Game #53, Home Game #28: San Antonio 100, Minnesota 99
Season record: 11-42
1. Crunchtime Dysfunction
The first thing I want to do is praise these post-All Star break Timberwolves, a ballclub that embodied the cliche "plucky" by refusing to do the expected thing and roll over and die after Manu Ginobili carved them up seven ways to Sunday (how's 44 points on 18 FGA for efficiency?) and Tim Duncan found his fundamentals long enough to nudge his team up to the game's first and only double-digit lead with 3:29 to play in the third period. This team is quickening, accruing confidence, and starting to identify itself via ball movement and Al Jefferson's post-up game and a steadily improving team defense. They scrabbled back in that third period to set up a taut, well-played final period in which the lead for either team was never great than 5, was tied with 3:20 to play and was a one-possession game for the last 1:31.
The whole shebang was so much fun to watch that I want to say neither team lost it, the Spurs simply won it. Except that's not true. Minnesota had two chances to ice a victory, coming downcourt with a one-point lead and 29 seconds to go and getting a final possession down a point with 6 seconds to go. During those two possessions neither leading scorer Jefferson nor second-leading scorer Rashad McCants touched the ball. On both possessions the crucial decision-maker was the (hopefully) still recovering Randy Foye and the final possession the shooter was Sebastian Telfair. To put it mildly, the Wolves did not have the right people doing the right things down the stretch.
Remember "4th Quarter Foye"? Randy Foye certainly does. It's a nifty catchphrase, with its cogent rhythm and stark alliteration, but what it stands for isn't all good. As Wolves' publicity has informed us on numerous occasions, Foye got more than half his points in the final period last season. Translation: The guy the ballclub would really like to transform into its starting point guard looks for his when the game is in the balance. This could rightfully be spun as a hopeful attribute when the front office was casting about for a worthy sidekick and complementary talent to go with Kevin Garnett, who liked nothing better than to make the "right basketball play" to win the game, be it an assist, steal or turnaround jumper. But on a team with Al Jefferson still spreading his offensive blossom, nurtured by contact and grit in the paint, the abiding priority for 4th Quarter Foye should be to get him the rock in the low block by any means necessary.
Instead we got the alpha Foye in a beta situation. The first time he reprised his signature move still stencilled on last year's scouting reports: A hard, guts-for-glory drive down the right lane that waits almost until he's out of bounds before leaning in slightly and lofting hooky jumper that he hopes will bank in over the outstretched leap of a couple of converging defenders. Tonight it barely grazed the front iron. The second time he got the inbounds, sought to drive, got bolloxed up, ditto the double-team Jefferson, and, in mid-air, flailed the ball over to a wide-open Telfair near the top of the key. If you are San Antonio, this is a job well done: No touches for Jefferson, giving Foye's ego enough rope to hang itself, and having the game decided on the do-or-die accuracy of Telfair's J.It went back iron.
Coach Randy Wittman was trying to play the role of dejected loser, but was too enthused to keep the satisfaction from creeping into his voice when describing the game. And he's right. Wittman bitched about a flagrant foul called on Telfair, who inadvertantly slugged Ginobili in the mouth when Manu went one way and Bassy the other out on the perimeter. Ginobili, who can take a dive on little or no contact, sold it beautifully and the Spurs had two foul shots *and* the ball with 1:40 to play and a two-point lead. Again, Wittman was right: obvious foul but just as obvious no flagrant foul. But at some other point in those last 100 seconds, Ginobili got mugged on a drive with no whistle, and although he showed the ref the scratches later (you gotta hate and love the guy) he took maybe a tenth of a second to beseech the ref when the play happened and then hustled hard back down the court. So yes, the free throws he hit off the flagrant counted mightily. But the winning margin of the game came when Ginobili got the ball with 10 seconds to play--as everyone who had just seen him go for 42 points thus far to that point *knew* would happen--then, after Foye cut off his brief left handed foray toward the hoop, slid to his right via a behind-the-back dribble, rose up and canned a 16-footer, the last of his 16 points in the final period. What "4th Quarter Ginobili" lacks in alliterative rhythm is more than compensated by the truth in advertising.
The point being, San Antonio got the ball to the guy they wanted to have it at crunchtime and the Wolves didn't. Asked about those final two possessions, Wittman replied, "We wanted to run the clock down and then run a two-man game with Al and Foye...On the high pick and roll, Al was beating them all night...Al was our first option."
Over in the Wolves' locker room, Jefferson was still sitting in his uni, large ice packs on both knees. A throng of nearly a dozen media did the pack-herd semicircle thing, microphones outstretched, like zoo animals reaching for food. In the adjoining locker to Jefferson's, Randy Foye dressed in relative oblivion. He was not happy, but enough of a pro to take my questions in stride, albeit with clipped responses. What happened on the next to last possession--too much rust from the injury or did they defend it well? "It was good defense," he said. And on the last possession? "That was the play," he said, a little edgy. "They double-teamed me and Al and I kicked it over." After Foye and nearly all the media had left, I asked Jefferson if he felt he could have gotten the ball on either of the last two possessions. He gave it a second to plot the response. "Well, Bassy had a great look on that shot. If we had a chance to do it over again, he'd take that shot and he'd make it."
And the other play with the Foye layup that came up short? "We ran the pick and roll." Short pause. "Randy took the shot and missed." Longer pause, as Big Al gathers up the starch for his classy follow-through. "If we do it over again, Randy takes that shot and he makes it."
To put the game in perspective, Telfair came out aggressively with 6 points in the first 2:18 of the game and a team-high 8 for the period. He finished with 15 points on 7-14 FG. Jefferson was by-now typically marvelous at 11-19 FG, with many of the attempts a flat out race to see if he could get the shot off before the double team converged. He also got to the line 9 times and had 28 points (albeit just 5 rebounds). And Foye had his best game of the season thus far, with a team-high 7 assists and 13 points on 5-10 FG.
But all three sported nothing but gooseggs in those last two possessions.
2, Theo's Return
For those of us excited to see Jefferson back at his natural power forward position beside a legit shot-blocking center, well, it happened for all of 2:16 in the fourth quarter tonight. Wittman used the remainder of Ratliff's 14:11 of PT having his spell Jefferson in the pivot. For what it's worth, the Wolves were plus +3 during the brief stint with Jefferson and Ratliff both in the game; othewise, Jefferson was a net zero and Ratliff at minus -4. The first thing Theo wanted to do after a 45-game layoff was shoot a jumper, but after he got that clank out of the way, he made his only other three attempts. While not as striking as he was on opening day and for a week or two before he got hurt, he moved relatively well, yet needs a little more time to get his timing down. He didn't block a shot tonight, while Jefferson and Duncan each swatted away a pair of the other's layup attempts. VP of Personnel Kevin McHale says the front office wants to see how Jefferson and company operate with a shot-blocking big man patrolling beside them. Don't we all, even on questionable matchups like the Dallas front line, which is likely to be Dampier-Dirk-Josh Howard. Counter with Theo-Jefferson-Brewer and let's see what happens.
3. Trades
I don't think I've ever witnessed a player with a bigger gap between his physical talent and his strategic comprehension than Gerald Green. Both the Wolves and Green are best separated, and if the second round pick two years hence yields a shot-in-the-dark glue guy or the cash considerations Houston threw into the deal along with Kirk Snyder help pay for Corey Brewer's weight supplements, than perhaps the trade won't be quite as insignificant as it seems today. Snyder is not likely to stick here. As for Green, you can never say never about a performer with that much spring and such sweet mechanics on his jumper, but until the technology develops to put a chip in his ear telling him what to do next on defense, I fear Green will forever wander the hardwood--sometimes with his headband on, sometimes without.
The Wolves may rue not getting rid of Antoine Walker (not that they didn't try, I'll bet), whose tenure as solid citizen and cheerleader/mentor is wearing thin for him as the playoffs approach and the trading deadline has come and gone. 'Toine was in street clothes tonight and the body language and derisive smirk he couldn't keep off his face may be a portent of trouble ahead.
In the deadline day's other swaps, the three-team merry-go-round between Chicago, Cleveland and Seattle favors the Cavs. I honestly don't know how much Ben Wallace has left in the tank, but a proud pro on his last legs has a potent incentive helping to enable LeBron to get his first ring. More significant is the pickup of Delonte West, who has looked impressive every time I've seen him play and, if he plays defense, has a good shot at regular minutes at the point on this team. And Wally Szczerbiak may be due to become a sharpshooting 9th man on a legit playoff contender. Joe Smith is a gamer. As a Mike Brown fan, I think he might be able to wheedle these pieces into something decent by the first round of the playoffs. In any event, Drew Gooden is overrated and Larry Hughes, while occasionally magnificent on D, is injury-prone and grossly overpaid.
I have no idea what the Bulls are doing. With Hughes and Gooden added to Sefalosha and Noah and Deng and Gordon likely leaving in a year or so, they are going to win and lose a lot of 88-85 games. But how bad does shipping out Tyson Chandler and bringing in Wallace look now?
Seattle is still tearing down for the future. Can you believe Kurt Thomas has brought them three top draft picks? Meanwhile, Steve Kerr has to hope the Suns don't face the Spurs early in the playoffs, because it could be Kurt Thomas demonstrating how foolish it was to get Shaq when they could have gotten better defense and a more simpatico style player for much less money. The Spurs are smart; Thomas fits better than Francisco Elson, Brent Barry is slipping fast and that 2009 pick won't be worth much unless the inevitable happens quickly and this team gets old and hurt in an epidemic hurry.
The first section of the next 3 pointer can be called complete 4th quarter dysfunction. Looks like nobody with the name "fourth quarter" was in a Wolves uniform at any time during the 4th against Dallas. Until proven otherwise, this is not a fourth quarter team. But let Foye develop anything he's got with the remainder of this year. No use squandering more development capital and picks for the sake of a few pointless wins.
Looking back, I wish I had not made the "anti-Foye bias" comment. For that I apologize, Britt. It came out of frustration about a guy I think has been unfairly criticized due to his injury and comparisons with Roy (who I still think Foye can match once healthy and used properly). Not an excuse, only an explanation.
It would seem to me that Britt's observations regarding the crunch time dysfunction on the second to last Wolves offensive play- are spot on. I noticed that the Strib reported the next day in practice Foye and Al worked on the half court offensive, because Randy did miss getting it to Al on that particular play. That the team reviewed the film and saw what was the problem and used it as a learning experience. Seems to me this was the first time this season where Randy was in a close game in crunch time with the ball in his hands. In a season about evaluation and learning for a young team it might have been better that Randy miss his shot and the team lose, then if he made the shot and they won. Learning is often about making mistakes recognizing them and correcting them.
Hey
Woah .. "identity" .. that sure sounds good. I too feel they are growing into something good.
As for the 4th quarter Foye thing. You might be right it's hyped more than it should be.
On the other hand, ironicly as with KG, I don't really see Big Al as a cluth player. The reflex tought is always to put the ball in your star player's hands but I do have the _feeling_ I'd rather have Foye trying something in crunch time.
Also, other teams expect us to go to Jefferson at times like that, as did Boston with the 5 second inbouds play.
Though I gotta be honest, haven't had the time to read through all the comments. The ones I have read seem to have stats supporting the case that Foye's 4th quarter skills are overhyped.
In any case he didn't do well this time, we'll see how it goes in the future.
Britt -
I have no problem with what you just wrote about "doinking" comments. I'm one of the people that hasn't been leaving comments as frequently because of how things have transgressed the past few months. I still read all your articles though, I would never stop doing that.
With that said, I agree with what SNP was saying about Foye being a terrible draft pick. I wouldn't say he's been our "worst pick ever", but it's close... namely because of how high he was drafted (6/7 whatever.) This team will be trying to "cover" that mistake for a while in the way they draft to replace him. It's a shame really. My draft board that draft went Roy, Gay, whoever. So, it's a damn shame we ended up with Foye when BOTH of those other two were still available. It's one thing to miss on picks lower in the draft, but you should do due diligence and everything in the FO's power to NOT miss on high lottery picks. I agree that they ignored a ton of statistical red flags about him. Oh well, not much I can do about it I guess. I would like to state that I have been "anti-Foye" since we drafted him, so it's not like I'm just jumping on SNP's bandwagon here. I completely agree with him.
It has been very dispiriting and bewildering for me to read the responses I have gotten occasionally to things I write. Because I believe in a free exchange of ideas and that substantive posts shouldn't be censored, I let these responses through. And because I believe that posts that take specific issue with what I have written need to be rebutted or risk seeming as if I agree with or have no answer for them, I spend a fair amount of time defending what I have previously written. But it is pretty time-consuming and energy-draining.
In particular, I was lamenting to a friend recently that my defenses of my writing have made it seem as if I was more anti-Jefferson (during the KG-oriented posts) and anti-Foye (this post) than I am. And I was honestly taken aback as to how or why commenters were thinking that I didn't like or respect Jefferson and/or Foye. Because I try to be very explicit about what I do or don't like in the posts I write. My friend noted that there have been raging discussions about KG-Jefferson and Foye-Roy (or Foye-Gay, etc) on other Timberwolves boards, and that the animus from those may be carrying over here. So I went and looked at a couple and he might be right.
So, I want to clarify a few things.
* I don't read other Wolves oriented boards--not because I don't respect the passion and intelligence they may bring to the general conversation, but simply because I don't have time.
* I will continue to not only allow but encourage substantive posts to appear here. I think pretty much everyone who stops by does so as much for the caliber of commentary after the posts as for the posts themselves. But I will no longer allow posts that deviate from basketball related commentary into personal name-calling. Thus, if Krush wants to say that he sees nothing wrong with what Randy Foye did on the Wolves' final possession the other night, he is encouraged to go into chapter and verse on all the ways he specifically disagrees with me. But if he then states that I have an anti-Foye bias, or otherwise broadens the conversation to my personal motivation, I will doink the comment. By the same token, if Levi wants to spend an entire post criticizing Krush for what he has said rather than rebutting the basketball plays or strategies in question, that comment will likewise be doinked.
* Obviously this will help enable me not to become enmeshed in a tit-for-tat defense of my writing that skews perspective on what I really believe. But for that to be true, I will have to hold myself to the same standard. I pledge not to respond in a personal manner to commenters, as I have done here in this comments section with Krush (Paul) and Rick.
* There will also be times when commenters will challenge the veracity of what I have written in a very nonpersonal, game-oriented way. And I have concluded that I simply don't have the time to always rebut these implicit criticisms, or to otherwise keep the conversation going. This does not mean I agree or disagree with the commenter, only that there isn't enough time in my life to constantly keep up with even the substantive remarks on this board.
* This blog has a well-deserved reputation for creating an intelligent and non-judgmental community of hoop heads. The intelligence has not diminished--one of the reasons why some of the personal squabbles have been so energy-draining is because guys like Krush are formidable intellects--but the more personal, judgmental remarks have definitely increased over time here, and, if I believe some anecdotal evidence, has driven some treasured commenters away. Having read some of the other boards now, I see that there are certainly places for people to engage in mud-slinging arguments. Please wash your hands before you enter here.
* Finally, I know some of you will want to applaud or give the raspberry to this reimposition of the blog's priorities. But whether you simply want to affirm or deny the wisdom of this particular action I'm taking, I'd prefer that we start the non-personal emphasis immediately, and will doink any comments that have a primary focus on these reestablished priorities. What we all share here is a love of basketball. Let's get back to debating the intricacies of that game, rather than each other.
Thanks.
Birtt,
With about 3 or 4 minutes left in the game, I noticed Corey Brewer at the scorers table about to check in. This is when Manu hit a few points in a row. My question is why did he get pulled back to the bench? and do you agree that corey should of been in there to guard Manu in the 2nd to last possession of the game. And as always, I appreciate your time, and the blog is going great!
Rich
I do remember "4th quarter Foye", which is why he was the right person to control the ball at the end of the game. Foye has a proven track record in the clutch. You can not say that about McCants.
I don't see what Foye did wrong on that last play. He was singled and he penetrated. As he beat his man, another came flying towards him so he passed to the open man, Telfair, who missed the shot.
It's becoming clear you have an anti-Foye bias Britt, especially when you've admitted being "unfair". Alpha Foye in a beta situation? Flailing? He pentrated, got doubled, and kicked the ball out to the open man. Simple as that. Good play, poor execution by Telfair. If you want to blame somebody besides Telfair for the final shot, blame Wittman for having Telfair in the game, not Foye.
A fabulous game, lots to talk about, and this article devolves into trying to take Foye down a notch. What a bummer. I opened up rake mag thinking there were going to be some significant space devoted to Jefferson's play against Duncan.
Jefferson was fantastic, and is proving to be on the best power forwards in the game. He completely abused Duncan offensively, who is one of the best low post defenders ever. On top of that, he played decent defense as well. The more I see Jefferson develop, the less and less I miss KG. Those that called the trade a bad one from the Wolves side will be eating sooner rather than later.
Foye gave up his dribble, took the shot at 10.something seconds, and drove against Tim Duncan. Krush....that's why him being in the air with so much time on the clock was a bone head move. Irregardless of him not trying to get the ball to Jefferson. The wolves had a 1 point lead. I was more outraged when I thought they inbounded the ball with 24 seconds, it turns out it was 29 seconds but still. There was no need to take that shot. It was 100 percent dumb. Apparently at 'Nova the aren't big on fundementals like knowing the clock. I don't question Foyes heart, but I do question his head. I'll let the ego thing go. That's too speculative.
I loved the description of Al Jefferson's locker room diplomacy. The more annectdotes I hear like that, the better I like him. Hilarious.
**************
Watched the Celtic/Suns game. Shaq is certainly playing hard, but the revelation was Grant Hill and Stoudemire. KG seemed a little overwhelmed by Stoudemire. Nash and Stoudemire were +17 each, and Hill appeared really active and energetic. Garnett was -14. The Celtics held the Suns to 85 points which is pretty good. Unfortunately they only amassed 77. Ouch.
Paul--
Very nice. Just in case I wouldn't rise to your diatribe about my comments vis a vis Foye, you thought you'd throw in old KG-Jefferson arguments to try and work something up. I won't be baited into another Garnett discussion--you want an audience for it, get your own blog.
I know this gets in the way of a good snit, but did you read my responses in the comments section about Foye? It was in response to Stop and Pop and was written at 10:12 a.m.. More dramatic evidence of how I have it out for Randy Foye.
As for flailing, did you see the play? Foye was in mid-air, and did have to flail (look up the word) to get it over to Telfair. And if you don't think ego played a role in Foye taking that shot on the next-to-last possession rather than getting it to Jefferson, the guy who had "completely abused Duncan," well, we disagree. I guess that makes me biased and you impartial on the subject. In fact you used my own words to prove it. One problem: If I'm so blindly biased, how did I have the wherewithal to say that?
I am not looking for a "snit", and my comment certainly was not a diatribe. I disagree with your admittedly "unfair" assessment of Foye. Nothing more, nothing less.
Anytime I see Jefferson have a dominant game against a guy like Duncan, I inevitably will think of KG and how happy I about the trade.
I was at the game and didn't get a chance to see a replay of Foye's end of game pass to Telfair. My recollection has Foye twisting and gyrating in the air (possibly even flailing). It appeared to me that he was absolutely determined to shoot, but every possible avenue was blocked and out of desperation, just before his feet hit the floor, he made a prayer of a pass to the only person he could see. I wish Foye would have had a little more of an "open mind" in that situation. Despite Telfair's shooting percentage, I would prefer to give him the ball in that type of situation. He has recently been making excellent decisions re when to pass and when to shoot.
Brewer has done very little impress so far. But I agree he should have been the guy to guard Genobli at the end of the game. Jefferson seems to be picking up his defense lately. He has a ways to go, but his upside is immense.
Oh my...I've been saying for years that Paul -- aka "Ikrushlots", or Krush by those of us who have debated the Wolves with him online -- just doesn't see the same things that I (and you, Britt) see happening on the court.
"Completely Abused" - good one! It'd make a good handle for someone.
With all the talk about Foye’s last second decision making, I’m surprised no one has picked up on my comment about the Wolves last defensive stand against the Spurs allowing Ginobili the chance to get the go-ahead shot and eventual game winner. Maybe someone else can verify it for me (limited access to internet from my current employer). Ginobili was unstoppable last night. His shooting was spectacular. Perhaps it was coincidence, but his scoring came mostly when Brewer was on the bench were my observations while at the game. Minnesota had the opportunity to put Brewer on Ginobili with Jaric playing off the ball (on Finley I think), Ratliff on Duncan, Jefferson on the 4 (Can’t remember) and Telfair playing Stoudamire (I think, again). But, instead they had Foye, McCants, Telfair, Jaric and Jefferson defending (pretty-sure). My memory is hazy, but the point is Brewer should have been the on-ball defender on Ginobili due to his length, hustle and quickness. Isn’t this obvious? I mean, more obvious than even the question of who should have taken the last shot for the Wolves? I know the Wolves had a few defensive stands before this where Jefferson showed hard on the roll with Ginobili and it led to a spur turnover, but Ginobili was still getting space for his shot when he wanted to take it and everyone knew that on the last Spurs possession he was going to take it and Foye ends up guarding him with Telfair sliding over to help and get a hand up. Brewer may have prevented that shot from being taken – probably would have blocked it (if he were Telfair). Wasn’t that the game and not the missed shot by Telfair-preceded by the botched pass from Foye-at the end or did I miss something? At least as important anyway? I mean, the Spurs play great D and they can shut it down. They are going to deny Jefferson and pressure the ball and likely make the Wolves take a bad shot. Likewise, on the offensive side-last night especially-Manu is going to have the ball in his hands at the end of the game and likely take a shot. Damn, Brewer was the only chance to stop Manu at the end, or am I completely wrong?
Two questions.
Does anyone thing it is a good idea to play McCants, Foye and Bassy at the same time? It seems that McCants and Foy are undersized at the 2 position, so they are really giving up size at the 3. This can't be a long term line-up.
Are they really thinking about re-signing Theo Ratliff? I thought the idea was to use his expiring contract so we could sign a younger healthier center.
It's well known that I'm a long time Wally-basher.
I believe Britt is right about Wally Szczerbiak's designated spot on the Cavalier' bench. I think Wally was rolled into the deal to make the salaries match up, but since he makes so much money (especially relative to his contributions) he rises up to 9th. We're probably a little too far away to read the tea leaves, but I see a huge potential for, ah, "cultural conflict" between him and Ben Wallace. And he'd better not piss off LeBron. Unlike KG, a punch from either of them would likely put Wally through the wall - literally.
The Cavs lineup looks pretty good to me now. Too bad they had to wait this long into the season to get it set up. I don't think you can get this many (heck, they just imported four guys who could conceivably all start alongside LeBron) players to mesh with just 28(?) games left.
Like Britt, I'm clueless about the choices Chicago has made. Or is it Chicago that is clueless?
Britt
I do think you are being overly critical of Foye. He has been improving pretty much every game since being back. Last night he shot 50% from the field and had 7 assists and 3 TOs. Minnesota is adjusting to having Foye back and I'm confident that Wittman will figure out the proper crunch time lineups after a few of these situations unfold. It's easy to sit here and second guess the last minute of plays, but Foye adds another variable into the mix. Personally, I like the fact that Foye wants to be the man, and given more situations to learn from, he will make better decisions in crunch time. Also, I hope Bassy and Foye can co-exist. It seems many of the bloggers are pitting them against eachother. Instead, I see it as the wolves can feel good about their point guard situation and look at other positions in the draft.
As always, great commentary on last nights game...
Your takes and the at the end of the game about Foye are way off. The arrogance you use to pick certain players games apart has been bothering me. Who took the game winning shot for the Spurs, Duncun, a 2 - MVP? No it was Ginnobli. A post player is very easily double teamed at the end of the game in that type of situation. That is why it is so important to have a "Closer" on your team. Shaq had Kobe and Wade, Duncun has Ginnobli and Parker, Detroit has Billups, Hakeem had Cassell and Maxwell. Heck anyone who paid attention knows the biggest reason for the drastic improvement for the twolves in 2004 is Cassell's shot making at the end of games. To be a "closer" you have to have an ego and believe you are going to make the final shot, while not caring what some blogger is going to write about you tommorow. Sometimes you are the hero and sometimes you are the goat. Mccants has had many chances to make big shots this year at the end of games and has NEVER come through, he makes shots when there is no pressure. Foye in limited opportunities last year proved he can get and make a pressure shot at the end of a game. Give him TIME!!!!
Well say hey Rick,
On the 82games site, there is an archived article looking at clutch performance from the 2004/5 season.
http://www.82games.com/clutchplay3.htm
Actually, Manu is probably as good a "closer" as anyone in the game and Duncan is right up there too. But Tony Parker didn't make the top 50 in that study, so I think you may need to reconsider your diatribe a bit. One of the reasons that Ginobilli does so well is that he actually takes it to the hoop in these situations -- and gets fouled doing it. Compare that to the image of Foye "flailing" on his way out of bounds.
Like Britt, I believe that the label "4th Quarter Foye" is far more hype than reality.
Levi-
I clearly stated Manu was a closer. Remind me, was Manu's game winning shot a drive to the hoop? Or was it a jump shot. But back to my point, how good of a closer was Manu his second year in the league? You grow into that role. You are right, since Tony Parker isn't ranked in the top 50 he must be terrible.
Manu's shot was a jumper, but I'm not sure why that's material. He makes those, as much as any of Larry Bird's jumpers were good clutch final plays. The flailing nature of Foye's drive, however, showed desperation, and looked as if he felt he was the only option. We have perhaps the best offensive post player in the league and it makes no sense for him not to touch the ball. Even if Jefferson immediately passed back out, Foye's drive would have an easier drive with the defense moving.
And you mentioned Manu's possible deficiencies as a closer in his second year. What would have Pops had done if Manu chose himself over TD to close a game back then?
RICK--
Would my arrogance be more appealing if I picked different players' games apart? Or do you just not like anyone being criticized on this 11-42 ballclub? If so--if, in other words, you can't grasp how intense analysis of the game pro and con (and if you missed all the praise in my last post I don't know what to tell you) bespeaks a love of the game--then why do you drop by?
As to the content of your post, yup, an outside presence at the end of a game is a good thing. But if you run a pick and roll up by a point in the final minute of the game and your budding star is open, however briefly, it is a better bet to get him the ball rather than go up with a dilapidated hook-banker with two guys on you.
Finally, Foye led the game in minutes played last night--he logged more minutes than Duncan, Ginobili, or anyone else. So I suggest he is no longer being "brought along slowly" and is now expected to provide production for his play.
Britt-
Your arrogance would be more apealing if your critiques were accurate. But ignoring 41 minutes of good play by your most important perimeter player who has been out 4 months due to injury and blaming his "ego" for the failure at the end of the game isn't exactly what I would call "intense analysis"of the game pro and con. I love the comeback when someone disagrees with a negative anaylisis its because they can't handle negative critcism.
This season is about rebuilding and learning to win. Foye is the only player on the roster that is capable of taking and making big shots from the perimeter at the end of the game. It is important for him to continue to develop this skill which can only be improved through trial and error. That dilapidated hook- banker as you called it worked several times last year.
I never claimed he was being"brought along slowly". My point is he missed all of training camp and the season to this point, you have to give him more than 10 games before you start passing judgement on what character flaws he has and what type of player he is or isn't. I don't know about you but I would consider 13pts and 7ast production, especially for a guard on this team.
Rick--
Go back and read the post. See if you can find the sentence where I didn't ignore Foye's good play. These kinds of oversights are damaging when you've just accused someone of unappealing arrogance due to inaccuracy.
As for the rest, I get that you like Randy Foye. And I think if you read me last year, you'd see that I liked him too. I also repeatedly said he is not a point guard. I maintain that is still true. Yet he played de facto point guard on the final two, unsuccessful possessions, in a one-point loss in which he led all players in court time. You want him to still be immune to criticism in that circumstance. I "arrogantly" disagree.
In today's NBA, games are won in the 4th quarter by guards making plays to the basket, not by feeding the ball into the low post. No competent coach is going to allow a low post play to decide the end of the game. So for those upset that Jefferson did not touch the ball in the last seconds, I say, get use to it. Because unless the game as a whole changes, it going to be the guards that settle the score.
Which brings up why it needed to be Foye, not Bassy, to have the ball. Foye has a reputation for finishing (as Britt so elegantly described) which Bassy does not have. We can debate until the cows come home if Foye's reputation is deserved (and/or if it is real post injury), but I don't think there is much debate that Bassy has always struggled finishing. What that means is Bassy is much less likely to draw the double team necessary to create the feed to the roller (Jefferson) or the shooters (who ever they may be) in the last minutes. After all, as an opposing coach, which play to you fear the most - Bassy on a driving layout or Jefferson getting a feed headed to the hoop. Me too.
Wittman again amazed me, as pointed out by several others, in 1) by leaving his self proclaimed defensive stopper on the bench while getting torched by Ginobili and 2) the inability to run a set in bounds play at the end of the game. With a full line up (Foye and Ratliff back), I think you are going to Wittman struggle again with lineups and match ups.
All that said,it was a very entertaining game.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Wittman really needs to address end of game in-bounds plays. Last nights game and the first Celtics game are prime examples of what I'm seeing.
I am not positive if last nights misadventure, along with a few others throughout the season, are examples of players not executing or the coach drawing up impossible plays. But in any case, botched late game plays like we saw again last night shouldn't be happening at this level.
On a different note, watching big Al develop into a premier player has really been fun this year. It is obvious that he is the real deal. It has also been fun watching Bassy become more comfortable and playing "loose".
So, besides a number of boneheaded moves a few years back, I think McHale & crew has our team headed in the right direction. What happens next with the franchise will be interesting to say the least.
I attended the game last night and it was a very entertaining game. The last two offensive possessions were very disappointing. But, what I was grumbling about was Manu Ginobili’ crunch time shot as I walked out of the target Center. The way he was shooting I knew he would be the one to give San Antonio the victory. Except, we still had one counter on the bench. Ginobili was to tall for Foye, McCants and Telfair and Jaric wasn’t quick enough to contest his shot. Brewer got a couple of quick fouls in the first quarter, but at least he contested his shots. At one point in the 4rth, when it looked like Ginobili would abuse Jaric all the way to the end of the game, Wittman motioned for Brewer to get up and replace Marko. Unfortunately, on the offensive possession, the ball swung to Marko and he hit the open three. Wittman motioned Brewer from the scorer table back to the bench. Then with the Wolves up by one and 10 seconds left, and a San Antonio 20 second timeout, WIttman still doesn’t substitute Brewer in for Foye or McCants for his defense against Manu. But, when we call the timeout after the Manu basket, Pops makes all of his defensive substitutions to end the game.
This game goes to Pops over Wittman.
Only caught the highlights and TNT Bonus Coverage of the final two plays, but I have a question about Wittman's remarks about:
"We wanted to run the clock down and then run a two-man game with Al and Foye...On the high pick and roll, Al was beating them all night...Al was our first option."
I commented last time about Foye's inability, and even unwillingness to look at the rolling Jefferson when they ran the pick and roll. Was it he, or Bassy, that was feeding Jefferson on it all night? I'd feel better knowing that it was quickly learned and implemented by Foye, so he's at least one step ahead of the previous game.
Andy:
Just to add a little to your comments, on the last 2 plays Foye missed a pick and roll and he was forced to kick it out to Bassy. Had the right player had the ball in his hands, I'm pretty confident in saying that Bassy would have either converted the pick and roll or kicked the ball out to Foye for the potential game winning 3. It was so frickin' back-asswards that I really wonder if the marketing department has some 4th Quarter Foye shirts printed up and they told Witt to make it happen because the whole Crunch's Birthday thing isn't really working out. Even if you're going to let Foye do the ball-handling, get Bassy out of there and put a shooter out at the perimeter to take the last-gasp kickout. Zero.Sense.
Oh well, I guess I'll never get why they just couldn't stick with the 2 man game that actually has been working: Bassy and Big Al...with Foye and Shaddy as the kickout options.
Because, as Britt has documented a number of times, the plan is to force-feed Foye the PG position whether he can handle it or not. Part of that process involves transitioning the pick and roll game to Foye and also the responsibility of running the offense in crunch time.
Especially with Bassy's jumper starting to come around, it makes no damn sense. But it is what it is. I don't know if you saw the interview before the game, but Foye said that he thinks playing the point is "boring" because you don't get to score as much. Foye fancies himself a Wade/Roy type player--a shooting guard who still has the ball in his hands enough to minimize the role of the real PG.
The Wolves need to make a decision: Foye or Bassy. If it's Foye, there is no sense in re-signing Bassy for anything more than his QO, if that. Foye can then become the ball-hogging combo guard he wants to be. If it's Bassy, the FO should trade Foye on draft day for a pastiche of picks and role players and continue the process of assembling a properly balanced team.
All indications are that it is the former and it's only a matter of time before Foye is starting at the one with Jaric at the two. For the Wolves, the sooner the better, because the more time Bassy gets, the more it will cost them to re-sign him. And I'll tell you this much...there is no way Telfair will sign a deal to be Foye's caddy. Earlier in the year, when his future in the league was very much in question, maybe. But not now. There should be a nice little market for his services.
S+P--
In fairness to Foye, it would have been very difficult to get the ball to Jefferson on that last possession. Not impossible, mind you, but pretty tough. My larger criticism would center on the previous possession, when seeing if Jefferson can get you up 3 with less than 40 seconds to play was on the table and Foye instead went to his patented right lane kamikaze. If a criticism is to be made of the final play, it would be not inbounding to Telfair. Doubling the dribbler (Foye) and Jefferson left Bassy wide open. But the Spurs wouldn't have doubled Telfair, meaning he could suss how McCants and Foye were faring, moving without the ball, while the Spurs doubled Jefferson. In any event, it is safe to say that Foye was the de facto point guard on the last two possessions, and if you have Telfair in the game, it makes no sense for him to be anything but the point guard; otherwise opponents wisely do what San Antonio did, leave him open so they can double the greater offensive threats. Without the ball in his hands to make decisions, Telfair's crunchtime value plunges into negative territory.
Brit (and poster at the top of the page who commented about Foye needing the ball):
I think we can all agree that if Bassy is in the game he needs to be the primary ball handler or he is of little use during the final seconds of a close game. Until Foye shows the ability to score in the lane (draw contact, convert the shot) he is just as useless with the ball as Bassy is without it during crunch time. He went 3-4 from 3 and 2-6 inside the arc. He's now had a few games where he's been completely ineffective without being able to catch and shoot.
I agree with the poster up top that guards/slashing 3's are what make the league go 'round in the 4th quarter, but my point is that Foye is not the player who can make that happen. In fact, his value comes as being a kick out option while Bassy's only value on the court in the last minute is being a ball-handling distributor who can get in the lane and execute the pick-and-roll or kick it out. Foye is no better finisher than Bassy and he is a much worse passer. Either take Bassy out of the game and put in a better shooter or give him the ball and let Foye be the spot-up guy from 3. Every option with Bassy with the ball is greater than the same situtation with Foye:
1- Bassy drives and shoots/tries layup > Foye drives/shoots/lay up. Bassy went 6-11 inside the arc; Foye went 2-6.
2- Bassy drives and executes the pick and roll > Foye drives and executes the pick and roll.
3- Bassy drives and kicks it out > Foye drives and kicks it out.
I understand that the team needs a go-to guard/3 in the 4th, but Foye is not and will not be this player. The way things stand now, give Bassy the ball, hope for the best on the high pick-and-roll, look for the kick out, and then shoot it as a last gasp effort. Foye does it backwards with Bassy-esque shooting proficiency and non-Bassy-esque decision making/point skills.
Stop-n-Pop.
I really disagree with comment.
Foye WAS the guy last year on numerous occasions who took the ball in the 4th quarter and created the necessary shot. With some pretty good success - even for a rookie.
Bassy has 4 years worth of demonstrated inability to finish at the rim (see Marko Jaric for another exampl).
Who do you want to take the shot - the injury recovering player who had some success last year or the 4 yr vet who has NEVER had any success finishing at the rim?
I realize that the injury may have zapped that ability from Foye - but we have 30 games to hopefully find out.
I agree that Bassy is the best point, certainly now, and in the future. I really like him as a player. But at the end of the game, the NBA puts their best creator in the roll of having the ball. If that is Bassy, I am afraid we are in for a much longer rebuild.
I don't think anybody is saying Bassy should have been the one to take the take the shot. In fact that's precisely why it was so ridiculous that he was playing off the ball and spotting up on both possessions. I'm not one to second-guess the coach, who has forgotten more about the game than I'll ever know, but this one totally defies logic, which is why I think there is an agenda to make Foye the team's PGOTF no matter what.
As the team's best facilitator, Bassy should have had the ball in his hands to initiate the offense, not to take the shot. If you have Foye, Shaddy and Al all moving around to get in position to take a good shot and a point guard who has demonstrated an exceptional aptitude for probing the defense, finding the right guy and making top-quality passes, why complicate things?
And if the purpose was for Foye taking over the point in crunchtime no matter what because he is the next Earvin Johnson, of course, why even have Bassy, a sub-40% shooter on the floor?
Settling for Jumpers.
i wish I could find the quotes, but...
all preseason and before Foye has come back Randy Wittman has repeatedly said that he does not want Foye at the point all the time. He has said he envisions him playing mostly off the ball. Therefore, it is patently false that the organization is force feeding Foye at the point guard position.
We can also look at game time evidence rather than simply Wittman's rhetorical flourishes. I think the Wolves see Foye as a playmaker, not as a point guard.
yes, it may have been better last night to give the ball to Bassy, especially on the first possession with 40 seconds remaining. On the last possession, however, I see the merits to giving the ball to Foye. He will get better and if he doesn't, at least they gave him a shot. This season is supposed to be about developing skills and seeing how players react to success and failure (not only their own success and failure but the success and failure of others).
Giving Foye the ball with 6 seconds left does mean that he's the point guard. Foye is not Dywane Wade (I think that's actually how Dwayne spells his name) but the wolves clearly want him to be a player maker like Wade. Wade is not a point guard.
Also, I watched the game and I did see Foye execute the pick and roll with Al very nicely on at least one occasion (bounce bass to Al between to defenders that ended with a layup). The man is not incapable of playing that game.
Do not forget that SA is still a top notch defensive team and that it's best for Foye to learn against the best.
JaF:
Fair points. I guess I would have to point to Foye's clutch/crunch stats from last year at 82Games.com:
http://www.82games.com/0607/06MIN4E.HTM
While 4th Quarter Foye may have some play in the minds and hearts of fans, it simply has never played out in the stat sheet (or in actual game time). From eFG% to getting to the line, he simply wasn't all he was cracked up to be in the last 5 minutes of the game/overtime or with the shot clock winding down. Conversely, as much as I've been up and down on the guy, Shaddy has better numbers this year with the same stats:
http://www.82games.com/0708/07MIN4E.HTM
Shaddy is every bit the point/combo guard as is Foye while being a better shooter and a more creative offensive player.
With the personnel that this club has, if there is more than 20 seconds left on the clock, Big Al should get the ball in his hands or be run off a pick and roll. Less than 20 should see Bassy drive with a kick out to Foye or Shaddy or Shaddy getting an iso look from the perimeter after Bassy can set the offense if there is enough time.
I completely, 100% agree with you that the best creator needs the ball. I also completely, 100% disagree that Foye is that player.
Yo Stop-and-Pop
A big caveat of the "clutch/crunch" time stats is that the sample size never really gets large enough for things like shooting percentages to be considered statistically significant.
There was a series of articles on 82games that looked at clutch play numbers in depth (despite the statistical shortcomings), they are archived:
http://www.82games.com/clutchplayers.htm
If I remember correctly, there's some analysis of how the game changes at crunch time, too.
Enjoy!
Levi:
Thanks for the link. I've read that article before and it's a good read for everybody here. There are 2 other parts to the analysis and you can read them by clicking at the link at the bottom of each page. They have developed a PER system for clutch as well as a 48 min system for clutch stats. If you look at possession-based or pace-adjusted stats, you can build a sample size big enough to deal with players that clear a certain number of minutes in clutch/crunch situations. Foye's minutes this year aren't up to snuff, but he had a decent sample size last year that was enough to get a clear picture of his 4th quarter game...which isn't all that different from his game in the first 3 quarters: he's a 40/35% shooter who depends on volume to score and who favors right handed dribble drives and spot up 3s. Average in every sense of the word and surely in no way deserving of such a catchy (and weighty) moniker.
Another thing to consider is his defense in the closing minutes. I think we can all come to an agreement that the most potent offensive lineup on this squad is Bassy, Foye, McCants, Gomes, and Big Al. That unit's going to get some burn and Foye's going to have more and more Manu-Moments.
I'll try to tone it down a bit on Foye because I don't want it to sound like it is personal or that I disrespect the guy. I think his selection was an awful decision by the front office and that's where most of my distaste comes from (the rest of it comes from people viewing him in the same way the front office did when they made the selection). I do think that the squad is going to have to have a Foye/McCants death match for the 3rd guard/Manu bench role. You can't get by with both. You can't run out Bassy, Foye, McCants across the perimeter and win. I guess it should come down to who is more Manu, McCants or Foye? I'd have to take a while to look at it but my knee-jerk reaction is Shaddy by a long shot.
SnP,
I am not sure that Foye is that player at crunch time either. But in a roster full of holes, we have to find some pieces on the existing roster to handle some of the key duties - we don't have enough draft picks to solve all our needs and, as we have seen, free agency is never going to be the answer in cold MN.
I am actually quite please that the current plan has Bassy at 1, Foye at 2 and Brewer at 3 at the start of games. Some of the key skills you need are in those players - maybe not in exactly the position you may want - but in the lineup none the less. And the one really key skill lacking, outside shooting, I believe will improve as both Brewer and Bassy seem to be coachable/hard working. Fredie H hopefully to the rescue!
We have Foye and Shaddy battling it out for the starter/6th man creator role. Personally, I am not sure if that works long term. I am thinking one or the other, but not both.
We only have 1 really great pick. But if Foye/Shaddy can work short term, then we can focus on getting bigger (4/5) with a big defensive presence. If not, then we need to use the pick on a A+ creator, and keep our fingers cross that small ball works for a few more years.
I completely agree with you on the free agency take. It's another reason why I think that not moving Ratliff's contract was a huge mistake. Good teams don't make big spashes in free agency; they get solid players that fill specific needs and who are priced to move.
As for the Foye/Shaddy death-match. I'm all in on Shaddy and, as I've made clear for a while now here, I don't even like his game all that much...although, he is growing on me with his new bench role. He could really be good in that position.
Again, not to harp on the Ratliff contract too much, but that was one of their chances to move up in the draft/get additional picks. Here are their other assets outside of their own 1st rounders:
1- 2 top 2nd rounders in the 2008 Draft
2- $5 mil trade exception (Blount trade)
3- Miami 1st rounder
4- Celtic 1st rounder
5- Foye or Shaddy
I'd love to see them package these resources to gain 2 additional 1st rounders in this year's draft. Ideally, they'd use Foye/Shaddy + the Miami pick to move into the top-12 and grab a center like Hibbert/Lopez/Thabeet. Then they could use the top 2nd rounders/trade exception and Celtic pick to move into the teens to grab a either someone like CDR who can shoot from outside and play the 2 or a legit sized backup for Big Al. They have the assets to get 2-3 decent 1st rounders this year and I think they should move to get their young core in place as soon as possible.
Thanks--yeah, I figured after watching the last game that Foye didn't master the art of the P & R in one practice. We'll have to agree to disagree about his shooting, but I think most would agree that Bassy is the better pure PG right now. We need the perfect combo of both players--I'm finally going to watch Memphis tomorrow night and hopefully see that player in Derrick Rose.
I have seen a fair amount of Derrick Rose, and I will say he is mighty impressive and will certainly be a very good NBA point guard. However, I tend to cringe at the thought of adding another guard or forward in the draft. We really need to add a defensive center to this team and I don't think the Twolves (or any team) will be able to address that need through free agency. How would you guys feel about adding Hasheem Thabeet? I think he is the only guy in the draft capable of maturing into a legit defensive center. It would mean letting the team develop around the interior guys for another 2 seasons, but thats time enough to shake out our confusing point/shooting guard situation. In any case, I think thats our most optimistic timetable.
AWG: Thabeet would be a good addition in the mid-to-late 1st. I don't like him as a top-5 pick but he's definitely NBA ready on the defensive end of the court. His offensive game leaves a lot to be desired and he can't pass worth a lick but defensively he would be an ok addition.
To tell you the truth, Roy Hibbert has really grown on me in the last few weeks. I've caught a couple of Georgetown games and the guy is one of the best interior passing bigmen I have seen in a long time. He has legit size, good fundamentals, and his ability to make the interior pass would be a nice addition next to Big Al. Again, I don't think he's a top-5 pick but if the team had the opportunity to pick between Hibbert and Thabeet at this point in time, I think Hibbert would be a nice compliment to Big Al based on his more complete offensive game and his ability to make the solid interior pass. Thabeet simply can't pass the damn ball.
Either one would be a nice addition if the Wolves could package their 2 2nd rounders to move up and select in the mid-to-late 1st round. Anything higher and you start to lose value to players like Devon Hardin and Joey Dorsey. Brook Lopez is another guy to look at...although he'll probably go much higher if he enters the draft. He should be the 1st center chosen.
I think you're correct about Thabeet and Hibbert. The primary thing that I think they should be concerned about is that they need to go for a guy with the potential to be an all-star. It's not like this is a one-shot deal, but if there are players in the draft who will make an immediate impact and be a potential all-star, they need to be picked, regardless of their position. (Remember, the early consensus in the KG draft was that the Wolves should pick Ed O'Bannon or Damon Stoudamire because they filled needs.) Included in that is that the player must have the physical ability to star at this level. Question is, who are those players? If Beasley is the only one, could he and Jefferson play together?
I guess I should add one thing about Thabeet (as it was especially noticeable in today's game): he's not the greatest 1-on-1 defender and court presence. Many of his blocks and rebounds come from him simply standing in the middle of a 2-3 zone. There's been times this year where he's had to go 1-on-1 and he's been clueless. There were a couple of possessions against Indiana and DJ White where he literally didn't know what to do when he had to man-up. He just stood there and White did his thing. I don't know how long he's balled, but unless the Wolves are going to switch to being a 2-3 zone team, this is something to keep an eye on. How much of his defense is based on playing zone? That's a legit question.
Without knowing who the top prospects will be, I agree with that type of thinking--long term success over any short-term gaps. That's not to say that a defensive center isn't a long-term need, but only that we need a couple stars with matched up primes. KG almost had this, until Marbury went mental. Then he had Brandon, and they were at different points in their careers. Brandon was on his way out when KG was hitting his prime. We'll want to match up Al with another stud whose best years are the same as Al's best years. A Stockton-Malone situation is my dream, and that's why I hope that if Rose is the real deal that many say he is, he ends up in MN. At that point, Foye and Shaddy can figure out who starts and who gets the 6th man gunner spot. Maybe we score a big project in the 2nd Round. For local interest, why not take a stab at Longar Longar from Rochester. 6'11 with crazy hops. Not sure where his D is at, but he should be toughened up after a career in the Big 12.
Bonus points for Longar Longar Being One Of Us reference :)
They could also hope that New Jersey lets Desagana Diop's contract expire and that he signs for a mid-level number. It will be very interesting to see what NJ does with their glut of frontcourt players. I'd bet they keep Williams, Krstic, and Diop at the 4/5, but you never know.
Anywho, I'm very curious to see if and how Longar plays out in the NBA. He has the tools to be a solid 15-20 minute sub at the 4/5 who can give you defense and rebounding if he put the effort into it.
I'm actually from that area, and played a small amount of pickup ball with Longar. It's amazing how much more skilled a big guy like that looks in a casual game than when pitted against other Big 12 posts. I have no idea what's in store for him, but most would agree that 6'11 with huge jumping ability is a good start. The Ebi comparisons would fly in fast, but a 2nd Rounder isn't a big gamble. Not worth it, though, if there are real players on the board that are worth more than a fun project that will attract 15 extra Rochester fans to the Target Center.
Not worth it, though, if there are real players on the board that are worth more than a fun project that will attract 15 extra Rochester fans to the Target Center.
....:) I suppose not. Although, I'm sure a coordinated group of 15 fans could make quite the ruckus in the Target Center these days. Where did Longar play? I was just in Rochester the other day and ate at John Hardy's (highly recommended) right across from John Marshall. Did he go there? I don't remember much from his high school career as I was abroad at the time.