will lose since the market keeps shrinking for PGs who cant shoot. We might as well keep him around and let his contract run out since Ant likes him so much.
CoolBreeze44 wrote:Let me ask a question about this debate, and I'll be blunt. Why is the reason for Ricky's malaise at the beginning of the season important now?
Because people are using Covid as a potential excuse for his poor play and Cam is citing information that counters that narrative, maintaining instead that it was simply him coming into camp out of shape. And if that's the case, we are paying an awful lot of money to someone brought in to mentor the younger guys, only to show up out of shape and kill the team with poor play for two whole months.
The good news is that RIcky has gone back to his (mostly) old self and is helping the team and recovered some value as a potential trade asset.
You encapsulated that well. But my question remains, why is it important now? Do we need to be wary of this the next time we look to sign Ricky for 2 years at $34 million?
Most of what we talk about isn't important. It's a typical debate about how Player X is viewed by fans coming from different perspectives. We do this all the time, including players that haven't played for this team for years.
CoolBreeze44 wrote:Let me ask a question about this debate, and I'll be blunt. Why is the reason for Ricky's malaise at the beginning of the season important now?
Because people are using Covid as a potential excuse for his poor play and Cam is citing information that counters that narrative, maintaining instead that it was simply him coming into camp out of shape. And if that's the case, we are paying an awful lot of money to someone brought in to mentor the younger guys, only to show up out of shape and kill the team with poor play for two whole months.
The good news is that RIcky has gone back to his (mostly) old self and is helping the team and recovered some value as a potential trade asset.
You encapsulated that well. But my question remains, why is it important now? Do we need to be wary of this the next time we look to sign Ricky for 2 years at $34 million?
Most of what we talk about isn't important. It's a typical debate about how Player X is viewed by fans coming from different perspectives. We do this all the time, including players that haven't played for this team for years.
Glad we agree it isn't important. In fact it's a real roller coaster of who gives a shit.
thedoper wrote:Ricky has been positively streaky before. How many times did people use 10 to 20 game stretches to show just how valuable Ricky is? I think the most disappointing aspect of Ricky is simply you cant rely on him when it counts. I dont think its any surprise that this positive stretch of games came with the fact that we had absolutely no pressure. Ricky plays loose, when the pressure ramps up he constantly gets desperate. Its too late to even matter, any trade we make with him we will lose since the market keeps shrinking for PGs who cant shoot. We might as well keep him around and let his contract run out since Ant likes him so much.
When has it ever counted for him here? His rookie year when he was leading the team to the playoffs before his injury. He played really well when he and Utah beat OKC and played well when the Suns went 8-0 in the bubble. I don't know if we necessarily can count on him to drag the team out of the dumps but he seems useful when there is something to play for.
Camden wrote:Not that Ricky Rubio's the singular reason for this Wolves team losing or even at the top of that list, but how is this board not exhausted of watching them lose with him in uniform? This is his seventh season in Minnesota and they are 183-335 (.353) in those seasons and counting. Maybe he's just not the straw that stirs a winning drink. Frankly, I'd like this franchise to distance itself from the losers of its past and try anything different. Give me a team full of shooters. Give me a team full of rangy, explosive athletes. Give me a team that defends like crazy but struggles to score. Anything besides what we've seen from the past. And that includes Rubio.
Rubio without a doubt in my mind cost this team wins in the first half of the year. He was giving the team 4 points on terrible shooting, 4 turnovers and 1 assist night in and out. (ok not exact stats but in the ballpark)
You lose multiple games by 3-4 points and yes it's arguable that Rubio's terrible play resulted in more losses.
I'm sure we are all fine trading him for a pick and player if that is possible. Wether that pick is decent or player is younger with potential to be a player either is fine with me. Rubio is not a long term answer and his mediocre play and leadership are not enough for me to consider the future.
"Not exact stats but in the ballpark"...
Apparently, wolvesfan's ballpark is 1,038 feet down the foul lines.
This is not an endorsement of Rubio... only pointing out the shadiness of the post.
Lol what a weird response. How's that post "shady"? (Note - Rhetorical/not interested in your weird response)
Being that far off with the statistics is being disingenuous. I went with shady because it's a slightly less pretentious word.
I've corrected people on the Assist/TO fallacy with Rubio before. Obviously, it didn't stick.
Either way... Wolvefan wasn't remotely in the ballpark with accurate stats. He deserves to be ripped for that... not me for calling him out on it.
Camden wrote:Not that Ricky Rubio's the singular reason for this Wolves team losing or even at the top of that list, but how is this board not exhausted of watching them lose with him in uniform? This is his seventh season in Minnesota and they are 183-335 (.353) in those seasons and counting. Maybe he's just not the straw that stirs a winning drink. Frankly, I'd like this franchise to distance itself from the losers of its past and try anything different. Give me a team full of shooters. Give me a team full of rangy, explosive athletes. Give me a team that defends like crazy but struggles to score. Anything besides what we've seen from the past. And that includes Rubio.
Rubio without a doubt in my mind cost this team wins in the first half of the year. He was giving the team 4 points on terrible shooting, 4 turnovers and 1 assist night in and out. (ok not exact stats but in the ballpark)
You lose multiple games by 3-4 points and yes it's arguable that Rubio's terrible play resulted in more losses.
I'm sure we are all fine trading him for a pick and player if that is possible. Wether that pick is decent or player is younger with potential to be a player either is fine with me. Rubio is not a long term answer and his mediocre play and leadership are not enough for me to consider the future.
"Not exact stats but in the ballpark"...
Apparently, wolvesfan's ballpark is 1,038 feet down the foul lines.
This is not an endorsement of Rubio... only pointing out the shadiness of the post.
If you are going to debate my stats then do it by actually calculating them. Because I remember he was avg about 6 points a game and was joking how we could replace them and his turnovers.
So yes, my stats were in the ballpark unless you can prove otherwise.
Rubio was also turning the ball over more then any PG in the league based on per minute played, only one player was worse and it was McConnell!!!
So garbage points on terrible shooting and almost turning the ball over more then any other. I was being KIND in my first post!
We'd have 5-6 more wins if he was merely avg!!!!!
You wrote... "4 turnovers and 1 assist night in and out."
Then acted offended that I teased you on that ridiculous stat/hyperbole. So here you go big guy...
Ricky Rubio has not had a game with more TOs than assists this season.
Rubio in December:
4.5 assists / 1.3 TO
Rubio in January:
6.2 assists / 2.5 TO
Rubio in February:
6.9 assists / 1.8 TO
Rubio in March:
8.4 assists / 2.0 TO
Happy now?
[Note: Rubio is 14th best in the league in Assist/TO ratio... McConnell is 13th. I don't know what source you're using for your stats... but you might want to find a different one.]
thedoper wrote:Ricky has been positively streaky before. How many times did people use 10 to 20 game stretches to show just how valuable Ricky is? I think the most disappointing aspect of Ricky is simply you cant rely on him when it counts. I dont think its any surprise that this positive stretch of games came with the fact that we had absolutely no pressure. Ricky plays loose, when the pressure ramps up he constantly gets desperate. Its too late to even matter, any trade we make with him we will lose since the market keeps shrinking for PGs who cant shoot. We might as well keep him around and let his contract run out since Ant likes him so much.
When has it ever counted for him here? His rookie year when he was leading the team to the playoffs before his injury. He played really well when he and Utah beat OKC and played well when the Suns went 8-0 in the bubble. I don't know if we necessarily can count on him to drag the team out of the dumps but he seems useful when there is something to play for.
Its counted for him here at the beginning of every season and in every 4th quarter he has ever played in.
thedoper wrote:Ricky has been positively streaky before. How many times did people use 10 to 20 game stretches to show just how valuable Ricky is? I think the most disappointing aspect of Ricky is simply you cant rely on him when it counts. I dont think its any surprise that this positive stretch of games came with the fact that we had absolutely no pressure. Ricky plays loose, when the pressure ramps up he constantly gets desperate. Its too late to even matter, any trade we make with him we will lose since the market keeps shrinking for PGs who cant shoot. We might as well keep him around and let his contract run out since Ant likes him so much.
When has it ever counted for him here? His rookie year when he was leading the team to the playoffs before his injury. He played really well when he and Utah beat OKC and played well when the Suns went 8-0 in the bubble. I don't know if we necessarily can count on him to drag the team out of the dumps but he seems useful when there is something to play for.
Its counted for him here at the beginning of every season and in every 4th quarter he has ever played in.
When the team is either tanking or trying to get some rookies feet wet and force feeding them? Unfortunately it was often the same story for Ricky here. Is that on Ricky? Or is it like most of the problems here, the direction of the franchise? I think context here is important. The team has really been all in for his first 2 seasons when his injury derailed the team and then when the team hit some anomaly when they had one of the highest point differentials for a team to miss the playoffs. Other than that he has only been expected to elevate a bunch of athletes devoid of much NBA skill.
