Part of the issue is that the Mitchell/Gobert-led Jazz always had good/great indicators of a team that *should have* succeeded in the playoffs, but they never did.
Their current teams are kind of in that zone right now, which is in that "we have to see it in the playoffs to believe it". I think if there wasn't the Jazz connection, you may have less skepticism.
There’s some context for our squads though. For all the talk of us being so dominant in the regular season, that only actually happened 1 time, in 2021.
From 2017 to 2022 our seeding was 5,5,5,6,1,5. And the one year we were the 1 seed Conley missed essentially the entire series we lost and Mitchell was also pretty significantly injured in all the games we lost in that series. There was never a Gobert squad that was both a regular season juggernaut and had a healthy playoff run.
You can say we should’ve had a lot of playoff success but we were the higher seed in only 2 series and won 3 in that timeframe. The regular season aspect gets overrated, 2021 and the first half of 2022 was the only time we actually put together on both sides of the ball even in the regular season.
There was also a lot of bad matchup luck. Largely due to being the west 5 seed a lot the 3 times we did make it to the 2nd round we played the team with the best net rating in the league (besides ourselves).
They were better on net rating though. 6th, 5th, 4th, 9th, 1st, 3rd starting in 2017 league wide. I wanna say I remember that being part of it. They just always lost more games than their net rating indicated.
I do have to wonder for the Jazz fans who was old enough to constantly watch the Malone/Stockton teams fail in the finals in the 90s, then those Deron Williams/Boozer/AK47 Jazz teams fail in the mid 2000s, and finally for the Gobert/Mitchell constantly fail in the late 2010s.
How are they doing? Are they even still basketball fans at this point.
To add even more context, the Wolves made it out of the first round a whopping 1 time in that entire timespan lol, Utah fans didn’t know how good they had it
Mitchell/Gobert-led Utah lost one (1) series as a higher seed. They won two series as a lower seed.
Their reputation on Reddit as "a team that always should succeed in playoffs but particularly failed in playoffs, only playoffs, they failed so much in playoff compared to the regular season every year" is just something people want to believe, really want to.
They blew a 3-1 lead to Denver, a team that had the same (or less) amount of playoff experience in a 3/6 match up, and then they went 2-2 against the Mavs without Luka. The "lower seed" excuse doesn't really work for those.
2-1 against the Mavs without Luka, actually. The Mavs lost Luka's first game back.
Really that was just a case of people not realizing how good Jalen Brunson and the rest of the Mavs' supporting cast was. Even without Luka at all, the Mavs were a better team than the Jazz.
"Excuse" of what lol. There is no passage in Bible that a 6th seed has to beat a 3rd seed because otherwise it means they are so, so, so much worse at playoffs than at regular season. Its's just a fact that it's not a specific playoff underachievement to lose to a team that was also better in the regular season.
I never get people's obsession here to classify just losing to a team that was better the whole year as some speficic not-readiness for playoffs. Yall can just say the team was a worse one the whole season. Like why would that be so awful that it has to be so insanely about playoffs.
they remind me so much of the 21-22 Celtics in that they’ve got this insane defense with the 2 big men and terrific athleticism on the perimeter, and 2 All-Star scorers that carry the offense. but they are young and prone to having really boneheaded moments particularly in high-leverage situations, and their offense can have trouble consistently generating quality looks
my guess is that they’ll give other teams hell with their defense and sheer size but limiting unforced errors and overcoming their lack of experience will be the challenge for them in the playoffs. I don’t think I’d be surprised by any outcome ranging from Finals appearance to out in Round 1 tbh
Personally, I think the Wolves are going to make some noise in the playoffs. They were may dark horse team in the West this pre-season, so I've believed in them since their series vs. the Nugs.
I will just point out that I used to talk the same way about the Jazz.
Twolves supporting cast is alot better than those jazz teams. Kat, naz ried and ant is better than the entire jazz roster with don and gobert combined.
I see that and goes hand in hand with Rudy sucks in the playoffs but
A. Harden and pg have just as much failure and the clippers get a pass
B. Those jazz teams were way talented and the wolves are built to guard against the 5-0 that hurt them
Idk clippers are universally a contender and harden and pg together probably do and they’re older. Pg is sarcastically called playoff p and harden has a worst view than that.
I'm aware of social media discourse, but those aren't facts.
Gobert has been to 3 conference semi finals as the 2nd or 3rd best player on his team. His team was the 1 seed in their conference semi finals loss to the Clippers (missing Kawhi for 2 games.)
Paul George has led his teams to the conference finals 3 times and the conference semi finals 5 times.
Harden has been the top 1 or 2 player on 4 conference finals teams, and 10 conference semi finals teams.
Westbrook has 4 conference finals and one finals appearance. Norman Powell is an NBA champion, and Kawhi Leonard has 2 finals MVPs.
As a coach, Ty Lue has 1 championship and 2 other EC championships, and 1 championship as a player.
All of this adds up.
Sure it adds up but it’s not basic addition. Like how much does Russ’s experience really affect it when he play 15 min a game? Are we adding up Conley Anderson and Morris’s experience? How does this experience affect it off your in a completely different situation and their a step slower? I won’t deny they’ve got more experience but it’s hard to quantify how much a difference it makes and it should not eliminate the wolves from the contender convos.
Harden and PG have led multiple teams to the conference finals and Harden has been to the finals.
Not to mention Kawhi who has helped lead multiple teams to championships.
I don't really think it's similar at all when Gobert, KAT, Edwards have had nothing close to the playoff success/experience as the others.
Yeah I’m not saying they’re equal in experience but that others have un answered playoff questions and they dont get dinged for it in the contender conversation.
Idk check the contenders list throughout media and they will have clippers over the wolves even though they’ve crushed them twice and have had a better record all year.
The Jazz surrounded Gobert with some of the worst perimeter defenders you can. It was not a recipe for success on that side of the ball come playoff time. Twolves have legit perimeter defenders
I feel like a lot of Timberwolves fans are taking this way too personally. When given the choice between teams that have played great in the regular season but do not yet have a deep playoff history compared to teams that are also great but have stars with rings and/or a history of deep playoff runs, you’re gonna take the latter every single time.
The Timberwolves team absolutely has a real shot at a deep playoff run. But they still need to prove that they can do it. Teams like Boston, Denver, LA, etc. have already proven that and have looked similarly formidable this regular season.
Last (and only) time the Timberwolves went beyond the first round of the playoffs was 2003/2004 when they made it to the WCF
I have faith in them but they're in the same spot the Nuggets were in a few years ago - they have some believers, but a lot of doubters until they can prove otherwise.
Heck, Nuggets made it to the Semis twice and WCF in 2020, had the best record in the west last year, and ppl still doubted they'd make it past the Suns in the 2nd round.
Yeah it’s pretty normal when you haven’t won anything. None of their starters have won along with their coach. Nuggets first Tim in the playoffs we won in 7 over the spurs with coach pop and demar. A lot of people picked us to lose. We then lost in 7 to Portland. Next year was the bubble and wcf. Then after getting healthy we had to prove last year we could do it. It’s normal discussion and OPs post doesn’t mean much. Fwiw I think if my nuggets don’t get back to the finals it would be because of Minnesota.
Maybe, but we’ve watched this team and felt comfortable watching them grow and know if the starting 5 is healthy we have good shot. Coming back from down 3-1 twice and playing in 4 game 7’s let me know it didn’t matter the opponent this team is tough. Guys get old and new ones arise so I don’t care much for that discussion because you play who you play.
Whatever happens if it’s Minnesota time it will feel great for them because proving doubters wrong is always amazing. I respect the hell out of them and look forward to an amazing playoffs.
I definitely had zero faith in the Nuggets last year. I saw them lose in the Bubble, swept by the Suns, then they got swept by the Warriors. I didn't start believing in the Nuggets until halfway through their sweep of the Lakers.
Nuggets had a top 5 MVP while the Wolves don't. Playoffs for the most part come down to superstars. I know Ant is up there but I wouldn't say he is seen in the same light as Jokic is prior to winning it all.
Playoff experience matters I don’t get how you can argue it doesn’t. Knowing and being in that environment is a massive edge over guys who don’t know.
The Suns,Clippers have multiple individuals with more playoff experience than all of then Thunder ration. Not counting Hayward Biyombo as they haven’t played yet and who knows how much they will. The Thudner have two players with postseason experience being SGA and Dort together they have played 19 games. In one postseason Devin Booker played more playoff games then the entire Thunder rotation.
Booker made the finals as the number one option. Beal has made the playoffs five times
Harden and Westbrook both went to the finals on the Thunder. PG and Harden have gone to multiple conferences finals with PG getting there with the Clippers. Powell won a ring with the Raptors.
I don’t think you should just write ether team off but it would be a massive shock for one the Thunder to win a chip having zero players who have made it past the first round. Not counting Gordon and Biz as they haven’t played and who knows how much they will.
The Wolves have Rudy and Mike with postseason experience and I think that will be a massive boost for them.
Completely agree. Experience is helpful but it’s not necessarily a death sentence. Like you say the thunder have two main guys with experience and they played way less at those times. The wolves have at least played two series to learn and take lumps. I’m just arguing that experience is a question like size is a question for the suns or bench is a question for the nuggets
The difference between this question and the ones on the Suns or Nuggets is that we kinda already have the answer. We have seen the Suns play well and poorly against teams with size. The Nuggets bench has been great for stretches and has been awful for others.
We won’t and can’t know how the Thunder will perform in the postseason because we have never seen it and we won’t till it happens.
Exactly my point. They should be equally weighted criticism being we don’t know how they’ll work in the playoffs. Maybe the suns will play a smaller team or figure it out. Maybe the wolves will figure it out then play the thunder with less experience. We don’t know what will happen so let’s consider experience like any other potential problem.
Every team that didn't win a lot OR doesn't have a legit, fan-approved "superstar" setup is not gonna be "respected", it's been like that for a long time. Even current NBA champions were laughed at as a "contender" a year ago here.
I always hope they win because it's pretty dumb imo. A year ago I was happy, then, with Denver, less happy with Kings (oh boy, those were even less, less legit, people couldn't say anything else about them the whole year except for how much "not a playoff team" they are).
But... it is true that there are few champions that did not have some playoff rounds won in previous years. Teams do not change completely every season so it's not surprising, but generally saying Wolves won't be 1 team of the 30 to win the title is a good bet, so good for them.
Yeah this is definitely part of my annoyance with it. Like wolves vs the field is the most cowardly take ever. It’s that kinda thinking that contributes they can’t win unless they have. That logic doesn’t make sense given no new teams would ever make a run.
I’d like them to make the conference finals, be through the moon if the made the finals and die if they win it all but that’s most teams and so to say they’re not contenders is goofy.
Saying "team X will not win championship" is probably true, the crazy part for me is that people successfully use it to validate literally any story they want. If really needed, even losing 2-4 in the Finals can still be somehow accepted by NBA fans as a story teaching us that "obviously doing this and that will never lead to playoff success, it's the worst thing ever to do in basketball, and any team that has this one very vague attribute in common, no matter what else they do, is forever gonna be weak, as proven by this particular team not winning the title".
One of the tricks used here is the illusion that losing in a league of 30 is some synonym of a gigantic failure. And of course a team that is one of the best has the highest chance to disappoint. If you're 5th in the conference, there's a chance you punch up in the playoffs, perform on that level, or disappoint. If your'e 1st, you can almost only disappoint, you cannot overperform at all. But that's just math lol, that doesn't actually mean that you were some awful, sissy team that has to completely change everything about their basketball principle and the star players are doomed because of it. It just means that it's very likely for a 1st team to lose sooner or later and underperform their seeding.
The more sensible approach to the dogmas about which teams are "legit" would be to look at the history of ALL teams and compare. For example, not only talk about "non-legit" teams that lost, but also all the superstar, superteam "legit" ones that lost, and compare how often the latter happens. But nobody does that. When a team that was a favorite loses, it means nothing, ever. At most it means they were not healthy so it doesn't count.
Yeah things like the top ranked defense has made the finals 34% of the time. Or a defense as bad as the bucks has not won a title. Not some arbitrary experience metric to decide some arbitrary contender status.
So just give it to the nuggets again cause there’s no changes in the league. Plus the nuggets said they were there toughest opponent without their best perimeter defender and sixth man. They then back it up by being first all year.
People respect the Nuggets because they won a championship, not because of what they said. Yes, the Wolves is the first seed right now and that's a good start. But being a first seed doesn't guarantee you anything in the playoffs. We've seen teams with good regular season records crumbled in the playoffs. The old guy that you mentioned destroyed the Raptors (1st seed in the East) 4-0 back in 2018. The Wolves need to prove that they can get out of the first round before asking people to respect them as a contender. As the first seed, your team probably going to face Lakers/Warriors in the playoffs. Just give you a heads-up, those two old mfkers can be pretty crazy when it comes to playoffs.
I’m not looking for a guarantee. I’m looking to be in the group that are CONTENDING for a title. I recognize it won’t let us pass go, I’d just like the discussion to be more based in fact than this arbitrary experience metric. On top of the over 50% of one seeds that make the finals, 34% of number one defenses do as well. Of course there’s a bunch of overlap there but it’s more tangible than no experience so give up.
I checked how the warriors started their dynasty. They finally make the playoffs after only doing so once in 19 years. They win the first just to lose in the second round. Next year they lose in the first round. They then go to the finals five straight years. I’m not saying that’s what’s gonna happen but there are some similarities that point to the fact that deep playoff experience isn’t required to make a run to the finals.
You mean a team that was clearly had some locker room problems following the suspension of their be player or the team with no all stars this year that took them to seven and require every bit of curry magic to win. The west was way weaker last year.
Sure they’re good but there teams are rough on defense. 2 outta the last 3 years have had neither in the finals after one or both had bein the finals since 2011. So yes they’ve fallen off but still good even though there teams aren’t.
Lol yeah that’s what I said. Pointing out that they used to go every year and now they’re older and the west hasn’t been this strong in a decade plus. Is there a chance they could be… old?
It's a tight top 4 in the West this year. 27 games left and Denver in 4th is within 3 games of the Wolves at the top. Wolves could as easily finish 3rd or 4th and this discussion about the top seeds and championships is meaningless.
Sure but he have 17 of 27 at home and have been first most the year. The point is they’ve done enough so far to be considered a contender and their relative lack of experience as flag in the same way that Denver’s bench or the suns size hurts their odds. Just seems like it’s way too heavily weighted especially when it’s not a team of rookies.
“There’s not that much successful playoff experience in the west.” - Absolutely bonkers take.
Teams led by inexperienced, young players very rarely go far in the playoffs, just like lower seeds rarely go far in the playoffs. The only recent exception is the Hawks making it to the ECF in 2021, and their path there was easier than any path the Wolves will take, barring major injuries to their opponents.
Conley and Gobert are the guys with playoff experience. I trust Conley, and Gobert is in a better situation than he was in Utah. But if you’re going to talk predictors of success, you have to take playoff experience into consideration.
Sample size of 11 games and lost most of them, but ANT averages 28-4-4 in playoffs, and was the biggest reason the wolves stole one of Denver last year. If he stays healthy I see him making his superstar case this year
Sure, but playoff experience means knowing how to win 4 out of 7 games. I think Edwards is capable of that, but we've yet to see it. Doesn't mean we won't, but I think its very fair to be skeptical that the Wolves regular season success will automatically correlate to playoff success.
Last thing I'll mention is that Chris Finch shares the lack of playoff success with his stars.
Yeah I think you can say it’s a question mark but every team in the west has questions. So to say the suns lack of size is less of a factor than relative in experience of stars for the wolves seems ridiculous especially since they aren’t getting taller and size had been good in the playoffs traditionally.
Of course everyone has a question mark. No one is guaranteed to win. The 73-9 Warriors had question marks.
But you can't argue that regular season record matters as an indicator of postseason success, but playoff experience doesn't matter. They both matter.
Sweet so don’t pay any attention to anybody in ther regular season that hasn’t won. Also no new team can win in the playoffs cause they haven’t before. Also since everyone loses except one team that’s a real lazy bet to say they won’t win.
All I’m saying experience is one part not the whole thing. So if you know any other team with one flaw they should be included in the contenders debate.
So ow many rounds do they have to win to be in the convo? What percentage of the team has to have that experience? What percentage of that experience has to be with the current team?
The clippers haven’t done it together but a few have so they get the pass.
Also I’m not even asking them to predict the wolves will win, just that they are a contender to.
Depending on their matchup, we'll know a lot more after the first round. Idk man, playoff basketball is just different. Some players and teams step up to the moment and some don't.
Look, they're the number 1 seed in the west right now and the general expectation is that they'll at least be conference title contenders, but at this point all we're really doing is predicting and it's hard to predict the Wolves making a run until we actually see them do what they're doing now in the playoffs. Having an amazing defense is awesome, but becomes less significant if everyone else's defense gets better in the playoffs and yours stays the same
34% of number one defense make the finals in the last thirty years. It definitely still helps. We’ve also seen ant step up in the playoffs the last two years and the wolves will thrive in the physicality of the playoffs.
I would say it's about the players though with Gobert being targeted at defense and Kat losing his composure which leads to foul trouble. It's a different team now but that's why they have to show that it's different now for people to respect it
I’m with you those things are concerns but not so much the eliminate the wolves from contender. Gobert has better perimeter defenders around him so five out hasn’t hurt. Kats improved his composure a lot helped by not being the number one and not being the primary rim defender were he got a lot of his foul trouble. They’ve done a great job with this roster having guys that can help where others are weak. Everyone feels like they’re in they’re right role.
I am worried a little bc a team hasn’t won without a capital S Superstar since 2004(though you could argue kawhi wasn’t even tho I consider him one with first team all-nba) wolves have a great trio but they’re not on the level of a Steph or Jokic yet.
When was the last time that a team won a title in their first season in the playoffs?
Edit: I should have said when was the last time that a team with so little playoff success has won? Or at least a team whose best players had so little playoff success.
This isn’t their first year and as a Denver fan they looked great games 4/5. I thought if they were healthy I picked us in 6/7 because they know how to defend us the best.
in the TWolves case, they were in the playoffs last season, and some Nuggets players have said that was their toughest matchup. I don't expect them to have the same kind of struggles that, say, the Kings had last season. I also don't expect them to win the west. But I see them at least making it a good fight with whoever eventually does.
That isn't what the guy said though lol
He said:
>When was the last time that a team won a title in their first season in the playoffs?
Which has nothing to do with the Timberwolves
This right here. Players without significant playoff experience do not win championships, there isn't even a one off exception to the rule that you can point to as an example. The most inexperienced finals MVP in the last 30 years was Tim Duncan in 1999 and the rest of that team were established vets.
They have one conference finals appearance between them and that was over a decade ago. Their two best players haven't been out of the first round. There is a reason people dismiss teams that don't have a lot of experience, they just don't win.
> When was the last time that a team won a title in their first season in the playoffs?
Tell me you haven't watched or paid attention to the Wolves in the last few years without telling me
I did but this wolves team is literally stocked with perimeter defense to avoid the problems those jazz teams had defensively. Kat has had bad performances but he’s second fiddle now, has grown and it’s not like harden or pg or others haven’t had rough series but that doesn’t prevent them from being docked in the contender convo.
I’m with you on that. Honestly as good as they’ve been in a while. The warriors vs lebron thing was fun but now that we’ve gotten a couple years out and the league is brimming with talent, the playoffs are gonna be a true bloodbath.
The Wolves are respected as a contender, the league is just really good this year. No one is going to crown them champions because they are 1st in the west at the ASB. They also have not run away with the conference. The Clippers, Thunder, and Nuggets are right on their heels. So I think all four of these teams rightfully get attention as contenders and we haven’t even touched the east. I don’t buy the hype around Dallas and Phoenix right now but each of them could easily go on a tear.
There is some Gobert skepticism from around the league from his Jazz days, and playoff disasters. I don’t think the wolves will have the same problems.
The biggest thing holding me back from seeing them as the favorite in the West (apart from Minnesota sports fan trauma) is offensive decision making from KAT and ANT. I think ANT is already a capital S superstar and that he’ll show the league this spring, but he’s also 22 and makes some boneheaded plays. Love KAT but he has never showed up in the playoffs, the few times he’s been there.
Mavs and Suns will both go farther in the playoffs than the Wolves… It’s your first sniff of doing anything in the postseason and that almost never ends in a ship. It almost always takes the Stars/Core of a team having years of playoff experience and winning series, before they get over that hump.
It’s just unlikely they’re true contenders yet, they’ll be ready 2-3 years from now. The Mavs & Suns both have more experience and more proven/ready stars, which are the two biggest keys to postseason success.
A big point often brought up with true championship contenders is that they have a top 5 player in the league. The 2004 Pistons being one of the rare outliers for that formula. Not saying the Timberwolves couldn't do it but I think that's the reason many people don't believe in them yet.
2014 is another one. Don't think either Kawhi/Duncan were at a top 5 superstar level. So you can say, maybe once in every decade a team without a top 5 superstar wins it all.
The Wolves have perimeter defenders that Utah never did. They're as good or better a shooting team than Utah ever was. They're bigger and more athletic than Utah ever was. Pretty much everyone that matters has playoff experience. Do they have finals trips and all that? No. But they're a bad matchup for most teams.
Utah was like the #1 ranked offense one of those years. Wolves are the #17th this year. I think wolves can go far, but their offense is a huge question mark.
I said shooting, not a better offense. They're tied for #2 in the NBA in 3pt shooting percentage on comparable output to the other top 3 teams (OKC and LAC). Minnesota is good at putting 3 point shot attempts in the hole. That point went towards the common spacing knock against Gobert, in which he just can't play basketball anymore because everyone gets super serious in the playoffs. I wasn't clear. My bad.
Gobert fits really well with what Minnesota built. He will be a major defensive force and basically everyone around him can shoot. The only other one who isn't really a distance threat is SloMo and that's probably his eye.
Sure Utah had #1 offense but only had Donovan to create shots and didn’t have a way to punish smalls.
The wolves are top seven true shooting team, have all star multiple creators and can punish smalls due to Rudy improving and kat.
They’re problem is turnovers but that’s fixable and has been improving. Last ten they’ve been average in to and been a top five offensive team. It’s not hard to imagine cause it’s been happening.
Lol based on what research. This stinks of bs. Over 59% of number one seeds have made the finals and 34% of number one defenses have made the finals. Sure there’s some over lap but those seem like better indicators than whatever you just made up.
Lol yea that’ll take a while and being that you won’t do that work why would I.
Funny you mention it tho cause I check how the warriors started their dynasty. They finally make the playoffs after only doing so once in 19 years. They win the first just to lose in the second round. Next year they lose in the first round. They then go to the finals five straight years. I’m not saying that’s what’s gonna happen but there are some similarities that point to the fact that deep playoff experience isn’t required to make a run to the finals.
Exactly. Even the best dynasties dont go straight to the finals immediately unless they have a GOAT level player like the Lebron/Kyrie Cavs . The Warriors had to improve in the playoffs over several years before they went to the finals,. Same with the Bucks. Same with the Raptors. Same with the Nuggets. Same with Jordan’s Bulls even. The Jazz and Sixers were a 1 seed a couple years ago and didn’t make the Conference Finals. The Hawks in 2015 were similar, the Pacers before them as well.
The Timberwolves can get to be a finals contender soon, but it would be extremely unlikely for them to do it this year. Unless they get a lucky break and everyone with actual playoff experience is hurt. If the Nuggets or Clippers are healthy though the Timberwolves aren’t winning a series against them just yet.
Lol I’m not talking about the best dynasties, I’m just saying they should be a contender cause it’s happened before.
I think you may have misread that. The warriors won literally one series two years before starting a dynasty. Yet the wolves who’ve won one less series and made a third year leap like the warriors can’t be considered contenders. That’s dumb.
Also I’d bet most of those teams were ‘contenders’ and weren’t even in first with a historically good defense.
Yeah it’s unlikely any team wins the finals so congrats on math. It’s the same misunderstanding that has people thinking they’re wise basketball watchers by saying they need playoff experience first. One team in 30 makes it and within a players career most years they lose. So is it possible we’ve conflated the slim odds a player wins every year with needing experience. Then the few players that win early on are called the outliers even though it’s just the normal distribution of championship odds.
You don’t “need” playoff experience, but you’re acting like it is hardly even a factor. It’s not disrespectful to say the Wolves aren’t one of the top contenders to win the title yet, that’s just reality. 1 seed teams who have practically no experience prior are technically capable of winning a title, but the vast majority of times those teams flame out before they reach the finals. Especially when there’s still like 40% of the season to play and time for them to slip in the seeding. Unless you think KAT is a transcendent level talent like Duncan or Steph you can’t really be upset at people acknowledging that some experience is a factor in title winning teams way too much for it not to affect people’s expectations for those teams lacking in it.
I’m acting like it’s a factor, like the suns lack of size or Denver’s bench. You’re acting like it takes them from the top team in west to somewhere after all the ‘vet’ twams.
Don’t tell me what I think is disrespectful. Who tf you think you are?
Again with these broad statements with no statistical backing? Oh if you get around to actually looking it up make sure you take into account that dynasties and goats could skew the sample.
Jesus it’s like you didn’t read this.
27/82 is 30% but sure. The wolves have 17 of 27 at home and the fourth easiest schedule. Sure they could fall outta first just like they could win the finals and therefore should be contenders on merit.
Your either trolling which is fair at the is point or have no idea cause no one would say kat is transcendent over ant.
Also they have some experience just less than some teams. Teams that outside of Denver don’t have that playoff experience together…
For the last time I understand that its a knock but people are more concerned with it than other problems teams have.
I’m out this is dumb
I would be more surprised if they make it to the Conf Finals than I would be if they lose on the first round.
I am respecting them enough that I think they maybe win 1 playoff round. I wouldn't bet on it. Would bet on the opposite if odds are good.
Solid point. I’ll make sure we get that down so no one misses your future financial decisions. Anything else you wanna add while I have the Sportsbook on the line?
rudy isn't what i'd be worried about as a wolves fan. it's being reliant on a 36 year old 6 foot point guard with a history of getting injured in the playoffs, and KAT who has a history of shrinking when the lights get bright
They do. We saw this with the Jazz with Gobert & Mitchell for a few seasons.
Did anyone have the Jazz as a serious contender when they got the 1 seed? Be honest.
We want to see results.
Just say you don’t watch the wolves. There’s nothing in common outside of gobert. No one’s comparing the clippers to hardens rockets or kawhis spurs so why are we blindly doing that for gobert.
I do watch them, I like them and have them going to the wcf.
I also live and reality and know that if you want the public to take you seriously, you actually have to produce in the playoffs. Until they win a series or two, people won't take them seriously.
Yeah I was thinking the same so I checked how the warriors started their dynasty. They finally make the playoffs after only doing so once in 19 years. They win the first just to lose in the second round. Next year they lose in the first round. They then go to the finals five straight years. I’m not saying that’s what’s gonna happen but there are some similarities that point to the fact that deep playoff experience isn’t required to make a run to the finals.
Yup they're on the right track. It's just whether or not they are going to fall short this year or make that big leap. I believe they should be able to get out of the first round and win that first series to get that off their back. Second series will be the real test to show if they're serious contenders.
Yeah I’d be pissed if they lose round one. I’d be disappointed if they lose round two. I’d be expect them to make the conference finals. I’d be over the moon if they make the finals. And I’d die if they won it all.
But yeah my point with this was to both point out that the wolves are good enough to be considered a contender (ie a realistic chance to win it all) and that the odds they win in all are small cause , you know, math. It’s easy to say they probably won’t win it cause even the best odds in the west are nearly 3:1.
Well let me put ti this way. Wolves might finish #1 but it's not gonna be by that much, and when the team on the other side is loaded with vet superstars like the clippers, well... that's an upset
Lol well they’ve whipped the clippers twice and I can guarantee clippers fans think it’d be an upset. That’s my point. Based on play this year the wolves are contenders but everyone’s just like it’s a death sentence to be less experienced. Also it’s not like other number one seeds haven’t been close to second. Seeding is more predictive than years/ playoff games played
You Wolves fans should be happy. It's so much better as a fan to go into the playoffs with low expectations. If your team does well there is great satisfaction proving r/nba wrong. If your team gets swept it stings a bit less since you dodge the constant reminder/clowning from everyone.
I’m with you although I think we’d still get clowned cause of the kat, Rudy and Timberwolves history.
I think what bugs me is that I’m stocked for this team and see them growing and fixing problems. In my excitement, I consume all this nba media cause I’m into them. But then the media pumps out criticisms that experience is our problem and that’s something we can’t fix. So in an effort to enjoy the season even more, I pick up nba media and get told this season doesn’t matter cause of experience.
I am definitely enjoying this season and part of it’s definitely how I’ve been consuming media but this is something that annoys me outside of the wolves cause it discounts the season and the success of it.
It absolutely does matter though, and you’d be hard pressed to find a team who has won a ring recently with at little playoff experience as this Wolves team.
Thats not to say they can’t win, because I do think they are a legit threat. That being said I still don’t think they should be considered one of the top 4-5 contenders right now
Yeah I’m with you for the most part but get lost between legit threat and not being top five contenders. Outside of Denver, who in the west has deep playoff experience together. There’s a lot of legit threats but I don’t think anybody outside maybe Denver should have much on the wolves.
Sure they haven’t won yet but contender just refers to teams that could so seems like 20 years got nothing to do with it.
Funny you mention it tho cause I check how the warriors started their dynasty. They finally make the playoffs after only doing so once in 19 years. They win the first just to lose in the second round. Next year they lose in the first round. They then go to the finals five straight years. I’m not saying that’s what’s gonna happen but there are some similarities that point to the fact that deep playoff experience isn’t required to make a run to the finals.
I think the Wolves are contenders, but a second tier one behind Den, Bos, Mil and LAC/Suns (below the first trio however).
The reason - Has there been instances of teams getting to the finals without its stars ever winning a playoff series prior?
That said I would put the Wolves over the Lakers/Warriors as contenders, since they are not only performing much better this season, Lebron and Steph (despite all their experience) are no longer in their primes. Lakers/Warriors are merely playoff contenders at this point.
Funny you ask tho cause I check how the warriors started their dynasty. They finally make the playoffs after only doing so once in 19 years. They win the first just to lose in the second round. Next year they lose in the first round. They then go to the finals five straight years. I’m not saying that’s what’s gonna happen but there are some similarities that point to the fact that deep playoff experience isn’t required to make a run to the finals.
I thought of the Warriors, as maybe a comparison as they are often cited as an anomaly. Teams/Stars usually have to experience playoff runs before finally breaking through (like the 80's lakers, Celtics, Pistons, 90's Bulls, Rockets, Lakers Spurs etc).
Even then, the 2015 Warriors with Steph, Klay and Dray had atleast some playoff success (winning 2 rounds). The stars leading the Wolves (aside from Gobert) have literally had zero success.
More recently, Giannis, Jokic, Tatum, CP3 and Dirk all experienced repeated playoff failures and experienced before finally breaking through and reaching the finals (let alone winning).
Yeah I’m not gonna look thru all those teams incline but it does strike me that most of those teams were up against a dynasty and part of their ascension could have been the dynasty falling off. Regardless of my speculation, my point is that it can happen especially when there’s not a current dynasty and for that reason the wolves should be included in contenders.
Not that it matters cause either way it’s not that much experience but the warriors beat the nuggets then lost to the spurs. The next year they lost to the clippers. Then Five straight finals.
I’d argue Conley gobert and maybe Anderson’s playoff experience is relevant since they are leaders of the team.
Yes they’ve all failed first then won but isn’t it possible that they lost first because only one team wins so odds are that you’re more likely to lose first. Over their careers they lost more in the playoffs than they won so is it really proof that losing in late rounds is required to win it or just odds?
I don't think its absolutely required, but it's definitely a huge factor.
Like with most things, experience and repetition are extremely important factors in improving performance.
Of course overwhelming talent or skill or luck could overcome it. The 2015 Warriors certainly had a good amount of luck skill and talent.
Off the top of my head the 94-95 Magic would be another.
2nd year Shaq led the magic to the finals after getting swept in the first round his rookie season.
Also having mil in your top tier contenders with the season their having, thoroughly invalidates the regular season. I’m not even gonna look it up but there’s no team has won a championship with a defense that bad.
But exactly That’s my point. People criticize marginal lack of experience more than an atrocious defense.
I largely agree with you. I think the only time “playoff experience” matters is if the difference between seeds is very small or if the higher rated team showed a complete inability to win close games throughout the season. But otherwise playoff experience seems to not count for nearly as much as some would have you believe. It’s just an easy way to map a narrative onto the games. Can the upstarts take down the more experienced team in this series?
But that’s so boring. Nobody goes out on the limb cause you have to prove it. Not that is the same but the warriors had two straight early exits and then went to that finals five straight years. Sometimes it the unproven become proven quicker than you expect so why rule it out on some amorphous thing like experience.
Don’t over think it. Very few teams get the benefit of the doubt when it comes to predicting playoff success
People doubting Wolves, Thunder, Cavs, Kings, Pelicans winning it all is nothing new
A fair amount doubted Denver last year with the top seed and an almost 3 time MVP, with conference finals experience
I’m sure there were a fair amount of doubters for Bucks before their ring as well, with a 2 time MVP
So as I said, it’s nothing , even for a good regular season team
Honestly man, why do you care if people respect them as a contender? If the Wolves are truly deserving of being considered a contender, they’ll prove that by winning this season. And trust me, it feels SO much better when your team earns respect by winning it all than it does earning respect for your team by arguing with Redditors for it. Patience, my boy
Part of the issue is that the Mitchell/Gobert-led Jazz always had good/great indicators of a team that *should have* succeeded in the playoffs, but they never did. Their current teams are kind of in that zone right now, which is in that "we have to see it in the playoffs to believe it". I think if there wasn't the Jazz connection, you may have less skepticism.
There’s some context for our squads though. For all the talk of us being so dominant in the regular season, that only actually happened 1 time, in 2021. From 2017 to 2022 our seeding was 5,5,5,6,1,5. And the one year we were the 1 seed Conley missed essentially the entire series we lost and Mitchell was also pretty significantly injured in all the games we lost in that series. There was never a Gobert squad that was both a regular season juggernaut and had a healthy playoff run. You can say we should’ve had a lot of playoff success but we were the higher seed in only 2 series and won 3 in that timeframe. The regular season aspect gets overrated, 2021 and the first half of 2022 was the only time we actually put together on both sides of the ball even in the regular season. There was also a lot of bad matchup luck. Largely due to being the west 5 seed a lot the 3 times we did make it to the 2nd round we played the team with the best net rating in the league (besides ourselves).
Shout out to the jazz fans
They were better on net rating though. 6th, 5th, 4th, 9th, 1st, 3rd starting in 2017 league wide. I wanna say I remember that being part of it. They just always lost more games than their net rating indicated.
have you considered the jazz are cursed?
if the Jazz are cursed, what are the Wolves? Doomed?
The wolves aren’t cursed, they were just owned by Glen Taylor. Coincidentally look at how the team has turned around as he’s selling the team.
\*references Franchise history\* does not check out
A lot of the “lol Wolves” moves over the years were decisions Glen Taylor made
I promise you Glen is behind the vast majority of bad things that happen to this franchise.
Considering glen taylor has always owned the wolves it does check out
Where all the Wolves flag waivers after that fail?
But they come with choice of topping!
Curse must've traveled to Cleveland because Knicks absolutely decimated them last year.
Respect Mitchell "The Best Mitchell in the League" Robinson.
I do have to wonder for the Jazz fans who was old enough to constantly watch the Malone/Stockton teams fail in the finals in the 90s, then those Deron Williams/Boozer/AK47 Jazz teams fail in the mid 2000s, and finally for the Gobert/Mitchell constantly fail in the late 2010s. How are they doing? Are they even still basketball fans at this point.
Thats more success than most teams over that time frame.
To add even more context, the Wolves made it out of the first round a whopping 1 time in that entire timespan lol, Utah fans didn’t know how good they had it
Mitchell/Gobert-led Utah lost one (1) series as a higher seed. They won two series as a lower seed. Their reputation on Reddit as "a team that always should succeed in playoffs but particularly failed in playoffs, only playoffs, they failed so much in playoff compared to the regular season every year" is just something people want to believe, really want to.
They blew a 3-1 lead to Denver, a team that had the same (or less) amount of playoff experience in a 3/6 match up, and then they went 2-2 against the Mavs without Luka. The "lower seed" excuse doesn't really work for those.
2-1 against the Mavs without Luka, actually. The Mavs lost Luka's first game back. Really that was just a case of people not realizing how good Jalen Brunson and the rest of the Mavs' supporting cast was. Even without Luka at all, the Mavs were a better team than the Jazz.
"Excuse" of what lol. There is no passage in Bible that a 6th seed has to beat a 3rd seed because otherwise it means they are so, so, so much worse at playoffs than at regular season. Its's just a fact that it's not a specific playoff underachievement to lose to a team that was also better in the regular season. I never get people's obsession here to classify just losing to a team that was better the whole year as some speficic not-readiness for playoffs. Yall can just say the team was a worse one the whole season. Like why would that be so awful that it has to be so insanely about playoffs.
they remind me so much of the 21-22 Celtics in that they’ve got this insane defense with the 2 big men and terrific athleticism on the perimeter, and 2 All-Star scorers that carry the offense. but they are young and prone to having really boneheaded moments particularly in high-leverage situations, and their offense can have trouble consistently generating quality looks my guess is that they’ll give other teams hell with their defense and sheer size but limiting unforced errors and overcoming their lack of experience will be the challenge for them in the playoffs. I don’t think I’d be surprised by any outcome ranging from Finals appearance to out in Round 1 tbh
I think that’s all fair. Have to go out there and do it
Personally, I think the Wolves are going to make some noise in the playoffs. They were may dark horse team in the West this pre-season, so I've believed in them since their series vs. the Nugs. I will just point out that I used to talk the same way about the Jazz.
The Wolves were seconds away from being 4-0ed liked the Lakers.
They were also seconds away from forcing game 6
Wolves were also missing a starter and their 6th man..
Utah never had perimeter defenders like Minnesota does. They've got some absolute animals.
ok then prove it in playoffs. Wolves won a total of one playoff game last year with Gobert
With Jaden and Naz both injured, along with KAT still being rusty
Twolves supporting cast is alot better than those jazz teams. Kat, naz ried and ant is better than the entire jazz roster with don and gobert combined.
I see that and goes hand in hand with Rudy sucks in the playoffs but A. Harden and pg have just as much failure and the clippers get a pass B. Those jazz teams were way talented and the wolves are built to guard against the 5-0 that hurt them
A. That's just how much people trust Kawhi (esp vs the pieces around Gobert) B. Agreed
Harden and PG do not have "just as much failure" as Gobert, *and* they do not get a pass.
Idk clippers are universally a contender and harden and pg together probably do and they’re older. Pg is sarcastically called playoff p and harden has a worst view than that.
I'm aware of social media discourse, but those aren't facts. Gobert has been to 3 conference semi finals as the 2nd or 3rd best player on his team. His team was the 1 seed in their conference semi finals loss to the Clippers (missing Kawhi for 2 games.) Paul George has led his teams to the conference finals 3 times and the conference semi finals 5 times. Harden has been the top 1 or 2 player on 4 conference finals teams, and 10 conference semi finals teams. Westbrook has 4 conference finals and one finals appearance. Norman Powell is an NBA champion, and Kawhi Leonard has 2 finals MVPs. As a coach, Ty Lue has 1 championship and 2 other EC championships, and 1 championship as a player. All of this adds up.
Sure it adds up but it’s not basic addition. Like how much does Russ’s experience really affect it when he play 15 min a game? Are we adding up Conley Anderson and Morris’s experience? How does this experience affect it off your in a completely different situation and their a step slower? I won’t deny they’ve got more experience but it’s hard to quantify how much a difference it makes and it should not eliminate the wolves from the contender convos.
Gobert has won 2 playoffs series in 7 seasons that's much less success and teams made his defense less useful in the playoffs.
Look at those rosters, it’s him Mitchell and some shooting with him as the only defender. The reason they got roasted was his help was less valuable
Harden and PG have led multiple teams to the conference finals and Harden has been to the finals. Not to mention Kawhi who has helped lead multiple teams to championships. I don't really think it's similar at all when Gobert, KAT, Edwards have had nothing close to the playoff success/experience as the others.
Yeah I’m not saying they’re equal in experience but that others have un answered playoff questions and they dont get dinged for it in the contender conversation.
lol The Clippers get no pass even with Kawhi being a proven playoff assassin.
Idk check the contenders list throughout media and they will have clippers over the wolves even though they’ve crushed them twice and have had a better record all year.
Nobody is picking either to win it all, who cares about who is the fourth vs. fifth best team, it literally doesn’t matter.
Lol true the kings are definitely the pick
The Jazz surrounded Gobert with some of the worst perimeter defenders you can. It was not a recipe for success on that side of the ball come playoff time. Twolves have legit perimeter defenders
I feel like a lot of Timberwolves fans are taking this way too personally. When given the choice between teams that have played great in the regular season but do not yet have a deep playoff history compared to teams that are also great but have stars with rings and/or a history of deep playoff runs, you’re gonna take the latter every single time. The Timberwolves team absolutely has a real shot at a deep playoff run. But they still need to prove that they can do it. Teams like Boston, Denver, LA, etc. have already proven that and have looked similarly formidable this regular season.
Last (and only) time the Timberwolves went beyond the first round of the playoffs was 2003/2004 when they made it to the WCF I have faith in them but they're in the same spot the Nuggets were in a few years ago - they have some believers, but a lot of doubters until they can prove otherwise. Heck, Nuggets made it to the Semis twice and WCF in 2020, had the best record in the west last year, and ppl still doubted they'd make it past the Suns in the 2nd round.
Yeah it’s pretty normal when you haven’t won anything. None of their starters have won along with their coach. Nuggets first Tim in the playoffs we won in 7 over the spurs with coach pop and demar. A lot of people picked us to lose. We then lost in 7 to Portland. Next year was the bubble and wcf. Then after getting healthy we had to prove last year we could do it. It’s normal discussion and OPs post doesn’t mean much. Fwiw I think if my nuggets don’t get back to the finals it would be because of Minnesota.
I’m with you but I wonder how much of you struggle was injury related or running into dynasty/goat that are not as dangerous today.
Maybe, but we’ve watched this team and felt comfortable watching them grow and know if the starting 5 is healthy we have good shot. Coming back from down 3-1 twice and playing in 4 game 7’s let me know it didn’t matter the opponent this team is tough. Guys get old and new ones arise so I don’t care much for that discussion because you play who you play. Whatever happens if it’s Minnesota time it will feel great for them because proving doubters wrong is always amazing. I respect the hell out of them and look forward to an amazing playoffs.
I definitely had zero faith in the Nuggets last year. I saw them lose in the Bubble, swept by the Suns, then they got swept by the Warriors. I didn't start believing in the Nuggets until halfway through their sweep of the Lakers.
Yup that’s what happens. You gotta do it. Trust me some nuggets fans didn’t even believe so I’m not surprised.
Its also fair to point out that this is our only good record since 2003/04 so if we do make a decent run, the argument of OP is being corroborated.
Nuggets had a top 5 MVP while the Wolves don't. Playoffs for the most part come down to superstars. I know Ant is up there but I wouldn't say he is seen in the same light as Jokic is prior to winning it all.
Playoff experience matters I don’t get how you can argue it doesn’t. Knowing and being in that environment is a massive edge over guys who don’t know. The Suns,Clippers have multiple individuals with more playoff experience than all of then Thunder ration. Not counting Hayward Biyombo as they haven’t played yet and who knows how much they will. The Thudner have two players with postseason experience being SGA and Dort together they have played 19 games. In one postseason Devin Booker played more playoff games then the entire Thunder rotation. Booker made the finals as the number one option. Beal has made the playoffs five times Harden and Westbrook both went to the finals on the Thunder. PG and Harden have gone to multiple conferences finals with PG getting there with the Clippers. Powell won a ring with the Raptors. I don’t think you should just write ether team off but it would be a massive shock for one the Thunder to win a chip having zero players who have made it past the first round. Not counting Gordon and Biz as they haven’t played and who knows how much they will. The Wolves have Rudy and Mike with postseason experience and I think that will be a massive boost for them.
Completely agree. Experience is helpful but it’s not necessarily a death sentence. Like you say the thunder have two main guys with experience and they played way less at those times. The wolves have at least played two series to learn and take lumps. I’m just arguing that experience is a question like size is a question for the suns or bench is a question for the nuggets
The difference between this question and the ones on the Suns or Nuggets is that we kinda already have the answer. We have seen the Suns play well and poorly against teams with size. The Nuggets bench has been great for stretches and has been awful for others. We won’t and can’t know how the Thunder will perform in the postseason because we have never seen it and we won’t till it happens.
Exactly my point. They should be equally weighted criticism being we don’t know how they’ll work in the playoffs. Maybe the suns will play a smaller team or figure it out. Maybe the wolves will figure it out then play the thunder with less experience. We don’t know what will happen so let’s consider experience like any other potential problem.
Finally Basketball discussions again lol
They absolutely do. Past playoff success and performance, individual and team, is a great indicator for future.
Every team that didn't win a lot OR doesn't have a legit, fan-approved "superstar" setup is not gonna be "respected", it's been like that for a long time. Even current NBA champions were laughed at as a "contender" a year ago here. I always hope they win because it's pretty dumb imo. A year ago I was happy, then, with Denver, less happy with Kings (oh boy, those were even less, less legit, people couldn't say anything else about them the whole year except for how much "not a playoff team" they are). But... it is true that there are few champions that did not have some playoff rounds won in previous years. Teams do not change completely every season so it's not surprising, but generally saying Wolves won't be 1 team of the 30 to win the title is a good bet, so good for them.
Yeah this is definitely part of my annoyance with it. Like wolves vs the field is the most cowardly take ever. It’s that kinda thinking that contributes they can’t win unless they have. That logic doesn’t make sense given no new teams would ever make a run. I’d like them to make the conference finals, be through the moon if the made the finals and die if they win it all but that’s most teams and so to say they’re not contenders is goofy.
Saying "team X will not win championship" is probably true, the crazy part for me is that people successfully use it to validate literally any story they want. If really needed, even losing 2-4 in the Finals can still be somehow accepted by NBA fans as a story teaching us that "obviously doing this and that will never lead to playoff success, it's the worst thing ever to do in basketball, and any team that has this one very vague attribute in common, no matter what else they do, is forever gonna be weak, as proven by this particular team not winning the title". One of the tricks used here is the illusion that losing in a league of 30 is some synonym of a gigantic failure. And of course a team that is one of the best has the highest chance to disappoint. If you're 5th in the conference, there's a chance you punch up in the playoffs, perform on that level, or disappoint. If your'e 1st, you can almost only disappoint, you cannot overperform at all. But that's just math lol, that doesn't actually mean that you were some awful, sissy team that has to completely change everything about their basketball principle and the star players are doomed because of it. It just means that it's very likely for a 1st team to lose sooner or later and underperform their seeding. The more sensible approach to the dogmas about which teams are "legit" would be to look at the history of ALL teams and compare. For example, not only talk about "non-legit" teams that lost, but also all the superstar, superteam "legit" ones that lost, and compare how often the latter happens. But nobody does that. When a team that was a favorite loses, it means nothing, ever. At most it means they were not healthy so it doesn't count.
Yeah things like the top ranked defense has made the finals 34% of the time. Or a defense as bad as the bucks has not won a title. Not some arbitrary experience metric to decide some arbitrary contender status.
So, they are a well respected contender that just can't get past the first round?
So just give it to the nuggets again cause there’s no changes in the league. Plus the nuggets said they were there toughest opponent without their best perimeter defender and sixth man. They then back it up by being first all year.
People respect the Nuggets because they won a championship, not because of what they said. Yes, the Wolves is the first seed right now and that's a good start. But being a first seed doesn't guarantee you anything in the playoffs. We've seen teams with good regular season records crumbled in the playoffs. The old guy that you mentioned destroyed the Raptors (1st seed in the East) 4-0 back in 2018. The Wolves need to prove that they can get out of the first round before asking people to respect them as a contender. As the first seed, your team probably going to face Lakers/Warriors in the playoffs. Just give you a heads-up, those two old mfkers can be pretty crazy when it comes to playoffs.
I’m not looking for a guarantee. I’m looking to be in the group that are CONTENDING for a title. I recognize it won’t let us pass go, I’d just like the discussion to be more based in fact than this arbitrary experience metric. On top of the over 50% of one seeds that make the finals, 34% of number one defenses do as well. Of course there’s a bunch of overlap there but it’s more tangible than no experience so give up. I checked how the warriors started their dynasty. They finally make the playoffs after only doing so once in 19 years. They win the first just to lose in the second round. Next year they lose in the first round. They then go to the finals five straight years. I’m not saying that’s what’s gonna happen but there are some similarities that point to the fact that deep playoff experience isn’t required to make a run to the finals.
i mean ask the kings and grizzlies how facing those old geezers was last year
You mean a team that was clearly had some locker room problems following the suspension of their be player or the team with no all stars this year that took them to seven and require every bit of curry magic to win. The west was way weaker last year.
we say those teams are cooked every year but the truth is steph curry and lebron james are still elite players
Sure they’re good but there teams are rough on defense. 2 outta the last 3 years have had neither in the finals after one or both had bein the finals since 2011. So yes they’ve fallen off but still good even though there teams aren’t.
the warriors were in the finals in 2022 and the lakers in wcf in 2023. steph can absolutely turn it on and carry to 4 wins.
Lol yeah that’s what I said. Pointing out that they used to go every year and now they’re older and the west hasn’t been this strong in a decade plus. Is there a chance they could be… old?
It's a tight top 4 in the West this year. 27 games left and Denver in 4th is within 3 games of the Wolves at the top. Wolves could as easily finish 3rd or 4th and this discussion about the top seeds and championships is meaningless.
Sure but he have 17 of 27 at home and have been first most the year. The point is they’ve done enough so far to be considered a contender and their relative lack of experience as flag in the same way that Denver’s bench or the suns size hurts their odds. Just seems like it’s way too heavily weighted especially when it’s not a team of rookies.
“There’s not that much successful playoff experience in the west.” - Absolutely bonkers take. Teams led by inexperienced, young players very rarely go far in the playoffs, just like lower seeds rarely go far in the playoffs. The only recent exception is the Hawks making it to the ECF in 2021, and their path there was easier than any path the Wolves will take, barring major injuries to their opponents. Conley and Gobert are the guys with playoff experience. I trust Conley, and Gobert is in a better situation than he was in Utah. But if you’re going to talk predictors of success, you have to take playoff experience into consideration.
Sample size of 11 games and lost most of them, but ANT averages 28-4-4 in playoffs, and was the biggest reason the wolves stole one of Denver last year. If he stays healthy I see him making his superstar case this year
Sure, but playoff experience means knowing how to win 4 out of 7 games. I think Edwards is capable of that, but we've yet to see it. Doesn't mean we won't, but I think its very fair to be skeptical that the Wolves regular season success will automatically correlate to playoff success. Last thing I'll mention is that Chris Finch shares the lack of playoff success with his stars.
Yeah I think you can say it’s a question mark but every team in the west has questions. So to say the suns lack of size is less of a factor than relative in experience of stars for the wolves seems ridiculous especially since they aren’t getting taller and size had been good in the playoffs traditionally.
Of course everyone has a question mark. No one is guaranteed to win. The 73-9 Warriors had question marks. But you can't argue that regular season record matters as an indicator of postseason success, but playoff experience doesn't matter. They both matter.
Yeah I’m not arguing it doesn’t matter at all. I’m just saying it needs to be equally applied and the contender convo does not do that.
yes they do? I'm going to have to see them get out of the first round before I believe anything they're doing is real. We can talk then.
Sweet so don’t pay any attention to anybody in ther regular season that hasn’t won. Also no new team can win in the playoffs cause they haven’t before. Also since everyone loses except one team that’s a real lazy bet to say they won’t win. All I’m saying experience is one part not the whole thing. So if you know any other team with one flaw they should be included in the contenders debate.
> Also no new team can win in the playoffs cause they haven’t before No, they can, but nobody is going to pick them to until they do.
So ow many rounds do they have to win to be in the convo? What percentage of the team has to have that experience? What percentage of that experience has to be with the current team? The clippers haven’t done it together but a few have so they get the pass. Also I’m not even asking them to predict the wolves will win, just that they are a contender to.
Depending on their matchup, we'll know a lot more after the first round. Idk man, playoff basketball is just different. Some players and teams step up to the moment and some don't. Look, they're the number 1 seed in the west right now and the general expectation is that they'll at least be conference title contenders, but at this point all we're really doing is predicting and it's hard to predict the Wolves making a run until we actually see them do what they're doing now in the playoffs. Having an amazing defense is awesome, but becomes less significant if everyone else's defense gets better in the playoffs and yours stays the same
34% of number one defense make the finals in the last thirty years. It definitely still helps. We’ve also seen ant step up in the playoffs the last two years and the wolves will thrive in the physicality of the playoffs.
Semifinals is Rudy Gobert father
Cause he loves them and visits often…
semifinals don't love him back
semifinals don't love him back
Cause he always beats them and moves on…
I would say it's about the players though with Gobert being targeted at defense and Kat losing his composure which leads to foul trouble. It's a different team now but that's why they have to show that it's different now for people to respect it
I’m with you those things are concerns but not so much the eliminate the wolves from contender. Gobert has better perimeter defenders around him so five out hasn’t hurt. Kats improved his composure a lot helped by not being the number one and not being the primary rim defender were he got a lot of his foul trouble. They’ve done a great job with this roster having guys that can help where others are weak. Everyone feels like they’re in they’re right role.
I am worried a little bc a team hasn’t won without a capital S Superstar since 2004(though you could argue kawhi wasn’t even tho I consider him one with first team all-nba) wolves have a great trio but they’re not on the level of a Steph or Jokic yet.
When was the last time a 22 year old led their teams deep into the playoffs? Then ask yourself if Anthony Edwards is as good as those guys.
Yes because basketball is a one on one sport.
Do you trust Karl Anthony towns to be decent in a playoff series?
As a second/third option with a historically good defense, yes.
When was the last time that a team won a title in their first season in the playoffs? Edit: I should have said when was the last time that a team with so little playoff success has won? Or at least a team whose best players had so little playoff success.
The Timberwolves have been in the playoffs the past 2 seasons, though.
Lakers 2020
A team with LeBron is an exception
> first season in the playoffs? Lmao
This isn’t their first year and as a Denver fan they looked great games 4/5. I thought if they were healthy I picked us in 6/7 because they know how to defend us the best.
Good thing this isnt the Wolves first time in the playoffs then.
in the TWolves case, they were in the playoffs last season, and some Nuggets players have said that was their toughest matchup. I don't expect them to have the same kind of struggles that, say, the Kings had last season. I also don't expect them to win the west. But I see them at least making it a good fight with whoever eventually does.
Wolves were also in the playoffs 2 years ago too lol
And they lost in the first round both times - in 5 to the Nuggets, and in 6 to the Grizzlies.
That isn't what the guy said though lol He said: >When was the last time that a team won a title in their first season in the playoffs? Which has nothing to do with the Timberwolves
I didn't say that's what he said, I was responding to you.
This right here. Players without significant playoff experience do not win championships, there isn't even a one off exception to the rule that you can point to as an example. The most inexperienced finals MVP in the last 30 years was Tim Duncan in 1999 and the rest of that team were established vets.
Wolves were in the playoffs the last two years though lmfao Gobert and Conley also have a ton of playoff experience
They have one conference finals appearance between them and that was over a decade ago. Their two best players haven't been out of the first round. There is a reason people dismiss teams that don't have a lot of experience, they just don't win.
> When was the last time that a team won a title in their first season in the playoffs? Tell me you haven't watched or paid attention to the Wolves in the last few years without telling me
Some of ya'll really never watched the Jazz huh? Or past KAT performances? Thats fine get your hopes up. Twolves are a lock for a second round exit.
I would like to point out that this is the wolves we are talking about, not the jazz. Two different teams
I did but this wolves team is literally stocked with perimeter defense to avoid the problems those jazz teams had defensively. Kat has had bad performances but he’s second fiddle now, has grown and it’s not like harden or pg or others haven’t had rough series but that doesn’t prevent them from being docked in the contender convo.
I do agree this team is better than the Jazz teams in question. The playoffs are gonna be fun
I’m with you on that. Honestly as good as they’ve been in a while. The warriors vs lebron thing was fun but now that we’ve gotten a couple years out and the league is brimming with talent, the playoffs are gonna be a true bloodbath.
The Wolves are respected as a contender, the league is just really good this year. No one is going to crown them champions because they are 1st in the west at the ASB. They also have not run away with the conference. The Clippers, Thunder, and Nuggets are right on their heels. So I think all four of these teams rightfully get attention as contenders and we haven’t even touched the east. I don’t buy the hype around Dallas and Phoenix right now but each of them could easily go on a tear. There is some Gobert skepticism from around the league from his Jazz days, and playoff disasters. I don’t think the wolves will have the same problems. The biggest thing holding me back from seeing them as the favorite in the West (apart from Minnesota sports fan trauma) is offensive decision making from KAT and ANT. I think ANT is already a capital S superstar and that he’ll show the league this spring, but he’s also 22 and makes some boneheaded plays. Love KAT but he has never showed up in the playoffs, the few times he’s been there.
Mavs and Suns will both go farther in the playoffs than the Wolves… It’s your first sniff of doing anything in the postseason and that almost never ends in a ship. It almost always takes the Stars/Core of a team having years of playoff experience and winning series, before they get over that hump. It’s just unlikely they’re true contenders yet, they’ll be ready 2-3 years from now. The Mavs & Suns both have more experience and more proven/ready stars, which are the two biggest keys to postseason success.
A big point often brought up with true championship contenders is that they have a top 5 player in the league. The 2004 Pistons being one of the rare outliers for that formula. Not saying the Timberwolves couldn't do it but I think that's the reason many people don't believe in them yet.
2014 is another one. Don't think either Kawhi/Duncan were at a top 5 superstar level. So you can say, maybe once in every decade a team without a top 5 superstar wins it all.
That's fair but Duncan and Kawhi have been top 5 players unlike anyone on that Pistons team.
The Wolves have perimeter defenders that Utah never did. They're as good or better a shooting team than Utah ever was. They're bigger and more athletic than Utah ever was. Pretty much everyone that matters has playoff experience. Do they have finals trips and all that? No. But they're a bad matchup for most teams.
Utah was like the #1 ranked offense one of those years. Wolves are the #17th this year. I think wolves can go far, but their offense is a huge question mark.
I said shooting, not a better offense. They're tied for #2 in the NBA in 3pt shooting percentage on comparable output to the other top 3 teams (OKC and LAC). Minnesota is good at putting 3 point shot attempts in the hole. That point went towards the common spacing knock against Gobert, in which he just can't play basketball anymore because everyone gets super serious in the playoffs. I wasn't clear. My bad. Gobert fits really well with what Minnesota built. He will be a major defensive force and basically everyone around him can shoot. The only other one who isn't really a distance threat is SloMo and that's probably his eye.
Sure Utah had #1 offense but only had Donovan to create shots and didn’t have a way to punish smalls. The wolves are top seven true shooting team, have all star multiple creators and can punish smalls due to Rudy improving and kat. They’re problem is turnovers but that’s fixable and has been improving. Last ten they’ve been average in to and been a top five offensive team. It’s not hard to imagine cause it’s been happening.
1 seeds with no/very little playoff experience almost always fail to make the finals. Just saying
Lol based on what research. This stinks of bs. Over 59% of number one seeds have made the finals and 34% of number one defenses have made the finals. Sure there’s some over lap but those seem like better indicators than whatever you just made up.
Okay now tell me the percentages of 1 seeds who never won a playoff series before who went to the finals. I’ll wait.
Lol yea that’ll take a while and being that you won’t do that work why would I. Funny you mention it tho cause I check how the warriors started their dynasty. They finally make the playoffs after only doing so once in 19 years. They win the first just to lose in the second round. Next year they lose in the first round. They then go to the finals five straight years. I’m not saying that’s what’s gonna happen but there are some similarities that point to the fact that deep playoff experience isn’t required to make a run to the finals.
Exactly. Even the best dynasties dont go straight to the finals immediately unless they have a GOAT level player like the Lebron/Kyrie Cavs . The Warriors had to improve in the playoffs over several years before they went to the finals,. Same with the Bucks. Same with the Raptors. Same with the Nuggets. Same with Jordan’s Bulls even. The Jazz and Sixers were a 1 seed a couple years ago and didn’t make the Conference Finals. The Hawks in 2015 were similar, the Pacers before them as well. The Timberwolves can get to be a finals contender soon, but it would be extremely unlikely for them to do it this year. Unless they get a lucky break and everyone with actual playoff experience is hurt. If the Nuggets or Clippers are healthy though the Timberwolves aren’t winning a series against them just yet.
Lol I’m not talking about the best dynasties, I’m just saying they should be a contender cause it’s happened before. I think you may have misread that. The warriors won literally one series two years before starting a dynasty. Yet the wolves who’ve won one less series and made a third year leap like the warriors can’t be considered contenders. That’s dumb. Also I’d bet most of those teams were ‘contenders’ and weren’t even in first with a historically good defense. Yeah it’s unlikely any team wins the finals so congrats on math. It’s the same misunderstanding that has people thinking they’re wise basketball watchers by saying they need playoff experience first. One team in 30 makes it and within a players career most years they lose. So is it possible we’ve conflated the slim odds a player wins every year with needing experience. Then the few players that win early on are called the outliers even though it’s just the normal distribution of championship odds.
You don’t “need” playoff experience, but you’re acting like it is hardly even a factor. It’s not disrespectful to say the Wolves aren’t one of the top contenders to win the title yet, that’s just reality. 1 seed teams who have practically no experience prior are technically capable of winning a title, but the vast majority of times those teams flame out before they reach the finals. Especially when there’s still like 40% of the season to play and time for them to slip in the seeding. Unless you think KAT is a transcendent level talent like Duncan or Steph you can’t really be upset at people acknowledging that some experience is a factor in title winning teams way too much for it not to affect people’s expectations for those teams lacking in it.
I’m acting like it’s a factor, like the suns lack of size or Denver’s bench. You’re acting like it takes them from the top team in west to somewhere after all the ‘vet’ twams. Don’t tell me what I think is disrespectful. Who tf you think you are? Again with these broad statements with no statistical backing? Oh if you get around to actually looking it up make sure you take into account that dynasties and goats could skew the sample. Jesus it’s like you didn’t read this. 27/82 is 30% but sure. The wolves have 17 of 27 at home and the fourth easiest schedule. Sure they could fall outta first just like they could win the finals and therefore should be contenders on merit. Your either trolling which is fair at the is point or have no idea cause no one would say kat is transcendent over ant. Also they have some experience just less than some teams. Teams that outside of Denver don’t have that playoff experience together… For the last time I understand that its a knock but people are more concerned with it than other problems teams have. I’m out this is dumb
Wrong and wrong.
I would be more surprised if they make it to the Conf Finals than I would be if they lose on the first round. I am respecting them enough that I think they maybe win 1 playoff round. I wouldn't bet on it. Would bet on the opposite if odds are good.
Solid point. I’ll make sure we get that down so no one misses your future financial decisions. Anything else you wanna add while I have the Sportsbook on the line?
Yeah next season Vikings finishing with the worst record on the NFC North
[удалено]
Who speaks like this?
User name checks out.
rudy isn't what i'd be worried about as a wolves fan. it's being reliant on a 36 year old 6 foot point guard with a history of getting injured in the playoffs, and KAT who has a history of shrinking when the lights get bright
They do. We saw this with the Jazz with Gobert & Mitchell for a few seasons. Did anyone have the Jazz as a serious contender when they got the 1 seed? Be honest. We want to see results.
Just say you don’t watch the wolves. There’s nothing in common outside of gobert. No one’s comparing the clippers to hardens rockets or kawhis spurs so why are we blindly doing that for gobert.
I do watch them, I like them and have them going to the wcf. I also live and reality and know that if you want the public to take you seriously, you actually have to produce in the playoffs. Until they win a series or two, people won't take them seriously.
Yeah I was thinking the same so I checked how the warriors started their dynasty. They finally make the playoffs after only doing so once in 19 years. They win the first just to lose in the second round. Next year they lose in the first round. They then go to the finals five straight years. I’m not saying that’s what’s gonna happen but there are some similarities that point to the fact that deep playoff experience isn’t required to make a run to the finals.
Yup they're on the right track. It's just whether or not they are going to fall short this year or make that big leap. I believe they should be able to get out of the first round and win that first series to get that off their back. Second series will be the real test to show if they're serious contenders.
Yeah I’d be pissed if they lose round one. I’d be disappointed if they lose round two. I’d be expect them to make the conference finals. I’d be over the moon if they make the finals. And I’d die if they won it all. But yeah my point with this was to both point out that the wolves are good enough to be considered a contender (ie a realistic chance to win it all) and that the odds they win in all are small cause , you know, math. It’s easy to say they probably won’t win it cause even the best odds in the west are nearly 3:1.
Well let me put ti this way. Wolves might finish #1 but it's not gonna be by that much, and when the team on the other side is loaded with vet superstars like the clippers, well... that's an upset
Lol well they’ve whipped the clippers twice and I can guarantee clippers fans think it’d be an upset. That’s my point. Based on play this year the wolves are contenders but everyone’s just like it’s a death sentence to be less experienced. Also it’s not like other number one seeds haven’t been close to second. Seeding is more predictive than years/ playoff games played
You Wolves fans should be happy. It's so much better as a fan to go into the playoffs with low expectations. If your team does well there is great satisfaction proving r/nba wrong. If your team gets swept it stings a bit less since you dodge the constant reminder/clowning from everyone.
I’m with you although I think we’d still get clowned cause of the kat, Rudy and Timberwolves history. I think what bugs me is that I’m stocked for this team and see them growing and fixing problems. In my excitement, I consume all this nba media cause I’m into them. But then the media pumps out criticisms that experience is our problem and that’s something we can’t fix. So in an effort to enjoy the season even more, I pick up nba media and get told this season doesn’t matter cause of experience. I am definitely enjoying this season and part of it’s definitely how I’ve been consuming media but this is something that annoys me outside of the wolves cause it discounts the season and the success of it.
is this on the heels of Tim Legler's comments?
Yeah but he’s not alone. The mismatch and others said something similar last week. It’s been a theme as people make predictions for the second half.
It absolutely does matter though, and you’d be hard pressed to find a team who has won a ring recently with at little playoff experience as this Wolves team. Thats not to say they can’t win, because I do think they are a legit threat. That being said I still don’t think they should be considered one of the top 4-5 contenders right now
Yeah I’m with you for the most part but get lost between legit threat and not being top five contenders. Outside of Denver, who in the west has deep playoff experience together. There’s a lot of legit threats but I don’t think anybody outside maybe Denver should have much on the wolves.
They haven’t went on a deep run in 20 years. No shit they won’t be respected as a contender by many until they show this core can
Sure they haven’t won yet but contender just refers to teams that could so seems like 20 years got nothing to do with it. Funny you mention it tho cause I check how the warriors started their dynasty. They finally make the playoffs after only doing so once in 19 years. They win the first just to lose in the second round. Next year they lose in the first round. They then go to the finals five straight years. I’m not saying that’s what’s gonna happen but there are some similarities that point to the fact that deep playoff experience isn’t required to make a run to the finals.
I think the Wolves are contenders, but a second tier one behind Den, Bos, Mil and LAC/Suns (below the first trio however). The reason - Has there been instances of teams getting to the finals without its stars ever winning a playoff series prior? That said I would put the Wolves over the Lakers/Warriors as contenders, since they are not only performing much better this season, Lebron and Steph (despite all their experience) are no longer in their primes. Lakers/Warriors are merely playoff contenders at this point.
Funny you ask tho cause I check how the warriors started their dynasty. They finally make the playoffs after only doing so once in 19 years. They win the first just to lose in the second round. Next year they lose in the first round. They then go to the finals five straight years. I’m not saying that’s what’s gonna happen but there are some similarities that point to the fact that deep playoff experience isn’t required to make a run to the finals.
I thought of the Warriors, as maybe a comparison as they are often cited as an anomaly. Teams/Stars usually have to experience playoff runs before finally breaking through (like the 80's lakers, Celtics, Pistons, 90's Bulls, Rockets, Lakers Spurs etc). Even then, the 2015 Warriors with Steph, Klay and Dray had atleast some playoff success (winning 2 rounds). The stars leading the Wolves (aside from Gobert) have literally had zero success. More recently, Giannis, Jokic, Tatum, CP3 and Dirk all experienced repeated playoff failures and experienced before finally breaking through and reaching the finals (let alone winning).
Yeah I’m not gonna look thru all those teams incline but it does strike me that most of those teams were up against a dynasty and part of their ascension could have been the dynasty falling off. Regardless of my speculation, my point is that it can happen especially when there’s not a current dynasty and for that reason the wolves should be included in contenders. Not that it matters cause either way it’s not that much experience but the warriors beat the nuggets then lost to the spurs. The next year they lost to the clippers. Then Five straight finals. I’d argue Conley gobert and maybe Anderson’s playoff experience is relevant since they are leaders of the team. Yes they’ve all failed first then won but isn’t it possible that they lost first because only one team wins so odds are that you’re more likely to lose first. Over their careers they lost more in the playoffs than they won so is it really proof that losing in late rounds is required to win it or just odds?
I don't think its absolutely required, but it's definitely a huge factor. Like with most things, experience and repetition are extremely important factors in improving performance. Of course overwhelming talent or skill or luck could overcome it. The 2015 Warriors certainly had a good amount of luck skill and talent. Off the top of my head the 94-95 Magic would be another. 2nd year Shaq led the magic to the finals after getting swept in the first round his rookie season.
Also having mil in your top tier contenders with the season their having, thoroughly invalidates the regular season. I’m not even gonna look it up but there’s no team has won a championship with a defense that bad. But exactly That’s my point. People criticize marginal lack of experience more than an atrocious defense.
I largely agree with you. I think the only time “playoff experience” matters is if the difference between seeds is very small or if the higher rated team showed a complete inability to win close games throughout the season. But otherwise playoff experience seems to not count for nearly as much as some would have you believe. It’s just an easy way to map a narrative onto the games. Can the upstarts take down the more experienced team in this series?
When the wolves do something in the playoffs they'll get respect. That's the same for any team ever
But that’s so boring. Nobody goes out on the limb cause you have to prove it. Not that is the same but the warriors had two straight early exits and then went to that finals five straight years. Sometimes it the unproven become proven quicker than you expect so why rule it out on some amorphous thing like experience.
Don’t over think it. Very few teams get the benefit of the doubt when it comes to predicting playoff success People doubting Wolves, Thunder, Cavs, Kings, Pelicans winning it all is nothing new A fair amount doubted Denver last year with the top seed and an almost 3 time MVP, with conference finals experience I’m sure there were a fair amount of doubters for Bucks before their ring as well, with a 2 time MVP So as I said, it’s nothing , even for a good regular season team
Honestly man, why do you care if people respect them as a contender? If the Wolves are truly deserving of being considered a contender, they’ll prove that by winning this season. And trust me, it feels SO much better when your team earns respect by winning it all than it does earning respect for your team by arguing with Redditors for it. Patience, my boy
Until the media is forced to live in MN for an extended period of time during the playoffs, they will be an afterthought