I think they are "good" when they don't have KAT. I think they shot their future in the foot with the Gobert trade and everything they gave up. But this team when KAT isn't on the court is exactly the type of team we struggle most with.
If they are "good" then why is their record 27-26 w/o KAT? They are 12-11 with him.
One game over .500 in both scenarios. Which is remarkably average.
As for the KINGS struggling against them, I think that's been drastically overstated too. The KINGS are 0-2 against ATL, but I'm not about to declare the Hawks as a bad matchup either.
$#1t happens over a long 82 game season. Back-to-backs, long road trips, player absences, poor patches of play, catching teams on fire, etc.
All 4 games were decided by 7, 7, 4, and 4 points respectively. Which means all 4 games were close and competitive. It's not like the KINGS lost 3 out of 4 in blowout fashion. In fact, if a break or two went their way instead of against, the KINGS could have won 3 of the 4.
Regardless, the T-Wolves record, largely w/o KAT this season, has proven to be average at best.
They clearly are capable of beating the KINGS on any given night, but so is every other team in the league. But the reverse is also true.