Ivan's Kevin Love Fantasy

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

I just want to take a second to say that finding this discussion of Love here is like finding a cold water spring in the dessert after walking all alone in the barren stats thread. I love you guys.

As a side note, I haven't seen that much Celtics basketball but Sullinger looks very good. You simply cannot move him for a guy like Love if Love cannot be locked up. /Master of the obvious

 

[nighthob]

I guess I'm just of the opinion that you can't win championships without stars.  They can *hopefully* get one future star in this year's lottery.  Rondo is a star of sorts - really good player, but can't carry a team.  And so they need, IMO, another star.  And there just aren't many stars potentially available.  And again, caveat:  Love might not be available.  But I think he can be had.

I'm the first one to say that you need stars. The problem is that three stars that don't play defense ≠ title contention. Especially when the two established ones have already proven that they can't carry bad teams anywhere. Which means that your third star needs to be LeBron. Unfortunately no one in this pool is. The only person on the horizon that might get there is a 2017 player named Josh Jackson, but then again he might stop growing and his peers catch up athletically, making him the next Lance Stephenson, instead.

As far as Love is concerned, he is going UFA, and in all likelihood leaving. So shooting your load for him means that you're, essentially, giving up the rebuilding project for the privilege of waiting to rebuild. Or, put another way, you're the 2014 Knicks. No thanks.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

If by "elite defensive 5" you mean "someone at least as good as Dwight Howard circa 2009-2010" then I agree. The problem is that those guys are a rarity. And one that Boston would be unlikely to fill.

 
I think this is an exaggeration. Sure, he's a really bad defender, but with the right pieces around him you can compensate for that. David Lee's just as bad as Love, even worse according to Kirk Goldsberry, and Golden State's defense has been well above average this season. Hell, even Minnesota's defense has been in the top 15 in the league this year, and they don't have the right pieces around Love.

 

[nighthob]

It wouldn't just be Love, though. Rondo is an indifferent defender at the best of times, and Parker just isnt cut out to defend NBA SFs. In fact, he'd be far better as an NBA 4 in front of someone like Tyson Chandler (a la Carmelo Anthony), but he could't do that on a team with Love. If Boston were to re-up Bradley so that they had someone that played D they would be sending out a starting lineup with Rondo & Parker not defending the wings and Love not acting as the primary help defender. There aren't any centers in the NBA that I can see today that could cover for that defense. Maybe Embiid in a few years. But Dwight Howard circa 2014 wouldn't have a prayer.

 

[ivanvamp]

But, would it be better than Rondo, Sullinger, Lottery Guy, 3 more 1st round picks, and the cap space to sign a max FA to join them?

 
I think quite possibly, yes.  Because under my premise, we CAN get Love and a top Lottery Guy.  Those guys would be in the bank.  Having the cap space to sign a mythical free agent sounds good IF and only if we actually DO sign a great max free agent.  And who, exactly, would that be?  
 
Again, I don't think Ainge added all these picks to use them to draft players.  Though obviously it's possible.  I think he acquired them so he could make a blockbuster trade or two.

 

[ivanvamp]

I'm the first one to say that you need stars. The problem is that three stars that don't play defense ≠ title contention. Especially when the two established ones have already proven that they can't carry bad teams anywhere. Which means that your third star needs to be LeBron. Unfortunately no one in this pool is. The only person on the horizon that might get there is a 2017 player named Josh Jackson, but then again he might stop growing and his peers catch up athletically, making him the next Lance Stephenson, instead.

As far as Love is concerned, he is going UFA, and in all likelihood leaving. So shooting your load for him means that you're, essentially, giving up the rebuilding project for the privilege of waiting to rebuild. Or, put another way, you're the 2014 Knicks. No thanks.

 
Well that last piece is the key for me.  If you can't sign Love to an extension (which has to be negotiated before the trade), then you simply don't do it.  That's a requirement.

 

[nighthob]

Love won't sign an extension, period. It would cost him millions of dollars. It's not even on the table. Extensions are always based on the value of the last year of the existing contract, whereas in free agency he gets to sign one of those super-max deals. Ergo, there won't be an extension. This is going to be a non-negotiable point.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

It wouldn't just be Love, though. Rondo is an indifferent defender at the best of times, and Parker just isnt cut out to defend NBA SFs. In fact, he'd be far better as an NBA 4 in front of someone like Tyson Chandler (a la Carmelo Anthony), but he could't do that on a team with Love. If Boston were to re-up Bradley so that they had someone that played D they would be sending out a starting lineup with Rondo & Parker not defending the wings and Love not acting as the primary help defender. There aren't any centers in the NBA that I can see today that could cover for that defense. Maybe Embiid in a few years. But Dwight Howard circa 2014 wouldn't have a prayer.

 
I haven't really watched enough of Parker to say much about how he profiles defensively, but most of the scouting reports I've seen have him listed as an average defender. Regardless, in the right system, I think you can hide more than one subpar defender. Golden State manages with Lee and Curry. I still dont think it's at all out of the question that a team built around those three guys could be very good.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

Love won't sign an extension, period. It would cost him millions of dollars. It's not even on the table. Extensions are always based on the value of the last year of the existing contract, whereas in free agency he gets to sign one of those super-max deals. Ergo, there won't be an extension. This is going to be a non-negotiable point.

 
I think you're getting caught up on semantics. No, Love won't sign an extension, but he very well might re-sign when he reaches unrestricted free agency, in which case not re-signing with Boston (in the scenario that he as traded there, of course) would result in leaving millions on the table. He's also not eligible for a super max--those are only available to players who are on a rookie scale contract when their new contract is signed. That he would agree to re-sign is an assumption that all of these discussions have been based on. Nobody is suggesting making a deal for a rental.

 

[nighthob]

No, as a max player he is eligible for a second max deal, which would be around 5/104 if he re-signs with the team that has him, or around 4/80 with someone else. So the question is do you bet the house (because that's going to be the cost) on a guy that's shown he can't carry teams with even up odds that he's going to walk and leave you without the assets to effectively rebuild? I'm hoping that Boston doesn't make that wager because while it amused me to see the Lakers get Dwightmared I don't want to see it happen to Boston.

 

[Cellar-Door]

 
I haven't really watched enough of Parker to say much about how he profiles defensively, but most of the scouting reports I've seen have him listed as an average defender. Regardless, in the right system, I think you can hide more than one subpar defender. Golden State manages with Lee and Curry. I still dont think it's at all out of the question that a team built around those three guys could be very good.

Golden State also has an exceptional defender at C.

 

[nighthob]

I haven't really watched enough of Parker to say much about how he profiles defensively, but most of the scouting reports I've seen have him listed as an average defender. Regardless, in the right system, I think you can hide more than one subpar defender. Golden State manages with Lee and Curry. I still dont think it's at all out of the question that a team built around those three guys could be very good.

Boston would be trying to hide three subpar defenders, two of them at the spots where most teams have their primary scorer and the other at arguably the most important defensive position on the floor. Even the Warriors went out and signed a strong defensive wing to help them in this regard (and Klay Thompson himself is decent). Boston would lack all of that. You would need an all-time great post defender to smother that mess.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

No, as a max player he is eligible for a second max deal, which would be around 5/104 if he re-signs with the team that has him, or around 4/80 with someone else. So the question is do you bet the house (because that's going to be the cost) on a guy that's shown he can't carry teams with even up odds that he's going to walk and leave you without the assets to effectively rebuild? I'm hoping that Boston doesn't make that wager because while it amused me to see the Lakers get Dwightmared I don't want to see it happen to Boston.

 
I didn't say he wasn't eligible for a second max deal. But I've always heard the phrase Super Max used in reference to deals like Derrick Rose and Russell Westbrook got, which refer to the 6 year contracts that can be given to players in the final year of their rookie scale contract who can then receive 30% of the cap instead of the standard 25%. I thought that's what you were referring to. I know he's eligible for a max contract--it's just not what I've heard referred to as a "super max". I might be wrong about that, I dunno.
 
Regardless, everybody here is saying that you only make this deal if Love shows a willingness to re-sign. All of the discussions of the merits of the deal assume that to be true.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

Boston would be trying to hide three subpar defenders, two of them at the spots where most teams have their primary scorer and the other at arguably the most important defensive position on the floor. Even the Warriors went out and signed a strong defensive wing to help them in this regard (and Klay Thompson himself is decent). Boston would lack all of that. You would need an all-time great post defender to smother that mess.

Jabari Parker has yet to play an NBA game. The scouting reports call him an average defender. I'm not quite ready to write him off as subpar, yet. Also, how are we discussing what this hypothetical team lacks at this point? As discussed to this point, they lack 2 starters and a bench.
 
But, still, I think it's entirely possible to build a competent defensive team around those three guys. It wouldn't be their strength, but they could fall in the top half of the league. Hell, Minnesota's managing that this year, and they've only got 2 plus defenders on their roster. Scheme goes a long way, put a very good defensive 5 next to Love and a 3 and D wing at the 2, and you can cover for a lot of mistakes.

 

[nighthob]

I didn't say he wasn't eligible for a second max deal. But I've always heard the phrase Super Max used in reference to deals like Derrick Rose and Russell Westbrook got, which refer to the 6 year contracts that can be given to players in the final year of their rookie scale contract who can then receive 30% of the cap instead of the standard 25%. I thought that's what you were referring to. I know he's eligible for a max contract--it's just not what I've heard referred to as a "super max". I might be wrong about that, I dunno.

That's the percentage of the cap you're eligible for on a second max. If he signed an extension as part of a deal this summer it would be a 2/36 extension to his current deal, making it essentially a 4/68 deal. Much less than he'd get on the open market, even if he left. So it's a non-starter. And it's not a gamble I'd make on a guy with no connections to this area when he lives in LA and the Lakers are going to have max cap space available the summer of his free agency.

Jabari Parker has yet to play an NBA game. The scouting reports call him an average defender. I'm not quite ready to write him off as subpar, yet. Also, how are we discussing what this hypothetical team lacks at this point? As discussed to this point, they lack 2 starters and a bench.
 
But, still, I think it's entirely possible to build a competent defensive team around those three guys. It wouldn't be their strength, but they could fall in the top half of the league. Hell, Minnesota's managing that this year, and they've only got 2 plus defenders on their roster. Scheme goes a long way, put a very good defensive 5 next to Love and a 3 and D wing at the 2, and you can cover for a lot of mistakes.

He might one day be a competent SF defender. But it wouldn't be during Boston's one year window. Right now he's out of shape, appears to have gained weight during the season, and doesn't have the quickness for the SF at the next level right now. And there's the rub, Rondo won't be signing an extension for the same reason that Love won't. And as of now we know that he's been talking to one of his old high school teammates about teaming up. There's an excellent chance that Rondo is suiting up for New York for the 2016 season. So by the time Parker got competent, Boston could find itself without 2/3 of its "three star" lineup, while having blown its load on one of them. It's just a really bad gamble.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

That's the percentage of the cap you're eligible for on a second max. If he signed an extension as part of a deal this summer it would be a 2/36 extension to his current deal, making it essentially a 4/68 deal. Much less than he'd get on the open market, even if he left. So it's a non-starter. And it's not a gamble I'd make on a guy with no connections to this area when he lives in LA and the Lakers are going to have max cap space available the summer of his free agency.


He might one day be a competent SF defender. But it wouldn't be during Boston's one year window. Right now he's out of shape, appears to have gained weight during the season, and doesn't have the quickness for the SF at the next level right now. And there's the rub, Rondo won't be signing an extension for the same reason that Love won't. And as of now we know that he's been talking to one of his old high school teammates about teaming up. There's an excellent chance that Rondo is suiting up for New York for the 2016 season. So by the time Parker got competent, Boston could find itself without 2/3 of its "three star" lineup, while having blown its load on one of them. It's just a really bad gamble.

Okay, we're talking past each other at this point. Again, nobody in this thread is saying that they're interested in this deal if Love doesn't agree to re-sign. At this point, reality has been tossed out the window, and the discussion is about the Love/Rondo/Parker trio as a hypothetical concept. Everybody acknowledges it's a long shot. Everybody knows Love won't sign an extension and that there's a risk he won't re-sign. At this point, we're just discussing the merits of that trio on the floor and not the viability of it happening. That's been made clear throughout the thread, I thought.

Also, again, not suggesting he'd sign an extension. Not sure why we're back to that. You used the phrase "super max." I was under the impression that applies to the Westbrook/Rose designated player contracts. That was the only source of the confusion. Not the length or value of what Love is eligible for.

 

[nighthob]

But even on the 2015 Celtics, you don't have any discernible defense at the 2/3/4. That's not something you cover up with a defender at the five unless we're discussing Dwight Howard when he was historically good. It would be a terrible defensive team that I can't see scoring enough to cover up for all the deficiencies.

 

[luckiestman]

id rather roll with 
 
Noah, Sully, lotto, Bradley, Rondo
 
then
 
TBA, Love, lotto, Bradley, Rondo

 

[ivanvamp]

Awesome.  Now how do you propose to get Noah?

 

[MakMan44]

I just want to take a second to say that finding this discussion of Love here is like finding a cold water spring in the dessert after walking all alone in the barren stats thread. I love you guys.

As a side note, I haven't seen that much Celtics basketball but Sullinger looks very good. You simply cannot move him for a guy like Love if Love cannot be locked up. /Master of the obvious

It's also incredibly depressing to be reminded of the constant mistakes the Wolves make.

 

[Brickowski]

Speaking of Sullinger, this article in Grantland about Sullinger and his childhood friend Trey Burke is a good read.

http://grantland.com/features/trey-burke-jared-sullinger-friends/

 

[Sprowl]

Noah would be the defensive glue that can make an otherwise stolid team with a veteran star at point guard coming off of injury into a real playoff contender. Noah is like Garnett ca. 2008 or McHale ca. 1994 -- a long, quick defender on the ball, and a hyper-aware help defender. (Gotta problem with the McHale comparisons? Tough titty.) The idea of a Noah, Sully, lotto, Bradley, Rondo core is very attractive, since competent, skilled complementary wing players are the easiest players to find, while keystone interior defenders are very scarce. That is why the Bulls won't let Noah go.
 
As far as veteran point guards coming off injury, Rondo and Rose are in similar positions. Rose had the higher ceiling because of his scoring prowess, but it's not a lock that he'll return with the same explosiveness to the hoop. During the 2009 playoffs, it wasn't so clear which player was the best. Rondo's defense has looked better than before his injury, and he has shown signs of becoming a traditional distributor point guard with a competent 20-foot jumper. There's no doubt that Rondo consistently gets the other Celtics the ball in the right timing and position for their best shots.

 

[wutang112878]

Haha.
 
As mentioned above, their games are totally different.
 
Love over his career has been a much more efficient scorer (.563 to .529 ts%), much better rebounder (13.6 to 10.6 rebounds per 36), and much better passer (2.5 to 1.5 assists per 36).
 
Love coming into this season had a stellar +5.3 cumulative RAPM (#7 among all NBA players) to Jefferson's +1.2 (#77).
 
Love this season has been a net +18.1 points per 100 possessions to Jefferson's +0.6.
 
They're "very comparable" in the sense that any two players can be compared. The better question is what on earth they have in common, other than the fact that they've both played for the Wolves. I suspect a Celtics forum may be the only place Al Jefferson would pop into anyone's head in the context of Kevin Love.
 
On a side note: we all know "PER" is bunk, right? It basically rewards volume-shooting above all else. LeBron has raised his scoring efficiency by over 80 points of ts relative to six years ago, and has seen his PER drop. I'm honestly surprised to see it referenced so frequently here.

 
Love really established himself in his 3rd year and took the leap and thats when his stats really got gaudy.  If he is really as good as the stats show, why in his 3rd and 4th year did he only win 17 and 26 games?  What he has had around him is bad, there is no doubt about that, but if his numbers that suggest he is one of the top guys in the NBA are legit, why cant that top guy get them close to mediocrity those years?  Without any answer to that question, its very fair to critique the stats.
 
On one hand you are critiquing PER which some of us just use as a general barometer, and then you point to RAPM (which granted I never heard of) and note how it indicates Love is really elite.  I found it a little odd that Millsap is ranked ahead of Love, and Tyson Chandler, Chris Anderson and Mike Conley are in the 5 spots below him.  But, that got me thinking, I'm pretty sure they could put together a complicated trade where they send out Love and get Millsap, Chandler and Conley and if those rankings are correct then the TWolves will have 3 of the top 13 players in the league, they would be unstoppable.
 
 

Not totally sure I understand the question, but it's possible, yes.  We've all probably played with players who aren't very good basketball players but who have, for example, a lot of points.  
 
I don't think Love fits that category though, if that's what you're getting at.  But of course I could be wrong.

 
Thats exactly what I mean, context is important.  I havent watched the TWolves closely enough but offensively I wonder if he is actually making the team better or just putting up his numbers.  The best example I can think of to demonstrate this is PP his first 2 years with Doc.  
 
In 03/04 Obie left and it was chaos and PP tried to carry the load and it was brutal to watch and his efficiency went down for the 2nd straight year.  Then 04/05 was when Doc came in and he and PP butted heads but Doc wanted PP to shoot less be more efficient and be more of a playmaker for his teammates.  Mission accomplished, his FGA per 36 drop tremendously, his eFG% and TS% go back up to career norms, his TOs are slightly down and his assists are actually down but the offense really revolved around him he became the playmaker.  The Celts win 45 games a big jump from the 36 the year before.  Its not always reliable of course, but his +/- tell the story, with virtually the same team he goes from hardly making an impact to being a ~8+ point impact guy.  
 
Then we have 05/06, from an shooting standpoint he puts up virtually the same stats, its uncanny.  But his FGAs are back up again, but there was no drop in efficiency that we would expect so thats a good thing right?  Again, not always accurate, but his +/- regresses and the Celts go from winning 45 to lucky 33
 
Without knowing the history of the Celts, I have no narrative to these numbers and I probably think 05/06 is more impressive than 04/05 because of the increase in usage but I'd be wrong.  Thats what I mean by hollow stats, and I just dont know enough about the TWolves to know if Love is PP of 04/05 or 05/06 or somewhere in between.
 
 

PP

Season	TS%	eFG%	FGA per 36	FTr	3PAr	ORB%	DRB%	TRB%	AST%	TOV%	USG%	ORtg	DRtg	Offense OnOff	Defense OnOff	Total OnOff
2003-04	0.517	0.441	17.4	0.422	0.257	2.6	16.4	9.6	25.1	14.6	30.5	101	103	+1.1	-0.3	+0.6
2004-05	0.583	0.499	14.9	0.546	0.239	3.1	17.8	10.6	20.3	13.2	26.6	114	105	+9.7	-1.8	+7.8
2005-06	0.582	0.509	17.1	0.555	0.215	3.1	17.5	10.5	23.4	13	31.2	112	106	+12.7	-9.9	+2.9

 

[luckiestman]

Awesome.  Now how do you propose to get Noah?

 
My thought was that he would cost less than Love. I don't think he is UFA until 2016

 

[ivanvamp]

Well maybe you'd be right, if the Bulls were selling.  Of course, why would they be selling?  Noah is a terrific player and they have him for a while longer.  But yeah, I could certainly live with Rondo/Lottery Stud/Noah plus a really good scorer at the wing as a FA pickup.  Though who that would be, I don't know.

 

[Blacken]

I dont think anyone would suggest that those guys are really franchise changers that lead you to a title

How many games have you actually watched in which LaMarcus Aldridge is playing?

 

[wutang112878]

How many games have you actually watched in which LaMarcus Aldridge is playing?

 
Honestly not that many, is my assessment far off?  Do you think he could be the alpha dog on a title winning team?

 

[Devizier]

All the same things were written about Paul Pierce for some time, even in these very forums.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

 
Love really established himself in his 3rd year and took the leap and thats when his stats really got gaudy.  If he is really as good as the stats show, why in his 3rd and 4th year did he only win 17 and 26 games?  What he has had around him is bad, there is no doubt about that, but if his numbers that suggest he is one of the top guys in the NBA are legit, why cant that top guy get them close to mediocrity those years?  Without any answer to that question, its very fair to critique the stats.
 
On one hand you are critiquing PER which some of us just use as a general barometer, and then you point to RAPM (which granted I never heard of) and note how it indicates Love is really elite.  I found it a little odd that Millsap is ranked ahead of Love, and Tyson Chandler, Chris Anderson and Mike Conley are in the 5 spots below him.  But, that got me thinking, I'm pretty sure they could put together a complicated trade where they send out Love and get Millsap, Chandler and Conley and if those rankings are correct then the TWolves will have 3 of the top 13 players in the league, they would be unstoppable.
 
 
 
Thats exactly what I mean, context is important.  I havent watched the TWolves closely enough but offensively I wonder if he is actually making the team better or just putting up his numbers.  The best example I can think of to demonstrate this is PP his first 2 years with Doc.  
 
In 03/04 Obie left and it was chaos and PP tried to carry the load and it was brutal to watch and his efficiency went down for the 2nd straight year.  Then 04/05 was when Doc came in and he and PP butted heads but Doc wanted PP to shoot less be more efficient and be more of a playmaker for his teammates.  Mission accomplished, his FGA per 36 drop tremendously, his eFG% and TS% go back up to career norms, his TOs are slightly down and his assists are actually down but the offense really revolved around him he became the playmaker.  The Celts win 45 games a big jump from the 36 the year before.  Its not always reliable of course, but his +/- tell the story, with virtually the same team he goes from hardly making an impact to being a ~8+ point impact guy.  
 
Then we have 05/06, from an shooting standpoint he puts up virtually the same stats, its uncanny.  But his FGAs are back up again, but there was no drop in efficiency that we would expect so thats a good thing right?  Again, not always accurate, but his +/- regresses and the Celts go from winning 45 to lucky 33
 
Without knowing the history of the Celts, I have no narrative to these numbers and I probably think 05/06 is more impressive than 04/05 because of the increase in usage but I'd be wrong.  Thats what I mean by hollow stats, and I just dont know enough about the TWolves to know if Love is PP of 04/05 or 05/06 or somewhere in between.

 
You answered your own question, though. The 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 Timberwolves were really bad because of their roster. Their top guys, in terms of minutes played in 2010-2011, were Love, Michael Beasley, Luke Ridnour, Wesley Johnson, and Darko Milicic. The next season, they added two rookies to that mix in Rubio and Williams and played both big minutes. They were a young, inexperienced team that consisted of a bunch of players who have had largely disappointing careers, outside of Love. If you're overmatched at 4 out 5 positions on the floor, is it at all reasonable to expect a single, very good player to lift a team on his own? Outside of LeBron, are there any examples of that happening? Who are the guys that have taken a young team comprised of replacement level or below players and flirted with a .500 record? The best example I can think of off the top of my head is Bosh in 2009-2010, when he was the best player on a 40-42 Toronto team. McGrady led Orlando to a .500ish record in 02-03. But beyond those, after a quick look, I can't really find any examples of a single elite player carrying an otherwise bad team to mediocrity.

 

[ivanvamp]

Jordan carrying the Bulls in his early years?
 
In 83-84, before he arrived, they were 27-55, finishing 5th in the Central.
 
In 84-85, Jordan's rookie year, he played 82 games, averaged 28.2 ppg, and the Bulls went 38-44, finishing 3rd in the Central, and went to the playoffs.
 
In 85-86, Jordan was injured and only played in 18 games, and the Bulls went 30-52.
 
In 86-87, Jordan played a full season, averaged 37.1 ppg, and the Bulls went 40-42, making the playoffs.
 
But again, we're talking about probably the greatest player of all time, and it's not at all fair to compare Love to Michael Jordan or LeBron James.  

 

[wutang112878]

 
You answered your own question, though. The 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 Timberwolves were really bad because of their roster. Their top guys, in terms of minutes played in 2010-2011, were Love, Michael Beasley, Luke Ridnour, Wesley Johnson, and Darko Milicic. The next season, they added two rookies to that mix in Rubio and Williams and played both big minutes. They were a young, inexperienced team that consisted of a bunch of players who have had largely disappointing careers, outside of Love. If you're overmatched at 4 out 5 positions on the floor, is it at all reasonable to expect a single, very good player to lift a team on his own? Outside of LeBron, are there any examples of that happening? Who are the guys that have taken a young team comprised of replacement level or below players and flirted with a .500 record? The best example I can think of off the top of my head is Bosh in 2009-2010, when he was the best player on a 40-42 Toronto team. McGrady led Orlando to a .500ish record in 02-03. But beyond those, after a quick look, I can't really find any examples of a single elite player carrying an otherwise bad team to mediocrity.

 
I really had to dig, and I couldnt find perfect examples of a superstar getting a horrible team to 30+ wins.  But I think Isiah Thomas is an example.
 
The 80/81 Pistons win 21 games with Terry Tyler, Phil Hubbard, Keith Herron, Kent Benson, Ron Lee and Paul Mokeski as the lead guys.  Ortg of 98.1 and Drtg of 104.3, and their win pythag was 24 wins
 
Thomas arrives in 81/82, although he comes in with Kelly Tripucka who we could make the case what an adequate sidekick.  That year Tripucka has a TS% of 0.57, eFG% of 0.498, usage of 23.3 and Drtg of 110.  In 09/10 Love had Big Al whose numbers are 0.52 / 0.498 / 24.3 / 108 so pretty comparable.  In 10/11 Love has deal with some inefficient shooting by Beasley but he also has Ridinour and his numbers are 0.567 / 0.528 / 17.8 / 113 
 
Getting back to the Pistons, Thomas's main guys in 81/82 are Tripucka, Kent Benson, John Long, Terry Tyler and Ron Lee  That team has an Ortg of 105.8 (+7.7 from the previous year) and Drtg of 106.6, their win pythag is 39 games and they win 39 games.
 
So maybe Thomas had a slightly better supporting cast, but he didnt have any chance to really impact their defense and certainly cant rebound and impact the qty of possessions like Love can.  But Thomas took almost the same crew and won an additional 18 games and brought them to a respectable record.  I wouldnt expect Love to get to 39 wins with his crew, but maybe breaking 30 or at least getting to the high 20s would demonstrate some of that impact that we are looking for.

 

[bowiac]

All the same things were written about Paul Pierce for some time, even in these very forums.

Except they weren't true. Pierce made the Eastern Conference Finals in his 4th year, and made the playoffs in his 5th and 6th years as well.  The Celtics won at a 47.6% clip during those 6 years. Love's Timberwolves are 0-6 on the playoffs, and have won at about a 31% clip.

 

[wutang112878]

 
You answered your own question, though. The 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 Timberwolves were really bad because of their roster. Their top guys, in terms of minutes played in 2010-2011, were Love, Michael Beasley, Luke Ridnour, Wesley Johnson, and Darko Milicic. The next season, they added two rookies to that mix in Rubio and Williams and played both big minutes. They were a young, inexperienced team that consisted of a bunch of players who have had largely disappointing careers, outside of Love. If you're overmatched at 4 out 5 positions on the floor, is it at all reasonable to expect a single, very good player to lift a team on his own? Outside of LeBron, are there any examples of that happening? Who are the guys that have taken a young team comprised of replacement level or below players and flirted with a .500 record? The best example I can think of off the top of my head is Bosh in 2009-2010, when he was the best player on a 40-42 Toronto team. McGrady led Orlando to a .500ish record in 02-03. But beyond those, after a quick look, I can't really find any examples of a single elite player carrying an otherwise bad team to mediocrity.

 
I think I might have a better example, Antoine Walker in his 2nd year and he isnt the player Love is.  In 96/97 they are intentionally tanking and win 15.  Granted it was under the amazing tutelage of one Rick Pitino, but they win 36 games with a winpythag of 33.  His cast of characters is Ron Mercer, Walter McCarty, Dana Barros, Andrew Declercq, Travis Knight and 51 games of Chauncey Billups and 16 from Kenny Anderson.  Hindsight being 20/20 the franchise was in the early stages of dysfunction, Pitino had no clue what he was doing but they had a respectable win total somehow.

 

[Jer]

Except they weren't true. Pierce made the Eastern Conference Finals in his 4th year, and made the playoffs in his 5th and 6th years as well.  The Celtics won at a 47.6% clip during those 6 years. Love's Timberwolves are 0-6 on the playoffs, and have won at about a 31% clip.

 
I think the point is more centered on a season like 2005-06 when the Celtics went 33-49. Pierce played 79 games, put up a 26.8/6.7/4.7 line and shot 47%. These were great numbers. He was ranked #11 in the league by PER that season.
 
The point being... we know Pierce played well that season and also was capable of being a top 2 player on a championship team... yet the Celtics still sucked that season. I think the only reasonable conclusion is that his teammates sucked and/or Doc was doing a shitty job coaching.
 
If you agree that the problem in 2005-06 wasn't Pierce... that it was in fact his teammates... and that he couldn't have "willed" the team to another 10 wins... then we now agree that it's possible for a great player to exist on a losing team. Then we're just debating if it's possible for the Minnesota roster to have sucked so badly around Love for an extended period of time. IMHO, yes it's possible.

 

[bowiac]

The thesis has always been about whether it's possible for it to happen over an extended period of time, yes. The Pierce example mostly goes towards the "no" answer.

 

[DourDoerr]

Given how important defense is to a championship contender, it doesn't make sense to use so much trade capital and just plain capital to lock down a guy who will be a drain on your defense.  If you're going to commit that much to a big, he needs to play down low and protect the rim.  Love is a tremendous rebounder and scorer, but you're paying through the nose for those numbers while being asked to ignore that other end of the court that's just as important and arguably more so in the playoffs.
 
Ideally in today's game, you'd have a big that can protect the rim, rebound, run the floor and shoot free throws.  Everything else is gravy and I'd rather not pay premium prices for more gravy than meat.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

 
I really had to dig, and I couldnt find perfect examples of a superstar getting a horrible team to 30+ wins.  But I think Isiah Thomas is an example.
 
The 80/81 Pistons win 21 games with Terry Tyler, Phil Hubbard, Keith Herron, Kent Benson, Ron Lee and Paul Mokeski as the lead guys.  Ortg of 98.1 and Drtg of 104.3, and their win pythag was 24 wins
 
Thomas arrives in 81/82, although he comes in with Kelly Tripucka who we could make the case what an adequate sidekick.  That year Tripucka has a TS% of 0.57, eFG% of 0.498, usage of 23.3 and Drtg of 110.  In 09/10 Love had Big Al whose numbers are 0.52 / 0.498 / 24.3 / 108 so pretty comparable.  In 10/11 Love has deal with some inefficient shooting by Beasley but he also has Ridinour and his numbers are 0.567 / 0.528 / 17.8 / 113 
 
Getting back to the Pistons, Thomas's main guys in 81/82 are Tripucka, Kent Benson, John Long, Terry Tyler and Ron Lee  That team has an Ortg of 105.8 (+7.7 from the previous year) and Drtg of 106.6, their win pythag is 39 games and they win 39 games.
 
So maybe Thomas had a slightly better supporting cast, but he didnt have any chance to really impact their defense and certainly cant rebound and impact the qty of possessions like Love can.  But Thomas took almost the same crew and won an additional 18 games and brought them to a respectable record.  I wouldnt expect Love to get to 39 wins with his crew, but maybe breaking 30 or at least getting to the high 20s would demonstrate some of that impact that we are looking for.

 
They won 26 games in 2011-2012 season. There's a good chance they break 30 if that's a full season. The next season, he only played 18 games, and this year they have 26 wins at the All-Star Break. They also have an expected record of 33-20 so far this season, so there's a good chance their winning percentage improves over the second half. So if that's the standard, he's accomplishing it.
 
Edit: Actually, now that I think about it a bit more, the Timberwolves made a pretty substantial leap between his 3rd and 4th season. In his third year, they won at a .207 clip. That improved to .394 the next year, and if you were to expand that out over a full 82 game season they'd have won 31 games. That's a 14 win improvement from one year to the next. Then Love had a lost season due to injury, and now the team's hovering around .500, and has a pythag expectation that's much better than that.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

The thesis has always been about whether it's possible for it to happen over an extended period of time, yes. The Pierce example mostly goes towards the "no" answer.

 
Not sure it does quite all that--compare the rosters and make the case that Pierce did better than Love when he had similar talent around him, though.  What does that case look like?   I think his success was with (initially) Walker and later Garnett/Allen who are superior to what Love has had, and with superior coaching both points in time as well.  Pierce having better players around him (which I think is the real story here) would take him out of the sample, not make him a 'no' for the thesis, wouldn't it?
 
I say that as someone who doesn't really disagree with the 'softer' version of your conclusion, which I think is that Minnesota's struggles suggest Love is not as impactful (or valuable) a player as some metrics suggest.   

 

[Jer]

So much Love around here on Valentine's Day...  the trade deadline can't arrive soon enough so we can stop talking theoreticals for a bit. A fun conversation either way.
 
The trouble with the Love situation is that it's really unprecedented for a player his age to put up numbers this good and have the team suck this much. This part seems like a fact. Here's a fun list...
 
Players since 1990; 3-6th seasons; WS/48 >= .2 and G >= 50 and M/G >= 25 
 

Since 1990, 3-6th seasons,WS/48 .2+,G 50+, and M/G 25+

Rk	Player	From	To	Tm	Count	Team Winning %
1	Tim Duncan	2000	2003	SAS	4	70%
2	Manu Ginobili	2005	2008	SAS	4	72%
3	LeBron James	2006	2009	CLE	4	64%
4	Kevin Durant	2010	2013	OKC	3	68%
5	Kevin Love	2011	2014	MIN	3	35%
6	Dirk Nowitzki	2001	2003	DAL	3	68%
7	Chris Paul	2008	2011	NOH	3	57%
8	David Robinson*	1992	1995	SAS	3	65%
9	Arvydas Sabonis*	1998	2000	POR	3	64%
10	Amar'e Stoudemire	2005	2008	PHO	3	71%
11	Dwyane Wade	2006	2009	MIA	3	47%

 
If it's possible to have massively inflated numbers but fundamentally be a loser, then Love might be the GOAT at this particular combination.
 
My view is that Love's stats probably overstate his contributions a bit, but more importantly, his style of play requires a more particular set of complimentary players. This presents a challenge for a GM, but it's not an insurmountable one. And if you do assemble the right pieces, you've got a contender where Love is your #1 or 2 player.
 
I'd still be thrilled if the Celtics acquired him in a sign-and-trade next summer. I think Danny/Brad could figure out how to maximize his contributions. Heck I can even see Rondo/Love/2014-Pick being our next Big 3... but then, I'm an optimist

 

[bowiac]

 
I say that as someone who doesn't really disagree with the 'softer' version of your conclusion, which I think is that Minnesota's struggles suggest Love is not as impactful (or valuable) a player as some metrics suggest.   

That's the only conclusion I've got really. I don't doubt he's a great player (i.e. top 20). I'm just not sure he's a top ~5 guy.
 
Pierce is a "no", only insofar as everyone is a "yes" or a "no" - I didn't mean anything beyond that. I agree he's not really comparable generally.

 

[Devizier]

The thesis has always been about whether it's possible for it to happen over an extended period of time, yes. The Pierce example mostly goes towards the "no" answer.

 
Only a handful players have fronted an extended championship window in league history, though:
 
George Mikan
Bill Russell
Magic Johnson
Larry Bird
Michael Jordan
Isaiah Thomas
Hakeem Olajuwon
Tim Duncan
Shaquille O'Neal
Kobe Bryant
Lebron James
 
And in every case, those guys had at least one HOF-caliber teammate during their championship runs. In many cases, two or three (or eight in Russell's 1962-1963 season).

 

[Devizier]

I think a more germane argument that accounts for Love's struggles is that very few teams have been as poorly run, historically, as the Minnesota Timberwolves.
 
Aside from lucking into Kevin Garnett and Kevin Love and a handful of other decent moves, that franchise has made unilaterally terrible decisions.
 
McHale and Kahn are both top ten worst general managers of all time, and they account for about 90% of the Minnesota front office history.

 

[wutang112878]

 
They won 26 games in 2011-2012 season. There's a good chance they break 30 if that's a full season. The next season, he only played 18 games, and this year they have 26 wins at the All-Star Break. They also have an expected record of 33-20 so far this season, so there's a good chance their winning percentage improves over the second half. So if that's the standard, he's accomplishing it.
 
Edit: Actually, now that I think about it a bit more, the Timberwolves made a pretty substantial leap between his 3rd and 4th season. In his third year, they won at a .207 clip. That improved to .394 the next year, and if you were to expand that out over a full 82 game season they'd have won 31 games. That's a 14 win improvement from one year to the next. Then Love had a lost season due to injury, and now the team's hovering around .500, and has a pythag expectation that's much better than that.

 
Forgot about the 18 games last year and the shortened season (was just looking at win total dur). 
 
But it brings up an interesting question, how did they win 31 in 12/13???  In 11/12 Love played 83% of the games and they were on a 32 win pace.  In 12/13 Love plays 22% of the games and that same crew wins 31  Wouldnt we expect there to be a drop off in wins? 

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

 
Forgot about the 18 games last year and the shortened season (was just looking at win total dur). 
 
But it brings up an interesting question, how did they win 31 in 12/13???  In 11/12 Love played 83% of the games and they were on a 32 win pace.  In 12/13 Love plays 22% of the games and that same crew wins 31  Wouldnt we expect there to be a drop off in wins? 

 
The talent around him was improving (e.g Rubio).  And they had Kirilenko for 12/13.

 

[wutang112878]

Rubio has put up virtually the same numbers every year he has been in the league, so they didnt get any real improvement there.  But if losing Love and adding AK47 is a wash that doesnt bode well for Love's value
 
Here is something else that is rather interesting, if you look at the players that were there for both years, in 12/13 all of them had an increase in minutes and usage, yet the only player to be less efficient was Pekovic.  Thats a little counter intuitive.  If you lose your best player and ask bad players to do more, then shouldnt they be less efficient?  Its sort of like the Ewing theory
 

Minny

2011 / 2012
Player	Min	TS%	USG%
Luke Ridnour	1750	0.53	17.8
Derrick Williams	1418	0.499	20.7
Ricky Rubio	1404	0.476	18.7
Nikola Pekovic	1264	0.607	21.9
Jose Barea	1032	0.502	24.3
2012 / 2013
Player	Min	TS%	USG%
Luke Ridnour	2474	0.532	18.3
Derrick Williams	1916	0.515	23.5
Ricky Rubio	1691	0.482	21.2
Nikola Pekovic	1959	0.572	22.5
Jose Barea	1713	0.51	25.1

 

 

[Curtis Pride]

Perhaps the "Love effect" is in fewer assists per game?
 
[tablegrid= Assists per game ]Player 2011-12 2012-13 Ricky Rubio 8.2 7.3 Jose Barea 5.7 4 Luke Ridnour 4.8 3.8 Nikola Pekovic 0.7 0.9 Derrick Williams 0.6 0.6 [/tablegrid]
 
As an aside, can the Kevin Love discussion be broken out into its own thread?

 

[Curtis Pride]

wutang, I think the Kirilenko vs. Love effect on the Wolves was rather simple: Kirilenko didn't take as many shots, made a higher percentage of his shots, and had more assists than Love that year. So it may be that the team played better with Kirilenko than with Love.

 

[wutang112878]

Take a step back. AK filled in for Love admirably and the team won at about the same rate. Has anyone ever asked if AK is a superstar?

 

[luckiestman]

Take a step back. AK filled in for Love admirably and the team won at about the same rate. Has anyone ever asked if AK is a superstar?

 
Tony Kornheiser, but for different reasons, or at least a different kind of love

 

[Cellar-Door]

Take a step back. AK filled in for Love admirably and the team won at about the same rate. Has anyone ever asked if AK is a superstar?

Yes they have, back when he probably was on the edge of being one in the early to mid-2000s. He was a top 5-10 player in the league in 2003, then got hurt in 2004 while having a great season, and while still very good after that, never quite broke out into a perennial top 10 player. Still he was an amazingly versatile player who was one of the best defenders in the league, passed well, rebounded decently, shot efficiently, but never piled up the points and so flew under the radar. If he had come along 10 years later he would have been far more appreciated.