Minnesota Sports Forum

monsterpile wrote:

Mikkeman wrote:

longstrangetrip wrote: Did you read the article I posted just above, kek. It's not just the narrative that we continue to blow 4th quarter leads...it's also that we are far and away the worst plus/minus 4th quarter team in the NBA. The 4th quarter is when the money is on the line...doesn't it tell you something that we are by far the worst team at crunch time? We were also terrible in the 4th last year, and some argued that it was because of the youth of our roster (I disagreed). So Thibs goes out and gets 4 veterans (Butler, Gibson, Teague and Crawford), and we are STILL the worst 4th quarter team in the league! What does that tell you? What's the one constant between last year's team and this year's? I'm still looking for a credible answer as to why we are so awful at the end of games other than Thibs' starter-killing rotations, and nobody has provided one. I'm still waiting...

Yes, I'm happy that we are happy we are 18-13, but many expected better given the addition of Butler and the easy schedule. But after a hot start, we are only 8-8 the past 16 while playing a cake schedule. I have a difficult time mustering much excitement about the last 16 games, especially when I attend games and see the negative body language on the court that Robson and others have also noticed. It's a team going in the wrong direction.

Based on stats playing bench more wouldn't help at least currently 4th quarter collapses. Bench players have clearly worse 4th quarter net rating numbers. Starters have 4th quarter net rating between -1.7(Teague) and -8.8 (Wiggins) when bench has it between -7.4 (Jones) and -24.4 (Shabazz). So giving bench more minutes in 4th quarter wouldn't likely lead to better results.

http://stats.nba.com/players/advanced/?sort=NET_RATING&dir=-1&Season=2017-18&SeasonType=Regular%20Season&TeamID=1610612750&Period=44th quarter net ratings

BTW. Another team that has also many promising young players seems to be even worse in 4th quarter. Milwaukee has currently 4th quarter net rating -11.0 when Wolves have it -8.1.

Interesting you mention the Bucks. Have you seen some of the tactics Kidd has been using lately at the end of games?

Unfortunately I haven't had much time this year to watch games, so I'm not aware about Kidd's tactics. I just noticed that Greek Freak had quite OK 4th Q net rating but many other their main players sucked. I also checked clutch net ratings (last 5 minutes in games that have ended with less than 5 pts margin) and there Milwaukee had pretty decent numbers (even positive net rating). Wolves had -7.2 but there were many other teams that had even worse numbers. (Toronto, OKC, Utah and Clippers for example) So it might be that MIlwaukee's bad 4th quarter numbers are mainly coming from blow out wins and losses where they have sat GF most of the 4th quarter.

Sometimes, it's like I can tell who posted what without even looking at the author.

We've all marked out our territories (to varying degrees)... and nobody seems to want to move an inch.

Fortunately, for bantering... this season offers something for everyone. A decent record + bad losses + same foibles + unexpected events = everyone gets to dig their trenches even deeper!!!

I completely agree lol, people on this board are frothing at the mouth after every game to push their agenda, me included

AbeVigodaLive wrote:Sometimes, it's like I can tell who posted what without even looking at the author.

We've all marked out our territories (to varying degrees)... and nobody seems to want to move an inch.

Fortunately, for bantering... this season offers something for everyone. A decent record + bad losses + same foibles + unexpected events = everyone gets to dig their trenches even deeper!!!

Half the time I read my own past posts and wonder what idiot wrote that...

Exactly Abe and I thought for sure Cam would be gloating after Murray's big game last night.

Mikkeman wrote:

longstrangetrip wrote: Did you read the article I posted just above, kek. It's not just the narrative that we continue to blow 4th quarter leads...it's also that we are far and away the worst plus/minus 4th quarter team in the NBA. The 4th quarter is when the money is on the line...doesn't it tell you something that we are by far the worst team at crunch time? We were also terrible in the 4th last year, and some argued that it was because of the youth of our roster (I disagreed). So Thibs goes out and gets 4 veterans (Butler, Gibson, Teague and Crawford), and we are STILL the worst 4th quarter team in the league! What does that tell you? What's the one constant between last year's team and this year's? I'm still looking for a credible answer as to why we are so awful at the end of games other than Thibs' starter-killing rotations, and nobody has provided one. I'm still waiting...

Yes, I'm happy that we are happy we are 18-13, but many expected better given the addition of Butler and the easy schedule. But after a hot start, we are only 8-8 the past 16 while playing a cake schedule. I have a difficult time mustering much excitement about the last 16 games, especially when I attend games and see the negative body language on the court that Robson and others have also noticed. It's a team going in the wrong direction.

Based on stats playing bench more wouldn't help at least currently 4th quarter collapses. Bench players have clearly worse 4th quarter net rating numbers. Starters have 4th quarter net rating between -1.7(Teague) and -8.8 (Wiggins) when bench has it between -7.4 (Jones) and -24.4 (Shabazz). So giving bench more minutes in 4th quarter wouldn't likely lead to better results.

http://stats.nba.com/players/advanced/?sort=NET_RATING&dir=-1&Season=2017-18&SeasonType=Regular%20Season&TeamID=1610612750&Period=44th quarter net ratings

BTW. Another team that has also many promising young players seems to be even worse in 4th quarter. Milwaukee has currently 4th quarter net rating -11.0 when Wolves have it -8.1.

I think you are missing my point, mikkeman. I want Thibs to have his best five players on the floor at crunch time...I just want them on the floor RESTED (like they were in the two recent wins against Portland and Denver). When they aren't, disaster follows more often than not (as in the recent home losses to the Suns and 76ers).

Or am I missing your point, mikkeman?

longstrangetrip wrote:

Mikkeman wrote:

longstrangetrip wrote: Did you read the article I posted just above, kek. It's not just the narrative that we continue to blow 4th quarter leads...it's also that we are far and away the worst plus/minus 4th quarter team in the NBA. The 4th quarter is when the money is on the line...doesn't it tell you something that we are by far the worst team at crunch time? We were also terrible in the 4th last year, and some argued that it was because of the youth of our roster (I disagreed). So Thibs goes out and gets 4 veterans (Butler, Gibson, Teague and Crawford), and we are STILL the worst 4th quarter team in the league! What does that tell you? What's the one constant between last year's team and this year's? I'm still looking for a credible answer as to why we are so awful at the end of games other than Thibs' starter-killing rotations, and nobody has provided one. I'm still waiting...

Yes, I'm happy that we are happy we are 18-13, but many expected better given the addition of Butler and the easy schedule. But after a hot start, we are only 8-8 the past 16 while playing a cake schedule. I have a difficult time mustering much excitement about the last 16 games, especially when I attend games and see the negative body language on the court that Robson and others have also noticed. It's a team going in the wrong direction.

Based on stats playing bench more wouldn't help at least currently 4th quarter collapses. Bench players have clearly worse 4th quarter net rating numbers. Starters have 4th quarter net rating between -1.7(Teague) and -8.8 (Wiggins) when bench has it between -7.4 (Jones) and -24.4 (Shabazz). So giving bench more minutes in 4th quarter wouldn't likely lead to better results.

http://stats.nba.com/players/advanced/?sort=NET_RATING&dir=-1&Season=2017-18&SeasonType=Regular%20Season&TeamID=1610612750&Period=44th quarter net ratings

BTW. Another team that has also many promising young players seems to be even worse in 4th quarter. Milwaukee has currently 4th quarter net rating -11.0 when Wolves have it -8.1.

I think you are missing my point, mikkeman. I want Thibs to have his best five players on the floor at crunch time...I just want them on the floor RESTED (like they were in the two recent wins against Portland and Denver). When they aren't, disaster follows more often than not (as in the recent home losses to the Suns and 76ers).

Or am I missing your point, mikkeman?

That's the problem LST, how much leash can you give the bench if you can't trust them not to dig holes so deep that crunch time ends up being more bench player time.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:Sometimes, it's like I can tell who posted what without even looking at the author.

We've all marked out our territories (to varying degrees)... and nobody seems to want to move an inch.

Fortunately, for bantering... this season offers something for everyone. A decent record + bad losses + same foibles + unexpected events = everyone gets to dig their trenches even deeper!!!

Go Twins, I hate Kyle Gibson, Paul Molitor doesn't know how to run a bullpen. Whoops wrong board :) I thought I mark my territory over here lol

longstrangetrip wrote:
I think you are missing my point, mikkeman. I want Thibs to have his best five players on the floor at crunch time...I just want them on the floor RESTED (like they were in the two recent wins against Portland and Denver). When they aren't, disaster follows more often than not (as in the recent home losses to the Suns and 76ers).

Or am I missing your point, mikkeman?

But if most of current bench players have worse overall net rating than starters have in 4th quarter (Dieng has net rating -6.4, Crawford -7.7, Shabazz -21.1, MGH -5.6. Only Tyus and Belly reserve more minutes based on net rating statistics), from purely mathematical point of view it looks like playing them more wouldn't produce better results.

Besides based on recent games it looks like Thibs is willing to give bench more minutes when they won't suck. For example in games against Denver and Sacramento bench was clearly net positive and played much more minutes than in other games when they were clearly negative. So it looks like Thibs makes at least some adjustments based on players performance in game.

One of the main reasons why I cannot understand your rant about our players minutes is that 2014-15 post all star break during the phase that you often refer as the period when Wolves were winning almost 50% of their games with Sam Mitchell as their coach it seems that Sam also played his starters pretty close same minutes than Thibs is playing.

KAT averaged 35.7 minutes, Wiggins 35.1, Lavine 35.0, Rubio 31.0 and Dieng 30.0. Not that dramatic difference compared to Thibs minutes (KAT 35.8, Wiggins 36.7, Butler 37.2, Teague 34.2 and Gibson 33.3) and I don't remember that you would have once criticised that Mitchell would have played starters too much.

Mikkeman wrote:

longstrangetrip wrote:
I think you are missing my point, mikkeman. I want Thibs to have his best five players on the floor at crunch time...I just want them on the floor RESTED (like they were in the two recent wins against Portland and Denver). When they aren't, disaster follows more often than not (as in the recent home losses to the Suns and 76ers).

Or am I missing your point, mikkeman?

But if most of current bench players have worse overall net rating than starters have in 4th quarter (Dieng has net rating -6.4, Crawford -7.7, Shabazz -21.1, MGH -5.6. Only Tyus and Belly reserve more minutes based on net rating statistics), from purely mathematical point of view it looks like playing them more wouldn't produce better results.

Besides based on recent games it looks like Thibs is willing to give bench more minutes when they won't suck. For example in games against Denver and Sacramento bench was clearly net positive and played much more minutes than in other games when they were clearly negative. So it looks like Thibs makes at least some adjustments based on players performance in game.

One of the main reasons why I cannot understand your rant about our players minutes is that 2014-15 post all star break during the phase that you often refer as the period when Wolves were winning almost 50% of their games with Sam Mitchell as their coach it seems that Sam also played his starters pretty close same minutes than Thibs is playing.

KAT averaged 35.7 minutes, Wiggins 35.1, Lavine 35.0, Rubio 31.0 and Dieng 30.0. Not that dramatic difference compared to Thibs minutes (KAT 35.8, Wiggins 36.7, Butler 37.2, Teague 34.2 and Gibson 33.3) and I don't remember that you would have once criticised that Mitchell would have played starters too much.

Mikkeman, I think you are focusing on MPG (which I am admittedly not ignoring either), while my key point is how Thibs works his rotations and how it leaves us tired and vulnerable when the game is on the line. I invite you to read the following article which contrasts D'Antoni's rotation method with Thibs'. I think it highlights beautifully why the Wolves are the worst 4th quarter team in the NBA despite their talented roster:

https://fansided.com/2017/12/20/nylon-calculus-rotations-rest-ramifications-timberwolves/

The issue is more about REST than minutes played, and Thibs ignores this concept as shown by the fact that 4 of our starters rank in the top 20 in average stint on the court without rest, and the 5th starter (Gibson) ranks 33rd. That is not a sustainable strategy, and it's no wonder we can't make shots or stops late in games in which he ignores his bench.

The evidence just seems too clear to ignore when Thibs is such a dramatic outlier in this important coaching area, and we are getting the 4th quarter results we deserve. My hope is that Thibs is tuned into how much better the Wolves were in the last two wins where our bench played about as many minutes as our opponents, and is smart enough to continue to make the coaching adjustments he made in the last two wins. If he does (and especially if Wig can return to form) this team can be very, very good this season.