Copyright 2008 NBAE (Photo by David Sherman/NBAE via Getty Images)
Game #48, Home Game #24: Boston 88, Minnesota 86
Season record: 10-38
1. Kevin Garnett, Over and Out
The big man came, he smiled, he waved, hit his heart once or twice, and left. The applause from the fans was long and genuine, but not so enthusiastic as to induce goosebumps, or to make either side of this classically Minnesotan, passive-aggressive relationship believe that something historically special was taking place.
It's another small but significant step of separation, and I'm glad it is over. As someone who has covered the Timberwolves on a near game-by-game basis since 1991, I've struggled to be a person of perspective, to suck it up and take the long view, and to give this current squad a chance for their talent, and their potential, to be judged on its own merits. I've tried not to be baited by the inevitable but absurd KG-Al Jefferson comparisons, by the various members of the media who say they'd rather have Jefferson than Garnett in a Wolves' uniform, by the folks who seem enthusiastic, almost giddy, about the trade that occurred this summer. So I am going to dive into this one more time and then hopefully leave it alone.
When Kevin McHale was named the most successful executive in pro team sports last year by Forbes.com, the hoots and hollars of derision were appropriately widespread. People who didn't look at the methodology wondered how such a conclusion could possibly be drawn. And the answer is, in the context of the dunderheaded Wolves management that had existed before, be it Bob Stein or Trader Jack McCloskey or the Musselman-McKinney power struggle, McHale did indeed look like a genius. The Wolves never won more than 29 games in an 82-game season before McHale came on board. And because he was instrumental in acquiring Gugliotta for Donyell Marshall, drafting KG and Stephon Marbury, installing Flip Saunders on the sideline, and weeding out the Laettners and the Riders, McHale laid the groundwork and then filled in the pieces, culminating in Spree and Cassell, for a franchise that *averaged* 51 wins per season from 1999 through 2004. That's a hell of an improvement, and that's what impressed the statistical formula Forbes.com was using.
The Garnett trade can be regarded with a similarly diverse, contextual perspective. For those who endured the increasingly dysfunctional, dispiriting decline in the team's fortunes the last three years, ending the inexorably fractious KG drama in exchange for a bona fide cornerstone player in Jefferson, a couple of draft picks, huge cap relief in Theo Ratliff's contract, and a couple of keepers in Gomes and (surprisingly) Telfair is a very good trade indeed. When the trade occurred I considered the circumstances and endorsed it. I still do. It was the right move and--*in context*--a good deal for the Wolves.
But proponents of the trade should stop right there. Don't blame Garnett for the Wolves' failures, or proclaim that, all things being equal, you'd prefer to have Jefferson instead, because you risk looking like a fool. Yes, I understand that Jefferson is just 23, already averaging 21.5 points and 12.3 rebounds a game, whereas KG at a similar age was averaging 18.5 and 9.6. I was there when KG was 23. He was putting together a season in which, if Jefferson's current averages hold out, had him block 37 more shots than Jefferson will block this year, steal the ball 55 more times, and, on a team where a relatively selfless Marbury was the point guard, passed for more than triple the number of assists Jefferson will deliver this year. Then there is the small matter of the 24 minutes when the Timberwolves don't have the ball.
Right now, the Celtics are 38-9 and Kevin Garnett is on a very short list of MVP candidates. Meanwhile, Leon Powe went 8-10 FG on Jefferson last night, and when Powe ran down and tipped in Ray Allen's missed layup with one-fifth of a second on the clock, Jefferson had not yet stepped over the half-court line. I say this out of no disrespect for Jefferson, a marvelous player who did not ask for this comparison, and who will make my job infinitely more pleasurable over the next five years. I say it out of disrespect for clueless homers suddenly contorted into revisionist history, who, because they don't want to think about how little this franchise reaped of a utterly distinctive and magical performer during his dozen years here, are overpraising what was salvaged via the KG yard sale.
Now you know why I'm glad this latest Garnett frenzy of attention is over. It brings out the grumpy old man in me. Because when it is all said and done, I miss the athletic beauty, and the consistency of effort and execution. I miss, with an ache and a surly passion that will now hopefully go back under wraps, the opportunity to watch Kevin Garnett display his multifaceted virtues on a near daily basis, including live and up close at least 40 times per year.
2. Now About The Ballgame...
You can probably blame it on such a young and inexperienced roster, but aside from Ryan Gomes, there is not a single player on Wolves who sports a balanced overall game of solid offense and solid defense, a fact that was apparent throughout last night's enjoyable game of roller-coaster highs and lows. Corey Brewer not only throttled Paul Pierce as well as can be expected for the second time this season, but was a whirling dervish of steals, rebounds and defensive rotations for most of the game--it ranks up there with his 18-rebound, 5-assist performance against Atlanta as his best game of the season. (Wittman, who started Brewer over Rashad McCants at the 3 to get the matchup on Pierce, says he thinks Brewer's length is the key, that Pierce likes to clear space for his jumper and Brewer is too long and tenacious to let that happen.) But Brewer was only 3-10 FG, a total that didn't appreciably diminish his 35.2% field goal accuracy for the season. Marko Jaric likewise hounded Ray Allen into 5-16 FG, but when Jaric went up for an uncontested jumper with the game on the line, did any Wolves fan feel good about the probable outcome?
On the flipside you've got Jefferson and Craig Smith. Be it Big Baby Glen Davis or the smaller, quicker James Posey, the Rhino cavorted at will in the paint, shooting 7-10 FG that included a desperation trey miss. But on defense especially, Smith is a 'tweener without position, unable to handle the behemoths backing him down or the larger 3s and quicker 4s who roam beyond the paint. As for Jefferson, once he was rid of his old practice partner-- the Celts starting center Kendrick Perkins, who wrenched his left shoulder late in the third period--he was unstoppable whenever Boston couldn't prevent him from getting the ball. It is easy to forget how much of Jefferson's post-game relies on guile; his upfakes, the footwork, the spectrum of options he has at his disposal and the unpredictible ways he combines them. But Perkins went against him every day in practice during most of that formative process, and defends Big Al with uncanny clairvoyance. Last night, Jefferson was 4-11 FG, had two shots blocked and committed six turnovers before Perkins went down. After that he was 5-6 FG without a miscue. But, as with Smith, defending people is more problematical.
On the perimeter, it is blatantly obvious that McCants is Minnesota's premiere scoring threat via perimeter jumpers or dribble penetration. The seemingly effortless elan with which he twice dribbled through two or three Celtics en route to a layup during the first 2 minutes of the second period was simply the latest in a string of constant reminders this season that no one on the Wolves can get his own shot more effectively than Shaddy.
And yet, with equally numbing frequency, it is apparent that McCants is enduring a star-crossed campaign. Despite three steals and disciplined play at both ends of the court during the first half last night, the defense of Jaric and Brewer deprived Shaddy of court time until the final three minutes of the third. Then, with 8:51 to go in the game, a fateful play occurred that began with a steal by Antoine Walker. 'Toine got the ball to McCants and the Wolves were 3-on-2 on the break. But McCants, whose skill set certainly gave him cause to try and take it all the way himself, instead followed the bball catechism of rewarding the ball-hawk if logically possible, and dished to Walker on the right wing. Walker flubbed it on the dribble, the Celts converged, and the ball rolled down his back and was up for grabs. McCants did not go down on the floor to get it, Tony Allen did, and fed it to Eddie House for a layup. At the next stoppage in play, Wittman subbed in Brewer for McCants, berated Shaddy as he went by, and left him on the pine the rest of the way. During the postgame, without naming names, he twice specificed the importance of getting down on the floor for loose balls as one of the little things that decide a ballgame. Whether this is tough love or residual disgust, standard discipline or a delayed blowback to Shaddy's snit the other night, is difficult to know. But the drama continues.
Then there is the point guard position. Randy Foye is the incumbent in waiting, the guy expected to sidle beside Jefferson for unquestioned team leader status. But Foye isn't ready yet, and that's being charitable. Readers are forgiven if they don't recall that one of my mantras last season was that "Foye is not a point guard," but I didn't remember either. But a few games seeing the difference between Telfair running the offense and Foye dribbling out on the perimeter has refreshened those impressions. Wittman was actually telling the truth when he said of Foye that last night was "one of his best games," although he once again reiterated that Foye is taking way too many three-pointers. The line on #4 was 3-12 FG, including 1-5 3ptFG, plus 3 assists and 2 turnovers, in 25:15. What the line can't show is the lack of grease in the team's offensive execution with Foye at the point instead of Telfair. The problem with Bassy, as always, is he can't hit the broad side of a barn with that jumper. He was 1-8 FG tonight in 22:45, which puts a large dent in that otherwise nifty 6/1 assist-to-turnover ratio, if you regard missed shots as the onset of a probable turnover.
Even Foye's defenders don't claim him to be Anthony Johnson, let alone Magic Johnson, when it comes to conscientiously doling out the rock. That may eventually came back to haunt the Wolves--as it currently stands, their future is Jefferson, Gomes, Foye, Brewer, and a center, which is a pretty shaky quintet on the handle. But for even that to pan out, Foye has to play defense better than the statuesque poses he's been making thus far this season, and he has to not only find his offense but incorporate it into a sharing philosophy. The best sight of the night for Wolves fans had to be the time Foye drove the right lane and--in a more pleasant flashback from the glorious of last season--hung in the air waiting for the contact before banking the shot home. As Wittman said, you spend 3 and a half months not playing, it is a long and slow road back. Foye showed too much to imagine that he won't bounce back. But, flat-out, you give Telfair Foye's 4th quarter minutes last night and Wolves win that game. As it was, Foye missed 9 shots in 25:15 to Telfair's seven misses in 22:45. That's a collective 4-20 FG from your point guard position, added to Brewer and Jaric playing a collective 63:11. And that's 86 points on 41.7% shooting, despite a combined 16-27 FG from Jefferson and Smith.
3. Two Big Deals
With the All-Star game just a week away and playoff positioning beginning in earnest, I will be devoting this third point in the trey increasingly to various observations about other teams around the league. Today, it's my quick take on the recent blockbusters swung by the Lakers and the Suns.
The Lakers now boast arguably the best player in the Western Conference in Kobe Bryant, and arguably the deepest team in the NBA. If Bynum comes back healthy, they are the biggest threat to the Spurs' return to the NBA Finals. What's great about Gausol in this context is the flexibility he provides their roster. LA is large--7 guys on their roster are 6-10 or above, only 3 are less than 6-5--yet remarkably quick for their size. Guys like Kobe, Luke Walton, and Lamar Odom are matchup nightmares for most swingmen. the two-headed point guard situation with Farmar and Fisher is a great mix of flashy kid and savvy vet. Ronny Turiaf, Sasha Vujacic, Vlad Rad, and even Trevor Ariza, should he ever find some minutes in edgewise, are the kind of players who can burn a second unit that isn't paying attention or merely going through the motions. The roster's personnel is well suited for the triangle offense, mobile and fairly smart (losing Kwame Brown boosted the BBIQ), and yet the team can ambush you in transition. The only questions are whether Bynum can be the stud in the paint that he was becoming before the injury, and whether team defense with respect to Gausol, Odom and the two point guards is sufficient in a rugged playoff series. I know Memphis clears lots of cap with Kwame and wants to feature Rudy Gay, season their point guards and line themselves up for the lottery, but even so, advantage Lakers.
The Shaq to Phoenix bombshell is a little different. As with the Lakers' trade, I'm probably not saying anything that hasn't already been said, ad nauseum (fortunately I haven't had time to read it, just getting it through osmosis in hoops talk with friends), but it is obviously a matter of Steve Kerr going for broke, figuring that spending tens of millions on a potent tub or lard is better than spending tens of millions on a cancerous swiss army knife (that would be Shaq and Shawn Marion, respectively). Phoenix's odds of winning the NBA Championship go up about 10 percent with this deal. Unfortunately, their odds of being eliminated in the first round of the playoffs go up about 30 percent.
How does a team getting the most out of Shaq also be a team that gets the most out of Steve Nash? It is difficult to think of two stars whose offensive games are less compatible. One of the precious few blessings of the deal will be that D'Antoni can significantly cut Nash's minutes, and I would imagine they won't share the court for any more than 12-20 minutes a game, tops. But it is hardly a secret that both don't defend very well--who guards Duncan in a matchup with San Antonio? For that matter, who is their premiere low-post defender--Brian Skinner? Losing Marion puts pressure on a physically fragile Grant Hill and a mentally fragile Boris Diaw.
The greatest justification for this trade is that Phoenix needs to do exactly what Kerr did--push all their chips on to a longshot hope of taking it all this season, because after that, the window is closed. New Orleans and Portland will soon take their place alongside Dallas and the Lakers as championship threats over the next 4-5 years. Better to get rid of the bitching Marion--who, even more than Joe Johnson, wins the Mr. Clueless award for wanting out of Phoenix--and have the aging Nash and the aging Shaq coming off the books; take the team down to the ground and start from scratch. But before that happens, see if D'Antoni can use his offensive genius to get a two-headed horse to go in the same direction. See if the change of speeds discombobulates opponents. See if Shaq and Nash can put their phenomenal talents and their considerable pride ahead of what common sense would say is a disastrous marriage.
As much as I love and have defended both Shaq and Nash in recent years, I think common sense wins out. I've already made a wager with a colleague on the regular season: He wins the bet if the Suns finish among the top three seeds; I win if they finish between sixth and eighth. (Four and five seeds are a push.) And, to bring it around to the Wolves, that Miami draft pick owed Minnesota in 2010 is going to be a lot worse with Marion joining Wade plus a high pick this season on the 2009-10 Heat roster.
Britt - have you gotten a chance to see this?
http://www.theonion.com/content/news_briefs/timberwolves_beat_writer
I think you should work the phrase "slap them down with the jazz hands" in your next post after a Utah game, by the way.
There is no comparison between KG and Al. KG is considerably more talented, and is going to have the better career. He simply does more on the court than just about any other NBA player. I will easily take KG's career over Al's career. HOWEVER, as a Wolves' fan, I would take the current "Al situation" over the last couple seasons (or any future seasons) of the "KG situation." While KG is a far better player, we couldn't go anywhere with him. This was not KG's fault, it was management. We didn't have the cap room or draft picks to build a better team, so it was best to get rid of him, rather than slowly die as a franchise during his final productive seasons. Now, we have a young team with cap room and draft picks that we will hopefully use wisely, to build a successful team. KG is a far superior player, Al is a far superior situation.
As for the draft, I think Derrick Rose is the way to go. (If we can get him). Look at what guys like Chris Paul and Deron Williams are doing for their respective teams. Look at what Nash & Kidd have accomplished for their teams (disregard the 2008 Nets). I think the best move for the Wolves is to start a backcourt of Rose and Foye. Bring Shaddy off the bench for instant offense. Also, adopt a running style much like Phoenix and Golden State. The Wolves have a young, athletic team. They should push the ball.
Unless we get a late lottery pick, I don't go after Hibbert. Someone previously posted (in regards to Hibbert):
"You can't teach 7'2"
While this is true, it is no reason to draft a player. No, you can't teach 7'2". Why does that matter? The league is full of 7' stiffs. Do we forget Felton Spencer, Luc Longley, Rasho Nesterovic, Michael Olowakandi? Anyone who ever drafts a player because of height is a fool. Shawn Bradly, Manut Bol, Gheorge Mureson, were well over 7 feet. None of them are going to the Hall Of Fame without buying a ticket. Give me a guy who can play. Period. Hibbert may be a good pro, he may be a great pro, but I would bet my money that Rose will be a better pro.
As for what to do with our cap room, I would go after Golden State center Andris Biedrins. He would be a nice fit for the team and, if I am not mistaken, is a unrestricted free-agent. Even if he is restricted, I would throw an offer sheet his way.
If the Wolves can add Rose and Biedrins in the off season, the future would be VERY bright.
As a clueless homer I take offense at that remark. But, I am no revisionist. KG was and still is a great player. He was wonderful to watch and beauty is an apt description for his artistry on the floor. However, not that anyone says he is, but the greatest of the great are always reserved for those that win championships. Individually, he has hall of fame stats, but Michael Jordan, Larry Bird and Magic Johnson, he is not. He is also not Tim Duncan. We can compare stats and teammates and make an argument, but at the end of the day, the ones with Championship on their resume get higher billing. Fortuneately, for KG, he now has a chance to put that label on his resume.
Now, for the homerism. Nothing against KG as a player or as his greatness as a wolf. I agree with Britt that the trade had to be made. But, the reason I can somtimes turn into a grump is the National pundits and the BOston fans (and a lot of Timberwolf fans as well) jumping on the McHale sucks bandwagon or the McHale Celtic-Pride conspiracy (he made the trade for Boston's benefit at great cost to the Wolves). For, many irrational (I like being contrian) reasons and some rational (it was actually a good trade for the Wolves that had to be made) ones, I will get giddy over KG's failure IF he doesn't win the championship. Not in spite of KG. But, in spite of the Boston fans (I rooted for the Giants, but not the Rockies). I won't be as giddy as AI will be in 4 or 5 years when and if Al Jefferson and company pour champaign over McHale, but I'll have a little satisfaction.
But, hey, I'm a hypocrit, because as a fan I allow myself certain liberties. I'll also get satisfaction out of watching KG smile and beam holding aloft an NBA championship trophy - cause, I still do love the guy.
ps. I started a new job that doesn't afford as much free time. So, I haven't been able to contribute lately. I still try to read Britts analysis and, when I can, the high quality comments
Some long-awaited support on the wild notion that playoff success is paramount to statistics and excuses. KG had one great chance at a title, when he was surrounded by three other players that could call themselves All-Stars at one point or another, as well as multiple goon centers to 'hack-a-Shaq'--now he's got another great chance. He'll have to cash in on this one to push himself ahead of the Barkleys & Malones--both world-class players, but not in the highest elite company that have dominated entire decades of playoff basketball. Funny seeing the 2002-03 season mentioned as obvious evidence that KG is better than TD, when Duncan, that season, took a group of extreme inexperience (2nd year Tony Parker, Rookie Ginobili), ready-to-retire Admiral, and a bunch of spot shooters and carried them to a championship--over the Kobe-Shaq tandem nonetheless.
The first section is, as always, beautifully written. You attack writing about basketball the way KG played basketball, and in a similar manner, have quickly become my favorite expert in the field.
And yes, the comparison's are silly. What Kevin Garnett did from right around 2001 until 2004 ranks as one of the best 3 year stretches of basketball brilliance this game has seen. I strongly believe there is not a single player today or in many years that could do more with less. Tim Duncan does not win 51 games with Troy Hudson, Wally Szczerbiak, and Rasho Nesterovic as his prime support, as KG did in the 02-03 season. Duncan's skills are more limited than KG's, but when he is surrounded by talented players, his limited skills are each pure brilliance. That is why he has rings. It's a team sport, and his dominance coupled with his teammates was the best you get. Kevin Garnett did not have that benefit. It is not right that the same man is your best perimeter defender, interior defender, perimeter shooter, low post scorer, passer, rebounder, leader, worker, and on and on. The game of basketball and the functions of a team are not designed to be this way. Yet KG was all these things, night in, night out, and the team had limited success because of it.
His help that year is not far off from Jefferson's supporting cast this year. This team is unquestionably more talented, the prior was easily more savvy on the court.
I hope and believe Jefferson will become more and more like Duncan. The Big Fundamental was a terrible passer early in his career, Jefferson is not much of one now. He will learn to recognize what teams are giving him and he will learn to exploit it. I think Jefferson can become a dominant defender. He's certainly athletic enough, he appears to work hard enough, he appears to have the desire to get better. Defense, however, is a team skill that the Wolves don't grasp yet, but it's Jefferson's job to make them see that. If he can get anywhere close to providing the same overall impact on a game that KG did, I'll be ecstatic. But again, comparing the two right now is silly. KG masked front office mistake after front office mistake by continually raising the bar of what he could do. If Big Al is lucky enough to get through his time in Minnesota without poor picks, illegal signings, extremely untimely new CBA rules, forced trades, bad trades, death of friends/teammates, and the like, he has a great chance of putting this team back in the discussion of the West's top 4 or 5.
Ah, yes, the "clueless homers" and "revisionist history".
And naturally, that bunch is led by Sid, the "King of Kluelessness", the "Humjob of Homers" Hartman. Check out his article in the Monday 2/11 Strib - the antithesis of Britt's raking.
To my mind, Boston is showing the world just how good, and how valuable, KG really is -- both on and off the court. Obviously, if Jefferson was so good (and remember, he's both young and relatively cheap), Boston shouldn't have wanted KG. Does anyone truly believe that McHale hoodwinked Ainge?
And I think that it's really important, but generally overlooked, that in Boston, KG is partnered with a big, serviceable, center in Kendrick Perkins. Sure, Ray Allen and Paul Pierce are All-Stars, but having a big guy taking the weight off of KG is what is (was?) letting the Celtics fly.
Theory: Kevin McHale remains so enthralled by his own "greatness" as a
Golden Gopher and then as multi-championship Celtic that he dismisses the huge contributions by Robert Parrish to those teams -- and centers in general. Is there any other explanation as to why he has not, to date, brought a bona fide "5" to the Timberwolves `cept Erv, who came by accidental salary match? And please, please, don't call Olowokandi and Bount "bona fide".
Nash and Shaq incompatible? Hmm....if I were Phoenix, that would be the last thing to worry about. If the Suns' shamans can conjure up a Shaq from slightly earlier in this decade, it's even money on a championship run. If it ends up being voodoo, and the Big Drop-Off can't stop fouling, clanking shots from the interior or the foul line (when it counts, of course), and is unable to get into post position before the shot clock expires (seven seconds or less?), then it will fail.
Nash is the most versatile point guard in the game today. If Diesel has any fuel left, I'm sure he will be able to adapt. What this trade and the Webber acquisition by GS tells me is that all the offensive geniuses in the league--D'Antoni, Nelson, heck, even Flip--are starting to recognize the limits of a strategy lacking the ability to score in the half court, or defend in the playoffs. It also may be the effects of former ballers--Steve Kerr in particular--who have recently been on championship clubs and upon joining said organizations, find that style of ball entertaining in the regular season, but futile in the second season.
Both moves are a little desperate, and in the Suns case, makes their window of opportunity extremely short. And, it also shows that the path from hardwood to front office isn't paved with gold; just because you were a successful player doesn't guarantee executive acumen.
As for Miami, it's unfortunate that we've played our two games with them this year. If Jim Petersen could find a workout partner in the Heat organization like the Rockets' Clyde Drexler (Rony Seikaly, maybe?), we could swap commentators with them for a quarter or two. Jim Pete could tell the Miami audience that Mark Blount is now the second best center in the Eastern Conference. I'm sure South Beach is all a-twitter over the reunion of Banks, Blount and Davis, with the role of KG being played by Marion. What it probably means for Wolves fans is that if Marion jells at all with his new club, and they don't shut D-Wade for the season, we end up at rock bottom in the win/loss column again, and get our superior allotment of ping-pong balls.
In this election year, where change is in the air and unity is promised, can't Wittman and McCants get along? Sure doesn't seem like it. So, the question for the Iron Ranger is whether or not he trusts his frat boy coach enough to jettison one of the pillars of the plan formerly known as the Blueprint for the Future. Maybe they can fly Roy Williams in to talk to Rashad to convince him that hustle is indeed an ingredient to winning basketball and a successful career.
Peter--
The incompatibility is in the pace. Yes, Nash can find ingenious ways to get Shaq the ball in the half-court set, but that's not Steve Nash basketball, and really wasn't even when he was with Dallas. On the other hand, even in his prime, Shaq didn't flourish on teams that ran. The Shamans can conjure all they want, but the pace is either going to be too fast for Shaq or too slow for Nash.
I agree with your sentiment about Phx, GS and Det working toward playoff ball, but still don't see how Phoenix's half-court D improves with this move. Here again, one of the ways Phoenix has been able to hide Nash's defensive deficiencies is to put down the throttle and say defense doesn't matter. If defense suddenly does matter, how does a starting five that includes at least three mediocre defenders--Nash, Stoudemire and Shaq--beat the likes of SA, Dallas, and even New Orleans?
Well, I'm sure Dirk was overjoyed to see Marion get traded away, because you're right, I can't see Diaw, or Grant Hill being able to guard a big who can shoot on the perimeter. However this is one of the few times I'll agree with Sir Charles--the Suns weren't going to win it with what they had. So, I guess the strategy is to make other teams adjust to you more than you have to adjust to them. If Shaq is at all a factor down low--both from a defensive and offensive standpoint--they have a better chance than if they were to stand pat. But it's a big if, and I have to believe they don't have the technology to rebuild him. On the other hand, if Horry hip checks Nash into the boards again during the playoffs, they might have someone on the court who can deal with it.
All I'm saying is that if Shaq is at all resuscitated, then Nash will find a way to work it, because I think he's that talented...and motivated.
I know I'm in the minority here, but I think this was actually a good move for Phoenix, if you'll allow some qualifications.
1. It's clear that Marion was going to declare himself a free agent after this season. To hear the pundits tell it, he didn't exactly get along with Amare, and I also get the feeling he didn't see eye-to-eye with some other members of the Suns.
2. Don't discount what this will do for Amare's development. Running with Nash means you can focus less on low-post skills and more on your Dwight Howard game - dunks, put-backs, offensive rebounds, etc. Perhaps Shaq will be the Big Aristotle to Amare's Alexander the Great? In addition, one thing that doesn't decline with age is court vision - the Suns halfcourt game just added an above-average low-post passer at the expense of a perimeter guy.
3. Yes, there's the issue of their defense, but having 2 bigs on the floor at once will probably make their weakside D better. A jitterbug like Manu or Parker now has to contend with 2 shot blockers who prefer to stay close to the basket, and having an interior (inferior?) defender at your back allows you to overplay Duncan's biggest strength, his bankshot.
4. I don't know who will guard these two when they're on the floor together (especially if they don't start together). Dirk? Oberto? I like Bynum and Gasol, but do they have the combined bodymass of either Shaq or Amare?
5. This actually extends Phoenix's "championship window" to 2010 (assuming a moderately healthy Shaq). Phoenix had shot itself in the foot long ago with their "no first rounders" policy, but as Nash and Shaq's contracts expire, Phoenix will have plenty of cap space to surround long-term guys: Amare and Leandro.
That last point is a good one. They clear $33 mil off the books between Nash and Shaq after the 09/10 season. That's also the year of Amare's player option, which could give them another $17. That's 2 max contracts and $13 mil (Nash) to throw around in a free agency year that will likely include LeBron and Chris Paul. This is also the 1st year that the Wolves have a legit shot of being players in free agency. There's no way they can make it to Phoenix like cap levels (or weather), but that's probably when the money will be available.
Thank you, Britt, for being one of the last few bastions of intelligence on the KG debate. I can't believe the amount of "good riddance" sentiment there is regarding KG. I was one of the few that hated the idea of trading him no matter who came back, but I do understand the reasons for doing so. Yet I still can't understand the amount of KG denigration that is perpetrated by Wolves fans. It happens constantly in the sandbox I usually in play in and, judging from your comments, is a regular occurrance here as well (I always read your blogs, but generally not the comments).
I just don't get it and apparently I share your propensity for working myself into a tizzy on the matter. It is so mind-boggling to me. Is it some deep-seated MN insecurity that causes fans to nonsensically rip the player they so recently cheered for? A convoluted way of talking themselves into this new team? I've even seen some trying to make the case that Celtic fans are regretting the trade. That they'd much prefer our 10-38 team and pursuit of the #1 pick to their 38-9 squad that is in contention for a title. Unreal.
The reason I think Perkins man-handled Al wasn't so much what he did after Al got the ball as what he did to make sure Al got the ball 14 feet from the basket every time. It was uncanny. And Al is neutered when he receives the ball that far from the hoop. I recall four airballs or near air balls from Al when Perkins had him stuck outside. Once Perkins was done, Al started getting the ball from his favorite 8-9 feet out where his jumper is surer and his moves get him right to the hole.
On a somewhat related note I thought Wittman kept Al on the bench too long in the fourth. But I was in complete agreement when Witt sat Shaddy in the fourth. I'm afraid he's becoming the new Pretty Ricky. Its getting hard for me to see Rashad as a long term part of this team.
Its also hard for me to see Foye becoming this team's main point guard. Investing the next 35 games to find out looks like a bad bet to me. I'd spend the time seeing how much Bassy can develop - if his trajectory is even close to the first half we'll have a mighty fine point. I'd rather see the team move Foye along at the two which has always seemed like the right place for him.
Britt,
I personally see no harm in comparing KG and Jeff, nor do I think that one who takes the side of Jefferson is at risk for looking foolish. I certainly wouldn't classify what the Wolves got back as a "yard sale", not when Jefferson and a first round pick are part of the mix.
I'm no homer (as a Minnesota transplant, the Wolves aren't even my favorite team), and right now I'd say both sides have good arguments. BTW, KG and Jefferson are averaging the same amount of blocks this season.
I like your strategy of using season totals for blocks and steals. Makes it look much more significant than it is. You were smart not to do the same for points and rebounds. Where were you when I was preparing my moot court arguments during law school? I continue to marvel at your ability to manipulate the facts in your favor (this is a compliment).
The fact that the Celts are 38-9 with KG doesn't prove his greatness or superiority over Jefferson. That same KG had a miserable record with the Wittman Wolves of last season. A team that had more talent than the current team.
Powe did not go 8-10 against Jefferson. He made two shots while Jefferson was out of the game (Walker was in for Jefferson at the beginning of the fourth). I can't remember how many plays Jeff was actually guarding Powe (my bad for not paying attention), but at best Powe was 6-8 against Jefferson.
I'm not sure I follow the "revisionist history" angle. I 'd say the majority would agree that McHale failed the Wolves during KG's tenure (note that I refuse to say he failed KG).
Paul--
You were so busy picking apart my argument that you forgot to make one of your own. Specifically you didn't tell me how, *all things being equal,* which means no consideration of age and future potential, you'd still take Jefferson instead of KG right now. All you said was that Jefferson and a first round pick can't be part of a yard sale, that Jefferson is blocking as many shots as KG this season, and that Jefferson held down Leon Powe to 6-8 FG rather than 8-10 FG. And that's your entire lawyerly brief?
You also say that last year's Wolves had more talent than the current team. Okay, let's begin by eliminating the duplicates--McCants, Foye, Smith, Jaric, and Madsen--from last year, and cancel out KG and Jefferson and see what we have left. Blount and Davis, who can't win as often as the current Wolves do even alongside Dwyane Wade and a few weeks of Shaq. Mike James and Trenton Hassell, who can't get off the bench in Houston and Dallas. Troy Hudson, Justin Reed, Bracey Wright, and 92 minutes of Eddie Griffin. That's a more talented bunch than Corey Brewer, Antoine Walker, *and* the other four players the Wolves got from Boston? My, there must have been *some* yard sale items in that batch then, eh?
And yes, while it is true that everybody seems to compile a miserable record under Wittman, you blithely conflate KG's mark of 12-25 with Jefferson's mark of 10-38. At the risk of dazzling you with more manipulative facts, I deducted the last five games--all losses--from last season, when the Wolves, for the second year in a row, decided KG needed to "rest" as they fought for their place in the draft lottery. Funny, KG missed almost as many games covering the ass of the front office the past two seasons than he missed due to injury in a dozen years. Not that McHale failed him or anything.
Okay. With that I'm retiring from KG talk on this site. It honestly baffles me--and obviously aggravates me--that others don't see the player I see, but all this does is raise my blood pressure and apparently turns off folks in the process. Feel free to have the last word (and you too CA, and any other KG bashers) but I'm done.
Britt,
With regards to making my own argument, note that I said their are good arguments on both sides, nor did I take a position.
I have already made an argument for Jefferson in the past, so I'm not going to add anything new by saying he is light years ahead of where KG was as a scorer. He's got a better arsenal of low post moves, is just as good or possibly better at rebounding. He is willing to be "da man" in the 4th quarter, something we all know KG was not. Most importantly, he is willing to do what's best for the team, even if it is to his own detriment. This is something KG never was willing to do. As hard as McHale tried, KG would not change his game. The guy listed himself at 6'11" so he would not have to play center. Now we have a guy who is 6'9" or 6'10", is best suited to be a classic power forward, but doesn't complain one lick when forced to play out of position and look bad.
It's obvious Jefferson will never be the defensive player KG is. However, that doesn't mean he can't become a decent defensive player. I don't think his shortcomings on defense (especially when forced to play out of position), outweigh his offensive prowess in the post.
When I look at Jefferson, I see a guy you can build around with role players, at least on the front line. With KG, you have to have a clutch scorer at his side.
Last season KG played along side a *healthy* Foye and Davis, two players more talented than anybody Jefferson has played with this season. I did not delve into chemistry issues, only talent. I did not say that team was better, only more talented.
Regardless of how bad the other players are, the fact that they got Jefferson and a first round pick takes it out of "yard sale" territory.
Finally, with regards to Powe. I was only correcting your mistake. I pointed out that it was my bad for not paying attention to who was guarding Powe throughout the game. I'll take your word that Jefferson was on Powe while he was 6-8.
Previous post was by me--Paul (ikrushlots).
I'd like to point out one last thing when we talk about KG and revisionist history. KG played on some talented teams. Year one of the Cassell-Spree experiment was not the Wolves only chance at getting deep into the playoffs. The Wolves blew it in 2001-02 when they had KG, Wally and Billups all averaging over 20/game in the series against Dallas. The same Dallas team that got whipped 4-1 in the next round. A team that was about at the same talent level as the Wolves, but with better results.
I also thought they had a chance to at least win round one when they were lead by Brandon at the point (especially against Portland). He was a marvelous point guard who got ripped a little too much during his stay with the Wolves. IMO, he's the best point guard to ever where a Wolves uniform.
IMO, it wasn't until post Cassell/Spree that McHale blew it.
IMO, it wasn't until post Cassell/Spree that McHale blew it.
Does the name Joe Smith mean anything to you?
Britt-
After watching that Cetlics game I believe we need to draft a point guard and use Foye like Dwade and make him a two guard. I think that if Shaddy can accept comming off the bench and learns to hustle a little more then we should keep him. Otherwise we need to use him to get some one who will. I also believe that seeing the defense Big Al played you are correct and saying that we need to find a Center, a young Theo Ratliff would be great. Can you answer me one question though. Why did I see 4 green jersey's at the end of the game below the basket rebounding and no white jersey's? I hope Randy runs the ragged over that one.
The Wolves lack of shooters cost them the game and Boston's marksmen paved the way for the W at the beginning of the second half: The Wolves were on top and in a position to put a few possessions in between the two clubs. Instead, House and Posey hit consecutive threes to tie the game and it was a nailbiter the rest of the way because the Wolves have zero answer for firepower like that.
They biffed shot after shot in the second half. Brewer clanked at least five straight wide open Js and no one other than Jefferson, and at times Foye, displayed any offensive game. McCants should not have been banished to the bench because it was embarrassing how badly the team needed his scoring.
An NBA team that starts three guys (Telfair, Brewer, Jaric) who can't shoot isn't giving itself much of a chance to win. I did indeed appreciate Brewer's defensive efforts and Telfairs nice passing. But neither made up for their horrid shooting performances.
Britt-
Couple questions, observations, and one defense of Shaddy to whichever posters rip him apart for the sulkiness he showed in the 2nd half:
While Foye is still rusty, it looked pretty clear last night that his skills involve scoring and not passing. With that said, does he or Telfair better complement Big Al? The ugliest half-court set we ran last night was the 2-man game with Marko and Big Al, when the D collapsed on AJ and he had nothing to work with. I feel like Foye would be a better guy to have since he can pop open 3's, but maybe Telfair's all-around distribution game is a big plus for Al. Wondering your thoughts on that. (In any case, that sub pattern that left Telfair out of the game until the very end was really odd...Witt should look like he's trying to win games and not get Foye a workout).
Does anyone else think Ryan Gomes ends up in the "right place/right time" too often for it to be a coincidence? Having he and Brewer is fun to watch in that regard. I think having successful college players who have experience working against zone defenses is a plus. Gomes also made me feel a lot better about his future when he made that cross-over dribble move all the way to the hole. He looked pretty athletic, which is probably the only question mark people have with him. Jeff Green has the same sort of "burst in reserve" and it only comes out when necessary.
Even though Britt's column put a sort of warning on KG-Al Jeff comparisons, there was one clear part of the game that seemed to pull out the main difference between the two players--(well, 2 if you count Leon Powe looking like Hakeem Olajuwon). Big Al was getting double and triple teamed, and was limited in point production for most of the way. He started to force shots and looked pretty ugly. However, this urgency to score finally paid off down the stretch with his great 4th Quarter of offense. Speaking only to the offensive side of the ball, it was nice to see our big man show that assertiveness when it mattered most, and will be fun to watch in years to come. However, the defense is miles away from KG country and I'm putting that big disclaimer to avoid blowback by way of Britt's reaction to it.
On to the defense of Shaddy. To most viewers, he looked like a world-class bitch last night when he blew off the coach and moped on the end of the bench. However, here's one spin on it that may be more significant to anyone who has sat in on practice or knows the dynamics of the other coach-player relationships, which I haven't and don't. He was clearly being singled out for hustle and a couple defensive mishaps, not to the point of nitpicking, but it's not like he was playing us out of the game--quite to the contrary, at least in the first half. Now, after a couple isolated incidents Witt seemed to blow a gasket--(I'm watching on TV, mind you, and relying on Jon Barry's take of the situation). This gets me to my point, which is that Witt doesn't blow that same gasket, or ANY gasket, when Big Al let's Leon Powe successfully execute the Dream Shake AT THE TOP OF THE KEY. Also, there was a play in the 2nd half where Big Al did something wrong on the O end, I can't remember what, and jogged back on D while he was passed by the man with the ball for an easy layup, a huge lack of hustle that led directly to a bucket for Boston. Again, I don't know the behind-the-scenes dynamics, and if Big Al is coddled or not, but I could see this clear difference in treatment as a big part of Shaddy's frustrations. Maybe I'm searching, I don't know.
AG--
Whatever else happens, barring a stunning inability to recover from his knee injury, Randy Foye will join Al Jefferson as one of the cornerstones of this team. At least that is the current plan of the front office. The question then becomes which backcourt position does he play and who are the other three starters? I think the front office would prefer Gomes and Brewer be two of them.
What do I think? I'd like to see Jefferson beside a legit center who doesn't need the ball but knows what to do with it when he gets it; a terror on defense being the priority. And I'd like to slide Gomes in at the three and flip Brewer between the two and the three with McCants and/or Jaric getting the other 2-guard minutes. I think you need to find out exactly what you have if Randy Foye plays the point. By the same token, Foye has to play the point guard position like a point guard, not with the 2-guard mindset. Telfair needs to be in limbo until Foye at the point is determined a success or a failure. That's the short straw for Bassy, no doubt. But if this team doesn't have faith in their top-10 draft picks, they should trade down or trade them away for more proven talent. McCants, Foye, Brewer--these are building blocks from the front office. If they don't pan out, the front office needs overhauling. It's not that complicated.
The theme for my post is family. McCants is like the rebel child. It doesn't matter what he does, his mistakes will always get noticed even when the "good" sibling may be just as much of a fuck-up but does a better job covering his ass. Sometimes it's hard for a parent to see it, but good parenting depends on being even-handed. Still I wonder if it was the lack of hustle that got McCants on the bench or the show of disrespect. Then again it all comes back to the fact that with the fuck up kid, it's never the crime so much as the attitude. Sadly it's a vicious cycle.
I'm afraid you're right about Telfair in limbo. He's the stepson. It's clear whose minutes Foye will get, and it's pure face-saving and politics because anybody who watches the games can see that Telfair brings more to the table at the PG spot and still has plenty of upside of his own to harvest. But the FO needs, for its own sake, to build around the guys its invested in. Telfair came as a throw-in that the FO didn't even want (isn't Boston paying half his salary as a condition to the KG deal?) and they passed on an all-star over Foye.
If the Wolves were open to grooming Bassy as a possible starting PG, they would lock him into a three or four year deal, move Foye over to the two and let the two develop some chemistry starting now. But the truth is, right now, Bassy is the most tradeable asset the Wolves have. Brewer. He's a UFA, so he can be locked up for at least another year; he is a good soldier; and he's has shown real development this year with plenty of upside left.
I meant to add that a Bassy-Brewer package could net something nice.
Britt -
I for one am glad The Messiah has come and left the Target Center. You're right about the futility of comparing KG with Big Al. But then you go ahead and make a statistic comparison.
Playing time is arguably the only way that a player can improve. Some "context" should be added when you then make such a comparison. KG got plenty of burn in his years leading to age 23 (your basis of comparison), KG averaged 29 minutes for 95-96; 39 minutes for 96-97 and 97-98, 38 minutes in 98-99, and 40 minutes for 99-00.
In contrast, Big Al averaged 15 minutes 04-05, 18 minutes 05-06, 34 minutes 06-07, and 36 minutes YTD.
In other words, KG played more than twice as much time on the floor than Big Al at the equivalent age. I'd consider that twice as long in the League.
In fairness, it should be mentioned that KG will never get the number of offensive boards that Big Al gets.
KG gave his heart and soul to this franchise, and we managed to flounder opportunities to build around him. But KG also took from this franchise. The drama (your apt description) surrounding KG was a major distraction.
You couldn't watch TNT last season or read columnists from ESPN without reading about the abusive situation KG was alleged to have been in; his loyalty, his inevitable trade. Then you read about Wittman calling Glen Taylor's attention to the passing patterns of last year's Wolves and that certain players were being frozen out on offense, and that KG had his favorites on the team (Trenton Hassell for one) and those he disliked.
As for this year, I'm bummed about KG's injury. This is a critically important year for the Celtics, a legacy NBA team. The Celtics (and the League) need to advance to at least conference finals.
It is also a critically important year for KG, who signed a 5-year contract extension for $105M and who is now the face of the Celtics. A second MVP could hinge in part on the playoff advancement of the Celtics. Doc Rivers is a very good coach for resting KG as he rehabs is stomach muscles and, assuming a full and speedy recovery, KG will tear up the League after the rest.
As For Last Night's Game
Wittman was upset with McCant's much of the game, not only upon Shaddy's lapse in diving for the loose ball. ESPN cameras caught Wittman throwing a towel on the scorer's table and ranting and fuming. The Wolves should seriously consider trading McCants or replacing Wittman if the outbursts persist. I know, I know, McCants is one of the precious few who creates his own offense and when he's on, he can rack up points. But no one wins under the current relationship.
The Celtics know Big Al well. They doubled and tripled teamed his all night when he had the ball, and they certainly bothered him. Al had 6 turnovers and couldn't outlet pass effectively. Still Al hit more than half his shots compared to 'Toine (1-5 FG), Bassy (1-8 FG), Corey (3-10 FG), and Foye (3-12 FG). Parameter shooting remains the biggest obstacle for the Wolves.
First thing -- doesn't every NBA fan passionate enough to post on message boards know that MVP voting takes place BEFORE the playoffs begin?
Secondly, and more importantly -- Britt, I often posted on your CityPages Blog, and I'm compelled again to praise in the highest manner possible your analysis on all things hoops, and your poignant comments about KG's return to the Target Center. I watched on ESPN, and indeed the response seemed almost luke-warm. I'm not sure Minneapolis is fully aware of what this man means to the history of the franchise, and to the history of the sport. I'm glad to know that that fact turns you into a grumpy old-man; revisionist history or not, those of us who recognize his greatness appreciate your words and your passion.
That said -- my allegiance to KG has led me to track Boston this season (I live in NYC nowadays), to the detriment of my following the Wolves. But after watching the game on Friday, it's refreshing to see the a youth movement injected into the Target Center. Period.
easy,
izisharp
CA--
Yes, by all means, Al Jefferson is a far superior offensive rebounder to Kevin Garnett. Always was, always will be. You can certainly hang your hat on that.
As for Jefferson's playing time, some players are ready sooner than others. Maybe Big Al is just a late bloomer on defense?
As for the drama of last season, well, I think I laid out my position pretty clearly. I used words like "dysfunctional," "dispiriting," and "fractious," and said that in that context, the trade of Garnett was a good trade for the ballclub. I think I then said that whoever tried to blame Garnett for last year's failures would look foolish. Your post didn't exactly dissuade me from that line of thought.
You strongly imply that Garnett somehow bears most of the responsibility for last year's failures. Here is the factual history of last season: By far the most prevalent starting lineup consisted of Mark Blount, Ricky Davis, Mike James, and Trenton Hassell alongside KG. None of them are with the Wolves any longer. Blount and Davis currently perform for the worst team in the NBA. James and Hassell rarely if ever get off the bench in Houston and Dallas. And the Celtics are 38-9. As for Wittman, the person he replaced was 20-20 and playoff eligible with that starting five at the time he was canned last season. Wittman took that same team and went 12-30. This season he is 10-38.
Do you seriously believe Kevin Garnett personally fed all the media speculation? Do you recall the hue and cry about the Bulls wanting to grab Garnett after his *rookie deal* expired? Do you realize how many times Garnett had to respond to people asking him when he was going to leave Minnesota, and how many times he said he was loyal to the franchise? Do you know that clowns like Chicago scribe Sam Smith publicly questioned Garnett's desire to win because of his loyalty to Minnesota? As for playing favorites and freezing people out, do you recall Terrell Brandon and Sam Mitchell bitch-slapping Wally Szczerbiak in a ESPN The Magazine piece a few years ago? Do you remember Sam Cassell freezing out Wally the year the Wolves went 58-24, and the year after that? And have you ever heard of Jack Haley?
Please, spare me any more words about how KG "took from this franchise."
Britt -
I didn't mean to imply that KG "bears most of the responsibility" for all the media garbage, only that the media hyperventilated over KG's loyalty v. the need to be traded and that that was a distraction.
You are obviously defensive about KG taking as well as giving to the franchise and you are welcome to your opinion. I don't agree.
Playing time is an essential consideration in any comparison. Fact remains that KG played twice (if not more) as much in his "formative" years up to age 23 than Big Al. That should negate any age-based comparison.
The more credible comparison would be based on actual on-court playing time. Given that KG played twice (or more minutes) prior to age 23.
Who knows if Al with equivalent playing time under his belt becomes as defensively skilled as Kevin at age 23. We should be able to find out in, say, two more seasons?
"Who knows if Al with equivalent playing time under his belt becomes as defensively skilled as Kevin at age 23. We should be able to find out in, say, two more seasons?"
Are you kidding? Why then is Corey Brewer, with a bit more than half a season of NBA basketball under his belt, a MUCH better defender than Al?
Playing good D is about hard work, pride, and athleticism. Experience is certainly helpful, but it is secondary.
Al is a great player, and has enormous potential, but if anyone thinks he will ever (EVER!) approach KG's level of all-around greatness they are seriously delusional.
Let's show the Ticket some respect. There were 2-3 seasons where he was the greatest player on the planet, and we were extremely fortunate to have had him on our team. None of the other shit really matters.
Rhino -
You're joking, right? I for one truly dislike making comparisons between players because they are not all alike. I do take issue with unreasonable basis of comparison, like chronological age, which is an easy handle unless you evaluate other variables like NBA playing time.
Hard work, pride, and athleticism are important attributes for any NBA player. In fact, you don't make it and stay in the league with a combination of all three. But I am sure you didn't mean to suggest that Big Al does not possess all three of these.
Players make it to the NBA because they possess special gifts, some are pure shooters (Ray Allen), others can distribute the rock (Nash), and still others are great rebounders (Marcus Camby).
But they stay in the league and perhaps reach the highest levels by rounding out their game.
Big Al can rebound and make exceptional low post moves. It is clear that in his limited NBA playing time that he has used his time to hone those skills. But he is still very early in his career. You see him looking for 15-foot pull up shots to confound his defenders.
Since double (at times triple) teams have limited his offensive moves, he will need to improve his passing skills too.
Jim Pete mentioned in the last broadcast that Big Al knows he needs to improve his defensive skills. I'm willing to give Big Al the benefit of the doubt and see what equivalent NBA playing time will do.
I suspect no one will give you a free pass on KG "being the greatest player on the planet" for 2-3 years, but I won't waste the space.
Corey Brewer is a much better defender than Al probably because that's what brought him into the league, whereas a 6'10" frame and a set of post-moves like no other is what brought Big Al into the league. I think Al can be taught to be a solid defender much more easily than any other big man on the planet can be taught half of his post-moves, most of which depend on a God-given touch with his extended right hand. I'm not touching the AJ-KG comparisons yet, but if he's conceded to be "great" with "enormous potential" I find it difficult to believe that thinking he'll "approach" ANY player's greatness requires "serious delusions." Personally, I'd say he's very good, with the potential to be great. Great players are perennial all-stars and legends have rings on their fingers. I'd say LeBron James is "great" with "enormous potential."
The one thing that's missing in this discussion is the philosophy of the franchises that Al and KG were a part of during their formative years in the league. With KG, he had basically three seasons where the team was as interested in developing talent as they were in winning; luckily, they had enough talent to get to the playoffs in two of those years. After players started leaving and they lost all of the picks, the focus became solely on winning. KG started out as a versatile 3/4 player who was probably being developed to play that way for a long time, but he had to become a 4/5 because that's what gave his team the best chance to win. With Al, he hasn't had the pressure of being the best player until this season, and he won't face the pressure of needing to make the playoffs for at least another year or two (although he was part of one Celtics playoff team). He's also been a 4 his entire career, and his coaches have developed him as a low-post player first and haven't asked him to do the things KG was asked to do (handle the ball on the perimeter, draw defenses out of the lane by making open jumpers). Part of the reason Al's been able to become such a good low-post player is because he's focused on that; KG couldn't afford to be that specialized. Overall, Al's going to be one of the guys who will be charged with turning this team around, but the hope is that, unlike KG, he'll have one or two players who have as much responsibility for that as he does.
Garnett is a b-ball player. Granted, he's the best this state has ever seen (sorry Mr. Mikan), but he was a pleasure to watch and his 03/04 season will go down as one of the top 20 seasons in NBA history (seriously, it was THAT good).
Big Al is not Kevin and that is a good thing. There was always something missing from KG's game and while Big Al might not be the greatest rebounder, I can tell you what he lacks with greater accuracy than what I can say about #5 with the Celts. If everything works out well, losing KG should be Rebuilding 101 with the front office. They have a big-time front court player with something missing. Hopefully they will diagnose what is wrong and make the proper moves.
Big Al doesn't have to be KG. KG is a top-5 performer at his position...of all time. He's Larry Legend + defense. Big Al is a 23 year old post player who can Dream Shake the Western Conference starting All Star center. He's young, hard working and improving. He has a team with solid glue guys (Bassy, Gomes, Brewer) and a few high draft picks (please Baby Jesus, be Michael Beasley or Donte Green). This can work out well for the home squad. Kevin McHale can be an effective front office guy. It all depends on people learning from past mistakes....KG included. Here's to the future. Go Wolves.
S-and-P:
Unless you're over the age of 65 (and maybe not even then) please no definitives on Mikan v. Garnett. We simply didn't see both play. Mikan was THE dominant player in the league until Russell, for years and years. He won championships, too, though with a better squad than KG ever had.
We just need a dose of humility here to admit what we simply don't know.
I know it was sort of a throwaway line, but having listened to political pundit bullshit all year, I simply can't abide definitives in the absence of clear evidence.
I agree--it's tough to make comparisons with stats from two totally different eras. The most important stat for any era is winning, and Mikan did plenty of that. Theoretically, if you put Mikan in today's game, you'd have to put him in with today's workouts/weights/nutrition supplements/etc. and he may just be the best big man around. As it is, that's way too difficult to do, so the easiest thing to do is look at the fact that Mikan was named top player of the first half century, and KG is/was not one of the top two or three players during his prime years. This, like the absurd comparison to Larry Bird, is unfair to KG--since he's an all-star player and deserves a lot more praise than criticism.
I think the cross-era comparison critique is a fair one (I think it can be done; I've read some baseball historians with some nice takes on how to do it). We'll just have to agree to disagree on that one. I view it as comparing someone like Johan Santana to a dominant pre-Ruth lefty. While they both may have the numbers, you can only be certain that Johan would dominate if placed in the other era and not the other way around. Oh well, it was sort of a throw away line and I really didn't intend to piss anyone wearing a vintage baby blue Mikan Mpls Laker jersey off.
I disagree with your take on KG. The guy was the 2003/04 MVP. His 02/03, 03/04 and 04/05 seasons placed him in the top 3-5 players in the league. He's been the top 4 in the league for a long time (Duncan is a 5 since Robinson left) and he's picked up right where he left off in Boston. How is praising the guy's game unfair? With their games, KG and Bird have a lot in common in the sense that they can get 20/10/5 from the forward position. There's not too many players that can stake that claim. Bird was the better outside/clutch shooter but KG holds a similar edge with his d. They were both glue-guy superstars.
I think the jump from 1950's ball to post-1980 ball is a tough one, due to the rule changes, strength increases, and more lenient officiating on defensive contact. I'm just saying that certain theoretical adjustments have to be done to make it fair, like assuming that GM would have hit the weights and used all the diet/supplements that today's players benefit from that help make them such amazing athletes. I have no idea what GM looked like in his prime, other than what my dad has told me and what I can read in comments like the recent one by his old coach. From a very broad, common sense view, however, I think it's tough to call any MN hoopstar better than the one who was labeled the clear-cut greatest over a 50-year period. To make a football analogy, I think Viking's Kevin Williams would have been an incredible terror in the 1960's NFL, but I would not dare call him "better" than Alan Page.
Obviously, we all have different takes on KG. I think he's a great player and a first ballot HOF'er. That's a huge compliment to any player, and nobody can reasonably say that I'm ripping him after giving him that much credit. But, as I've said before, I can't think of him the way I think of guys like Magic, Bird, Jordan, Shaq, Duncan and Kobe, who have so much post-season success to hang their hat on, even if they had better teammates. It's a team game and, fair or not, the ultimate measure of success is wins and losses. KG has an unbelievable opportunity this season, as he's surrounded by two other all stars and possible HOF'ers. If he goes on a two or three season run of deep playoff runs, and a title, his place in history will be far different than it is right now.
Fair points. Basketball stats are nowhere near as comprehensive as baseball ones are and I'd like for some of these ABPR guys do some research on how to compare trends between different eras. Granted, modern NBA record keeping didn't really take shape until relatively recently, but I think you could still piece together something approaching a workable formula for making comparisons.
As far as individual players go, I come from more of a standpoint of viewing players (especially in the expansion era) outside of a league setting. How they play with their teammates matters, but as far as championships or deep playoff runs go, I don't think they are a necessary component of great play/greatness. All you can ask of a player is that he perform as well as he can in the situation given to him and KG just happened to play in a place and time where there were better overall teams in the league. In fact, during his heydays with the Wolves, he had to go up against 2 legit historical teams: the Shaq/Kobe Lakers and Duncan's
Spurs. I think that had KG had the opportunity to lace it up in Duncan's spot he would have had a few rings as his stats, efficiency ratings, etc are every bit as impressive as the Big Fundamentals. You are what you make of it and KG made the most of playing in a tough conference (remember that all those 1st round exits were against higher ranked teams) and getting stuck in the NBA purgatory of being just good enough to make the playoffs but not bad enough to enter full blown rebuilding mode. There's a good deal of luck involved in all of this (the Spurs getting taken down by injury to get the Duncan pick; Charlotte trading Kobe to the Lakers; Cassell getting hurt in the Wolves only big playoff run; Kareem Rush going nuts from 3) and for one reason or another things never panned out at the championship level for KG.
Oh well, it's all speculation and I hear what you're saying about comparing different eras.
Also, if you're defending KG, you should point out the Joe Smith sanctions and never getting 1st Rounders to fill out the roster. That, perhaps more than anything, ruined his chances at a title in MN.
I agree that KG had some tough luck--but I'd also give TD a whole lot of the credit for making his team the 4-time champ vs. the Wolves lack of playoff success.
One final remark about the KG stuff, and then I'd be officially beating a dead horse. Imagine if he played his entire career surrounded by better talent--for arguments' sake, let's say the group he's with now: KG/Allen/Pierce. His stats would suffer for the good of the team, as they have this season. However, he may have won a title or even multiple titles. Would he then be viewed as a Bird or Jordan, or as a McHale or Pippen? It's no certainty that he would've stood out as the superstar he was able to in his MN years--leading the team in all the relevant stat categories. It's so tough to make these comparisons, since you have to make all sorts of assumptions. I guess that's why I start with wins/losses, then look to who's making the plays in crunchtime, and then finally look to whatever statistics may fill in the blanks.
In any case, if KG makes big plays this postseason that end up in a title, he's a big step closer to Larry and MJ territory and everybody that ripped him in MN can admit they're wrong.
Evidence:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/mikange01.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/garneke01.html
20/10/5 beat anything Mikan ever had and a PER over 29 in 03/04 (against superior talent) topped anything the drill master ever put up. KG shot better from the floor, was a more effective offensive player, and was able to maintain his level of proficiency as his career wore on. Granted, Mikan played in an era where the scores were smaller and leading FG%s were under 50%, but his best 3-4 year stretch (numbers-wise) was at the beginning of his career and his stats declined with each and every year following 50-51 (what happened that year?). He got out at the age of 31...3 years before all doubt would have been removed about his relevance:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/chambwi01.html
Cousy, Pettit, and Mikkelsen made the transition. Mikan showed signs of quitting at the right time.
Be tired of political pundit bullshit all you want, but there's plenty of evidence to suggest that KG is the superior baller and you don't need to break down tapes from the old armory to make this claim. Your statement also goes both ways. Why shouldn't KG have that title in the absence of clear evidence?
SNP- When they change the rules of the game because you are too dominant, then perhaps you can begin to understand why Mikan was so important to the Mpls Lakers, and basketball history.
I didn't say he wasn't important. You're creating a straw man with that one...argue with it all you want. I simply said that KG is the superior player in a tougher league. I also implied that Mikan got out just in time. Mikan played in the basketball equivalent of the dead ball era. He played an important part in the development of the game and was the sport's first dominant center. That being said, he is a prisoner of the era, the quality of athlete, and the times. I understand the pioneer aspect of his game and the model for which later players would step into (all the way up to Shaq). I get that. I get the importance. KG's simply the better baller and Mikan got out just in time to not have to play Wilt. He's also every bit the pioneer in the 1-and-done/high-school era, to say nothing of a league now filled with 7 footers who can dribble, pass, play facing the backet, etc. This isn't a slight against Mikan. KG is simply THAT good and it was a pleasure to watch him all these years.
Is this an issue over players with abilities versus players who win? I noticed that in the All-Star balloting, many were discounting Big Al's impressive stats because his team was doing poorly, and from the looks of things, KG's stats in Boston aren't nearly what they were when he played here. Has anyone ever compared the stats of Lebron James to those of World B. Free?
Most of us follow sports for the competition, especially in post-season play. Minnesota sports fans will always remember which baseball player was Mr. October and who got dubbed "Mr. May." Most of us also still remember the key roles of Marbury and Cassell in those two seasons when it appeared that the Wolves actually had a chance to go somewhere.
Some of us also believe that the nasty rumors of KG as a teammate and leader mean that KG was over-hyped as well as overpaid in MN. After watching talents like Gugliotta, Marbury, and Billups leave town, later followed by Cassell and Sprewell, it's hard to believe that Garnett's salary was his only role in those departure