We need to adjust.
With Ricky out there, play McDaniels. With Dlo, play Vando.
McDaniels or Vanderbilt?
Moderators: Domejandro, Worm Guts, Calinks
Re: McDaniels or Vanderbilt?
-
Merc_Porto
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,941
- And1: 3,540
- Joined: Nov 21, 2013
-
Re: McDaniels or Vanderbilt?
-
Klomp
- Retired Mod

- Posts: 69,959
- And1: 23,219
- Joined: Jul 08, 2005
- Contact:
-
Re: McDaniels or Vanderbilt?
mercgold3 wrote:We need to adjust.
With Ricky out there, play McDaniels. With Dlo, play Vando.
I actually disagree, I think Vanderbilt needs a PG like Rubio in order to maximize his offensive ability. It's similar to how young Rubio maximized so many guys from a flawed Wolves roster at that time.
tsherkin wrote:The important thing to take away here is that Klomp is wrong.
Esohny wrote:Why are you asking Klomp? "He's" actually a bot that posts random blurbs from a database.
Klomp wrote:I'm putting the tired in retired mod at the moment
Re: McDaniels or Vanderbilt?
-
Merc_Porto
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,941
- And1: 3,540
- Joined: Nov 21, 2013
-
Re: McDaniels or Vanderbilt?
Klomp wrote:mercgold3 wrote:We need to adjust.
With Ricky out there, play McDaniels. With Dlo, play Vando.
I actually disagree, I think Vanderbilt needs a PG like Rubio in order to maximize his offensive ability. It's similar to how young Rubio maximized so many guys from a flawed Wolves roster at that time.
I understand that. But they are both young and we cant have Ricky with Okogie and Vando out there at same time. No shooting at all.
With Dlo shooting ability at least we can balance more the lineups.
Give Ricky capable shooters to have around. That would help him with his shooting ability as well because when the opponents know that we have 3 non shooters out there is easy to defend against us.
Just lock up Beasley and Naz (Meh) and thats it.
Re: McDaniels or Vanderbilt?
- Krapinsky
- RealGM
- Posts: 20,712
- And1: 1,952
- Joined: May 13, 2007
- Location: Los Angeles
Re: McDaniels or Vanderbilt?
I think McDaniels has a chance to be our starting SF of the future once he fills out and tightens his handle.
Vanderbilt could be a real piece and could potentially be a long term fit at PF next to KAT. Can he develop a respectable 18 footer?
With Rubio, MCLaughlin, Okogie, Beasley, Vanderbilt, Naz, McDaniels, and Ed Davis, you can almost see this team start to form a gritty identity. Edwards even started to buy in last night. Not sure how D-Lo fits into that.
Vanderbilt could be a real piece and could potentially be a long term fit at PF next to KAT. Can he develop a respectable 18 footer?
With Rubio, MCLaughlin, Okogie, Beasley, Vanderbilt, Naz, McDaniels, and Ed Davis, you can almost see this team start to form a gritty identity. Edwards even started to buy in last night. Not sure how D-Lo fits into that.
FinnTheHuman wrote: Your post is just garbage.
NewWolvesOrder wrote:Garbage post, indeed.
Re: McDaniels or Vanderbilt?
-
Dewey
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,926
- And1: 1,086
- Joined: May 22, 2001
Re: McDaniels or Vanderbilt?
Krapinsky wrote:I think McDaniels has a chance to be our starting SF of the future once he fills out and tightens his handle.
Vanderbilt could be a real piece and could potentially be a long term fit at PF next to KAT. Can he develop a respectable 18 footer?
With Rubio, MCLaughlin, Okogie, Beasley, Vanderbilt, Naz, McDaniels, and Ed Davis, you can almost see this team start to form a gritty identity. Edwards even started to buy in last night. Not sure how D-Lo fits into that.
Agree ... we need to master what we can control without scorers (KAT and DLo) such as loose balls, rebounding, and defense.
Maybe I'm wrong, but we know Ant (like any rookie) needs leadership to help set a precedent of workmanship ... maybe DLo does too
Flip response to Love wanting out, "He has no reason to be upset, you're either a part of the problem or a part of the solution"
Re: McDaniels or Vanderbilt?
-
Klomp
- Retired Mod

- Posts: 69,959
- And1: 23,219
- Joined: Jul 08, 2005
- Contact:
-
Re: McDaniels or Vanderbilt?
I think the more important question is if either of them individually is good enough to where the team no longer views upgrading the position as a need? Right now I'd lean no.
tsherkin wrote:The important thing to take away here is that Klomp is wrong.
Esohny wrote:Why are you asking Klomp? "He's" actually a bot that posts random blurbs from a database.
Klomp wrote:I'm putting the tired in retired mod at the moment
Re: McDaniels or Vanderbilt?
-
Jedzz
- RealGM
- Posts: 12,322
- And1: 2,506
- Joined: Oct 05, 2018
Return to Minnesota Timberwolves



