I don’t think anyone had a 143-101 Minnesota Timberwolves blowout win in Game 3 of the Western Conference Finals on their Bingo card. Virtually everything went right for the Wolves.
Still, with Game 4 taking place just 48 hours later, it’s natural to wonder what Minnesota can carry over to Monday’s game.
Ball Pressure
The Wolves often discuss the need to set the tone early on defense with their physical play. They also attempt to understand what the officials will call early, gauging how much physicality they will allow.
Minnesota’s ball pressure and defense were exquisite in Game 3. They finished the first quarter with a 56.0 defensive rating and had a 12% steal percentage, meaning just over 1 in 10 possessions resulted in a steal. The Wolves forced six turnovers that resulted in eleven points. Even with all that havoc on the defensive side, they only had two fouls in the first quarter.
They created pressure without fouling by strategically pressing Shai Gilgeous-Alexander from the second he got the inbound pass to the court line, then applying a double team to trap him and force him to make a difficult pass.
After a made basket, they would allow him to dribble up the court and run the first action of a pick-and-roll before Jaden McDaniels blitzed Gilgeous-Alexander, forcing him to get off the ball. The Wolves would even switch in and out of zone defense every few possessions to ensure the Gilgeous-Alexander never saw the same look.
To be fair, the Timberwolves did try all of these things in Games 1 and 2. However, by applying the pressure early and often, the Wolves allowed themselves to subtly dictate what would be considered a foul and what was not, thus setting the game’s tone.
Shot Quality
Shooting is always variable. Sometimes, a team misses shots, regardless of whether they get open looks. That was the case for the Wolves in Games 1 and 2, where they shot 29.4% on open to wide open on three pointers(open being a shot with no defender between 4-6 feet, and wide open being no defender within at least 6 feet). They shot 48.4% on the same shots in Game 3.
The biggest difference between Games 1 and 2 may be that they hit their open shots. In Game 3, 32.3% of their shots were open or wide-open threes, down from 50.0% combined in Games 1 and 2. Minnesota’s ability to make those open shots caused the percentage to drop, because the Thunder were daring Minnesota to shoot threes in the previous two games.
As the Wolves converted, the Thunder had to respect the three-point game and adapt their defense, pushing it out to the perimeter to slow Minnesota’s shooting. That opened up the space inside for Edwards and Julius Randle to start attacking and driving to the rim.
That’s where Minnesota’s offense is truly dangerous. The driving lanes open as the outside shot falls and the defense shifts, and the lob pass to Rudy Gobert becomes an option, opening up the offense.
Game 3 was much more similar to how the Wolves played in the regular season. 41.1% of their shots in the regular season were either open or wide-open threes, and they converted at 38.3%. That outside shooting set up play in the restricted area at the rim, a place the Wolves converted at an impressive 67.5%. Due to the outside shooting, the Wolves shot 70.8% in the restricted area in Game 3, as opposed to 55.6% in Games 1 and 2.
Ball Movement
It’s been no secret how vital ball movement has been to the Timberwolves this playoffs. In wins, the percentage of assists on baskets has been 63.9%. In losses, it’s 55.5%. Some of that results from the Wolves shooting 7.3% worse in the losses from the field, but that does not make up the entire difference.
In certain games, the Wolves allow the ball to become “sticky,” as Chris Finch calls it. That means the ball often does not make the extra pass to the more open offensive player. The ball also becomes sticky when the players lose trust that it will circle back to them within the offense.
Stickiness can cause turnovers or frustrate players, which negatively affects the defense. As the game gets more out of hand, the negative feedback loop continues as the ball becomes increasingly sticky. It’s been something of a trend in the many blowout losses the Wolves have faced.
Minnesota’s assist percentage dropped to 58.5% in the two losses to Oklahoma City. Considering Minnesota’s extreme scoring issues, it was still pretty good. Despite making so many more shots in Game 3, Minnesota’s assist percentage dropped to 54.5%, suggesting the ball movement may not have been as good.
However, Oklahoma City’s defense opened up in Game 3, allowing the ball-handler to make more straight-line drives at the basket, which usually don’t create the same assist rate as catch-and-shoot threes. However, it could be something to monitor, because the Thunder will study every minute detail between Games 3 and 4.
The Wolves can replicate success. The same game plan will likely work in Game 4: set the tone defensively, make more shots, and move the ball. It’s a simple formula, but the Wolves struggled with it all season until the playoffs started.
Now that the stakes are at their highest, the Timberwolves will try to build consistency in what they know works. They will need a similarly perfect game in Game 4 to tie things up in the series.