All Things 2025-2026 Minnesota Timberwolves In-Season Thread

Donate To GopherHole

tikited said:
I don't think one person has claimed that is the reason for all of our problems let alone defensively. It's a big reason though for the team having issues. To not see that is insane.
Click to expand...

Based on what? The constant clamoring for a new PG on here is due to not being able to setup the offense and TO's allegedly. Those have nothing to do with solving the defense issues and they're in the middle of the pack in TO's per game.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
What you said earlier about the Naz/Randle combo is the issue. They are the worst frontcourt duo defensively in years right now. That's the #1 problem.

There are many combo guards/shooting guards playing lead guard across the NBA right now. That's today's NBA. Needing a classic PG is not how it works anymore and there are very few of those that even exist. It's not the issue with why this team isn't playing defense right now.
Click to expand...
What would you call Dillingham?
 

We are taking the crap teams to the woodshed.

The good teams are taking us to the woodshed.

Can we pick it up?
 





GopherWeatherGuy said:
What you said earlier about the Naz/Randle combo is the issue. They are the worst frontcourt duo defensively in years right now. That's the #1 problem.

There are many combo guards/shooting guards playing lead guard across the NBA right now. That's today's NBA. Needing a classic PG is not how it works anymore and there are very few of those that even exist. It's not the issue with why this team isn't playing defense right now.
Click to expand...
You are using a lot of labels. Basically there are a number of pg's in the NBA that shoot the ball really well and can run an offense. Ant isn't one of them. Claiming that Ant can do both at a high level is nonsense.
 

jamiche said:
You are using a lot of labels. Basically there are a number of pg's in the NBA that shoot the ball really well and can run an offense. Ant isn't one of them. Claiming that Ant can do both at a high level is nonsense.
Click to expand...

Why?
 





jamiche said:
A comparatively low usage to assist ratio and well below 2:1 assist to turnover ratio. He’s a great scorer who shouldn’t be running an offense.
Click to expand...

4 of the 5 starters can run the offense and do. It's not only on Ant and never will be.

The offense has not been the problem this year.
 

-Bringing the ball up MAY prevent Ant from focusing on scoring which MAY hurt the offense.
-Bringing the ball up MAY make teams scheme to get the ball out of Ant's hands early in the offense which MAY open up opportunities for others on offense.

-Bringing the ball up MAY make Ant work harder on offense which MAY hurt his defense.
-Bringing the ball up MAY make Ant work less hard on offense so he isn't focused on cutting and moving without the ball so it MAY save him energy to expend on defense.

You both WIN!

Please take further debate to your DMs. This thread is on it's 7th page and I wouldn't be surprised if at least 3 pages has been devoted to your back and forth. It's entirely possible and likely that you are both right.
 



ecoperson said:
-Bringing the ball up MAY prevent Ant from focusing on scoring which MAY hurt the offense.
-Bringing the ball up MAY make teams scheme to get the ball out of Ant's hands early in the offense which MAY open up opportunities for others on offense.

-Bringing the ball up MAY make Ant work harder on offense which MAY hurt his defense.
-Bringing the ball up MAY make Ant work less hard on offense so he isn't focused on cutting and moving without the ball so it MAY save him energy to expend on defense.

You both WIN!

Please take further debate to your DMs. This thread is on it's 7th page and I wouldn't be surprised if at least 3 pages has been devoted to your back and forth. It's entirely possible and likely that you are both right.
Click to expand...

Oh no, not a discussion about the Timberwolves PG situation in the Timberwolves thread.

If you want to talk about something else, then bring up a different subject, Karen.
 


GopherWeatherGuy said:
Oh no, not a discussion about the Timberwolves PG situation in the Timberwolves thread.

If you want to talk about something else, then bring up a different subject, Karen.
Click to expand...
A 'discussion' usually leads to some resolution. This 'discussion' of yours has been going on since last season, continued through the off-season, and picked up again with game 1 this year. Both sides of the argument have provided data and examples stating their case... I, unfortunately, see no evidence whatsoever that either point of view is gaining any traction with the other side. We're far enough into the season that it might be time to agree to disagree and just watch the games.
 

ecoperson said:
A 'discussion' usually leads to some resolution. This 'discussion' of yours has been going on since last season, continued through the off-season, and picked up again with game 1 this year. Both sides of the argument have provided data and examples stating their case... I, unfortunately, see no evidence whatsoever that either point of view is gaining any traction with the other side. We're far enough into the season that it might be time to agree to disagree and just watch the games.
Click to expand...
My point with our point guards is they don't score, don't create for others, and are pathetic defenders.

How did I do? And If I did ok on that......is pg a weakness?
 

ecoperson said:
A 'discussion' usually leads to some resolution. This 'discussion' of yours has been going on since last season, continued through the off-season, and picked up again with game 1 this year. Both sides of the argument have provided data and examples stating their case... I, unfortunately, see no evidence whatsoever that either point of view is gaining any traction with the other side. We're far enough into the season that it might be time to agree to disagree and just watch the games.
Click to expand...
Fair point.
 

ecoperson said:
A 'discussion' usually leads to some resolution. This 'discussion' of yours has been going on since last season, continued through the off-season, and picked up again with game 1 this year. Both sides of the argument have provided data and examples stating their case... I, unfortunately, see no evidence whatsoever that either point of view is gaining any traction with the other side. We're far enough into the season that it might be time to agree to disagree and just watch the games.
Click to expand...

I'm not the one constantly complaining about the PG situation, and I haven't been the one continuing to bring it up since last season. I continue to defend that the Wolves can win with their current guard situation. You want evidence?

The Wolves are currently 4th in offensive rating. They were 8th last year, and 17th the year before that. Their offense continues to improve year over year despite 'not having a PG'.

No one asked you to engage on the topic nor are you any sort of authority on this board.
 


GopherWeatherGuy said:
I'm not the one constantly complaining about the PG situation, and I haven't been the one continuing to bring it up since last season. I continue to defend that the Wolves can win with their current guard situation. You want evidence?

The Wolves are currently 4th in offensive rating. They were 8th last year, and 17th the year before that. Their offense continues to improve year over year despite 'not having a PG'.

No one asked you to engage on the topic nor are you any sort of authority on this board.
Click to expand...
Maybe its worthy of its own thread.🤔😁
 

upnorthkid said:
this is an impressive reaction here on GH for a team that also started 3-3 last year and is currently missing its, by far, best player as well as playing numerous guys about 50% more minutes than they have in their career or for us last year. This is the pain of Finch not playing some of these guys more last year (TSJ, Clark, Dilly) and needing to figure out what the rotation will be without NAW who played 25min/game for us last year while acknowledging Mike has gotten another year older and slower.

It's been 5 games y'all. 100% get people worrying and personally I don't think even if this team is fully healthy they're a title team (this is going to be OKCs year yet again unless someone major on that team gets hurt).

The clippers got blown out by the Jazz and GS. Houston is 2-2. The Magic, who some people liked as a sleeper pick in a weak east are 1-4, the Knicks are 2-2 and the Cavs are 2-2. We'll see where it goes and I hope they cut some bait, but this team will be fine as they get the rotations together and Ant comes back
Click to expand...
may just be that finchy is starting to figure out the rotations more and more as we go. it will take time and there will be growing pains. Make hay on the bad teams you're playing and we'll see the dust settles in what's going to be a very crowded middle of the pack in the west (As it was last year) between seeds 2-10
 

It was nice seeing Clark taking open 3's without hesitation. Jim Pete mentioned he's been working hard on his outside jumper and it sure paid dividends last night. If he can shoot even 35% from 3, his playing time needs to increase.

I didn't have Clark ahead of TSJ and Dilly in the rotation at this juncture of the season on my Bingo card.
 

Slim Tubby said:
It was nice seeing Clark taking open 3's without hesitation. Jim Pete mentioned he's been working hard on his outside jumper and it sure paid dividends last night. If he can shoot even 35% from 3, his playing time needs to increase.

I didn't have Clark ahead of TSJ and Dilly in the rotation at this juncture of the season on my Bingo card.
Click to expand...
He's hurt, so who knows at this point.
 

Jon K. claims that we have been in contact with Memphis regarding Ja.

The Minnesota Timberwolves have had issues at the point guard position this season. That has the Wolves looking for potential options to take some playmaking pressure off Anthony Edwards and Julius Randle. One of those options could be Ja Morant of the Memphis Grizzlies.

Minnesota has checked in with Memphis on Morant's availability, according to The Athletic's Jon Krawczynski.

"They're testing the waters a little bit. I don't get the sense that there's anything real close," Krawczynski said on SiriusXM NBA Radio. "I do think that, if we get to late December and the Wolves are still treading water and that point guard position still has not solidified...I do think that they could explore at least looking harder at Ja Morant."

Trading for Morant could be challenging for Minnesota, as the Timberwolves are well above the luxury tax and first apron. That means that the Wolves are limited to sending out less salary, or matching dollar for dollar, in a trade.
 

Morant brings too much baggage, he's too injury prone and they would have to give up too much to get him.

Electric talent. Hard pass.
 

jamiche said:
Morant brings too much baggage, he's too injury prone and they would have to give up too much to get him.

Electric talent. Hard pass.
Click to expand...
The list of reasons NOT to trade for Morant is long and legitimate. This would be my best offer, and most likely not enough:

* Naz, Dillingham, Shannon Jr, Conley (salary ballast) & pick swaps for Morant

Morant/Hyland
Edwards/DiVincenzo
McDaniels/Clark/Juzang
Randle/Miller/Ingles
Gobert/Beringer/Sikorsky

That's a heck of a roster by name recognition alone but our lack of depth at C/PF would be frightening and probably requires moving DDV for a viable back-up big man.

Going into next season, this would be Minnesota's salary situation with both Gobert and Randle having Player Options on the last year of their deals:

Edwards - $48,924,624 | $52,298,736 | $55,672,848

Morant - $42,166,510 | $44,886,930

Gobert - $36,500,000 | $38,000,000

Randle - $33,333,334 | $35,802,468

McDaniels - $26,200,000 | $28,006,898 | $29,813,790

DiVincenzo - $12,535,000

Effectively, this gives Minnesota a two-year timespan with Morant, Gobert and Randle with the ability to reload the following year (if it doesn't work well) with Anthony Edwards and Jaden McDaniels both still under contract.

At the end of the day, adding Morant would certainly create a buzz but I'm not convinced we would actually be a better "team" after such a trade.
 

Slim Tubby said:
The list of reasons NOT to trade for Morant is long and legitimate. This would be my best offer, and most likely not enough:

* Naz, Dillingham, Shannon Jr, Conley (salary ballast) & pick swaps for Morant

Morant/Hyland
Edwards/DiVincenzo
McDaniels/Clark/Juzang
Randle/Miller/Ingles
Gobert/Beringer/Sikorsky

That's a heck of a roster by name recognition alone but our lack of depth at C/PF would be frightening and probably requires moving DDV for a viable back-up big man.

Going into next season, this would be Minnesota's salary situation with both Gobert and Randle having Player Options on the last year of their deals:

Edwards - $48,924,624 | $52,298,736 | $55,672,848

Morant - $42,166,510 | $44,886,930

Gobert - $36,500,000 | $38,000,000

Randle - $33,333,334 | $35,802,468

McDaniels - $26,200,000 | $28,006,898 | $29,813,790

DiVincenzo - $12,535,000

Effectively, this gives Minnesota a two-year timespan with Morant, Gobert and Randle with the ability to reload the following year (if it doesn't work well) with Anthony Edwards and Jaden McDaniels both still under contract.

At the end of the day, adding Morant would certainly create a buzz but I'm not convinced we would actually be a better "team" after such a trade.
Click to expand...
high usage guy who's going to take 14-18 shots/game, mediocre from deep, doesn't play much defense, and is bleh health wise. Plus the wolves have to shed almost all their depth to get him?
You can see why the trade market for him is ice cold when you add in the off court crap.
We would definitely not be a better team with that trade above. Maybe you could salvage some if you got them to swing you Edey (doubtful) so your front court isn't getting roasted.
If you move Julius or Rudy it gets easier money wise, but again I don't think that's going to make us better
 

upnorthkid said:
high usage guy who's going to take 14-18 shots/game, mediocre from deep, doesn't play much defense, and is bleh health wise. Plus the wolves have to shed almost all their depth to get him?
You can see why the trade market for him is ice cold when you add in the off court crap.
We would definitely not be a better team with that trade above. Maybe you could salvage some if you got them to swing you Edey (doubtful) so your front court isn't getting roasted.
If you move Julius or Rudy it gets easier money wise, but again I don't think that's going to make us better
Click to expand...
I wouldn't even consider moving Gobert, Randle or McDaniels in a potential trade. Other than hindering our depth, I wouldn't lose any sleep over moving any of the guys I mentioned, including TSJ who I like a lot.

I think what appeals to me the most is being able to reset after just two (2) years if it's a disaster with Ant/McDaniels still under contract and a ton of Cap space to start another rebuild around them.

I'm sure Connelly chats with every GM but Jon K. isn't the type to throw a ton of gossip against the wall hoping something sticks. If things continue to deteriorate in MEM, I suspect the rumors about MIN will intensify.
 

Slim Tubby said:
I wouldn't even consider moving Gobert, Randle or McDaniels in a potential trade. Other than hindering our depth, I wouldn't lose any sleep over moving any of the guys I mentioned, including TSJ who I like a lot.

I think what appeals to me the most is being able to reset after just two (2) years if it's a disaster with Ant/McDaniels still under contract and a ton of Cap space to start another rebuild around them.

I'm sure Connelly chats with every GM but Jon K. isn't the type to throw a ton of gossip against the wall hoping something sticks. If things continue to deteriorate in MEM, I suspect the rumors about MIN will intensify.
Click to expand...
i think the only way they want to do this is if they don't have to get rid of "all" the young depth and are waiting to watch the Memphis/Morant relationship just continue to tank. Wouldn't surprise me to see them go that route, but I'd expect they aren't going to want to unload all the depth to do so as that lineup you list above is real thin
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom