Page 8 of 8
Re: Wolves v Warriors
Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2017 3:54 pm
by Monster
thedoper wrote:Transition defense against the warriors is impossible when you take bad shots. If you move the ball around with in good position you can get back. If you stand around and watch other's take turns on their shot you're going to get burned on the other end. After watching the whole game it was clear that once we abandoned our sharing on the offense, the transition D turned. We make strides for a few games then the Warriors expose our significant areas of needed improvement on both sides of the ball. I don't losing to the Warriors on the road should negate the progress that was made on the defensive end in the 5 games previous.
+1 This is exactly how I felt.
Re: Wolves v Warriors
Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2017 4:57 pm
by Coolbreeze44
Q12543 wrote:LST, I guess I have a more comprehensive perspective on our performance than wins and losses. I look for example at some of our wins. REALLY close games that could have easily gone the other direction if not for some ridiculous shots (the Crawford corner 3 that he literally couldn't see upon release and the Wiggins game winning heave are two examples). Yes, credit is due to those two for actually making those shots, but these are 50/50 type games and in my opinion we simply got the karmic coin flip to go our way.
Also, SAS was missing Leonard; Golden State was missing Durant. These are literally their best players! And both teams pretty easily handled a full strength Minnesota team. I mean, we couldn't even keep it close? Really? These are teams we should be getting totally pumped up for.
I stand by my assertion that what I see on the floor is a 38-42 win team. I hope I'm wrong.
I guess I would ask if this team can't win half their games, what would it take to get there. We have stars, we have vets, we have a better bench. New coach? More shooters? Move to Seattle?
Re: Wolves v Warriors
Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2017 8:33 pm
by Q12543 [enjin:6621299]
CoolBreeze44 wrote:Q12543 wrote:LST, I guess I have a more comprehensive perspective on our performance than wins and losses. I look for example at some of our wins. REALLY close games that could have easily gone the other direction if not for some ridiculous shots (the Crawford corner 3 that he literally couldn't see upon release and the Wiggins game winning heave are two examples). Yes, credit is due to those two for actually making those shots, but these are 50/50 type games and in my opinion we simply got the karmic coin flip to go our way.
Also, SAS was missing Leonard; Golden State was missing Durant. These are literally their best players! And both teams pretty easily handled a full strength Minnesota team. I mean, we couldn't even keep it close? Really? These are teams we should be getting totally pumped up for.
I stand by my assertion that what I see on the floor is a 38-42 win team. I hope I'm wrong.
I guess I would ask if this team can't win half their games, what would it take to get there. We have stars, we have vets, we have a better bench. New coach? More shooters? Move to Seattle?
While I say this in a state of calm (i.e. I reserve the right to ask for Thibs head in the future!), I think if we end up around .500, as I suspect we will, he should probably be given one more year with this core. He'll have another shot at upgrading the bench (they need better wing depth) and the KAT/Wig will be one more year older.
I would also quibble with the "we have stars" piece. I think we have
a star in Butler, and frankly, he's not having the best year himself. KAT I hesitate on because he's now anchoring one of the league's worst defenses for the third year in a row. That was easy to overlook in Year 1, a little less less easy in Year 2, and now a lot less easy in Year 3. I just can't bring myself to calling someone a star that is so clumsy defensively, no matter how gifted he is on offense.
Re: Wolves v Warriors
Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2017 9:36 pm
by kekgeek
Wasn't a pretty game but the wolves are still on pace for 52 wins just saying.
Re: Wolves v Warriors
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:02 am
by mjs34
We should have a pretty good idea at the 20 game mark. I would expect us to be at 13 wins by then if we are going to make any noise.
Re: Wolves v Warriors
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:14 am
by longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]
sjm34 wrote:We should have a pretty good idea at the 20 game mark. I would expect us to be at 13 wins by then if we are going to make any noise.
I agree, sjm. The next 9 games don't look too difficult (only SA is an elite opponent), so if Butler plays all 9 we should easily be 13-7 by then...and that puts us on a path for over 52 wins.
Q, if we are 13-7 after 20, will you still be sitting at 38-42 :)?
Re: Wolves v Warriors
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 11:59 am
by TAFKASP
kekgeek1 wrote:Wasn't a pretty game but the wolves are still on pace for 52 wins just saying.
Well damn it, I need them to cool off just a tad!
Re: Wolves v Warriors
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 1:51 pm
by Q12543 [enjin:6621299]
longstrangetrip wrote:sjm34 wrote:We should have a pretty good idea at the 20 game mark. I would expect us to be at 13 wins by then if we are going to make any noise.
I agree, sjm. The next 9 games don't look too difficult (only SA is an elite opponent), so if Butler plays all 9 we should easily be 13-7 by then...and that puts us on a path for over 52 wins.
Q, if we are 13-7 after 20, will you still be sitting at 38-42 :)?
Heh, we'll see. Never underestimate the ability of a Wolves team to severely disappoint you!
Like I said before, I look beyond just Ws and Ls to assess a team early on. 20 games is still pretty early in my book, meaning you can't take the record completely at face value.
So I will look at
how we achieved those 13 wins (margin of victory, strength of competition, last minute luck, etc.) in assessing the squad.