Dude Weather Subscribe to Secrets Minneapolis / St. Paul

On the Ball

The Three Pointer: Feel The Love

Share

Photo copyright 2008 NBAE (Photo by David Sherman/NBAE via Getty Images)

Game #1, Home Game #1: Timberwolves 98, Sacramento 96

Record 1-0

1. Love Rises, Bails Out Wolves Vets

It won't always be this way. Kevin Love won't always be matched up against willowy neophytes like Spencer Hawes and overpaid journeymen like Mikki Moore and lower-drafted rooks from the same class such as Jason Thompson. He won't usually have his game-time jitters quelled by his man forgetting to box out on a missed free throw, giving him an easy putback.

Okay, cavaets duly noted. It's opening night and there are some definite causes for concern about the Wolves needing a horrid shooting performance from the normally accurate Kevin Martin to eke out a home win against the least talented team in the NBA. But the play of Kevin Love is a silver lining, a warm spot, a legit reason to smile. Yeah, the competition was sub-mediocre, especially with Kings' mucker Brad Miller serving a suspension. But Love still had to maintain his poise and fit in with his teammates in his first-ever NBA game.

In my Wolves preview written just before the opener, I said that Love would have games that got folks excited, games that had people putting their heads in their hands, and, most of all, games where Love simply wasn't that big of a factor. Well, this was an excited-about-Love game. It wasn't the raw numbers--12 points (5-8 FG, 2-2 FT), 9 rebounds, 2 blocks and 2 dimes in 18:31. Better yet, it was the knowing when to exert maximum individual effort (going for offensive rebounds and putbacks) and when to blend in (passing, moving without the ball, rotating on defense). Best of all--and yes, the competition is a major cavaet here--it indicated that smallball with Jefferson and Love will be considerably larger than smallball with Jefferson and Gomes, which is why Gomes was a game-worst minus -19 in his 29:59 and Love was a game-best plus +20 in his time on the court.

Love's best stint occurred right after he and Jefferson were paired for the first time, with Big Al replacing Craig Smith with 8:34 to go in the second and the Kings up 38-37. After the teams traded baskets, Love rebounded a John Salmons miss, then hit the boards on Jeffersons wayward layup for a putback plus-one on the foul by Hawes. It was Love's third putback in his first 7 minutes of NBA action (albeit one was a followup of his own shot getting blocked). Following a Kevin Martin travel, Love dribble-penetrated and laid off a nice dime to Jefferson for a slam; 14 seconds later, he'd reversed a Kevin Ollie steal into one of his patented outlets to a breaking Corey Brewer for another slam. After being behind for almost the entire game, the Wolves suddenly had a six-point lead.

After the game, I enjoyed Love's level-headed poise in the face of batshit-crazy deadline media sensing the obvious opening-night feel-good story. He correctly noted that his defense needs work, and that he "definitely might be a little undersized" matched with a seven-footer like Hawes, who sealed him and spun past him in the paint twice. "Team defense, that's what I'm going to have to do," Love said, meaning that at 6-8, he better know how to rotate and how to move his feet quickly, because he's not standing up the leviathans of the game in the low block--he needs to know how to help others and how to effectively be helped. He acknowledged that the game is faster and the talent better in the pros but said the real adjustment has been "speed in general, going from a 35-second clock [in college] to 24, how often people quickly get into their sets." Asked if he can imagine an 82-game NBA season at this pace, he replied, "I can imagine 82 games but what I can't imagine is the four or five games in seven nights. I'll just have to experience that to know what it's like."

For the record, going small with Gomes at power forward still doesn't work. He was minus -8 in 4:02 paired in a tiny frontcourt with Chris Smith, even paired with Love for 1:00 and minus -11 paired with Jefferson for the remainder of his 29:56. In the first half alone, Hawes was 4-5 FG, Mikki Moore hit all three of his shots, and the rookie Thompson was 6-7 FG, making the Kings' bigs 13-15 FG while the rest of the team went 6-25 FG.

2. No 4th Quarter Foye

In terms of substitution patterns, the game's most noteworthy development for Wolves fans was Wittman's decision to ride with Kevin Ollie for 10:05 of the 4th quarter of a nip-and-tuck contest, allotting starter Randy Foye--famously nicknamed "4th Quarter Foye" for his crunchtime heroics during his rookie season--a mere 2:28 of burn (there was obviously some overlap when the Kings went very small in the last minute of the game). "I thought Kevin played good--it had nothing to do with Randy," Wittman demurred, when asked why a guy who just barely made the roster at the end of preseason would get the nod over the guy who is arguably the team's biggest X factor heading into this season.

Well, there is no question that Ollie played well, getting others involved, stimulating ball movement, making three assists and not registering a turnover, and shooting only once in 16:36 (0-1 FG) while generating a second-best plus +13. What's more, on the crucial last possession where the Kings had 24 seconds to tie the game and yanked big men Moore and Thompson for guards Bobby Jackson and Udrih, Ollie was matched up with Martin, the Kings' most potent scorer, while Witt blanketed the very hot Salmons with his shutdown man Brewer. Wittman gushed about the total team effort on the game-deciding sequence, where none of the Kings seemed anxious to put up a shot, in part because the Wolves were scrambling so effectively. Eventually, Martin did launch and miss and Salmons grabbed the offensive rebound and came closer on the followup. The carom off that second miss was still being contested when the buzzer sounded. "On defense at the end, we've got a vet like K.O, out there, who knows how to switch out on guys and not leave his feet," Gomes said.

Actually, I agree with Wittman that riding with Ollie shoujld be viewed as more a tribute to the vet than a vote of no-confidence in Foye, but, considering the circumstances, that doesn't diminish the surprise. Witt did concede that he felt like the offense occasionally "became to predictable," and that in particular he noted that when the Kings compelled Minnesota to "push the pick and roll down, you don't try to run through them...Randy got an offensive foul in there...that's whnere we have got to improve. The numbers aren't kind to Foye--he was 5-12 FG and 2-5 3pt FG with the same number of assists (3) as Ollie in 15 more minutes, and all of Foye's were in the game's first 9 minutes. Foye also committed four turnovers while Ollie was blemish-free, resulting in Foye being a minus -10, second-worst behind Gomes on the ballclub. But half of those 4 turnovers were actually flubs by Gomes on nice interior passes by Foye, and Randy also had three steals to tie him for the lead with Brewer.

What bothered me most was that after hitting a trey off a right-handed dribble in the third period, Foye came back and almost immediately chucked up a heat-check jumper on the next possession, On a team of shooters, the starkest difference is that Ollie tried one shot in 16:36 while Foye launched 12 in 31:57, then said after the game that the Kings were giving the Wolves everything on offense--"I could pretty much do what I wanted." I wish he'd wanted to pass more, a la vet Mike Miller, a sharpshooter who went only 4-7 FG in 31:02 and didn't have an official shot in the entire second half, but did get to the line 6 times (inexplicably converting only half of them, a shock for someone like Miller) and led the entire team with 6 assists.

Meanwhile, Beno Udrih of the Kings, who the Wolves got in a salary cap trade with San Antonio just before the onset of last season and waived away for nothing, played 35:24 at the point and scored 10 points (4-9 FG, 2-2 FT) with five rebounds and 5 assists and 5 turnovers . And Mario Chalmers, the rookie from Kansas who the Miami Heat selected with the Wolves' second-round draft pick in a casual giveaway on draft night last summer, had 17 points (7-13 FG, 2-4 3ptFG. 1-2 FT), 7 rebounds, 8 assists and just one turnover in 35:46 of plus +2 basketball during the Heat's opening night loss to the Knicks.

3. Quick Hits

Corey Brewer had a good night, defending Martin well while getting his team's second-best assist total of 4 in just 26:31, combined with 7 rebounds and 8 points (4-9 FG). Brewer still has a tendency to play out of control--he had two particularly ugly layup attempts tonight, Rube Goldberg-like flailing of the appendages as he arose outj of rhythm and either unsuccessfully tried to draw the foul or was intent on winning a silly game of HORSE with his awkward missives, which either airballed or barely grazed the iron. It is fitting to notice that all of Brewer's four baskets came on open dunks off steals in transition or driving layups in the half court.

Rashad McCants, on the other hand, did not have a good night. Forced into the game with the starters when Mike Miller got in foul trouble, Shaddy ignored them and went for his, executing beautiful bursts and dribble-contortions through traffic that registered neither a basket nor free throws most of the time--he was 3-9 FG in the first half, almost all of them from point blank range inside the paint. Instead, the ball tantalyzingly bounced and rolls around the hoop and casually fell out. Nevertheless, Shaddy finished 7-18 FG and plus +7 overall--not putrid numbers for an obviously subpar performance.

Finally, Rodney Carney got some nondescript but not injurious burn for defensive purposes, and Mark Madsen was the only healthy DNP.  

46 Reader Comments

Skyhook (not verified)06:01am
Oct 30
Britt, Looking forward to another season of your unique, thoughtful analysis. As a Wolves fan living in L.A. -- one who's not willing to spring for NBA League Pass for another rebuilding year -- your posts (and reader comments) are my primary source for Wolves coverage. Thanks for that. And if I may, one request for the upcoming season: please consider retiring the Jim Rome-esque "burn."
Britt Robson09:00am
Oct 30
Skyhook-- I hear ya, but when you are pounding something out for folks to read the next morning, the too-easy lingo, like the typos, are unfortunate consequences. "Burn" sometimes just fits the rhythm of the sentences better than "playing time" or "minutes." But I appreciate being alerted to the danger of faux-hipsterism.
Olowa-ebi (not verified)09:39am
Oct 30
Thanks to the free tickets, via Target, I saw the game first hand. First, I thought Foye played well in the first half; passing up shots and always looking to make a good pass. But then in the second half, perhaps due to Wittman's non-sensical substitution pattern, he never got in the same flow and reverted to his easy, old habits. Second, I predict that our challenge going forward will be two-fold -- Wittman and defense. It was simply inexcusable for Wittman to be playing Rhino extended minutes, especially in the second half, in the center spot. Rhino is a five minute energy or burst type of a player who can come in, establish a physical presence, and then leave before his lack of size and defense is exposed. The second half substitution pattern made little to no sense, especially keeping Love on the bench when he was clearly feeling it and doing all of the little things right. As for the defense, perhaps it's better to say, what defense. Besides Brewer, no one is interested. Which is why Brewer must play and play a lot. But if the other four guys on the floor are Jefferson, Love, Miller, and Foye, then he never needs to shoot Lastly, Mr. I don't give a sh#t, Mr. I am a punk in everything I do --- yes that's you Rashad McCants -- needs to go. His attitude stinks as does his commitment to team principles. The very definition of an enigma and not in a good way. He is a player who should be traded anywhere. I've never liked him and now am convinced that McCan't is a Cancer.
Dave T (not verified)12:16pm
Oct 30
Now now, no need to get upset. McCants is an energy guy off the bench. This year, the Wolves finally have the luxury of sitting him down if he is screwing up.
Neil O. (not verified)02:07pm
Oct 30
Aside from Ollie playing much of the fourth I thought the most interesting aspect of last night's game was Miller adjusting to what the defense was giving him. It seems odd that Miller, who will forever be known for his long-distance marksmanship, only attempted one three point shot. Miller drew the line between himself and Rashad McCants tonight quite clearly. McCants, when he wants a shot, will take it, even if it is the first pass in the offense, even if it is not a good look. Meanwhile, Miller hardly ever forces the matter and instead of settling for three point shots that were not there, beat his man to the hole on a number of occasions and racked up a team high 6 assists also. Great to have you back Britt. www.TwolvesBlog.com
Jason Zeaman (not verified)09:31pm
Oct 30
I like "burn". It does have a nice rhythm and I actually noticed liking the way those sentences rolled when I first read the posting. Keep playing your word jazz.
A.K. Agikamik (not verified)10:21pm
Oct 30
Personally, I'm a "lunched" guy. But 'burn" is ok too. I just want to make sure I never have a burned lunch.
A.K. Agikamik (not verified)10:22pm
Oct 30
Correction: "burnt lunch".
Britt Robson02:45am
Oct 31
Don't worry AK, lunched is not going away, mostly because I know it when I see it. Alas, nobody was really lunched either way in the opener, a sad testimonial on Spencer Hawes, who had six blocks but not a lunch in the bunch. The closest thing to it might have come on a penetration when Jefferson delivered a pretty strong block, but the ball was barely out of the shooter's hand and thus more of a stuff than a lunch.
Cheap Seats Erick (not verified)07:55am
Oct 31
Admit it, you just wanted to write, "not a lunch in the bunch" ...
levi (not verified)06:02am
Oct 30
It's been said that we usually measure the intelligence of someone by how much we agree with them. Britt must be a real smart guy, because I also predicted 30 wins for the Wolves this season. However, Roland Beech is certifiably a Real Smart Guy and his website, 82games.com, is a great source for statistical information and analysis. Roland analyzed historical performances in the preseason as a predictor of the following regular season performance. By dint of their (ahem) gaudy 6-2 record, the Wolves might be expected to gain an average of 17 wins over the prior season: http://www.82games.com/preseason0809.htm Umm 22 (wins in 2007) + 17 (predicted gain) = 39 wins in 2008/9 Yeah, well, before you call your bookie, note that the correlation factor is .35 BTW, the Popcorn Machine was popping, so we can see the game flow and all the +/-, etc. stats: http://popcornmachine.net Kevin Love's decent +/- is a good sign. I was interested in how he performed playing alongside Al Jefferson, so a closer inspection (made easy by the Popcorn site) shows us that the *trio* of Jefferson, Love, and Ollie were +11 in less than 9 minutes on the floor together and pretty much playing against starters. At that pace, over 48 minutes, you'd win by 50. Kevin Ollie for PG.
Wolf in MO (not verified)07:41am
Oct 30
Levi - thanks for the link to popcorn. I can see that that will help in my views of the game, since I am to cheap (broke) to get league pass. Britt - look forward to reading your takes on the games and the great comments by everyone else. GO WOLVES!!!
levi (not verified)08:30am
Oct 30
Sure thing, Wolf. One other site that I find to be very informative is the CBS Sportsline GameCenter, where you can pull up the shot chart for each team or player in a game: http://www.sportsline.com/nba/gamecenter/shotchart/NBA_20081029_SAC@MIN Look at poor ol`Cory Brewer...Layups: 1-4, Jumpers: 0-2. That's kinda like my junior high stat sheet...except for Dunks: 3-3. Compare Kevin Ollie's shot chart to Randy Foye's. Then remember that the Wolves were +13 in 16 minutes with Ollie, but -10 after 32 Foye minutes. It might not be a surprise that Wittman kept Foye out of the 4th, when you see Foye's four shots from 28 feet and beyond -- plus three turnovers to boot. Kevin Ollie for {starting) PG.
antonymous (not verified)11:08am
Oct 30
Just an FYI - NBA League Pass Broadband (or whatever) has a free trial going on until November 11. I can't attest to the quality, but it may be worth checking out for the next couple of weeks (I think the League Pass on the teevee is free for the first couple of weeks too).
pagingstanleyroberts (not verified)03:36pm
Oct 30
It is for sure if you have Comcast or a dish. I'm not sure about other cable systems.
Nate (not verified)05:33pm
Oct 30
Yes, it was a smart move to keep Ollie on the roster. Should he be the starting PG? Hell, no. Foye should play big minutes unless he flames out or refuses to play defense. Ollie should be the veteran PG who teaches Foye. This year is still about information, not about winning. Great to have you and the Wolves back, Britt!
Wim (Belgium) (not verified)06:19am
Oct 30
Yes!, finally me regular dose of Britt Robson game reviews is back. Oh how I craved for it. Anyway good insights as always. I especially liked the fact that a lot of players got some burn. Though I had the same kinda bad feeling that we only one by one bucket from the team that is supposed to be one of the worst in the league... A win is a win though.
b (not verified)08:46am
Oct 30
I thought Love led the reserves well and that Shaddy and Love played pretty well together. I loved Shaddy's dish to a diving Love for a dunk in traffic. I like the energy of Love, Brewer and even Carney. The terrible free throw shooting is a worry as well as some times when the offense really struggled. This team isn't going to be able to afford extended lapses on the offensive end with the scrappy-at-best defense. I like the new floor and uniforms, too.
Britt Robson09:03am
Oct 30
b-- I didn't mention the missed free throws because it feels like an aberrant happenstance, ultimately as significant as someone discovering the Wolves are only 2-18 on Wednesdays, or something. Five of those 11 misses belonged to Miller (3-6) and Foye (0-2), and I don't see that being a trend going forward. They'll be fine at the line. Agree on the floor. Didn't notice the uniforms.
stop-n-pop (not verified)10:37am
Oct 30
I'm a bit more worried about the free throws. They shot terrible at the line during the pre-season. Last year they were outscored at the line by nearly 7 points per game. They need every point they can get at the line to be successful. It was their single biggest weakness last year and they simply can't afford to a) not be FTA neutral or better and b) make less than 70% of their FTAs. If they are going to improve their offensive efficiency enough to make up for their overall poor defense, they need to capitalize at the line. Free throws, free throws, free throws.
Andy G (not verified)08:55am
Oct 30
Good recap, Britt. Some of this is already mentioned, but I took away a couple of things from the opener: As good as Miller is on offense, he's not very good on defense. They spread the floor for Salmons, and he had his way with that matchup. I'm guessing that most teams will try to beat us with the matchups down low, so this might not be a major concern as the year goes on, but it's worth mentioning. Love played great. I would've liked to see him get a few more minutes. The Rhino-Gomes front line is a joke. It has to be, right? There are MIAC front lines bigger than that one. Foye will have a good year. He has some of that "spring" in his step that was obviously missing last year. His jumper looks great, and he's getting into the lane pretty easily. Some of his passes in the lane didnt' work out, but they will as time goes on. He's not a great floor general/true point guard, but he is explosive and I think he'll have a lot of big games. Also, I haven't noticed the defensive struggles that plagued him, last year. Either I'm missing something, or his renewed bounce in his step is also helping on that end. I hope they figure out ways to get Jefferson more shots. I get the whole "he needs to kick it out to shooters" thing, but after a dynamite first half, there wasn't much of an effort to keep that going in the 3rd Quarter. Maybe it was his own fault. He hit a couple 15-20 footers, also. If he gets that going with some consistency, his head fakes will only be more effective. Man, that guy is fun to watch. Shaddy should take it up hard for dunks, when he gets that deep into the lane. He dunked hard on Detroit last year (over Amir Johnson, I think) and he clearly has the strength/athleticism to do that. He uses too much finesse, in traffic. His change of pace moves, off the dribble, are great, though and he's gotten even better at getting to the hole. He also had a nice dime to Love for that big dunk.
APB (not verified)09:53am
Oct 30
It was a good game to get out of the way. Sacremento is not a good team and there are many reasons to feel we were lucky to pull out a win. But, there were also indications that the Wolves should have won by 25. I don't have much to add about last night other than my personal highlight coming on Loves hook while getting fouled for the three point play late in the 4th. One thing that makes opening night fun vs. most nights the last few years at Target center is all the occupants and activity sitting near Britt in the press area, instead of the usual empty seats. I had been keeping an eye on Ruesse as he tapped away on his laptop non-stop and, seemingly rarely lookingup to take in the game. Its always a wonder to consider how these guys approach wriitng a column. I mean Ruesse is tapping away furiously in the first qtr. He must be writing 8 or 9 columns depending on the eventual outcome of the game. Anyway. Love makes his hook and gets the foul and the fans are yelling and I look down and Sid seated in the first row, who has just been leaning back in his chair with his arms folded on his chest, slowly leans forward, pushes back his chair, stand up, turns around and starts barking something at Ruesse sitting a couple rows back, while Ruesse continues to tap away without making any sort of acknowledgement to him (although I can imagine as light smile and chuckle appearing on his face-his back was to me). I was happy to read in this mornings column that Ruesse revealed what Sid had said to him ("What do you think of Love now?). Anyway, I still think we are going to have to figure which guys fit in best to play with Jefferson and Love earned some points towards being considered as a mainstay in the lineup tonight. Granted, it was only one night against infrerior competition, but Sacremento does have the length that everyone has said will give the Wolves problems. I'd like to see Gomes and Brewer splitting time at the Three alongside Jefferson and Love/Collins. I thought Brewer had a nice pace to his game. He still thrived in chaos, but I didn't think he played as fast and furious as he sometimes does. I was also glad to see Ollie in there in the 4rth over Foye. I think Foye needs some tutoring from the veteran point guard and there are times early in the season where Foye should just watch and learn. It is nothing against Foye, he just needs to see how to run the team and this is why Ollie was such a great choice over Ahearn in the final cut. Foye can only benefit and I am hoping he will be a better point gaurd because of it. We'll see how the Wolves do against better competition soon, but I got the feeling the Wolves were pretty deep and when we get Collins back they will have an ability to play bigger as well.
Cheap Seats Erick (not verified)12:29pm
Oct 30
APB- Thanks for the play-by-play of Reusse/Sid. Funny stuff. They're both fools, in my opinion, for too quickly jumping on one bandwagon or the other regarding Love. Sid's position I can understand, since he rarely has anything negative to say and is also rarely mistaken for a quality columnist by his peers. But what incentive does Reusse have for declaring the Love/Mayo trade a bust before the season even starts?! I mean, I'm no McHale apologist, but c'mon ... not *everything* the front office does is terrible!
APE (not verified)01:56pm
Oct 30
CSE, I love the Wolves and I love bball, but I love reading about it more than anything. I have a passion for writing at all sorts of levels. I am not going to call Ruesse a great writer, but I do like to read his columns no matter what he is writing about. I think his bball insights are minimal and his knowledge of bball is much less than his knowledge of baseball. However, he has a gift for bringing out the human side of sports. Some of his columns are clunkers and his column on Love to start the season might have been one of them. BUt, I have a feeling he was setting up later columns and I don't think he really cares whether Love proves him right or wrong. Either way, it gives him something to write about and a unique angle to approach the game or sport. I am sure he loves to get Sids goat, but I think he also likes to get others too. I just enjoyed Sids and his back and forth. They both have jobs and seem to enjoy the jobs they do (why else won't SId retire) and thats more than I can say for me.
APB (not verified)03:53pm
Oct 30
just in case your wondering, I have a job, I just don't always enjoy it.
A.K. Agikamik (not verified)10:26am
Oct 30
There was a lot to like last evening. Kevin Love contributed well and used the PT he was granted very effectively. After the first few minutes Corey Brewer looked good. His hands and dervishness were effective and he felt out of control only in limited spurts. Big Al had a terrrific first half. Mike Miller contributed with some nice drives and assists making lemonade out of a lemon-shooting night. Kevin Ollie was clearly the proper roster choice. His zero turnovers were noticeable. On the flip side, Gomes was not on his game. Silver lining: last season that would have meant almost certain defeat. Smitty too, made limited contributions. And Shaddy is in the doghouse. As Britt said, his 3-9 in the first half was worse than you think. Nearly every attempt was right at the rim, yet he finished just three and did not draw a single foul. An NBA player in his fourth year with nine attempts that close should probably generate 12-14 points for his team between makes, fouls drawn and perhaps one three point play. Britt, your remarks regarding Wolves Brass and Rashad were reinforced as I walked out last night. Unsolicited, the sunniest Wolves staffer I know took a shot at McCants' locker room demeanor in our 20 second conversation. Your point about about the Wolves posture towards McCants is an interesting one. Its an issue smaller organizations often face: do we reach out and make things easier for a talented but often-frustrating colleague, or do we cut our losses? That's a drama worth keeping an eye on.
Cheap Seats Erick (not verified)12:09pm
Oct 30
The way this team plays with a lead near the end of games really bothers me. Up by 7 with about 2.5 minutes left, they seemed to give up on their half-court set. On one possession, they inexplicably ran a two-man game with arguably their third and fourth scoring options (Gomes posting up w/ Miller on the perimeter). Did either Foye or Jefferson touch the ball in the last two minutes? With three capable jump-shooters on the floor (Miller, Foye, Gomes), shouldn't Jefferson get the ball on the block and either try to score or pass out of the double-team? I'm with antonymous on McCants. All due respect to AK, who is breaming with hoops acumen ... but I don't think McCants played that poorly last night. He missed a few bunnies, but most of his shots were good looks. Sometimes the ball just doesn't go in. I liked that he was willing to drive to the basket consistently throughout the game (he often was the only Wolves guard willing to do so) and was generally looking to make things happen. He had a couple of nice assists, didn't hold the ball too long on the perimeter (as he is often wont to do), and I don't remember seeing him have any egregious defensive breakdowns. Subpar? Sure. Bad? I say no. However, I absolutely agree that the bigger-picture Wolves/McCants issue is a powderkeg waiting for a spark. I don't think it's going to turn out well, which is unfortunate. He is obviously a very talented player.
Andy G (not verified)12:39pm
Oct 30
Agreed on McCants. A few bounces go his way, and he has a really good game, rather than a so-so game that still netted 15 much-needed points off the bench. We're definitely a better team with Shaddy getting 20+ minutes off the bench.
levi (not verified)12:27pm
Oct 30
Glad you revisited Britt's McCants theory, A.K. I was going to comment on the pre-game Rake, but the weakness of blog format is that discussion threads get whacked when a new post is made. Britt makes some good points about the front office posture wrt Rashad. One wonders what are the decision factors when deciding who goes in the promo pics, who gets called on to do "face work" publicity. Did they give Rashad enough (in his mind, obviously) kudos for his "work" last year, did he decline to repeat his efforts, what? I am an avowed McCants "hater" -- I simply don't think he has the game to be a starting "2" on a championship contending team. It's a combination of his small size, selfish play, and his "ghetto" antics on the court that make me feel that way. I don't think that he really gets the ethos of the general ticket buying Wolves fan, or the average citizen in the office buildings downtown. Now, few of those folk would have enjoyed hearing K.G.s on-court vocalizations, but Garnett's play, and genuine enjoyment of the community was undeniable. I'll be watching the drama unfold.
APB (not verified)02:05pm
Oct 30
Levi, I can understand the criticisms of McCants. His game has some holes in it. I am sure there is room for disagreement on whether he is a liability or a asset to the team. As AK suggests, it will be fun to watch (for those of you who weren't at the game there was a Team promo on the screen during a stop in play where McCants acted out a scene from Dumb and Dumber) how McCants and his relationship with coaches, teammates and management plays itself out. But, hating McCants for his "ghetto" antics makes as much sense as hating Miller for his "corn palace" antics with his funny hairdo. I am sure there are many people who do hate Miller for that reason, but I think its better to keep the criticisms to the game. McCants scowls and argues with officials and pouts and slouches his shoulders, etc, because hes an emotional individual and he probably needs to act a little more mature at times (although, I'm not yet convinved hes a bad teammate and his chemistry on the floor with other players stills seems to be good), however he does none of these things because hes "ghetto." What is "ghetto" anyway?
levi (not verified)07:57am
Oct 31
What do I mean by "ghetto". A fair enough question, APB. First, I am not trying to be covertly racist here. The origins of the word come from an island, Gheto, in Venice, Italy, where Jews were forced to live apart in isolation and economic disadvantage in the early 1600s. Webster's offers the following definition: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ghetto And meaning 3b is close to what I'm talking about. For better or worse, I'm trying to use the word to imply an entire set of behavioral patterns that develop in such conditions. To me, one of the most notable behaviors that tend to develop is violence, especially upon the weakest. And secondarily, a tendency to crow over these "victories". McCants throws cheap shot elbows, etc., and the posturing and all. But t only on opponents who are physically overmatched. You won't see this on TV, for sure, and the cheap shots are away from the action, so even if a ref sees it, it might not get called. And so far, I haven't seen him cross the line far enough to get called for a "T". But if you wonder why he doesn't get "respect" from refs if he gets fouled taking it to the hoop, there's a contributing factor for you.
APB (not verified)08:48am
Oct 31
Levi C'mon give me a break. "Ghetto" is a term that denotes an inferior status is correct and this is why it is used to describe individuals who are predominately "inferior" in status and not those who inflict violence on those who are "inferior." In ethnic terms it has been reserved for those who are Blacks, jews, latino, and other minority origins. It has not been used to describe those who inflict violence on these inferior people, such as nazis. McCants is not a dirty player. I'v ewatched the Wolves and there are many more players in the league who play dirty than McCants and most of these players are described as "thugs" not as ghetto. What you just wrote is nothing but bs.
levi (not verified)10:43am
Oct 31
-(- Shrug -)- It's a free country - think what you will. I do. Without apology. I think you missed the point about "ghetto". I'm not using it as a synonym for "violence", or "people who inflict violence". It is a set of behaviors that includes those. I've also heard "ghetto" being used (by people in both north and south MPLS) to describe how some people dress, or act. Heard it used to describe using what little money you have to buy a burger at McD;s and liquor at the corner store instead of making the trip to a supermarket. If you haven't noticed McCants dirty play, staredowns, and posturing, then I think that you weren't watching the Wolves from the Target Center. And that even if you were there, you weren't watching the off the ball action. Given that I can usually watch the game on tape, when I'm watching "live" I really try to focus on the things that the TV cameras don't follow. Now, whether other players in the League play dirtier, whatever, doesn't matter. We're talking about McCants.
APB (not verified)11:48am
Oct 31
Levi, My point is not whether or not McCants is a dirty player. My point is not whether or not you think McCants is a cancer on the team. My point IS how you describe his play and him as a person. If you think he is a dirty player and I or the rest of us have missed examples of his thuggishness, then give examples. When did he throw an elbow and who was the recipient of his elbow. Describe the play and I might have some respect for your characterization of him as "Ghetto," once I understand how you are using the term. As it is, your reluctance to give specific examples makes your claim of "ghetto" not being covert racism dubious. Because, "ghetto" is reserved as a description for young black men in the majority cases and most often in a derogatory manner. The NBA, and basketball in general, is a physical sport. I was taught in high school by my coach, how to get open when a defender was persistently denying the opening pass from the point gaurd while I was on the wing. With my arm down low and my hand in a fist, bring the defender to the T at the top of the lane and when I make my cut outside, swing my arm low right between the defenders legs. This wasn't taught in the "ghetto" but a suburban school. McCants is no dirtier or thuggish than the average NBA player. Hes squat and strong and he can deliver the hard foul if need be, but he does not intentionally hurt opposing players. If I'm wrong, give examples that can be verified. That's all I ask.
levi (not verified)12:48pm
Oct 31
If it wasn't obvious let me point it out again -- McCants little dirty plays are off the ball and away from the action. Refs usually aren't looking either. Certainly not the TV cameras, or more precisely, the footage that gets aired. You'll have to go to the games, watch McCants at all times. I didn't take notes, but the last time I observed a streak of this behavior was in the preseason game vs Milwuakee (also the last time I was at the Target Center) and I believe it was against Damon Sessions in the 2nd Quarter. During this stretch, I also recall McCants posturing a bit and holding on to the ball after he made a layup -- which was one of two of these in that game that I thought were almost worthy of a delay of game technical. His entire body language changes during these little episodes. If you've got tape...have a look.
APB (not verified)12:53pm
Oct 31
Thanks, McCants is a pretty smart guy to be aware when the camara is on him and when its not and to know who the ref is looking at too all while to playing the game of bball. Yep, Ghetto. All right, you don't have anything. Let me know when you do.
Britt Robson02:21pm
Oct 31
APB-- Careful. Taunting people on the board isn't something I tolerate for long, especially when he gave you "something," just not what you want to define as "something." He also had a defender who agreed with him, and both were relatively respectful to your view. Whether McCants indulges in mind games that border on predator/prey behavior, is relatively harmless or is physically a cheap shot artist are all fine distinctions bundled up and occasionally blurred during this conversation. And I'm okay with folks sorting it out if they legitimately try to see the other side and don't proclaim superiority or call out inferiority especially in reference to people who are well regarded here.
APB (not verified)02:48pm
Oct 31
Sorry Britt and Sorry Levi for the taunting, I'll tone it down. As I've been saying the whole time, I think there are many criticisms that can be made of McCants, I just think "thug" and "ghetto" antics go beyond criticizing McCants for his contributions or detriments to the team. I think they are baseless and unsupported. I don't have any tape for the preseason game against Milwaukee, and I was hoping for a description of actual behavior or thughishness that could be more easily verified opr that someone else had wrote about or made comments on. But, agree these matters are not easily distinguished. For what it is worth I responded to Levi before I read C's agreement with him. Also, you wrote awhile back that there are either McCants-haters or McCants-lovers. Well, I'm NOT a McCants lover (hes just another basketball player) and I've seen one person on this board who was (born to be loved, dying to be hated), but it sure seems like there have been a lot of McCants-haters coming out, and, although, I understand why he could rub people the wrong way, the vitriol of some of the comments can be over the top. I apologize, but I took "ghetto" and Thug, as two descriptions I thought were over-the-top. I'll try and be more respectful in the future.
Andy G (not verified)04:22pm
Oct 31
You're right that lots of McCants haters are coming out. He plays a unique style of play that probably reminds some people of what they think is wrong with the NBA. By that, I just mean the isolation, "ball-stopping" one-on-one moves to the hole. I happen to think that he's a savior of sorts on this team, since it's capable of throwing out some really awful offensive lineups. Shaddy has an almost Allen-Iverson-like quality about the way he can carry himself and four stiffs to a respectable stretch of offensive possessions. He mixes in one or two sensational assists, usually after having shot enough times to draw a lot of extra attention. I'm not saying it's even close to perfect, or always pretty, but you're kidding yourself if you don't think the guy is valuable to our team--or any other in the league. I won't touch the "ghetto" stuff other than to say that I'm glad that he, and most other NBA players, don't try to alter their personalities to fit the mold of the typical season-ticket holder. Being one of them myself, I know that my personality and most of the folks sitting around me are a lot less entertaining than guys like Shaddy & Al Jeff.
RhinoLove (not verified)10:28am
Nov 2
Here, here Andy. I don't want to dredge up the "ghetto conversation" either, but I find Levi's comment that McCants is not a starting 2 guard on a championship team to be particularly annoying. 1) He is not a starter 2) we are not a championship caliber team. Should we dismiss the entire team (sans Big Al) because they would not be starting for most contenders? Levi how many teams would challenge for a title with Gomes, Foye, Brewer and Miller as their 1-4s? I think it is already pretty clear that McCants and Love should be receiving starter minutes. They don't need to start, but 30+ minutes should just be a given. We'd not only be 0-2 without those guys, but we'd be 0 and 2 assing kickings and already hanging our heads. I was particularly disappointed that McCants didn't get a single touch in Q4 crunchtime. He had the hot hand, and the ability to create a good shot. Instead we saw Foye force a wild bank and Al hand the ball over in triple coverage (when he had an open man in his sights on the perimeter)...game-set-match. It's only the second game of the season and we've already become predictable offensively.
Caerochren (not verified)01:03pm
Oct 31
I'll have to agree with Levi on his description of McCant's playing style. If you prefer the short-hand notation of "thug", that's fine. Regardless, his antics are annoying. Some people like to have a jerk on their team because it throws the other team off, but I would prefer that he changed that aspect of his game.
APB (not verified)01:10pm
Oct 31
As I said C, I am aware of his scowls and his pouts, but there is absolutely no evidence that McCants is a thug. I've enot heard it from refs, opposing players or opposing coaches. When you have some evidence to the contrary, please bring it. His description as a jerk on the team is speculative, it might even be justifiable. However, for every instance that makes you wonder whether or not he is a jerk he turns around and proves the opposite. Yer, hes and enigma. Yes he is prone to make bone-head plays and yes he has some facial expressions that make him look like a jerk or even a punk or perhaps a jerk too. But, the jury is still out on whether or not he is a bad teammate and a liability to the team. I think it could go 50-50 either way. He seems capable of going into I don't care mode, especially if it is percieved by him that he does not have the support of management, coaches, teammates and/or fans. I'm hoping he proves himself to be an asset to the team, though.
plinytheelder (not verified)11:28am
Oct 30
I already mentioned this at canis hoopus so I'll be brief, but one thing I liked about Foye's game, despite the average numbers, was this: he doesn't look out of place at the PG position, i.e. a position at which it's easy to look out of place. Some of the mistakes, I think - placement of passes, indecision on whether to pass or shoot - can be chalked up to learning the nuances of the position. But basically I think he's "got it," i.e. I think he showed the necessary instincts and smarts to run a team. You can always tell when there's an impostor at that position - the team's offensive rhythm goes out the window, everyone starts taking bad shots, etc. I didn't think that was the case with Foye, especially in the first half. I like the points you make about Love. I think he can help here, he's almost like another pg on the floor or a "point forward," it's incredible how much more smoothly the offence runs with him in there. I think he'll either be starting or getting the majority of the minutes at that position by mid-season.
antonymous (not verified)11:40am
Oct 30
It's tough to tell what the quality of this team is after one opponent, but what stood out to me last night was our poor rotations on defense. There were numerous occasions when the Kings would find a wide-open look but the player would pass on it or pass to someone else, rarely resulting in points. That won't happen again - gotta tighten up the perimeter D. Second (probably related) - while Al and Love had 10 and 9 boards respectively, Spencer Hawes and Jason Thompson had 10 and 14. Those two also had plenty of open looks - shooting more as their alpha dog Martin was clearly having a sub-Alpha night. Hawes also had a ridiculous 6 blocks (including a blatant goaltend on a McCants drive), reminding me how much this team lacks for solid weakside help. I thought Ollie's extended play in the 4Q was more related to the presence of Bobby Jackson than anything - both teams were running small (and young), and often that vet makes all the difference in those situations. Not knocking Foye, but we've all seen what Bobby Jackson does to inexperienced players, and I think Ollie handled it very nicely. In defense of Rashad McCants - it's clear he gets down on himself when he doesn't play well. He came in during the middle of the third, when Mike Miller was (uncharacteristically) playing like crap and picking up fouls in the process. Rashad stayed in until the very end of the 4th, when he was swapped out for defensive purposes. I thought he had an off night (no FTs at all is a shock against the Kings' D), but he more than held his own in a situation he probably won't be in too often this year. Last year, he might have easily melted down and shot jumpers and complained, but I didn't see it last night. I think it was a great effort and it makes me glad we've stuck with him. (I'm a recovering Rashad-hater, if anyone cares - he's actually become one of my favorites as of late)
pagingstanleyroberts (not verified)03:32pm
Oct 30
I think you bring up a good point about McCants. One of the things he's said is that his visible pouting (when it's not directed at the officials) is him being hard on himself. Most importantly, he helps this team more than he hurts it, so as long as he's not committing crimes in his spare time, I think he needs and deserves 25+ minutes a game.
andym (not verified)12:48pm
Oct 30
Hey! Hello everyone and thank you Britt for keeping me interested in Wolves basketball. After Mark Giselson and Norwegianity left us this summer it is good to have you back.It's that time of year again for drinking beer and watching the game and then reading the Three Pointer. Nice game last night but I agree with others about the McCants situation. Hopefully he can stay otherwise I see a mid season trade along with Calvin Booths expiring contract for a decent draft pick and a somewhat talented shooting guard. Should be fun to see it played out......

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