Dude Weather Subscribe to Secrets Minneapolis / St. Paul
{This was ready to go up in the wee hours last night, as is typical, but the computer gremlins ate my copy so I went to bed and am banging this out in a rush to beat the New Year. Sorry for the delay.}
Game #30, Home Game #15: Minnesota 108, Memphis 98 (OT)
Game #31, Road Game #16: Dallas 107, Minnesota 100
Season Record: 6-25
1. The Worst of Both Worlds
How can a team hit its first 7 shots of a ballgame then misfire all but once, clanking 15 out of 16 attempts, in the very next quarter? The same way that same team can blow a 29-point lead with 22 minutes to play, and lose by 7, the following night--by having no idea what is successful and wise, and what isn't. Or, worse, knowing what is successful and wise and ignoring that wisdom.
The Timberwolves absolutely know how to lose. They have the right combination of a lack of core confidence, a roster suffused with redundant strengths, and glaring weaknesses at key skills such as interior defense and court vision, a toxic blend of misspent youth who have been improperly nurtured and over-the-hill journeymen thrust into leadership. They are led by a coach who'd rather not be on the sidelines, and are marinating in what has now been a five-year period of abject cluelessness. For all of these reasons, they can't always seize the gifts an NBA season invariably brings, like an opponent who comes out with flat energy and distracted minds, ready to be whupped. You won't find a more compelling Exhibit A for that gift-wrapping than the smelly egg laid by the Dallas Mavericks in the first half of Tuesday night's game. But no, the Wolves require that a team be off its game *and* be less than mediocre to boot, as in the Exhibit B Memphis Grizzlies on Monday night. Then their knowledge of how to lose may not be enough to succumb, and their decent talent level and orocess-of-elimination wielding of their one or two strengths brings them through.
For die-hard Wolves fans--and by now, there are no other kind--the most disheartening thing about Tuesday night's historic collapse in Dallas was how nonsensical it seemed in the greater context of the future course of the franchise. When Kevin McHale took over the coaching reins from Randy Wittman, he stated that he "likes this team," and whatever else one might have felt about the ex-hero of the Celtics and the Iron Range, there was a reasonable expectation was that he would at least groom the youngsters upon whom he staked his the shreds of his reputation in the wake of the grotesque mishanding of the Kevin Garnett era. But that has not happened. As the Wolves were being outscored 66-30 in the final 22 minutes of the game--this, after being up 70-41 through the first 26 minutes--it is revealing to look at who got the minutes, the playing time that is the down payment or venture capital on the future improvement of this team.
Randy Foye got a team-high 19:02 during that 22-minute span, solidifying his status as the number two option behind Al Jefferson and team cornerstone going forward--at shooting guard. I know McHale doesn't like to pinpoint positions (he reminds me of those global warming skeptics who keep maintaining that nobody had to wear sunscreen back when *they* were growing up), but it needs to be said that Foye at the 2 instead of the point eliminates a key rationalization for the Brandon Roy shenanigans, makes the drafting of Rashad McCants the previous year illogical, and unfortunately confirms the wisdom of many, many of us from Foye's rookie year forward who said with either furrowed brows or exasperated howls that Foye was not ever going to pan out as a point guard. I don't dispute that off-guard is Foye's best position, and I suppose admitting he can't run an offense is a necessarily wise cutting of losses. But ah, off-guards need to defend some pretty good shooters and Foye's defense on his counterpart, Jason Terry, in those final 22 was abysmal. Terry had 24 points on 9-13 FG and 4-5 3ptFG in 19:12. Foye countered with a couple of big treys to keep things close in the 4th quarter, but just 10 points with zero assists and 3 turnovers in that final 22, versus Terry's 1 dime (plus a steal and two blocks) and turnover-free performance during the comeback.
Al Jefferson and Ryan Gomes tied for second with 16:44 worth of time in that collapse. We'll deal with Jefferson later, but suffice to say that you play Big Al as much as possible while trying to hold a lead down the stretch. In most situations I'd say the same for Gomes, and especially against Dallas, where he's a viable matchup against either Josh Howard or Dirk Nowitzki, who otherwise are very tough covers for the Wolves. Last year, I christened Gomes the barometer because the caliber of his play often served as a reliable indicator of how the team as a whole would fare. While that hasn't been as apparent this season, Monday night was the first time the Wolves won without Gomes scoring in double figures. On Tuesday night, however, Gomes was the barometer for the Mavericks. Yes, his aggression toward the hoop was a shock to almost all of us, and certainly Howard, who found himself being blitzed for 11 first-quarter points by Gomes, who went on to hit his first 7 shots. But even granting the surprise factor, the fact that Gomes was taking it to the hole on Howard with impunity, and that none of the Mavs' bigs were coming over to help, was a neon sign indicating that Dallas hadn't come to play. (There's a marijuana joke just begging to be told on Howard here, but having blazed more than a few spliffs when I was 28, I'm not going to go there.) Consider that Gomes was 8-9 FG for 19 points and three rebounds in that first 26, versus Howard's 4-12 FG for 9 points and no boards. Now flip the switch: Gomes was scoreless with 2 shots and nothing but a turnover in his 16:44 line over the final 22, while Howard went 6-10 FG en route to 14 points, plus a rebound and two assists, during his 19:02 over that span.
Okay, so if I concede it is not wrong to play Foye at the 2, and that Jefferson and Gomes were necessary and viable among the frontcourt positions, what is so disheartening here? The players getting the 4th and 5th most minutes: Brian Cardinal and Kevin Ollie.
When McHale said he "liked this team" and when McHale was praising this roster as being capable of making a big leap forward over last year's 22 wins, Cardinal and Ollie were nowhere in the picture--nor should they have been. Cardinal was taken as a deal-sweetener for Memphis who was desperate to unload his salary, in the draft day deal this summer. And Ollie was added as the last spot on the roster, in a neck-and-neck competition with Lilliput Blake Ahearn, a choice even McHale has indicated was insignificant.
Just to prove that we know the argument, let's trot out the rationale for Cardinal and Ollie being on the floor. In my last trey, I wrote about Cardinal's knowledge of how to enable his teammates at both ends of the floor, and his remarkable string of plus/minus positives (broken, naturally, the next game, when he was minus -1 versus Memphis). He was the team's best defender on Nowitzki in the first half, getting physical and goading him into a silly foul and loss of temper. And even in the wasteland of that second half pasting, he was the one Timberwolf on the floor who seemed to grasp the need for rapid ball movement and then moving without the ball--he had half of the squad's 4 assists in the final 22 minutes. And Ollie's role has risen in almost direct proportion to the concession about Foye's unsuitability to play the point. The other backcourt option, Bassy Telfair, is pretty undersized against a big galoot like Jason Kidd, and besides, Ollie had done a decent job guarding Terry in the first half when he and Foye switched off.
Now, having said all that, WTF is Kevin McHale thinking here? Clearly, he consciously decided to stunt the development of his young personnel and ride a slow 31-year old power forward and a 36-year old point guard down the stretch in order to improve his team's record to 7-24, a win that would have moved the Wolves ahead of Washington for the 28th best record in the 30-team NBA, and put it only 11 games out of the 8th seed in the playoffs. Those were the stakes. And, incredibly, the Wolves *blew a 29-point lead anyway*. Could it really have been worse than minus -36 over a 22-minute span giving that playing time to top draft pick Kevin Love, who had something of a breakout game just a night before; Bassy Telfair, who has begun to emerge despite (and emphatically not because of) McHale's heavy thumb the past few weeks, and who possesses a new two-year multimillion contract with an option for a third year; and Shaddy McCants, whom McHale had just defended and expressed his affection for during the postgame press conference on Monday, and who had gone 4-4 FG in the first half?
We'll never know, because Love was limited to 5:05 over that final 22, same as 5th wheel Rodney Carney and 13 seconds less than Craig Smith, of whom McHale seems irrationally enamored, even against Dallas, one of many teams who provide horrible matchups for the Rhino on defense, as was conclusively demonstrated again on Tuesday, when Notwitzki toyed with him at both ends of the court. With Smith and Cardinal holding down the bulk of the power forward minutes during the collapse, Dallas missed only 16 shots (26-42) and got 9 offensive rebounds (beating the Wolves, who had 7 defensive caroms, on their own boards. Since Dallas had a grand total of one turnover during that 22 minute time period, that means the Mavs scored on 26 of 33 possessions, not counting the 12 trips they went to the line. It might have been nice to see what one of the league's top rebounders per48 could have done to secure more one-and-dones for Dallas, with the added bonus that he also happens to be your top draft pick in desperate need of seasoning.
Meanwhile, Bassy was allotted 9:36 and McCants a measly 2:47. By contrast, Cardinal had 16:31 and Ollie got 12:13. As if all this wasn't head-slapping enough, in the portion of the postgame press conference shown by FoxSports, McHale exclaimed that his goal during that second half was to push to pace, as the team had done successfully during the first half. Yup, it's always a good idea to leave your frisky young talent on the bench and play your wise but slow journeymen vets while engaging in a track meet on the road against a team ranked 5th in the NBA in fast break points playing in front of their 291st sellout crowd. The only other thing left to do to seal this ignominius giveaway of a 29-point lead is to hold off on calling timeouts--the Wolves left three unused in the second half--so the Mavs and their crowd could work up a good froth.
2. Big Al
There is one thing, and one thing only, that the Wolves can take to the bank as we close out the 2008 portion of the 08-09 season: That Al Jefferson is a monstrous, beastly load in the low block. As almost every other member of the Timberwolves has proven at some point during the season, it is easy to make shots when the game is early, the pressure is light and the play is flowing, quite another to stick it in the hole when it is crunchtime do-or-dying, insecurity is gnawing your psyche, and the opponent is selling out to stop you. Any team that has a player who can get his when the game is in the balance has a valuable commodity indeed, and Jefferson laid any doubts to rest about his go-to status in this thrilling, maddening, ultimately discouraging back-to-back split of games versus Memphis and Dallas.
There wasn't anybody in a Memphis uniform that was going to stop Jefferson on Monday night. Certainly not Marc Gasol, a water buffalo who moves most rapidly backpedling his way down the paint while Jefferson soars over him for slams and layups. Not stringbean rook Darrel Arthur, undersized pogostick Hakim Warrick, injured Darko Milicic or future wrestling villain and zero-minute man Hamed Haddadi from Iran. As has been the case all season, at least if your name is not Dwight Howard, the best way to defend Jefferson is to send multiple bodies at him, like a kung-fo flick, and hopefully wrest the rock loose from his grasp. As much fun as it was to watch Kevin Love sink all four of his shots in the 4th period Monday (and still lose the mythical matchup with OJ Mayo on style points, real points and all around composure and maturity), Jefferson can put the victory over Memphis up in his locker like a pelt. If the Wolves hadn't bungled the out-of-bounds play with the score tied and 27.5 to go in regulation--unable to get the ball to Jefferson as the call required, the possession ran out with Foye contorting himself for an ugly miss--Big Al could have prevented overtime . By that point, everybody in the building knew that if he touched the ball, he was going to make the scoreboard click for Minnesota. The 16-25 FG is gaudy enough, but diminishes what happened in that nip-and-tuck final 17 minutes of the 4th and overtime--Jefferson was 7-8 FG for 19 points.
Even in the soon-to-be-legendary foldup job in Dallas, Jefferson nearly single-handedly staved off the Mavs with his low post offense. He was 6-11 FG, and six of his last 9, in the 22 minute botch, even as the Mavs correctly assumed that no one else could beat them (the rest of the Wolves were 5-22 FG) and sent the cavalry at him. The addition of his midrange jumper and the refinement of his baseline spin on the left block--he's better at sealing his opponent with the jab-step (or fake jab) to the middle and then taking the leagues hardest angle for the bank to the hoop--have made him that much tougher to defend. In previous posts, I've had my issues with Jefferson's inconsistent defense and his occasionally abrasive and hypocritical attitude toward his teammates. But I haven't had as much fun watching the Timberwolves (as opposed to their opponents) this year as I did marveling in the offensive display he put on during crunchtime on Monday. Bravo.
3. Quick Hits
Obscured by Jefferson's heroics and the monumental collapse, Telfair continues to dramatically improve his offensive arensal. All color commentators deliver the old saw about how if a player sees the ball go in via a free throw or a gift layup, it helps his shooting eye on more typical jumpers. but in Bassy's case it seems to be true. Ollie is a fine, upstanding individual, who rocks a suit as well as I've every seen a Wolves player dress on the sideline, but giving him more than 5-8 minutes a night, and not giving Telfair the added boost of starting alongside Foye, seems counterproductive for both the present and the future.
Allow me to be the last person to weigh in on Mayo. Most impressively, he seems to have a complete game, without any real discernible weakness. His strengths seem to be the ability to both catch-and-shoot and score off the dribble moving in either direction; that and his mature sense of not needing to be the man until the situation warrants. He stayed within the offense for nearly the entire game, but aggressively looked for his shot, and nailed a trey, after a pair of Love baskets had pulled the Wolves into a 79-79 tie Monday. I see what people mean about there not being much further upside to his game--he's remarkably polished already--but his current baseline augurs for Mitch Richmond territory, the player comparison that makes the most sense after seeing him in action. I did find it interesting that Memphis put Mayo on Carney and allowed defensive specialist Quinton Ross to guard Foye when they were all out there, but overall, Mayo seemed a reasonably solid defender. On the limited samples I've seen, I'd still make Derrick Rose my Rookie of the Year, but Mayo is the second-best rookie thus far this year. Meanwhile, I'll keep raving about Russell Westbrook, who has the potential to rival Rose in a Paul-DRon fashion down the road.
Speaking of point guards, how does Deron Williams make the West All Stars this year? Paul is a slam-dunk choice, and I think you'd have to say the same about Billups in Denver. Meanwhile, Williams has been beset by injuries and even when healthy hasn't been able to push Utah (who have had others banged up) away from the brink of being the odd team out of the playoffs. And if you are going merely by numbers and reputation, how does Williams get the nod over Kidd in Dallas?
Britt, excellent write up on the Mavs game. To be honest though, I really liked how McHale managed the game for the first half and most of the the 3rd quarter.
I thought "for once it seems like we have a rotation". But as you pointed out...he totally broke from game plan later in the game. When I saw McCants and Carney set to go in, it seemed like I was getting used to it. But where where they towards the end.
Britt I couldn't agree more with you on your observations. But one thing I think you were too kind on was McHale.
But perhaps it's the same as I feel. I want to give him huge props for the first half and most of the 3rd, but then I have to really question what he was thinking for the rest of the game.
Rashad McCants was 4/4 from the field 1/2 from the line. It's not like the game against Memphis where he didn't have it. He had it last night and McHale shelfed it.
Are we tanking with the vets again? Just kidding but Britt, I do agree Cardinal can be a positive influence in game and off the court, but how is it the fans see the reality of his limitation better than the coaching staff?
Telfair I thought had a good game, though I felt he had a bad sequence of events that really kinda gave the Mavs and opening. A few hurried shots here and there and a turn over. But he wasn't the only Timberwolf forcing up bad and quick shots late in the game..and the surprising thing is that it wasn't McCants. In fact, I would rather have a hot hand jacking up shots than a cold shooter jacking up quick ones.
I would really like to see Mchale solidify his rotation. And I do understand you have to make adjustments during the game...but he really made some bad ones.
But anyway... I am not really that angry at last night's loss. I really enjoyed watching them play good basketball. ANd I mean really good. (Their transition defense wasn't so hot, but I feel it was hidden by the amount of steals they got) but back to what I was saying. I think they played a really complete game and would like to see more of it.
Last night they could have used another shooter on the floor. Miller is hurt, Foye was kinda of hitting, but last night, McCants should have been no the floor.
Happy new year to all! Be safe!
Great write-up as always.
The only thing I would substantially disagree with is your point on Telfair. While he certainly seems to be hitting more open jumpers, I actually think he has regressed overall as this season has gone on when it comes to controlling the offense and getting others involved. His assists are down in December, and it just seems to the naked eye that he is not playing the role of creator and distributor as effectively as he did last year. Especially during the collapse last night, when the Wolves desperately needed some high-percentage shots and offensive flow, Bassy seemed unable to deliver (of course, none of the other guards did either).
I still think I'd rather see Telfair than Ollie, but I wish he could combine his newfound jumper with the spark he gave the offense last year.
I rarely disagree with you Britt, but I was furious that McHale played Bassey as long as he did in the 2nd half. He lost all control ~2:30 mark of the 3rd period. Up by 10, he commits a stupid foul on Kidd, followed by the serious bitch at the referee. So, Telfair is going to get even. Kidd makes the FTs and on the next play, Bassey grabs an offensive rebound an immediately hoist a 20 footer instead of setting up and running clock. Next, he makes a terrible rotation on Kidd causing the entire defense to break down leading to a Dampier dunk. Finally, he puts his head down an lungs into Kidd who rejects the runner. This little man o man o goes on for the first few minutes of the 4th too, including another blocked runner, a blocked jumper (a great play by Howard) and a blatant head down charge.
Now I am the first to scream play the young kids. But Telfair needed to sit, and sit long, until he got his head on straight. You can't be an effective NBA point guard if you are going to have a little personal meltdown just because you got shafted on a foul call. He needs to grow up in a hurry.
I had upgraded seats Monday (131 row A) and had a great chance to watch some small game stuff that you down always get to see from a distance. I am really puzzled by big Al's defense. He did not show hard on the pick and roll for the 1st 3 quarters which I thought was a serious problem that gave Memphis way too many easy looks. Down by ~8 in the 4th quarter, somewhere near the 9 minute mark, Al all of a sudden shows hard 5 possessions in a row - which resulted in 4 stops. We are now back in the game - and he stops showing hard!! I am absolutely puzzled by this. There was no clues from the bench as to why it started and why it stopped. Is Al deciding on his own when to show hard? Or is this coaching strategy? Or do the need to conserve his energy for offense? I would love to hear your insight Britt. Because when he did it, he was effective. But why for only 3 minutes?
I wish I could have seen the last 4 games, but I've been ice fishing up at Lake of the Woods (We got our limit). At Least the Wolves won a couple and we were in all of them. I think there are some signs for improvement despite the maddening 4th qtr breakdowns.
he reminds me of those global warming skeptics who keep maintaining that nobody had to wear sunscreen back when *they* were growing up.
Who wears sunscreen any more? Haven't you heard the latest about the lack of vitamin D and all the connections to vareious modern illness's. Now we're suippose to get more sun and leave the sunscreen at home. Don't call me a global warming skeptic, because I really don't know. But, this whole relying on what the experts and science tells us can be pretty darn confusing. Is the Earth Warming? what the hell do I know? What does anyone know besides what they heard on CNN or talk radio? None of us know.
And, to get back to basketball, I really don't know whether McHale is a bad coach or not either, or even a bad GM. I still think his predicament has as much to do with random luck as anything else. Sure, using hindsight we can tell a pretty convincing story using causes (draft picks, trades, free agents, contracts) to explain effects (the current roster and losing record), but at the time every decision is made it still is a crapshoot and whether or not a decision is right or wrong is not known by any of us. That's right, what I'm saying is that I think San Antonio is lucky and McHale is not. And I really don't know if GLobal warming is real. (Don't call me a right wing skeptic, though, I'm as liberal as they come. I am a skeptic in just about every offical explanation that ever is put before us though. Which explains my view of McHale. We search for explanations for everything. It is in our genetic makeup. But we really don't know as much as we think. But, it sure makes life interesting that we all think we do and basketball all the more fun to watch and read about. What was this post about again?)
Britt,
I'll bite on a couple of your points. As to the playing time of the veteran journeymen, I think it could be argued that having more of the "youngsters" participate in the worst collapse in the history of the franchise probably would be more devastating to them than either Cardinal or Ollie, who've been around enough to shrug it off, pick themselves off the pavement, and get back to work. For example, since Kevin Love seemingly can't have a sharp object around him when he misses a shot, I can only imagine how K-Love would handle being on the court for the entire meltdown, since--being the proverbial long time, hard-core fan-- the odds were substantial that the Wolves were going to lose the game from about the last part of the third quarter on. We HAVE seen this type of loss before from the club, you realize. Plus, I would imagine he's looking for folks who can play the right way in certain situations. Obviously against Dallas he didn't find any, but it is one potential explanation.
But more to the core of the situation, you assume McHale actually knows what he's doing as a head coach, and that he's making rational decisions. The reality is however, that he's pretty green to steer the on-court ship. Yeah, he knows more about basketball in his pinky finger than a thousand of us fans do collectively, yada, yada, but as with his role as VP and chief talent evaluator, that necessarily doesn't translate into being a good NBA head skipper.
I submit to you that it was much easier going 19-12 back in the day with a solid veteran roster with a Hall of Famer (who also failed to achieve their goal BTW) as leader, than it is now trying to eke out a few more wins, develop a young roster AND teach half of them the "right way to play NBA ball" simultaneously. As I mentioned in my blog, he looks like an over-the-hill fighter (Ali, Tyson come to mind) refusing to acknowledge that the glory days are over. McHale still thinks he can grind this out to a satisfactory conclusion. Whether that's confidence or sheer arrogance...who knows. But his body language and facial expressions are getting worse by the game.
As to the Mayo vs. Love deal and what rookies are looking good, I submit to you that--although still premature--another argument can be made that the player the Wolves certainly could have used right now is Brook Lopez of New Jersey. He's having a solid season, and would have certainly looked good with Al in the front court, being a true center. I say this with the clear admission that I would have screamed bloody murder if he would have been selected by the club at number three...the fact that Petersen could block his shot at the pre-draft looksee cemented my opinion of the lug. Mayo's a very good player, but if Rose wasn't to be had, all the rest of the remaining talent had a reason to be looked over. Hindsight being what it is, Lopez would have certainly been a better addition than Love currently, and would have been different--not necessarily better or worse than Mayo--and maybe a better fit for what the Wolves really need. A Lopez/Chalmers draft straight up--even with no salary cap movement--would look pretty sweet on this roster right now, given the continual PG issues.
Ah, what could have been...
Great stuff from all of you, thanks.
A few responses...
Astute commentary on Bassy, both in general and in detail. For the record, I'm not going to say anyone had a good second half versus Dallas, even Al, who didn't box out at all. And yes, I did see the mini-meltdown that Just A Fan mentioned and thought it played into Telfair's new pattern of being more outwardly demonstrative in both his mien and his play, which is to the good for the latter, but screws up his head. I also think it is a little bit brown-nose, sort of a "look at me, I'm playing hard!" sort of thing that is more facade that reality. All that said, the way Telfair has been jerked around minutes-wise by two coaches now, and the way he has attempted to respond without pouting but rededicating himself, and trying to tailor his play more toward the way the coaches seem to prefer, indicates someone trying to do the right thing.
I did something during that Dallas second half that I didn't write about but recommend to viewers: Watch the likes of Cardinal and Ollie and pretend that instead of wily vets, they truly are in competition with Love and McCants, etc., and are up and comers, if not youngsters, striving to earn minutes. For my part, anyway, it enabled me to appreciate Cardinal more and Ollie less. During the time Ollie was on the court during the collapse, he had absolutely no clue about how to get the Wolves into the half court, and how to get the ball to a double-teamed Jefferson. Nor could he initiate his own offense nearly as well as either Foye or Telfair. In fact a Foye-McCants backcourt might have been the best response to the Mavs' blitz, but of course would have then confused the message they are currently sending Foye.
As to the kids, and in particular Love, being too emotionally volatile to handle the (inevitable?) collapse, I say that we at least should have run a few plays for the rook, a la the previous game in Memphis, and found out whether he could have made something happen. I also say that losing the rebounding contest on their own glass wouldn't have happened with Love instead of Cardinal in the game, and that, whatever Love's problems getting off his shot (and they are legion), he pretty much always has his rebounding prowess for succor, and that was a skill the team needed the other night. Bottom line, I think you could have gone to Love and told him that, despite the collapse, he stayed in the game because he was the best option at the time, and I think he would have known that was true.
APB--Climate change, global warming, whatever you want to call it, is real, according to the vast preponderance of scientific evidence. I too appreciate skepticism, but it blows my mind that folks will countenance a $700 billion bailout by saying we can't afford not to try it, that the economy will tank otherwise, but still argue that we *can* afford to countenance inaction on climate change. And if you can get all the Vitamin D you need from our current sunshine without either some sort of sunblock protection or skin cancer, please let me know how.
Forgot to address Just A Fan's second astute point, about Jefferson's defense. I agree, and think it does have to do with conserving energy. Nobody likes to put it that bluntly--the pat retort would be that you go all-out all the time at both ends of the court. But the truth is that, yes, the roles of some players require greater effort at one end and a bit of conservation at the other, with key moments necessitating both-ends maximum effort to win the game. (And for those who want to rebut that, consider KG, arguably the game's best defender currently, and his displeasure at being put out on the perimeter of Flip's 3-2 zone occasionally. It was a very effective defense, but it totally burnt him out.) I don't have a problem with Al not devoting his defensive energies totally to the cause; my problem is that he doesn't wield his on-court intelligence in the service of defense nearly as much as he does on offense. Okay, he can't show that hard on the pick and roll for all 38 minutes or so; but he can limit the times he confuses his own teammates with a half-show, or be alert to interior rotations that require more awareness than energy.
I thought both you and canishoopus did a great job summarizing McHale's 2nd half ice-fishing nap as another warmed glacier broke off and sunk the team even as the coach he fired gets a positive snow flake next to his name in the Mavericks record books. It's easy to remain a skeptic of change when you're sleeping under ice water. Telfair was 2nd only to McCants in +/- for the game, while Foye and Ollie were pinned under the glacier. Rhino would have been worse, but he was spared the 4th quarter, and the one chunk of the 3rd quarter when the Ice-Fish actually built on the lead. From the 29-point peak to the time Rhino and Ollie were removed, the Ice-fish were -20. The rest of the quarter with Telfair and Cardinal subbed in, they were +2. As I mentioned in your previous pointer, McHale has a hard time dealing with hot players (and we can expand that to teams), something Casey showed he was better at in addition to assessing talent. Casey's science +2, McHale's -2.
BTW, Britt, there's something that the gremlins programmed for you called autosave. Lacking a modern word processor, you can get yourself a gmail account for free and write the points initially as an email while gmail does the autosaving, complete with spell checking. I'm assuming you understand how to copy & paste.
I think Peter gets close to the nub of things when he questions the assumption that McHale is competent to actually perform the jobs that Glen Taylor has assigned to him over the years. And now, specifically, coach.
Personally, I have always been pretty critical of McHale's long stint as "VP and chief talent evaluator". And wayyy before that, in his playing days, I never had the feeling that McHale was much of a leader, or even particularly accepted by his Celtics teammates. How, now, can Taylor (or us fans) expect him to be competent as a head coach?
Thinking of leadership took me to another discussion.
I was reading the following fluff on the Wolves' web site, about how Al Jefferson wanted to become more of a leader for the team:
http://www.nba.com/timberwolves/news/Leader_of_the_Pack-294916-1193.html
Playing NBA level basketball is one thing -- and we're constantly debating Jefferson's NBA talents. Fine. But asking him (or himself) to also be the team leader is an awfully big expectation that may be a huge overreach.
I wondered to myself (and admittedly the sample size is small) just how many NBA players came into the league from high school (like Jefferson) or even as college underclassmen, and became true leaders of men.
Not Moses Malone.
Not Kobe Bryant.
I vote for KG.
And LeBron James is close.
We've seen this type of folding before, just not on this epic scale. I remember two home games during the Flip and KG era, one against Golden State in which they were up 20 in the second quarter and ended up losing by 25 and one against the Nash/Finley Mavs in which they were up 20 late in the third and ended up losing the game. There were some other instances, like being ahead to Houston by 10 with two minutes left and losing in regulation.
The same thing happened then as now: the head coach sent in a few panic substitutions and didn't use timeouts wisely. It was clear as it was happening that the Wolves needed to step up the effort on D when the Mavs started their run. Why no timeout? McHale said that the only thing the coach can get on his players about during the game is effort. Right after they gave up a couple of easy hoops because they weren't getting back on defense was the time to try to nip that in the bud.
As for using the vets, I don't have a problem if they bring something that the others don't and they've proven themselves in difficult situations. The problem, to me, isn't using vets; it's who gets used. Kevin Ollie has, historically, barely been a backup, only getting regular minutes on non-contenders. Cardinal hasn't shown enough consistency in his previous stops to warrant regular minutes; I like what he's bringing to this team, but it would surprise me if he can do it consistently. These two aren't the second coming of Terry Porter and Sam Mitchell, who both played significant minutes on teams that went deep into the playoffs.
As a fan who lived in outstate MN until a couple of years ago, one of the things that I've wrestled with is what the appropriate fan response is: start going to games because the opportunity has never been greater (cheap tix, proximity to the Target Center) or refuse to allow Glen Taylor to profit from the mistakes of this personnel department and coaching staff.
The Ollie and Cardinal situations are really puzzling, since Telfair and Love are both better and younger players. I just wish they'd run out Telfair, Foye, Gomes, Love, Jefferson and see how it works for the next 50 games. I'm sure the record won't improve much, but we can at least get a good idea of our true needs--with the current situation, we've got people calling to trade just about every player on the roster... our biggest need could be a true point guard, a get-his-own-shot wing player, or a shotblocking center. The fact that we don't really know says a lot about the way the roster has been managed.
That was a treat to watch Big Al go to work against Memphis. Without his clutch play, OJ would've stolen the show completely. Speaking of which, he's a little bit better than I thought--or at least he looked like it that night (his 4-20 performance the next night probably looked a bit different). He's a do-it-all kind of player that will probably make a few All-Star teams. Considering how good he looks as a rookie, I expect he'll become at least as good as Brandon Roy. Oh well, maybe we'll get it right next year...
I'll give you an Amen on Russell Westbrook.
That dude is one bad muthaf***er.
Forget Mayo, in two years, we'll be talking about passing up Westbrook. He is everything Randy Foye could be if it was more athletic and mentally strong.
The athletic thing is easy to see. As Jim Pete was saying against Memphis, Foye jumps with both legs, rather than just one, this makes him less dangerous on the drive. Meanwhile, Westbrook easily explodes to the basket and unleashes freakish dunks.
The mentally strong aspect is more based on Westbrook's ability to learn the point. I have League Pass and have taken to watching OKC to get a glimpse of Westbrook and Durant. This team is awful, but these two are going to be monsters.
Foye on the other hand said in a recent interview that he needs to work on not letting his failures on offense affect his defense. I don't understand how a guy who grew up like Foye (both parents dead, in Newark) can not gather himself enough to focus on defense all the time. The guy must have a ton of mental strength, but maybe he needed it all growing up.
I just read an article the other day suggesting that the Memphis owner pulled the trigger on the Mayo-Love deal and that the Memphis coach and Jerry West (who offered his advice) hated the idea and wanted to keep Love. If this is true, I'm fine with McHale doing whatever Jerry West wants.
Link
http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2008/dec/28/mayo-for-love-working-out/
Quote:
T'Wolves fans probably consider this Love-Mayo linkage in the context of Kevin McHale, who swapped Brandon Roy for Randy Foye with Portland in the 2006 draft. Griz owner Michael Heisley is like McHale in this regard: He's maligned by fans for a variety of reasons. Heisley, though, is proving to be a decent talent evaluator in his first season as lead decision-maker.
The guy who pulled the plug on Casey "Brick" Jacobsen and insisted that Hakim Warrick log significant minutes ignored coach Marc Iavaroni and former team president Jerry West's appeal for Love.
I found this John Holllinger nugget via espn-insider.
Hollinger on mavs' comeback:
The final tally on Dallas' amazing comeback over Minnesota on Tuesday: 30 scores in 34 trips, not including a desperation heave at the end of the third quarter. Dallas went from trailing 70-41 to leading 105-98 by scoring 64 points on those 34 possessions, for an offensive efficiency rating of 188.2. It would have been even better had they not missed four free throws.
Perhaps the most amazing stat is how the Mavs were able to keep possession. Dallas had only one turnover in those 34 trips, and absolutely crushed Minnesota on the glass: The Mavs had nine offensive boards to just five defensive rips for the Wolves, and of those five two came on missed foul shots.
In other words, only three of the Mavs' 12 missed shots in that stretch cost them possession.
(dec 31, 2008)
Thanks to everyone for contributing so thoughtfully. When I try to formulate useful contributions I find my tank pretty much on empty.
Britt,
I agree with you that the vast preponderance of scinetific evidence says global warming, climate change or whatever you want to call it is real. But, whether or not the Earths climate is actually changing becuase of manmade activities and this will lead to a worldwide catastrophe is not known by you or me and, I doubt, by anyone else. In other word, I have as much faith in the clause "vast preponderance of scientific evidence" as I do "the high priests of Rome," because, from an individual point of view, we have to rely upon faith in something to take a position on climate change, skin cancer or any number of other diseases and manmade cuases. Most of us hook this faith up with "science," but that doesn't make it any more real. Science has proven itself incapable of making future predictions in many circumstances and regularly makes recommendations that later turn out to be wrong by a vast preponderance of scientific evidence so one decade we are told to layer on the sunscreen because sunshine is deadly and the next decade we're told, well actually sunshine is pretty essential to human health.
Regardless, my lifestyle reflects someone who believes climate change is real. I own a Prius and I, as much as possible buy and consume food that is local and organic. I also have invested in solar panels and am involved with NGOs that promote renewable energies. Still, I have a hard time saying something is Real based on what science says and make most of my personal choices based upon economics and a desire to give the least amount of support to foriegn oil as possible. But, again, to bring this all back to McHale and basketball, my point is that science, just like basketball analysis, is often plagued by "overcausation" meaning we seek to explain effects with past causes, but most historical sequences are easy to explain by looking at past events, but they provide us little advantage for predicting the future. Right now, we can all say that Roy for Foye was a horrible trade, and we all KNEW it at the time it was made and this proves McHale knows nothing about player evaluation and he's lazy and all that. Likewise with coaching. The benefit of hindsight provides great clarity. But, there is much more that can't be known at in the present to predict how the future will unfold.
Rondo looks like a good if not great point guard for the Celtics. Foye could very well be the same player if he had the benefit of playing with KG for the last two years. Doc Rivers is now a great coach, but what explains that besides a trade. We can tell a great story explaining all these events and support all of it with obvious cuases and come to the final conclusion that McHale is neither meant to be a GM or NBA coach. I would even agree with the vast majority of these stories and certainly can't tell a story that presents him in a better light. But, if Marbury... and then, Googs... or Cassell and Spreewell behave rationaly instead of demanding money, or the personalities of KG and Wally don't mix like oil and water...or any other number of random events unfold in the WOlves favor over the last decade s, could Flip be one of the NBA's greatest coaches and McHale be considered a great NBA GM.
As the great prognosticator Rumsfeld said, "then there are the unknown unknowns," meaning we don't really know, none of us, but its still fun trying to pretend that we do.
Speaking of Marbury, there are hot rumors that he's going to negotiate a buyout and sign with the Celtics. As a Laker fan, I love this news and hope it's all true. Aside from Terrell Owens, is there a worse person the Celtics could add to its roster? They're the front-runner for the title with a point guard that many think should be an All-Star and they are going to bring in the cancer of all cancers to be--what exactly--Rondo's backup? From a pure basketball standpoint, I think Marbury would hurt Ray Allen's game, which seems to thrive off of Rondo's drive-and-dish, keep the ball moving ways. From a team-chemistry standpoint, I think KG and him would have problems. After the two directions that each player's career went, I think Steph would be eagar to show off his skills and it would be to the detriment of the team. Rivers would face a similar situation to what he had with aging Cassell, last year--only Marbury would be more disruptive and probably a much-better talent--(making the decision to bench him more difficult than it was with Sam). I just see such little reward in this idea for Boston (they'll probably win the title without him) and a ton of risk (ruining what seems to be a great locker room that, again, will probably win the title without Marbury).
It would make for great tv.
This one is on Foye and the Coach. If Randy Foye wants to be a great player, he needs to dedicate himself to being a defensive stopper. Here is an article on improving footspeed: http://www.fiba.com/asp_includes/download.asp?file_id=163 In the second half of the Mavs game, call a time out (or two or three), and tell McCants that his job is to shut down Terry, tell Carney that his job is to shut down Howard, tell Love that his job is to shut down Nowitski, and tell Telfair that his job is to get the ball to Jefferson. Did you hear how fast Gomes was talking in his interview after his manic performance in the first half? Why did he disappear in the second?
Baseball:
Warning Track Power by Alex Halsted
Sports:
On the Ball by Britt Robson
Weather:
Dude Weather by Jimmy Gaines
Fiction:
Write Now! by Terry Faust
Hockey:
Spazz Dad by Todd Smith
Style:
Hook & Eye
Misc:
Is This News?
Fiction:
Yo, Ivanhoe by Brad Zellar
Food:
Consider the Egg by Stephanie March
Wine:
Beyond the Cask
Food:
Food Fight!
Media:
To the Slaughter
Misc:
Outrage by Staff
Food:
Chef's Table
Guest Commentary:
Just Passing Through
Humor:
Spazz Dad by Todd Smith
Cars:
Road Rake by Chris Birt
Commentary:
Read Menace by Tom Bartel
Society:
The Adventures of Melinda by Melinda Jacobs
Politics:
Defenestrator by Rich Goldsmith
Food:
Breaking Bread by Jeremy Iggers & Ann Bauer
Books:
Cracking Spines by Max Ross
Music:
Hear, Hear by Staff
Art:
The Vicious Circle by 6 Critics
Secrets:
Secrets of the Day by Kate Iverson
Theater:
Seen in the City by Staff
Film:
Talk About Talkies by Staff