Page 1 of 2
Can this team really play defense without Rudy?
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2025 8:15 am
by Wolvesfan21
Seeing his name come up in trade discussions has me concerned that we end up getting worse overall and people seem OK with IT!!! Because the dude is still a lockdown top 10 defense basically with him just showing up. That's even when he's not 100% too, which he wasn't for much of the season.
If we do trade Rudy in this offseason we sure as hell better have a plan coming back because in the end, Naz and Ju they aren't centers. It's nearly impossible to play defense with out one. Trying to outscore teams 128 to 127 might be entertaining, I'm not sure how much winning happens.
Re: Can this team really play defense without Rudy?
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2025 8:58 am
by 60WinTim
Wolvesfan21 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 16, 2025 8:15 am
Seeing his name come up in trade discussions has me concerned that we end up getting worse overall and people seem OK with IT!!! Because the dude is still a lockdown top 10 defense basically with him just showing up. That's even when he's not 100% too, which he wasn't for much of the season.
If we do trade Rudy in this offseason we sure as hell better have a plan coming back because in the end, Naz and Ju they aren't centers. It's nearly impossible to play defense with out one. Trying to outscore teams 128 to 127 might be entertaining, I'm not sure how much winning happens.
I am very skeptical that Rudy is in trade conversations. As you said, he is just too important to our defensive identity. The only reason he even gets mentioned is because some talking heads tried to figure out how salaries might match up. That might as well have included ANT!
And I agree with you on the NAZ/Randle pairing. It does not work. I happen to prefer Randle over NAZ, but I hope the Wolves choose just one of them to go forward with (or neither).
Re: Can this team really play defense without Rudy?
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2025 8:59 am
by FNG
I’ll say it right now. Rudy frustrates all of us at times, but without picking up a comparable defensive replacement, we will struggle next year. All you need to do is review some GDTs to see Kek’s posts about how easy it is to score on us when he’s out. Fortunately, I don’t think TC has any intention to move him, unless it’s part of a big splash move like KD. And I guess then our strategy would become trying to outscore the opponent…a lot of 135-130 games. Bottom line? I see little chance of another WCF appearance if Rudy is traded.
Re: Can this team really play defense without Rudy?
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2025 10:23 am
by Q-is-here
Yes, this team can play defense without Rudy, but it would require that Connelly has a plan to acquire some other Center that can offer at least 75% of what Rudy does at a lesser cost and presumably with more reliable hands/finishing ability in traffic (otherwise, why trade Rudy?).
It would also require we get Jaylen Clark on the floor more, as I would submit he's probably the best perimeter defender on the team, including Jaden. However, Jaden can be a really effective off ball defender and rim protector, so I feel like we unleash a much better overall player in Jaden by playing Clark more off the bench.
I can't speak to any of these guys in detail, but here are some Center trade/free agent targets that could backfill Rudy at 75%: Wendell Carter Jr., Goga Bitadze, Daniel Gafford, and Clint Capela.
Re: Can this team really play defense without Rudy?
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2025 10:31 am
by rapsuperstar31
Q-is-here wrote: ↑Mon Jun 16, 2025 10:23 am
Yes, this team can play defense without Rudy, but it would require that Connelly has a plan to acquire some other Center that can offer at least 75% of what Rudy does at a lesser cost and presumably with more reliable hands/finishing ability in traffic (otherwise, why trade Rudy?).
It would also require we get Jaylen Clark on the floor more, as I would submit he's probably the best perimeter defender on the team, including Jaden. However, Jaden can be a really effective off ball defender and rim protector, so I feel like we unleash a much better overall player in Jaden by playing Clark more off the bench.
I can't speak to any of these guys in detail, but here are some Center trade/free agent targets that could backfill Rudy at 75%: Wendell Carter Jr., Goga Bitadze, Daniel Gafford, and Clint Capela.
If we don't go center/pf in the draft at 17, we could easily find someone to take Donte and or NAW's spot at 17. Jase Richardson is a smaller better playmaking Donte. Nique Clifford or Cedric Coward can easily take NAW's spot. Dallas is in need of a point guard with Kyrie out maybe they view Donte as a temporary band aid there. Donte for Gafford and whatever other pieces needed to match salary might work.
Re: Can this team really play defense without Rudy?
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2025 10:39 am
by Q-is-here
rapsuperstar31 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 16, 2025 10:31 am
Q-is-here wrote: ↑Mon Jun 16, 2025 10:23 am
Yes, this team can play defense without Rudy, but it would require that Connelly has a plan to acquire some other Center that can offer at least 75% of what Rudy does at a lesser cost and presumably with more reliable hands/finishing ability in traffic (otherwise, why trade Rudy?).
It would also require we get Jaylen Clark on the floor more, as I would submit he's probably the best perimeter defender on the team, including Jaden. However, Jaden can be a really effective off ball defender and rim protector, so I feel like we unleash a much better overall player in Jaden by playing Clark more off the bench.
I can't speak to any of these guys in detail, but here are some Center trade/free agent targets that could backfill Rudy at 75%: Wendell Carter Jr., Goga Bitadze, Daniel Gafford, and Clint Capela.
If we don't go center/pf in the draft at 17, we could easily find someone to take Donte and or NAW's spot at 17. Jase Richardson is a smaller better playmaking Donte. Nique Clifford or Cedric Coward can easily take NAW's spot. Dallas is in need of a point guard with Kyrie out maybe they view Donte as a temporary band aid there. Donte for Gafford and whatever other pieces needed to match salary might work.
Yup. You should put that idea in Lip's non-Durant trade thread!
Connelly really has a ton of options this offseason to either make some really big moves or more modest moves that improve the roster. It's hard for me to believe that he will completely stand pat.
As for NAW's spot, I really think the trio of Shannon, Clark, and Dillingham almost perfectly compliment each other and they need to play next season. If we draft a guard or wing, he would presumably compete with them for minutes but most likely be in a 10th to 12th man role like the other guys were this season.
Re: Can this team really play defense without Rudy?
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2025 11:39 am
by 60WinTim
An FYI: Nique Clifford is working out for the Wolves today, per Doogie.
Re: Can this team really play defense without Rudy?
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2025 12:22 pm
by DNatagal
The amount of "nopes" that happen when Rudy is in the game is very valuable. The layup line when Rudy is on the bench really skews the TS% higher due to the efficiency of an uncontested layup/dunk.
I would love to see a bouncy 7' center that wants to dunk on people whenever he gets the ball at point blank range, but doesn't need touches in the post. Nothing more frustrating for a motion type offense than the ball not actually moving. Unfortunately, Rudy is most of what we need, most of the time. He disappears far too often on the glass for his size, he sometimes has hands like stone, a few times he is a 7' Justin Jefferson catching everything near him. He doesn't need touches in the post, but he does need the ball when he has someone pinned under the hoop. Ant needs to throw the right pass and let Rudy draw fouls, which of course helps Ant get to the line more often when the opponent is in the penalty.
Is there a cheaper version of Rudy out there that the Wolves can acquire?
Walker Kessler seems to be the pundits savior for the Lakers. It is kind of funny how many Lakers are/could be former Wolves players or draft picks.
Embiid is too rickety and undependable. Needs to many touches and isn't as mobile as he once was.
Zubaz might be the perfect guy for the Wolves, but he isn't going anywhere .
Re: Can this team really play defense without Rudy?
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2025 12:50 pm
by Q-is-here
60WinTim wrote: ↑Mon Jun 16, 2025 11:39 am
An FYI: Nique Clifford is working out for the Wolves today, per Doogie.
May be someone to look at in the event NAW isn't back and DDV might get traded?
Re: Can this team really play defense without Rudy?
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2025 1:32 pm
by 60WinTim
DNatagal wrote: ↑Mon Jun 16, 2025 12:22 pm
The amount of "nopes" that happen when Rudy is in the game is very valuable. The layup line when Rudy is on the bench really skews the TS% higher due to the efficiency of an uncontested layup/dunk.
I would love to see a bouncy 7' center that wants to dunk on people whenever he gets the ball at point blank range, but doesn't need touches in the post. Nothing more frustrating for a motion type offense than the ball not actually moving. Unfortunately, Rudy is most of what we need, most of the time. He disappears far too often on the glass for his size, he sometimes has hands like stone, a few times he is a 7' Justin Jefferson catching everything near him. He doesn't need touches in the post, but he does need the ball when he has someone pinned under the hoop. Ant needs to throw the right pass and let Rudy draw fouls, which of course helps Ant get to the line more often when the opponent is in the penalty.
Is there a cheaper version of Rudy out there that the Wolves can acquire?
Walker Kessler seems to be the pundits savior for the Lakers. It is kind of funny how many Lakers are/could be former Wolves players or draft picks.
Embiid is too rickety and undependable. Needs to many touches and isn't as mobile as he once was.
Zubaz might be the perfect guy for the Wolves, but he isn't going anywhere .
Their called "never minds", not "nopes" (per Grady).
As mentioned a few times, Clint Capela would be a nice add, regardless of whether Rudy is here or not.