A real #2

[frankenwolf]

That is my thinking too. Jaden is a proven 3rd man on a championship roster - an amazing fit if roster has legit #1 (Wolves do in Edwards) and legit #2. The legit #2 is missing. Randle and Reid combine to be close. Randle however isn’t a longterm solution and his ideal fit with Edwards as ideal #2 should be in question (and is). So….

If we are talking roster construction, how do Wolves get that upgraded player? Leverage the remaining assets for legit #2.

But I think too many here think legit and perfect #2 is sitting somewhere on another NBA roster obvious and ready to be traded for by Wolves. I don’t think the trade has presented itself - yet. I also think the player Wolves go all-in for may not appear perfect or even ideal in said player’s current situation. Said player in Wolves price point will be acquired in faith (warts and all). Faith being = not perfect or ideal now, once on roster and assimilated will mold into the better (to much much better) roster construction once it plays out.

Which means, Wolves will have better roster construction AND organic development of young players to finally push through ceiling of being a WCF loser and become a legit championship contender (even in the gauntlet which is the west).

Quoted from Wolveswin in the Jaden thread and I didn't want to derail that topic thread, so who is a perfect #2? I think we have our number two sitting on the roster right now, we just need more development time/expand his duties.

Let's explore who would be the perfect #2 for Ant

[Wolveswin]

This is a tasters choice thread.

I throw out a name, everyone who disagrees shoots holes in said player. Those who agree talk up how good player might be for Wolves.

Also a thread that tests bias on Wolves trade value of tradeable assets. Someone will undoubtedly name a player that would be amazing #2 for Wolves but way out of realistic price point for Wolves.

Should be entertaining…

[jpatrick]

If we’re dreaming, a big wing/combo forward that can really defend and pass, be the #1 when Ant is on the bench, and shoot well enough to space the floor. So, Scottie Pippen. In modern times, Jalen Williams.

I also loved watching him with Halliburton on Team USA, but I think that big defensive forward/wing archetype has more value in the modern NBA as a #2.

Who can we get realistically? I have no idea. I’ve wondered if Lauri Markennen would be a better fit. Really spaces the floor for Ant, which we need if we’ll have a non-shooting center (Beringer/Gobert). And has shown, especially a couple years ago and even during international basketball, he can score one on one.

[frankenwolf]

If we’re dreaming, a big wing/combo forward that can really defend and pass, be the #1 when Ant is on the bench, and shoot well enough to space the floor. So, Scottie Pippen. In modern times, Jalen Williams.

I also loved watching him with Halliburton on Team USA, but I think that big defensive forward/wing archetype has more value in the modern NBA as a #2.

Who can we get realistically? I have no idea. I’ve wondered if Lauri Markennen would be a better fit. Really spaces the floor for Ant, which we need if we’ll have a non-shooting center (Beringer/Gobert). And has shown, especially a couple years ago and even during international basketball, he can score one on one.

Based on the bolded/underlined section, could Jaden "become" Scotty to Ant's MJ? I think he has all the tools, but maybe there should be more effort put into integrating Jaden into the offense ( I know, someone has been hollering for this for a couple of years)

I also think that Joan will be more offensive minded and more of a threat than Gobert.

[Biff Cooper]

Please define what a #2 is and why we need one. I don't get it and I think everyone has a different notion of what is being talked about. Do #1s and #2s only matter in isolation offense? What if we are running our normal offense - do #1s and #2s still matter? If it only matters in isolation offense, how often exactly should we be running isolation offense? Do #1s and #2s matter on defense or is it just offense?

I see a team that should be playing fast as much as possible, should be running a normal half-court offense most of the rest of the time, and should only be playing isolation offense at end of clock situations or if a hugely advantageous matchup means easy points. In a normal halfcourt offense, the offense should be run until one of the guys gets an advantage, and then they take a shot or make a play. It doesn't matter what number they are. They owe it to their teammates to go when they get an advantage.

Our #1 isn't even consistently good at isolation ball or isolation playmaking. So does that mean you want a real #2 who is really a real #1?

[frankenwolf]

Please define what a #2 is and why we need one. I don't get it and I think everyone has a different notion of what is being talked about. Do #1s and #2s only matter in isolation offense? What if we are running our normal offense - do #1s and #2s still matter? If it only matters in isolation offense, how often exactly should we be running isolation offense? Do #1s and #2s matter on defense or is it just offense?

I see a team that should be playing fast as much as possible, should be running a normal half-court offense most of the rest of the time, and should only be playing isolation offense at end of clock situations or if a hugely advantageous matchup means easy points. In a normal halfcourt offense, the offense should be run until one of the guys gets an advantage, and then they take a shot or make a play. It doesn't matter what number they are. They owe it to their teammates to go when they get an advantage.

Our #1 isn't even consistently good at isolation ball or isolation playmaking. So does that mean you want a real #2 who is really a real #1?

My understanding is someone who can:

1) Take the heat off of Ant
2) take the ball to the hole and make the correct play
3) can guard anyone from SGA to Joel Embiid
4) Defers to Ant at all times, unless he needs to take the game because Ant is having a bad night
5) Is an all-nba player that doesn't get the recognition he deserves
6) Scotty Pippen

Yes, I'm being slightly sarcastic here, but I feel exactly like that list is what people are wanting. Who fits that bill??

[KGdaBom]

Please define what a #2 is and why we need one. I don't get it and I think everyone has a different notion of what is being talked about. Do #1s and #2s only matter in isolation offense? What if we are running our normal offense - do #1s and #2s still matter? If it only matters in isolation offense, how often exactly should we be running isolation offense? Do #1s and #2s matter on defense or is it just offense?

I see a team that should be playing fast as much as possible, should be running a normal half-court offense most of the rest of the time, and should only be playing isolation offense at end of clock situations or if a hugely advantageous matchup means easy points. In a normal halfcourt offense, the offense should be run until one of the guys gets an advantage, and then they take a shot or make a play. It doesn't matter what number they are. They owe it to their teammates to go when they get an advantage.

Our #1 isn't even consistently good at isolation ball or isolation playmaking. So does that mean you want a real #2 who is really a real #1?

Good question. Based on 30 teams the average #2 will be the 45th best player in the NBA. I say both Randle and Jaden are top 40 maybe even top 30 players in the league. However when discussing #1s and 2s as Batman and Robin people seem to think the Batman has to be a top 5 player and the Robin needs to be top 10. It's not very realistic for us to get that Kind of Robin without gutting our team. That's why I've been in favor of letting the team we have grow together and seeing what they can do.

[Klomp]

No one can be #2, it's retired.

[Klomp]

It might just be that they are building the roster to have a bunch of guys who can step up to be the #2 on any given night. This is an option that helps maximize roster and salary cap flexibility to the fullest extent.

[KGdaBom]

No one can be #2, it's retired.

RIP Malik. Drunk idiot driving the wrong way on the freeway.

[KGdaBom]

It might just be that they are building the roster to have a bunch of guys who can step up to be the #2 on any given night. This is an option that helps maximize roster and salary cap flexibility to the fullest extent.

Based on averages we have two players IMO that are #2 worthy.

[Wolveswin]

My realistic choice is LaMelo Ball. Hold those stones…

He is not perfect. Which makes him in Wolves price range. Hornets will need to stumble - again - and Ball remain healthy (big if) while Randle becomes available in trade.

LaMelo will not be asked to be same Melo he is today on bad Hornets team. He will join a team with a 1A in Edwards, championship ready team, who needs him to continue to score - but more efficiently as 2A - need him to pass more - already elite - and play more team defense - huge weakness.

If defense is Ball’s weakness (a reason why in Wolves price point) Wolves are home for him. Ball has never played with a Gobert at the rim or a McDaniels in the lineup or a Edwards leading/pushing Ball to be better on D.

Some positives, Ball is perfect age (same as Edwards) and core fitting and just before prime (like Edwards). If Ball and Edwards can prove ideal fit…Wolves could have one of the best backcourts in NBA for 10+ years. Ball can play at least 3 positions well. This would allow for major lineup flexibility in support of Edwards and what is best for Edwards long term.

Gobert
Reid
McDaniels
Edwards
Ball

[Klomp]

My realistic choice is LaMelo Ball. Hold those stones…

He is not perfect. Which makes him in Wolves price range. Hornets will need to stumble - again - and Ball remain healthy (big if) while Randle becomes available in trade.

LaMelo will not be asked to be same Melo he is today on bad Hornets team. He will join a team with a 1A in Edwards, championship ready team, who needs him to continue to score - but more efficiently as 2A - need him to pass more - already elite - and play more team defense - huge weakness.

If defense is Ball’s weakness (a reason why in Wolves price point) Wolves are home for him. Ball has never played with a Gobert at the rim or a McDaniels in the lineup or a Edwards leading/pushing Ball to be better on D.

Some positives, Ball is perfect age (same as Edwards) and core fitting and just before prime (like Edwards). If Ball and Edwards can prove ideal fit…Wolves could have one of the best backcourts in NBA for 10+ years. Ball can play at least 3 positions well. This would allow for major lineup flexibility in support of Edwards and what is best for Edwards long term.

Gobert
Reid
McDaniels
Edwards
Ball

I appreciate the outside-the-box thinking, but I don't think it's very realistic.

Price point: I know Charlotte is bad, but he is still their No. 1 and franchise player. I question if Julius Randle would be enough as a trade centerpiece.
Right fit: I don't like the idea of adding the 1A on a perennially bad team.In that role, players develop bad habits (and Ball also came into the league already having some). Better to target role players on these teams, as those important roles get under-appreciated on bad teams, but can catapult teams from good to great (think about the Charlotte and Washington trades Dallas made two seasons ago).

[Klomp]

It might just be that they are building the roster to have a bunch of guys who can step up to be the #2 on any given night. This is an option that helps maximize roster and salary cap flexibility to the fullest extent.

Based on averages we have two players IMO that are #2 worthy.

Again, I'm talking about "on any given night", which is different than "on a consistent basis". These aren't guys who are going to have the averages that look like a No. 2 option, because they aren't putting up No. 2 numbers often enough.

Any of Julius, Jaden, Rudy, Donte, TJ, or Rob can step up to be a No. 2 to Ant in a game.

[Wolveswin]

I appreciate the outside-the-box thinking, but I don't think it's very realistic.

Price point: I know Charlotte is bad, but he is still their No. 1 and franchise player. I question if Julius Randle would be enough as a trade centerpiece.
Right fit: I don't like the idea of adding the 1A on a perennially bad team.In that role, players develop bad habits (and Ball also came into the league already having some). Better to target role players on these teams, as those important roles get under-appreciated on bad teams, but can catapult teams from good to great (think about the Charlotte and Washington trades Dallas made two seasons ago).

Price point: it why I stated Hornets need struggle. And it wouldn’t be for Randle direct. Randle to third team with with assets to Hornets.

[FrenchMinnyFan]

Interesting topic. Scottie Pippen was a 16.1 points carrrer player and not very good 3 pts shooter ( 32%). He was a top defender.

Pretty convinced here that we got our number 2 already with Jaden. Jaden should score 16-18 every night and he is a better 3 points shooter. High level defense too.

[Klomp]

Interesting topic. Scottie Pippen was a 16.1 points carrrer player and not very good 3 pts shooter ( 32%). He was a top defender.

Pretty convinced here that we got our number 2 already with Jaden. Jaden should score 16-18 every night and he is a better 3 points shooter. High level defense too.

Point of clarification on Scottie, over eight-season period (1990-98), he averaged 20 ppg.

[cmoss84]

I took one about 2 hrs ago.
But seriously...Giannis.

[Wolveswin]

Interesting topic. Scottie Pippen was a 16.1 points carrrer player and not very good 3 pts shooter ( 32%). He was a top defender.

Pretty convinced here that we got our number 2 already with Jaden. Jaden should score 16-18 every night and he is a better 3 points shooter. High level defense too.

Jaden is a clear #3 on championship team.

[frankenwolf]

I took one about 2 hrs ago.
But seriously...Giannis.

Seriously, how would the Wolves go about acquiring Giannis? Sure, it would be nice to load up on top ten players, but the financial implications are impossible at this point.