Minnesota Sports Forum

I've taken some time away from the board since the start of the 2021 mainly due to the growing amount of irrational posts I've seen flung about. Normally, that's not an issue with this forum, but this season has been different from what I'm used to. They're not only tiring to read but also to entertain in debate when there's little consistency being displayed. Why bother to argue the same points with the same people when there's a clear disconnect in how we see the game, right? Well, that's where I'm at with a few specific topics. I'd like to explain these before returning to my corner of lurking for the remainder of this season.

Firstly, the Wolves have an insurmountable issue in terms of coaching. For me, Ryan Saunders had already proven his inability to be an NBA head coach at this stage in his career before the season started. But just this year he has cost the Wolves a handful of winnable games with his decision-making from the bench. We can point to his consistently odd usage (or anti-usage) of timeouts and challenges. We can question the lineup combinations that clearly don't work. There's also the lack of feel that's painfully evident during the flow of games -- specifically when it comes to substitutions involving a player that's performing well or changing schemes that shouldn't be altered. If it's not broken, then why try to fix it? Saunders has yet to grasp this.

What I find to be messy in terms of the board, however, is the inconsistency. I recall reading many, many nightly criticisms of Tom Thibodeau's antics on the sideline or how his style of play had sucked the fun out of the game for the viewer... while Minnesota was actually winning games. It was either too slow, or too much isolation, or too much yelling, or too much this, or too little that -- while Minnesota had a record above .500 at the time and was challenging for a top-four seed in a loaded Western Conference. It was absolutely wild to me then, and it's even more wild to see how little criticism Saunders receives now while doing a much worse job comparatively.

Secondly, there's a preordained scapegoat on this Wolves team and it lacks valid reasoning. If I knew nothing about basketball and only knew what this board told me this season, then I would be led to believe that D'Angelo Russell was one of the league's worst players with poor character and attitude to match. In lurking over the past several weeks I've noticed that there is little to no appreciation for his game here even when he's been the main reason the team stood a chance on a given night, which doesn't surprise me. He's had three suboptimal to poor games this year in the 13 that he's played. That'd be the Lakers, Wizards, and first Spurs games. You'd never know that based on the rhetoric here. He is the opposite of a fan favorite among this particular group of Wolves supporters.

However, I've also seen a growing appreciation for Malik Beasley's game and that leads me back to the inconsistency. Both Russell and Beasley are volume scorers/shooters with defensive weaknesses. Russell's arguably been the better, more consistent player of the two thus far, but Beasley seems to be more favored on this board. The question there is why? Is it the optics? Because Beasley seems to try harder? Because of their respective contracts? It's certainly not based on performance to this point because if it was there would be an almost equal level of positivity surrounding them. When they're going good, they are a very potent backcourt.

Lastly, there's Ricky Rubio. He's been downright awful this season for reasons unbeknownst to me. Is it simply a player passing his prime? Is it situation-based? Is it due to lingering issues with COVID? I can't answer that, but his previous weaknesses have only gotten worse while his few strengths have rapidly declined to levels that are merely acceptable territory. That's unfortunately not a player worth anywhere close to the price that was paid to acquire him nor is it worth $17-million on the payroll this year and next.

What I find to be an issue here with some of the board is that Rubio is their beloved statistical darling. He sets the tone for many advanced metrics discussions. Does his game help or hurt the team? Clearly, to anyone who has watched the games thus far, he's been awful and a shell of himself. But statistically speaking, I could paint the picture that Rubio's only been a slight negative to this team. All hail the plus-minus gods, right!?

Numbers require context. The best analysts combine what they see with what the numbers illustrate. And by numbers I mean the collection of many -- not just one.

I mention that because plus-minus is a notoriously noisy statistic. The main reason for that is because it doesn't account for everything at play. It doesn't factor in who that player is playing with OR against during the time he was on the court. It doesn't account for game situations. It also doesn't account for individual involvement -- whether or not that player was actually involved in an offensive or defensive play during that stretch of basketball. There's far too much removed from the equation. Can plus-minus be useful in making conclusions? Absolutely. Is it a dependable metric in a vacuum? No, and it shouldn't be used that way.

I'm thankful for anyone that reads this, and to those that didn't even open the thread I'm thankful for you as well for other reasons. For many years, this has been a fun and constructive forum for rational and consistent basketball discussion, but this season it hasn't been any of that for me. Go Wolves.

Hey Cam, your presence and knowledge have been missed here. I guess I would say you take issue with the board because you tend to be inflexible. You plant your flag on one side of a given issue and then relentlessly defend it. Case in point, the Thibs/Ryan Saunders argument. To me it seems Ryan is getting constant heat from most posters, maybe even more than Thibs did. And I don't even understand why we're still talking about Thibs anyway. I think you're a little like me in that you take opposing views a little too personally. I'd suggest you open yourself up to opposing arguments and try to appreciate those views. Without them we wouldn't have much of a forum. As someone who frequently goes against the grain and has been wrong a good share of the time, people still seem to respect my posts. Just my 2 cents.

Thanks for your post Cam I relate to some of what you are saying.

LikeJimPete said the other night it would be nice to see the Wolves overachieve for once. This last couple games were a chance to get some wins but just led to somewhat watchable compatible games. The Wolves were missing their own guys but we have some depth. It's not looking good for Ryan. It feels like this team has more talent than the record is. The good news is I think there are going to be good options if Ryan proves he isn't good enough and we finally end up making the change. I think it's gonna be a while (Probably wait this whole season) before Rosas is going to make that move unless it becomes REALLY Obvious. It's gonna suck on a few levels if we fire Ryan. Even if you don't think he ever deserved the job it still sucks to think another person with such close ties to the franchise will be leaving on a sour note. Sigh

Personally I think Rubio looks like the guys he has been for the past what like 5 years? Flawed with some game looks kinda bad some night looks really good other nights. I don't think he has had one of those awesome night yet but it's early. He has started off slow before. Has he been worth his salary especially for next season? No. I still think he will end up having enough value that trading for him will he a solid overall move. Obviously he hasn't helped enough based on the Wolves record so I get why people are down on him.

IMHO Beasley and Russell are not the problem on this team. Both guys have played reasonably well considering my Personal expectations for them. Beasley is probably exceeding them and so the Beasley contract looks good at this point. Russell has been balling lately and even his defense the last couple games looks not bad. Is either guy THE answer for the roster? Maybe not but there are some other bigger problems that need to be sorted out before I get to those guys.

I'll mention a couple other positives for this team. Vanderbilt looks like a guy worth having around and it makes me feel a bit better than they got him in the trade last year and that the hype they had for him In the off-season seems at least Mildly warranted. McDaniels looks legitimately intriguing. Honestly I might be throwing him out there for a short stint some games even when the team gets healthy. His length and athletic ability really shows up. Okogie is a flawed player but his ability to just go at people on both ends is something I want to see. He can really move his feet and is strong. We need to keep him.

If there was a deal where we got some legit value back for Culver I would be ready to deal him. If not I'm cool keeping him and having him become a solid rotation guy in the mold of Kris Dunn...but you know like hopefully healthy. I still think there is a chance Culver breaks out and becomes a pretty good player but the good vibes of the preseason and early in in this season has been diminished in terms of his shooting. He could be a Kyle Anderson type also which is a reasonably valuable player.

Thanks for the insight Cam. As someone who has had a fair share of disagreements with you on a number of topics I 100% endorse the perspectives on basketball takes on this post. In a bit of a challenge, I would say that I don't want to add a qualifier to anyone who tries to present a statistical analysis of performance even if you disagree with their take though. There needs to be variant perspectives for healthy debate, even if advanced stats are being used incorrectly or presented in a illogical way.

Rubio for instance has always been an advanced stat darling in some areas, more challenging in others. DLo has always struggled in some advanced stats. I think this is how some people look at basketball now. From any statistical discipline you will know that advanced stats explain base stats, not the opposite. No one doing any sort of professional statistical analysis would start with the advanced stat for their explanation of what the gross evaluation is saying, it just doesn't happen. In basketball media it does unfortunately. I think that is because these advanced stats have become part of the trend in conversation for what analytically-minded people are looking for. I applaud people for trying, but I have skepticism too. I personally hope you can be more patient with people so that it doesn't cause you to want to leave as your contribution to the conversation is part of the fun of this board.

The ONLY reason DLO takes heat is because we gave up a first rounder for him along with Wiggins AND he makes max money. If was was on a minimum contract and we just signed him we would love his game. What great value we would have. If a guy isn't outperforming what he is paid in a capped league then you have a sunk cost or net negative player.

DLO also isn't a great passer, so he doesn't make the team better night in and out. If he makes his shots it's good. I think he's a good passer but he's certainly not elite in that area.

Then we have the defensive side. He's been up and down defensively and mostly down so what he gives you on one end likely washes with the defensive side.

Thus far the trade has been one sided and I think we will see that in the long run. I hope not.

WolvesFan21 wrote:The ONLY reason DLO takes heat is because we gave up a first rounder for him along with Wiggins AND he makes max money. If was was on a minimum contract and we just signed him we would love his game. What great value we would have. If a guy isn't outperforming what he is paid in a capped league then you have a sunk cost or net negative player.

DLO also isn't a great passer, so he doesn't make the team better night in and out. If he makes his shots it's good. I think he's a good passer but he's certainly not elite in that area.

Then we have the defensive side. He's been up and down defensively and mostly down so what he gives you on one end likely washes with the defensive side.

Thus far the trade has been one sided and I think we will see that in the long run. I hope not.

Imagine what the Warriors fans are saying about Kelly Oubre who is costing the team 82 million for this year plus a 1st and 2nd round pick...or a 2nd round pick and the Wolves 2nd rounder. Lol

Thanks for your post Cam.

On Ryan Saunders....I think people have recently ramped up their criticism of Ryan. He's also, frankly, a more likeable guy than "the barking ogre" (not my nickname, borrowing from someone else!). And whether you like it or not, a nice guy is going to be given a bit more rope. Also - and this is important - it's Rosas who gave Ryan this roster. Thibs gave himself his roster. For those of us that think Rosas really screwed things up and that Ryan has less freedom as a coach to alter lineups and the system than Thibs did, here again, we may give him a bit more rope.

On DLO....Wolvesfan is mostly right....I am evaluating him through the lens of his salary and his role as team leader. By the way, this is the same lens I evaluated Wiggins through and I was extremely critical of him. Now I don't think DLO or Wiggins are bad overall players. But hell yeah, both are overpaid and DLO especially hurts this team on defense.

On On/Off stats.....I admit to placing a lot of weight on them when they basically say the same thing over a period of multiple years/teams. To me that smooths out the noise considerably. But yeah - over a single game, single month, or even single season it should be one of many things looked at.

On Rubio....No one is happy with how Rubio has played for the Wolves. However, the product we're getting this season is not the same product that was in Phoenix last season. And that's disappointing.


Hope to hear from you more Cam! You are a valued member of the board and bring a ton to the conversation. I can understand why you stepped away for a period.

As perhaps the newest member of this community, I'm just getting to know the personalities here. But my off-the-cuff observation with all due respect, Camden, is the one CoolBreeze voiced...that perhaps you take offense too easily at views separate from yours- that perhaps you take opinions that differ from yours as an indictment of you personally rather than what they are---just a different opinion from a different person.

Moving on, I have to admit I was surprised that you think Ryan Saunders is defended on this board...I would have said I'm the only defender he has here, and my defense is only half-hearted! (If anyone else is a Ryan defender, please stand up and let yourself be known). It's a little lonely for me on Ryan Island, so I guess I understand why you might feel lonely as one of the few occupants on DLO Island. My defense of Ryan actually parallels that of a guy you defend- D'Angelo Russell. DLO consistently says Ryan hasn't been given a chance to show what he can do, in that his best player has not been on the court for most of the games he has coached. It would be somewhat like judging Steve Kerr's coaching ability on the 2019-20 season alone...not fair at all. After all, Ryan still has a .500 record this season is games in which both of his max players have suited up, and that would be considered overachieving by experts in Vegas who had the Wolves only winning 28 games this year. He may prove to be a terrible coach even after he's allowed to play with a full roster, but asking a near-rookie coach to win with this KAT-less roster is unreasonable in my opinion. I acknowledge that my Saunders take differs from at least 90% of this board, but I'm not going to call others' takes irrational or take it personally. I'm here to share my views and listen to others, not to try to turn anyone's opinion around.

As for DLO, I think I find myself in the majority there. Most of us recognize his talent and also credit his scoring for a few wins this season and last. But I frankly find his defense substandard and downright baffling at times. And while I agree that +/- can be a messy stat in a small sample size (Ant's big positive in the Orlando game, for instance), over time I find it to be a true measure of the value or lack thereof a player brings to his team...especially when the results are so consistent season to season. It's not just that DLO is almost always among the worst on/off players at his position, more importantly it's that he almost always ranks at the bottom of his own team...and he does it while being paid a max salary! Ignoring the fact that a player consistently does so poorly in this stat presents a very incomplete measure of that player. Magic Johnson always made his teammates better, and it spoke volumes when he said DLO lacked leadership and the ability to make his teammates better. I think the Hall of Famer was 100% correct.

Anyway, despite our differences of opinion on these two matters, I still enjoy your informative basketball takes, and look forward to your continuing involvement on this board.

Of course, Cam, all those words but you are singing the same old tune. I'm not surprised. Its all Ryan's fault and DLO is misunderstood and unfairly criticized. Got it for the 500th time. And anyone who disagrees with you must be irrational. Thanks.

Glad you're back Cam. Just a few thoughts:

1. I agree that Ryan has been awful. I've said that many times in my posts. I'll add that most of those who post on this board have been highly critical of Ryan. When it comes to Thibodeau, you might want to stop looking backwards. I criticized Thibodeau a lot based on what I saw and knew about him from people in the organization. Was he a better head coach than Ryan? Absolutely and I think most on this board would agree. But let's remember that this team was a loser in Thibodeau's first season - no better than they were the season before under Sam Mitchell. Both he and Ryan have been roundly criticized on this board. The comparative level of criticism you've observed seems trivial to me.

2. I completely agree with you on Rubio. I criticized him pretty scathingly in some of my posts, but again I'm not alone in that. Nevertheless, it's certainly fair for some to post a statistical defense of his play - although like you I don't find the statistical argument persuasive.

3. I think the criticism of DLO, myself included, relates to his play relative to his max salary and the fact that the Wolves gave up their 1st and 2nd round picks to get him. He was brought here to be the team's second star and I (along with many others) don't see him meeting that expectation. As with Rubio, statistics don't tell the whole story. It's fair game on a message board to criticize him while being less critical of Beasley who makes far less, didn't cost any future picks and wasn't expected to be one of the team's two pillars. But I'll say this - I don't blame DLO for the Wolves abysmal showing so far this season. I put all of the blame on Rosas for what he did before and after trading for DLO, including his decision to hire Ryan Saunders. Hiring Ryan, trading up for Garland and then drafting Culver, drafting Edwards, trading for Rubio, drafting Bolmaro, signing Juancho at $7M per year. Well, the list goes on. DLO didn't make the trade to bring him here. Rosas did that. And I have no doubt DLO would be better with an NBA-caliber head coach.

4. Finally, it's unfortunate that you were so put off by some of the posts you read that you decided to stay away for a while. I missed your posts and was wondering what was up. I think Cool made some good points above are worth pondering. We just can't take ourselves or this board too seriously or personally. It's a place for the exchange of ideas and opinions related to the Wolves and basketball generally. We sometimes disagree and we may not always be consistent. Heck, sometimes I disagree with what I posted a day or two earlier. :) But thankfully this is a message board intended for fun. And the level of consistency and integrity on this message board is still a lot better than you'll find in the news media today. Ok, I know that's a low bar, but you know what I mean. :) Anyway, welcome back.