Dude Weather Subscribe to Secrets Minneapolis / St. Paul

On the Ball

Abbreviated Trey: Still Going Down

Game #24, Home Game #12: Golden State 111, Minnesota 98

Season Record: 3-21

First, a confession: An interview for another story I'm working on lasted much longer than anticipated, and as it turned out, I walked into Target Center at halftime, with the Wolves holding an 8-point lead. Thus, I only saw the collapse and don't feel it fair to rip into performances without the context of what was apparently some inspired play, particularly from the recently maligned Rashad McCants, who got off for 13 in the first period and then four dimes and another six points in the second. Yeah, he was going up against Golden State and Nellyball, but those numbers seem to (at least temporarily) rebut my contention that McCants can't score within the flow of the team's offense.

I don't imagine me missing the first half is what Kelly Dwyer was hoping the future of sportswriting would be like. I don't know Mr. Dwyer but was incredibly flattered by his generous praise in a column he wrote earlier today, and wish to publicly thank him. Before we drop the subject so it doesn't go any further to my head, I just want to repeat that it is the quality of the comments on this blog and the knowledge that smart people are reading me that provides much of the enthusiasm that people enjoy in my work.

1. Wittman Raises The Ante

Randy Wittman angrily called out his team in the postgame press conference, essentially calling them spineless, and chokers. The coach again invoked the fighting analogy, claiming that when the team gets hit in the mouth it doesn't fight back, and going so far as to say the team "would not allow people to do that to them in the parking lot." Earlier he had pretty much hollared, "At some point we have to man up, stand up and say `Enough is enough!'" The coach further added that when he called time out with 8:34 to go in the third, "their body language said it all to me...their heads were down." He noted it was something the team "had been fighting all year," specifically citing the 8 point halftime lead tonight, the six point halftime lead Monday in Miami, and the 15 point first quarter lead last week at home against Seattle--all for naught in three losses.

I understand Witt is competitive, and increasingly frustrated. These losses are like water drips from a faucet when you're trying to sleep--they'll drive you temporarily crazy. But calling out a team is the coaching equivalent of firing a bullet--there are only so many chambers in that gun, and he needs to use them wisely. The season is 24 games old--58 to go--and the Wolves were without Foye, Ratliff, Walker, Jaric (felled by the flu) and Buckner tonight, while Craig Smith and Corey Brewer were both reportedly feeling ill.

Now consider what Wittman is quoted as saying in today's Strib. First, on Corey Brewer's shooting woes: "He's putting himself in trouble, driving the ball into trouble...He's [taking] bad shots because he's turning down an open 18-footer and dribbling in for a worse shot." In the next graph, the Strib reported that Witt talked to Jaric after Tuesday's practice--about regaining his aggressiveness. "He needs to get it back. I don't know why it left...It is hard for a coach to call on a guy when he's showing no aggression."

Got that? Corey Brewer needs to stop driving to the hoop and pull up for 18 footers but if you're not aggressive, it is going to be hard for you to get in the game. I know Brewer and Jaric are two very different players and he was addressing them separately. But a day after being told to be more aggressive, Jaric is probably cradling the toilet--do you remember how you feel about yourself during that process? Like a baby. Meanwhile, Brewer shot 4-12 FG, which actually boosts his season FG%. Half his shots, but alas, only one of his makes, were from outside the paint.

Leaving aside the timing of Wittman's diatribe, he is at least half-right in questioning the gumption and self-confidence of his ballclub as it spits up leads. No matter how young or untalented an NBA is, when it yields 15 baskets in 20 shots, as the Wolves did during the third period tonight, it is a half-assed effort. But shoddy defense wasn't Minnesota's only undoing--once again, turnovers played a major role, and contributed to easy transition baskets that made the D look worse. After turning the ball over just twice in the entire first half, the Wolves coughed it up 7 times in a 6:15 span early in the third--and 5 different players were the culprits. I'm not sure questioning a team's manhood and daring a squad to stand up and say "enough is enough" is going to reduce turnovers. The defense, on the other hand, could use a little of that macho swagger, as well as better cohesion.

Wittman vowed to figure out how to fix things, which inevitably brings us back to the fact that he is the coach of a team that constantly blows leads and otherwise fails to take advantage of eminently winnable games. On the one hand, what can legitimately be expected of a ballclub without Foye and Ratliff, starting two guys--Brewer and Telfair-- who are legitimately suspect shooters who must prove they have to be guarded; an undersized center and power forward if Jefferson and Smith are the tandem, and a mercurial shooting guard? On the other hand, is the aforementioned lineup, plus the likes of Jaric, Gomes, Richard and Walker off the bench, more likely to respond to the carrot or the stick. On this question, I'm a vegetarian.

Bottom line, the Timberwolves won't fire Wittman until the end of the year at the earliest--otherwise that is three coaches dumped during the regular season three of the last four years, which would be a loud and damning indictment of front office incompetence in at least two or three different ways. But with a mark of 2-19 to go with last year's 12-30, Wittman needs to watch how loudly he yells "Enough is enough."

2. Another Gerald Green Sighting

Gerald Green had a relatively lovely stat line: 18 points on 6-13 FG, including 4-8 from beyond the arc, and 8 rebounds in 30:10. But I am forced to repeat that the kid is lost on defense. Seventeen seconds after he entered in the third quarter, Stephen Jackson had him swatting at air while executing a layup. Rare were the occasions when Green was properly face up on a man; much more often he was running at the shooter, caught in mid-leap to commit the foul or enable the penetration, or dashing over to the bench to ask what the hell to do when the Wolves went into what looked like a matchup zone. Again, the cavaet is that I didn't see the 16:04 GG played in the first half, when he knocked in 10 points and grabbed five boards.

3. Quick Hits

When I saw Craig Smith gasping for air with 8:12 remaining in the third, I scrawled an angry note about his conditioning and not being ready for Golden State's pace, only to later learn he is probably ill.

Al Harrington had a monster night, getting 14 in the third on 5-5 FG and finishing with a game-best plus +27 in 30:43. Just for grins, it would be nice to see if Chris Richard could handle a guy like Harrington, who goes 6-9 250 but can play on the perimeter. Smith is too slow, Brewer too light, making Ryan Gomes the best bet. But Richard, who got only 4:52 all night anyway, might have been a good experiment.

So, McCants only went 2-6 FG with one rebound and 2 assists in 21:11 of the second half and I still thought he played well, especially as the main defender on Baron Davis. Anyone want to rave about that first half?

Bassy Telfair played the entire second half against Golden State's murderous pace with predictible results: 1-9 FG, four turnovers.

38 Reader Comments

Wim (Belgium) (not verified)03:46am
Dec 20
Weren't turnover already a problem with last years team when Wittman took over? Or was it already a problem when Casey was coaching? I agree they probably won't fire Wittman until the end of the season at the earliest, maybe McHale might step down and point out his successor. We'll see. I'm also still waiting to see Richard get some more minutes. Only 5, while the Rhino is ill. I don't get that. What about GG to the D-league by the way? If he can't really make the rotation on the worst team in the league I don't think he's gonna get a lot of offers from other teams after this year. Could we keep him for minimum money and let him learn some stuff in the D-League so it could be paired with his obvious talent? Or is that not going to happen?
Jason N (not verified)09:50am
Dec 20
Britt: I just wanted to post to second Kelly D's praise. You've done a remarkable job making a bad team interesting over the past three years, and I'm especially impressed you've been able to do so this season without KG's nightly moments of brilliance. I agree that Witt is unlikely to be fired, mainly for the reason you mentioned, but I also have a hard time not seeing him as one of the two or three worst coaches in the league. He's got a large body of work, here and at Cleveland, which shows among other things that his teams are lousy defensively. I really think D is the area in the NBA that coaching matters most, and where a good coach can take average talent and get them to excel. I am not necessarily dreaming of Fratello-ball, where the team slows the pace dramatically just to keep the score down, and I realize the roster is defensively challenged in its construction, but its been clear over the second half of last year and so far this year that Witt is unable to get even basic concepts regarding who and when to double and how to rotate through to his players. I agree with the sentiment that this year should be about seeing what you've got in the young guys (my fear is that we don't have as much as we think we do) but part of that is seeing who is going to be able to be part of a winning basketball team. That means showing that you can guard -- which also means that you have a coaching staff that understands how to teach defense. And I would say the evidence so far points to such a staff as among this franchise's many deficiencies.
Just a Fan (not verified)01:21pm
Dec 20
Sorry Guys. Wittman is the wrong coach at the wrong time for this team. I took a look through the season stats at ESPN. Our team currently has 10 players averaging more than 20 min/game - the only team in the league with such a high number. The league average is 8 and the teams with .500 records average 7. Before injuries get mentioned, realize that Ratliff is not in that #, nor is Foye. I submit that minus those two, our injury situation is not that dissimilar from the rest of the NBA. Look at Wittman in Cleveland, ~2000. 1st year he had a mix of old and young, second year, was much younger. Both years, he had 10 players averaging ~20 minutes per game with no win-loss improvement as the season went along. Where am I going with this? I think Wittman does not have the patience to set a line up and let it grow through hard earned experience. He is way too quick to change the parts to find something that may work for that moment, for that game. In the process of shuffling the cards so frequently that he creates the very inconsistency he laments in his players. Hence his comments that Britt quotes above re Jaric/Brewer. For that reason, I feel he is the wrong coach. McHale wanted a disciplinarian rather than a teacher (Casey) to tame the Ricky Davis led roster. What we learned is that the spots on those leopards could not be changed even by a disciplinarian. Hence the roster make over. But we are still stuck with the disciplinarian, when in fact we need the teacher. I see us getting no better until a change is made.
Andy B (not verified)02:19pm
Dec 20
Justa, Interesting observation. I have to agree that any team that expects to be making the playoffs would not have this lack of commitment to players. 10 players on a roster averaging 20 mpg means the team probably is not competing very well. However, Wittman has taken charge of a young team of unproven players. Of the 10, the young ones comprise 6 (Jefferson, McCants, Smith, Telfair, Gomes and Brewer). Ratliff makes 7 and Buckner, Walker and Jaric make 10. Wittman could probably have a team with 10 or more wins if he stuck to a 8-9 man rotation with Ratliff at the Center. However, with Ratliff hurt it means that his minutes have to be split between Maddog, Richard, and Doleac or he has to try Jefferson at center. It has become painfully obvious that Jefferson at the center is not going to work. The injury situation is dire for the Wolves mostly because it has left them without options at the center unless Wittman is willing to commit to placing Richard there full time. So a 8-9 man rotation would mean a starting five of Richards, Jefferson, Brewer, Bassy and McCants. Off the bench would be Jaric, Smith and Walker. This means we keep Green, Gomes, Buckner and Maddog tethered to the bench for the remainder of the season, or at least that is what we would expect the replacement for Wittman to do. When Foye comes back we decide between Jaric, Walker or McCants to join the list of players reserved for mop-up duties. If Ratliff becomes available, Richards will have to go to the end of the bench as well. This is what is necessary to win at a pace the resembles respectability for the Wolves. I think there are many coaches who could improve upon Wittman's success by adopting this strategy. However, it still means that you have to give up on some young talent - possibly prematurely. Gomes is the most obvious one. Green, McCants and Richards are other possibilities given certain scenarios. Although I agree Wittman needs to be judged upon wins and losses along with the development of a roster of young inexperienced players, I still think it is forgivable that he has 10 players averaging 20 mog at this time. He needs to win a couple of games before the close of December, however if he wants to demonstate to me that he is making some progress in this development.
Just a Fan (not verified)03:24pm
Dec 20
I think the decisions are much more obvious. Al and Foye are definitely staying. Richards/Smith need the bulk of the 5 minutes. Reason being - is Smith really good enough to be a 4 with Al at 5 against most teams? By that, I mean can Smith and Al deliver 45 pts, 20 rebounds between them playing 50+ minutes together. If so, a journeyman center is needed for the "big" teams, someone who is probably much bigger than Richards. If Smith and Al can't co exits, than the center need becomes more important and a journeyman no longer the fix. We will need a stud. Then the question becomes cab Richards be a long term effective 4/5 back up to a stud center while Smith is traded? You will only find this out if you play Richards regularly. Telfair stays as it looks like he can be a serviceable backup point providing 20+ minutes of playing time against back ups. Also gives Foye some opportunity to be a 2. I would have extended Green and had a McCants/Green competition for the 2. Each has certain tantalizing skills with some serious weaknesses. Which one to keep (and determine if it is as a starter or as reserve) should be the primary focus. Not extending Green makes this more dicey as if he does win out, does he jump ship to another team? That would be a serious kick in the pants - which is why I would have paid the relatively small price to extend his rookie contract. Brewer and Jaric share 3. Brewer is a player, he just needs to learn to relax on his shot. That will come as the shot is fundamental sound. Jaric can be a glue guy plus, with his unfortunate contract, he really is not going anywhere. Minutes become: Al = 35 Foye/Telfair = 35/20 Smith/Richards = 30/20 (higher minutes based on opponent) McCants/Green = 20/20 Brewer/Jaric = 30/25 There is your 9 player rotation for this year. With Foye out right now, Telfair takes 30 minutes and you can give more minutes to Jaric/McCants or add in Gomes - though I would personally just go with 8. Walker, Ratliff, Maddog, Buckner, and Gomes just don't fit. They will simply be too old (or in the case of Gomes, redundant to somewhat younger players) when this team matures in 2-3 years. They should only receive garbage minutes and/or foul trouble minutes. That is going to lead to some potential unhappy campers. Hopefully, Taylor will dig a little deeper for a few more buy outs if trades can't be found. If you follow this, at the end of the year, you should have demonstrated stats to determine : 1- if we need the stud center or a serviceable one? 2- if we need a stud point, a stud 2, or just better back ups? That is what I would be doing. Then again, I am not in charge.
ToineStillRules (not verified)12:19am
Dec 21
Walker DOES fit 'cause he would MAKE IT "FIT", period. Walker stated that he's tired of moving from team to team and is just looking for one final stop before calling it a career. He said he's got at least 5 good years left....and also says that he's concentrating on this year and the last year(next year) of his contract; then he'd look where he's at. Providing he doesn't get dealt at the deadline next season(I don't see it happening this year), if he's dead serious in wanting to stay in Minny, we could do a lot worse than having someone of his skillset come off the bench to spell BOTH the PF and SF position.. Heck, he could even play some C on occasion and Point-Forward, too. 6'9 guys with ball-handling abilities that can play multiple positions on the court DON'T GROW ON TREES!! Walker can still "fit" on this team in 2-3 years 'cause of those skills. He's got his ring, he knows what other players on this team are going through(considering he's been in the same boat twice in the past), and he's PATIENT.
ToineStillRules (not verified)12:21am
Dec 21
One more thing, in 2-3 years, Walker will be 33-34 Years old....No longer in his prime but not exactly past it either. He can still be that Sage Old Vet coming off the bench to provide a spark when needed....
Just a Fan (not verified)09:18am
Dec 21
I appreciate your passion for Walker. He certainly is an solid, veteran, NBA player with value. But I firmly believe his value is as a trading chip to another NBA team looking for that "Sage Old Vet" that puts them over the top in their chase for the NBA title right now. Realistically, Walker can play 3 or 4. He is not going to take Al minutes at 4. So, it is up to him to take minutes from 3. Taking minutes from Brewer is not likely (and in fact unwise since Brewer is one of the 2-3 young players the T-wolves have to hope develop into stars). So, should he take Jaric's minutes? I am fine with that. But then you have 2 vets fighting for the same minutes. I believe Jaric is untradeable. Walker has some value. Since my comment that Walker does not fit - he should be traded.
Andy B (not verified)09:57am
Dec 21
Putting the youth out there without veteran guidance certainly is an option, but you have to be prepared to lose - a lot. And as George Karl says, "Losing is the worst coach!" You cannot predict injuries and you also have to deal with them. But, the set-backs to Ratliff, Walker and Buckner have had a negative effect on the Wolves chances to win games this year. You need a combination of Veteran leadership to go with a youth movement. Just throwing Richards, Green, McCants, Jefferson, Telfair, Brewer, Smith, Foye and Gomes out there to develop alongside the veteran leadership of the untradeable Jaric is a recipe for losing and development will be unlikely to happen. No one can overestimate the effect of Sam Mitchell on the young and impressionable Kevin Garnett. Sam was competing for Garnett minutes. He was a veteran with no long term future on the team. But, keeping him around was the smart thing to do. I think the same argument can be made for Walker.
Just a Fan (not verified)10:25am
Dec 21
Andy B, Aren't we losing a lot by playing the mix of veterans/young guns right now? Not sure how we could lose much more. I am not completely sold on Karl's losing is the worse coach. Losing makes people try to do too much. Losing can make people give up. But a strong coach can minimize this by setting non win loss goals (win the quarter, hold them to 40 pts in the half, etc.) that can be very serviceable in reinforcing progress. If your goal is to win today, I agree that the veteran leadership is a must. If your goal is to figure out what you really have (and as a result what your true needs are), then playing the young guys is the way to go. Yes, there will be wild swings playing young. We will win some games, lose some games, and, worse of all, throw some away. But by the end of the season, we will know what we have. Which I think needs to be the goal.
Andy B (not verified)10:30am
Dec 21
yes, and that is why I made a point about the injuries. Somethings are beyond Wittman's control. And it also answers why there are so many olayers averaging a lot of mpg on the team and why he has been unable to find a consistent lineup. As long as the veterans are injured you have no choice but allow players like Richards, Green and Telfair the opportunity to play heavy minutes. But, you have to expect losing in return. Karl's point was that losing teaches bad habits, especially in terms of blaming and team oriented goals. Think Christian Laettner going around the locker-room pointing to the players lockers one at a time saying "Loser, Loser, Loser..."
Jim (not verified)11:49am
Dec 21
I think Karl's argument was that its dangerous to let a team get the point where its so over-matched players know they are going to lose almost every night no matter how hard they play. We can argue about how much talent this Wolves team has, but its clearly not nearly as much as most NBA teams. Mentally, it has to be difficult for players over the course of such a long season to know their the worst team. I don't think many guys would buy into "non win" goals. Once things start to tank in games, the idea of trying to "win" a quarter doesn't seem like the kind of motivation that would cause guys to drastically sharpen their focus or concentrate on team goals rather than stat padding. At some point, constant losing probably does strip a lot of players of a killer instinct, leads to bad habits and the blame game, as Karl mentioned.
Steve J (not verified)02:26pm
Dec 20
I concur with the stats showing Wittman's indecisiveness. There's only so much of this that can be blamed on the players and McHale. Sure, we've shot ourselves in the foot a few times with personel moves and the KG trade may take a few years to bear fruit. However, unless we're going to compete with the Spurs/Mavs/Suns of the world, there's no reason whatsoever to stick with a failing experiment at the head coaching position. Foye and Ratliff aside, the Wolves have two players who would start on most NBA squads (Big Al and Mr. Rhino), and another handful who would certainly be in most NBA rotations (Shaddy as a microwave, Telfair as a viable backup point, Marko as a dystopian version of a Hassell/T. Prince hybrid, Brewer as a kamikazi pressure-D guy who could develop into a Kobe stopper, Gomes as a glue guy, and Toine as the sage vet who can carry a team for stretches). Sure, we still need a pure scorer and Foye running the point and a center and blah, however this team has more talent than 3-21. One only needs to look at the excitement at the Barn to find how a blue-chip coach can raise expectations and have a team ready to play against anyone at anytime. It's time to find out if this team can actually hold a lead and win a few ballgames. If not, Coach Wittman, McHale, and the "smash mouth"-style should be abandoned for some version of Nellie Ball. If you're going to be a 15-67 team you may as well score 100pts per game doing it.
Snyder (not verified)06:29pm
Dec 20
My understanding is that the D-League is only an option for rookie and 2nd year players and so, as a third year player, GG would not be eligible for that.
Jackson (not verified)06:16am
Dec 20
You say that firing Wittman would be a damning indictment of the Wolves' front office? I think that might be like saying that you shouldn't smoke in the middle of a raging forest fire. There are too many aspects of the Wolves that are damning to the FO but the current record is about all you need to see. Wittman is a cooked goose I am afraid to say. He is not displaying anything on the coaching front that seems to resemble quality or competency. Is it too early to start talking about who the next coach will be? So let me get this whole player situation straight. It is hard to keep this whole convoluted scenario organized. Please correct me if I am wrong. For center, Ratliff is as good as gone. Madsen is a benchwarmer. Doleac is done for. Smith is too small to play Center. Al can't play center. That leaves Chris Richards as who we should be starting or else picking up a draft next year or a killer free agent. Since great free agent centers are very hard to find and very expensive, it seems like we will have to focus on a center for next year's draft. For point guard, Foye will be back eventually. He might be our starter or he might not. It is too early to tell. But he is a good athlete who we should keep around it seems. Also, Telfair has been coming along nicely so we should keep him. Between these two guys and Marco in a pinch we kind of have the point guard position covered in a fashion? Good enough for the Wolves for now I reckon. If a superstar shows up in the draft we should probably go for it though, I guess, obviously. All the other guys; Rashad is a damaged tool who we need to get rid of. Some teams are into his potential. Deal him to get us something to work with. Craig Smith is solid. Keep him. Al is obviously great. Gerald Green is too rough. Deal him with Rashad and pick up a real center or a young starting point guard. Gomes is a smart guy who has had a rough time this year. Keep him around. Everyone else can go. We need to start over next year. I wonder if Casey is available?
RhinoLove (not verified)08:51am
Dec 20
Jackson, We, fortunately, still have 75% left to sort out the who do we keep/who do we get rid of issue. I'd also add that when you are this bad, you've got to take the best available player in the draft. Reaching for a Center in the lottery has burned too many teams to count. I am not going to argue with any of your assessments, but given our record, nobody has locked up a position.
Jae (not verified)12:20pm
Dec 31
Jackson, great post! I'd have to agree with most of it. I'm a little harder on Brandon Roy (Sorry, Randy Foy, I just can't let go of that GREAT trade ;-) because I don't think we'll get great production from him and I think we need to look to the draft for a real point guard. Still, I read your post and I wonder how you can see all this while the Idiocracy (the seven-deep Wolves' 'brain trust') remains clueless.
Shawn (not verified)07:20am
Dec 20
Re: What happened in the first half McCants played pretty well. He had "two drive and dish" plays to Al that were beautiful. While not looking smooth, I thought he did a decent job as an emergency PG. Gerald played better in the first half than the second. He played smarter defense (not trying to block shots), hit the boards, and took good shots. Re: Wittman I would think the criteria for judging him would be player development more than wins. I'm not a good enough basketball observer to judge this. Al and Telfair have been playing better than I expected and seem to have improved as the year went along. Rashad, Jaric, Brewer, Richard, and Smith are playing about as well as I expected. Gomes and Green are playing worse than last year (considering the season as a whole - not last night). Are they as a team getting better at running their plays, executing the defense, avoiding turnovers, taking good shots, etc?
Britt Robson08:16am
Dec 20
Shawn-- I agree that player development over wins is the right criteria. But the longer the season progresses, the more those two things should be intertwined; if the players are developing, the wins should increase, as the Wolves' roster theoretically can improve and develop more than veteran teams that have played together awhile. I sincerely do understand Witt going off--it must be enormously frustrating--but part of his job as a coach is to wield his emotions and public comments in a way that wrings maximum effort, confidence and cohesion from his players. Jefferson and Jaric in particular have stepped up and praised Wittman this season, and I think both on balance are enjoying their best NBA seasons. And obviously Telfair is playing better than ever. So when does that start translating into more than a 10-win pace for this season?>
Stop-n-Pop (not verified)09:10am
Dec 20
I too am growing increasingly frustrated with Randy Wittman. I've never been a fan of the Bobby Knight style of coaching but at least I was impressed by the way some of the young players talked about Wiit's ability to get them focused and learn some of the finer points of the game. Thanks to the inability of the Wolves TV broadcast to sell advertising, we all have been getting treated to some of this first hand during the commercial-free half-time show where players chat with Jim Peterson about the finer points of the night's match-up. Another example is when Randy Foye spent the entire 1st half with the TV broadcasting team; you clearly get the sense that these young players are being told about this, that, and the other. However, I also notice that Witt has the ability to send about 10 different messages all at once. Yeah, his players can cough up a few talking points in canned TV segments, but are they really being coached to such an extent where the class room knowledge is put into action? Are they talented enough to put it into action? I wrote a bit about it on my blog here: http://tinyurl.com/2l3tk2 But I honestly don't know where the problem lies with all of this. We obviously don't have a lot of talent, and we have seen improvement with players like Telfair and Jaric, but we also see Witt giving players like Shad and Brewer the Gardenhire/Bartlett treatment: calling them out publicly for things he has previously said the team needs more of. It can't simply be a case of players repeating the good things he says. He can yell all he wants, but as long as the results don't come along with the individual improvement, I don't see how he can avoid the lion's share of the blame...especially after the bad taste left after they fired Casey last year.
Wim (Belgium) (not verified)01:12pm
Dec 20
I have to disagree with the fact that we don't have a lot of talent. If we had no talent we get beaten by 20 on a regular basis. Most games are still lost by less than double digit numbers.
Jim (not verified)02:13pm
Dec 20
The Wolves are at or near the bottom in every team statistical category. They lose by an average of about 8 points, second only to the trascendantly pitiful Knicks. Not being blown out every night hardly denotes talent level in this league. Elite teams routinely coast in games until taking control in the second half. Nellie said after the game his club decided at halftime it didn't want to lose, so they came out and blew the Wolves out of the gym in the third quarter. Look at the other rosters in the NBA and there aren't many clubs you can reasonably expect the Wolves to beat. Wittman may well be the worst coach in the league, but the talent level isn't there for this team to be winning many more games than it is.
Stop-n-Pop (not verified)04:02pm
Dec 20
That's the rub. They have so little talent and there's so little improvement that even if this year was Witt's best year as a coach, it wouldn't make a difference and you couldn't even begin to tell how he's doing better than previous stints at the head of the bench. Either he's doing a better job with less talent or he's doing the same as he always has...either way, at 3-21 (6-42, 9-63) it doesn't make a whole lot of difference to me if they can't look back at this season and know where Foye will fit in, whether McCants will work at the 2, and who should be re-signed (if anyone) out of the Smith/Gomes/Telfair trio. If they're going to build long term, they need to figure those things out before they make one of their (likely) 2 top-3 picks in the next 2 drafts. Let me swallow the Kool-Aid for a second and pretend that we're bottoming out for a reason. If that's true, then we need to know who gets to stay on the way back up. Clearing salary, getting ping-pong balls, and figuring out who gets to stay...that's the success of this, and next, year. Of course, looking forward to a Wolves' draft pick is kind of scary by itself. The Foye sandwich of Brandon Roy and Rudy Gay gives me confidence that the bottom of the barrel is a lot further down than I had initially guessed. What out of position tweener will we take this time around?
Just a Fan (not verified)10:10pm
Dec 20
I really disagree. There is plenty of basketball talent on this team. You don't play for national championships, don't become All Americans, don't play in high profile programs, if you are talent less. The issue becomes one of utilization. Do we have the right mix? Do we have players whose strengths and weaknesses compliment each other? Do we have a style of play that maximize strengths and minimizes weaknesses? No. Is that on the players, coach or GM? I say coach first, GM second and players last. Michael Jordan was an unbelievable talent in his mid 20's and never won a championship. Age caused his skill level to drop yet 3 ended his career with 3 consecutive championships. Why? The coach's system coupled with the GM's roster building resulted in a championship mix. I am not suggesting that we have a Michael Jordan talent. But I am suggesting that we have no system in place that utilizes the talent that we have.
Stop-n-Pop (not verified)06:17am
Dec 21
I agree that you have to have a certain amount of talent to reach this level. Hell, look at someone like Rick Rickert; a very talented high school and college talent who currently plays in New Zealand. But you have to take into consideration the relative talent on the Wolves' roster vis-a-vis the NBA at large. Take a basic player rating like PER. While it's not all that hot at taking into account defensive acumen, it has a fairly decent reputation of being a fair indicator of talent. A PER score of 15 indicates an average NBA player. On the Wolves' roster, they have 1 player with long-term minutes significantly above 15 (Jefferson-22.19). Craig Smith currently sits at 17.99 but his number is falling. Beyond that, Antoine Walker is right at 15 and the rest are 13 and below. In terms of the entire league, Big Al ranks 20th in PER while the next Wolf with enough qualifying minutes comes in at 128 (Jaric). (Smith would come in the mid 60s if he played enough.) http://www.knickerblogger.net/stats/2008/jh_ALL_PER.htm I think you are right about the talent not mixing up. Jefferson and Smith are like Ghostbuster streams and we don't have a legit perimeter threat when McCants isn't on the floor. I think Foye, Brewer, and Telfair will develop to a point of being productive, average-to-above-average players, but right now, the Wolves have 2 legit players (3 if you count Walker) who can't really be on the court at the same time.
A.K. Agikamik (not verified)09:51am
Dec 21
SnP - Good post. I spent a few moments looking at the link. Other than Bassy, I can't think of a member of the Timberwolves who has exclusively played one position this season. I'll bet that Wolves players generally lose altitude on a ranking like this due to the added weight of preparing mind and body for multiple roles. Throw in the utter unpredictability of lineups on the team and you put a group like the '07-'08 Wolves at a real disadvantage. My point is that raw/pure talent may be underreprtedin the stats you present.
Stop-n-Pop (not verified)11:59am
Dec 21
Good points on all of the replies. I guess where I'd draw the line is that eventually talent has to produce or it isn't talent. Gerald Green is the case book study for this sort of gap. Yes, he has talent in the sense that he can jump high and his jumper looks about as pretty as a jumper could, but he doesn't have talent in the sense that he can play and produce on a consistent basis in the league. Raw talent has to, at some point, produce, or, at the very least, show improvement across numerous facets of the game. At this point, I'd settle for competency more than raw talent. More than anything else, I don't see a lot of b-ball IQ talent on this team. I know that's a completely subjective statement, but beyond Toine and Big Al (on one side of the court), I don't see a lot of guys who really "get" it. I know this is obtuse and I don't really know how to put my finger on it, and I know that guys like Bassy and Brewer show flashes of getting it, but...well, I've seen more "getting it" in the Barn this year than I have at 600 First Avenue. Granted, this is apples and oranges, but at some point we have to see some examples of some of these young players getting it on a more frequent basis.
A.K. Agikamik (not verified)01:02pm
Dec 21
SnP - If you're throwing Green under the bus, I'll be happy to drive it back and forth over him. My point is, if you took each man on the Wolves and magically dropped them into an imaginary team where they had a single position and relatively predictable rotation and minutes based on merit, the average PER would rise pretty significantly. That's a lot closer to what most of the rest of the players on your link experience day to day.
Wim (Belgium) (not verified)10:09am
Dec 21
Just a fan you're pulling the words out of my mouth. Those are exactly my thoughts. Word by word. Stop-n-pop I think you should be aware of the difference between talent and performance/production/... . The PER ratings shows you how good a player is playing, and off course, our players are not playing above average, otherwise we wouldn't lose that much. Talent on the other hands defines how good a player COULD be playing. It is a bit like "potential", if I'm right. Talent means how good a player is, not how good he is playing. Other things come into that, off course experience, how good the system fits you, the level of the opponent and how he matches up, fysical traits, etc... So while they're defenitly not only playing bad on a team basis but also on individual basis, I defenitly see some players that could be good players if their talent was better utiliased, and had more experience, etc...
midlife crisis (not verified)02:41pm
Dec 20
I don't have a problem with calling out Brewer for his shot selection. If he is trying to teach the kids for the future, he's trying to teach what you are supposed to do in a situation. Right now his shots don't fall, but that doesn't make it a good idea to drive into the pack of bigs packed around Jefferson and Smith. Being agressive is not Brewer's weakness. For other players (and for all the years of wolves since about '95), jump shooting happens far too often. Next year, he'll be hitting some of those shots (...i hope)
Kate Doan (not verified)09:14am
Dec 20
Good question Britt. When will development translate to wins? I also agree that Wittman really has to watch how he calls out the players. Sometimes that type of frustrating rant causes players to look inward and try harder, and sometimes it causes them to lose what little confidence they have. Increasingly as the season goes on, as our vets have gone down with injury we are playing a younger and younger line-up. Al Harrington made a comment that Golden State knew they had the Wolves where they wanted them in the second half, just apply more on the ball pressure, and the perimeter players melt. He said he remembered that is exactly what happened to the Hawks when he played on that extremely young team. FWIW- I will say that having Shaddy be the primary defender of Baron Davis was a good move. Baron loves to go into the post and direct the team from there, but with Shaddy guarding him, there was no way that Baron could overpower the kid.
RhinoLove (not verified)08:36am
Dec 20
This is purely a subjective observation, but the Wolves really seem to be lacking comradery on the court. Britt cited the defeatist body language, and I'd add to that a lack of on-court chatter, encouragement, high fives, etc. These guys just don't seem to be supporting each other. We knew there would be issues with minutes heading into this season, especially with so many young guys playing for contracts, and I think it is beginning to rear its head. The Wolves need an emotional leader. Can Randy Foye can fill this role? I sure hope so, because I don't think there is much that Wittman can do to make these guys act like a team.
Captain America (not verified)09:38am
Dec 20
Britt - I dare say I disagree with you. The silent voice in all this is a team that is telling Wittman, "Enough is enough." Wittman is on his last leg as a coach. He was removed from his last coaching job when he took this one. Wilttman is desperate to rectify his losing record. He knows that if he is removed from this job that his career as an NBA head coach is over.
Andy B (not verified)10:16am
Dec 20
After Isiah called his players out in public - like Wittman questioning their heart and grit - after their embarrassing loss to the at home to the Pacers amidst "Fire Isiah" chants, the Knicks responded last night by routing the Lebron and the Cavaliers. What motivates individuals and teams to perform at a championship level is something that cannot be easily grasped. I think Wittman has been patient so far this year and with diverse personalities and abilities a coach is bound to say contradictory statements while struggling to motivate his team to perform. I don't know if Wittman is bound to be a head coach, but I do believe that players either make coaches look good or bad, more than the other way around. Doc Rivers might be a recent example. I think these players have to start looking at each other and less at Wittman and figure out how to trust teach other on the court. Wittman might be responsible for creating an atmosphere for that to happen, but ultimately I think it will have to do with a healthy Antoine or even Foye coming back and showing how you can win a game in the 4th quarter, more than whether Wittman should handle players psyches with kid gloves or not.
Jim (not verified)11:25am
Dec 20
I'm no Wittman apologist, his record here and in Cleveland speaks for itself, but I almost feel sorry for him this year. This is a 3-21 roster and 100 percent of the blame for that has to go to McHale and the rest of the FO. One of the many reasons this team is in dire straights is that everyone knows half the roster won't be here in two years anyway, so even many serious Wovles fans see little point in watching to see who improves. The team's biggest problem is defense, but it's hard to figure out how much blame Wittman should get for that. Coming into the year only the two rooks, Theo and Buckner and maybe Jaric were known as above average defensive players. I don't see how any coach could have squeezed more than a couple more wins out of this sorry squad. I'd be more up for ripping Wittman if, like Britt mentioned, he at least had Foye and Theo in the line-up. His post game comments don't bother me because he'd get ripped whether he coddles the players or calls them out. But on a team this rancid, its true there's little point in a coach going nuts over a blown lead against a Warriors club with three times as much fire power as the Wolves. Even though I don't think Wittman earned this head coaching position, its hard to see the upside of throwing yet another coach under the bus when everyone knows the real problems are upstairs.
A.K. Agikamik (not verified)12:10pm
Dec 20
When I think of Wittman's recent public comments, I am reminded of Lucy Van Pelt. In Peanuts, when Lucy loses control of her kite she alternates between sugary sweet pleadings and angry rants towards the wayward kite in her vain attempts to control that which she is unable to control. So goes it for the Wolves' Head Coach. On another note, I am attaching the comment I tried unsuccessfully to post beneath Kelly Dwyer's fine write up on our man Britt. I know you don't care for this stuff, Britt, but please leave it alone. "Britt's writing contributes enormously to my engagement, enjoyment and understanding of the Wolves and the NBA. Britt's a tweener, neither a beat guy nor a national columnist. Britt attends probably 38-40 of 43 home games and catches most every Wolves' road tilt on the tube. He provides writeups maybe 60 times per season (combining many back-to-backs). Unlike a true beat writer, he doesn't have to worry about filler junk and editor-masters to please. His full access is leavened by not sharing private jets, game buses and four star hotel lobbies with the team which keeps him from going native. On the flip side, unlike the Big Feet, he has tethered himself to the Minnesota Timberwolves. In addition to exposing an element of self-loathing, this choice provides Britt an excellent lens through which to capture the players, tactics, strategies, team dynamics and energy of the game. The beat guys can lose their bearings in the seven month slog through the forest. The national boys are masters of the obvious from 10,000 feet. Britt hovers just above the tree line and covers the game better than anyone with panache and insight."
Xand (not verified)02:32pm
Dec 20
What is most frustrating about this team is the distinct lack of an identity as noticeable lack of progress toward acquiring one. Over half the time we set up on offense, you have absolutely no idea who is going to end up with a shot. After Al and Shaddy score 17 and 19 respectively in the first half off a series of excellent shots by Rashad and some great pick and roll plays between the two, both disappeared almost completely in the 2nd half. Instead, we were swinging it around getting jumpers for Brewer or Telfair. McCants may be inconsistent, but he played great yesterday, and as such we should have been running plays through him and Al all game long instead of lapsing into nonsensical lineups and offensive sets.. Shaddy is clearly our best perimeter option at the moment, and it kills me to see the Wolves struggle to get a shot and wind up either firing a clunker from a suspect shooter or forcing an errant pass into the hands of the other team instead of going back to your best players and the plays that have worked all game long. The pick and roll worked to perfection in the first half and no one could stop McCants from getting to the lane, so why did it disappear in favor of pointlessly swinging the ball around the perimeter..? I just don't get it. Britt, I agree that Witt should have thrown Richard out there last night. The insistence on playing an undersized, redundant front court combo of Al and Smith is infuriating. FYI, if I remember correctly, Richard posted surprising numbers in the combine for a guy his size as far as foot speed goes. I think it would have been worthwhile to try him on Harrington (as well as Biedrins, who dominated the boards, even against Al) given his length and relative speed. I seem to recall Smith being matched up on the perimeter against Harrington numerous times, with Harrington promptly shooting over him or going right around him. If the matchup looks lopsided to a rube like me, I fail to comprehend comprehend how it makes sense to an NBA coach.. C'est la vie.
Jae (not verified)12:06pm
Dec 31
I've said it in the blogosphere ever since Dwane Casey's being fired at .500 (?!) ball. Randy Wittman is not a good NBA coach. He's simply someone McHale (Fortune mag's highest rated GM) is comfortable with. What was Wittman's record at Cleveland, .333? FTMFA! The Timberwolves idiocracy runs seven-deep -- including ALL of the decision-makers. I don't know how we can avoid being a joke until this team is sold or six of these guys are unemployed. And, this "rebuilding" effort is a sham with no plan. "See what they can do," indeed. I've heard mothers say that about their two-year-olds and then lead me to a pile of shit. The draft has no immediate help for this team, with the possible exceptions of Rose or Mayo. We desperately need a real point guard who is not named Telfair or Jaric. Coaching-wise, we are outgunned every night, no matter what the injury situation. And, when (not if) Jefferson goes down because of those heavy minutes, these will seem like the good old days. In the immortal, paraphrased words of Cap'n Jack Sparrow, Lets fire Wittman's ass, then cut out his tongue, then fire his tounge

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <i> <b> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <br> <p>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
By entering in the words in the captcha image, you help us prevent automated spam submissions and keep the site tidy.

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