TimConnelly's model VS coach Finch's model

[Danimals]

Finch is the best coach in Wolves history. I’d also call him a good, but not great coach. He could still develop into a great coach.

He’s known as an offensive genius, he has consistently produced more on the defensive side of the ball. He has some weaknesses: teams are consistently low energy against weak competition, questionable in game adjustments, lack of structure, and I don’t think he’s done enough to adapt his preferred style of offense to his stats strengths. He’s also got clear strengths: he builds great team culture, has developed many players (Ant,Jaden, Naz, NAW), makes great season long adjustments, and has produced with wildly different rosters.

[Slim Tubby]

As long as this thread is getting out of hand..

If I had to guess shrink quite left leaning, and w4l is quite right leaning on the political spectrum.

Politically, I'm a Moderate so everybody on both sides gets their chance to hate on me.

Wouldn't have it any other way.

Sent from my G54 using RealGM mobile app

[winforlose]

As long as this thread is getting out of hand..

If I had to guess shrink quite left leaning, and w4l is quite right leaning on the political spectrum.

Funny you should say that as I am life long liberal. I am not a progressive, but I have leaned toward plenty of entitlement reforms that would eliminate waste to instead achieve goals like a minimum free health care and universal income for people who grow up poor. I am left leaning on personal liberty. I believe that people should be free to love who they love, dress how they want to dress, ect… The one caveat is that I do understand that personal liberty does overlap with the rights of others, and this creates a grey area where people need to figure out how not to trample each other.

[winforlose]

I also will point out that I gave a concreate example of most personal growth occurring during the offseason (Ant learning to shoot 3s at a high clip.) You could argue Finch letting Ant shoot those 3s is a good job by him. Except that he doesn’t make that call, because the organized chaos and hero mode mentality do.

That was actually a big sticking point for the coaching staff up until Ant made the leap. So yes, I would give Finch some of the credit for that. Obviously Ant had to put in the work, but the coaching staff was pushing him to focus less on midrange and more on 3-pointers for years.

Thank you for stating a position. I think there is an interesting point here. On the one hand Ant developed the skills away from the team, but Finch may have given him at least some direction on what to focus on. It is a tough needle to thread because all young players who succeed in the NBA should be on an upward trajectory which usually peaks during their prime. Then most tend to decline following that peak (obviously at different rates, and with injury playing a major factor,) until the inevitable decline gets to great to continue. For me the test tends to be that the individual leaps between seasons belong to the players, but the improvement within the function of the teams offense and defense belongs to the team (including the coach.) For example, Jaden learning to pass to Rudy better is more of a team and scheme improvement. Jaden hitting a higher percentage of his 3s is more of Jaden accomplishment. But I do agree it is interesting conversation with variables.

[nolian]

I don't see Finch's fault in every thing like it appears in some posts here

I was talking about his inability to develope rookies
in more than five years there no one rookie that had a real chance to emerge

He give some chances to other young players, some that were here before him, some other arrived by trades

***

at this moment, we don't have a playmaker except of Conley, we read about Finch said

I thought it was time to try something different

Are there someone think Dillingham had a real chance to emerge as our PG?
What is talking about (Finch)? "try somithing different" from what? Different from what? 5-8 minutes per game?

[BlacJacMac]

I don't see Finch's fault in every thing like it appears in some posts here

I was talking about his inability to develope rookies
in more than five years there no one rookie that had a real chance to emerge

He give some chances to other young players, some that were here before him, some other arrived by trades

***

at this moment, we don't have a playmaker except of Conley, we read about Finch said

I thought it was time to try something different

Are there someone think Dillingham had a real chance to emerge as our PG?
What is talking about (Finch)? "try somithing different" from what? Different from what? 5-8 minutes per game?

Again, he coached Ant and Jaden for over half their rookie years.

[gandlogo]

I'm not sure this is the thread to put this, but it's the internet and opinion's are like a$$holes, so here I go. I am ambivalent about Finch. Like any coach, there are things he does that I agree with, and other things that I just shake my head at. But that's also life in general. Probably the biggest issue I have is second guessing coaches regarding playing time. I've coached a long time. I currently am on staff of a high school football team (and I'm fortunate to work with all of our players from middle school on). Football is just different in the South. It is cutthroat competitive. Our staff is right around 15 coaches, all of us having played D1 or D2. Many having played for Holtz, Spurrier, or Dabo - so some dang historic college football coaches. And many also coached collegiately before joining the high school ranks. As you can imagine, the coaches are uber competitive individuals. Our school is new having played only four seasons in it's history. The first year at the varsity level we only had sophomores and freshmen on the team - and the results were predictable. We not only were we 0-10, we were blown off the field every week. We started a freshman at QB because we had no choice. The following year, we again started a freshman at QB, but because he was a better option to help us win games - and we did win three games. Year three we made the playoffs. Year four we hosted a playoff game. We had seven make all-region this season - only one was a senior (one freshman, two sophs, three juniors). We play in the second highest division in the state based on school size, and will likely move up for next year. A brief history or a brief program and the type of coaches I am around nearly year around. I think it's relevant because of the experience level of the coaches and the fact that our program has gone through a condensed maturation process, but still is focused on results.

My assumption is that our staff evaluates and develop players similar to most programs looking to win ball games. The best guys play. Period. Players are constantly evaluated in everything they do - individual work, group, team. Practice and game film is part of that as well. We put them in as many different situations as possible and always require them to compete in everything they do. Every drill. Every snap. Every second of conditioning. Iron sharpens iron. We know what they are capable of - and we know what they are willing to do (most often the bigger limitation). Each player earns their opportunities in practice and keeps playing based on performance; bench players are never put into a game to "develop" and only play in extreme emergencies or it is garbage time. Depth charts are simple - best players play. Being the second best DT doesn't mean you go into the game when a DT does down. Our next best player might be an OLB. He goes in, the OLB goes to DE, and then the DE goes to DT. Did I mention that the best players play? Position coaches collaborate with the coordinators and the personnel decisions are made there. The head coach has almost zero impact on the depth chart or in-game personnel adjustments.

When I apply that approach to the Wolves with younger players I have no problem with Shifty and Joan not playing. If they cannot positively impact the game, they shouldn't see a single minute when the game is in doubt. The difference between wins and losses is too close in the NBA. A one-minute run can turn a game. And I have no problem with neither spending any time in Iowa. Working against significantly weaker competition isn't the answer. Having the coaching staff in their ears every single day and competing against a playoff caliber roster every day is far more important. Further, our expectations are players develop in the off season and teams develop during the season. It is on the individual's shoulders to do whatever it takes to develop his body and his game so he can compete and earn playing time when the team is back together. Coaches are hired to win games (especially in college and pros). They play the players they believe will help them win the most games. Although basketball is different than football, I believe that Finch's assistants have a great deal of sway with him because all good head coaches listen to their lieutenants. Players aren't sat because coaches have a bias against them, the coaches simply view the players as not ready. Just one old guy's opinion (but it's identical to every coach I work with).

[jscott]

I don't see Finch's fault in every thing like it appears in some posts here

I was talking about his inability to develope rookies
in more than five years there no one rookie that had a real chance to emerge

He give some chances to other young players, some that were here before him, some other arrived by trades

***

at this moment, we don't have a playmaker except of Conley, we read about Finch said

I thought it was time to try something different

Are there someone think Dillingham had a real chance to emerge as our PG?
What is talking about (Finch)? "try somithing different" from what? Different from what? 5-8 minutes per game?

Ant, Jaden, Clark (basically a rookie since he was rehabbing a torn ACL), TSJ….

[BlacJacMac]

I'm not sure this is the thread to put this, but it's the internet and opinion's are like a$$holes, so here I go. I am ambivalent about Finch. Like any coach, there are things he does that I agree with, and other things that I just shake my head at. But that's also life in general. Probably the biggest issue I have is second guessing coaches regarding playing time. I've coached a long time. I currently am on staff of a high school football team (and I'm fortunate to work with all of our players from middle school on). Football is just different in the South. It is cutthroat competitive. Our staff is right around 15 coaches, all of us having played D1 or D2. Many having played for Holtz, Spurrier, or Dabo - so some dang historic college football coaches. And many also coached collegiately before joining the high school ranks. As you can imagine, the coaches are uber competitive individuals. Our school is new having played only four seasons in it's history. The first year at the varsity level we only had sophomores and freshmen on the team - and the results were predictable. We not only were we 0-10, we were blown off the field every week. We started a freshman at QB because we had no choice. The following year, we again started a freshman at QB, but because he was a better option to help us win games - and we did win three games. Year three we made the playoffs. Year four we hosted a playoff game. We had seven make all-region this season - only one was a senior (one freshman, two sophs, three juniors). We play in the second highest division in the state based on school size, and will likely move up for next year. A brief history or a brief program and the type of coaches I am around nearly year around. I think it's relevant because of the experience level of the coaches and the fact that our program has gone through a condensed maturation process, but still is focused on results.

My assumption is that our staff evaluates and develop players similar to most programs looking to win ball games. The best guys play. Period. Players are constantly evaluated in everything they do - individual work, group, team. Practice and game film is part of that as well. We put them in as many different situations as possible and always require them to compete in everything they do. Every drill. Every snap. Every second of conditioning. Iron sharpens iron. We know what they are capable of - and we know what they are willing to do (most often the bigger limitation). Each player earns their opportunities in practice and keeps playing based on performance; bench players are never put into a game to "develop" and only play in extreme emergencies or it is garbage time. Depth charts are simple - best players play. Being the second best DT doesn't mean you go into the game when a DT does down. Our next best player might be an OLB. He goes in, the OLB goes to DE, and then the DE goes to DT. Did I mention that the best players play? Position coaches collaborate with the coordinators and the personnel decisions are made there. The head coach has almost zero impact on the depth chart or in-game personnel adjustments.

When I apply that approach to the Wolves with younger players I have no problem with Shifty and Joan not playing. If they cannot positively impact the game, they shouldn't see a single minute when the game is in doubt. The difference between wins and losses is too close in the NBA. A one-minute run can turn a game. And I have no problem with neither spending any time in Iowa. Working against significantly weaker competition isn't the answer. Having the coaching staff in their ears every single day and competing against a playoff caliber roster every day is far more important. Further, our expectations are players develop in the off season and teams develop during the season. It is on the individual's shoulders to do whatever it takes to develop his body and his game so he can compete and earn playing time when the team is back together. Coaches are hired to win games (especially in college and pros). They play the players they believe will help them win the most games. Although basketball is different than football, I believe that Finch's assistants have a great deal of sway with him because all good head coaches listen to their lieutenants. Players aren't sat because coaches have a bias against them, the coaches simply view the players as not ready. Just one old guy's opinion (but it's identical to every coach I work with).

This is outstanding. Thank you!

[Klomp]

Another example is Jaden has taken a major offensive step in year 5, but I contend he could have much sooner if he was given a coach who encouraged his offense to develop instead of parking him in a corner and demanding he only shoot 3s. Jaden still does not shoot enough even after having proven he has 3rd option potential on very efficient shooting. I would argue that Finch got in on the ground floor and had a direct negative effect on the pace of development of both Ant and Jaden. Likewise he played a big role in holdback the development of Josh Minott, who is proving rotation worthy for Boston.

Sometimes, developing a complete offensive game takes time. Showing 3rd option potential in spurts is nice, but consistency is a big key for NBA coaches. And that's something this entire roster has always struggled with. There's a volatility that has come with having Anthony Edwards as your star, at least to this point.

[gandlogo]

This, plus Ant and Jaden were drafted in 2020 and Finch was hired in February 22, 2021. Finch took over literally during Ant and Jaden’s rookie season. That being true, how much credit does Finch get for Ant developing a 3 point shoot or improving his turnaround game during the offseason? Also how much blame does Finch get for Ant going hero mode and losing games by halting ball movement? Another example is Jaden has taken a major offensive step in year 5, but I contend he could have much sooner if he was given a coach who encouraged his offense to develop instead of parking him in a corner and demanding he only shoot 3s. Jaden still does not shoot enough even after having proven he has 3rd option potential on very efficient shooting. I would argue that Finch got in on the ground floor and had a direct negative effect on the pace of development of both Ant and Jaden. Likewise he played a big role in holdback the development of Josh Minott, who is proving rotation worthy for Boston.

Sometimes, developing a complete offensive game takes time. Showing 3rd option potential in spurts is nice, but consistency is a big key for NBA coaches. And that's something this entire roster has always struggled with. There's a volatility that has come with having Anthony Edwards as your star, at least to this point.

I also believe that most teams have shot hierarchy and that can hide a player's actual offensive prowess that are lower in that hierarchy. Ant and Julius are going to take a lot of shots every game they play. It's also why I don't believe in the hot hand thingy.

[BlacJacMac]

This, plus Ant and Jaden were drafted in 2020 and Finch was hired in February 22, 2021. Finch took over literally during Ant and Jaden’s rookie season. That being true, how much credit does Finch get for Ant developing a 3 point shoot or improving his turnaround game during the offseason? Also how much blame does Finch get for Ant going hero mode and losing games by halting ball movement? Another example is Jaden has taken a major offensive step in year 5, but I contend he could have much sooner if he was given a coach who encouraged his offense to develop instead of parking him in a corner and demanding he only shoot 3s. Jaden still does not shoot enough even after having proven he has 3rd option potential on very efficient shooting. I would argue that Finch got in on the ground floor and had a direct negative effect on the pace of development of both Ant and Jaden. Likewise he played a big role in holdback the development of Josh Minott, who is proving rotation worthy for Boston.

Sometimes, developing a complete offensive game takes time. Showing 3rd option potential in spurts is nice, but consistency is a big key for NBA coaches. And that's something this entire roster has always struggled with. There's a volatility that has come with having Anthony Edwards as your star, at least to this point.

I also believe that most teams have shot hierarchy and that can hide a player's actual offensive prowess that are lower in that hierarchy. Ant and Julius are going to take a lot of shots every game they play. It's also why I don't believe in the hot hand thingy.

There is also a mentality to being a scorer that is not natural to every player.

Even in college, Jaden only averaged 10 FGA. This year, its not a huge jump, but he's averaging the most FGAs and FTAs of his career.

Part of that might be from being more aggressive, but part of it is how much he's worked on his game. His handle is noticeably better, as is his decision making. He's attacking closeouts so much better than he ever has. That's also likely the reason that he's not "parked in the corner" as much as in years past. Because he's more capable than he used to be.

[winforlose]

Sometimes, developing a complete offensive game takes time. Showing 3rd option potential in spurts is nice, but consistency is a big key for NBA coaches. And that's something this entire roster has always struggled with. There's a volatility that has come with having Anthony Edwards as your star, at least to this point.

I also believe that most teams have shot hierarchy and that can hide a player's actual offensive prowess that are lower in that hierarchy. Ant and Julius are going to take a lot of shots every game they play. It's also why I don't believe in the hot hand thingy.

There is also a mentality to being a scorer that is not natural to every player.

Even in college, Jaden only averaged 10 FGA. This year, its not a huge jump, but he's averaging the most FGAs and FTAs of his career.

Part of that might be from being more aggressive, but part of it is how much he's worked on his game. His handle is noticeably better, as is his decision making. He's attacking closeouts so much better than he ever has. That's also likely the reason that he's not "parked in the corner" as much as in years past. Because he's more capable than he used to be.

Just gonna respond to all of the above here. I do think some of it is evolution of his game over time, (he is getting pretty close to the age most people start their prime,) but some of it is the scheme or lack there of. When everything is chaotic roles get murky and players get lost in the shuffle. If Jaden is not assertive or not high priority then all the more reason the coach needs to stand and up and say shoot more. This was the problem with Bjelly back in the day. KMart was also a high impact 3 point shooter who didn’t want to shoot enough. Part of the process of developing young players is helping them find consistency and guiding them to unlock their potential. I still think poor coaching is hurting both Jaden and the Wolves offense because I think Jaden at 15-17 FGA per game is probably an all star. That extra attention he would command from the defense could loosen things up for his teammates. Jaden is also proving he has a playmaking layer to him. I cannot remember who said his usage is about 18% (I think that was the number, it might between 15-18,) and he is elite within that usage range. Finding ways to get Jaden from the low to mid teens PPG to the low to mid twenties would be massive for this team.

[gandlogo]

There is also a mentality to being a scorer that is not natural to every player.

Not to turn this into the Jaden thread, but this is a great point.

[shrink]

There is also a mentality to being a scorer that is not natural to every player.

Not to turn this into the Jaden thread, but this is a great point.

I remember Jaden getting asked if he would rather score, or prevent his opponent from scoring, and he instantly chose defense. That is such a rare commodity for an NBA player, and a reminder that players are human beings. Regardless of the coach, Jaden’s mindset prioritizes defense, and we’ve made good use of that.

[Klomp]

Few times we talked about TC model in Denver, where he has renovated with rookies, but that model appear doesn't work in Minnesota under coach finch

I do think there are a lot of similarities between Denver and Minnesota, but I actually see that as a positive while others want to dwell on these characteristics as a negative.

Fairly quickly, a young core was identified. In Denver, that was Jokic, Murray, and Porter. In Minnesota, that's Edwards, McDaniels and Reid. Everything is built around these trios. In Denver, Connelly brought in a veteran like Paul Millsap to help the youngsters level up. In Minnesota, he brought in Rudy Gobert. In Denver, he made a big trade to add Aaron Gordon as a complementary piece to the core three. In Minnesota, I believe that was the Randle trade (though it could also be one to come).

Other than that, there wasn't a ton of turnover year over year in Denver. It took a while for young picks to break into the rotation, as early picks were stabs at upside. That's why his first round hit rate isn't that great. Guys maybe showed flashes for a week or a month, but the bankable consistency was absent. Second round picks were value plays on international, injured, or raw prospects. These hit more often than the first round, even though most really were never core pieces. They supported the core though.