After Minnesota’s resounding Game 1 win on Saturday to claim a 1-0 advantage over the Lakers, Anthony Edwards was asked what the message was to the world after pundits across the globe had widely picked Los Angeles to win the first-round playoff series.

“No message, man,” Edwards said. “They still got the Lakers. Lakers supposed to win. That’s how it’s supposed to go and how it’s supposed to be.”

It’s debatable whether that’s still true. Minnesota has received plenty of praise in the wake of its impressive performance to open the series, and is now the betting favorite on all sportsbooks to topple the Lakers.

But it’s in the best interest of the Timberwolves to believe otherwise. What’s particularly interesting about the Timberwolves is the degree to which they know that to be true.

Wolves guard Mike Conley recently lauded his team’s ability to meet any challenge.

“We’re a team that plays well when we’re looking up, and fight our way and claw our way up a hill,” Conley said. “We understand with our back against the wall, we’re a much more dangerous team in our minds.”

Which is a great trait, as seen in last Saturday’s victory. Minnesota was on its P’s and Q’s in Game 1. The Wolves were as sharp as they’ve been on all season on both ends of the floor, particularly over the final three quarters.

That was the team many envisioned pushing the Thunder to win the Western Conference at the season’s outset. It’s why the Wolves were such a frustrating and confusing watch throughout the regular season. Because the team that took the floor over the first five months of the season rarely looked like the one that trounced the Lakers.

When Minnesota believed it was destined for the play-in tournament, it went on a 17-4 tear over its final 21 games to nab a top-six seed. Some of that strong close to the season had to do with Minnesota’s roster — reconfigured just two days before the start of training camp — meshing at the right time. But the urgency with which the team played was also palpable.

Ideally, of course, the team could deliver that same brand of basketball regardless.

“Sometimes when we get too much love and attention, we get a little bit soft and lazy,” Wolves coach Chris Finch said in the hours ahead of Game 1.

There’s a lot of evidence behind that assertion. Even just this season, the schedule brought Minnesota to California immediately after the Wolves used a thrilling fourth-quarter rally to down Oklahoma City in overtime. The next day, Finch and numerous Wolves players made in-person appearances on national programs.

And then proceeded to drop their next two games.

“We are our biggest opponent. We get a little complacent. When people start saying we’re good, and when the odds are with us, that’s when we’re not as good,” Wolves center Rudy Gobert noted at the end of March. “It happened last year in the playoffs. The odds had us losing every series. As soon as the odds had us winning (against Dallas in the West Finals), we didn’t.”

That was prevalent at a more granular level within the Western Conference semifinals. Minnesota was not picked by many to down the defending champs in Denver, but then the Wolves took Game 1. Gobert’s absence in Game 2 made Minnesota a heavy underdog again, and the Wolves ran roughshod over the Nuggets.

Heading back to Minnesota armed with a 2-0 series lead, a sweep felt almost inevitable. But Minnesota’s tenacity dipped noticeably and the Wolves dropped the next three games. The urgency returned in Game 6 for another dominant win and, finally, Minnesota put the Nuggets away in Game 7 — but only after and indifferent first-half performance that left the Wolves trailing by 20 in the third quarter.

After that second-half performance in Denver, Wolves assistant coach Micah Nori noted, “Fear is a hell of a motivator.”

“Fear of your season being over,” Nori said. “Fear of just not performing and going out the way that you would want to.”

That fear, that urgency, was all present in Minnesota’s performance Saturday in Los Angeles.

“I know we wanted it more,” Naz Reid said after the game. “That’s kind of how it has to be, especially when you’re the underdog.”

Minnesota is one of the best underdogs in basketball. It’s .500 record this season when playing as an underdog (10-10), per Sportsbook odds, was only bested by Oklahoma City, which was 2-1. Minnesota also had the second-best performance against the Vegas spread this season when playing as an underdog, behind only Cleveland.

The Wolves do not like to be discounted, but they play their best when they are.

“I think we have a lot of guys in this locker room that have been underdogs their whole life,” Gobert said. “It’s a position that we embrace, and I think we embrace it individually and collectively.”

The challenge for this group is to maintain that same mindset even when things are going well. The Wolves certainly don’t need to win Game 2 on Tuesday (in which they are still an underdog), but can they play as though they do?

Because while Minnesota ultimately won the Denver series a year ago, there’s a strong case to be made that the mid-series slump — which forced Minnesota to play seven grueling, energy-sapping games — ultimately cost the Wolves an NBA Finals appearance.

That’s not a mistake you want to make twice.

“Experience is real. It’s a real thing — especially when you can kind of keep it within a same eight or nine guys who go through it together,” Conley said. “You immediately remember things. You immediately remember Luka destroying us last season and what happened in the conference championship. You immediately remember Milwaukee a week ago when we lost a game up 24. … Those things pop in your mind and you immediately try to be like, ‘What do we got to do different?’ Right now, it’s one game, and move onto the next one.”

“It’s on us to fix our own odds,” Gobert said. “We’ve been through it for the last few years, so by now we know that it’s just about us.”

Related Articles

Timberwolves Playoffs: Reserves again ignite team’s best play

The Timberwolves had one of best shooting performances of the season Saturday. How will the Lakers react in Game 2?

Pack of rabid Timberwolves harass Lakers en route to Game 1 rout

Timberwolves playoffs: From contracts to reputation, what’s at stake

5 things the Timberwolves must do to upset the Lakers, plus a prediction

By EDDIE PELLS, Associated Press

The NCAA passed rules Monday that would upend decades of precedent by allowing colleges to pay their athletes per terms of a multibillion-dollar lawsuit settlement expected to go into effect this summer.

Related Articles

Women’s basketball: Gophers add 6-2 post through portal

Sports world mourns soccer-loving Pope Francis with games in Italy and Argentina postponed

Where are Gophers projected to go in NFL Draft?

Gophers football: Running back Jaydon Wright to enter transfer portal

More of same in postseason: Wild drop Game 1 in Vegas

The nine proposals passed by the NCAA board were largely expected but still mark a defining day in the history of college sports. An athlete’s ability to be paid directly by his or her university is on track to be enshrined in a rulebook that has forbidden that kind of relationship for decades.

For the NCAA rules to officially go into effect, the changes prescribed by the House settlement still have to be granted final approval by a federal judge, whose hearing earlier this month led to questions about potential tweaks before the new guidelines are supposed to go into play on July 1.

The changes will eliminate around 150 rules and alter many others in the NCAA’s sprawling rulebook. They essentially codify measures set up by the settlement, including:

Modifying bylaws to allow schools to pay the athletes directly.
Eliminating scholarship limits for teams, while also setting roster limits that are designed to replace the scholarship caps. Some details of the roster limits, which were a key sticking point in the April 7 hearing, will be finalized later.
Establishing annual reporting requirements for schools that pay athletes; a payment pool is set to be approximately $20.5 million for the biggest schools beginning next academic year.
Setting up a clearinghouse for all name, image and likeness (NIL) deals that come from third parties and are worth $600 or more.
Granting authority to an enforcement body being developed by the conferences named as defendants in the lawsuit to enforce the new rules passed to implement terms of the settlement. This includes compliance with roster limits, payment of direct benefits to players and meeting requirements for the third-party deals.

By WYATTE GRANTHAM-PHILIPS and DAMIAN J. TROISE, Associated Press

NEW YORK (AP) — Global financial markets have been turned upside down this year by President Donald Trump’s burgeoning trade war. Markets are not in full panic, but the double-digit declines in major U.S. stock indexes are testing nerves.

U.S. markets had been on a two-year tear coming into 2025, though many believed that stock prices had become overinflated. Trump’s trade war pushed that sentiment into hyperdrive. The S&P 500 has tumbled 13%, and U.S. markets are being outpaced in Europe, Asia, and just about everywhere else.

FILE – An American flag is displayed on the New York Stock Exchange in New York, Monday, Feb. 24, 2025. (AP Photo/Seth Wenig, File)

Trading in traditional “safe havens” like U.S. Treasurys and the dollar has become erratic and unpredictable. On Monday, the dollar struck a three-year low and U.S. Treasury yields have been soaring. Typically, yields would fall as investors seek a safe place to park their money. U.S. Treasurys no longer appear to provide the shelter they once did.

Only gold, a commodity traded internationally, has maintained its reputation as a safe zone. The price of gold is hitting one record high after another.

Here’s a roundup of what is happening in various segments of the financial market:

Stocks

U.S. stocks have been losing ground in a sharp reversal after two years of stellar gains.

The S&P 500 index, which is considered a benchmark for the broader market’s health, is down more than 13% in 2025. It gained more than 20% in both 2023 and 2024.

The benchmark index is already in “correction,” having fallen more than 10% from the record it set in February. There have been only five weeks in which it’s ended in positive territory this year and with Monday’s decline it’s moving closer to bear market territory, or a 20% drop from recent highs.

It’s worse on the growth-focused Nasdaq composite, which has plunged 19%.

Overseas markets have largely performed much better than their U.S. counterparts.

Bonds

Treasurys, typically considered a less risky area of the market, have been volatile throughout the year.

The 10-year Treasury, which influences mortgage rates and other loans, was as high as 4.80% in January but then fell until Trump announced the broad details of his tariff policy in early April. Yields then began to spike this month. The recent jump in bond yields, which happens when bond prices fall, reflects rising anxiety about inflation and a potential recession.

Treasury bonds are essentially IOUs from the U.S. government and they’re how Washington pays its bills. Bond prices typically move in the opposite direction of stock prices, but prices for both have fallen in tandem. That raises more significant concerns, namely a loss of faith in the U.S. as a safe place to invest.

Gold

In all of the economic uncertainty, gold is soaring — setting record after record in 2025.

New York spot gold hit another all-time high Thursday, closing at about $3,343 per Troy ounce — the standard for measuring precious metals — per FactSet. The price is up nearly 27% this year.

Gold futures rose to more than $3,432 Monday.

Interest in gold spikes in times of uncertainty as investors seek a safe place for their money, although there can still be some volatility. The price of spot gold fell for three straight trading days following Trump’s sweeping “Liberation Day” announcement on April 2, for example, but soon rebounded overall.

Foreign Exchange

The U.S. dollar, the world’s reserve currency, is falling under the weight of uncertainty over tariffs, inflation and the direction of the U.S. economy.

Related Articles

Student loans in default to be referred to debt collection, Education Department says

America (and I) went on a pre-tariff splurge in March

Secondhand stores are poised to benefit if US tariffs drive up new clothing costs

Google faces off with US government in attempt to break up company in search monopoly case

Trump renews attack on Federal Reserve Chair Powell, Dow Jones tumbles 1,000 points

The U.S. dollar is down a steep 9% for the year when measured against a basket of other currencies, including the euro, Japanese yen, Canadian Dollar and Swiss franc.

The dollar began to erode almost immediately in 2025, but those losses have accelerated over the past two months. A weakened dollar means it is more difficult for the U.S. government, businesses and consumers to borrow money at lower rates. It also means less purchasing power for U.S. consumers and the potential for stunted economic growth.

Oil

There is good news and bad news about energy prices. The average price for a gallon of gasoline in the U.S. on Monday was $3.15, down sharply from $3.67 at this time last year. That’s the good news.

The bad news is that energy prices fall when people start anticipating an economic slowdown. Factories produce less, families call off vacations and businesses cut travel expenses.

Oil prices hit a four-year low this month with anxiety over the impact of tariffs on global economic growth sinking in.

West Texas Intermediate crude, the U.S. benchmark, stood at around $63 per barrel as of midday Monday. That’s down nearly 14% year to date. And Brent crude, the European standard, was just above $66 — down nearly 13% since the start of 2025.

Economists are warning that the steep tariffs Trump is pursuing could cause a recession, which could carry significant implications for the supply chain and jobs in the energy sector.

Bitcoin

Bitcoin has continued to undulate.

The world’s largest cryptocurrency has been on a rollercoaster since the start of the year — with the volatile asset climbing to more than $109,000 ahead of Trump’s inauguration in January, only to dip under $75,000 amid wider market sell-offs this month. As of midday Monday, bitcoin’s going price was above $88,000, per CoinMarketCap.

That’s more than $6,000 lower than what bitcoin was trading at the start of 2025 — but still significantly higher than in recent years. At this time last year, bitcoin traded around $65,000. And in April 2023, months after the November 2022 collapse of FTX crushed crypto, the digital asset went for under $30,000.

Trump, once a crypto skeptic, became a major promoter of the industry throughout his campaign — and last month, he signed an executive order establishing a government reserve of bitcoin.

By LARRY NEUMEISTER, Associated Press

NEW YORK (AP) — Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin testified Monday at a defamation trial that an editorial about gun control in The New York Times in 2017 was devastating and “kicked the oomph” out of her.

The former Republican candidate for vice president answered questions in Manhattan federal court at a trial of her libel claims against the newspaper. She seeks unspecified damages.

“This was the gamechanger,” Palin said of the effect on her life after the newspaper in June 2017 published an editorial about gun control. “I felt defenseless. It just kicked the oomph right out of you.”

The editorial was created after U.S. Rep. Steve Scalise, a Louisiana Republican, was wounded when a man with a history of anti-GOP activity opened fire on a congressional baseball team practice in Washington.

In the editorial, the Times wrote that before the 2011 mass shooting in Arizona that severely wounded former U.S. Rep. Gabby Giffords and killed six others, Palin’s political action committee had contributed to an atmosphere of violence by circulating a map of electoral districts that put Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized crosshairs.

In a correction published less than a day later, the Times said the editorial had “incorrectly stated that a link existed between political rhetoric and the 2011 shooting” and had “incorrectly described” the map.

But Palin said the correction didn’t name her or restore her reputation, leaving it hard to overcome “when the loudest voice in the room, the most credible, biggest publication, was making things up about me.”

Last week, former Times editorial page editor James Bennet cried as he apologized to Palin from the witness stand, saying he “blew it” when he inserted the incorrect information in the editorial.

He said he was “really upset, and I still am, obviously.”

In February 2022, a jury found against Palin’s libel claims, but the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan last year revived the case, citing errors made by the trial judge.