# Chances of winning NW division?



## Timmons (May 25, 2005)

Alright Wolves fans. Do you think you can win the Northwest division over the Nuggets and ....sonics (maybe?)?

Thoughts?


----------



## socco (Jul 14, 2002)

We definately can, but I wouldn't say that we will. You can't predict where this team will end up, that was clearly shown from last season. I don't expect the Sonics to be any good, I'd be surprised if they made the playoffs. So I think it'll be between us and Denver. It wouldn't shock me if we did, but I wouldn't bet on it.


----------



## Flanders (Jul 24, 2004)

I can certainly see us winning the division. When you have KG on your team, you are never counted out. The team we have now is much better than the one we had last season. We will have young players who have been given the chance to play basketball with the best basketball player in the NBA. KG was dissappointed with last season and I'm sure he'll do something about it, and I'm sure McHale will make more moves this offseason, or if not, by the trade deadline.

We played horrible last season, worst Timberwolves basketball I've seen. Ever. But we managed to get 44 wins, still. 

The Sonics have lost some of their core players from last season and as well as their coach.

The Nuggets had a good spurt last season after George Karl came. If they can play at that level all season, they have a good shot at taking the division.

So yes, I can see the Wolves winning the division.


----------



## sheefo13 (Jul 13, 2002)

There is no doubt in my mind that the Wolves win the division. I think its a little too early to tell but this team is better and honestly I think every team in our division got worse that were contenders... And the team that got better is Utah since they are healthy now. Denver doesn't seem like they will be any better than they were last year. They really haven't improved but didn't get that much worse. The 2 is still in question for them right now anywayz. The Sonics clearly got worse. And the Wolves seem like the only team that has improved along with the Jazz....


----------



## kaniffmn (Jul 29, 2003)

I think the Wolves will win the division. Though the Sonics lost some core players, they still have a solid starting lineup. Their bench and post play could sorely lack some punch, but I don't see them completely falling off the map with Ray Ray, Rashard, and Ridnour at the helm. I like what Sheefo said about Utah and Denver. I'm not all that convinced that Denver is that good of a team. They finished out extremely well last season, but it's over and done with. New year, new games, anything can happen. Portland is one that i'm not even worried about.


----------



## G-Force (Jan 4, 2005)

While the Sonics lost J'rome and AD, they did not really lose any core players. Some FA's are yet to sign contracts, but the starters for the Sonics are looking pretty good. Collison and Ridnour should continue to improve and Ray and Rashard will pick it up where they left off last season. The Sonics outlook will improve after a feew more role players get signed.


----------



## Jonathan Watters (Jul 20, 2002)

I really don't see the Wolves contending with a healthy Nuggets team this year. Obviously a lot rests on Marcus Camby's health, but we are outclassed by the Nuggets pretty much across the board when their frontcourt is healthy. Marcus Camby is one of the few players that can actually stick with KG athletically. They are a young team, and are only going to get better.


----------



## sheefo13 (Jul 13, 2002)

But still, in order to contend a team must improve. The Nuggets did get my favorite rookie in Hodge, but still lacking a good player in arguably the most talented position in the league at the 2-guard. They are going to have to deal with tough 2 guards in the game like the tmacs, kobes, ray rays, redds, pierces etc. Plus Karl's health is in question. Camby is not getting any younger, Nene is not getting any happier, and Boykins seems to be less effective each year. Plus Melo doesn't seem like he is improving at the rate that everyone expected...


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

Jonathan Watters said:


> I really don't see the Wolves contending with a healthy Nuggets team this year. Obviously a lot rests on Marcus Camby's health, but we are outclassed by the Nuggets pretty much across the board when their frontcourt is healthy. Marcus Camby is one of the few players that can actually stick with KG athletically. They are a young team, and are only going to get better.


Exactly. The Wolve's will definitely finish 2nd, but the team that has a decent shot of getting 2nd as well is the Jazz. If they are healthy with, finally, a point guard, I think they could challenge the Wolves for 2nd place.

Sonics and Portland are out of it.


----------



## sheefo13 (Jul 13, 2002)

I think the Jazz will be last again. A lot of people say they will be on their way up again but I truly doubt it. This team doesn't have a consistent scorer and from the looks of how D.Williams played in the summer league, he will need another year or two to mature. It is up there between the Nuggets and Wolves... Here is how I see the NW panning out
1.Wolves
2.Nuggets
3. Sonics
4.Jazz
5.Blazers

Blazers truly couldn't beat half of the top 25 teams in college is how I see it right now...


----------



## Jonathan Watters (Jul 20, 2002)

sheefo13 said:


> But still, in order to contend a team must improve.


The question wasn't whether the Nuggets will contend. It was whether the Wolves will win the NW.

Once again, your arguments are wishful thinking. Denver is a group that has largely been playing together for 3 years now. Numerous players are still developing, and are only just beginning to learn what it takes to win. As they continue to gel, they are only going to get better. This team didn't need to add pieces this year to win their division, although adding a legitimate 2-guard probably puts them on an entirely different level. 

The Wolves have a new coach/system, several new players to integrate, numerous players with a history of injury, and several major holes in the roster. I see these two teams in very different tiers.


----------



## sheefo13 (Jul 13, 2002)

Just because they are goin on to playin for their 3 year together surely doesn't mean they are better. Yet they still haven't played under the same system for those years. This year the Wolves have players that actually compliment each other. They aren't just a bunch of scorers anymore. The 3 guys that will carry the majority of the scoring will definetly be McCants, Wally and Garnett. We have good rebounders. Good shotblockers. A few good defenders. Guys who will now play their roles. You get it?


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

sheefo13 said:


> But still, in order to contend a team must improve. The Nuggets did get my favorite rookie in Hodge, but still lacking a good player in arguably the most talented position in the league at the 2-guard. They are going to have to deal with tough 2 guards in the game like the tmacs, kobes, ray rays, redds, pierces etc. Plus Karl's health is in question. Camby is not getting any younger, Nene is not getting any happier, and Boykins seems to be less effective each year. Plus Melo doesn't seem like he is improving at the rate that everyone expected...



Who's to say the Timberwolves improved though? I think the jury is still out on that as far as the non-Minnesota fans, so while Denver hasn't added anything, I think they still have a better outlook this upcoming season. 

Minnesota can win the division, but I think it will take a Denver downfall to accomplish it.


----------



## The lone wolf (Jul 23, 2003)

As things stand now Denver has a better shot at the division title than us..


----------



## sheefo13 (Jul 13, 2002)

The wolves got rid of two players that were holding us back all year... Is that not improving? The thing this off season was to get better, but also to get younger, more athletic, better defensivley, and play a more team oriented game. For the first time, the Wolves got a point guard that is not only big, but is a pass first pg that doesn't turn the ball over a lot. Then we got a young, atheltic scoring 2... The replacement for Spree. We add another perimter defender (in Wilkens) and resign the big men that were big contributers last summer. Plus we got rid of Cassell. Wally is getting more minutes now and will be happy. How hasn't this team improved? If we haven't put in place players that will benifit off kg and compliment KG's game, explain it to me.


----------



## myELFboy (Jun 28, 2005)

i love posts like this; everyone bias to their own team.

No one picked the Sonics with Jerome James, Antonio Daniels, & Nate McMillan as head coach---we were picked to finish DEAD LAST last year in the NW division. Those were the 3 we have lost so far, as well as Dwayne Casey which I think hurts the Sonics most because he has been with the Sonics organization so long, he helped develop players like Rashard, Luke, Nick, Vladimir....

anyway, who's to say we'll be worse? I'm not coming out & saying the Sonics will win the division, my gut tells me otherwise. Unless they can start the season off so hot like they did last year, but going 17-3 is difficult to do. 

I think Denver will be the team to beat, esp. after finishing the year off on such a high note. Portland is young, i don't see them winning a bunch of road games next year, which is key to success. Minnesota should be pretty good, but I don't think they'll win the division. Utah i have no idea about. 

Sonics have good leaders in Ray & Rashard, Ray in particular. if the team is slacking off, Ray will take control. The core is intact, Jerome & AD were just overpaid, they weren't core pieces. the loss of AD off the bench sucks, but I'd rather pay Brunson minimum contract for a year than pay AD $30 mil over 5 years for a back up role.


----------



## Timmons (May 25, 2005)

sheefo13 said:


> But still, in order to contend a team must improve. The Nuggets did get my favorite rookie in *Hodge*, but still lacking a good player in arguably the most talented position in the league at the 2-guard. They are going to have to deal with tough 2 guards in the game like the tmacs, kobes, ray rays, redds, pierces etc. Plus Karl's health is in question. Camby is not getting any younger, *Nene is not getting any happier*, and *Boykins seems to be less effective each year*. Plus Melo doesn't seem like he is improving at the rate that everyone expected...


Hodge is a huge X-Factor right now. If he can D-up he'll be a big advantage against those talented 2 guards.

Nene is actually very happy and hungry to play and hopefully start. And get some fat dollars at the end of the year! Haha.

Boykins actually put up career highs in every category that means something and his minutes practically doubled from what he played just 3 seasons ago in G.S. and L.A., so your 'less effective each year' is way off base! :eek8: 

Yeah, this really is Melo's season to show that he can take over and become somebody in this league besides a draft redo where Wade goes ahead of him.


----------



## Timmons (May 25, 2005)

I think that Minnesota is a big Wild-Card so far. Who knows how all the new guys will gel with eachother and the veterans in Minny.

The Vegas trip is supposed to build chemistry, but we'll see.

How's Minnesota's lineup looking

Jaric / 
McCants / Wilkens?
Wally / Hassell?
KG / Griffin / 
Kandi / 

Help me out here! I know Minny just added a big man, but I can't think of who it was???? Being lazy too, but fill in the roster and subs.


----------



## socco (Jul 14, 2002)

Jaric/Hudson/Chalmers
Hassell/McCants
Szczerbiak/Tskitishvili/Ebi
Garnett/Madsen
Olowokandi/Griffin

Dwayne Jones, probably the big man you were thinking of, is likely going to the NBDL.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

myELFboy said:


> i love posts like this; everyone bias to their own team.
> 
> No one picked the Sonics with Jerome James, Antonio Daniels, & Nate McMillan as head coach---we were picked to finish DEAD LAST last year in the NW division. Those were the 3 we have lost so far, as well as Dwayne Casey which I think hurts the Sonics most because he has been with the Sonics organization so long, he helped develop players like Rashard, Luke, Nick, Vladimir....
> 
> ...


Nate is gone. Thats the problem. Not only have you lost AD, JJ(even though he wasn't even good he was still another big man off the bench), maybe Wilkens, but you lost your head coach. I'm sure anyone would rather pay Brunson that, but AD added a versitility off you bench, he could play the 1 or 2 and he rarely turned the ball over. 

I think some Sonic fans are really underrating the loss of your good-great head coach. Sure Weiss worked under him, but that doesn't mean he's just as good of a coach, and I'm not saying you said that. 

I guess what I'm just trying to say is that sure the Sonics kept Ray Allen and they still have Rashard, but Nate played a major role in getting some of the players to overacheive. Bob Weiss doesn't, atleast not yet, command enough respect from the players for that to happen. The Sonics are most likely, since they have a new coach start off to a bumpy start just like most teams do. How they recover from that determines how well they will do for the rest of the season.


----------



## sheefo13 (Jul 13, 2002)

What we do know at this point is that every team has a legitamate chance of winning it, well except for the Blazers...


----------



## Jonathan Watters (Jul 20, 2002)

sheefo13 said:


> Just because they are goin on to playin for their 3 year together surely doesn't mean they are better.


So you are saying that teams aren't likely to get better the more they play with each other? Please. This is a team that has improved fairly dramatically over the past couple of seasons, and has several key players that are still young and improving. You can say there is a chance they won't keep improving, but you know as well as I do that the likelihood is that they will. 



> Yet they still haven't played under the same system for those years.


All the more reason to think that they will improve. Giving George Karl a training camp and preseason with his players is only going to make them a better team. And using your argument against you, what does it mean for the Wolves, who are implmenting an entirely new system? At least the Nuggets have been under Karl for the majority of a season...



> This year the Wolves have players that actually compliment each other. They aren't just a bunch of scorers anymore. The 3 guys that will carry the majority of the scoring will definetly be McCants, Wally and Garnett.


The Jaric move should help a bit. Is he somebody that is going to turn a team that was significantly worse than the Nuggets into one that is better? I don't think so. Is he going to play more games than Sam Cassell did last year? That's a legitimate question. 

However, it hasn't been proven in the least bit that these players complement Garnett. We still don't have anybody that can score off of the dribble. We still don't have a center, or a post player that can rough people up. 

And you seriously think the #14 pick in a weak draft is "definitely" going to help carry the majority of the scoring on a division-winning team? 



> We have good rebounders. Good shotblockers. A few good defenders. Guys who will now play their roles. You get it?


No, I don't. Wishing for something doesn't make it true. 

We've improved our rebounding at the PG position, which likely means very little, considering the C spot is where we are losing the most on the glass. We haven't improved our shotblocking at all. We will be able to defend the PG position better, but if McCants is going to be lighting it up on the offensive end as much as you think he is, that means he's also going to be out there on defense. And a 6'3 rookie that barely puts in a token effort on that end of the floor is a huge downgrade compared to Spree at the wing. 

As for guys that play their roles, that completely remains to be seen. McCants is a primadona. Griffin thinks his role is to shoot the 3-ball every time he gets a touch. Wally still thinks he deserves 25 shots a game. 

And we have a superstar that is livid about seeing Cassell get traded. If Cassell being gone is going to help the team's chemistry and win totals as much as you are assuming, don't you think if KG really wants to win he would be happy with the move?


----------



## sheefo13 (Jul 13, 2002)

KG was unhappy with the trade because he was his good friend. He usually likes moves that involves having his friends around him, not neccasarily who would improve the team.

The reason I think McCants can carry a majority of the scoring is because he is capable. You simply do not like the guy. You would think with a guy like Casey here his defense would improve. Coming out of college, Hassell was simply a scorer, not the defensive specialist he is. There is still room for improvement.

You would also think, in a 23 year old PF like Griffin that he will be working on his post moves this summer, so he is not one dimensional...


----------



## Jonathan Watters (Jul 20, 2002)

sheefo13 said:


> KG was unhappy with the trade because he was his good friend. He usually likes moves that involves having his friends around him, not neccasarily who would improve the team.


Then I have to wonder what the true cause of the chemistry problems were last season? Is Garnett about winning, or about keeping his slack-off buddies around? Is he going to pout this season now that they are gone? Again, I'm not saying this is likely to happen, but that these are legitimate questions that must be brought up when discussing whether the Wolves can win the division. 



> The reason I think McCants can carry a majority of the scoring is because he is capable. You simply do not like the guy. You would think with a guy like Casey here his defense would improve. Coming out of college, Hassell was simply a scorer, not the defensive specialist he is. There is still room for improvement.


I simply do not like the guy? Or maybe I've been scouting him for the past three seasons, and I happen to not like what I see. Personally, I think I'm somewhat qualified to comment on the guy, unlike somebody who clearly wasn't all that enamoured with him before the draft and is a Wolves fan first, scout second. At least I had the same opinion about McCants before the draft as I do now, unlike you. I can't just change my opinion about a player because he got drafted by my favorite team. Is that what you expect me to do? 

I will lay it on the line one last time. There is absolutely nothing out there to support McCants becoming a good defender. Yes, it *could* happen. Yes, players improve their defense after becoming pro's. So does that mean we throw the past out the window? Does his horrible defensive effort at the college level mean nothing? From the only rational way to analyze things, McCants is a god-awful defensive prospect. There's no other way to look at it. He doesn't give the effort, and he doesn't have the size. And you can't just assume he's going to turn things around because Trenton Hassell all of a sudden became a good defender. And by the way, I'm pretty sure Hassell wasn't the defensive slacker that McCants was at the college level. 



> You would also think, in a 23 year old PF like Griffin that he will be working on his post moves this summer, so he is not one dimensional...


No, you wouldn't. 

The Nuggets improved last season. Their younger players developed. You expect that to continue. 

Eddie Griffin hasn't improved his post moves one bit, in his 4 years in the league. Sure, maybe the light bulb will come on. But history says that it won't.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

sheefo13 said:


> KG was unhappy with the trade because he was his good friend. He usually likes moves that involves having his friends around him, not neccasarily who would improve the team.
> 
> The reason I think McCants can carry a majority of the scoring is because he is capable. You simply do not like the guy. You would think with a guy like Casey here his defense would improve. Coming out of college, Hassell was simply a scorer, not the defensive specialist he is. There is still room for improvement.
> 
> You would also think, in a 23 year old PF like Griffin that he will be working on his post moves this summer, so he is not one dimensional...


That doesn't mean they necessarily will work on what they need too. Sometimes players get lazy when they finally get a contract.


----------



## kaniffmn (Jul 29, 2003)

Jonathan Watters said:


> So you are saying that teams aren't likely to get better the more they play with each other? Please. This is a team that has improved fairly dramatically over the past couple of seasons, and has several key players that are still young and improving. You can say there is a chance they won't keep improving, but you know as well as I do that the likelihood is that they will.


Denver has improved. Do I see them improving into a 55-60+ game winner? Absolutely not. Especially in the West. They might win the division, but I swear the Northwest Division will be one of the most hotly contested divisions in the NBA this season. It is fairly wide open. Who's to say that what the Nuggets did at the end of the season is how they will play for an entire 82 game season. As I said before, it doesn't matter how they finished the regular season off. What did they do in the playoffs? How they finished the regular season didn't matter. So ending the season they were 1-4. 
They had another first round exit from the playoffs. Why does that sound so familiar? 

[/QUOTE]The Jaric move should help a bit. Is he somebody that is going to turn a team that was significantly worse than the Nuggets into one that is better? I don't think so. Is he going to play more games than Sam Cassell did last year? That's a legitimate question. [/QUOTE]

It will help. But the Wolves were only 5 games behind them. Significantly worse...that is a huge over-statement. Nobody is to say how many games he'll play. Nobody knows the answer. 

[/QUOTE]However, it hasn't been proven in the least bit that these players complement Garnett. We still don't have anybody that can score off of the dribble. We still don't have a center, or a post player that can rough people up. And you seriously think the #14 pick in a weak draft is "definitely" going to help carry the majority of the scoring on a division-winning team? 
No, I don't. Wishing for something doesn't make it true. [/QUOTE]

Obviously you are right here. It isn't proven that these players can play with Garnett. However, people were saying the same thing about Cassell and Spree when we traded for them. It's not wrong to think that it can happen. You have outlined some of things that we still seriously need that we have not picked up this off-season: rugged post player, depth. I don't know where you think this draft was weak. I feel this is a draft that people will look back on and it will produce a lot of quality players. I don't know much about star quality...but there are a lot of decent players. But of course Sheefo will be optimistic about McCants coming in, this is a Wolves forum, and there is homerism in it. Do I see him coming in averaging 20 pts. a game? NO. Wally will be our second leading scorer. I see McCants putting up 10-15 pts. and a more consistant player than Spree was last year.

[/QUOTE]We've improved our rebounding at the PG position, which likely means very little, considering the C spot is where we are losing the most on the glass. We haven't improved our shotblocking at all. We will be able to defend the PG position better, but if McCants is going to be lighting it up on the offensive end as much as you think he is, that means he's also going to be out there on defense. And a 6'3 rookie that barely puts in a token effort on that end of the floor is a huge downgrade compared to Spree at the wing. [/QUOTE]

We were top-10 in shot blocking, I don't think we needed a lot of help in that area. But a defensive minded center is still needed. You seriously over-rate Spree's effectiveness on the floor. Again, with the new players, nobody knows how they'll respond to the situation of being in the NBA, playing with a player of Garnett's calibur, a new system, etc. It's too early to be saying a guy will absolutely not help at any aspect. 

[/QUOTE]As for guys that play their roles, that completely remains to be seen. McCants is a primadona. Griffin thinks his role is to shoot the 3-ball every time he gets a touch. Wally still thinks he deserves 25 shots a game. 
And we have a superstar that is livid about seeing Cassell get traded. If Cassell being gone is going to help the team's chemistry and win totals as much as you are assuming, don't you think if KG really wants to win he would be happy with the move?[/QUOTE]

You had me with you until you said Wally deserves 25 shots a game. The guy shoots over 50% damn near every season and all he shoots are jump shots. Of course he deserves more shots. Have you seen his contract? He's getting paid to come off the bench when he is a starter. He's taken hits for the team since Spree and Cassell came here. Now let him do what he was doing before they were around. For God's sake, the guy was an All Star. He was doing something right. And even then, he wasn't shooting 25 times a game. He is due to get his shots. I for one, am thankful he is still here (I know there are so few of us who think this way).

How do you know Garnett is livid about the trade? Are you his close personal friend? He hasn't said a word to the press since the season ended. This isn't show-friends, it's show-business.


----------



## Flanders (Jul 24, 2004)

Flanders said:


> I can certainly see us winning the division. When you have KG on your team, you are never counted out. The team we have now is much better than the one we had last season. We will have young players who have been given the chance to play basketball with the best basketball player in the NBA. KG was dissappointed with last season and I'm sure he'll do something about it, and I'm sure McHale will make more moves this offseason, or if not, by the trade deadline.
> 
> We played horrible last season, worst Timberwolves basketball I've seen. Ever. But we managed to get 44 wins, still.
> 
> ...


I confess.

I was trying to be optimistic here, but really, I do not see the Wolves winning the division at all. Honestly, the Wolves squad we have right now is getting me a little worried. Too young, inexperienced, lack of character, we have no identity. I don't know what style of basketball we are going to play. With a rookie coach and players who think "ME"...I just don't see us contending.

Just look at the lineup (compared to the Elites):

Michael Olowakandi
Kevin Garnett
Wally Szczerbiak
Trenton Hassell
Marko Jaric

Unless Kandi shoots 50% and averages a double double, or Rashad McCants averages 15 off the bench ala Ben Gordon, or Trenton Hassell shuts his man down every night while averaging at least 10PPG, or Wally scores 20 PPG, and Jaric dishes out 8 APG while giving at least 10 PPG....I don't see us contending. Plus, we will probably be one of the worst rebounding teams in the league if we don't get some help down low. So hopefully Eddie Griffin will be playing no less than 25 minutes per game backing up Kandi. 

Sure, we have an okay team. But the Spurs, Rockets, Suns, Mavericks, Denver...those teams are just too young, athletic, and experienced for us to stand a chance.

At *best* we are 2nd in the division and 6th in the West.

Though, be warned, this may be the pessimistic side of me right now. So...there.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

sheefo13 said:


> The wolves got rid of two players that were holding us back all year... Is that not improving? The thing this off season was to get better, but also to get younger, more athletic, better defensivley, and play a more team oriented game. For the first time, the Wolves got a point guard that is not only big, but is a pass first pg that doesn't turn the ball over a lot. Then we got a young, atheltic scoring 2... The replacement for Spree. We add another perimter defender (in Wilkens) and resign the big men that were big contributers last summer. Plus we got rid of Cassell. Wally is getting more minutes now and will be happy. How hasn't this team improved? If we haven't put in place players that will benifit off kg and compliment KG's game, explain it to me.



Marko Jaric....how does he compliment Kevin Garnett? Is he a legit 2nd wheel to KG? Is he a big man that KG needs to help in the interior? Does he get to the line a lot? Does he stay healthy? The answers to all of those questions leads me to believe Jaric doesn't compliment Garnett any better than Cassell and Sprewell did. Aside from that, you added Rashad McCants. Instant offense, good shooting touch, athletic....I like it. He will work nicely, but is McCants the type of talent that can take a borderline playoff team into a division winner? Doubt it. 


I don't think Minny did anything special this offseason. Okay, you got rid of Spree and Sam....does that mean you can replace them with guys who are on the same caliber and significant strides will be made? And don't forget, Minny's best season ever was due in part to Spree and Sam's play, so losing those two isn't going to amount to some huge addition by subtraction. Talent-wise, the Wolves have marginally improved at best. That's the bottom line as to why people are questioning if they can win the division, or even make the playoffs. Marko Jaric, Rashad McCants, and Tskitishville aren't the type of headline additions that will take a team from non playoffs to division winners, so Casey is going to have to work some magic, and the "cancer" theory will have to be proven true if the T'Wolves want to win the division.


----------



## Jonathan Watters (Jul 20, 2002)

kaniffmn said:


> Denver has improved. Do I see them improving into a 55-60+ game winner? Absolutely not. Especially in the West. They might win the division, but I swear the Northwest Division will be one of the most hotly contested divisions in the NBA this season. It is fairly wide open. Who's to say that what the Nuggets did at the end of the season is how they will play for an entire 82 game season. As I said before, it doesn't matter how they finished the regular season off. What did they do in the playoffs? How they finished the regular season didn't matter. So ending the season they were 1-4.
> They had another first round exit from the playoffs. Why does that sound so familiar?


Well, it's been two years now. Not too surprising for a young team. To reiterate, I'm not expecting them to become a legit contender this year either. But I am disagreeing with the idea that they haven't improved, and the idea that the Wolves are in their class. Obviously you can never say never, but if you are going to use that as an argument you might as well throw all preseason speculation out the window. We speculate with the information we have, and the information we have is very clear. 



> > The Jaric move should help a bit. Is he somebody that is going to turn a team that was significantly worse than the Nuggets into one that is better? I don't think so. Is he going to play more games than Sam Cassell did last year? That's a legitimate question.
> 
> 
> It will help. But the Wolves were only 5 games behind them. Significantly worse...that is a huge over-statement. Nobody is to say how many games he'll play. Nobody knows the answer.


So Jaric's injury history isn't an issue to you, simply because you never know when a player will get injured? Again, what you are really saying here is that it's impossible to predict anything, so why bother? If you truly believe that, you probably don't need to be posting on this thread. 



> > However, it hasn't been proven in the least bit that these players complement Garnett. We still don't have anybody that can score off of the dribble. We still don't have a center, or a post player that can rough people up. And you seriously think the #14 pick in a weak draft is "definitely" going to help carry the majority of the scoring on a division-winning team?
> > No, I don't. Wishing for something doesn't make it true.
> 
> 
> Obviously you are right here. It isn't proven that these players can play with Garnett. However, people were saying the same thing about Cassell and Spree when we traded for them. It's not wrong to think that it can happen. You have outlined some of things that we still seriously need that we have not picked up this off-season: rugged post player, depth. I don't know where you think this draft was weak. I feel this is a draft that people will look back on and it will produce a lot of quality players. I don't know much about star quality...but there are a lot of decent players.


Yes, there was some nice depth around in the middle of the first round. Of course, that's another reason why the McCants pick was a mistake. 



> > We've improved our rebounding at the PG position, which likely means very little, considering the C spot is where we are losing the most on the glass. We haven't improved our shotblocking at all. We will be able to defend the PG position better, but if McCants is going to be lighting it up on the offensive end as much as you think he is, that means he's also going to be out there on defense. And a 6'3 rookie that barely puts in a token effort on that end of the floor is a huge downgrade compared to Spree at the wing.
> 
> 
> We were top-10 in shot blocking, I don't think we needed a lot of help in that area. But a defensive minded center is still needed. You seriously over-rate Spree's effectiveness on the floor. Again, with the new players, nobody knows how they'll respond to the situation of being in the NBA, playing with a player of Garnett's calibur, a new system, etc. It's too early to be saying a guy will absolutely not help at any aspect.


Notice where I say that there is always a chance that McCants turns his defense around. But does that make sense to expect it, based on his physical attributes, his approach to defense, and effectiveness in the past? It absolutely does not! Once again - if you want to say all speculation is pointless, go ahead and quit posting on the thread. If you want to look at things realistically and make an edjucated projection of McCants' defensive contributions this year, it's impossible to be optimistic. 



> > As for guys that play their roles, that completely remains to be seen. McCants is a primadona. Griffin thinks his role is to shoot the 3-ball every time he gets a touch. Wally still thinks he deserves 25 shots a game.
> > And we have a superstar that is livid about seeing Cassell get traded. If Cassell being gone is going to help the team's chemistry and win totals as much as you are assuming, don't you think if KG really wants to win he would be happy with the move?
> 
> 
> You had me with you until you said Wally deserves 25 shots a game. The guy shoots over 50% damn near every season and all he shoots are jump shots. Of course he deserves more shots. Have you seen his contract? He's getting paid to come off the bench when he is a starter. He's taken hits for the team since Spree and Cassell came here. Now let him do what he was doing before they were around. For God's sake, the guy was an All Star. He was doing something right. And even then, he wasn't shooting 25 times a game. He is due to get his shots. I for one, am thankful he is still here (I know there are so few of us who think this way).


I happen to agree with you about Wally and his role in the offense. He ought to be featured, especially now. My comment about Wally had more to do with the idea that we still have a lot of guys who want to shoot the ball every time they touch it. It also has to do with the general chemistry of the team - I don't think Wally and KG are ever going to do more than just put up with each other. 



> How do you know Garnett is livid about the trade? Are you his close personal friend? He hasn't said a word to the press since the season ended. This isn't show-friends, it's show-business.


We all know what's been reported in the media, from multiple sources, since the trade went down. Sure, maybe the media sources are outright lying about it. That's what a person trying to put a positive spin on everything would try and say.


----------



## sheefo13 (Jul 13, 2002)

KokoTheMonkey said:


> Marko Jaric....how does he compliment Kevin Garnett? Is he a legit 2nd wheel to KG? Is he a big man that KG needs to help in the interior? Does he get to the line a lot? Does he stay healthy? The answers to all of those questions leads me to believe Jaric doesn't compliment Garnett any better than Cassell and Sprewell did. Aside from that, you added Rashad McCants. Instant offense, good shooting touch, athletic....I like it. He will work nicely, but is McCants the type of talent that can take a borderline playoff team into a division winner? Doubt it.
> 
> 
> I don't think Minny did anything special this offseason. Okay, you got rid of Spree and Sam....does that mean you can replace them with guys who are on the same caliber and significant strides will be made? And don't forget, Minny's best season ever was due in part to Spree and Sam's play, so losing those two isn't going to amount to some huge addition by subtraction. Talent-wise, the Wolves have marginally improved at best. That's the bottom line as to why people are questioning if they can win the division, or even make the playoffs. Marko Jaric, Rashad McCants, and Tskitishville aren't the type of headline additions that will take a team from non playoffs to division winners, so Casey is going to have to work some magic, and the "cancer" theory will have to be proven true if the T'Wolves want to win the division.


Wanna know why? KG is in need of a good passing pg that won't turn it over... It does help that he is big and will be able to get the passes into the post easier. 


JW, I understand you are a scout and generally you know more about rookies coming into the draft than everyone else here, but it doesn't nessaceraly mean you will always be right. And I know it doesn't mean that for me neither. Rookies are unpredictable and once the season starts we will be able to understand what he is capable of doing. And I do understand you are more likely to be right about him than me, but I am not trying to be mean or anything, the Wolves have scouts too.


----------



## Jonathan Watters (Jul 20, 2002)

sheefo13 said:


> Wanna know why? KG is in need of a good passing pg that won't turn it over... It does help that he is big and will be able to get the passes into the post easier.


KG had no problems getting the ball or shots last year. None. 

The reason Jaric fits with the team is that he gives the team more versatility and options in the backcourt, especially defensively. Basically, you can put him out there with undersized 2-guards like McCants and Hudson and not automatically be at a disadvantage on defense. 



> JW, I understand you are a scout and generally you know more about rookies coming into the draft than everyone else here, but it doesn't nessaceraly mean you will always be right. And I know it doesn't mean that for me neither. Rookies are unpredictable and once the season starts we will be able to understand what he is capable of doing. And I do understand you are more likely to be right about him than me, but I am not trying to be mean or anything, the Wolves have scouts too.


Rookies are unpredictable. Fine. Then don't tell me he's going to be one of the Wolves' 3 main scoring options this year. That's a prediction, you know. 

Like I've always said: I have no problem disagreeing with somebody, if they have a reasoning behind what they are trying to argue. I just don't see much reasoning behind the flip-flopping after draft night and inability to see the possibility that the #14 pick in the draft might not be a sure thing. 

I mean, if you tell me that McCants is going to be a factor with his long range shooting, I can't argue with you there. He will be able to draw defenses, and hit open looks from the outside at a very good clip. But when you try to tell me that Casey is going to turn him into a good defender, that he isn't a poor ballhandler, and that he will create his own shot with ease at the NBA level - those are things that I have seen with my own eyes to be completely false. And saying "you never know what's going to happen" isn't really an argument. Every time a fan posts about an upcoming season, "you never know what is going to happen" is assumed. 

And the comment about the scouts is uncalled for. We all know every team has scouts. The Wolves had scouts when they drafted Ndudi Ebi and Will Avery. The Wizards had scouts when they drafted Kwame Brown. If we took that approach, we would consider every player drafted to be a can't miss prospect just because our favorite team drafted them.


----------



## sheefo13 (Jul 13, 2002)

I agree with you 100% JW. You would think McCants would be the best scoring option off the bench since he is the only legit scorer off it.. Well him and Hudson. What I am trying to say is that noone will know how good or bad McCants will be until we see some of him in the preseason and especially the season.. With Wilkens gone now, I would hope McCants would see more minutes.


----------



## socco (Jul 14, 2002)

Jonathan Watters said:


> KG had no problems getting the ball or shots last year. None.


:uhoh:

The last time he had as few shots (per minute) was in 98, his 3rd year in the league. And he had 3 shots less per 48 minutes than he did a year ago. There were 35 games where he didn't get more than 15 shots. Kobe, T-Mac, and Arenas had a combined 37. Did you watch the Wolves last season? The reason isn't because of Cassell's style though, I agree with your point there, as the previous year was the 2nd highest of his career in terms of shots per minute, and the highest overall. But there were plenty of games where I'd look at the boxscore the next day and wonder why the hell Garnett only got 9 shots in a loss.


----------



## sheefo13 (Jul 13, 2002)

Good discussion in the NBA General forum too if you are interest...
http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?t=194865

I will say what i have said there. The Wolves do have KG and people are really begining to underrate his ability right now.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

sheefo, people don't underrate KG. You could start a "who's the best player in the NBA" thread right now and his name will pop up time and time again. 


It's the supporting cast, the same supporting cast you guys have been complaining about for awhile now. That's why people are "underrating" the Wolves.


----------



## sheefo13 (Jul 13, 2002)

People don't think he can lead this team single- handldly to the playoffs when he had done it 7 straight years? Look at the supporting cast then. Look at it now. It has improved from the days when we were the 5th seed against the Mavs, or those years vs Portland or LA or SA. Wally is always up there with his FG% and as the second option, I have no doubt that he can average 18-21 ppg. Why? Because he is healthy and managed to score 15.5 ppg as the 4th option on his first season back healthy. I think a lot of doubters will be proven wrong when it comes down to the season, because guys like Hudson, Wally, Jaric are capable of doing damage in games. Yes, it is more likely that the Nuggets will be ahead of the WOlves this year, but when people say the Wolves will be the 10 seed again? I highly doubt that. This team has a good shot at winning the NW division and I bet that is what the WOlves orginization is shooting for this next season. 
I simply can not wait until the season starts... WOW I can not wait. This is why I love basketball and I bet the same reason goes for everyone else :clap:


----------



## socco (Jul 14, 2002)

sheefo13 said:


> Look at the supporting cast then. Look at it now.


I think that's the problem more than anything. People either don't remember the past, or don't want to remember the past.


----------



## Flanders (Jul 24, 2004)

The best point guards that compliment KG are the ones like Sam Cassell. 

KG sets high screen, Sam uses the screen, open mid-range jumper, money, Wolves win. KG probably sets the best screens in the league, btw. If his guards can utilize his screens correctly for an open J, then the Wolves are good.

Now, if we can somehow get Mike Bibby...I'd say we'd have a younger version of Cassell who can compliment KG.

Also, I think KG can lead his team to the Playoffs if he had as good of a cast as Dirk, Duncan, Amare, and Carmelo. KG was able to lead his team to the playoffs in the past because teams were just mediocre and we happened to be a little better than mediocre. But last season and now, teams are just stacked. Dallas has always been stacked, San Antonio got their young players to develop into VERY good players, and Denver just has a great GM that signed good players to make a good team, the Suns found a gem in Amare while already having Marbury and Marion, they signed Nash, JJ, and Q and they became a good team....all while we sat and watched.

Right now, I'd say we are at the same level as the Lakers and Grizzlies, which is a borderline playoff team.


----------



## Jonathan Watters (Jul 20, 2002)

socco said:


> :uhoh:
> 
> The last time he had as few shots (per minute) was in 98, his 3rd year in the league. And he had 3 shots less per 48 minutes than he did a year ago. There were 35 games where he didn't get more than 15 shots. Kobe, T-Mac, and Arenas had a combined 37. Did you watch the Wolves last season? The reason isn't because of Cassell's style though, I agree with your point there, as the previous year was the 2nd highest of his career in terms of shots per minute, and the highest overall. But there were plenty of games where I'd look at the boxscore the next day and wonder why the hell Garnett only got 9 shots in a loss.


If Garnett had problems getting shots last season, it was because he wasn't as aggressive as he has been in the past. Heck, it's always been like pulling teeth to get Garnett to step up and take a lot of shots. He likes to blend in with the offense and make people better. Him being banged up was part of it also, but he definitely didn't look to force the issue on the offensive end like he did in his MVP season. It wasn't anything to do with Cassell or any of his other teammates, and that was point in response to sheefo saying why Jaric fit better on this team...


----------



## socco (Jul 14, 2002)

Jonathan Watters said:


> If Garnett had problems getting shots last season, it was because he wasn't as aggressive as he has been in the past. Heck, it's always been like pulling teeth to get Garnett to step up and take a lot of shots. He likes to blend in with the offense and make people better. Him being banged up was part of it also, but he definitely didn't look to force the issue on the offensive end like he did in his MVP season. It wasn't anything to do with Cassell or any of his other teammates, and that was point in response to sheefo saying why Jaric fit better on this team...


I agree with your point, just not how you made it, that's all.


----------

