Very skillful since the start of the season, and even with a 62% shooting success rate over the last five matches, Chet Holmgren had quite a bit to swallow against the Wolves when facing Rudy Gobert. Forty-eight minutes later, it’s confirmed: the Thunder rookie has indeed fallen on a bone.
Back in his hometown, Holmgren was bothered by the presence of the Frenchman, especially in the second half where his shots were constantly contested by the long arms of the three-time defender of the year. The Oklahoma City player finished with 16 points at 6/20 shooting. One of the worst matches of his young career in terms of skill.
The symbol of this difficult evening, marked by the Thunder’s defeat, is this sequence in the last quarter where Rudy Gobert defends on two shots in a row (and on a penetration attempt), including the second, mid- distance, ends in air ball.
Chet Holmgren broke his teeth
“I love it when a guy tries to attack me, especially several times in a row. Hats off to Chet, because he insisted,” explains the Wolves pivot to ESPN. “He was aggressive, he pushed me to really move my supports even more. »
Rudy Gobert also weighed in on offense with his 17 points (to add to his 16 rebounds and 4 blocks), his season record equaled, but it is as always in defense that he makes the difference. “He sets the tone for our defense”insists Chris Finch.
The move to zone defense in the second half shook up the Thunder, who only shot 31% after the break. With help and with his energy and his movements, the former Jazz player carried out a huge project.
“We just tried something different, to make them uncomfortable,” analyzes the Blues player for Star Tribune. “The zone was indeed very good, but above all our state of mind was much better. We were more physical in the second half and our defense in transition was better. »
| Rudy Gobert | Percentage | Rebounds | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Season | Team | MJ | Min | Shots | 3pts | L.F. | Off | Def | Early | Pd | Party | Int | Bp | Ct | Pts |
| 2013-14 | UTH | 45 | 10 | 48.6 | 0.0 | 49.2 | 1.1 | 2.3 | 3.4 | 0.2 | 1.3 | 0.2 | 0.7 | 0.9 | 2.3 |
| 2014-15 | UTH | 82 | 26 | 60.4 | 0.0 | 62.3 | 3.2 | 6.2 | 9.5 | 1.3 | 2.1 | 0.8 | 1.4 | 2.3 | 8.4 |
| 2015-16 | UTH | 61 | 32 | 55.9 | 0.0 | 56.9 | 3.4 | 7.5 | 11.0 | 1.5 | 2.7 | 0.7 | 1.9 | 2.2 | 9.1 |
| 2016-17 | UTH | 81 | 34 | 66.1 | 0.0 | 65.3 | 3.9 | 8.9 | 12.8 | 1.2 | 3.0 | 0.6 | 1.8 | 2.6 | 14.0 |
| 2017-18 | UTH | 56 | 32 | 62.2 | 0.0 | 68.2 | 3.0 | 7.8 | 10.7 | 1.4 | 2.7 | 0.8 | 1.9 | 2.3 | 13.5 |
| 2018-19 | UTH | 81 | 32 | 66.9 | 0.0 | 63.6 | 3.8 | 9.0 | 12.9 | 2.0 | 2.9 | 0.8 | 1.6 | 2.3 | 15.9 |
| 2019-20 | UTH | 68 | 34 | 69.3 | 0.0 | 63.0 | 3.4 | 10.1 | 13.5 | 1.5 | 3.2 | 0.8 | 1.9 | 2.0 | 15.1 |
| 2020-21 | UTH | 71 | 31 | 67.5 | 0.0 | 62.3 | 3.4 | 10.1 | 13.5 | 1.3 | 2.3 | 0.6 | 1.7 | 2.7 | 14.3 |
| 2021-22 | UTH | 66 | 32 | 71.3 | 0.0 | 69.0 | 3.7 | 11.0 | 14.7 | 1.1 | 2.7 | 0.7 | 1.8 | 2.1 | 15.6 |
| 2022-23 | MIN | 70 | 31 | 65.9 | 0.0 | 64.4 | 3.3 | 8.3 | 11.6 | 1.2 | 3.0 | 0.8 | 1.7 | 1.4 | 13.4 |
| 2023-24 | MIN | 16 | 32 | 58.5 | 0.0 | 58.8 | 3.6 | 7.6 | 11.3 | 1.3 | 2.9 | 0.6 | 1.8 | 2.2 | 12.1 |
| Total | 697 | 30 | 65.2 | 0.0 | 63.8 | 3.3 | 8.3 | 11.6 | 1.3 | 2.6 | 0.7 | 1.7 | 2.1 | 12.5 | |
How to read the stats? MJ = matches played; Min = Minutes; Shots = Successful shots / Attempted shots; 3pts = 3-points / 3-points attempted; LF = free throws made / free throws attempted; Off = offensive rebound; Def=defensive rebound; Tot = Total rebounds; Pd = assists; Fte: Personal fouls; Int = Intercepts; Bp = Lost balls; Ct: Against; Pts = Points.
