Updates on former Wolves

[Note30]

Yep....worse.

Oh **** this. You really want to start this ****?

We're way worse this year in every department.

Since Vando joined the team the Lakers went from being 6-9 to 9-6. So a 3 game difference in standings.

Beverley just joined the Bulls and they have a 7-3 record since he joined, as compared to the 4-6 record they had the 10 games before he joined. Also a 3 game difference in standings.

Meanwhile with Gobert we've had a record of 27-33. And when he hasnt played we've gone 8-4.

Tell me what top 10 player is so good that the team plays significantly better without him than with him. Luka? Nope. Giannis? Nope. Jokic? No. Durant? No. Leonard? No. Curry? No. Embiid? No. List goes on but even Shai, Tatum, Mitchell all make their team better.

Not to mention we'd still have all of our assets if we still had those guys so we wouldn't feel so screwed at the deadline and could have traded for a player that would have made our team better at a position of need.

We're also going to probably be giving up a lottery pick this year.

We as a fan base wouldn't be so desperate to see wins because we mortgaged any ability to make our team substantially better through trades or draft. In fact, even if we did miss the playoffs this year atleast we'd still have Walker Kessler and this year's pick, along with guys the team loved instead of being forced to trade players to accommodate the fact that our PG hated our C. We wouldn't be forced to trade for an old PG that doesn't fit our timeline just so a guy we paid 40 million dollars for could finally catch a lob.

A lot of us could look forward to tanking and potentially getting Wemby, given that Edwards and KAT are out now. However small a chance that would be. Or even look forward to drafting a good PG.

So yeah had we not made that stupid trade last summer we'd be way better off.

Keep schlobbin on the FOs knob Klomp cause that's what you do best.

You're forgetting something rather significant here...

Last year, the Minnesota 15-man roster had 79 lost games due to injury. Only Patrick Beverley (20) missed more than 12 games
This year, the Minnesota 15-man roster has 174 lost games due to injury already. Towns (51), McLaughlin (37), Prince (24) and Anderson (13) have already missed more than 12 games.

Fine, put Vanderbilt, Beverley and Beasley back on the roster. But you still have Towns missing 51 games. You still have McLaughlin missing games. You still have Prince missing games. You're now relying on Naz Reid as your starting C for 50+ games with no Towns. How are you winning games? Are you a Top 10 defense as we've been most of the season to-date? Unlikely.

This has nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing with the trade. This is a pure numbers game.

Reid and Walker Kessler who might have become our center that we needed.

And it's all fine, we could have missed the playoffs this year, there's no consequences. There's no urgency for us to win or be a top tier team without the trade.

We could have continued to build slowly and find the right superstar to trade for or draft the right PG.

But now with Gobert? We have to because we need to draft picks to matter less, we need to take advantage of the window we have that's shortening every year.

[bluethunder0005]

Oh **** this. You really want to start this ****?

We're way worse this year in every department.

Since Vando joined the team the Lakers went from being 6-9 to 9-6. So a 3 game difference in standings.

Beverley just joined the Bulls and they have a 7-3 record since he joined, as compared to the 4-6 record they had the 10 games before he joined. Also a 3 game difference in standings.

Meanwhile with Gobert we've had a record of 27-33. And when he hasnt played we've gone 8-4.

Tell me what top 10 player is so good that the team plays significantly better without him than with him. Luka? Nope. Giannis? Nope. Jokic? No. Durant? No. Leonard? No. Curry? No. Embiid? No. List goes on but even Shai, Tatum, Mitchell all make their team better.

Not to mention we'd still have all of our assets if we still had those guys so we wouldn't feel so screwed at the deadline and could have traded for a player that would have made our team better at a position of need.

We're also going to probably be giving up a lottery pick this year.

We as a fan base wouldn't be so desperate to see wins because we mortgaged any ability to make our team substantially better through trades or draft. In fact, even if we did miss the playoffs this year atleast we'd still have Walker Kessler and this year's pick, along with guys the team loved instead of being forced to trade players to accommodate the fact that our PG hated our C. We wouldn't be forced to trade for an old PG that doesn't fit our timeline just so a guy we paid 40 million dollars for could finally catch a lob.

A lot of us could look forward to tanking and potentially getting Wemby, given that Edwards and KAT are out now. However small a chance that would be. Or even look forward to drafting a good PG.

So yeah had we not made that stupid trade last summer we'd be way better off.

Keep schlobbin on the FOs knob Klomp cause that's what you do best.

You're forgetting something rather significant here...

Last year, the Minnesota 15-man roster had 79 lost games due to injury. Only Patrick Beverley (20) missed more than 12 games
This year, the Minnesota 15-man roster has 174 lost games due to injury already. Towns (51), McLaughlin (37), Prince (24) and Anderson (13) have already missed more than 12 games.

Fine, put Vanderbilt, Beverley and Beasley back on the roster. But you still have Towns missing 51 games. You still have McLaughlin missing games. You still have Prince missing games. You're now relying on Naz Reid as your starting C for 50+ games with no Towns. How are you winning games? Are you a Top 10 defense as we've been most of the season to-date? Unlikely.

This has nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing with the trade. This is a pure numbers game.

Reid and Walker Kessler who might have become our center that we needed.

And it's all fine, we could have missed the playoffs this year, there's no consequences. There's no urgency for us to win or be a top tier team without the trade.

We could have continued to build slowly and find the right superstar to trade for or draft the right PG.

But now with Gobert? We have to because we need to draft picks to matter less, we need to take advantage of the window we have that's shortening every year.

Reid sucks. Beverly sucks this year, Vanderbilt is a 20 minute a night energy player, and Beasley has regressed in shooting for 4 consecutive seasons.

You wanna be upset about trading draft picks and Kessler fine, I'm right there with you, 5 was too much. But this nonsense of Beverly, Beasley, and Vanderbilt are difference makers this year needs to stop. All 3 were negatives on their starting teams this year. Vanderbilt is about as much of a liability as you can be on offense, Beverly is getting old, and I already brought up Beasley's problems. This team would be below Portland in the standings if we had kept those guys. Granted we'd have our pick so we could still hope for a lottery ticket but we'd be trash this year.

[Klomp]

You wanna be upset about trading draft picks and Kessler fine, I'm right there with you, 5 was too much. But this nonsense of Beverly, Beasley, and Vanderbilt are difference makers this year needs to stop. All 3 were negatives on their starting teams this year. Vanderbilt is about as much of a liability as you can be on offense, Beverly is getting old, and I already brought up Beasley's problems. This team would be below Portland in the standings if we had kept those guys. Granted we'd have our pick so we could still hope for a lottery ticket but we'd be trash this year.

You bring something important up.

We sold high.

Now, you can debate that Utah may have sold Gobert high as well, considering what he once was and who he's been for the bulk of the season, but that still doesn't eliminate that we sold those three at arguably their peak trade values. We weren't going to get a better value by holding onto them.

[shrink]

We could have continued to build slowly and find the right superstar to trade for or draft the right PG.

Which “right superstar” is coming to Minnesota? Give us names here.

And you believe that we would have won more games keeping the same players. That means non-lotto draft picks, right?

[Note30]

We could have continued to build slowly and find the right superstar to trade for or draft the right PG.

Which “right superstar” is coming to Minnesota? Give us names here.

And you believe that the players we traded away cost us wins. That means non-lotto draft picks, right?

The Suns were trash four years ago. They now have KD.

Donovan Mitchell went to Cleveland I would rather have him playing point than Rudy.

Stars only want to leave teams when the teams are trash. (i.e. Jimmy Butler).

So as to who? Whoever is available.

[Note30]

You're forgetting something rather significant here...

Last year, the Minnesota 15-man roster had 79 lost games due to injury. Only Patrick Beverley (20) missed more than 12 games
This year, the Minnesota 15-man roster has 174 lost games due to injury already. Towns (51), McLaughlin (37), Prince (24) and Anderson (13) have already missed more than 12 games.

Fine, put Vanderbilt, Beverley and Beasley back on the roster. But you still have Towns missing 51 games. You still have McLaughlin missing games. You still have Prince missing games. You're now relying on Naz Reid as your starting C for 50+ games with no Towns. How are you winning games? Are you a Top 10 defense as we've been most of the season to-date? Unlikely.

This has nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing with the trade. This is a pure numbers game.

Reid and Walker Kessler who might have become our center that we needed.

And it's all fine, we could have missed the playoffs this year, there's no consequences. There's no urgency for us to win or be a top tier team without the trade.

We could have continued to build slowly and find the right superstar to trade for or draft the right PG.

But now with Gobert? We have to because we need to draft picks to matter less, we need to take advantage of the window we have that's shortening every year.

Reid sucks. Beverly sucks this year, Vanderbilt is a 20 minute a night energy player, and Beasley has regressed in shooting for 4 consecutive seasons.

You wanna be upset about trading draft picks and Kessler fine, I'm right there with you, 5 was too much. But this nonsense of Beverly, Beasley, and Vanderbilt are difference makers this year needs to stop. All 3 were negatives on their starting teams this year. Vanderbilt is about as much of a liability as you can be on offense, Beverly is getting old, and I already brought up Beasley's problems. This team would be below Portland in the standings if we had kept those guys. Granted we'd have our pick so we could still hope for a lottery ticket but we'd be trash this year.

I'd rather have Vanderbilt, Kessler, and this year's pick.

And all the other ones.

[Note30]

You wanna be upset about trading draft picks and Kessler fine, I'm right there with you, 5 was too much. But this nonsense of Beverly, Beasley, and Vanderbilt are difference makers this year needs to stop. All 3 were negatives on their starting teams this year. Vanderbilt is about as much of a liability as you can be on offense, Beverly is getting old, and I already brought up Beasley's problems. This team would be below Portland in the standings if we had kept those guys. Granted we'd have our pick so we could still hope for a lottery ticket but we'd be trash this year.

You bring something important up.

We sold high.

Now, you can debate that Utah may have sold Gobert high as well, considering what he once was and who he's been for the bulk of the season, but that still doesn't eliminate that we sold those three at arguably their peak trade values. We weren't going to get a better value by holding onto them.

Maybe not on Bev, but definitely on Vanderbilt - he's going to get better.

[younggunsmn]

You wanna be upset about trading draft picks and Kessler fine, I'm right there with you, 5 was too much. But this nonsense of Beverly, Beasley, and Vanderbilt are difference makers this year needs to stop. All 3 were negatives on their starting teams this year. Vanderbilt is about as much of a liability as you can be on offense, Beverly is getting old, and I already brought up Beasley's problems. This team would be below Portland in the standings if we had kept those guys. Granted we'd have our pick so we could still hope for a lottery ticket but we'd be trash this year.

You bring something important up.

We sold high.

Now, you can debate that Utah may have sold Gobert high as well, considering what he once was and who he's been for the bulk of the season, but that still doesn't eliminate that we sold those three at arguably their peak trade values. We weren't going to get a better value by holding onto them.

Beverly and Vanderbilt held the keys to our culture and we are undoubtedly worse without them.
And Vanderbilt still has tremendous value he's IMHO less of a liability than Gobert on offense because he doesn't require touches and can cut and pass without turning the ball over. He can guard 5 positions at a high hevel and switch everything.
He's had a much better season than you are giving him credit for.
You don't see teams scheming to ISO V8 in crunch time like they do Gobert or exploiting him with shooters.

Keeping Beverly would have also allowed us to trade DLo without necessarily requiring a PG in return, expanding our options.

Beasley is red hot and ice cold with little in between. Still Nowell/NAW have been downgrades.
And he had a very tradeable contract that would have fit into a plethora of potential acquisitions. Brogdon for Beasley/Bolmaro and a protected 1st for instance. It's also the opportunity cost of throwing 3 very useful players/contracts essentially away as salary filler (and a reminder: Vanderbilt did not need to be included to make the salary matching work.)

But keep telling me how the Gobert trade saved our season as we skid towards 11th-13th place.

[Note30]

You wanna be upset about trading draft picks and Kessler fine, I'm right there with you, 5 was too much. But this nonsense of Beverly, Beasley, and Vanderbilt are difference makers this year needs to stop. All 3 were negatives on their starting teams this year. Vanderbilt is about as much of a liability as you can be on offense, Beverly is getting old, and I already brought up Beasley's problems. This team would be below Portland in the standings if we had kept those guys. Granted we'd have our pick so we could still hope for a lottery ticket but we'd be trash this year.

You bring something important up.

We sold high.

Now, you can debate that Utah may have sold Gobert high as well, considering what he once was and who he's been for the bulk of the season, but that still doesn't eliminate that we sold those three at arguably their peak trade values. We weren't going to get a better value by holding onto them.

Beverly and Vanderbilt held the keys to our culture and we are undoubtedly worse without them.
And Vanderbilt still has tremendous value he's IMHO less of a liability than Gobert on offense because he doesn't require touches and can cut and pass without turning the ball over. He can guard 5 positions at a high hevel and switch everything.
He's had a much better season than you are giving him credit for.
You don't see teams scheming to ISO V8 in crunch time like they do Gobert or exploiting him with shooters.

Keeping Beverly would have also allowed us to trade DLo without necessarily requiring a PG in return, expanding our options.

Beasley is red hot and ice cold with little in between. Still Nowell/NAW have been downgrades.
And he had a very tradeable contract that would have fit into a plethora of potential acquisitions. Brogdon for Beasley/Bolmaro and a protected 1st for instance. It's also the opportunity cost of throwing 3 very useful players/contracts essentially away as salary filler (and a reminder: Vanderbilt did not need to be included to make the salary matching work.)

But keep telling me how the Gobert trade saved our season as we skid towards 11th-13th place.

You're not going to get a straight answer. They'll just scream... "but the metrics".

[bluethunder0005]

You wanna be upset about trading draft picks and Kessler fine, I'm right there with you, 5 was too much. But this nonsense of Beverly, Beasley, and Vanderbilt are difference makers this year needs to stop. All 3 were negatives on their starting teams this year. Vanderbilt is about as much of a liability as you can be on offense, Beverly is getting old, and I already brought up Beasley's problems. This team would be below Portland in the standings if we had kept those guys. Granted we'd have our pick so we could still hope for a lottery ticket but we'd be trash this year.

You bring something important up.

We sold high.

Now, you can debate that Utah may have sold Gobert high as well, considering what he once was and who he's been for the bulk of the season, but that still doesn't eliminate that we sold those three at arguably their peak trade values. We weren't going to get a better value by holding onto them.

Beverly and Vanderbilt held the keys to our culture and we are undoubtedly worse without them.
And Vanderbilt still has tremendous value he's IMHO less of a liability than Gobert on offense because he doesn't require touches and can cut and pass without turning the ball over. He can guard 5 positions at a high hevel and switch everything.
He's had a much better season than you are giving him credit for.
You don't see teams scheming to ISO V8 in crunch time like they do Gobert or exploiting him with shooters.

Keeping Beverly would have also allowed us to trade DLo without necessarily requiring a PG in return, expanding our options.

Beasley is red hot and ice cold with little in between. Still Nowell/NAW have been downgrades.
And he had a very tradeable contract that would have fit into a plethora of potential acquisitions. Brogdon for Beasley/Bolmaro and a protected 1st for instance. It's also the opportunity cost of throwing 3 very useful players/contracts essentially away as salary filler (and a reminder: Vanderbilt did not need to be included to make the salary matching work.)

But keep telling me how the Gobert trade saved our season as we skid towards 11th-13th place.

Vanderbilt is less of a liability? Are you kidding me? The only thing on offense he does better than Gobert is shooting a corner 3 and making 1 every other game. His hands were stone last year, he's not a better screener or roller, he even shoots bad in the restricted area. Players don't magically develop an offensive game, if they did Rubio would be an all-star. Vanderbilt is a guy that's a nice thing to have because he does provide high energy for 20 minutes a night but he's not a difference maker. He tries hard and that makes him likable but let's stop pretending he's a good player.

Beverly isn't a PG so that doesn't change anything for us. Beverly is a 6'2 SG who is a good defender.

You're right, Beasley is hot or cold and he's gotten a lot more cold over the years. You think Boston would trade a guy that is a much better defender and shooter than Beasley in exchange for a mediocre pick? I'd love to live in that reality.

Again, be upset about Kessler and the draft picks. I understand that. But let's stop pretending that the other players involved move the needle any. Beasley had a -5.4 on/off value for the Jazz, Vanderbilt had a -3.6, and Beverly was -2.7. All 3 were either starters or played starters minutes and played with players who were mostly positives in on/off.

[Klomp]

Beverly and Vanderbilt held the keys to our culture and we are undoubtedly worse without them.
And Vanderbilt still has tremendous value he's IMHO less of a liability than Gobert on offense because he doesn't require touches and can cut and pass without turning the ball over. He can guard 5 positions at a high hevel and switch everything.
He's had a much better season than you are giving him credit for.
You don't see teams scheming to ISO V8 in crunch time like they do Gobert or exploiting him with shooters.

Keeping Beverly would have also allowed us to trade DLo without necessarily requiring a PG in return, expanding our options.

Beasley is red hot and ice cold with little in between. Still Nowell/NAW have been downgrades.
And he had a very tradeable contract that would have fit into a plethora of potential acquisitions. Brogdon for Beasley/Bolmaro and a protected 1st for instance. It's also the opportunity cost of throwing 3 very useful players/contracts essentially away as salary filler (and a reminder: Vanderbilt did not need to be included to make the salary matching work.)

But keep telling me how the Gobert trade saved our season as we skid towards 11th-13th place.

Vanderbilt hasn't made as much of a difference as you think.

Vanderbilt has played 30+ minutes in just 8 games this season (3 with Lakers); 3-5 record (1-2 with Lakers).

[younggunsmn]

double posted

[younggunsmn]

Beverly and Vanderbilt held the keys to our culture and we are undoubtedly worse without them.
And Vanderbilt still has tremendous value he's IMHO less of a liability than Gobert on offense because he doesn't require touches and can cut and pass without turning the ball over. He can guard 5 positions at a high hevel and switch everything.
He's had a much better season than you are giving him credit for.
You don't see teams scheming to ISO V8 in crunch time like they do Gobert or exploiting him with shooters.

Keeping Beverly would have also allowed us to trade DLo without necessarily requiring a PG in return, expanding our options.

Beasley is red hot and ice cold with little in between. Still Nowell/NAW have been downgrades.
And he had a very tradeable contract that would have fit into a plethora of potential acquisitions. Brogdon for Beasley/Bolmaro and a protected 1st for instance. It's also the opportunity cost of throwing 3 very useful players/contracts essentially away as salary filler (and a reminder: Vanderbilt did not need to be included to make the salary matching work.)

But keep telling me how the Gobert trade saved our season as we skid towards 11th-13th place.

Vanderbilt is less of a liability? Are you kidding me? The only thing on offense he does better than Gobert is shooting a corner 3 and making 1 every other game. His hands were stone last year, he's not a better screener or roller, he even shoots bad in the restricted area. Players don't magically develop an offensive game, if they did Rubio would be an all-star. Vanderbilt is a guy that's a nice thing to have because he does provide high energy for 20 minutes a night but he's not a difference maker. He tries hard and that makes him likable but let's stop pretending he's a good player.

Beverly isn't a PG so that doesn't change anything for us. Beverly is a 6'2 SG who is a good defender.

You're right, Beasley is hot or cold and he's gotten a lot more cold over the years. You think Boston would trade a guy that is a much better defender and shooter than Beasley in exchange for a mediocre pick? I'd love to live in that reality.

Again, be upset about Kessler and the draft picks. I understand that. But let's stop pretending that the other players involved move the needle any. Beasley had a -5.4 on/off value for the Jazz, Vanderbilt had a -3.6, and Beverly was -2.7. All 3 were either starters or played starters minutes and played with players who were mostly positives in on/off.

Vanderbilt doesn't destroy the flow of the offense and erase driving lanes by clogging the paint the way Gobert does.
He doesn't have to play 30+ minutes and score to have a postitve effect on the game. He point blank can lock down the other teams best player and was the lynchpin that held together our low man concept, which Finch had to abandon because Gobert can't play it.

Gobert has been an utter disappointment he doesn't even guard the Jokic and Embiid types for us, can't get to 3 point shooters, and has been pathetic at contesting shots and cutting off drivers on the pick and roll compared to the hype we were sold. Or did you miss the 57 points Julius Randle dropped tonight, gee would have been nice to have a Vanderbilt to try to cool him off. We would have won by 30. He's a more valuable defensive player in the modern game than Gobert.
How quickly some slag on a player we all universally loved last year because it helps them cope with the horrible awful trade we made.

Did you miss the article the other day where the Bulls said Beverly has changed their culture?
And Utah got THT for Beverly who is now their PG and may lead them into the play-in tournament?
Or the article where the Pelicans almost landed Beasley and Vanderbilt at the trade deadline but Utah liked the Lakers lightly protected 1st better than the 1st(s?) that the Pelicans were offering.

We could have traded for Brogdon last summer when INDIANA was shopping him and BOSTON (a conference rival) got him dirt cheap.
But we had already thrown all our assets at Gobert.

These players had value both on the court and on the trade market and we flushed them down the toilet just as badly as the 4 draft picks plus a swap, we are just paying that cost right now and the rest is still to come.

[bluethunder0005]

Beverly and Vanderbilt held the keys to our culture and we are undoubtedly worse without them.
And Vanderbilt still has tremendous value he's IMHO less of a liability than Gobert on offense because he doesn't require touches and can cut and pass without turning the ball over. He can guard 5 positions at a high hevel and switch everything.
He's had a much better season than you are giving him credit for.
You don't see teams scheming to ISO V8 in crunch time like they do Gobert or exploiting him with shooters.

Keeping Beverly would have also allowed us to trade DLo without necessarily requiring a PG in return, expanding our options.

Beasley is red hot and ice cold with little in between. Still Nowell/NAW have been downgrades.
And he had a very tradeable contract that would have fit into a plethora of potential acquisitions. Brogdon for Beasley/Bolmaro and a protected 1st for instance. It's also the opportunity cost of throwing 3 very useful players/contracts essentially away as salary filler (and a reminder: Vanderbilt did not need to be included to make the salary matching work.)

But keep telling me how the Gobert trade saved our season as we skid towards 11th-13th place.

Vanderbilt is less of a liability? Are you kidding me? The only thing on offense he does better than Gobert is shooting a corner 3 and making 1 every other game. His hands were stone last year, he's not a better screener or roller, he even shoots bad in the restricted area. Players don't magically develop an offensive game, if they did Rubio would be an all-star. Vanderbilt is a guy that's a nice thing to have because he does provide high energy for 20 minutes a night but he's not a difference maker. He tries hard and that makes him likable but let's stop pretending he's a good player.

Beverly isn't a PG so that doesn't change anything for us. Beverly is a 6'2 SG who is a good defender.

You're right, Beasley is hot or cold and he's gotten a lot more cold over the years. You think Boston would trade a guy that is a much better defender and shooter than Beasley in exchange for a mediocre pick? I'd love to live in that reality.

Again, be upset about Kessler and the draft picks. I understand that. But let's stop pretending that the other players involved move the needle any. Beasley had a -5.4 on/off value for the Jazz, Vanderbilt had a -3.6, and Beverly was -2.7. All 3 were either starters or played starters minutes and played with players who were mostly positives in on/off.

Vanderbilt doesn't destroy the flow of the offense and erase driving lanes by clogging the paint the way Gobert does.
He doesn't have to play 30+ minutes and score to have a postitve effect on the game. He point blank can lock down the other teams best player and was the lynchpin that held together our low man concept, which Finch had to abandon because Gobert can't play it.

Gobert has been an utter disappointment he doesn't even guard the Jokic and Embiid types for us, can't get to 3 point shooters, and has been pathetic at contesting shots and cutting off drivers on the pick and roll compared to the hype we were sold. Or did you miss the 57 points Julius Randle dropped tonight, gee would have been nice to have a Vanderbilt to try to cool him off. We would have won by 30.
How quickly some slag on a player we all universally loved last year because it helps them cope with the horrible awful trade we made.

Did you miss the article the other day where the Bulls said Beverly has changed their culture?
And Utah got THT for Beverly who is now their PG and may lead them into the play-in tournament?
Or the article where the Pelicans almost landed Beasley and Vanderbilt at the trade deadline but Utah liked the Lakers lightly protected 1st better than the 1st(s?) that the Pelicans were offering.

We could have traded for Brogdon when INDIANA was shopping him and BOSTON (a conference rival) got him dirt cheap.

These players had value both on the court and on the trade market and we flushed them down the toilet just as badly as the 4 draft picks plus a swap, we are just paying that cost right now and the rest is still to come.

Vanderbilt destroys an offense just by his presence. Gobert for all his faults is at least a threat when rolling to the basket. Vanderbilt only scores points if the guy guarding him falls asleep. Does everyone forget why we lost to the Grizzlies last year? One of the biggest reasons was getting killed on the boards, but we couldn't play Vanderbilt because he's literally a 0 on offense, he's as good as playing 4 v 5 out there and he's not a good enough defender to make up for it. I'm not sure where you think Vanderbilt is some lock down defender, he's not even better as an on ball or off ball defender as Jaden is. Vanderbilt is an energy player only.

I don't care about what the Bulls article said. Beverly was literally in the perfect spot for him in LA and the Lakers tossed him away without a 2nd thought because he had played so poorly they didn't even care what they got for him, they used Bamba as a blowout player, they didn't trade him to address a need. They sent him away because he was bad.

I understand that you and several others grew attached to one of the only decent teams we've had in the last two decades but take off the rose colored glasses. Beverly is a mentor and defender and that's it, Beasley is a regressing floor stretcher and that's it, and Vanderbilt (who I still like) is an energy player who is good for 20 minutes a night where he gets a couple points, hustles, is a capable switching defender, and solid rebounder but you can't play him more than that. He's literally invisible out there on offense.

[younggunsmn]

If a player doesn't score points they are useless to you, i get it. 55% shooting on low volume plus 20 minutes a night of high energy defense and rebounding on a bargain contract would be a godsend to this team. Plus he was supposedly one of Ant's best friends on the team.

We have to spend the whole night running plays for Gobert and making turnovers trying to feed him just to get him points.
It sucks up all the offensive oxygen and sucks the life out of the offense much more than a player like Vanderbilt.

Lebron goes through teammates quicker than a Kardashian goes through clothes. This is known.
Lakers also gave a 2nd for Bamba and gave up a better player in Bryant to make room for him in the rotation.
They just apparently didn't realize he is also a complete moron.
This is just the dumb stuff that happens to your team when Lebron is your shadow GM.

This team has already lost 2 more games than it did all of last year in a conference that is suddenly as mediocre as it has been in 20+ years. Chemistry matters and we blew ours up.
We lost to Memphis primarily because KAT was horrible for most of the series and DLO was horrible for ALL of it,
and we got horribly outrebounded because Finch went super small and played McDaniels at the 4 a lot, and D-Lo, who was hidden on a 3 or 4 the whole series, absolutely did not even try when it came to rebounding.

Did we trade D-Lo? No. We blew our team up and mortgaged the future instead.

Am I attached to that team? No I was willing to trade anyone outside of Ant if I felt it made us better, not just now but in the years to come too.
I want us IN the playoffs every year like in the KG era.
That horrible awful trade made that less likely over the long term and if you need to slag on guys we used to cheer for to cope with what is already one of the 5 worst trades of all time, that is your prerogative.

Adding a single player, even one as talented as Durant, is no guarantee to put you in the finals or even to win a playoff series.
Teams that make the finals always have high team chemistry, and our winning chemistry was sacrificed in the Gobert trade when we could have built upon it with a smaller more targeted move like replacing D-Lo with a headier veteran like I wanted to this summer and Connelly finally pulled the trigger on at the deadline.

[minimus]

Vanderbilt is less of a liability? Are you kidding me? The only thing on offense he does better than Gobert is shooting a corner 3 and making 1 every other game. His hands were stone last year, he's not a better screener or roller, he even shoots bad in the restricted area. Players don't magically develop an offensive game, if they did Rubio would be an all-star. Vanderbilt is a guy that's a nice thing to have because he does provide high energy for 20 minutes a night but he's not a difference maker. He tries hard and that makes him likable but let's stop pretending he's a good player.

Beverly isn't a PG so that doesn't change anything for us. Beverly is a 6'2 SG who is a good defender.

You're right, Beasley is hot or cold and he's gotten a lot more cold over the years. You think Boston would trade a guy that is a much better defender and shooter than Beasley in exchange for a mediocre pick? I'd love to live in that reality.

Again, be upset about Kessler and the draft picks. I understand that. But let's stop pretending that the other players involved move the needle any. Beasley had a -5.4 on/off value for the Jazz, Vanderbilt had a -3.6, and Beverly was -2.7. All 3 were either starters or played starters minutes and played with players who were mostly positives in on/off.

Vanderbilt doesn't destroy the flow of the offense and erase driving lanes by clogging the paint the way Gobert does.

Vanderbilt destroys an offense just by his presence.

Well... If I remember correctly LAC were first who put comboforward (Batum) on Towns and let big bodied С (Zubac) completely destroy slashing game of Edwards and Towns. There was playoff series against MEM where Vando did not have much impact. I love Vando but lets be honest he is all effort, but little skills, his biggest strength right now is his contract.

[frankenwolf]

I want us IN the playoffs every year like in the KG era.

So, in every year and, with the exception of one, exit after barely making a splash. Nope, I want to be competitive and have a chance to make the WCF & the NBA finals. That is what the Gobert trade was about - addressing the weaknesses on display in the Memphis series and getting to the finals.

KAT has not played in 52 games. Do you really think we would have this record if KAT had been available for even 1/2 of those games?? If so, you are far more negative than I give you credit for. I would guarantee that at this point in the season, the Timberwolves would be in the top four or five based on what else has happened this year with KAT playing 50 games instead of 21.

[TimberKat]

I want us IN the playoffs every year like in the KG era.

So, in every year and, with the exception of one, exit after barely making a splash. Nope, I want to be competitive and have a chance to make the WCF & the NBA finals. That is what the Gobert trade was about - addressing the weaknesses on display in the Memphis series and getting to the finals.

KAT has not played in 52 games. Do you really think we would have this record if KAT had been available for even 1/2 of those games?? If so, you are far more negative than I give you credit for. I would guarantee that at this point in the season, the Timberwolves would be in the top four or five based on what else has happened this year with KAT playing 50 games instead of 21.

If Towns was only out 15 games. I can see we win 4 more games and that would put us in 4th place right now. So, how does that change the perspective of the Gobert trade? Can one say it works out better than KD or Kyrie trade?

[frankenwolf]

I want us IN the playoffs every year like in the KG era.

So, in every year and, with the exception of one, exit after barely making a splash. Nope, I want to be competitive and have a chance to make the WCF & the NBA finals. That is what the Gobert trade was about - addressing the weaknesses on display in the Memphis series and getting to the finals.

KAT has not played in 52 games. Do you really think we would have this record if KAT had been available for even 1/2 of those games?? If so, you are far more negative than I give you credit for. I would guarantee that at this point in the season, the Timberwolves would be in the top four or five based on what else has happened this year with KAT playing 50 games instead of 21.

If Towns was only out 15 games. I can see we win 4 more games and that would put us in 4th place right now. So, how does that change the perspective of the Gobert trade? Can one say it works out better than KD or Kyrie trade?

At this point, I would say it's better than either. KD's only played three games with his new team and the Mav's are not gaining any ground since Kyrie has joined. That is only my humble opinion.

[younggunsmn]

I want us IN the playoffs every year like in the KG era.

So, in every year and, with the exception of one, exit after barely making a splash. Nope, I want to be competitive and have a chance to make the WCF & the NBA finals. That is what the Gobert trade was about - addressing the weaknesses on display in the Memphis series and getting to the finals.

KAT has not played in 52 games. Do you really think we would have this record if KAT had been available for even 1/2 of those games?? If so, you are far more negative than I give you credit for. I would guarantee that at this point in the season, the Timberwolves would be in the top four or five based on what else has happened this year with KAT playing 50 games instead of 21.

With Gobert or with Kessler/Beverly/Beasley/Vanderbilt, I think we would have the same or similar record, with or without KAT's injury.
Had we not made the trade and been able to upgrade D-Lo with Conley or Brogdon in the summer, IMHO we would be battling for the 2 or 3 seed right now with memphis and sacto/phx.