[Brandon Rahbar] Everyone: Thunder has to add size to compete with the Wolves. Mark Daigneault: Goes even smaller and doesn’t play backup bigs Jaylin Williams or Ousmane Dieng. Minnesota: 106 OKC: 129
And played Rudy and KAT right off the court. Neither of those guys played past 7 minutes in the fourth. Super well coached.
Thing is; it kind of makes a ton of sense to go small against that line up, since you’re never going to beat them trying to go big. It’s like in poker if you’re playing against a lot of super loose players you need to nit it up, even if it feels uncomfortable.
Where we could use help on the boards is actually against the teams that *aren’t* committing to this super big twin towers of style play, even if that seems a bit counterintuitive. So using this game to support the argument of not working on rebounding is a bit disingenuous IMO, but still very well coached game and also if we do find a player to add size it needs to be an excellent fit, not just any random big man
Pilgrims-to-Nowhere
“Styles make fights” as they say. Couple things though:
-MIN is a top team for a reason, and I’m sure they will adapt just like the Thunder did after the previous game. This would have also been another dog fight if our shots were not falling like they were. That being said, when we’re shooting well, we can beat anyone.
-Having another dependable big would be nice to have regardless, because as tough as Chet is, bumping around there with the big boys can be exhausting over a long season. I don’t think JWill or Ousmane will become Lauri by season’s end, but their continued development could make a trade for Lauri unnecessary.
DaveWest12
Dieng is big trash
blacksoxing
I can’t agree with Rahbar’s post as it devalues the Wolves. They did beat us big last game. Thunder did win small this game. Doesn’t mean in a 7 game series the Thunder could go small and beat the Wolves…or that the Wolves couldn’t adjust themselves.
Just means that Mark is a very smart coach alongside Chris, his counterpart. There’s two more games this season so we’ll see with game 3 is looking like, which may be both teams trying to outsmart each other.
IntellectualSavante
Thunder played very well last night. Turnover ratio was a very telling stat in that game.
JeramiGrantsTomb
T-wolves aren’t the team where I want a thicc forward, I’m more concerned with heliocentric teams like the Sixers. I don’t want Chet to have to handle getting beat up by Embiid, takes away his potential as a help-side defender and gases him on offense. If we put a chonk in to lean on Embiid’s kidneys, Chet can keep his eyes up.
But what the hell do I know, maybe they’re fine as is.
YouWannaSeeADeadBody
Russ, Harden and the Rockets had great regular season success with PJ Tucker at the 5 until they met the lakers in the playoffs and got utterly dismantled. Being undersized is a glaring weakness that over a 7 game series can easily be gameplanned for and exploited
0siris0
Good win last night but we shot 60% from 2 and 46% from 3. Those aren’t sustainable in a playoff series.
We have to have the 15 man roster that can do everything, not just play one style when we have a hot shooting night. If we shot average last night, 52% from 2 and 38% from 3, the Wolves +5 rebounding advantage would have been glaring (probably wider, because of more misses), and we likely would have lost because of it.
9 Comments
It’s almost like they have a plan🤔
And played Rudy and KAT right off the court. Neither of those guys played past 7 minutes in the fourth. Super well coached.
Thing is; it kind of makes a ton of sense to go small against that line up, since you’re never going to beat them trying to go big. It’s like in poker if you’re playing against a lot of super loose players you need to nit it up, even if it feels uncomfortable.
Where we could use help on the boards is actually against the teams that *aren’t* committing to this super big twin towers of style play, even if that seems a bit counterintuitive.
So using this game to support the argument of not working on rebounding is a bit disingenuous IMO, but still very well coached game and also if we do find a player to add size it needs to be an excellent fit, not just any random big man
“Styles make fights” as they say. Couple things though:
-MIN is a top team for a reason, and I’m sure they will adapt just like the Thunder did after the previous game. This would have also been another dog fight if our shots were not falling like they were. That being said, when we’re shooting well, we can beat anyone.
-Having another dependable big would be nice to have regardless, because as tough as Chet is, bumping around there with the big boys can be exhausting over a long season. I don’t think JWill or Ousmane will become Lauri by season’s end, but their continued development could make a trade for Lauri unnecessary.
Dieng is big trash
I can’t agree with Rahbar’s post as it devalues the Wolves. They did beat us big last game. Thunder did win small this game. Doesn’t mean in a 7 game series the Thunder could go small and beat the Wolves…or that the Wolves couldn’t adjust themselves.
Just means that Mark is a very smart coach alongside Chris, his counterpart. There’s two more games this season so we’ll see with game 3 is looking like, which may be both teams trying to outsmart each other.
Thunder played very well last night. Turnover ratio was a very telling stat in that game.
T-wolves aren’t the team where I want a thicc forward, I’m more concerned with heliocentric teams like the Sixers. I don’t want Chet to have to handle getting beat up by Embiid, takes away his potential as a help-side defender and gases him on offense. If we put a chonk in to lean on Embiid’s kidneys, Chet can keep his eyes up.
But what the hell do I know, maybe they’re fine as is.
Russ, Harden and the Rockets had great regular season success with PJ Tucker at the 5 until they met the lakers in the playoffs and got utterly dismantled. Being undersized is a glaring weakness that over a 7 game series can easily be gameplanned for and exploited
Good win last night but we shot 60% from 2 and 46% from 3. Those aren’t sustainable in a playoff series.
We have to have the 15 man roster that can do everything, not just play one style when we have a hot shooting night. If we shot average last night, 52% from 2 and 38% from 3, the Wolves +5 rebounding advantage would have been glaring (probably wider, because of more misses), and we likely would have lost because of it.