Fixing the T-Wolves - Part 1: Roster Theory
Before we can fix the T-Wolves, we need to know what a good team looks like. Following is a breakdown of each roster spot, 1-15.
ROSTER SPOTS 1-5: Clearly the starters are the most important spots on any teams. Some teams pretend one of their top 5 is actually a backup (see Manu Ginobli and the San Antonio Spurs), but a good read of a teams top 5 is average minutes and who is in the game in the 4th quarter of a close game. Beyond identifying the top 5, there can exist a gulf of talent between 1 and 5 (see LeBron James and anyone else on the Cavs). For later grading purposes, I will grade starters who have a shot at the All-Star game as A1, and solid NBA starters as A2.
All sorts of different theories of the starting 5 have been created. Looking at recent history, I've identified 4 successful mixes that have won the NBA championship.
The Batman and Robin: Essentially this model takes the best player in the league and pairs him with a very competent sidekick. The Bulls with Jordan and Pippen (6 titles), the Lakers with Shaq and Kobe (3 titles), and the Heat with Shaq and Wade (1 title). The problem with this strategy is having the best player in the league. I think only Cleveland with LeBron, and maybe the Lakers with Kobe can pursue this option, but unless you want to knock Lamar Odom's Robin skills, Kobe has shown himself not to be a Batman. The T-Wolves have little chance hitting this formula unless they get Mike Beasley and he becomes that guy.
The GI Joe Ninja Team: I was always a big fan of the comic book and a regular side series was following the ninjas - Snake Eyes, Storm Shadow and Scarlett. Snake Eyes was the cool, popular ninja of the group, but the other two were close in ability. Most teams pursue this 3 star strategy and San Antonio with Duncan, Manu, and Tony Parker has won 4 titles this way. This strategy could work for the Wolves, but I suggest they take the following path;
The X-Men: I hate the movies and I hate the comics, but it works for this analogy - essentially 5 players with pretty similar skills if different skill sets. I think this model is incredibly difficult to cultivate for two reasons - creating a team concept in the ultimate me league of the NBA, and the salary cap. Only Detroit has won a single title following this model. However, I think this model is the best bet for the Wolves.
These models take us back to 1991 sans the two titles won by Houston in 1994 and 1995. Other than Hakeem, I don't know how that team did it or what model they fall in.
ROSTER SPOTS 6-8: These are the team's key backups that get significant minutes and are important to a team's overall success. For grading purposes I give a B to a player who is a solid backup and a B* to a young player who is a back up now, but could be developed into a starter.
ROSTER SPOTS 9-10: These are lightly used backups who take up garbage time and fill in for injured players. Almost always one of these guys is a back up big since they are more likely to get winded and need a deeper reserve. This is a lousy place to develop a player, but that is quite common to see. These guys get a C grade.
ROSTER SPOTS 11-15: There are 5 uses for these spots. In descending order of usefulness, they are:
D-1: Stashing a young, undeveloped, talented player. Great place for a kid who comes out too early as a freshman and needs some years and practice before they can really contribute.
D-2: Injury reserve. Essentially you have a player in your top 8 who is prone to injury and a veteran option is needed as insurance, but otherwise gets no minutes.
E: Leaving the spot empty, all the other 'options' are really just salary cap killer.
D-3: A highly over paid and useless veteran who has one year left on their contract. The only way this person helps you win is that an expiring contract has some trade value.
D-4: An over paid useless veteran with multiple years left on their contract. For an example, please see the New York Knicks roster.
ROSTER SPOTS 1-5: Clearly the starters are the most important spots on any teams. Some teams pretend one of their top 5 is actually a backup (see Manu Ginobli and the San Antonio Spurs), but a good read of a teams top 5 is average minutes and who is in the game in the 4th quarter of a close game. Beyond identifying the top 5, there can exist a gulf of talent between 1 and 5 (see LeBron James and anyone else on the Cavs). For later grading purposes, I will grade starters who have a shot at the All-Star game as A1, and solid NBA starters as A2.
All sorts of different theories of the starting 5 have been created. Looking at recent history, I've identified 4 successful mixes that have won the NBA championship.
The Batman and Robin: Essentially this model takes the best player in the league and pairs him with a very competent sidekick. The Bulls with Jordan and Pippen (6 titles), the Lakers with Shaq and Kobe (3 titles), and the Heat with Shaq and Wade (1 title). The problem with this strategy is having the best player in the league. I think only Cleveland with LeBron, and maybe the Lakers with Kobe can pursue this option, but unless you want to knock Lamar Odom's Robin skills, Kobe has shown himself not to be a Batman. The T-Wolves have little chance hitting this formula unless they get Mike Beasley and he becomes that guy.
The GI Joe Ninja Team: I was always a big fan of the comic book and a regular side series was following the ninjas - Snake Eyes, Storm Shadow and Scarlett. Snake Eyes was the cool, popular ninja of the group, but the other two were close in ability. Most teams pursue this 3 star strategy and San Antonio with Duncan, Manu, and Tony Parker has won 4 titles this way. This strategy could work for the Wolves, but I suggest they take the following path;
The X-Men: I hate the movies and I hate the comics, but it works for this analogy - essentially 5 players with pretty similar skills if different skill sets. I think this model is incredibly difficult to cultivate for two reasons - creating a team concept in the ultimate me league of the NBA, and the salary cap. Only Detroit has won a single title following this model. However, I think this model is the best bet for the Wolves.
These models take us back to 1991 sans the two titles won by Houston in 1994 and 1995. Other than Hakeem, I don't know how that team did it or what model they fall in.
ROSTER SPOTS 6-8: These are the team's key backups that get significant minutes and are important to a team's overall success. For grading purposes I give a B to a player who is a solid backup and a B* to a young player who is a back up now, but could be developed into a starter.
ROSTER SPOTS 9-10: These are lightly used backups who take up garbage time and fill in for injured players. Almost always one of these guys is a back up big since they are more likely to get winded and need a deeper reserve. This is a lousy place to develop a player, but that is quite common to see. These guys get a C grade.
ROSTER SPOTS 11-15: There are 5 uses for these spots. In descending order of usefulness, they are:
D-1: Stashing a young, undeveloped, talented player. Great place for a kid who comes out too early as a freshman and needs some years and practice before they can really contribute.
D-2: Injury reserve. Essentially you have a player in your top 8 who is prone to injury and a veteran option is needed as insurance, but otherwise gets no minutes.
E: Leaving the spot empty, all the other 'options' are really just salary cap killer.
D-3: A highly over paid and useless veteran who has one year left on their contract. The only way this person helps you win is that an expiring contract has some trade value.
D-4: An over paid useless veteran with multiple years left on their contract. For an example, please see the New York Knicks roster.
posted by Bill Gilles | 3:32 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home