# Twolves are Title Contender?



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

IMO, Twolves are the first rounder again in the playoffs. Spurs, Kings and Mavs are better than Twolves. See my post in October: "State of the Wolves".

Currently Twolves are the West 7th seed. They have 2 Quality wins in the West.

1. In the final minute, they defeat Mavs without Dirk and Finley;

2. In the final minute defeat Rockets without Macgrady.

Next 2 games:

Play with Pacers without JO, Artest, Jackson

Play with Griz without Gasol.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

Damn, they've been extremely lucky. 15 games into the season and they already play against teams without McGrady, Dirk, JO, Finley, Artest, Jackson and Gasol. 

I had my doubts about the Timberwolves, mainly because they lack interior defense and Cassell/Sprewell are aging and may not be able to duplicate the great seasons they had last year. 

I see 1st round exit, again. I think they'll struggle to win any 7 game series against a playoff team in the west.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

Cassell is never a good defender. Spree can't defend any shooting guards now. He is Finley-like defender.


----------



## Pan Mengtu (Jun 18, 2004)

They'll be a second round team, western finals if they get lucky in who they face in the second round. Cassell and Sprewell are playing bad. I don't know if it's because of age or because they aren't getting paid like superstars, but they are playing really bad.

There are good roleplayers on the Wolves, but not enough to put them past the Spurs. This is 100% Kevin McHale (most overrated GM in the league)'s fault. But I think they'll still make it to the second round. Garnett is too good.


----------



## bball251 (Nov 23, 2004)

Wow. You guys realize the Wolves started even worse than this last year right? And if they had Cassell, the best PG in the league, healthy againt the Lakers there's a good chance they win the title. There is no chance in hell this team doesn't make the WCF, and they're probably the best team in the entire league. They're just off to a bad start becasue they aren't used to having Wally and Hudson playing.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>bball251</b>!
> They're just off to a bad start becasue they aren't used to having Wally and Hudson playing.


LOL excuse.


----------



## bball251 (Nov 23, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Johnny Mac</b>!
> Damn, they've been extremely lucky. 15 games into the season and they already play against teams without McGrady, Dirk, JO, Finley, Artest, Jackson and Gasol.
> 
> I had my doubts about the Timberwolves, mainly because they lack interior defense and Cassell/Sprewell are aging and may not be able to duplicate the great seasons they had last year.
> ...


Well it's only 10 games into the season and we've played teams without McGrady, Dirk, Finley, and Artest. I'm not sure where you get JO, Jackson, and Gasol from. And this team has arguably the best talent in the entire league, yet after 10 games into the season they aren't gonna be able to beat any playoff team in a 7 game series? Wow! If we play like we have so far yeah you're right, but you can't win a championship in Novemeber, remember that.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>bball251</b>!
> Wow. You guys realize the Wolves started even worse than this last year right? And if they had Cassell, the best PG in the league, healthy againt the Lakers there's a good chance they win the title. There is no chance in hell this team doesn't make the WCF, and they're probably the best team in the entire league. They're just off to a bad start becasue they aren't used to having Wally and Hudson playing.


There is no chance they don't make the WCF? The west is a little too stacked to make that kind of statement. You couldn't say that about any team in the west, except maybe the Spurs, but the Spurs are a lot better than the Timberwolves. The Timberwolves have fallen back into the pack of playoff teams in the west.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>bball251</b>!
> And this team has arguably the best talent in the entire league, yet after 10 games into the season they aren't gonna be able to beat any playoff team in a 7 game series?


I disagree. Timberwolves have no interior defense.


----------



## bball251 (Nov 23, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Johnny Mac</b>!
> 
> 
> There is no chance they don't make the WCF? The west is a little too stacked to make that kind of statement. You couldn't say that about any team in the west, except maybe the Spurs, but the Spurs are a lot better than the Timberwolves. The Timberwolves have fallen back into the pack of playoff teams in the west.


No the Spurs aren't alot better than the Wolves. So far this season yeah that would be an accurate statement, but the Wolves have just sucked early this year. You'll see, don't worry.


----------



## bball251 (Nov 23, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Johnny Mac</b>!
> 
> 
> I disagree. Timberwolves have no interior defense.


Garnett, Kandi, Madsen, Griffen, and even Erv. Doesn't seem that bad to me.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Johnny Mac</b>!
> 
> 
> Timberwolves have no interior defense.


no interior and exterior defense. see my post 'state of the Wolves'.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>bball251</b>!
> Garnett, Kandi, Madsen, Griffen, and even Erv. Doesn't seem that bad to me.


And thats the problem. 

Take out Duncan and Garnett as virtually equal, and compare the Spurs to the Timberwolves.


----------



## bball251 (Nov 23, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Johnny Mac</b>!
> 
> 
> And thats the problem.
> ...


Cassell if healthy is way better than Parker. Ginobili and Spree are equal in the playoffs. Hassell is equal to Bowen I guess, Bowen might have slightly better D, Hassell with better O. Rasho is better than Kandi, but that doesn't say much. Wally is way better than Barry. Griffen and Horry are equal I guess. Rose and Madsen are equal. And then that leaves Hudson and Hoiberg who are 10x better than any other Spur. I think the Wolves are a better team than the Spurs if they are healthy and they mesh.


----------



## bball251 (Nov 23, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Ballscientist</b>!
> 
> 
> no interior and exterior defense. see my post 'state of the Wolves'.


The Wolves have 2 of the best defenders in the entire league!


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

Currently, Cassell is not better than Parker. If Cassell has a repeat performance of last year, then Timberwolves will be okay, but otherwise they are done. 

Parker = Cassell (right now)
Ginobili > Sprewell
Rasho > Kandi
Barry > Wally

And so on. What seperates the two teams is the system and balance. They are not only better on paper, but they have much better chemistry and are a well oiled machine on most nights.


----------



## Tobias (Aug 5, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>bball251</b>!
> 
> Cassell if healthy is way better than Parker.


Considering its highly unlikely to the the case henceforth



> Ginobili and Spree are equal in the playoffs.


Maybe the Spree circa '99, and even then - if Manu continues to play the wah he's beenm playing...



> Rose and Madsen are equal.


say what??


----------



## bball251 (Nov 23, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Johnny Mac</b>!
> Currently, Cassell is not better than Parker. If Cassell has a repeat performance of last year, then Timberwolves will be okay, but otherwise they are done.
> 
> Parker = Cassell (right now)
> ...


I've alredy said right now the Spurs are the better team. Look at last year, the Wolves were better then, and they've improved more (getting back Walyl and Hudson healthy) than the Spurs. If we can get used to playing with each other and get a solid rotation down, then the Wolves are a better team. If not, the Spurs are. And in the playoffs Spree is better than Ginobili. And Wally is definately better than Barry. There's also Hudson who before last season was our 2nd best player, and Hoiberg too who is extremely valuable.


----------



## bball251 (Nov 23, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Tobias</b>!
> 
> Considering its highly unlikely to the the case henceforth
> 
> ...


It's highly unlikely Cassell will be healthy? Why do you say that? Let me guess, because you're a Suprs fan.
And no, a healthy Spree in the playoffs is better than Ginobili. In the regular season it's a whole different story.
And I guess you're right, Madsen is a little better than Rose.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

Ginobili is better than Sprewell in the regular season, playoffs, finals, you name it. Anywhere. 

I'd take Barry over Wally. Wally is overrated, imo.


----------



## Tobias (Aug 5, 2002)

Lets not forget Cassell had a hip injury, what, last May? He's not a spry kid whose gonna bounce back to 100% so quickly. Sprees not healthy? Is that his excuse?  
Let's not totally undemine one's self, Rose is more productive than Madsen.


----------



## bball251 (Nov 23, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Tobias</b>!
> Lets not forget Cassell had a hip injury, what, last May? He's not a spry kid whose gonna bounce back to 100% so quickly. Sprees not healthy? Is that his excuse?
> Let's not totally undemine one's self, Rose is more productive than Madsen.


I'd rather have Madsen. He's no where near as talented obviously, but he's a very valuable part of the team. And we happen to have one of the best backup PG's in the league in Hudson, which will make it possible for Sam to have nights like last night where he played 18 minutes. Spree is old, he's prone to injury, so he needs to stay healthy. Watch the Laker series last year? Spree was great. Ginobili's off to a great start this season and hopefully he keeps it up, I got him on my fantasy team.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

defense

spurs >>>>>>>>>>> wolves


----------



## bball251 (Nov 23, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Ballscientist</b>!
> defense
> 
> spurs >>>>>>>>>>> wolves


The Spurs defense is better than the Wolves, but not that much better. That's definately something that the Wolves need to improve, but on offense
Wolves>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Spurs


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

Did you watched the game last night?

Twolves vs Pacers


Pacers are wide-open all night.


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

Kings are better than Wolves.

They would have won in the WCF if Bjax was available. :whoknows:


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

Spurs were better than Twolves if they had a chance to play against them.


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>bball251</b>!
> 
> I've alredy said right now the Spurs are the better team. Look at last year, the Wolves were better then, and they've improved more (getting back Walyl and Hudson healthy) than the Spurs. If we can get used to playing with each other and get a solid rotation down, then the Wolves are a better team. If not, the Spurs are. And in the playoffs Spree is better than Ginobili. And Wally is definately better than Barry. There's also Hudson who before last season was our 2nd best player, and Hoiberg too who is extremely valuable.


Your only looking at hte surface of both teams.

First off, the Spurs were better than the T'Wolves last year, and they will be better this year. You are delusional if you think that if the Wolves had met the Spurs in the second round that they wouldn't have lost. They almost lost to the Kings. The Lakers after beating the Spurs toyed with the Timberwolves. The Spurs also had one weakness last year, which was there weren't enough consistent shooters on the outside other than Ginobli (who was a streaky guy to begin with), the second that the Lakers cut off Tony Parker's dribble penetration, the Spurs struggled because guys on the perimeter were not dependable enough to beat the Lakers shooting from outside. The T'Wolves problems were a bit deeper. First off, Spree looked terrible trying to contain Kobe, even had Cassell been a factor, he would not have made up for their poor defensive presence on the outside. Payton had a lot of trouble with Parker because Parker was so quick and he looked even worse when he and Duncan ran a high post screen and roll and Shaq didn't come out of hte low post to cover leaving Parker an open lane to penetrate with absurd ease. Billups would also come across the pick and step out to the perimeter and bomb a 3 pointer. Cassell is mainly a jumpshooter up to about 20 feet out, Cassell is old, Payton would not have as much trouble with him as he would Parker or Billups. Now for the interior. Olowokandi is a joke of an NBA player, Earvin Johnson was their best center, but even he is mediocre. Now to match the Spurs against the Wolves, if Garnett guards Duncan and Johnson guards Rasho, the Spurs are going to pummel the Wolves in the post. Rasho is a perimeter threat that can draw Johnson out of hte paint, if it leads to Duncan playing Garnett one on one down low, Duncan is probably 30 lbs heavier than Garnett and will destroy him. Garnett as a one on one defender is nothing special, he is good on coming from the weakside and blocking some shots but put him one on one with probably the best low post player in the NBA, your interior will fall apart. Duncan on the other hand is a good one on one defender in the post. Garnett is NOT a dominant force down low. He is a forward that operates on the midrange on offense more often than not. He doesn't have the bulk or strength to dominate in the low post. The only thing that will seperate Duncan and Garnett is KG's quickness and his shot from midrange could give Duncan problems if he doesn't come out of the paint to guard him. In a 7 game series, last years Spurs would win in 5.

Edit: and saying htat improving more htan the Spurs by having Hudson and Wally back is just dumb. This is like the Mavs getting Walker and Jamison. The last thing hte T'Wolves need are more jumpshooters. They need a guy inside who will play defense and crash the boards. They still don't have one. The Spurs needed a guy who could hit from outside consistently when a defense would collapse on Duncan or Parker, and they got that in Barry.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

Compare to Spurs? :no: 

Compare to Mavs, Kings, ...... questionable.


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Ballscientist</b>!
> Compare to Spurs? :no:
> 
> Compare to Mavs, Kings, ...... questionable.


exactly my point.


----------



## jokeaward (May 22, 2003)

Yes, compare to Spurs. If the Kings and Mavs are up in the top four then good for them.

I'm not ready to drop expectations for Minnesota. Traditionally they do so-so early on (9-8 last year, trailing Phoenix in 02-03) and do better in possibly December, January, and February. There's a March swoon but a decent April with a lighter schedule.

I'm concerned about Spree and Sam. Spree looks like he's becoming more of a role player. He hasn't had much over a guy like Anthony Peeler since about last February. I think Sam will "turn it around" and get back to consistency and the occasional 28 points, 8-12 shooting, or 10+ assists (with 7 usually).

It's good to have Wally. He can still score in bunches and he works for offensive rebounds. He also has a little post game (though Sam and even Spree do somewhat) that I hope wwe use a little more and he can pass a bit. He's not at his old 18 or 17 PPG form but he's playing fewer minutes. He's at 13 PPG, .455, .421. And he's tenth all-time in 3PP.

I'd split last year in two parts: Big Three plus role-players and integrating the Little Three, Kandi Wally and a little of Troy. Despite having a 9-8 start the Big Three phase was a great run, 37-15 sticks out in my mind. http://www.nba.com/games/20040211/MINUTA/boxscore.html

Not the projected lineup of Kandi-KG-Wally-Spree-Sam but the good ol' Erv-KG-Dr. D-Spree-Sam lineup. Erv brought smarts and toughness. If only his head were in Kandi... Hassell brought great D and the open, set jumper which is great as a complimentary player. He also made good decisions and had that good FG% with almost no turnovers. Fred was another heady player who was obviously a marksman from the arc. Then again they drove from time to time. Madsen had stone hands and no FT ability, but he worked his tail off and got offensive rebounds, charges, etc. How can a fan not love that? Even Big O and Trent did their thing. Gary was pretty good to start the year. He played a LOT like Mo Taylor with fewer minutes.

The second phase was... an adjustment. Some good (if crazy) things did happn like Kandi with a streak of double-double play in April to help the Wolves finish the season on a winning streak and hold off the Spurs. Not just one enigma game like the one against Boston, but a solid couple of weeks. 

http://www.basketballreference.com/players/playerlog.htm?yr=2003&ilkid=OLOWOMI01

Maybe unexpected stuff like that will happen this year. We do have the enigmatic Eddie Griffin.


----------

