Wolves vs Thunder part II on ESPN Game Thread

[Mattya]

Last year when Rubio came back the Wolves went 5-5 over a 10 game stretch in February. Apparently that 10 game stretch means we weren't the worst team in the league because we were playing better than the Sixers, and Lakers during that one stretch of the season.

[LesGrossman]

Last year when Rubio came back the Wolves went 5-5 over a 10 game stretch in February. Apparently that 10 game stretch means we weren't the worst team in the league because we were playing better than the Sixers, and Lakers during that one stretch of the season.

Thats mathematically correct. And it makes sense to assess that new team without regard for whatever happened before. You're slowly getting there.

[LesGrossman]

Didn't watch...but patience guys, patience.

This is year two of the post-Love rebuilding process and we already have KAT and Wiggins to show for it. A third stud in the upcoming draft and then we are set for a good future...if we somehow manage to add any semi competent coach and gm with Flip having passed away.

I wouldnt exactly say patience is what this team and this club needs. If they have shown to have one thing over the past decade, its patience.

I believe its a common theme here and at the same time a huge mistake, to expect things to get better simply by doing them longer. Talent is a guarantee for nothing, exactly. As we just saw OKC, lets look at them. As an outsider watching maybe 50% of their games, I thought they were really poorly coached, Brooks was relying on the exceptional talent of his roster. He did not put a leash on Westbrook, he did not give Harden the feeling of appreciation he needed, i didnt see much stuff being run; two guys were shooting all the time (with Harden and Ibaka make it four), everyone else got bored and frustrated and uninvolved. Think about who he had: Durant, Westbrook, Ibaka, Harden, Reggie Jackson and a lot of other very skilled role players. They should have multiple titles by now, but they had "patience". They kept repeating the same mistakes and expected their problems and struggles to just go away over time, until recently. And after their peak, the roster broke apart and as good as they may look against trash teams like the wolves, we all know they are out of contention now. Theres no way they get past the Warriors or Spurs.

Repeating mistakes will not remove them. Getting better at doing the wrong things does not make you better as a player or team. Right now, we are wasting one season of a handful we have with this group. Not only is there no progress, but a measurable regress - which is kind of logical, since teams are learning about your strengths and weaknesses and if you stand still you work into their hands. All the flip flopping around topics that should be marginal (is Lavine a 1 or 2? Truth is, he wont be exceptional at either so why slow the team down to give him experience?) has so far lead nowhere. After so many games we havent really figured out the best 5 to start. Smitch has only recently rediscovered the great player he had on his bench, by the name of Bjelica. A waste of time. While we argue here about how it makes no sense to fire him, BETTER coaches are being let go and replaced by others, making those teams better.

Patience/Develop/fail/Patience/tank/draft/patience/develop/fail/patience. I dont believe any more. I am with the people who demand actions to be taken. Get rid of Smitch and the whole assistant country club, get players who are good right NOW, not in some imaginary future that has yet to manifest.

So I really don't want to write a long post right now but I guess I'll have to.

Lets look at our situation:
We are in year 2 of the rebuilding process in the post love/since adding Wiggins era...currently a 12-29 record....so on pace to improve on the terrible last season. I know it is disappointing and some (if not all) of us might've expected more improvement but this is the NBA. You are not going to complete a full rebuild in two seasons. It simply does not work.
So...I think we are in a pretty good position right now with two young studs in Wiggins and KAT.

Lets look at the situation of the two teams you mentioned when they got their young studs.
The notSonics first two seasons with Durant finished well outside the playoffs. So sucking is exactly what got them Westbrook, Harden and Ibaka to pair with Durant...which resulted in building a contender in year 4 of the rebuilding process.
That they are only a borderline contender right now has more to do with Durant not being 100% and them making some poor roster choices which allowed other teams (such as GS, SA) to collect a more talented roster than the notSonics have.

Golden State...exactly same story. first two years after getting Curry finished outside of the playoffs. Didn't become a contender until Curry's 6th year. And even last season it was really surprising they did as well as they did.

I see your concerns about Mitchell holding the team back and not having a good GM but in reality a lot of those mediocre teams above us would probably love to switch situations with us because we have two young studs in place and are about to get a third one if we draft smart next offseason.

It takes time too build a quality team. Towns and Wiggins are just 20. It will take another two years and adding talent around them to fully unleash their potential.

Everything you wrote explains why it makes sense to not expect immediate results, and be patient in a rebuild process. It makes a lot of sense and i share those thoughts. But at the same time, you dont address my main concern: with the wrong coach and staff, the rebuild will just not happen. Its not like you put them all together and just wait 2-3 years and when you open the lid they are a contender. With the wrong coach, you will just have a big pile of wasted talent that cannot produce consistent results (the "Knick" approach). You need all ingredients to cook a strong team: talented players, patience and great coaching/a great organization. If just one is lacking it will not turn out tasty

[Mattya]

Last year when Rubio came back the Wolves went 5-5 over a 10 game stretch in February. Apparently that 10 game stretch means we weren't the worst team in the league because we were playing better than the Sixers, and Lakers during that one stretch of the season.

Thats mathematically correct. And it makes sense to assess that new team without regard for whatever happened before. You're slowly getting there.

We can assess that new team by judging them on their entire season. They continued to suck. Just like the Sixers have after they won a few games this year. Which is exactly why you judge who was the better team on the entire season. Not a 10 game stretch. Which you think is blasphemy apparently.

You seem to be stuck in your ways. Which is again ironic coming from you. Since that is what you like to complain about whenever someone disagrees with anything you.

[Mattya]

We should probably go back to blaming Smitch for players not having the elementary school fundamentals of boxing out.

[LesGrossman]

Last year when Rubio came back the Wolves went 5-5 over a 10 game stretch in February. Apparently that 10 game stretch means we weren't the worst team in the league because we were playing better than the Sixers, and Lakers during that one stretch of the season.

Thats mathematically correct. And it makes sense to assess that new team without regard for whatever happened before. You're slowly getting there.

We can assess that new team by judging them on their entire season. They continued to suck. Just like the Sixers have after they won a few games this year. Which is exactly why you judge who was the better team on the entire season. Not a 10 game stretch. Which you think is blasphemy apparently.

You seem to be stuck in your ways. Which is again ironic coming from you. Since that is what you like to complain about whenever someone disagrees with anything you.

Actually, iirc, Ricky showed the potential of that team, and got benched most of the time ("preventive restrictions...") because he would have risked the tanking mission. You could NOT assess the strength of that team based on previous results, rather the opposite. All numbers for the team with/without Ricky confirm that. But whatever. I dont know what you''re even trying to say and certainly you are not open to any other ideas so i agree theres no point in arguing any more.

[Merc_Porto]

Says people who aren't crazy. Go look at the Lakers board when Russell wasn't getting minutes and Kobe was struggling. Go look at the Sixers board before Ish Smith.

So, you see right ?
Everybody is improving and we are regressing. But that is ok i guess.

See what. The Sixers have lost 4 games in a row. The Lakers are 4-6 over their last 10. The Nets are 3-7. That means if the Wolves win 2 games, 2 freaking games, we right back on par with the pace that these teams that are supposedly better than us.

I'll let you get back to your misery.

Is not about the records.

[Mattya]

Thats mathematically correct. And it makes sense to assess that new team without regard for whatever happened before. You're slowly getting there.

We can assess that new team by judging them on their entire season. They continued to suck. Just like the Sixers have after they won a few games this year. Which is exactly why you judge who was the better team on the entire season. Not a 10 game stretch. Which you think is blasphemy apparently.

You seem to be stuck in your ways. Which is again ironic coming from you. Since that is what you like to complain about whenever someone disagrees with anything you.

Actually, iirc, Ricky showed the potential of that team, and got benched most of the time ("preventive restrictions...") because he would have risked the tanking mission. You could NOT assess the strength of that team based on previous results, rather the opposite. All numbers for the team with/without Ricky confirm that. But whatever. I dont know what you''re even trying to say and certainly you are not open to any other ideas so i agree theres no point in arguing any more.

Which is EXACTLY why you judge how good a team is by the entire season. Not small sample sizes. Just because something is more recent doesn't mean it is sustainable.

I'm open to other ideas. If you can provide a clear point with evidence. My history reading your posts has been the exact opposite. Usually you just complain about people having some sort of anti European sentiment or blame Mitchell for anything and everything that any of the players do wrong.

[Mattya]

So, you see right ?
Everybody is improving and we are regressing. But that is ok i guess.

See what. The Sixers have lost 4 games in a row. The Lakers are 4-6 over their last 10. The Nets are 3-7. That means if the Wolves win 2 games, 2 freaking games, we right back on par with the pace that these teams that are supposedly better than us.

I'll let you get back to your misery.

Is not about the records.

What is it about then. Why does playoff seeding depend on your season record? Why do your lottery odds depend on you season record. Recency bias is running rampant.

[Merc_Porto]

I thought this was a year of development.

[Mattya]

I thought this was a year of development.

No you thought this was a team going to the playoffs. It was always a year for developments. The team is still on pace to win 24 games. Which again as a reminder Durant and Westrbook only won 23 games in their first year together. Did they develop despite that record? Yea, but to some here that just want to complain everything is doomed.

[Klomp]

Development isn't a constant uphill trajectory. There will always be peaks and valleys.

[Merc_Porto]

I thought this was a year of development.

No you thought this was a team going to the playoffs. It was always a year for developments. The team is still on pace to win 24 games. Which again as a reminder Durant and Westrbook only won 23 games in their first year together. Did they develop despite that record? Yea, but to some here that just want to complain everything is doomed.

Yes, i tought we would make the playoffs. Again, with an average coach we would be a playoff team right now. Portland is in a "rebuilding year" and they are in the race to the playoffs with that garbage roster. Denver doesnt have one player in the starting lineup with more than 30 years. Gallinari has 27, Faried has 26, the rest is Mudiay with 19, Harris with 21, Nurkic with 21... And this 3 dont have the talent of Towns / Wiggins and they still are, very competitive... You want to know the difference between Denver and Minnesota IS ?
They got a good coach, we have the worst coach in entire NBA.

This year the West got worse.

This is a year of development with the players getting worse. As a team we are getting worse as well.

[Mattya]

I thought this was a year of development.

No you thought this was a team going to the playoffs. It was always a year for developments. The team is still on pace to win 24 games. Which again as a reminder Durant and Westrbook only won 23 games in their first year together. Did they develop despite that record? Yea, but to some here that just want to complain everything is doomed.

Yes, i tought we would make the playoffs. Again, with an average coach we would be a playoff team right now. Portland is in a "rebuilding year" and they are in the race to the playoffs with that garbage roster. Denver doesnt have one player in the starting lineup with more than 30 years. Gallinari has 27, Faried has 26, the rest is Mudiay with 19, Harris with 21, Nurkic with 21... And this 3 dont have the talent of Towns / Wiggins and they still are, very competitive... You want to know the difference between Denver and Minnesota IS ?
They got a good coach, we have the worst coach in entire NBA.

This year the West got worse.

This is a year of development with the players getting worse. As a team we are getting worse as well.

No we wouldn't have. If the players were that good they wouldn't look this bad no matter who the coach is. That should be very evident watching the games this year. The difference is they have vets with experience who can still play. We have Rubio as the only vet who still contributes. We still have no shooting. Our players are lazy defensively and on the boards. You can blame the coach all you want, but the biggest problems with this team no coach would fix. So would you have blown up the Thunder as well?

The team has played worse recently. What happens if they go on a 4 game win streak? Do all of your complaints about development become invalid again?

[LesGrossman]

No you thought this was a team going to the playoffs. It was always a year for developments. The team is still on pace to win 24 games. Which again as a reminder Durant and Westrbook only won 23 games in their first year together. Did they develop despite that record? Yea, but to some here that just want to complain everything is doomed.

Yes, i tought we would make the playoffs. Again, with an average coach we would be a playoff team right now. Portland is in a "rebuilding year" and they are in the race to the playoffs with that garbage roster. Denver doesnt have one player in the starting lineup with more than 30 years. Gallinari has 27, Faried has 26, the rest is Mudiay with 19, Harris with 21, Nurkic with 21... And this 3 dont have the talent of Towns / Wiggins and they still are, very competitive... You want to know the difference between Denver and Minnesota IS ?
They got a good coach, we have the worst coach in entire NBA.

This year the West got worse.

This is a year of development with the players getting worse. As a team we are getting worse as well.

No we wouldn't have. If the players were that good they wouldn't look this bad no matter who the coach is. That should be very evident watching the games this year. The difference is they have vets with experience who can still play. We have Rubio as the only vet who still contributes. We still have no shooting. Our players are lazy defensively and on the boards. You can blame the coach all you want, but the biggest problems with this team no coach would fix. So would you have blown up the Thunder as well?

The team has played worse recently. What happens if they go on a 4 game win streak? Do all of your complaints about development become invalid again?

Wanna exchange fallacies? Typical strawman. Who talked about "blowing up" anything? The topic everyone is talking about is replacing one key piece, and changing the game plan from tank / talent draft / another development year to try to get someone who can instantly contribute in exchange for pick. Thats all we talk about but you keep coming back to that "blowup" story.

[Mattya]

Yes, i tought we would make the playoffs. Again, with an average coach we would be a playoff team right now. Portland is in a "rebuilding year" and they are in the race to the playoffs with that garbage roster. Denver doesnt have one player in the starting lineup with more than 30 years. Gallinari has 27, Faried has 26, the rest is Mudiay with 19, Harris with 21, Nurkic with 21... And this 3 dont have the talent of Towns / Wiggins and they still are, very competitive... You want to know the difference between Denver and Minnesota IS ?
They got a good coach, we have the worst coach in entire NBA.

This year the West got worse.

This is a year of development with the players getting worse. As a team we are getting worse as well.

No we wouldn't have. If the players were that good they wouldn't look this bad no matter who the coach is. That should be very evident watching the games this year. The difference is they have vets with experience who can still play. We have Rubio as the only vet who still contributes. We still have no shooting. Our players are lazy defensively and on the boards. You can blame the coach all you want, but the biggest problems with this team no coach would fix. So would you have blown up the Thunder as well?

The team has played worse recently. What happens if they go on a 4 game win streak? Do all of your complaints about development become invalid again?

Wanna exchange fallacies? Typical strawman. Who talked about "blowing up" anything? The topic everyone is talking about is replacing one key piece, and changing the game plan from tank / talent draft / another development year to try to get someone who can instantly contribute in exchange for pick. Thats all we talk about but you keep coming back to that "blowup" story.

Hey, its the only way you people know how to communicate. Remember just yesterday where you were saying I "booed Rubio."

and no, by "you people," I don't mean Europeans, because I know that is where you wanted to go with that to play your Euro victim card again.

[LesGrossman]

No we wouldn't have. If the players were that good they wouldn't look this bad no matter who the coach is. That should be very evident watching the games this year. The difference is they have vets with experience who can still play. We have Rubio as the only vet who still contributes. We still have no shooting. Our players are lazy defensively and on the boards. You can blame the coach all you want, but the biggest problems with this team no coach would fix. So would you have blown up the Thunder as well?

The team has played worse recently. What happens if they go on a 4 game win streak? Do all of your complaints about development become invalid again?

Wanna exchange fallacies? Typical strawman. Who talked about "blowing up" anything? The topic everyone is talking about is replacing one key piece, and changing the game plan from tank / talent draft / another development year to try to get someone who can instantly contribute in exchange for pick. Thats all we talk about but you keep coming back to that "blowup" story.

Hey, its the only way you people know how to communicate. Remember just yesterday where you were saying I "booed Rubio."

and no, by "you people," I don't mean Europeans, because I know that is where you wanted to go with that to play your Euro victim card again.

You're making up stuff again. I think i wrote "you probably booed him, too" in a certain context. What is your actual message though? I dont know what you try to say at all. People have said they want to have Smitch replaced right now. Nothing else. You comment on some imaginary stupid suggestions noone ever made. What are you trying to tell us?

[Mattya]

Wanna exchange fallacies? Typical strawman. Who talked about "blowing up" anything? The topic everyone is talking about is replacing one key piece, and changing the game plan from tank / talent draft / another development year to try to get someone who can instantly contribute in exchange for pick. Thats all we talk about but you keep coming back to that "blowup" story.

Hey, its the only way you people know how to communicate. Remember just yesterday where you were saying I "booed Rubio."

and no, by "you people," I don't mean Europeans, because I know that is where you wanted to go with that to play your Euro victim card again.

You're making up stuff again. I think i wrote "you probably booed him, too" in a certain context. What is your actual message though? I dont know what you try to say at all. People have said they want to have Smitch replaced right now. Nothing else. You comment on some imaginary stupid suggestions noone ever made. What are you trying to tell us?

Lol at me making that up.

What is my message? You replied to it, and seemed to understand it just fine an hour ago. What imaginary thing am I making up. I replied to a comment from a poster who has suggested trading Rubio and young talent for win now players, you interject and yet again assume you know that persons viewpoints. Every time you have tried to call someone out you end up just showing the irony and hypocrisy that you post every single day.

[Merc_Porto]

The difference is they have vets with experience who can still play.

So, The difference is J.Nelson and R.Foye. I see.
With Portland, is... well, they dont have vets.

[Mattya]

The difference is they have vets with experience who can still play.

So, The difference is J.Nelson and R.Foye. I see.
With Portland, is... well, they dont have vets.

You see what?

You don't consider Gallinari and productive vet? Or Damian Lillard? or Al Farouq Aminu?