Dude Weather Subscribe to Secrets Minneapolis / St. Paul
On the Ball
The Three-Pointer: Four In A Row
Photo copyright 2008 NBAE (Photo by David Sherman/NBAE via Getty Images)
Game #34, Road Game #18: Memphis 87, Minnesota 94
Game #35, Home Game #17: Minnesota 129, Oklahoma City 87
Season Record: 10-25
1. Give Me The Nailbiter
Coughing up a 29-point lead in the final game of a calendar year to degrade your record to 6-25 isn't a common formula for resilience. But in the four games since the ball dropped in 2009, the longest the Wolves have relinquished the lead was a 3:22 stretch in the third quarter against Golden State last Friday. Chicago got a sniff of an advantage early in the first and midway through the fourth, yet Minnesota promptly snatched it back. And in these last two, a gritty road win over Memphis and a blowout supreme versus pathetic Oklahoma City, the Wolves never trailed.
Beating the Grizzlies for the second time was far more entertaining than the clown show staged by the Thunder tonight--and better for the Wolves to boot. Having covered this Minnesota franchise for nearly 20 years, I know disease and dysfunction when I see it, and Oklahoma City is rife with defender's rot, listless with late-stage anemia, comatose from the boomerang bad karma emanating from their wretched ju ju in Seattle, and, flat-out, a ballclub without pride. I love Russell Westbrook, would now take him second (behind Rose and ahead of Mayo) in this current rookie class, but Kevin Durant is almost comically overrated (a poor and thin man's Melo Anthony), Jeff Green is a nasty tease as a negative 'tweener, and coach Scottie Brooks is in way over his head, dyed hair and all. The Wolves didn't have passing and driving lanes tonight, they had L.A.-width freeways. Randy Foye came out and destroyed whatever reputation Desmond Mason enjoyed as a mediocre defender, scoring ten points in the game's first four minutes and banishing Mason to the pine at 7:08. After a driving layup, Foye sat at 3:58; Mason returned at 2:24; Foye came back at 1:11 and jacked in a couple more treys to finish with 18 of Minnesota's 42 points for the period, 16 of them in the 6:03 he and Mason shared the court.
The rout was on, the 18-point lead swollen to 29 at the half, 32 after three, 42 for the game. It was impossible to tell exactly how well the Wolves were playing--the disparity seemed greater than varsity-JV scrimmages in high school. Westbrook's size advantage over Bassy Telfair helped him get 16 points and 12 assists before sitting the 4th period, and Nick Collison battled after coming in off the bench, but the Thunder's defensive rotations were nonexistent, one or two by-the-numbers passes were all it took to land a wide open look at the hoop, and the Wolves' confidence snowballed from there.
By contrast, the Wolves needed to show some mettle to vanquish the Grizzlies on Tuesday night. Bassy Telfair demonstrated that there is a little hogwash in the hype about Kevin Ollie's value to the team by compiling one of the more impressive games a player shooting 2-11 FG can muster. Not only does Telfair put pace into the game when the team has a chance to lower the throttle in transition, but he also provides the illusion of pace with his itchy, jumping-bean style in the half court, where he's driving to the foul line and pulling it out, snapping passes with some mustard instead of the standard ball delivery. The nonverbal message is for his teammates to move around and get open. Unlike the Chicago game, where the Wolves ran relentlessly, the going was slower in Memphis, but Telfair's body language made his teammates more alert.
I understand the calming quality of Kevin Ollie and how it must generally be reflexively praised, but guess what? Kevin Ollie is a career journeyman who has shown nothing to dispute that history here in Minnesota. He's mature and wise only by comparison, and if he was a marginally better defender than the disinterested Foye and the undersized Telfair at the point earlier this season, that doesn't mean he was a stopper. I'm content with the three-player rotation coach Kevin McHale has devised for the backcourt, with Mike Miller coming in for Foye at the 2 and then Foye later subbing for Telfair at the point for awhile. What it yields on backcourt defense (especially with Foye and Miller together on the floor) compared to Ollie's work is more than overcome by the chemistry Foye and Telfair are developing--and if Mike Miller ever deigns to shoot wide open (if only for a second) jumpers instead of making the nifty pass that sets up a less accurate shooter with a slightly better shot (net gain, nada), rotating the trio would be even more effective. Besides, now that Kevin McHale is stroking this team like a diva in a room full of Siamese cats, the Wolves are playing with enough confidence and self-assurance that "calming down" is no longer near the top of the priority list.
Now Brian Cardinal is a journeyman vet who understands this. Cardinal is an undersized banger with an outsized appreciation for how to enrich his team. In Memphis, he went for a loose ball like a dog launches himself for a frisbee, focusing totally on the orb as he flatlined his body forward, worrying later about how he was going to land--there's probably a six-inch tread of very white skin still stuck to the arena floor--and he earned and won the resultant jump ball. Tonight he was about to send a bounce pass to Miller rubbing himself off Cardinal's screen, but a Thunder player picked him up and Cardinal merely picked up his dribble. Miller reversed course and went around Cardinal a second time, whereupon Cardinal hit him with an overhead feed for the hoop.
But the clearcut star of the past two games--the first time this season that a pair of games hasn't been led by Al Jefferson at least once--was Randy Foye. Foye tying his career high with 32 tonight was just leftover adrenaline from his heroics at crunchtime in Memphis. The Wolves had been up 8 with less than five to play, and while Memphis had never led, there was an everpresent sense the Grizzlies weren't going away. An 8-0 run in a three and a half minute span confirmed it. All game long, Memphis had demonstrated they learned from the 38-point, 16-rebound whupping Jefferson had put on them the week before, and they surrounded and harassed Jefferson until it was finally becoming plain that he wasn't necessarily the savior this time.
But Foye was. The beauty of his three-pointer was the certainty of his body language, infused with the sort of purposeful flow that makes it "pretty" and has you judging it a "good shot" regardless of circumstance. It came with 40 seconds to play and it gave fans of this franchise a little trill inside, the feeling of cynicism thawing, at least to the point that you know not *everything* will go wrong. And then, after OJ Mayo--the kindred spirit to Foye nemesis Brandon Roy, and the latest in the litany of McHale's personnel crimes, of the sort that got him kicked downstairs to coach this team--beat Foye off the dribble and went up for a layup, Foye dogged him down the lane, a step behind but no more than that, waiting for Mayo to make his finish at the rim. As Mayo went up, Foye blocked him cleaned from behind--the blind spot over the right shoulder for a car driver. "Last night he took that game over late," said McHale in tonight's postgame press conference, still raving 24 hours later. The block, the coach added, "was one of those that gets you out of your chair--really special."
The numbers will show that Mayo had another stellar outing--20 points, 8 rebounds, 5 assists. But if you factor in delivery when it matters most, Foye more than held his own, on a night when the two players often guarded each other. And as mentioned in the last trey, that switchover to off-guard is vital to Foye's mindset and skill set both. Asked after tonight's game whether it is psychologically easier to come down and launch those treys earlier in the shot clock as a two guard instead of a point guard, Foye replied, "It is definitely easier. But I don't look at myself as a two-guard; I look at myself as a playmaker. But it is definitely easier when I am playing there to come down and shoot because that is my job, where my job as a point guard is to get everybody else involved too."
You don't have to run as many set plays with this coach as you did with the last one, I continued, remembering that Foye's best game under Wittman was the "throw-out-the-playbook" game in Detroit. Does that help you? "It definitely helps," Foye agreed. "Coach has confidence in us. He always tells us, 'Game day is your day and practice is my day.' So if anything goes wrong in the game, he's going to let us know in practice. So he can instill confidence in us in a game so much that way." That's different than the other guy, who would often call you over and point out the mistake right there on the sideline, I said. Was that productive or not? "Most of the time it is not," Foye said. "When you are playing you know you made a mistake and the crowd is on you and you really don't want to hear from the people who are supposed to be on your side that you made a mistake. Now it is different--he is just there," Foye says about McHale. "And guys want to play now."
2. Love Notes
There is improvement of sorts in Kevin Love's game. He still is horrible finishing a play, and tonight, given OKC's pathetic interior rotations and awareness in the paint, the rook caught at least ten balls deep in the paint with a chance to convert. Two or three weeks ago, nearly all of those shots would be blocked. Now, he still costs his teammates the assist, but at least he is drawing the foul as he misses.
I asked him about it after the game--how going from getting housed to getting fouled is incremental improvement, but what is required for the next step, where he finishes with the bucket and perhaps even the and-one? He mentioned that he had been considering the games of undersized power forwards such as Elton Brand and Carlos Boozer, trying to get tips, because some of the stuff underneath the hoop that worked in college doesn't cut it in the pros. He mentioned Brand's little step-back bunny jumper, and Boozer's use of the left hand. Then he said something interesting--he'd been working on his 12-15 foot jumper. The results are obvious--he's been both attempting and sticking that mini-midrange much more frequently in recent games. So then once he regains his collegiate accuracy with the J, the upfakes and penetrations will become easier and perhaps earn you a better FG% inside? I asked. He nodded.
3. Hit and Run
I asked McHale what the biggest difference in his team was between two or three weeks ago and now. "Confidence," he said simply, then praised their character, their work effort, everything seven ways to Sunday so that that confidence level increases. Confidence and wins is a weird, chicken-and-egg thing, where one begets the other and nobody is sure which is the trigger. Nobody questions that thrashing weak teams still remains a significant step up for the Wolves; or that their daring, their resilience and their confidence are all bundled up in a potent package right now. After facing a murderer's row of elite opponents with no practices early in his second tenure as coach, McHale almost couldn't have structured this second run any better. The Knicks are a team tailor-made to be exploited by Minnesota, and then after a blip or two versus Orlando and Dallas, you had a couple of legit but mediocre squads in Memphis and a banged up Golden State, a slightly stiffer test on the road in Chicago, a road rematch with Memphis for a barometer of progress, a feel-good break against the league's worst ballclub, and now a couple of opponents one level up--the improved Bucks (albeit perhaps without Bogut) and the Heat with Dwyane Wade--a great test and foil for Foye. When does the confidence-win combo require a regrouping?
Give McHale credit for saying what the team needed to do and then almost always doing it--from confidence to half court spacing to more uptempo ball in transition to mental toughness. But there is one proclamation still awaiting fruition. More than once--maybe more than 3 or 4 times--McHale has exclaimed, "We've got to get more shots for Mike Miller." But that's a coach protecting his player. The shots for Miller are there, should he choose to look for them even half as aggressively as Foye is right now. Miller needs to see that while the passing and the rebounding prowess are both duly noted and somewhat appreciated, he was brought here to spread the floor by shooting the ball in the hole: It is almost that simple. In return, the team doesn't mention his lousy on-ball defense (the sprained ankles haven't helped). After Miller first left and then returned to the Memphis game despite turning his ankle yet again on an opponent, color commentator Jim Petersen stated that if Miller wasn't able to shoot, perhaps a longer recuperation is in order. Agreed. But what I don't understand is that the guy is by all accounts a gym rat who has refined his shooting stroke down to an art form. So why isn't he shooting enough to even develop a rhythm, and to determine what is wrong with the flow during the game tha prevents him from going off? And what was with Miller passing up a perfectly good look from trey, to whip it over to Gomes to take essentially the same shot (only more on the wing) in the game in Memphis; especially when he came down a possession or two later and launching one nearly from half-court with no externalities (like a dwindling shot clock, end of quarter, or drawing the foul) to cloud the action. Why does a total gym rat good enough to be rookie of the year and 6th man of the year in the NBA during his career not have a firm grasp on the rudiments of shot selection?
55 Reader Comments
As one who is always interested in the issues of team psychology (a dangerous thing about which to speculate), I have an observation and a question.
The observation is that Kevin McHale's personality seems to be as perfectly suited to the bench as it was ill-suited to the front office. As a GM, he was like a disengaged uncle; as a coach, he is like a stern but relaxed father. He has the team smiling and laughing, and it's not just because they are winning. You can see the gorky jokester attitude working with these somewhat fragile athletic egos. With the exception, that is, of Rashad McCants, and that leads me to my question.
I was listening to Flip on KFAN yesterday, and he was talking about how one bad attitude can be a cancer to a team. Is this, then, what we are seeing in McHale's quarantining of McCants? I'm in front of a television set, not in the crowd (?)near the bench, so I can't watch the coach-player dynamic except when the t.v. producer highlights it. Can you, Brett, or any of the rest of you who are closer to the action and the internal dynamics of the team give the rest of us some sense of what is really happening with McCants? Something in his benching seems to be playing into this resurgence of confidence and team chemistry, and I'm curious as to how it looks up close.
Sorry, Britt. Hit the wrong key when typing your name. An unnecessary apology, I know. But a man deserves to be called by his proper name. Thanks again for your relentless and intelligent lens on the Wolves.
I had the same impression about McHale on the bench with one more observation. It seems like the referees like talking to McHale when he pulls them over to complain about a call. I know. I know. The referees are supposed to be impartial, but we all know that is bull. I think it helps the calls when the refs like the coach and the players.
Excellent stuff, as always.
The part of Randy Foye's emergence that I've enjoyed the most is that he's playing almost exactly the way most of us thought he could--or at least, thought he could in a "best-case scenario." He's a pure scorer two-guard, who is never going to rack up the assist numbers of Kobe or Roy, but will drop the occasional dime (like last night's beauty to Rhino for a dunk) when he gets into the paint. Yeah, he's still not Brandon Roy (unless he stays this hot from downtown) but he's certainly an impact player, and that's a big step up from what he looked like as a confused, kind-of-slow point guard. I've been thinking for a while now that Foye's future could be like Jason Terry's--which would be a good thing. Focus mostly on his money jumper, but mix in some dribble penetration, here and there, to keep the defense honest.
Telfair has been this team's best point guard since Day 1 of the 2007-08 Season. Why it's taken them this long to figure that out, I'm not sure. I guess it was the experiment of Foye being a true point guard. That's a great description of the way Bassy bounces around the half-court set. We can all bitch and moan about how great he'd be if he could shoot, but the fact of the matter is that he's doing a lot of good, right now. If I have any complaint with his game, it's that he doesn't come off that intital ball screen (often set by Love) tight enough and it's just wasted motion. There are rookie guards, like Jarryd Bayless and DJ Augustine that have shown the ability to make this play and split the double team if it's jumped aggressively. This seems like the sort of play that would be right up Bassy's wheelhouse, considering his supreme handling skills. If he did it, we'd probably see more of those corney treys from Foye and Gomes.
I suppose the streak is best attributed to the quality of opponents, but it's still great to see us climbing out of the cellar.
I'll say it again, Mike Miller doesn't shoot off the dribble. He needs to receive the ball with space in front of him. That comes from an inside out game Big Al does not provide. That, I believe is why McHale was bringing Love, Miller, and Cardinal in together. Passing
Interesting observation about Bassy coming off that screen too loosely. I've always felt that while he is arguably the game's fastest north-south player (Devin Harris, TJ Ford and Rondo being the only other candidates), he has average lateral quickness for an NBA PG and that hurts him on the pick and roll and on defense.
But once he gets even a little room to accelerate it's almost impossible to stop him from making a play. It's also, I think, why it seems like he over dribbles. He has great handle and is just trying to shake defenders so he can find room to get that acceleration. The
I think it is especially fitting that this is the team's 1st four game win streak since Jan 7th of 2007, when Casey was at the head of the bench. Case was fired a few days later for being too "inconsistent".
I'm beginning to view the Disaster in Dallas/Casey's Revenge game less as an unforgivable coaching sin (it was brutal in the 2nd half; McHale was clueless and his team quit) and more of a necessary karmic payment to the basketball gods for the way in which Casey was tossed aside for another man's sins. It almost had to happen in order to set the Wolves right again. Now, with 4 in a row 2 years to the day after their last 4 game win streak, the Wolves are playing what we fans can only recognize as exciting ball with something of the same results as the ones that got Casey fired. It will especially be fitting if McHale matches Casey's pre-firing record from here on out.
Good stuff folks. Thank you for the time and energy that goes into these thoughtful comments.
Dr. K--While I'm sure that McCants is not the most popular guy on the team, neither is he a pariah. His relations with Jefferson seem distant (to be charitable), but he mixes easily with Gomes and Smith, and Madsen, of course. I think the addition-by-subtraction is more on the court than in the locker room, and I think it is mostly just clearing playing time for Foye. Looked at another way, last year there was a lot of Telfair-McCants in the backcourt; now it is Telfair-Foye in a similar dynamic, with the exception that Foye has more point guard experience and doesn't search for his shot with quite the tunnel vision of McCants. BTW, did you notice that Shaddy's garbage time minutes came at the point last night?
Bottom line, without going on the road with this team or attending practice much, I'm not the best person to ask, but IMHO, McCants is not nearly the "cancer" that Ricky Davis and Mark Blount were during their time here, or that the Cassell-Sprewell tandem turned out to be their second year here.
Andy G--Great observation about Telfair. My response on the tight screen curl is that Bassy is too much of a "pass first" point to be thinking about splitting the double team, so he takes the angle that he hopes will provide enough separation for his teammate. But I agree that the "new" Telfair who goes to the rack and gets to the line should make the adjustment. And at the risk of being cruel, a pick-and-roll with Bassy and Love isn't exactly a high percentage play to begin with.
NOA--I'm not going to debate Jefferson's improvement or lack thereof in passing out of the double team. But Mike Miller has caught the ball in stride to the hoop dozens of times this season and eschewed the pull-up, with space in front of him, in favor of dribble-curls, up-fakes and then dribble look-arounds, and simple ball-movement snap passes. Are we really to believe that the team's plan is to bring Miller in as a decoy? The opportunities are there, he's just not seizing them.
I just want to take back what I said about Gomes being bust. But, his improved play has as much to do with the Wolves recent success as Foye's. I might even argue more so.
I appreciate the glue guy stuff and also that he has always been one of the best Wolves defender. Like Hassell, I think a defensive specialist and glue guy/hustle play is best coming off the bench ala Cardinal and not getting significant starter minutes. However, Gomes has been more than that lately and opposing teams now have to pay attention to him and not just Jefferson and Foye. This creates space for Foye to work as well as Jefferson. But, you were right all along Britt that Gomes provides a barometer for how well the team is doing.
Fourth Quarter Foye is back and it is great to see. It's starting to look like we've got a bit of a team here, maybe even something to build on. Can Foye average around 20-5-5 at the 2? Can Telfair continue giving out close to 10 assists a game? Can Love continue his astouding rebound rate? Will the end of the Memphis game make Big Al realize that he can't stay on one end of the floor and bitch at refs while the rest of his team is trying (and failing) to play defense? Can we acually get something for McCants, or will he be ripping it up in Sioux City next year? Is McHale interested in continuing to coach? How dominant can Big Al be if he's got another big time scorer on the floor? I am very happy just to be considering these questions, misguided as they may be (and probably are).
APB--
As one who has made more than his fair share of analytical mistakes over time, I can tell you that checking yourself can only make you smarter--and increase the respect your peers hold for you.
Thanks for inserting Gomes into this round of the conversation--he's an easy guy to overlook and his D on Rudy Gay and Kevin Durant the past two, as well as his improved jumper, are definitely a key part of the mix.
About the ball-screen for Telfair-- I guess if they really made the effort to set up a screen and roll, and Bassy came off it shoulder-to-shoulder, defenders would just slide underneath, before they let him carve up the interior defense. He's not going to pull the jumpshot from behind it, ala Tony Parker, so you're probably right that the Telfair-Love pick & roll game isn't in the cards. Still, I don't see the need to set the fake screen, which usually bumps him out 25-30 feet from the hoop and wastes a few of the 24 seconds.
Also, wanted to point out that I liked the description of Foye's big trey against Memphis. That wasn't just a big shot for that game, but also for Foye's career. Just right in Mayo's grill at a point in time when it seemed like his season (and the team's) could go in one of two directions. This is a little over-dramatic, but if he misses that shot, we very-well might lose the game, and OJ Mayo might've been the reason why. The more that Randy can string together games like this, the more he'll have Jefferson-like reliability that other teams will have to worry about.
Great job with the use of literary devices, Britt. As much as I read sports and talk about writing as a teacher, the two worlds usually don't come together much. What is it about OKC that doesn't impress you? Looking at their roster and the deals they've made recently, there are at least a few Wolves fans who would trade our roster for theirs straight-up (not sure if that includes me).
S-n-P: I understand where you're coming from with the Dallas game, but this type of game happened more than once when Flip was coach. A good example was in the 99-00 season, when the Wolves faced a bad and shorthanded Golden State team at home, had a 20-point lead in the 2nd quarter, and ended up losing by 25. McHale did a bad job, but I think those things become unforgivable if there's a lingering negative effect, which is something that can't be determined until they play another playoff team on the road.
I didn't see a lot of the last few games, but to me, the interesting thing is that this rotation is something that was inconceivable at the start of the year. Not playing anyone taller than 6'9, using 6'6 power forwards, playing Miller off the bench: theoretically, that didn't seem to work. I don't agree with McHale that there are no positions anymore, but there a lot of different combos that don't fit conventional standards yet still produce, and that's what's happening now. Also, it doesn't matter who the team is; beating someone by 40-plus on the second night of a back-to-back is impressive.
I have two observations from the Memphis game. First, the ball movement in and around the paint was remarkable. It felt like a well oiled popcorn machine in there.
Second, following Foye's 3 and block in the final minute the tv shot was looking in on the Wolves timeout. The players were giddy, but McHale was like a kid in a candy store. He could barely contain himself. It was a hoot! Dr K. is right about McHale - I had the feeling 2-3 years ago that he exhibited outward signs of depression. He seems like a new or renewed man now that he is on the bench.
Last evening Barreiro had Flip on for an extended segment. My question to Flip was to give a letter grade on McHale as GM and as Head Coach. Not surprisingly he dodged the question. I'd say C- and B+.
I'm truly looking forward to being at the game Saturday. I haven't felt as strongly since the SA game on November 5.
I think that this current hot streak is not too indicative of the wolves future. Everyone acknowledges that they're doing this against an easier part of the schedule, but I think their timing has been even better than that. They are playing these bad teams right when those teams are struggling the most. The Chicago and Memphis teams are certainly not playing as well right now as they were earlier in the season (not to say they were anything but 2nd rate talents even then). But even if they are suddenly putting it together it's not necessarily encouraging. The wolves team as a whole seems to mirror McCants - when the season (game) is a bust and the pressure is off they suddenly start playing well. This is the second year in a row where they can't win a game in the first half of the season but now that they are hopelessly out of contention they are going to start winning? What's the point? Or maybe Gomes is an even better comparison, taking him as the barometer theory, this is the second year in a row where he starts the year playing very inconsistently to turn it on once the season is meaningless.
Not a recipe for fan enthusiasm.
I wish I had seen Westbrook play, his numbers looked encouraging. After watching Memphis, I'm even more impressed by Mayo then his numbers led me to be - that is not a good team. He should have had many more assists, those guys couldn't hit wide open shots. He also plays passing lanes well (or at least did against the wolves), though he was not otherwise an outstanding defender. He's clearly the best player on that team as a rookie - pretty impressive. I consider him to be better than Foye, though Randy did have a good game that night I can't give him the edge.
I am thrilled with the wins, but I see a concern coming quickly - where do the 2nd unit points come from against better teams.
With our second unit now being Carney, Love, Cardinal, Miller and Bassy/Foye, we have a serious shortage in offense for the last few minutes of 1/3 and the first few minutes of 2/4.
Carney has come back to earth and is shooting his more customary 20% from 3pt land. His only effective offense, demonstrated perfectly last night in the 4th quarter, is transition dunks. Cardinal real has no offensive game left. Love tries hard (I really like that jump hook), but his offensive strength right now is rebound put backs. (Love's ability to use his body to draw contact/fouls has improved tremendously leading to many of his recent points). Whoever is running the point (Bassy/Foye) is really not going to be a scoring factor due to shooting ability/mentality respectively.
Which leaves Miller to carry the offense. I see that as a huge problem going forward. For whatever reason, he seems to have lost that hired gun swagger that made him so valuable as a 6th man (when he won the award). Anyone have any idea what it is? System of play different? Chemistry? Obviously, the injured ankle is playing some role (physically or mentally), but not enough to justify the rather radical change in disposition.
The Rhino is back! Which is super from my perspective as his improved play recently will hopefully increase his trade value. I can't see him and Love both being part of a contending team rotation. Love seems to have far more upside, so I think it is the Rhino that needs to go. I still like Rhino to Chicago for Noah as the base for a trade. Let's hope Chicago (or someone else) thinks so too.
Good question about Miller. What's up with that man? "Just a fan" sums up the options pretty well. I, too, wonder about him every time I see him on the court. This is not the ball player I remember, and there has to be some explanation for the change.
agreed with AK's read of the good vibes during the Wolves timeout post-foye 3 and block in memphis. to be honest, i can't remember the last time [if ever] seeing that in a wolves huddle. these guys are becoming something, me thinks. bring on the bucks.
I'm not sure if the hot streak is indicative of the Wolves future, but it does show that they are improving and I'll take it.
I'd rather be in the position of losing early than coming on strong to end the season than the other way around. I know its been two years in a row, but the Wolves are still a player or two away from being an average to an above average team in the NBA. I wouldn't say they are at the point now where I expected they would be coming into the season, but beating teams that are down and that they should beat is a step in the right direction - plus its fun to watch.
I too wonder what is up with Miller. Obviously the ankle has something to do with it, but his shot selection and tendency to not shoot was happening before his ankle troubles. I see a lot of people talking about his trade value, but really, what benefit would he bring to Cleveland or LA right now given the way he is playing and his injury problems?
I saw Miller taking some 3-point shots in the OKC game. All of them bricks, but if he keeps firing, the shots will start falling. I think he will be the scorer off the bench.
Actually this is a repost from my late posting to the previous blog article.
----
There's so much -- and so little -- to say.
I was skeptical, but indeed it seems that Randy Foye is far better suited to play the off guard. It was obvious from the first that he wasn't a natural point guard and finally, McHale seems to have accepted that and moved him to the "2". It has been looking good so far, but that's really only relative. Flip Saunders used to talk about things taking about 10 games to really see if something is working, so I'll opine that we'll have a better handle on it in a couple of weeks from now.
That McCants has made that decision easier is a whole story in itself. And there must be some kind of backstory that isn't being publicly discussed. McHale will probably never "admit" that he was wrong about Rashad, but his actions (or actually lack thereof) are speaking for him.
With Ollie out for at least the heart of the season, the team now seems in dire need of a point guard. OF course, last year, Telfair was an iron man and perhaps will have to reprise that performance.
From the Strib, we read: "Could the Wolves also be looking on the market for a new guard?"
"We'll see how it goes," McHale said with a grin, then declined to comment further other than to nod when pressed about whether he is comfortable with the team's current makeup.
Oh my.
Please don't tell me he's gone fishing for Stephon Marbury.
Those keen eyed professional observers of the Timberwolves, Jim Petersen and Tom Hanneman have sussed out that Brian Cardinal and Kevin Love make a decent pairing on the court. Certainly, playing Love with Al Jefferson won't do much for Love's progression as a player. I applaud the "strategy", even as I wish that the Wolves would get a couple of servicable centers.
Nice points, as always. I was also wondering about Durant - comically overrated is a good way to put it. I wonder if he's going to become a "permanent potential" guy in the league, like Stro Swift or Darius Miles. He has more desire than those two, but right now it seems like his scoring is just there to fill a glaring need that OKC has.
I think we're finally seeing the fruits of the Foye-as-PG experiment. His scoring at the off-guard has been important, but his ability to make a play and set up teammates is really where his improvement has been. Also, earlier in the season his threes looked flatter - now I notice a pronounced Hassell-arc, which apparently is working.
I'm coming around on Cardinal as well. His obsession with bounce passes led to a turnover last night when he threw one at Craig Smith's shoes, but other than that, he's a crafty passer when not pressured. Like Kevin Love, he's going to need to knock down some shots soon to keep defenses honest.
And Miller off the bench is the right call at the moment. He's just not hitting his stride for whatever reason, and playing with the second unit gives him another chance to find it. Let's keep in mind that he had six seasons to establish himself at Memphis.
Interesting thing I noticed: Does anyone ever watch "Wolves Weekly"? I usually don't, but I had the game on the DVR and it was on after the game. It's normally just fluff pieces with Lea B. Olsen playing pool with Al and the like. However, they had a segment with assistant coach, Dean Cooper about working with players during shoot around before a game. Specifically, they showed him working with Love. Cooper was saying that the thing he's working on him most is angles, putting english on the ball near the hook, and jump hooks. He talked about how many times when a player faces up down low, they cannot see the hoop clearly because of the defender's arms and how the offensive player needs to pick a spot on the backboard and try to put it there and the various uses of english needed to score down low. They also showed him working with Love on a drop step and then spin away from the basket & shooting a jump hook. Cooper ended it by saying something along of the lines of "Because Kevin is so cerebral, he often begins to incorporate a lot of these things within the next game." After seeing this, I remember Love hitting at least two jump hooks and also another move under the basket where he scored on a reverse underneath flipping the ball up in last night's game.
Not going to get into a Love/Mayo thing, but I really like the progress he consistently is showing. He's 20 years old & seems to be learning and adjusting his game constantly. He should be a sophomore in college, yet he's capable of a double-double any night in the NBA as a rookie. Wait until he gets his body built up for the NBA. Remember string-bean KG as a rookie? Look at him now. Guys need a couple of years to bulk up their bodies, which is why I agree with Britt that Durant will be a bust unless he beefs up. Britt's conversation with Love above only reinforces the idea that he knows where & how he can improve & keeps working at it. Love's not the only 6'9" power forward in the league. i think he has all the tools & smarts to be as good or better than Brand or Boozer in time.
It is nice to see the Wolves finally win a few in a row. Rather than being the league dormat, the team has established itself against other teams in the NBA's bottom 1/3. The next three games against Milwaukee, Miami, and Phoenix should give an even better idea of where this team is in the greater scheme of things.
Permanently moving Foye to the 2 and McCants to the bench is among McHale's best moves as coach. McCants' time in Minnesota is over and his skills as pretty much redundant to Foye's, so why give him any burn? Better to see what Foye can do as the shooting guard for the remainder of the season. I think in the long run Bassy makes for a good backup point, unless he miraculously learns how to shoot. Down the road, they'll need to get a starter and allow Bassy to be the primary backup. Foye should only be used as an emergency point guard; he just doesn't have the skills to play the position. Any thoughts on bringing in Livingston to see if he's got anything left in Ollie's absence? What could it hurt?
While McHale needs to have some time with the team to see what they have, I think the Wolves are going to have to be players at the trade deadline. The top two players to me that are expendable and actually worth something to other teams are the Rhino and Miller, along with their draft picks. Getting a center and point guard should be the priority moving forward.
Holy god, this is an awful, awful analysis of the Thunder's potential, and anybody who is agreeing with this "Durant is a bust" drivel must just not watch games. Yeah, he came into our bulding and had a bad game, but look at the previous, I dunno, 20 games he played. He dropped 27 and 12 on NY the night before he came here, and had 33 and 9 to nearly knock off Denver the night before that.
He is flat-out dominating, and in his second year is already one of the best three point shooters in the game. He's just 20, so he's only going to get bigger, and better. I would trade Jefferson, Foye, and several draft picks for the opportunity to have this kid, but OKC would never be stupid enough to take it. For christ's sake, he's averagins 23.5 pts, 6 rebounds, 2 assists, a steal and a block on 46.5 percent shooting. That is stunning.
Sorry about the rant, but I just can't believe the stupidity inherent in that statement, or the comments agreeing with it. You'd all do McFail proud as GM's.
Hey Everyone,
Thanks for such insiteful comments. Brit's mention of Cassell and Sprewell being a "cancer" got me thinking of that horrible season that could have been.
I know this is off-topic, but I was out of the country during the 04-05 season. Can someone that has a few minutes to deviate from this year's T-wolves happenings please tell me what exactly happened with Cassell and Sprewell in 04-05 season? Was it injuries, bad attitudes, or both? I still haven't been able to move on from what could have been during that season, the second and last of the "three-headed monster's" existence.
thanks.
A bit of both, but mostly attitude. Cassell was aging, he just wasn't the same anymore, and he had never adjusted his game to his athletic limitations. I didn't feel like he ever went into full blown mutiny mode though.
Sprewell, on the other hand, was a huge, huge cancer in the lockerroom, and I think that was just a massive distraction to everyone. He played the game with a chip on his shoulder all year, but it was the wrong kind of chip. It was like he wanted to stick it to his own team all night long. I can only imagine that the practices with him, and his whole lockerroom vibe, would have been even worse.
Britt - allow me.
Ethan - Opinions (particularly well-reasoned opinions that include back up) are welcome and heartily encouraged by any readers of this blog. A multi-paragraph personal attack is not.
The tone and content of this blog is a near-treasure and ought to be respected.
Your defense of the greatness that is Kevin Durant would be a fine addition to today's blog were it not sandwiched between personal attacks based on the words "almost comically overrated".
OKC is 5-31. They have no player that is "flat-out dominating."
When I watch Kevin Durant, I see a young Rashard Lewis trying to play like a young Tracy McGrady. Once he figures out his role, he'll be a good-to-great player.
I see an interesting theme emerging here -- and it is as fruitless as it is interesting: assessing the potential of 20 year olds. For every LeBron there are a hundred Mayos and Durants and Loves and Odens. In fact, for every LeBron there is everyone else, including KG. Simply put, we don't know what they've got. You can talk about ceilings, walls, potentials, etc., but, ultimately, this is not a 20 year old's game. You can make some body-type guesses and some attitude guesses. Until a guy dominates, you can't write him in as a sure thing, and until a guy dogs out for three or four years, you can't write him off. I, for one, am watching Love with great curiosity. He's getting lunched right now, but he is getting those boards. And, oh yes, his famous "hops" appear to have left the building along with Miller's jump shot. But every once in awhile there's a paradigm shift that is not predicated on "bigger, faster, and quicker." European white boys came over and put a little different mustard in the game. Love may well have some strange condiment in his game that we have not seen before, too. And Mayo may not spread quite as far as we think. He may be nothing more than a very good version of exactly what he is, and there are a fair number of them in the league already. It all bears watching, which is why we follow the game.
Fair enough A.K., I apologize for the tone of that post. I think it is fair to point out, though, that "comically overrated" sounded pretty disparaging. A number of other comments enhanced my impression that a pretty negative and poorly reasoned dismissal of a very good player, with a lot of fans, was taking place here. I am a big fan of his, and as a midwest transplant to Texas have followed his game for quite awhile, so I took it kinda personal.
As to what I meant by flat-out dominating; Durant is playing on an incredibly young team, and they are losing a lot of games. But they have also beaten some good teams recently, and I was very impressed with the way they played against the Pistons and Nuggets. In most of those games, Durant has been basically unguardable. All that said, he is not dominating the way a Kobe or LeBron does, because he isn't that good yet. But for a second year player, who should be a junior in college, I think dominating is a fair descriptor.
And the Melo comparison is kinda funny, since Durant's numbers are better than Melo's were in his second season, even though Melo was in a better situation, and physically far more mature than Durant at the same point.
The Thunder actually have really good talent, but they are very young. Young teams can look very bad on any given night. The biggest Wolves win in team history (51) was against one of the earlier versions of the Baby Bull teams in 2001.
Witness the Wolves against another bad team in Sacromento three weeks ago. After that game, there seemed to be little hope of any of our players succeeding judging by the posts around here. They were either too short, unathletic, or mismatched roster wise. Now here we are - and the Wolves young team NOW appears versitile, adept to the new - shorter NBA (Foye blocks both Golden Boy 6'3 OJ Mayo and 6'3 scorer Ben Gordon and soon to be matched up against Eric Gordon - Kevin Love - league leader in rebounds per 48 minutes), and brimming with chemistry.
A couple nights ago OKC actually beat the Knicks (yes, not saying much), who beat the Celtics last Sunday.
Ethan--
You have every right to your opinion and I don't begrudge your defense of Durant. I'll lay my cards on the table and you can decide for yourself whether my case is legit.
In the 6-8 games I've watched Durant play the entire contest instead of simply highlight plays (all of them in the pros), he has *never* exhibited a credible defensive performance, has had difficulty sussing out how to play with others on offense, has exercised wretched shot selection (something that, given his FG% this year, I imagine has improved), has been easily bodied at both ends of the floor, and hasn't demonstrated leadership by either temperament or all-around performance. Yes, he can get hot, and be a marvelous scorer in both transition and the half-court game. Can he improve? Without question--I'm certain he will. But for a reigning rookie of the year who was widely touted as a franchise player coming out of college, I regard him as "almost comically overrated." His one tremendous skill--his ability to put the ball in the basket, is fairly common and his progress on the type of skills that complement his teammates and help a ballclub become a winner are far more evident in Russell Westbrook than they are in Durant.
Let's get really specific. Where was your boy when the Wolves were going off on a 42-24 blast in the first quarter to put away the game before it really started last night? I'll tell you what I saw: a skinny kid clank five shots without a make or a clue, register his one point on a defensive three second by the opposition, garner a defensive rebound and turnover while contributing to perhaps the worst defensive performance I have seen at the Target Center. Meanwhile, the man he was guarding, Ryan Gomes, scored 5 points (2-4 FG, 1-2 3ptFG) and had a rebound, an assist, and a steal in the 8:02 Durant was on him, despite being the third option behind Foye and Jeffeson. For the game, Durant was 3-13 FG, with 2 rebounds, one assist and two turnovers in 22:14, during which time the Thunder were minus -27.
Okay, you say, but that was a bad game. Fine, let's look at the previous two Thunder-Wolves games this year. In the first one, Durant was 7-21 FG with zero assists, a turnover and 5 rebounds in 37:30, during which time the Thunder were minus -2 in a game they won by 3. In the second matchup, Durant's best of the trio, he shot 7-18 FG and had four rebounds, three assists and a turnover in 40:53, during which time the Thunder were minus -3 in a game they lost by one.
So, to recap, against the Timberwolves this season, Durant is 17-52 (32.7%) with 11 rebounds, 4 assists and 4 turnovers in a total 100:37 he's been on the court, during which time his team is a composite minus -32. By contrast, in the 43:23 when Durant has sat, the Thunder are a composite minus -8. Pardon me if I'm not impressed.
Yes, I know that Durant went off against the Knicks--scoring on a Mike D'Antoni club that goes up and down and tries to beat you with pace; who would have guessed Durant would thrive? And the Denver game was against Melo Anthony, who had almost exactly the same line (31-9-2) as Durant's 33-9-5.
Finally, in the second Sprewell and Cassell year, everyone from Flip to McHale to KG agreed that Sprewell busted his hump on the court--it was the idiotic comments in the preseason that poisoned the well for him. Cassell, on the other hand, knowing that he himself was to blame for his rotten contract situation, took out his ire and frustration blasting team management for not giving Spree more than a 3-year $21 million offer, and then played lackluster and unprofessional basketball for most of the season--McHale wouldn't start him during his first tenure as coach after replacing Flip.
I hear ya, he's had some bad games against Minnesota, and maybe playing well against Denver and NYK doesn't impress you. But he also has had big games against Cleveland, Detroit, Boston, Atlanta, and a bunch of other very, very good defensive teams. I actually was at the game when he put up 28 and 13 on the road against San Antonio. It isn't like he's had a couple flashes of promise and a bunch of bad games this season, he's had a couple of bad games and a ton of great ones.
His defense is a work in progress, and like most young players he has games where he is awful, but he also often plays very well on that end. Funny thing is, he actually reminds me a lot of KG, my all-time favorite NBA player, which is probably why I immediately was such a huge fan. He definitely doesn't have the same natural defensive instincts, but he's a bigtime competitor with great length and athleticism, so I would guess he'll actually be a great defender someday.
The only area I feel he needs to really work on is creating shots for teammates. He did it at Texas very effectively, but he has really struggled with that at the NBA level. In that sense, I think your comparison to a young Melo is more apt.
Ethan--
Fair enough. The quality of your response will have me put my opinion on ice the next game or two I catch with him and let's see if a totally objective perspective all over again alters my view.
We are the world!
(arms around each other everybody!)
We are the children!
We love the Wolves and the NBA so much, so let's start giving...
I don't want to drag out the Durant thing, but sometimes being called "overrated" simply means a lot of people are talking about you. Durant has had to wear the "face of the franchise" tag, while other top lotto picks (Green and Westbrook) get to play without the burden of expectations. Westbrook's skills are going to help the development of both Green and Durant - a cursory look at the stats shows most OKC shooters are improved behind the arc this year, and a quality PG can really improve shooting percentage. Of course, players so young are going to improve on their own if they've got the work ethic anyway.
Durrant always seems to pop up over at APBR. He may have won the rookie of the year last year but he really wasn't that good. He was below average in several key areas for shooting guards and small forwards and his scoring was based more on volume than it was efficiency.
This year he's pretty much the same player except that he's shooting an eFG of 50% and rebounding at a better clip. He's still on the chucker side of the efficiency/volume scoring divide but OKC is so bad that it's hard to tell whether or not this is because he's simply the best player on a crappy team and someone needs to fill the score sheet or if this is just how he rolls. I tend to come down on the side of him being a Grade A chucker. There's nothing wrong with this but I don't think he's the type of player you can build a franchise around and I sure don't think you give up Al and Foye for him (I think OKC would jump at that opportunity BTW). He's tall and he can shoot. He can make a long career out of those two attributes.
If he is going to make the next step, he needs to worship at the altar of Kevin Martin. This is his role model, not Keith Van Horn. This means he needs to lower his turnovers and get the hell to the line. If he continues jacking up a ton of shots and hoping that a 40+ 3p% takes him to 20ppg land while doing very little else to help his squad win in terms of rebounding, turnovers, and free throws, he's not going to do OKC any favors. This is the skinny Melo path. Inefficiency and big scoring numbers. If he chooses the Kevin Martin path (previously traveled by Reggie Miller), he can be an efficient scorer and help his team win.
I have no idea where he'll end up. He's made some strides this year since PJ left so I'd kind of like to see that play out. If I had to bet, I'd say he remains a Grade A chucker for his entire career and ends up in the neighborhood of Chuck Person, Glen Robinson, and Keith Van Horn.
Durant is actually very efficient, knocking down 46% of his field goals, 42% 3PT, and getting to the line 6 times per game. Heck, that's more efficient than anyone we have on our team, including Al Jefferson, who gets to the line a pedestrian 5 times per game.
None of that means he's a "franchise player", which requires one to defend and pass too. But he is already an elite scorer - and an efficient one at that.
OKC has a trio of young talent that will be a handful to deal with in the future. They're in great position in my opinion, esp. if they land Griffin.
In order to calculate efficiency you need to take into account some sort of time or possession based statistic. Durrant is in the league's top 10 in FGA (7th with 642), TO (7th with 103), mpg (8th with 38.3), FG (6th with 298), and total minutes (7th). In order for him to be efficient, he would have to cut down the number of possessions or minutes it would take him to get these numbers.
Look at how many points he scores per shot and net possession based stats. He definitely is shooting the ball better but not more efficiently. He still requires a lot of shots to get his points and he doesn't offset this volume with much else.
What an interesting debate on Durant. Just wanted to say: keep it up.
Many of us enjoy reading informed discussions like this. And as always I am impressed by the level of intelligence, analysis and articulation displayed here.
SNP, I agree Durant is not at an elite efficiency level, but his points per shot are better than Jefferson, Foye, Gomes, and Miller - our top four scorers, two of which only take "good" shots. And our horrid play earlier in the year had as much to do with horrific scoring efficiency as anything else. My understanding of "efficiency" pretty much ends at PPS, so I'll defer to you on the more advanced measures.
Since we won't have another 3-pointer until sometime after Saturday, I just needed to say something: screw the Blazers if this whole lawsuit-threatening stuff is true. Seriously this irks me to no end.
You have a player whom your doctors determined suffered a career-ending injury. He proved that he still has a chance to make a career in this league - he's only 27, after all. Now, to keep the luxury of cap space, you're doing all you can to prevent him from getting that chance in the NBA.
I'm not a doctor, so I can't comment on the extent of his injury. But if he managed to get minutes with the Celtics and Grizzlies without embarrassing himself, anyone should have a shot at this guy.
But it's not only about Miles, and I hope you'll excuse my mini-rant here. The mere threat of litigation is often enough to deter "taking a risk" on making anything better. Come up with an innovative new product? Prepare for an onslaught of largely baseless infringement lawsuits. Design a better cell phone? Gotta pay off Qualcomm and anyone else who owns similar intellectual property.
The bottom line is that Stern needs to nip this in the bud ASAP. I think loss of a first-round pick AND forcing the Blazers to pay out Miles's contract is almost too lenient. Obviously my argument for Miles is based on the fact that he should never have been declared ineligible, and we're going to need new rules in place to prevent this from happening again. Even though Miles turned out to be an above-average NBA player for his healthy years, we'd all be crying bloody murder if a megastar's comeback was prevented by his old team. /rant
I agree that the Blazers are completely in the wrong here. A few points of interest: Miles will get paid no matter what. The Blazers had a doctor declare him inelligible and his contract is being paid out by insurance. If he can play, they face 2 expensive options: they pay back insurance and they go over the luxury mark. I don't care how rich Paul Allen is, that's near $20 mil and it has to hurt.
I want to know where the players' rep is on all of this. A billionaire owner and his team singled out a specific player and effectively said they will sue anyone who signs him. Whoever signs him will immediately become my 2nd favorite team in the league. I think Portland should pay a big penalty for this. This is every bit as bad as making an under-the-table contract deal. I'd like to know if the Blazers contacted Memphis about this before they released Miles. I don't know about you, but he looked OK against the Wolves and I was kind of surprised to see him released. I get that there was the issue of guaranteeing his salary if he wasn't released by Wednesday, but how much was he costing them anyway? I'd like to know the timing of this legal threat.
So after writing that, I was a little curious about what became of Terrell Brandon, whom the Wolves ended up trading in the Sprewell deal despite his actual career-ending injury. Not only does he own a barbershop (in Portland of course), but one year ago he thwarted an extortion attempt by filling a bag with crumpled paper with a single dollar bill on the top. It all turns out well, but that's seriously scary stuff.
It should be noted that Portland is threatening to sue if Darius is signed for the purpose of hurting Portland. Of course, there's no way to prove this unless he plays for 15 seconds in two games and then is waived. But a legit contender could probably use his services in the event of injury or just to bolster their bench. Even if he's lost a step, his experience alone could make him valuable. And who knows - maybe this entire experience has refocused Darius and he can drop that "often aloof" tag and fulfill his initial promise.
And I agree with SnP - I'd like to know more about the timing of this and any other contact the Blazers may have had with other teams. This aggression will not stand, man.
Let's also not forget that the Blazers violated Miles' HIPPA rights earlier this year by Pritchard talking about his injury in the press.
Personally, I'd love to see Papa Glen bring him in. I'll even write the press release for the team:
Today the Minnesota Timberwolves announced the signing of forward Darius Miles. Miles signed a 10 day contract and will join the team this Monday.
"Darius showed us a lot during last week's game against Memphis," said Wolves assistant GM Fred Hoiberg. "He really got up and down the floor and provided a defensive shot blocking presence that we believe will fit in well with our current roster."
Center Calvin Booth was released to make room for Miles on the active roster.
...there you go. Sue away Portland, sue away. I'm sure Papa Glen would have no problem finding a good lawyer to represent a client who is clearly able to work in a suit against a billionaire who says he can't so that he can collect insuance money and cap space.
Agreed on the Portland thing. I think Memphis will bring him back when he can be signed to a 10-day contract. He obviously is healthy enough to give it a shot, and his style of play (positives and negatives) fit with Memphis. Aside from the new threat of litigation, the reason a team wouldn't take a chance on him has more to do with his personality than his skills.
To answer the Brandon thing: the Wolves had an insurance policy on him that allowed the team who held his rights to collect if he retired. Because of that and because his certain retirement would clear his salary off the books, Atlanta took him to in effect dump Glenn Robinson's salary. Atlanta cashed in the insurance policy, and he retired during the 03-04 season. I hadn't heard about that story in Portland, but what a gutsy and heady decision by him.
Stop-N-Pop, I don't know if you're joking or not about the signing, but I don't see the downside. Why not release Booth? We're not going to get anything meaningful for his contract besides the 1st pick in the 3rd round in 2012. I don't see the Wolves making any trades, but I suppose his contract could be a throw in to a larger deal. Who anyone available on our roster?
So we add add a player, who has something to prove, on a 10-day or league minimum deal. In the meantime, we totally ruin the salary cap of a team poised to become an upper echelon team for years to come in our own division. Where's the downside? This team is 10-25. Could Portland really argue that the Wolves signing a guy once viewed as a potential KG hybrid entering the league out of high school was done out of malice, when he's replacing the league's ugliest, most unskilled big man. A man the Sonic's once signed to a 5 year $34 million deal. The Wolves once traded for Marc Jackson, gave Gary Trent playing time, and signed Reggie Slater twice. What do we have to lose?
Hi, first time poster here, sorry to drag the conversation back to Durant (and Melo) but I couldn't resist tossing in my two-cents.
"Comically overrated" initially sounded a bit harsh to me as well, but that's probably because most of the people I talk to (outside of fantasy circles) don't think too much of Durant right now, I was actually starting to think he was being underrated; it all depends on your baseline I guess.
Thin and poor man's Melo isn't too far off at this point, but that's no insult for a second year player as long as we're not assuming that is his ceiling.
Melo may not be the kind of player I would want to build a team around, but he is a very skilled and talented player (when healthy) and few if any sophmores can expect to be on his level. Now that he has stopped leaking out early on defense as much, Melo is actually one of the best rebounders at his position in the NBA. He's currently ranked 3rd in rebound rate amongst starting small forwards, just behind Marion and Mbah a Moute (who also plays a lot of power forward). This isn't a fluke either, last year Melo had the same rebound rate as LeBron (this year Melo is way ahead). Since moving to small forward, Durant has really improved his rebounding; he averaged 7.7 rebs per game in December after averaging only 4.1 in November and 4.4 his rookie year. Its still too early to tell if he can keep it up, but so far Durant has been a great rebounder from the small forward position, which makes sense given his long arms but lack of great quickness; the farther away from the hoop you get the more rebounding depends on anticipation and quickness (not Durant's strong suit), however, the closer you get to the hoop the more length comes into play (Durant's chief asset).
I also think that Durant is proving that he can be a great scorer and an efficient one, not just a chucker. Durant's true shooting percentage (factors in threes and FTs) is around 56%, which is right there with Melo's (and LeBron's as well in every year except this year). Again, this is only likely to increase now that Durant is playing SF where he can expect to get more inside shots and put backs and draw more fouls.
Unfortunately, Durant also resembles the negative aspects of Melo's game such as a relatively high turnover rate (not uncommon for sophmores) and a very low assist rate (much lower than Melo's in fact).
However, Durant IS already a pretty efficient overall player, ranking 5th in the league in PER at the SF position. Of course, PER isn't a perfect statistic (it doesn't factor in defense for example), but it does provide a nice snapshot of a player's overall efficieny, while adjusting for the amount of possessions he uses, his turnover rate, the pace his team plays at, his minutes, etc.
Like Melo, Durant hasn't been a great defender so far, but I think it may be too early to call. He has definitely shown some shot blcoking ability and may yet develop into a quality defender, especially in zones.
Anyway, while I don't completely agree with Britt's take on Durant, these kind of player observations (which are hard to come by on SportsCenter) are exactly why I like reading this blog. I was specifically looking forward to this post because I wanted to read Britt's take on the new and improved Durant and as well as Westbrook. In fact, I wasn't able to watch the game and would love to hear any additional thoughts on Westbrook's performance. Did he match up on Foye at all? With Mason getting torched I would have thought that a Watson-Westbrook backcourt would match up better with Telfair and the red-hot Foye.
doubleplussgood:
I was kind of joking about the signing but it certainly wouldn't be a bad thing if the Wolves did and they certainly have a good excuse for doing so. The guy played some solid bench minutes for Memphis and he was better than Calvin Booth or Mark Madsen were for the Wolves.
As far as efficiency goes, I'll say this about Durrant (and players in general): it's about what you bring to your team in terms of scoring, rebounding, and turnovers in terms of a 100 possession rate. Let's say player x factors in on 23.9% of his team's possessions and player y comes in at 23.4. Player x takes 0.26 fta/pos and player y takes 0.34. Player x gets 0.10 ast/poss while player y gets 0.25. Player x has a to/poss number of 0.13 while player y has 0.10. Player x gets 8.3% of his team's Orebs while player y gets 10.7. Both players have an eFG of 50% and their TS% is in the 55-57 range. Player x has a fta/fga of .33 and player y is .41.
Player x is Durrant. Player y is Brandon Roy. They both shoot a similar percentage from the floor, they both take a similar amount of 3s, and they are effectively equal free throw shooters. The difference is that Roy gets to the line on a far greater clip than Durrant while filling the stat sheet with numerous other favorable possession ending numbers. As far as net numbers go, they're somewhat similar but if you stretch out what they do over 100 possessions, you can begin to see why Roy is the much more efficient player. The ability to get to the line, facilitate, and get your own misses/limit the other team's capture of misses turn chuckers into star ballers.
PS: stat comparison is taken from here:
http://www.draftexpress.com/stats.php?year=2008%2F09&q=&per=pergame&qual...
I gotta agree with GregSandpaper (also my first post). Fantastic blog (as is Canis Hoopus) made better by a troll-free intelligent comment board.
In any case let me add some birthdates:
Foye Sep 24th, 1983
Melo May 29th, 1984
Roy July 23rd, 1984
Mayo Nov 5th, 1987
Love Sep 7th, 1988
Durant Sep 29th, 1988
Rose Oct 4th, 1988
Westbrook Nov 12th, 1988
I'm not necessarily comparing the players, but it IS meaningful that Durant is younger than Kevin Love, 4 years younger than Roy and about a year younger than Mayo. Seriously, Durant was a teenager until 1 day before training camp this year. IF he has the work ethic, coaching and gets into a good team situation he absolutely has the potential and early career path of a Hall of Famer.
And yes, it is painful to realize Foye is older than Roy and Melo.
Good analysis stop-n-pop, and you'll get no argument from me that Roy is currently the more efficient player. But if you are comparing a player four years younger to an all-star guard who is at least on the margins of MVP consideration, that's pretty good news for Durant.
The thing with Durant that makes some people so adamant about his greatness is his length, his unusual athleticism for his size, his intelligence, and his work ethic, which is truly crazy. For me, it's just hard to imagine him failing to go down as a Hall of Fame great (barring injury). That might sound extreme, but when you look beyond even the stats, which are already phenomenal, I think you'll see how unusual he is. At least in my opinion :P
Thanks Ethan (and CaliWolf). I don't doubt that Durrant will improve but the question is how he will improve. Roy is older but he also played like he's playing now, style-wise, at Washington. Durrant is very young and he plays for a crappy team so there's obviously a lot he can change, but there's nothing in his stat history to suggest he can suddenly develop the all-around type of efficiency that a player like Roy has. In this sense, he has been very limited so far in his career. He needs to lower the turnovers, increase the free throws, and grab more offensive rebounds. He can have all the length in the world but he still rebounds like crap on the offensive end of the court.
Post new comment
Blogs
Sports
Baseball:
Warning Track Power by Alex Halsted
Sports:
On the Ball by Britt Robson
Society
Weather:
Dude Weather by Jimmy Gaines
A&E
Fiction:
Write Now! by Terry Faust
Retired
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
- Contact:
- Secrets Staff
- Write to Editors
- Send Press Release
- Reprint Request
- Work at Secrets of the City
- Our Address:
- Secrets of the City
- PO Box 3690
- Minneapolis, MN 55403
- (651) 356-8714
©2002-2009 Entropy Publishing, LLC. No part of this site may be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Entropy Publishing, LLC. except that an individual may print for personal use and/or forward articles via e-mail to a reasonable number of recipients for personal, non-commercial purposes. Thanks to FAMFAMFAM and Tango Project for their icons.
Media Partners
