Dude Weather Subscribe to Secrets Minneapolis / St. Paul
On the Ball
The Three-Pointer: Some Fresh Air
Photo copyright 2008 NBAE (Photo by David Sherman/NBAE via Getty Images)
Game # 32, Home Game #16: Minnesota 115, Golden State 108
Game #33, Road Game #17: Chicago 92, Minnesota 102
Season Record: 8-25
1. What's Happening
Following the Minnesota Timberwolves can make you mean. You confront a second-rate hype machine that tells you to get optimistic about a group of well-meaning mediocrities and, against your better judgment, you hope on board, convince yourself that black is. if not exactly white, then a prettier shade of gray...until the evidence becomes relentless that your better judgment was accurate after all. Sooner or later--It could be Christmas, could be the dogsled days of January and February, could be the Ides of March or Easter--you start listening to self-appointed experts feed you bullshit about the top college prospects (how often are these jokers right?) , and hoping the team loses so the draft pick is better and perhaps, just perhaps, this is the year some important heads roll. The alternative, after all, is dwelling in detail on the performance of players who are as likely to be future trivia questions as touchstones for this franchise.
I sidestep those attitudinal shenanigans as much as possible. First, I'm a fan of the game more than any specific team, especially one as relentlessly woeful as the hometown ballclub has been. Second, I'm looking for the brighter side of honesty. I'm not going to slap a "Support The Troops!" bumper sticker or a flag decal on bone-headed personnel decisions and selfish or indifferent play. If there isn't much that is pleasant to say, I'll speak and write the unpleasantries. But I'd rather praise than criticize, would rather, at the end of the day, to be a chump than a nasty cynic (while striving hard to be neither. of course). So I've been thirsty for the Wolves to stitch together a few wins so we can analyze what's going right, instead of wrong, for a change.
That's finally happened. After winning just 4 of their first 27 games, the Wolves have won four of their last 6. Let's not kid ourselves: The biggest change has been in the level of competition, and this nice little patch is probably more of a blip than a trend in the fortunes of the team the rest of the season. But the schedule remains favorable for another week, with three winnable games (at Memphis, then home against the Thunder and the Bucks) on the docket. Besides, success isn't totally related to the schedule: Without some fairly significant improvement over their dreadful play early last month, the Wolves couldn't have beaten Golden State nor Chicago this past weekend. Here's my take on the uptick.
* Clarity on Foye
It's been painful to watch this franchise play Al Jefferson and Randy Foye--the two people the braintrust cherishes most as cornerstones--out of position at center and point guard, respectively. Finally throwing in the towel on Foye as floor general, a move begun at the tail end of Randy Wittman's disastrous tenure, has been a tonic for all concerned, most of all Foye, who can now exercise his ego in the realm of his virtues. There are subtle but crucial differences between being a freelance playmaker (which fits Foye's m.o.) and a point guard. To command the point guard slot, you need expansive, strategic court vision and an utterly reliable handle; otherwise, you aren't going to be able to effectively execute your half-court sets against opponents who have scouted the plays and worked up defensive wrinkles to stop them. The point guard's anticipatory vision and second-nature dribbling according to the split-second dictates of his brain and his instincts are key tools in his ability to counter the defensive gambits while keeping the set play reasonably in sync. Foye has never done this well and never will. He's got relatively generous impulses but lacks the specific skills to fully exploit them until opponents are fixated on stopping his scoring. Flipping him over to the off-guard spot has literally freed him scamper and hurl up jumpers, his body language unfettered from the rigid brace the point duties had imposed on his thoughts and actions.
Even with the Saturday night injury to Kevin Ollie, there should be no turning back on the commitment to keep playing Foye off the ball. After Ollie suffered a dislocated elbow and left a tie game just 3:37 into the first quarter versus the Bulls, Bassy Telfair manned the point for 38:47 of the remaining 44:23, and racked up a plus +22. By contrast, the Wolves were minus -12 in the two brief stints (comprising 5:36) that Bassy sat and Foye went back to the point.
* Spacing and Pacing and Free Throws
After Friday night's win against Golden State, coach Kevin McHale spoke of his ongoing attempts to get the Wolves' offense to deploy better spacing out on the floor. McHale memorably (and accurately) claimed that too frequently his players were getting in the way of their own teammates. Absolutely true. For at least the last year or two, the Wolves have been horrible at the pick and roll and at spreading the floor enough to create both open jumpers and driving lanes for penetration. One of the main reasons Brian Cardinal has been getting so many minutes of late has been his proclivity to move away, with a purpose, from the person to whom he has just passed, and to otherwise position himself in the half-court with enough distance and angles to facilitate options for his teammates in terms of using him for picks or driving straight to the hoop. Here again, not having Foye at the point helps, as Randy's uncertainty often compelled him to dribble toward a teammate before passing it to him.
Another way to generate the habit of moving without the ball is to push the pace, another McHale priority for the offense that has recently borne fruit. It's been a kick to watch Minnesota beat a couple of (admittedly injury-wracked and otherwise depleted) running teams at their own game en route to triple-digit scoring performances. Save for a big win last year versus Indiana, I can't remember a game when Minnesota pushed the pace as relentless as they did in Chicago Saturday. This fosters a variety of benefits for this particular ballclub. It allows regular rotation players not named Al Jefferson to get some good looks at the basket and stimulate their own internal offensive rhythm, while concurrently relieving some of the pressure on Big Al to produce in the half court. As I just mentioned, it creates habitual movement that extends to half-court sets and thus improves spacing. It helps obscure some of Minnesota's problems defending in the half court, especially their lack of size in the paint, by accelerating the prevailing rhythm of the game and inducing opponents to follow suit. And it draws more fouls and generates more free throws. In three of their past four wins, the Wolves have gone to the line at least 37 times (and in the 4th one they shot 27 free throws). Compare that to a year ago, when the team made 30 or more FTA just 5 times in 82 games.
* The Emergence of Gomes
For the second straight season, Ryan Gomes has weathered a slow start, especially on offense, and begun to score with efficiency and regularity while becoming a barometer of the team's overall performance. After killing Minnesota's offense with his 21% clanking from the field over a 7-game span in mid to late December in which the Wolves went 1-6, Gomes has nailed 53% of his shots (33-62), including 60% of his treys (8-15) over the last five, as the Wolves have gone 3-2. And unlike the team's two leading scorers, Jefferson and Foye, Gomes isn't a liability at the defensive end. Indeed, his savvy, dedicated guarding of Memphis's Rudy Gay and Golden State's Stephen Jackson had as much to do with Wolves victories as the jumpers Gomes has been hitting, most of them in the second half.
* Synergy
Naturally, all of these above factors don't happen in a vacuum, but feed on each other. Foye's move to off-guard provides more minutes for Telfair at the point, which naturally helps the team push the pace more frequently (as is Bassy's wont), which generates more spacing and movement in the half court, which creates more free throws. And because Gomes is such a smart, team-oriented player, his personal numbers will almost inevitably rise when his teammates are more productive, efficient, and team-oriented.
2. Addition by Subtraction
It's instructive to see the connection between the Wolves' improved performance and dramatically fewer minutes of late for both Craig Smith and Rashad McCants, two players McHale obviously wanted to feature more prominently after he took over from Wittman. Smith has been victimized by Minnesota playing teams that murder him in matchups, such as Orlando and Dallas, but the fact remains that there are more of those teams than a mysteriously infatuated McHale thinks, and as scouts continue to suss out the Rhino's pronounced strengths and weaknesses and plan accordingly, he loses the power of surprise. Why McHale continues to start him alongside four others who already are relatively small in size and questionable defensively is heightened by his robbing minutes for top pick Kevin Love to play beside Al Jefferson. That's the grand plan, isn't it? Ironically, the only reason not to start Love with Jefferson is that it exposes the Wolves' interior defense, but Jefferson and Smith are an even worse tandem than Jefferson and Love in that regard. McHale is drawn to smallball like a moth to the flame; lately he's been using Cardinal at power forward in certain situations, while Jason Collins may never see the floor in a Wolves' uni again. If a bona fide center isn't in the Iron Ranger's plans, then Love should get 35-38 minutes a night--ditto Jefferson, of course--and let Madsen, Smith and Cardinal unsuccessfully try and hold the fort for the remainder. That said, it is time to start the most productive quintet--Jefferson, Love, Gomes, Foye and Telfair--and shorten the playing time of the bench. That will signal to the fan base that the franchise is legitimately building for the future (Gomes is the graybeard at 26, with Foye 25, Jefferson 24, Telfair 23 and Love 20), and providing an extensive assessment of the most precious existing assets so those four first round picks and extensive cap space are better utilized down the road.
That's right, Shaddy McCants is nowhere to be found in this longterm picture. With Foye now snugly installed at off guard, Gomes' solidifying his grip on the small forward slot and Mike Miller available for long range sniping, McCants' behavioral filibuster has effectively played out the expiration date on his development period here in Minnesota. The latest straw, which may or may not break the camel's back, was Shaddy's constant clanking to short-circuit the offense versus Golden State, culminating in him faking a jumper and holding the ball when ball movement was paramount. After Telfair finally received the pass and McCants waited for the return dish without moving (he is one of the prime offenders on jammed up spacing), Telfair imperiously waved him away. Shaddy, who may or may not have been aware of the Telfair emerging status as the point guard of at least the near-future, chose the time to scowl and drift away slightly, still looking to receive the rock with minimal movement. McHale yanked him shortly thereafter, and talked about the need for consistent effort from McCants after the game. He was a DNP-CD versus Chicago.
McCants's lack of self-awareness is increasingly making him look bad. An obviously smart, sensitive, perceptive guy, what doesn't he understand about his currently precarious state in the rotation. The dude is shooting 36%, less than 32% from outside the arc, has been a below-average defender and a ball-stopper on offense, and tops it all off with a petulant attitude. The change on the sideline from Wittman to McHale was perhaps his last real opportunity to catch a break and show what he could do in all facets of his game with an empathetic coach. To say he's blowing it is optimistic--it may already be blown.
3. Will It Ever Be Miller Time?
Everybody seems to like Mike Miller--the front office, the coaching staff, and perhaps most of all his teammates. But along with Foye's inability to play the point and McCants belly-flop, Miller's weird disinclination to shoot the damn ball has damaged and deflated the Wolves' prospects this year. It probably won't happen, but perhaps the best fit at this point would be to bring him off the bench, the way McCants was going to be used. For one thing, as a former sixth man of the year, Miller is a proven commodity in the role. He'll also not pout or grate as much as Shaddy was destined to pout and grate. And playing alongside the likes of Ollie and Rodney Carney and perhaps Cardinal, the need for him to shoot was be emboldened in neon, which perhaps is what is required for us all to get a glimpse of the guy who was supposed to be the irresistible sweetener that facilitated the Mayo-Love swap.
41 Reader Comments
Foye and Jefferson.
Playing the cornerstones out of position? IMO, they are both incurable tweeners! Foye needs to show a little better at PG in Ollies absence, for the sake of his career as a combo guard. The wolves need to replace Smith in their 3 man frontcourt with a tall defensive Center. By pretending either of these players has a set position, the team is doing them a disfavour.
Brit: I fully understand your reluctance to write a column for each game when the Wolves are not playing well and am aware that you have many other writing responsibilities. Nevertheless, I miss your detailed descriptions of key portions of games and player's individual contributions in the context of specific games or match-ups. Out here in the hinterlands, we don't get Channel 45, and therefore, rely on FSN (which often pre-empts the Wolves for Wild or Gopher hockey). Even if I could watch every game, I really appreciate your visual writing style. Perhaps you could include a highlights paragraph for each game. Thank you for the best basketball commentary on the web.
Hard not to like what we saw this weekend. I agree completely - McHale is starting to get a rotation and system of play that seems to work well for the pieces that we have (at least against the bottom 3rd of the NBA).
I never felt so sorry for a player as I did for Cardinal during the few minutes each half that he was forced to guard Tyrus Thomas. That had to be one of the biggest athleticism mismatch in the entire NBA. But I give props to Cardinal for the effort.
Count me as 1 who was seriously disappointed in 1) the T-wolves resigning Smith in the first place and 2) not trading Smith in late Nov. when he went on his mini offensive run and made his value about as high as it ever is going to be.
Yet, Smith is serving a purpose. I believe McHale is intentionally starting Smith so that Love gets his 1st minutes of each game against the other teams second string. As noted, Love has struggled with confidence. By giving him his first minutes against the second stringers, I think McHale is maximizing Love's chances of having immediate success which builds confidence - confidence which McHale hopes to carry forward later in the game against the 1st string. At least that is my theory and, if true, I think it is working perfectly. But I would still rather see Collins get Smith's limited minutes.
Even with their pretty meager contributions, I would love to see a Smith/Noah trade. It was amazing to me that with their size and athleticism up front, Chicago real has no one with a post game. They will never compete in the East with out a post option. Smith's tweener size would not be an issue with Chicago's front line. Here is hoping that Chicago gets desperate latter in the year.
I am sorry to say I agree with you completely - McCant's days as a contributing T-wolve look to be over. There is talent there - a la Ricky Davis - but I am not sure anyone will be able to get it out in a way that contributes to the greater benefit of the overall team.
Britt,
Thanks again for dropping the knowledge. I checked out the Chicago game on Saturday and, except for the wretched first 4 mintues, was pleasantly surprised with the results. Overall, the team looked at its best with Bassy running the show. Ollie's injury might turn out to be a blessing, allowing Bassy to develop and the Wolves to experiment with Foye as a starting shooting guard/back-up point guard. They'll need to know by the end of the year if it's feasible to see how much we need a floor general. Otherwise do we consider drafting someone like Ricky Rubio next year's high draft pick?
One of the team's disturbing characteristics was that they were not very athletic. Aside from Carney, nobody was playing or could play above the rim. Tyrus Thomas' 8 blocks were evidence of that. In this game, however, their hustle made up for it, especially on the boards. The best example of this was during Love's time on the floor in the first half.
McHale needs to give the Love - Jefferson experiment a shot for the remainder of the year. Personally, I think they need a real big man in the pivot, but since they aren't bound to get one by the end of this season, McHale might as well see if Love and Jefferson can play 4 and 5. If not, the team's got to draft one or trade for somebody. I would suggest shipping Smith and one of their picks, while the Rhino still has some value.
Solid analysis, Britt. Although I do not consider Foye to be particularly viable at the "2", putting him there inarguably makes the Wolves more effective than when he's at the point.
I'd say NoOnesAdvocate has it right - Foye and Jefferson are incurable tweeners. And thus, if these two are the cornerstone of the franchise, the Timberwolves cannot be considered seriously.
While we spend so much time looking at Jefferson, Foye, etc., I keep wondering exactly why the Wolves franchise does not seem to believe in manning the "5" with genuine big men who can at least play defense and rebound.
Regarding McCants, perhaps his personal life has left him too exhausted to perform up to McHale's expectations.
http://perezhilton.com/2009-01-02-khloe-kardashian-lands-a-boyfriend
I mean, if Khloe Kardashian was my New Year's date in Vegas...
Actually, I offer this not from a lurid perspective, but more as an insight to where McCants' head may be.
Hey Britt,
I was surprised to see that you did not mention Kevin Love's improved play as of late. Do you think we've seen evidence these last few games of Kevin Love learning how to get his shot off around the basket? Or are these the same shots as before...only this time they've gone in? I'd love to see what you (or anyone else for that matter) think about this.
I agree wholeheartedly with your proposed line up. This weekend four guys stepped up to match Al - Love, Gomes, Foye and Telfair. Start 'em and run 'em.
Most of the players seem to like playing for McHale. In his postgame Saturday, Gomes made a point of giving Kevin props. That has been his rep in both brief coaching stints. Just like Foye at the 2 and Al at the 4, the bench seems like a much better place for McHale. I think he looks better in a sportcoat than the Cosby sweaters too.
When is it ok to go with off court rumors? We know about the celebrity squeeze. Nothin' wrong with that. Smoke on the water can get in the way, though. That's what I hear.
Miller is worth a quick take too. Seven, eight weeks ago, Mike Miller was probably considered the Wolves' second best player. Foye in the wrong spot, Gomes shooting like Telfair, Love looking lost. Miller as sixth man says a lot about his play so far, but it also serves as a positive marker for this team.
AK< I remember Mike Miller killing the Wolves. He was receiving the ball in a stand still (or moving toward the hoop) position in an inside out game. With the TWolves he seems to be getting the ball as he comes around screens. That's a totally different shooting scenario. I think Jefferson's slow to absent passing creates an offensive flow (or lack thereof) which disables Miller's shooting. I would expect McHale to start playing Miller with Love more.
I'm still not sure the Disaster in Dallas/Dwane Casey's Revenge is a forgivable offense--McHale was shell-shocked in the second 1/2 and his team quit with timeouts remaining in a close game--but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't pleased with the way McHale has handled this squad other than that game.
I wonder what the learning curve is for McHale. At the time of the change there were a copule of reports that pegged him as being in over his head when it came to x's and o's. If he is serious about being a long term coach, how much slack should he get? Is 23-25 wins enough considering where this team is coming from? Would fans accept that? I think this is the most interesting story line going forward until the end of the year. The guy has them playing well, they are playing a style of ball that suits the personnel, and individual players are showing improvement. Best of all, he appears to be approaching something resembling a predictable lineup.
I'd love to see something like this for the rest of the year:
1- Ollie (15)/Bassy (25)/Foye (8)
2- Foye (25)/ Miller (23)
3- Gomes (25)/Miller (5)/Carney (18)
4- Love (20)/Cardinal (15)/Gomes (13)
5= Jefferson (35)/Love & Cardinal (13)
I'd like to see Carney get Brewer's mimnutes...with maybe some time at the 2 thrown in as well. If Shaddy isn't going to be resigned (and they should know this by now) he shouldn't see the court. Neither should Smith if Cardinal is playing the way he is.
I'd also like to raise a practical question that faces this squad in the off-season: Like it or not, this team is built around McHale's idea of small ball. If they bring in a new GM or if the Triangle of Unaccountability (Freddie Iowa, Toronto Ron, Jesus Jim) takes over, do they stay the course or do they go in a different direction? In other words, do they continue on the higher paced, sharp elbowed, offensively minded ball? I don't think they're that far away from being a good team. If they can land a real point in this year's draft while moving their other assets for a perimeter scorer (while returning Foye to his rightful position as 6th man) I don't think there's too much more they can do other than watch the grass grow.
Finally, to reignite the Love/Mayo debate on the day before the matchup in Memphis, I don't think you can overlook Love's play in the last 5-10 games. He is gaining confidence and they are finally running him out of the high post. McHale is closely monitoring his minutes and he's getting about 21 mpg with Smith and Cardinal filling in the lost minutes. While I think Mayo will always be the better scorer, I don't think he's that much better of a player as Love and I as Mayo's FG% continues to plummet (and it will; it was unnaturally high for any NBA player, let alone a rookie...his 2FG% was freakish and his 3FG% was inflated over what was expected) and as Love's FG% rises as he acclimates to the league, I don't think fans will be too upset about the deal. Love is an elite rebounder. You can look at what Mayo is doing as a rookie scorer and Love is every bit his equal as a rookie rebounder. His rebound rate is off-the-charts-historically good. Right now he has a 16.3 OReb%, 24.5 DReb%, and a 20.2 TReb%. This means that when Love is on the court, he grabs about a 5th of the misses with 10 players out there. If you plug these numbers into the league history, he's in Moses Malone, Charles Barkley, Shawn Kemp, Dennis Rodman territory for young rebounders.
This is hugely important. In the 1st half of the Bulls game he had 4 OReb that led to 8 points. He also got 2 Bulls to foul him on a rebound attempt, further extending the Wolves' possession. They scored on 1 of them. 4 of the 8 points were his own bucket so we can take those off the board, but that's 6 points above and beyond what the team would have gotten without him out there. Getting your own misses and limiting your opponents from getting theirs is a HUGE part of the game...especially on a crappy shooting team with bad defense. In some of these game, the Wovles are collecting upwards of 30% of their misses from the field. That makes up for a lot of bad defense and lost inches.
Now that they are running him in the high post like a hybrid Euro center with an American banger streak on the boards, he should start getting better putback opportunities. He's also looking to kick it out more after the OReb. If he can get the mid-range jumper back from what he had last year, he'll get his eFG up to the league average for the 4 (around 48%) and he'll be a well above average player. When you can rebound like he does, it makes up for a lot. Eventually, he'll start filling in the deficiencies.
Glad to see the Bassy-Foye tandem at work. It's not a championship--and maybe not even a playoff--backcourt, but they might complement one another well-enough that they improve individually and either set up a nice trade or deepen our rotation when an impact-guard is finally added to the roster.
Speaking of which (impact-guard), are fans patient enough to keep trying to build through the draft? The odds of the current group plus a couple 20-year old rooks making the 2009-10 Playoffs are incredibly low. In fact, they'd probably get off to another 5-15 start that sinks the ship and sends away the fans (again). I don't know what trades are possible, but if any big names on bad teams are being shopped, I hope we get on the phones. Outside of Jefferson, all of our players should be on the block. Jefferson plus a couple of the current starters, and another All-Star-type talent could be a good team. The current group plus Ricky Rubio or somebody, would probably struggle to hit 30 wins, then struggle to hit 35 wins, then we fire another coach, and so on, and so on... I'd rather we bring in a star, if the situation presents itself. It just has to be done responsibly, unlike the Clippers, who brought in Baron, only to watch Elton leave for Philly.
Great post s-n-p. Love's rebounding in two months has gone from good to really good. I also like the way he is getting directly to the hole more on close in shots and putbacks. Earlier in the season he was trying too much dipsy doodle which worked in college but was getting rejected much more in the pros.
Ah, today I guess I'm the happy contrarian. I would agree with S&P on the McHale story line, disagree on how far away they are from being a good team. A lot of good karma is going to have swing their way in order for them to be a decent club.
If McHale isn't simply saving face and ends up coaching this ball club into the future, whether he's VP or not doesn't really matter all that much, methinks. He's still going to have significant impact on who gets drafted onto the roster, etc. Unless you get a superstar VP, which one of the current executive troika is going to overrule him on the critical issues? Call me someone from Missouri, but someone would have to show me that could happen.
The Wolves are more watchable and thus more entertaining, but they are going to have to absolutely nail some future acquisitions to get better, either by draft or otherwise. With a ton of player movement and mediocre to outright blown high draft choices, we have essentially one legitimate player and some decent role players who might still develop. The only different between that scenario and when KG was here is that the Wolves cap and draft situation is significantly better. In the end, the franchise actually has to DO something with those assets.
As for K-Love, if he becomes as confident playing against better front court opponents as he is playing against the rather thin and mediocre front courts of the Grizz, Warriors and Bulls, then we'll have something. He's going to have to hit that outside shot consistently and actually be able to dunk or score on folks like Diop, Varejao, or Duncan after an offensive rebound. Because he's undersized, that might take him a bit to get it figured out, which is why the whole Mayo vs. Love issue needs to wait awhile longer before it's settled. Roy vs. Foye was much easier to determine...it's not even close.
And, that's only one aspect. Al and Love still play essentially the same position. Plus, there's the nagging defensive end of the court.
I do have some decent karmic chants ready though, so who knows?
*On Love, if he ever gets full starter minutes, I expect his rebound rate to go down. Rebounding is an exhausting task, so he actually benefits in this regard from the limited minutes. On the other hand, I'll take 15 PPG, 10 RPG, and a couple of dimes with starter's minutes as opposed to the pure rebounding specialist role he's in now.
* Although Telfair provides some "pure" PG abilities, let's not forget he can't shoot, and there is nothing to indicate that after 4 years in the league, he's suddenly going to start hitting jump shots. He'd never start at PG for a good team and probably never will. We desperately need an elite backcourt talent, even if it's a playmaking 2 in the mold of D-Wade or Brandon Roy.
* I also agree that this team needs a 5. The problem with defense-only 5's like Collins is that the opposing team can play 5 on 4 when we're on offense. We eventually need a 5 that can defend AND be just good enough (doesn't have to be great) offensively to keep the defense honest.
Rascal:
I think this team needs a guy who can backfill 25 minutes at the 4/5. Maybe a Brendan Haywood type player. Can Pekovic help on this front? I don't know. I'm not going to argue that Love and Al have big time match up problems on defense but I do think that you can win at a decent rate with superior rebounding and offense, things that I think the Love/Jefferson duo can bring in spades in the coming years. Plus, small ball is damn entertaining and barring a super star showing up at the Target Center, I believe this is the right route to go with the current make up of the squad and their assets. If they can land either a starting level point or 2 guard in the 09 draft (something that should be in reach with guys like Harden, Holiday, Rubio, and Jennings possibly on the board) they should be able to cash in their remaining assets for the position they don't get in the draft: a real point or a real perimeter threat. I just wish they'd bring in a real honest-to-Pete professional GM to oversee the operation going forward.
An overlooked part of the new rotation (more Cardinal and Carney and less McCants and Smith) is that it establishes more of a pecking order offensively. Offense from those two and Ollie is a bonus, and none of them will create shots for teammates. However, they know that part of their job is to make it easier for their more skilled teammates to score, and in return, they get some open looks.
As for defensively, they both know that they need to play D to stay on the floor, which isn't a pressure their teammates face. In a way, they serve the same purpose that guys like Trenton Hassell, Mark Madsen, and Ervin Johnson served for the Wolves previously.
This also connects to the center question. In this situation, a good center complements Jefferson and Love by flashing to the hoop, scoring on layups and putbacks, blocking shots, and defending guys they can't. The question, then, becomes whether that guy should be someone who can guard physically strong players or a guy who can get back quickly in transition and guard guys like Tyson Chandler. Either way, it will require Jefferson and Love to improve their footwork so they can guard guys away from the hoop.
I agree with the assertion that McHale is limiting Love's minutes in order to build confidence. It seems to be working, in combination with Love's ongoing NBA education.
I'm wondering how long the current rotation can last? If Love plays this way another 5 or 10 games, won't it be kind of embarrassing for both he and Smith? Smith would benefit from playing against poorer quality, smaller 2nd units as well.
How long can McCants get minimal minutes? I have to think either McHale will go back to playing him, thinking he's "learned his lesson", or he will become a major locker room issue.
How long can they play Miller minimal minutes unless his ankle continues to give him trouble? He was a major piece of the embarrassing OJ/Love trade.
I like the idea of McCants + Smith for Noah. We could use an athletic 7 footer as a backup C. Would be kind of funny to hear Jim P backtrack after trashing Noah during the Bulls game. Approximate quote: "The problem for Chicago is that they are starting two backup centers (Noah and Gray), and Noah is terrible."
S&P -
I think there's been a thread about this before in Britt's blog, but I think there's a significant question yet to be answered about how good this club has to be in order to be relevant to both the NBA and the Minnesota fan base.
I think Britt said he enjoyed the Saunders/Garnett "make the playoffs" years, but as we saw yesterday with our dear Vikings, a 10-6 losing playoff team with an unpopular coach and a crappy quarterback aren't going to sell season tickets or compel people to support a new stadium in a lousy economy, even with Adrian Peterson in tow.
I guess what I'm saying is it's not about us and what we prefer, it's about what will get fans back into the seats at Target Center and make the franchise viable again. As we have seen with the Wild, despite the large crowds, folks are beginning to get restless about simply making the playoffs and losing, even if they have one of the best hockey coaches in the business, and particularly if they lose Gaborik with nothing in return.
Ultimately, I think fans in this town are more about winning than they are about style of play. I've said it before...Nelson, D'Antoni and Saunders have had great careers, but no rings. Certainly a team can get into the playoffs with run and gun, but can that style get deep enough into the playoff mix to satiate our fickle fans?
A point worth knocking around further, at the risk of being repetitious.
Peter:
I think that's an interesting question, especially considering the local sports landscape. My cousin and uncle just paid $48/ticket to be in the standing-room only section of a Wild game. They said some fans were bringing out the Bronx Cheer for shots on goal and that the general tone of the audience was one that wasn't exactly happy with paying that much money for that crappy of a product.
The Vikes...well, I don't watch much football but even I know you don't pin your hopes on a D-1A QB, especially with an aging offensive line. Even the Twinkies aren't immune. Last year's Delmon Young deal is shaping up to be quite the fiasco and they keep losing top line talent while fans are told to sit tight for a new stadium (probably with higher ticket prices; I don't follow them closely enough to know what they will charge).
I'd like to see the NBA in general move to attract more average fans by reducing the salary cap and lowering ticket prices. I don't know if this will happen but as anyone can see, these arenas are depressingly empty in areas where teams aren't competitive.
Getting back to the specific question of the Wolves, I think fan interest will depend on a few things: a new GM, reduced ticket prices, a real marketing strategy, and a big acquisition/popular draft pick. I think Kevin Love was completely the right choice and I even wrote at the time that I would have taken him at 3 before Mayo, but I also get the marketing side of things and he has been a disaster on that front compared to what Mayo could have been. I think sports fans want to know their team is competitive and that they aren't predictable in their failures. The Vikes are bordering on apathy because anyone not named Brad Childress could have told you at the beginning of the year exactly how they would fail...which they promptly did. The Wild are pretty predictable in their ways with Lemaire at the head of the bench. The Twins get away with it because they win at a hefty clip but even they are becoming problematic because of the poor moves that fail to put them over the top. Sidney Ponson, Hernandez, Batiste, Punto...they had a premier core of Hunter, Morneau, Mauer, Santana, Nathan, Liriano, and Garza. That's 3 top-flight everyday players, 3 top-flight starters, and one of the best 3 or 4 closers in the game. They, however, win the marketing battle by focusing on the players and the "little things". They also have a flashy new stadium on the way. However, it shouldn't be under-stated just how important it is to have top-flight talent (Morneau, Mauer, Nathan) to reel in the casual fans. Peterson does it with the Vikes.
Anywho, I think the Wolves are positioned well to bring back a lot of fans. Especially considering the situation of the other winter sports in this town. If they land a solid top pick, bring in a solid free agent or player via trade, and win upwards of 30 games in an exciting manner next season, and they do so with a new GM and a non-gimmicky marketing approach, I think fans will return. Chilly ball is unwatchable. Lemaire puck is going in the wrong direction and at much higher prices. If McHale turns out to be a good coach will McHale ball be acceptable to the casual fan considering his front office baggage? I think it's about getting a good product that is in line with what the team is selling. The gap between what the Wolves marketing folks are selling and what we see on the court is huge. Only die-hards are left and we know the score. Even casual fans know McHale is a front office screw up. I'll once again point to what I said about him becoming coach: What if he's good? If this was a move to get him out the door, then he needed to suck on a level close to or beyond Wittman. The team couldn't show improvement. If it was a move for the longer term, what then? Will fans accept it?
Getting back to the larger NBA picture (and making a long post longer), I'll go back to a post I wrote at Hoopus in August about making changes to the league:
1- Shorten the season. 82 games is wayyyyyy too long.
2- Amend the post season to a round robin tourney with 16 teams.
3- Rework the league's relationship with college ball to allow for coordination and sponsorship of college programs by professional organizations (i.e. teams pick 1 or 2 colleges to send players to and draft out of high school.)
4- Standardize the rules and regulations to international guidelines.
5- Bring on a true world club championship.
Part of the NBA's (and the Wolves') problem is that the season and playoffs are too damn long. The league also needs to do more to open up the lane and increase the amount of shots taken per game. I'd like to see a wider lane, closer 3 point line, and a rim with a greater circumference.
Anywho, I think the Wolves are positioned well if they make the right decisions in the front office and in the draft to bring back a lot of fans. I also think the NBA could help things out by making some changes and lowering ticket prices and the cap.
I agree with Jim Pete that Noah is terrible - but only offensively. His shot does have a weird rotation. Looks like he shoots it almost with 2 hands.
But he is a legit 6'11". He has good athleticism. He is a hustler. Knows how to play defense. Will get bigger (ie heavier) as he matures. Plus, he does NOT need the ball offensively - a big point to consider when paired with Al.
Maybe they take Smith and McCants as suggested. I doubt it as I don't see anyway McCants helps Chicago. I think Smith and Booth would be more palatable for Chicago as it gives them the service of a back up center.
As someone who has held season tickets for awhile (downgraded to partial the last few years due to economy/lack of interest by my clients), the expectations are not insurmountable to keep me as an active fan.
1- that the team be competitive
2- that they play a style that is exciting
and at a distant 3
3- that they occasionally compete for a championship.
Obviously, in the WCF year, I had tons of people wanting the tickets. But in most years (mid 90's through ~2005), I had no trouble taking clients and having them be entertained. The last 2 years have been very difficult as the team just has not been entertaining.
For the last 3 home games, I used my seats, did an upgraded, and used a suite. Took a variety of family, friends and clients. Everyone was happy with their experience. That is a big change from last year.
While this type of achievement is not going to drive demand to scalper nirvana levels, I really believe it would result in frequent sell outs / 15K attendance games. I think we are only a savvy draft pick and trade away from being there.
Going to SnP's comment, I agree, single game tickets are way too high. But the staff has been very proactive in working with businesses/season ticket holders to make things more financially reasonable. Would agree - a 20% ticket price reduction for the lower level would be sweet - but not in the cards I am afraid.
Britt,
I'm not sure you were implying this but, I might (agree) orwould like to point out that it's always a good thing if you make your guy work at both ends of the floor. A Gomes that isn't hitting can allow a defender to slide off of him betting he doesn't make the jump shot. And it just give his opponent that much more energy to work on Gomes when gomes is playing defense. Bottom line is if Gomes gets his shot going, then it makes the other guy have to work on D too.
Another thing about the games as of late is Randy and AJ. I have noticed in a number of games, they do get a little 2 on 2 working on the wing from time to time and it has looked smooth for the most part. They look like they're in tune with one another which was a surprise to me at first. But now whenever I see those two working together I get happy because it shows it's not an impossible feat to create some chemistry between the players on this team no matter how tenuous or brief.
As much as I don't particulary like Rashad McCants's game, I refuse to say that he's beyond saving. At the same time I don't see his future here like many of the posters have said. But, it does make me upset to see we could have had Danny Granger instead of him.
About the small ball... I don't see any way we could go BIG. Only if the match up allows - meaning that the other team has to have some shrimps and tweeners too. We didn't sign guys (Bigs) we didn't draft any Bigs. We got Collins in a trade. As far back as I can remember we have never, never went out of our way to sign a servicable big man. (No Kandi was not what you consider servicable...nor is Mark Blount) And when was the last big we drafted? (That's not playing in Europe) We have a history in MN of not going after big guys. The reason we don't go big is because our GM has never put a premium on a big. He must think you only need 1 large guy and a few semi-large guys. No bigs. All those years with KG. No bigs. And why is it always this same issue with finding a big man to put next to another big man on our front court? Why is it so hard to find a guy with decent size that compliments their other big? I don't think it's that hard. But I'm just a peon Wolves junkie. But the brain trust is not. They should have figured it out by now.
Anyway... your write up on Chicago is great. We did push the pace I thought in that game well. The only thing is that I beleive Chicago was missing 2 of ther starters. But we played a good game.
I have one really big question though Britt...
What do you think of McHale's coaching so far? Good? Bad? Why? Excluding his previous fill in, but just from what you've seen of him with this squad so far.
Thanks in advance!
S-n-P
I'm not sure much needs to be changed in NBA rules to make the game more entertaining. I like it pretty much the way it currently is. However, I do recognize that many people may have faults with the final product and changing the rules of the game may bring in a larger fan base. But I do see some problems with a few of your proposals.
1- Shorten the season. 82 games is wayyyyyy too long. I'm not sure 82 games is too long but spread out from November to March and with the addition of the playoffs to the championship series finishing in June, the entire NBA season is absolutely wayyyyyy too long. By June, too many people have lost an interest n the NBA and are tuned into baseball, fishing, golf, sunbathing or any other summer activity.
2- Amend the post season to a round robin tourney with 16 teams. I'm not exactly sure what this suggestion entails. According to Wikopedia, [a] round-robin tournament or all-play-all tournament is a type of group tournament in which each participant plays every other participant an equal number of times. In a single round-robin schedule, each participant plays every other participant once. I'm not sure I understand the advantage over the current system, nor do I see why it would be more entertaining for the fans. The current framework with seven game series, although too long, produces great fan tension, rivalries and is entertaining. A round robin tournament may be shorter and arguably fairer, but I don't think it would be as entertaining.
3- Rework the league's relationship with college ball to allow for coordination and sponsorship of college programs by professional organizations (i.e. teams pick 1 or 2 colleges to send players to and draft out of high school.) I think this is a horrible idea. The NBA would be much better off with promoting its developmental league. Most college players are not going to be drafted and having drafts would create situations where college coaches would be at the mercy of professional teams. A college coach would be forced to play the players that NBA teams have made an investment in by drafting and if the coach didn't play them ahead of players the coach recruited that were not drafted, the university would be pressured to fire the coach since professional teams will invest heavily in the schools athletic departments and facilities. I don't think it is a woprkable situation.
4- Standardize the rules and regulations to international guidelines. I'm am not an expert on the international game and, again, I'm quite please with the NBA game as it is. There are probably advantages to standardizing the rules, but there is a part of me that like basketball because it is an American game invented by Americans. I realize this is probably chauvanist, but without comparing the two games with the rules and regs side by side, I'm not sure that the NBA fans would be enthusiastic over simply adopting all the rules and regulations of International bball.
5- Bring on a true world club championship. Not sure this workable nor necessary either. The debate between the NBA and the rest of the world can be answered every four years. As it is now, the NBA still is the most entertaining brand of ball with the most talented players bringing in the best from around the world. That could change in the future, but I doubt it will be soon.
6-The league also needs to do more to open up the lane and increase the amount of shots taken per game. I'd like to see a wider lane, closer 3 point line, and a rim with a greater circumference. Ewwww. This one really seems unappealing to me. Making a rim with greater circumference and a closer 3 point line seems a little like men playing golf from the women's tees, or making accomadations for kids sports. I could possibly see the advantages for a wider lane, but I am still don't see how the current rules make basketball any less exciting than it could possibly be. The 3 point line seems to provide the right incentive for having expertise shooting from this distance. I don't like the idea of an Al Jefferson suddenly finding advantages of 3 point shooting over his expertise near the basket because the 3 point shot is so easy. Scoring in the NBA could be higher, but I think there are better ways at achieving this objective with other less invasive rule changes that won't completely change the style of NBA ball, such as calling more fouls for contact.
APB:
I suggest checking out the original post at the link above where I go into a bit more detail about what each proposal entails. I think some of your concerns are answered better over there...especially the tourney question.
I do think that your concerns about college ball already exist in the form of alumni donors, shoe companies, etc. I don't think the practical outcome would be that much different from what we already see in college ball. If each NBA team took 1-2 programs we're talking about 30-60 decent college ball programs. College ball is the d-league and it always has been for the NBA. If anything, you may create a situation where some prospects are able to stay in school longer because of the coordination with the pro team (i.e. the pro team could tell them to wait and develop a year or two more).
Basketball is a world sport. It was invented in America but by a Canadian. The NBA is filled with international players and as we saw in the Olympics, the rest of the world is catching up with our talent. This is something that should be fostered and standardized a'la soccer.
As for the changes, I'm talking about a 1 inch increase. It was something that was brought up at MIT's sports business conference last year in the b-ball panel about how to make the game better:
http://mitsloan.mit.edu/newsroom/2008-sportsconf.php
The other changes are widening the lane and bringing in the 3 point line to international standards.
As for your Al Jefferson example, he would be less motivated to shoot 3s as he would be to move more in the offense and run more in transition. The pace in this league is terrible and there simply needs to be more shots.
S&P-
i find it odd you left the Gophers out. talk about a team with excellent leadership, young talent, and a bright future, there you go. i reckon the Wolves will continue to have a hard time winning over the hoops fans out there in a season or two, much less the casual sports fans. the Gophs play D, hustle, and i'm sure Tubby wouldn't-and doesn't have to-stand for the attitude problems of McCants (now that i think about it, maybe McHale should talk to Roy Williams for some pointers on how to get through to the kid). and more importantly, they win.
enough with my obsession on college bball, i was very interested to read McHale's quotes in the paper today about Love "earning" his minutes. does anybody really think that approach works in the modern NBA?
Well, I don't take it as a given that the pace is terrible. During the 70's they were talking about how to slow the game down and decrease scoring. There was even talk of raising the hoop. The pace of a Timberwolves game may be terrible, but watching Boston, LA, Cleveland, SA and other elites teams play does not bring to mind a desire to change the pace of the game.
I agree on college ball already resembling a pro or marketable product that makes the idea of amatuer athletics laughable. But, if anything, we should be protecting college ball and amatuer athletes from further encroachments of commercialization not make it all the more easier.
I don't know, you may be right on all accounts, but to me, it seems like someone messing with a great product with the possibility of ruining it and the last thing I want the NBA to resemble is world soccer. NBA should not have to make changes to more closely resemble the international game or to make the pace similar to the INTL pace. My gut feeling says it should be the other way around. There are probably some reasonable additions to the game that can be brought over to the NBA from International standards, but not the wholesale changes. And, I really don't like the idea of wider rims and closer 3-point shots. Good teams with good three point shooters already are able to open up the lane. Bad teams without this asset are going to suffer with clogged lanes. I think that is the way it should be.
johndough:
I'm kind of in the middle when it comes to college ball. I went to the U for my undergrad and I had season tickets at the Barn back in David Grimm's last season and the season that never happened. I love going to games there for the atmosphere. However, I think that it's different enough from the pro game that it attracts a different sort of casual fan. Casual fans come to the NBA arena to watch the world's best athletes play the worlds' best game. Casual fans go to the Barn because it's the thing to do on campus before going up and down frat row on a Friday night. The die-hards at the Barn are alumni. The die-hards at Target Center are suckers for punishment. I just think that the games are different enough and that the fan base constituencies are different enough that they won't affect one another all that much. However, it certainly is fun to talk about how the better basketball product (relatively speaking) is over at Williams Arena.
John Dough,
i was very interested to read McHale's quotes in the paper today about Love "earning" his minutes. does anybody really think that approach works in the modern NBA?
I liked the article and found McHales comments interesting as well. It certainly does seem a bit old school, but I, for one, hope it still does work in the modern NBA. I think as long as Love continues to respect McHale as a coach and mentor, it will work. If he thinks playing time is an entitlement along with many others in the modern NBA such as McCants, he will soon find himself outside the NBA looking in.
APB:
Well put. I guess I just want to see 110 shots per game and a completely internationalized sport with up and down action. I'll watch pro ball in almost any form but I'm a sucker for good ol' fashioned up-tempo ball a'la John McLendon. I also think college athletics could be enhanced if they just stopped the charade and actually coordinated with the leagues they funnel talent into instead of pretending that they are just a bunch of amateur student athletes operating on their own.
Also, as far as Love's minutes go, after looking at how he's played in the last 10, I think he's being used correctly at this point in the season. He currently has the 5th most minutes on the team and at around 23 mpg he is right in line with what Brewer and Foye had in their rookie seasons and he will probably end up with more.
OJ Mayo is averaging something like 38 mpg. He has over 41 in his last 5. He's 4th in the league in minutes and his FG% is dropping. If Love can work his way into 25-28 mpg by the end of the year while ending the 1/2 and the game, and if he can maintain his rebound rates and get his PER into the 16-18 range, he will have been handled perfectly. I also think he responds to the old school challenge from McHale. I have nothing to prove that assertion and I don't like to speculate, but I get that sense from the quotes in the paper and watching the games.
To S-N-P's idea for a round robin tourney and a true international championship I think you have to look no further then the UEFA Champions League. They have a great system, that runs concurrently with multiple different soccer leagues.
Also, the added suspense from international tournaments like the Champions League makes the otherwise slow and plodding EPL season zip right along. Really I think adding an international tournament schedule to the NBA could in time be really amazing. The problem that I see is it would still take 5-10 years for international teams to really become competative with NBA teams.
With free-agency maybe a few deep-pocketed non-NBA teams could add some NBA talent to give the likes of the Lakers or the Celtics a run for their money. I just don't see that happening anytime soon.
If the NBA did go to this type of system I think they would have to contract a few teams due to the inevitable loss of talent to outside leagues. In fact they might be benifted from creating a promotion/relegation system between the NBA and the D-League. Cap the NBA at 24 teams (or 20 or whatever number you choose) with the bottom 4/5 NBA teams moving down each season with the same number coming up fron the D-League.
You would have to move to a system like FIFA has for player movement and this would totally kill NCAA b-ball so it will probably never happen but its fun to speculate!
Three in a row!!!
After watching last night's game, I only have one question.
I was under the impression that we traded OJ Mayo for Kevin Love and Mike Miller. If that is the case, can someone explain to me why former Lynx player Katie Smith is wearing Miller's jersey?
The hair, the chin, the headband.... I swear the two of them are twins or they had the same milkman.
They're undefeated in 2009....maybe they'll stay unbeaten the whole year! :)
To be precise, it's a winning streak over teams on pace to win less than 40 games this year, as are all 5 wins. So feel free to brag about having the best of the worst.
Maybe with Smith's breakout +/- game of the year and another weak inside team to push through tonight, the ice doggie answering machine execs can ship him and a pick to Chicago for Noah. Smith still has, by far, the worst +/- of the team.
In response to the fact we're winning games against weak teams, we were planning on being a 30-35 win team this year, not world beaters. And three of these wins have been on the road, never an easy task in the NBA. They're at least playing up to the practical expectations many of us had for them at the beginning of the year.
danny b reading my mind. and yeah, it took all of 5 seconds.
The ice doggies are on pace to win 22 games. Even if you argue that McHale now has them back on a 40 win pace, that still amounts to a 27-28 win season. They're still in need of defensive talent and consistent 3 shooting, so it's good they remain in the lotto pool. I'd still be playing to develop the talent and showcase any tradeable talent that clearly doesn't fit, not to secure a few extra wins in a season that's doomed.
WLST, Of course we're still going to be in the lotto. And what young guys aren't being featured and developed? McCants has been featured and flunked. Brewer is out for the season. And Telfair/Smith/Gomes/Foye/Love are all in the regular rotation. Who isn't being featured or developed? There's no one left! Unless you want a 6-man rotation, we have to play some of the old dogs. So I'm not sure what you mean by securing a few extra wins at the expense of development. And I don't see the two as mutually exclusive either with this squad anyway. Winning in and of itself can be a development experience for a young squad. I'd much rather see Foye and Love grow before our eyes than see them fall flat on their face just so that we can get the third pick in a weak draft.
Hey we're beating the teams we should beat as of lately. Wins are better than losses. Adding everything up, I am actually enjoting our season so far. What I like is seeing developement! Any developement is better than the degressive atmosphere we have had since the beginning. That said, I'm at work tonight and I am begging my boss to put on the Wolves game! LOL Go T-Wolves!!
There's so much -- and so little -- to say.
I was sceptical, 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.
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
