Game 13: Minnesota Timberwolves at Dallas Mavericks
Posted by SBG on Monday, November 27th, 2006 at 7:40 pm
Smells like a loss, but if this turns into a win, my won't the interest level shoot up?
This entry was posted by SBG on Monday, November 27th, 2006 at 7:40 pm and is filed under Game Logs, Minnesota Timberwolves. It is one of 2393 entries by the author. We are no longer accepting Letters to the Editor on this post. Why?
7 LTEs
Sorry, The WGOM is no longer accepting Letters to the Editor on this article.
Loading ...
Still not smelling very good. Dallas is shooting rediculously well, and even though Mike James is shooting well tonight, he's no Sam Cassell. I miss the days where the point guard would score 20 and add 7 assists. Between James and Davis, only 2 right now.
Hey, they made a game of it. That Foye kid is starting to look pretty good.
Foye shot too much late, but I like what he's bringing.
I think we are seeing him growing up before our eyes. You can use that line without attributing me if you want.
T-Wolves out-rebounded again tonight--69.0% to 64.5%. On the season, they've been out-rebounded 75.6% to 71.9%.
Looking at the league stats, the T-Wolves actually look like they are around the median for defensive rebounding, but only three teams (NJN, MIL, and PHO) have been worse than Minnesota on the offensive glass, ratewise.
ubelmann: what's your source for the rebounding stats?
According to ESPN, the Wolves have a .244 offensive rebounding rate, which ranks them 23rd (Pho is worst, preceded by Mil, NJ, Cha, Tor, and Bos).
on the defensive end, the Wolves .718 clip ranks 17th. 20th overall at .491.
Uh, espn? I'm not sure if I'm calculating it the standard way or not. I took (off boards)/(off boards + opponents' def boards) for off rebounding rate and I took (def reb)/(def reb + opp off reb) for def rebounding rate. I put in the T-Wolves 13th game in by hand, so maybe that is what the difference is (considering that you have PHO, MIL, and NJN in the same order that I did.) It's still early so I imagine that a game or two could move you up or down a few places in the ranking.
Or I made some sort of mistake calculating them. Either way, the conclusion looks roughly the same--poor on the offensive glass and middle-of-the-pack on defensive rebounding.