CoolBreeze44 wrote:No, I did not bet on the Wolves last night, but managed to lose enough baseball bets to have a negative night.
The interesting thing about the game last night was the brutal honesty we received from the broadcast team. They usually don't vent their frustration like that. Both Benz and JPete were clearly annoyed that the Wolves couldn't handle a depleted Pacers group. I guess I'm so used to these performances that one doesn't stand out from another.
Until defense becomes a higher priority we are not going to win consistently. You can have 4 players executing on D, but NBA teams will attack the one that isn't and get easy baskets. Problem is the Wolves sometimes have 3 or 4 players not doing their job on D. It's just not going to work.
I was even disappointed in the other rookie last night, defensively. We've all raved about McDaniels' defensive chops early this season. But he was putting up minimal resistance on several drives to the hoop yesterday. And that's probably just an anomaly.
BUT... imagine you're a rookie who's watching almost everybody else be constantly rewarded for lazy, effortless defense. Some guys are not wired to let it impact how they play. Others might take an occasional play off, too. After all, he's still trying harder than the other rookie getting all the glory. But then one play becomes two plays. And away we go. I'm not suggesting that's the case with McDaniels. Only that these are young impressionable players and leading by example is a thing.
The Wolves need LEADERS to set a positive example, especially on defense.
I'm relieved to hear Cool did not act on my poor advice to bet the Wolves last night. If anyone else did bet on them based on my suggestion, please email me at notgonnahappen@biteme.com, and I will transfer bitcoin to you to make you whole.
Just finished watching the replay. Wasn't gonna do it because someone told me last night they were down 21 at the half. I guess I'm glad I did because they actually turned it into a close game. But losing to a depleted team like Indy cannot be summarized as anything other than a disaster. Doesn't mean there aren't some good and bad things to discuss, but still a disaster.
Obviously this was nothing short of a defensive disaster. Nobody should give up 141 points to a ragtag bunch like the Pacers ran out there last night. Neither Ricky nor J-Mac was able to contain TJ McConnell, and J-Mac's poor defense was the reason for his team-worst -10. But even worse was the dreadful 3-point defense. I don't think Ant and DLO were loafing on defense last night, I just think they don't understand proper NBA defense. If anyone has the game recorded, please go back and review DLO's defense in the 4th quarter. You can tell he sincerely wants to provide help defense in the lane, but he regularly puts himself in a position where he is unable to provide any meaningful challenge against his man outside the arc. It was painful to watch. I hope Finch or Vanterpool sits down with DLO and Ant (and also Beas, even though he isn't likely to play this season) and review video to show them exactly what they are doing wrong. Maybe DLO has never played for a coach who has really taught him how to play team defense. We desperately need DLO and Ant's 4th quarter scoring to accompany KAT, but they aren't helping us if they give up more on the other end of the court than they score.
PG shooting was horrible last night. Ricky and J-mac were 5-15 combined, and DLO was 5-15 by himself...not winning stats. At least Ricky and DLO were both able to get to the free throw line (second encouraging game in a row in that regard for DLO), so Ricky ended up with an efficient 17 points on just 11 shots and DLO had 17 points on 15 shots. But we need better shooting from all three.
After ripping the point guards defense and shooting, I'm going to balance it with some positive comments. All three of them (and I'm including DLO, because he's almost like a 2nd PG when he is out there) knew that KAT and Naz could not be stopped by an undersized Pacers' defense, and they all did a great job of feeding the centers. 15 assists between the 3 of them, with only 1 TO. DLO in particular had some terrific feeds for open layups. And the centers really took advantage of the poor interior defense with 48 points on only 24 shots along with 17 rebounds.
Finally, where's the love for Rubio? I get the criticism in the second quarter as he forced a couple shots...something that should never happen with him. But an efficient 17/7/5 with three steals and no turnovers would be a stellar line for any PG, not to mention a +7 that was only bested by KAT. I think we lose credibility as a board when we are so quick to point out Ricky's mistakes (and I willingly join in when he deserves it) but painfully slow to point out a very good line. 8 pages of Wolves analysis by smart guys, and the only positive comment on a guy with 17/7/5/3 no TOs and 3 steals is a comment by Cam about a nice strip. Balance, boys, balance...
CoolBreeze44 wrote:No, I did not bet on the Wolves last night, but managed to lose enough baseball bets to have a negative night.
The interesting thing about the game last night was the brutal honesty we received from the broadcast team. They usually don't vent their frustration like that. Both Benz and JPete were clearly annoyed that the Wolves couldn't handle a depleted Pacers group. I guess I'm so used to these performances that one doesn't stand out from another.
Until defense becomes a higher priority we are not going to win consistently. You can have 4 players executing on D, but NBA teams will attack the one that isn't and get easy baskets. Problem is the Wolves sometimes have 3 or 4 players not doing their job on D. It's just not going to work.
I was even disappointed in the other rookie last night, defensively. We've all raved about McDaniels' defensive chops early this season. But he was putting up minimal resistance on several drives to the hoop yesterday. And that's probably just an anomaly.
BUT... imagine you're a rookie who's watching almost everybody else be constantly rewarded for lazy, effortless defense. Some guys are not wired to let it impact how they play. Others might take an occasional play off, too. After all, he's still trying harder than the other rookie getting all the glory. But then one play becomes two plays. And away we go. I'm not suggesting that's the case with McDaniels. Only that these are young impressionable players and leading by example is a thing.
The Wolves need LEADERS to set a positive example, especially on defense.
McDaniels is going to be fine, I think. He had a quiet game last night and I also noticed the same uncharacteristic defensive lapses Abe noticed, but even on a relatively off night, is box score was still quite good. He clearly has Finch's confidence, and he should.
Abe, I think your main point is spot on. Every team needs one of its best players to consistently show good effort on D. It's so crucial for setting the bar for everyone else.
Everybody righty talks about the importance of floor spacing and shot creation, and those are crucial, but I honestly think setting the tone on D is the #1 way a star player can make their teammates better.
FNG, once again it comes down to watching the game and everyone's interpretation of what's happening. I see that you said you watched the replay, but there's a reason why there were as many Rubio comments as there was.
Firstly, Rubio was a liability in the first half. His nine points on 2-9 shooting from the floor is where my biggest issue with him stemmed from. There's no logical reason for him to lead the team in shot attempts through an entire half of basketball, especially on a team that features Karl-Anthony Towns, D'Angelo Russell, and Anthony Edwards. Oddly, he was shot-hunting and ended up taking very awkward and contested shots resulting in wasted possessions. His play was a large factor for the 21-point deficit after two quarters of play.
The third quarter was much better as Rubio ceased hunting his own broken shot and instead focused on feeding Towns in his spots. Three of his four assists in the quarter were simple passes to Towns behind the arc or in the post. Another was a no-look dish to Layman cutting to the rim. This was by far Rubio's best stretch of play last night.
I barely noticed Rubio was on the floor in the fourth quarter. His biggest contributions in the quarter came at the free throw line -- once when he was fouled by McConnell above the three-point line and Minnesota was in the bonus, and another when McConnell fouled him on a three late in the quarter when the game was practically decided.
His horrendous first half contributed to the Wolves falling behind by 21. His third quarter helped Towns get the Wolves back into the game. And then he disappeared in the final frame as Edwards, Towns, and Russell brought the game within reach.
While this game is unfolding the many of us in the chat are frustrated that Minnesota even fell behind in that game to begin with. Throughout the game it felt like Rubio and others dug the Wolves into a hole, but then Rubio did little to help them climb out of it. The box score may say otherwise, but watching the game was another story.
I don't necessarily disagree with Abe and Drew's point that defensive leadership is important, but I'll push back. KAT is the de facto leader of the team, and I have no problem with either his defensive effort or results...I think he has taken a big step forward defensively. I would also point out that Rubio is constantly talking with the younger guys on the court and pointing out what they should be doing on the court both on offense and defense. I would say that KAT is clearly the stat leader on this team, and Rubio is the veteran coach-on-the-floor leader, and except for the occasional failure by KAT to get back on defense when he thinks he has been fouled, both lead by example.
As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I think the problem is more lack of defensive knowledge than leadership on the part of our wings. Again, I encourage those who can to review DLO and Ant's inability to defend the 3-point shot last night, even on a night when I didn't question their effort. Maybe the coaching staff is guilty for not stressing this in practice, or maybe they are just not very coachable...but they gave up way too many wide open looks last night. Finch couldn't take either DLO or Ant out on the 4th quarter last night because they were both scoring well. But their lack of defense was maddening.
FNG wrote:I don't necessarily disagree with Abe and Drew's point that defensive leadership is important, but I'll push back. KAT is the de facto leader of the team, and I have no problem with either his defensive effort or results...I think he has taken a big step forward defensively. I would also point out that Rubio is constantly talking with the younger guys on the court and pointing out what they should be doing on the court both on offense and defense. I would say that KAT is clearly the stat leader on this team, and Rubio is the veteran coach-on-the-floor leader, and except for the occasional failure by KAT to get back on defense when he thinks he has been fouled, both lead by example.
As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I think the problem is more lack of defensive knowledge than leadership on the part of our wings. Again, I encourage those who can to review DLO and Ant's inability to defend the 3-point shot last night, even on a night when I didn't question their effort. Maybe the coaching staff is guilty for not stressing this in practice, or maybe they are just not very coachable...but they gave up way too many wide open looks last night. Finch couldn't take either DLO or Ant out on the 4th quarter last night because they were both scoring well. But their lack of defense was maddening.
Leadership comes in many forms. Every NBA team has a pecking order among the players. THE alpha player can hold teammates accountable in any number of ways.
Camden wrote:FNG, once again it comes down to watching the game and everyone's interpretation of what's happening. I see that you said you watched the replay, but there's a reason why there were as many Rubio comments as there was.
Firstly, Rubio was a liability in the first half. His nine points on 2-9 shooting from the floor is where my biggest issue with him stemmed from. There's no logical reason for him to lead the team in shot attempts through an entire half of basketball, especially on a team that features Karl-Anthony Towns, D'Angelo Russell, and Anthony Edwards. Oddly, he was shot-hunting and ended up taking very awkward and contested shots resulting in wasted possessions. His play was a large factor for the 21-point deficit after two quarters of play.
The third quarter was much better as Rubio ceased hunting his own broken shot and instead focused on feeding Towns in his spots. Three of his four assists in the quarter were simple passes to Towns behind the arc or in the post. Another was a no-look dish to Layman cutting to the rim. This was by far Rubio's best stretch of play last night.
I barely noticed Rubio was on the floor in the fourth quarter. His biggest contributions in the quarter came at the free throw line -- once when he was fouled by McConnell above the three-point line and Minnesota was in the bonus, and another when McConnell fouled him on a three late in the quarter when the game was practically decided.
His horrendous first half contributed to the Wolves falling behind by 21. His third quarter helped Towns get the Wolves back into the game. And then he disappeared in the final frame as Edwards, Towns, and Russell brought the game within reach.
While this game is unfolding the many of us in the chat are frustrated that Minnesota even fell behind in that game to begin with. Throughout the game it felt like Rubio and others dug the Wolves into a hole, but then Rubio did little to help them climb out of it. The box score may say otherwise, but watching the game was another story.
We're going to have to disagree on this one, Cam. I watched the game very closely, and have already commented that Rubio shouldn't have forced a couple shots in the second quarter...it was his worst moment of the game (I'll also point out that they were up 4 when he was subbed out in the first quarter, and then I believe down 12 by the time Finch put him back in the game in the second quarter). But even when he was shooting poorly during that second quarter, he was one of the only Wolves who was effectively preventing open 3-point looks. In my opinion the primary reason we lost this game was our inability to defend the 3-point line resulting in 14 made three's by Indy on 50% shooting, and I'm fairly sure Finch recognized Ricky (and Jaden) were not the culprits here. I recognize you're not a fan of on/off stats, but there's a reason Ricky consistently performs well in this measure, and it's why Finch gives him 30 minutes despite being a poor shooter and always has him on the court in close games. There's value in a guy who can defend while also giving guys easy looks while not turning the ball over. Not exciting, I agree, but effective.
You're impossible, Cam! Go back and read my analysis of Ricky's game. Yes, I said that his 17/7/5 with three steals, no turnovers and a plus 7 was a good line...it's difficult objectively to argue with that. I also said that he is more effective in protecting the 3-point line than most of our other defenders (subjective, but go back and watch the 4th quarter closely). Finally I questioned the objective balance in our GDT thread when, despite the line he posted, there were almost nothing but criticisms. But I also said that he forced some shots in the second quarter and that he struggled to keep TJ in front of him. And I also pointed out that the 10 for 30 shooting that he, J-Mac and DLO put up wasn't helpful. Please explain how that turns into "Rubio can do no wrong!".
I get that Rubio is a whipping boy for a portion of this forum and that it's oddly distasteful for some here to read anything but criticism about Rubio, but I think opinions are much more meaningful when we present both good and bad aspects of a player's performance (see previous paragraph) rather than trying to "sell" the board on the merits or deficiencies of a particular player. Let's at least try to maintain some semblance of objectivity in evaluating how a player is performing.
