← Team Metrics
Latest

Minnesota Timberwolves

2017-18
2016-172017-182018-192019-202020-212021-222022-232023-242024-252025-26
Latest available releaseEvidence released Aug 22, 2026, 8:30 PM UTCLive database

What were the Minnesota Timberwolves in 2017-18, and what needed front-office attention?

MIN 2017-18: no supported structural problem was identified. The strongest covered areas were Interior finishing, Rim pressure, Rebounding. The main rotation-player dependency cases were Karl-Anthony Towns, Jeff Teague, Taj Gibson, Jimmy Butler III, Tyus Jones. Structural basketball need, injuries, replacement lineups, and financial constraints are reported separately.

CoveragePartial8 supported · 3 withheld
Cap positionOver the cap, below the tax line, on selected player charges
Next decision dateNo calendar release at this as-of time

What can be trusted

Supported strengths — production, who carries it, and what money is already committed.
Interior finishing
100th percentile
Karl-Anthony Towns carries 28.0%
Availability: No governed recent availability evidence for this seasonMoney: Heavy or redundant salary already committed here
Full reading

MIN 2017-18 Interior finishing: this was a team strength; production ranked at the 100.0 league percentile. Karl-Anthony Towns supplied 28.0% of the team's above-replacement production in this area. No governed recent game-level availability layer exists for this season. The team already committed substantial or redundant cap resources here.

Rim pressure
100th percentile
Andrew Wiggins carries 28.6%
Availability: No governed recent availability evidence for this seasonMoney: Heavy or redundant salary already committed here
Full reading

MIN 2017-18 Rim pressure: this was a team strength; production ranked at the 100.0 league percentile. Andrew Wiggins supplied 28.6% of the team's above-replacement production in this area. No governed recent game-level availability layer exists for this season. The team already committed substantial or redundant cap resources here.

Rebounding
85th percentile
Karl-Anthony Towns carries 38.9%
Availability: No governed recent availability evidence for this seasonMoney: Balanced or context-dependent salary commitment
Full reading

MIN 2017-18 Rebounding: this was a team strength; production ranked at the 85.2 league percentile. Karl-Anthony Towns supplied 38.9% of the team's above-replacement production in this area. No governed recent game-level availability layer exists for this season. Financial commitment is shown separately and does not determine basketball quality.

What needs attention

The clearest roster problems the evidence supports.

No supported roster problems are on record for this season — team picture available; recent availability layer unavailable.

Every covered basketball function (11)
FunctionReadingLeague percentileLargest contributorRecent availabilitySalary commitment
CreationSupportedTeam strength78th percentileJeff Teague · 28.1%No recent availability layer for this seasonHeavy or redundant salary already committed here
Defensive event creationSupportedMiddle of the league67th percentileJimmy Butler III · 23.9%No recent availability layer for this seasonHeavy or redundant salary already committed here
Interior finishingSupportedTeam strength100th percentileKarl-Anthony Towns · 28.0%No recent availability layer for this seasonHeavy or redundant salary already committed here
Passing connectivitySupportedMiddle of the league74th percentileJeff Teague · 28.6%No recent availability layer for this seasonHeavy or redundant salary already committed here
Point-of-attack defense proxyWithheldBasketball conclusion withheldTyus JonesNo recent availability layer for this seasonBalanced or context-dependent salary commitment
ReboundingSupportedTeam strength85th percentileKarl-Anthony Towns · 38.9%No recent availability layer for this seasonBalanced or context-dependent salary commitment
Rim pressureSupportedTeam strength100th percentileAndrew Wiggins · 28.6%No recent availability layer for this seasonHeavy or redundant salary already committed here
Rim protectionSupportedMiddle of the league37th percentileKarl-Anthony Towns · 37.5%No recent availability layer for this seasonBalanced or context-dependent salary commitment
ScreeningWithheldBasketball conclusion withheldTyus JonesNo recent availability layer for this seasonBalanced or context-dependent salary commitment
Shooting and spacingSupportedMiddle-tier area with one-player risk48th percentileKarl-Anthony Towns · 48.9%No recent availability layer for this seasonBalanced or context-dependent salary commitment
Switch coverage proxyWithheldBasketball conclusion withheldTyus JonesNo recent availability layer for this seasonBalanced or context-dependent salary commitment

Who the team depends on

What disappears when a player is removed — and whether an observed replacement five exists.
Karl-Anthony Towns
Critical basketball and lineup dependence

MIN was highly dependent on Karl-Anthony Towns. Removing him cost about 28.0% of interior finish production, and lineups with him performed 10.5 points per 100 possessions better than lineups without him. The best supported replacement group was [Jamal Crawford, Nemanja Bjelica, Gorgui Dieng, Andrew Wiggins, Tyus Jones] over 250 possessions.

rotation 74%loses 28.0% of interior finishing
Replacement evidence
Best observed five without Karl-Anthony Towns

Jamal Crawford · Nemanja Bjelica · Gorgui Dieng · Andrew Wiggins · Tyus Jones

shrunk net -1.213 over 250 possessions — small sample

on floor 5,477 possessions · off floor 1,984 possessions

Jeff Teague
Single-skill dependence

MIN did not have strong functional backup for Jeff Teague in creation; removing him cost about 28.1% of the team's production in that area. The next observed option was Jimmy Butler III.

rotation 59%loses 28.1% of creation
Replacement evidence
Best observed five without Jeff Teague

Taj Gibson · Jimmy Butler III · Andrew Wiggins · Tyus Jones · Karl-Anthony Towns

shrunk net 9.079 over 458 possessions

on floor 4,481 possessions · off floor 2,980 possessions

Taj Gibson
Lineup performance dependence

MIN lineups performed 4.9 points per 100 possessions better with Taj Gibson than without him. The best supported alternative was [Jamal Crawford, Nemanja Bjelica, Gorgui Dieng, Andrew Wiggins, Tyus Jones] over 250 possessions.

rotation 68%loses 21.3% of interior finishing
Replacement evidence
Best observed five without Taj Gibson

Jamal Crawford · Nemanja Bjelica · Gorgui Dieng · Andrew Wiggins · Tyus Jones

shrunk net -1.213 over 250 possessions — small sample

on floor 5,103 possessions · off floor 2,358 possessions

Jimmy Butler III
Lineup performance dependence

MIN lineups performed 13.0 points per 100 possessions better with Jimmy Butler III than without him. The best supported alternative was [Jeff Teague, Taj Gibson, Nemanja Bjelica, Andrew Wiggins, Karl-Anthony Towns] over 739 possessions.

rotation 55%loses 24.7% of creation
Replacement evidence
Best observed five without Jimmy Butler III

Jeff Teague · Taj Gibson · Nemanja Bjelica · Andrew Wiggins · Karl-Anthony Towns

shrunk net 2.635 over 739 possessions

on floor 4,079 possessions · off floor 3,382 possessions

Tyus Jones
Lineup performance dependence

MIN lineups performed 5.2 points per 100 possessions better with Tyus Jones than without him. The best supported alternative was [Jeff Teague, Taj Gibson, Jimmy Butler III, Andrew Wiggins, Karl-Anthony Towns] over 2195 possessions.

rotation 36%loses 13.6% of defensive event creation
Replacement evidence
Best observed five without Tyus Jones

Jeff Teague · Taj Gibson · Jimmy Butler III · Andrew Wiggins · Karl-Anthony Towns

shrunk net 5.787 over 2,195 possessions

on floor 2,627 possessions · off floor 4,834 possessions

Function loss, lineup performance, and replacement-lineup evidence remain separate; none is causal player value.

What injuries change

Recent absences and the basketball needs they created or worsened.

No governed recent game-level availability layer exists for this season.

Where money is tied up

Cap position and salary allocation — shown beside the basketball picture, never blended into it.
WithheldThe team was over the cap but below the tax on selected player charges; exception detail remains withheld.
Selected player charges
$116.1M
Share of cap
117%
Tax line
$3.19M under
First apron
$9.19M under
Second apron
No governed line that season

Most salary is mapped to interior finishing; the highest-need area is shooting and spacing. Salary-to-function mapping covers 88% of charges.

Exact figures
Salary cap: $99,093,000Luxury tax line: $119,266,000First apron: $125,266,000Second apron: Selected player charges: $116,075,131Source-reported payroll: $116,075,131 (source-named payroll total; not relabeled as cash or cap)

Exact transaction legality withheld — no exception-usage, cap-hold, and transaction ledger evidence.

What the evidence cannot answer

Deliberate abstentions — where the database refuses a conclusion rather than guessing.
PartialTeam picture available; recent availability layer unavailable8 of 11 functions supported
  • Point-of-attack defense proxy: Basketball conclusion withheld
  • Screening: Basketball conclusion withheld
  • Switch coverage proxy: Basketball conclusion withheld

Exact transaction legality: Exact transaction legality withheld — no exception-usage, cap-hold, and transaction ledger evidence

Team-season situation report. Structural basketball quality, recent availability, player dependence, replacement lineups, and financial position remain separate. No acquisition recommendation, transaction grade, coaching grade, outcome claim, or causal value is inferred.