Minnesota T-Wolves Breakdown: Despite Amorous Performances, Wolves May Be Heartbroken

[Erick Blasco]

As the Minnesota Timberwolves wallow through the fourth season of a miasmal rebuilding process, this season is yet another one of talent evaluation geared towards a future beyond the horizon.

 

Under that heading, let’s take a look at how the T-Wolves performed in a gutty 112-103 win over the New York Knicks to see if a promising future is anywhere in sight.

 

Kevin Love had a game for the history books, with 31 points, 31 boards, and five assists sprinkled in for good measure.

 

Love’s 31 rebounds were definitely aided to an extent by his propensity for missing close-range shots—eight in total. However, his low center of gravity makes him extremely difficult to root out of position, plus, he has immaculate timing of when to jump for loose balls, compromising for the fact that he has zero elevation.

 

The most important weapon in Love’s rebounding arsenal, though, is clearly his vacuum-like hands. No matter how hard, how soft, what angle, and whether it was deflected or not, Love was able to suck in a wide variety of wild loose balls, and the ones he couldn’t grab outright, he’d control with soft tips until he was able to pull them down.

 

Offensively, Love has only one post move he trusts, a mechanical right hook over his left shoulder he unleashes without any lift. Defended by wings in Wilson Chandler and Danilo Gallinari, Love was only 2-6 in the post.

 

Love also has no elevation at the basket, having to resort to pump fakes to clear space to finish. He had three layups blocked, and has one of the worst shots blocked percentage in the game.

 

Love is a decent jump shooter, as he knocked down 3-8 attempts from outside the paint against the Knicks, but his three-point range is overrated. He only shot 1-4 from bonus land against New York (and was unguarded on his make) and is only a 32% career shooter from behind the arc.

 

None of Love’s five assists were particularly impressive—four of them were rudimentary passes to wide open players, though he did execute a nice pass to Darko Milicic curling out of the triangle for a layup.

 

Defensively, Love offered zero resistance to whoever he was guarding, and the T-Wolves had to offer significant help when Love was attacked. He’s not a shot blocker, he doesn’t move his feet particularly well and he was often late in his rotations.

 

Right now, Love is the Timberwolves’ best player, which makes it hard for Minnesota to win games since he’s essentially a glorified role player.

 

Minnesota’s best scorer is Michael Beasley. He can get to the rim in a straight line, has a feathery touch around the basket, and is even showing signs of basketball intelligence, and unselfishness—looking to refeed the post after kickouts; not forcing the action one a one-on-one fast break, waiting for a trailer who drew a foul; reading the Knicks overplaying a screen and adjusting his route the other way to notch a jumper, and making several excellent defensive rotations.

 

Beasley’s go to move is a right wing jab-step jumper, that with his size and elevation is hard to contest. When the Knicks played up on him to put more pressure on his shot, he simply spun baseline late in the fourth, and finished with an assertive dunk.

 

Beasley is also playing with a freedom and an assertiveness he never showed in Miami’s rigid, no-mistakes system. With the T-Wolves not worried about a playoff berth anytime soon, Beasley is allowed to make mistakes without repercussions. In Miami, those same mistakes would lead to lost games, which a playoff team like the Heat couldn’t afford.

 

On the minus side, Beasley forced more than a half-dozen shots, has tunnel vision, and is totally soft, shying away from contact at all opportunities. This characteristic rings through statistically as well—29 shot attempts, two free throws. This softness will keep Beasley from being the dominant, alpha-male type scorer the Timberwolves will need to become a contender. However, should the T-Wolves get that scorer, than what exactly becomes Beasley’s role, since he offers little off-the-ball?

 

For a team starved for wing talent though, Beasley is a shot in the arm—even if his best projected role is as a sixth-man designated scorer that won’t be a team’s primary offensive player.

 

As for the rest of the Wolves, Darko Milicic has poor court awareness and only wants to go left—on one occasion spinning to his left away from an open lane to the basket into two Knicks defenders. He too is defenseless, and while he’s a respectable passer, his decision making leaves much to be desired. He’s obviously not the center the T-Wolves need going forward.

 

Wesley Johnson didn’t try to do too much, and made some mistakes in moving within the triangle (which is understandable for a young player). He made his open jumpers—6-9 FG, 3-5 3FG, 15 PTS—didn’t make too many bad decisions with the ball, and had several exemplary baseline rotations to protect the rim.

 

Sebastian Telfair can’t penetrate, can’t defend, can’t shoot (airballing a floater and a layup among his five attempts) and only had moderate success—8 AST, 3 TO—by giving the ball up and getting out of the way. There’s little Telfair offers to a winning team, and his lack of upside offers even less to a losing one. Once Jonny Flynn and Luke Ridnour heal up, Telfair should find himself glued to the bench.

 

Corey Brewer still handles too high, still has a flawed jumper, still has no discipline on defense, still forces shots and drives, and still is a terrific athlete. His lack of development is a major reason why the T-Wolves haven’t developed the past four years.

 

Anthony Tolliver is a small forward in a center’s body—1-7 FG, 1-4 3FG, 2-2 FT, 1 REB, 0 AST, 2 TO, 5 PTS. His only value is as a floor-stretching big.

 

Sundiatta Gaines overhandles and can’t shoot, but he’s fine as a fourth string point guard.

 

Kosta Koufas missed a right hook in his brief action.

 

It’s interesting that the T-Wolves ran their offense through the various motions of the Triangle in the first half, but their second half offense was almost exclusively Beasley isolations and Love post ups. This is dangerous for several reasons.

 

One, the Triangle isn’t a sometimes offense, but a full-fledged philosophy. Breaking the offense and breaking the philosophy from a coaching end indicates that the offense is flawed, and breaking it from a players end triumphs the self over the team.

 

By the T-Wolves running various isolations, they’re basically stating that one-on-one play trumps team play, especially as there are plenty of isolation opportunities run out of triangle continuity anyway.

 

If the team has success outside of the triangle, the players will break it off more to run different plays. After all, if the team is having success with something easier, why run something harder?

 

Also, there’s a strong belief by basketball theorists that the triangle is the best offense in the game. Any deviation from it, is a deviation towards something easier.

 

Of course on the other hand, the Wolves are a young team who need victories for self-confidence, and the triangle is definitely a long-term, not a short-term plan for a success, given how difficult it is to learn for young players, and how radical it is for older players who are used to two-man offenses, or stat-compiling gameplans.

 

How often the T-Wolves run the triangle going forward is something to pay attention to.

 

What do the Timberwolves need going forward?

 

• An athletic and smart shot blocking center to pair with Love, and not an Al Jefferson type who was lazy and missed assignments.
• An athletic scorer who can finish near the basket. This player can play any position, though a center would be preferred, with a shooting guard as the second best option. Said player must be willing to cut and pass as the triangle offense dictates, not stand around until the ball entered his hands, a la Jefferson.
• A competent point guard with shooting range. Neither Ridnour, nor Flynn are adept three-point shooters.
• Defenders, defenders, defenders.
• A coach to deconstruct Brewer and rebuild him from the ground up.
• More athletes.
• A wing who can create his own shot.

Most importantly, the T-Wolves still need an influx of talent. While fans are in a state of amore over Beasley’s breakout games (against awful defensive teams) and Love’s 30-30 line, having those two as the T-Wolves best players (with their third best player being…Johnson? Ridnour? Darko?) will only have Minnesota loving the lottery.

[ChosenOne]

You said it best, as Love is only a glorified role player, and Beasely should be nothing more than a third option at best. I also have to agree and say that they need a wing player that can creat this own shot before anything else. If the Wolves can manage to get a sg the can attack the rim and make his own shot they will improve and start heading towards the right direction. Untill then the rubuilding process will continue like like it has been for the last 4 years. Love, Beasely (if you can keep him for the right price) and Rubio (when he decides to enter the NBA) all great pieces to start moving forward with, get a solid shooting guard into that mix and possible playoff team can emerge.

Edited November 14, 2010 by ChosenOne

[B-Easy and K-Love]

so a Knicks fan writes an article bashing a team that just beat his, just to make himself feel better. Not even a good article breaking down our team, complete waste of time reading.

[ChosenOne]

so a Knicks fan writes an article bashing a team that just beat his, just to make himself feel better. Not even a good article breaking down our team, complete waste of time reading.

 

How about you explain why? I believe what he said was correct.

 

I am sure you aint going to reply to me (becuase even you know what was written is correct) so next time when you reply against an article or a post, make a post to discuss what you believe is incorrect. Dont just say it was a waste of time.

[B-Easy and K-Love]

How about you explain why? I believe what he said was correct.

 

I am sure you aint going to reply to me (becuase even you know what was written is correct) so next time when you reply against an article or a post, make a post to discuss what you believe is incorrect. Dont just say it was a waste of time.

I'll reply, I'll man up. I don't have a problem with doing so.

 

First off, I don't disagree with everything. However, just don't go bashing a team for your own good. There were a lot more positives in the game than what you said. You only hit on the two big, rather obvious, points. You say that Love can only be a glorified role player, yet you just got done praising him on his historic 30-30 game??? He may have been that before, but all teams are different. Right now, in Minnesota, he is a star. Don't go around calling him a glorified role player, if he was on the Hornets, I could see that, but Minnesota..."C'mon Man!"

 

Now to touch on your final points. I couldn't agree more with the first bullet point. Your second point, I half-agree. We have that in Wes, but we are waiting and breaking him into the NBA. He needs time just like any other rookie, but hopefully when Jonny comes back they will gel much better. Webster is also a player who can match that description. He just needs to get healthy. Ridnour not a shooter?? Really..."C'mon Man!" He is a solid 3-point shooter. Defenders I have to agree with, but then again we shut you guys down in the second half as well, so I believe we are okay there, for now. I disagree with this next point completely! Why deconstruct Brewer? He is a solid perimeter defender and towards the end of last year really started to show a lot better offense then what he has shown. We can't get more athletes than what we have. The only way we can do that is getting rid of Darko, which I'm praising for us to do but will never happen, and replacing him with an athletic wing. The final bullet point is a repeat being redundant. Not needed at all. But HARRISON BARNES!

[Dash]

so a Knicks fan writes an article bashing a team that just beat his, just to make himself feel better. Not even a good article breaking down our team, complete waste of time reading.

 

Watch it, these kinds of posts don't fly around here in OTR. If you disagreed with him so much then you should have replied like you did in your second post.

 

Also I don't think Blasco supports any particular team and may be one of the more unbiased posters here, but I can't speak for him so whatever.

 

First off, I don't disagree with everything. However, just don't go bashing a team for your own good. There were a lot more positives in the game than what you said. You only hit on the two big, rather obvious, points. You say that Love can only be a glorified role player, yet you just got done praising him on his historic 30-30 game??? He may have been that before, but all teams are different. Right now, in Minnesota, he is a star. Don't go around calling him a glorified role player, if he was on the Hornets, I could see that, but Minnesota..."C'mon Man!"

 

This pretty much speaks for itself.

 

Edit: I just realized this isn't the Northwest, not my jurisdiction. Oh well.

Edited November 16, 2010 by Dash

[Erick Blasco]

so a Knicks fan writes an article bashing a team that just beat his, just to make himself feel better. Not even a good article breaking down our team, complete waste of time reading.

 

You are obviously very new here...

[B-Easy and K-Love]

Watch it, these kinds of posts don't fly around here in OTR. If you disagreed with him so much then you should have replied like you did in your second post.

 

Also I don't think Blasco supports any particular team and may be one of the more unbiased posters here, but I can't speak for him so whatever.

 

 

 

This pretty much speaks for itself.

 

Edit: I just realized this isn't the Northwest, not my jurisdiction. Oh well.

it's a forum, i didn't do anything out of line at all. All I see is he's from Brooklyn, and I'm new here anyway, at least give me time, I make an assumption cuz he's from Brooklyn and everyone flips the [expletive] out. I'm not from the Northwest either. All someone had to do was ask for my reasoning. Otherwise I don't usually supply it unless it's a debate. Well for articles anyway.

 

You are obviously very new here...

no [expletive] sherlock.

Edited November 16, 2010 by B-Easy and K-Love

[Erick Blasco]

I'll reply, I'll man up. I don't have a problem with doing so.

 

First off, I don't disagree with everything. However, just don't go bashing a team for your own good. There were a lot more positives in the game than what you said. You only hit on the two big, rather obvious, points. You say that Love can only be a glorified role player, yet you just got done praising him on his historic 30-30 game??? He may have been that before, but all teams are different. Right now, in Minnesota, he is a star. Don't go around calling him a glorified role player, if he was on the Hornets, I could see that, but Minnesota..."C'mon Man!"

 

Now to touch on your final points. I couldn't agree more with the first bullet point. Your second point, I half-agree. We have that in Wes, but we are waiting and breaking him into the NBA. He needs time just like any other rookie, but hopefully when Jonny comes back they will gel much better. Webster is also a player who can match that description. He just needs to get healthy. Ridnour not a shooter?? Really..."C'mon Man!" He is a solid 3-point shooter. Defenders I have to agree with, but then again we shut you guys down in the second half as well, so I believe we are okay there, for now. I disagree with this next point completely! Why deconstruct Brewer? He is a solid perimeter defender and towards the end of last year really started to show a lot better offense then what he has shown. We can't get more athletes than what we have. The only way we can do that is getting rid of Darko, which I'm praising for us to do but will never happen, and replacing him with an athletic wing. The final bullet point is a repeat being redundant. Not needed at all. But HARRISON BARNES!

 

Most teams need at least one special player or two to become really good teams. Right now Love is a "star" because he's a recognizable face. If he were the kind of star that can flat out win games with his offense, the Wolves wouldn't be a team with 20 or so wins the past season-plus. Sure he wouldn't be a star on the Hornets---because he's not a star. And the term star is misleading too. It implies popularity and other factors other than pure basketball skills. It's the same thing with Emeka Okafor back in the day...he's a star only because he's the only thing the Bobcats have going and he has semi-decent numbers. When he leaves, nobody cares about him as a "star," but he's become a pretty solid role player.

 

I didn't see Johnson create much offense off the dribble so I can't project him right now. If you think he's an exceptionally talented player, so be it. He sure has a pretty high basketball IQ for a rookie.

 

Webster can't create his own offense. Never has, never will. He'll stroke the three and play some D.

 

Ridnour is a sub-35% three-point shooter for his career. I'd like to see him duplicate last season's modest success before I trust his jumper as reliable.

 

I didn't field a team against the T-Wolves. You're damn right they shut me down. I scored zero points from my laptop because of their great defense. I'll work on my zone-laptop offense when I get the chance. Then the Wolves will really be in trouble. They have the fastest pace in the league, so I'll use my bad dorm wi-fi to slow the game down. That's my strategy.

 

Brewer needs to be deconstructed because right now he's just a guy who can run and jump and crash the paint without reason, while reaching in all the time, and playing with his hands permanently in the cookie jar. Players like that become fourth wings for mediocre teams. This guy clearly has talent, he's still young, and he was a seventh overall pick. Get the most out of his natural gifts. Teach him to shoot. Teach him to handle. Teach him a proper defensive stance. Make him consistently useful.

 

You're not getting rid of Darko because teams won't want to take on four years of him, for a relatively pricey sum of money. Darko, Love, Webster, these guys are non-athletes. Ridnour's a system runner. I don't think Flynn is anything special from a talent standpoint. The Wolves are like the anti-Wizards who are all athleticism and have no court IQ. The T-Wolves are all role players and Beasley, who's a touch soft.

Edited November 16, 2010 by Erick Blasco

[Erick Blasco]

it's a forum, i didn't do anything out of line at all. All I see is he's from Brooklyn, and I'm new here anyway, at least give me time, I make an assumption cuz he's from Brooklyn and everyone flips the [expletive] out. I'm not from the Northwest either. All someone had to do was ask for my reasoning. Otherwise I don't usually supply it unless it's a debate. Well for articles anyway.

 

 

no [expletive] sherlock.

 

Nah, OTR's better than a forum...it's a community.

 

You make an assumption about my favorite team right off the back based on location---I'm certainly not a Knicks fan. You also used a tone insinuating that the only reason I wrote this article was because the Knicks lost---when you can clearly see from the other articles that I'm not simply writing articles bashing teams that the Knicks lose to.

 

Also, your biting, confrontational demeanor doesn't lend itself to discussion. All you're doing is coming off as a Wolves fan who wants to pick a fight with anyone anti-T-Wolves, and I'm not going down that road. Check your tone or you'll be yelling by yourself.

[B-Easy and K-Love]

Nah, OTR's better than a forum...it's a community.

 

You make an assumption about my favorite team right off the back based on location---I'm certainly not a Knicks fan. You also used a tone insinuating that the only reason I wrote this article was because the Knicks lost---when you can clearly see from the other articles that I'm not simply writing articles bashing teams that the Knicks lose to.

 

Also, your biting, confrontational demeanor doesn't lend itself to discussion. All you're doing is coming off as a Wolves fan who wants to pick a fight with anyone anti-T-Wolves, and I'm not going down that road. Check your tone or you'll be yelling by yourself.

So are the other forums I've been on. Whoop dee doo!

 

Yeah, but it's easy to make an assumption...I'm an example of a Wolves fan in Illinois. So I know not all fans live in the remote area.

I like to debate and discuss that's all. I thought it was an unfare assessment, and I wasn't in the greatest moods when I read it, sorry if I offended you.

[ChosenOne]

I'll reply, I'll man up. I don't have a problem with doing so.

 

First off, I don't disagree with everything. However, just don't go bashing a team for your own good. There were a lot more positives in the game than what you said. You only hit on the two big, rather obvious, points. You say that Love can only be a glorified role player, yet you just got done praising him on his historic 30-30 game??? He may have been that before, but all teams are different. Right now, in Minnesota, he is a star. Don't go around calling him a glorified role player, if he was on the Hornets, I could see that, but Minnesota..."C'mon Man!"

 

Love is a glorified role player, just because he is on a team lacking talent that dont mean he is a star that can lead in this league. Yes he might be the star for Minnesota but still at this point in his carear he is nothing better that a role player.

[B-Easy and K-Love]

Love is a glorified role player, just because he is on a team lacking talent that dont mean he is a star that can lead in this league. Yes he might be the star for Minnesota but still at this point in his carear he is nothing better that a role player.

Shaq is a role player and was last year, does this mean he wasn't a star???

[Check my Stats]

Do a San Antonio Spurs write up.