First off, it's 52 degree in Minneapolis right now, I have two things to say about that:
1) Al Gore, you were right, but it is in no way inconvenient
2) It's only 10 weeks until March Madness/Final Five, the greatest sports weekend of the year, any chance the weather could just stay this way until then?
A bit odd to be thinking winter sports on a day when it's anything but winter outside, yet it's time to assess the winter sports teams. Or as I call them, the Olves and the Ild, the two Ws that lack Ws.
That joke may not be great material, but it doesn't change the reality of the situation faced during the long, (typically) cold Minnesota winters. February can be a hellish month to live in this state. In addition to the cold or snow, boredom weighs down like an anvil on your chest. Cabin fever sets in, it's dark all the time; once the temperature reaches a certain point, venturing outside is limited to getting the mail and the hated act of shoveling. During really bad winters, like the last one, people end up walking around with a half-glazed look on their face, hallucinating an oasis of green grass like a thirsty man in a desert.
Basically the need for distractions is at it's peak, just as the number of them dwindles to almost nothing. Only so many trips to the rink can be made and the skiing situation is limited at best, so basically everyone ascribes to the twin tenets that I do year-round: Drinking and sports. Problem is, the precious little entertainment offered by awful winter sports can make drinking a bit too prominent in the equation. So it's basically the improvement of the Wolves and Wild is more than a sports thing, it's a public health issue.
(But first, we need to get whoever comes up with the ridiculous definition of "binge drinking" as being five drinks to realize that they need to calibrate. Nobody is taking you seriously with this type of nonsense, it's going to fall on deaf ears. People hear the term "binge" and think "that sounds excessive, then they hear the definition and think "what a bunch of reactionary BS, that reminds me, I should have a beer".
Five drinks isn't a binge, it's a Friday. Five drinks is only a binge if you're under 18 years old and 5'8". I wouldn't call having five slices of pizza "binge eating", particularly if you were really hungry. The whole thing depends on the circumstances, and alcohol should be treated the same way. If you lost your job today, five drinks is probably just getting warmed.
This topic is front-of-mind today, because I just read this really dumb article in the paper. My first question is, if people are averaging nine drinks when they binge drink, then why not make that number the definition? Not only would it be more fair to every guy who ever had five beers over a couple hours of poker, it might make people take the whole concept seriously for once. We also need a more firm time limit, the whole "few hours" thing not only seems too generalized, but implies a leisurely pace that I do not associate with the term "binge". I'm putting it at 3 hours, if you're not putting down a drink every 20 minutes, that's not a binge, plain and simple.
Secondly, if binge drinking is most common among people who make $75k or more, where's the problem? One man's binge is another man's unwinding at the end of a long week. My advice to anyone making over $75k a year would be to keep doing what you're doing. Have we spent any time investigating the linkage here? I know that correlation doesn't prove causation, but perhaps people that know how to have a good time are just inherently more successful.
Finally, Wisconsin at 26% binge drinkers, once again you show us the way. The West Virginia number I don't buy for a minute, they're lying so you don't go snooping around by the still out back. And is it just me, or is there caption on that picture blatantly racist? Not to mention you spelled schnapps wrong, otherwise great work their guys.
So here's where we landed:
Binge drinking - 9+ drinks in under 3 hours
Happy hour - Binge drinking for people who work, but make under $75k for year
Cocktailing - Binge drinking for people who make over $75k per year
Wassailing - Binge drinking on a holiday
Bender - Binge drinking for 3+ days in a row, requires immediate hair-of-the-dog, any attempt to fight a hangover disqualifies
Now those are some definitions with a chance of getting some traction with the public, back to sports.)
The Wolves haven't been to the playoffs since 2004, which was also the only year they made it out of the first round in franchise history. The Wild are currently nursing a 3-year playoff drought of their own, and similarly have a single season of any real note in their history. Both teams came into this season with new coaches, and both, despite early signs of life from the Wild, seem likely to continue their current streaks of futility this season.
But things are looking up (no, seriously, they are), with an influx of young talent and prospects on both rosters. I'm happy to say that it appears I was dead wrong on both Kevin Love (who I didn't think they should've traded OJ Mayo for) and Ricky Rubio (who I didn't think would ever play here). Both are here now and look like franchise building blocks, although it is quite early to say that, on Rubio in particular.
The Wild have turned a bare cupboard into and nice stockpile of young talent, granted that much of it is still too young to be contributing at the NHL level. Despite my personal conspiracy theory that owner Craig Leipold forced the signing of uninspired winger Marty Havlat a few years ago, he generally seems like a fan at heart, wanting to see the team win and being willing to spend to do so.
Both teams have left the salary-cap hell of a few years ago, when they were not only terrible, but paying handsomely for the privilege. As difficult as it seems to be to lure free agents to Minnesota, there is at least now room to do so. It's highly doubtful we'll see a playoff appearance in Minneapolis or St. Paul this spring, but in the not-too-distant future, that should be the expectation. If next year isn't contention, then it should definitely be the year after, frankly it's been too long already.
Timberwolves
Where we are: Emerging from the 7th circle of franchise hell
2012 Ceiling: 25 wins, figuring out that the team has three legit NBA starters in Rubio, Love and Derrick Williams, being poised to add the piece that makes them a playoff contender in the offseason
(Of course the downside is that Love doesn't want to play here, signs a one-year tender and bolts as a free agent the following year, then all bets are off)
Long-term prognosis: Until they get a guard who seems suited to take (and make) big shots in key spots, all I can see is an entertaining team that's a fringe playoff contender. No doubt a huge upgrade from where they were, but it doesn't appear to be on the roster yet.
Wild
Where we are: Still one of the more boring and low-scoring franchises in the league. Showed some signs of life early in the year, but after a series of excellent breaks, things have regressed to the mean in a big way, the bleeding needs to be stopped pronto to have any chance of a playoff berth.
2012 Ceiling: 10th in the Western Conference, just where they appeared to be headed when the season began.
Long-term prognosis: Perhaps it's just that the hype of the World Juniors tourney hasn't yet faded away, but there seems to be a lot to be excited about here. Prospects like Mikael Granlund and Jason Zucker could be ready to contribute in a year or two, and the impressive collection of young players makes the idea of a big trade seem possible. Not to mention, some huge names could be hitting the free agent market this offseason, and unlike the NBA, a few might actually consider signing in Minnesota, particularly if they look to be headed in the right direction.
So in a nutshell on both teams, enthusiasm as always, and as always, it's tempered.
Time to get myself outside :)
Showing posts with label Wolves. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Wolves. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Thursday, September 22, 2011
Thrown to the Wolves
A friend of mine who's been the biggest supporter of this blog since day one told me the other day that he was looking forward to hearing my thoughts on the hiring of Rick Adelman as the new coach of the Minnesota Timberwolves. Since he's been the biggest fan and most frequent commenter on my writing, I figure that I should grant that request...even though he's not going to like what I have to say.
I try not to talk about the local "professional" basketball squad, expressly because of people like the aforementioned individual. Fans who remain loyal to the club because it's their hometown team, and keep hoping one day to see a payoff for all they've suffered through. Remember what your mothers taught you, if you can't say anything nice, then leave the room and post an angry screed of invective on the internet. Just don't go piling on to a bunch of people who already know exactly what it is their dealing with. When you tell a fan of a Minnesota team their squad sucks, you're not providing any new info, just being a dick.
Astonishingly, there are apparently still a large number of people who feel this way about the Wolves, including many friends of mine. These guys are the ultimate gluttons for punishment. Remember those Samsonite commericals where the suitcase were thrown down stairs, fell off baggage trucks, etc? Being a Wolves fan is kind of like that, only if someone took a dump in said suitcase, stuffed you inside, then threw it down those stairs. The moral of the story being, when you follow the Wolves, it's impossible not to get sh*t on.
The NBA is much more of an ala carte situation for me, like sports sushi. When something looks like a high-quality product good, I sample, but it's not a spot where you roll the dice on anything questionable. I spare the dedicated souls my critiques, because the last thing anyone wants to hear when they're trying to make the best of a bad situation is someone standing over their shoulder telling them how much everything sucks. It's like that prick you know know who lives in California and goes out of his way to alert you how nice the weather is everytime it snows a foot in your town. Sure you can rest easy with the knowledge that someday they'll reside in the 9th circle of hell with Judas Iscariot, but that's a comfort colder than the temps outside.
But since the question was asked, and it's timely, I'll just say they will probably continue to be mediocre-to-bad for the rest of my life.
Everyone agrees that they made the best possible hire. But there are so many things fundamentally flawed about this franchise that it probably won't matter. In 20 years of existence, there's been one brilliant decision (Kevin Garnett), many head-scratchers (Mike James, Troy Hudson) and one apocalyptically bad one (Joe Smith). Even the moves that looked okay on paper, like Ray Allen-for-Stephon Marbury, ended in catastrophe. One of my favorite saying is that even a broken clock is right twice a day, and that's one better than the Wolves have done on major decisions in the past 20 years.
Funny thing is, you can't kill them for their desparate reaches without first noting that they can't catch a damn break. Exhibit A is their NBA lottery history, as this year was the first time that the ping-pong balls ever allowed for a move up. Some of that can be overcome with savvy drafting, but that's like pitting me against Adrian Peterson in a footrace. Technically we both have the necessary equipment, two legs, but that is where all similarities cease. In this case I'm operating with a degree of difficulty called being me.
The 1992 debacle of Chirstian Laettner 3rd, behind Shaq and Alonzo Mourning has been done to death, but there are more worth noting. Glenn Robinson, Jason Kidd and Grant Hill go top 3, we get Donyell Marshall 4th. Chris Webber, Penny Hardaway and Jamal Mashburn, same deal, while we were left with the outrageously entertaining (but completely psychotic) J.R./Junior/Isaiah Rider. I could go on, but I'll spare you; point is, if you look back at history, the players they never got a shot at is a far more impressive list than the players passed over.
So now enter Adelman, who comes to this circus with a nice resume, and should have the team looking relevant in time. Who knows, maybe even make a playoff push in a couple of years? But history suggest rather strongly that it will end the same as it ever has: A catastrophic injury, a free-agent skips town, a star forces a trade for a fraction of his value, you know the drill. I swear I don't go out of my way to be fatalistic, but 20 years of worst case scenario makes it hard to consider anything else being possible.
The big positive could be the ouster of GM David Kahn, who's done a decent job cleaning up a roster that was filled with bad contracts, but doesn't seem to have a handle on building a basketball team. They can deny it all they want, but one look at his resume screamed "3rd choice". Here's hoping he gets into a pissing match with the new $25 million coach, because that'd be easier to handicap than the aforementioned race from a couple paragraphs back.
(Quick aside, Kahn used to be a sportswriter in Portland, and the Star Tribune published one of his old columns from his days covering the Trailblazers the other day, it's a must-read if you're familiar with his work as a GM.
First off, it's interesting to be reminded that he was a sportswriter when so many people thought it would be such a radical move to hire Bill Simmons two years ago. At the time I thought, what have we got to lose? Turns out we would've missed out on quite a bit of comedy. But that would've been at least balanced out by the book Simmons would've written about his time on the job. Calling it a wash.
Secondly, that article is a hilarious read, if only for all the rips he throws at the front office. No business handling basketball decisions? No front office has a worse reputation? Hmm, where have I heard these things said recently? That's right. it was about you Dave! The story about computerized scouting reports is a dead ringer for when you told Chris Webber the Wolves would be a better franchise, BECAUSE YOU STARTED SERVING BREAKFAST!!!
I'll miss him when he's gone, I really will. Hopefully in a year or two, when they hire a real GM, they can keep him on for comic relief. As a matter of fact, this might be a brilliant strategy, sort of a Trojan Horse type of thing. Put Kahn out there talking to people all offseason, make it seem like he's in charge, then BOOM!, spring the real GM on them when it's time to negotiate. There's something there.)
Anyway, to the few people out there who love the Wolves, and want them to succeed, I'm with you. Just in more of a metaphorical sense than actually attending games, getting invested in the team, etc. I like to think of myself as not being too bandwagon, but with this team, I actually consider it a point of pride. Like a dog who doesn't eat his own turds, watching another dog and thinking "Good God, how can he stand the taste!"
But hey, I'm talking about other fans there, not you guys...as far as you know :)
I try not to talk about the local "professional" basketball squad, expressly because of people like the aforementioned individual. Fans who remain loyal to the club because it's their hometown team, and keep hoping one day to see a payoff for all they've suffered through. Remember what your mothers taught you, if you can't say anything nice, then leave the room and post an angry screed of invective on the internet. Just don't go piling on to a bunch of people who already know exactly what it is their dealing with. When you tell a fan of a Minnesota team their squad sucks, you're not providing any new info, just being a dick.
Astonishingly, there are apparently still a large number of people who feel this way about the Wolves, including many friends of mine. These guys are the ultimate gluttons for punishment. Remember those Samsonite commericals where the suitcase were thrown down stairs, fell off baggage trucks, etc? Being a Wolves fan is kind of like that, only if someone took a dump in said suitcase, stuffed you inside, then threw it down those stairs. The moral of the story being, when you follow the Wolves, it's impossible not to get sh*t on.
The NBA is much more of an ala carte situation for me, like sports sushi. When something looks like a high-quality product good, I sample, but it's not a spot where you roll the dice on anything questionable. I spare the dedicated souls my critiques, because the last thing anyone wants to hear when they're trying to make the best of a bad situation is someone standing over their shoulder telling them how much everything sucks. It's like that prick you know know who lives in California and goes out of his way to alert you how nice the weather is everytime it snows a foot in your town. Sure you can rest easy with the knowledge that someday they'll reside in the 9th circle of hell with Judas Iscariot, but that's a comfort colder than the temps outside.
But since the question was asked, and it's timely, I'll just say they will probably continue to be mediocre-to-bad for the rest of my life.
Everyone agrees that they made the best possible hire. But there are so many things fundamentally flawed about this franchise that it probably won't matter. In 20 years of existence, there's been one brilliant decision (Kevin Garnett), many head-scratchers (Mike James, Troy Hudson) and one apocalyptically bad one (Joe Smith). Even the moves that looked okay on paper, like Ray Allen-for-Stephon Marbury, ended in catastrophe. One of my favorite saying is that even a broken clock is right twice a day, and that's one better than the Wolves have done on major decisions in the past 20 years.
Funny thing is, you can't kill them for their desparate reaches without first noting that they can't catch a damn break. Exhibit A is their NBA lottery history, as this year was the first time that the ping-pong balls ever allowed for a move up. Some of that can be overcome with savvy drafting, but that's like pitting me against Adrian Peterson in a footrace. Technically we both have the necessary equipment, two legs, but that is where all similarities cease. In this case I'm operating with a degree of difficulty called being me.
The 1992 debacle of Chirstian Laettner 3rd, behind Shaq and Alonzo Mourning has been done to death, but there are more worth noting. Glenn Robinson, Jason Kidd and Grant Hill go top 3, we get Donyell Marshall 4th. Chris Webber, Penny Hardaway and Jamal Mashburn, same deal, while we were left with the outrageously entertaining (but completely psychotic) J.R./Junior/Isaiah Rider. I could go on, but I'll spare you; point is, if you look back at history, the players they never got a shot at is a far more impressive list than the players passed over.
So now enter Adelman, who comes to this circus with a nice resume, and should have the team looking relevant in time. Who knows, maybe even make a playoff push in a couple of years? But history suggest rather strongly that it will end the same as it ever has: A catastrophic injury, a free-agent skips town, a star forces a trade for a fraction of his value, you know the drill. I swear I don't go out of my way to be fatalistic, but 20 years of worst case scenario makes it hard to consider anything else being possible.
The big positive could be the ouster of GM David Kahn, who's done a decent job cleaning up a roster that was filled with bad contracts, but doesn't seem to have a handle on building a basketball team. They can deny it all they want, but one look at his resume screamed "3rd choice". Here's hoping he gets into a pissing match with the new $25 million coach, because that'd be easier to handicap than the aforementioned race from a couple paragraphs back.
(Quick aside, Kahn used to be a sportswriter in Portland, and the Star Tribune published one of his old columns from his days covering the Trailblazers the other day, it's a must-read if you're familiar with his work as a GM.
First off, it's interesting to be reminded that he was a sportswriter when so many people thought it would be such a radical move to hire Bill Simmons two years ago. At the time I thought, what have we got to lose? Turns out we would've missed out on quite a bit of comedy. But that would've been at least balanced out by the book Simmons would've written about his time on the job. Calling it a wash.
Secondly, that article is a hilarious read, if only for all the rips he throws at the front office. No business handling basketball decisions? No front office has a worse reputation? Hmm, where have I heard these things said recently? That's right. it was about you Dave! The story about computerized scouting reports is a dead ringer for when you told Chris Webber the Wolves would be a better franchise, BECAUSE YOU STARTED SERVING BREAKFAST!!!
I'll miss him when he's gone, I really will. Hopefully in a year or two, when they hire a real GM, they can keep him on for comic relief. As a matter of fact, this might be a brilliant strategy, sort of a Trojan Horse type of thing. Put Kahn out there talking to people all offseason, make it seem like he's in charge, then BOOM!, spring the real GM on them when it's time to negotiate. There's something there.)
Anyway, to the few people out there who love the Wolves, and want them to succeed, I'm with you. Just in more of a metaphorical sense than actually attending games, getting invested in the team, etc. I like to think of myself as not being too bandwagon, but with this team, I actually consider it a point of pride. Like a dog who doesn't eat his own turds, watching another dog and thinking "Good God, how can he stand the taste!"
But hey, I'm talking about other fans there, not you guys...as far as you know :)
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
On the outside looking in
The first of May is typically when it hits me every year that the baseball season is going to have many ups and downs that can kill a guy if he overreacts to every one. Is that going to keep me from flying off the handle on an almost daily basis when things go wrong? Probably not, but I can at least take a break from chronicling every step of the journey here to chew over some other issues.
With that in mind, I've spent a lot of time this week watching something we're not very familiar with here in Loserville: Spring playoffs. The NBA and NHL are both leagues with ridiculously drawn-out seasons that grow tedious toward the end, fortunately they more than make up for it by delivering stellar (albeit also ridiculously drawn-out) playoff action that answers the question "What would it be like if these guys tried hard all the time?" The only thing better than catching a great playoff series this time of year is catching a great playoff series involving one of your teams, and that's where the trouble starts, at least around these parts. Sure our teams show up once in awhile, a few years ago it was actually pretty frequent, but even when it happens, the trips are short lived. My question is, which one of our winter teams will make the return first, and when, for the love of God, is that going to be?
The Timberwolves have made 8 playoff appearances in their 21 years of existence, advancing past the first round only once and compiling an overall record of 17-30. The Wild have batted at a slightly higher clip, managing a postseason appearance in 3 out of their 9 seasons and also one trip out of the first round on their way to a 11-18 overall record. The bad news? That was the good news, it all goes downhill from here.
Compounding this historic futility at the moment is the fact that both teams are coming off seasons of historic ineptitude. The Wolves limped home with a 15-67 record, tying the mark they had in the 1991-92 season (their third in existence), while the Wild finished with 84 points, their lowest total since the rule change that began awarding points for shootouts five years ago. I suppose this means there's nowhere to go but up, unfortunately it also means there's a long climb ahead for both squads.
Consensus opinon seems to be that the Wild are in a much better situation than the Wolves, given both their current level of talent and the league they play in. This is not to say that either is a threat to reach "contender" status any time soon, in fact it would seem ludicrous to aim that high at the moment. This is Remedial Sports 101, if they knew anything they wouldn't be in attendance, we're simply shooting for one notch above abject failure here. First round exits don't sound like much, but when you're face-down in shit, having it washed off with urine doesn't seem so bad...or something like that. Anyway, back to the Wild before I get too far off track.
As stated previously, the NHL is a league where teams can (and do) rise and fall with great speed. Minnesota finished 11 points out of a playoff spot this season, and could've been right in the mix had the team not stumbled out of the gate with a 2-9 record that put them behind the 8-ball for the rest of the year. Only problem is that there were 4 other teams falling within that 11-point gap, meaning the team not only needs to beat more teams, they need to beat the right teams and hope those teams don't start beating better ones.
An overarching theme with both of the puck and hoops squads is that they play in the wrong conference and division if you're a mediocre team, and that's not going to change in the immediate future. The Wild faces a slew of opponents that are either on the rise or well established, most have more depth in their development pipelines, as well as higher ceilings for their current teams. So how, you might ask, is this the better of the two situations? Short answer: Because the NHL is wacky.
This season the NHL saw 4 playoff teams from the Western Conference who weren't participants in last year's tourney, including the bottom 3 in the conference standings. Goaltenders get hot, lines begin to click, good scheduling, good energy, staying healthy, any number of things can be enough to tilt the scale. While the Wild may lack big time impact players who are ready to make the leap, they do have a solid (if unspectacular) squad that will not have the burden of adjusting to a new coach and system, as they did last year. Unfortunately they have a huge amount of their payroll tied up in an 18-goal scorer, a goaltender who got increasingly shaky as the year wore on and a bunch of good-not-great defensemen. On top of this is the fact that little help is available in the minors, with the small amount that is there being redundant to the spots that are already well-manned in the pros. All of this adds up to the fact that, barring some moves to shed salary, the guys we've got are the guys we're going to have for quite some time.
In my opinion, it may be a bit much to expect a playoff appearance in the coming season, but seeing the team grab a 7 or 8 seed would certainly not be surprising. Maybe Latandresse isn't a flash in the pan (likely), Backstrom stands on his head (possible), Havlat finds his scoring touch (plausible)and the defensive corps finds a way to contribute more offense (cough, Schultz, cough), but betting on ALL that stuff to happen? Those are some long odds. Official prediction is a return to relevance during 2010-11 and a fight down to the wire, falling just short of a playoff spot. At least we'll have some intrigue, and a return to the best tourney in sports should be on the horizon for two seasons from now...then we can lament how long it will take to actually contend for a championship.
The Wolves are in a wholly different situation on a lot of levels, I'd rank their problems as follows:
1) It's a players league, and we have no players - In the NBA, systems can't save you, talent can't be masked and your team is as good as your 2-3 star players make it. By my count, we have exactly zero guys who could be one of the top 2 guys on a playoff team, and one (Jefferson) who could be a capable 3rd, as long as you have the personnel to hide him defensively. At the risk of beating a dead horse, the failure of the 2009 Draft grows by the day, and unless Ricky Rubio shows up with all the game he was credited with having in the Olympics, that's not going to change any time soon.
2) Nobody wants to play here - I love my hometown teams first and foremost, and a big part of why I have trouble getting into the NBA is because the Wolves can't seem to convincing players to play here. Whether it's the cold, the nightlife, or just the fact the team is crap, no help is coming from free agency and even draft picks need to be regarded with skepticism. The aforementioned Rubio situation is the latest example, as I believe he would be an NBAer currently had he went to New York or Miami, but there are others as well.
OJ Mayo should be knocking down threes and playing lockdown D (think we could use some of that?), which would solve our perimeter problems and the Love/Jefferson redundancy. Heck, Stephon Marbury might've had a productive career alongside KG if we'd been a more cosmoplitan destination...on second thought, scratch that, I don't want to speculate on the motives of the insane. But however you spin it, it's obvious this franchise is operating with a degree of difficulty, which is understandable for free agents, but really a drag when you consider having to pass on the most talented players in the draft because they don't like your city. The GM made a serious blunder by thinking he could overcome this with the Rubio pick, he should've taken a cue from other NBA wastelands like Memphis, Oklahoma City and Sacramento, who passed on a guy they knew wouldn't suit up for them, maybe the first clue was when he wouldn;t come here for a workout? Oops.
3) Lousy draft/Lotto hex - First off, I don't want to get into a lot of jinx talk, as that is the Vikings exclusive domain, but just once can we get some luck in the damn lottery? By all accounts there are two players in this year's draft, John Wall and Evan Turner; the Wolves can select no lower than 5th and statistically are most likely to select 4th. You know where we're picking? 3rd, bank on it. Not only will this allow us to miss out on the two "can't miss" guys, but it will put our GM, Mr. Kahn, staring smack dab into the unplesant possibility of DeMarcus Cousins, who is not only a bit crazy and a terrible fit for a team with two undersized power forward/center types, he also seems like he would take a season or two on Team Rubio before he ever showed up here. We're not tops on his list, just a hunch, and this draft isn't deep either, so the 4 picks = 4 starters scenario some people seem to have in their minds is a pipe dream.
It's very depressing when you lay it all out, all things considered, I don't see the Timberwolves knocking on the playoff door for at least a couple of seasons and it's probably a couple more before they actually kick it in. As with the Wild, a lot can change, but for that to happen, this franchise would need something that has been in short supply throughout it's history: Good luck.
All in all, we'll probably be right back here next spring having this same conversation, which would truly be a shame. Playoffs are fun in general, but become exponentially more so when you add in a rooting interest, and it does not look like that is on the horizon. For the moment I will pick surrogate teams to live through vicariously, celebrating when they win, bumming when they lose, but not truly internalizing as I would if it were "my" team. A lot of teams make the postseason in both leagues, so playoff droughts should theoretically be short lived. Unfortunately when a franchise is run as far into the ground as these two have been, just getting back to the surface is quite a climb, nevermind soaring to new heights.
What time does the Twins game start again?
With that in mind, I've spent a lot of time this week watching something we're not very familiar with here in Loserville: Spring playoffs. The NBA and NHL are both leagues with ridiculously drawn-out seasons that grow tedious toward the end, fortunately they more than make up for it by delivering stellar (albeit also ridiculously drawn-out) playoff action that answers the question "What would it be like if these guys tried hard all the time?" The only thing better than catching a great playoff series this time of year is catching a great playoff series involving one of your teams, and that's where the trouble starts, at least around these parts. Sure our teams show up once in awhile, a few years ago it was actually pretty frequent, but even when it happens, the trips are short lived. My question is, which one of our winter teams will make the return first, and when, for the love of God, is that going to be?
The Timberwolves have made 8 playoff appearances in their 21 years of existence, advancing past the first round only once and compiling an overall record of 17-30. The Wild have batted at a slightly higher clip, managing a postseason appearance in 3 out of their 9 seasons and also one trip out of the first round on their way to a 11-18 overall record. The bad news? That was the good news, it all goes downhill from here.
Compounding this historic futility at the moment is the fact that both teams are coming off seasons of historic ineptitude. The Wolves limped home with a 15-67 record, tying the mark they had in the 1991-92 season (their third in existence), while the Wild finished with 84 points, their lowest total since the rule change that began awarding points for shootouts five years ago. I suppose this means there's nowhere to go but up, unfortunately it also means there's a long climb ahead for both squads.
Consensus opinon seems to be that the Wild are in a much better situation than the Wolves, given both their current level of talent and the league they play in. This is not to say that either is a threat to reach "contender" status any time soon, in fact it would seem ludicrous to aim that high at the moment. This is Remedial Sports 101, if they knew anything they wouldn't be in attendance, we're simply shooting for one notch above abject failure here. First round exits don't sound like much, but when you're face-down in shit, having it washed off with urine doesn't seem so bad...or something like that. Anyway, back to the Wild before I get too far off track.
As stated previously, the NHL is a league where teams can (and do) rise and fall with great speed. Minnesota finished 11 points out of a playoff spot this season, and could've been right in the mix had the team not stumbled out of the gate with a 2-9 record that put them behind the 8-ball for the rest of the year. Only problem is that there were 4 other teams falling within that 11-point gap, meaning the team not only needs to beat more teams, they need to beat the right teams and hope those teams don't start beating better ones.
An overarching theme with both of the puck and hoops squads is that they play in the wrong conference and division if you're a mediocre team, and that's not going to change in the immediate future. The Wild faces a slew of opponents that are either on the rise or well established, most have more depth in their development pipelines, as well as higher ceilings for their current teams. So how, you might ask, is this the better of the two situations? Short answer: Because the NHL is wacky.
This season the NHL saw 4 playoff teams from the Western Conference who weren't participants in last year's tourney, including the bottom 3 in the conference standings. Goaltenders get hot, lines begin to click, good scheduling, good energy, staying healthy, any number of things can be enough to tilt the scale. While the Wild may lack big time impact players who are ready to make the leap, they do have a solid (if unspectacular) squad that will not have the burden of adjusting to a new coach and system, as they did last year. Unfortunately they have a huge amount of their payroll tied up in an 18-goal scorer, a goaltender who got increasingly shaky as the year wore on and a bunch of good-not-great defensemen. On top of this is the fact that little help is available in the minors, with the small amount that is there being redundant to the spots that are already well-manned in the pros. All of this adds up to the fact that, barring some moves to shed salary, the guys we've got are the guys we're going to have for quite some time.
In my opinion, it may be a bit much to expect a playoff appearance in the coming season, but seeing the team grab a 7 or 8 seed would certainly not be surprising. Maybe Latandresse isn't a flash in the pan (likely), Backstrom stands on his head (possible), Havlat finds his scoring touch (plausible)and the defensive corps finds a way to contribute more offense (cough, Schultz, cough), but betting on ALL that stuff to happen? Those are some long odds. Official prediction is a return to relevance during 2010-11 and a fight down to the wire, falling just short of a playoff spot. At least we'll have some intrigue, and a return to the best tourney in sports should be on the horizon for two seasons from now...then we can lament how long it will take to actually contend for a championship.
The Wolves are in a wholly different situation on a lot of levels, I'd rank their problems as follows:
1) It's a players league, and we have no players - In the NBA, systems can't save you, talent can't be masked and your team is as good as your 2-3 star players make it. By my count, we have exactly zero guys who could be one of the top 2 guys on a playoff team, and one (Jefferson) who could be a capable 3rd, as long as you have the personnel to hide him defensively. At the risk of beating a dead horse, the failure of the 2009 Draft grows by the day, and unless Ricky Rubio shows up with all the game he was credited with having in the Olympics, that's not going to change any time soon.
2) Nobody wants to play here - I love my hometown teams first and foremost, and a big part of why I have trouble getting into the NBA is because the Wolves can't seem to convincing players to play here. Whether it's the cold, the nightlife, or just the fact the team is crap, no help is coming from free agency and even draft picks need to be regarded with skepticism. The aforementioned Rubio situation is the latest example, as I believe he would be an NBAer currently had he went to New York or Miami, but there are others as well.
OJ Mayo should be knocking down threes and playing lockdown D (think we could use some of that?), which would solve our perimeter problems and the Love/Jefferson redundancy. Heck, Stephon Marbury might've had a productive career alongside KG if we'd been a more cosmoplitan destination...on second thought, scratch that, I don't want to speculate on the motives of the insane. But however you spin it, it's obvious this franchise is operating with a degree of difficulty, which is understandable for free agents, but really a drag when you consider having to pass on the most talented players in the draft because they don't like your city. The GM made a serious blunder by thinking he could overcome this with the Rubio pick, he should've taken a cue from other NBA wastelands like Memphis, Oklahoma City and Sacramento, who passed on a guy they knew wouldn't suit up for them, maybe the first clue was when he wouldn;t come here for a workout? Oops.
3) Lousy draft/Lotto hex - First off, I don't want to get into a lot of jinx talk, as that is the Vikings exclusive domain, but just once can we get some luck in the damn lottery? By all accounts there are two players in this year's draft, John Wall and Evan Turner; the Wolves can select no lower than 5th and statistically are most likely to select 4th. You know where we're picking? 3rd, bank on it. Not only will this allow us to miss out on the two "can't miss" guys, but it will put our GM, Mr. Kahn, staring smack dab into the unplesant possibility of DeMarcus Cousins, who is not only a bit crazy and a terrible fit for a team with two undersized power forward/center types, he also seems like he would take a season or two on Team Rubio before he ever showed up here. We're not tops on his list, just a hunch, and this draft isn't deep either, so the 4 picks = 4 starters scenario some people seem to have in their minds is a pipe dream.
It's very depressing when you lay it all out, all things considered, I don't see the Timberwolves knocking on the playoff door for at least a couple of seasons and it's probably a couple more before they actually kick it in. As with the Wild, a lot can change, but for that to happen, this franchise would need something that has been in short supply throughout it's history: Good luck.
All in all, we'll probably be right back here next spring having this same conversation, which would truly be a shame. Playoffs are fun in general, but become exponentially more so when you add in a rooting interest, and it does not look like that is on the horizon. For the moment I will pick surrogate teams to live through vicariously, celebrating when they win, bumming when they lose, but not truly internalizing as I would if it were "my" team. A lot of teams make the postseason in both leagues, so playoff droughts should theoretically be short lived. Unfortunately when a franchise is run as far into the ground as these two have been, just getting back to the surface is quite a climb, nevermind soaring to new heights.
What time does the Twins game start again?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)