CoolBreeze44 wrote:Anyone know which 2nd round picks we gave up?
Gave up 2 future 2nd in that trade (not sure what ones in the future) then traded 40 for 2 future 2nds
Wendell Moore
Re: Wendell Moore
Gave up 2 future 2nd in that trade (not sure what ones in the future) then traded 40 for 2 future 2nds
Re: Wendell Moore
https://youtu.be/i0uVRhFx9Mk (Good positive highlights of Moore)
https://youtu.be/O7KQQVZPP9Q (Good discussion. Former Wake Forest star, Randolph Childress, really likes Moore)
Excerpt from Article in The Athletic:
Moore Jr. averaged 13.4 points, 5.3 rebounds and 4.4 assists across 39 games last season. He shot 41.3 percent from the field and 50 percent from 3-point range.
"Wendell Moore Jr. is one of those guys I feel I should like as a prospect. I tend to like those who have high feel for the game, are comfortable putting the ball on the deck, can pass and have made a high percentage of 3s. Moore also is a good defender," The Athletic's Sam Vecenie wrote in his scouting report.
"So why am I not quite as in as I feel like I should be? I worry about the intersection of lack of twitchy athleticism and questionable shooting. That can be a tough combination when it comes to carving out a role as an NBA rotation player. Moore seems to understand his role and does a good job of playing within the team. He is a trustworthy player who makes good decisions. If he shoots it at a reasonable level, he will stick in the NBA for a while."
There's been a lot more discussion on this board about Walker Kessler. I'm still not happy with that pick. But I wanted to focus a bit on the Wendell Moore pick at #26. I really like this pick for the following reasons:
1. I think he was at least arguably the best player on the board at 26, although I'd rank him behind Ty Ty Washington. Even at #19, Moore would have been one of what I considered the top three players on the board at that point behind Branham and Ty Ty. So this was a very good match between pick and value.
2. He's a multi-dimensional player. He's definitely a two-way player unless his shooting as a Junior was an aberration and he's actually more like the shooter he was his first two years at Duke. I think his shooting as a Junior is for real. In any event, there's no questioning his defense. He's an excellent defender and will be at the NBA level. He proved it with his play in college and he has all the ingredients that make a very good defender at the NBA level: (a) quick feet laterally; (b) quick hands; (c) physical strength; (d) high basketball IQ/defensive instincts; and (e) defensive competitiveness - i.e., he likes to play defense. So at a minimum, I think he's a two-way 3 & D guy. But the better news is that his not just a 3-point shooter on the offensive side of the ball. He's a three-level scorer with a nice mid-range shot and the ability to score at the rim. Even better is that he's not just a shooter. He's also a good passer and a good ball-handler, which gives him dribble penetration ability - an essential ingredient to being a good rotation guard or wing in the NBA.
3. He appears to have both a high basketball IQ and a competitive nature. These are the two key intangible ingredients to NBA success and I think he has them both.
4. He a good fit for the Wolves. I'm not big on fit when drafting, especially in the first round. But it's not totally irrelevant. So it's worth adding that Moore is a very good fit for the Wolves. He fits well in several ways. First, fills a need for 3 & D players on the roster. Right now, the Wolves have only one such player, Patrick Beverley, and between his age and lack of durability he's not nearly enough either long-term or even short term. Second, he fits the Wolves long-term need for rotation players who are good passers/playmakers to optimize the production and efficiency of our two stars, KAT and Ant, who are primarily scorers.
Yes, Moore has weaknesses and there are some uncertainties. He has trouble finishing over taller players at the rim and gets his shot blocked a lot down now. That will only get worse at the NBA level. But he did have an excellent vertical at the draft combine -- 32.5" standing vertical and 38.5 max vertical. So perhaps he just needs to work on harnessing that ability on the court with the ball.
In any event, all draft prospects have weaknesses, especially those available in the lower half of the 1st round and below. I like Moore's strengths and I like that he's on an upward trajectory. And although he was a Junior last season, he's still relatively young. I still think Ty Ty would have been a better pick based on upside. He certainly would have been a more exciting pick in my view. But I really like the Wendell Moore pick.
https://youtu.be/O7KQQVZPP9Q (Good discussion. Former Wake Forest star, Randolph Childress, really likes Moore)
Excerpt from Article in The Athletic:
Moore Jr. averaged 13.4 points, 5.3 rebounds and 4.4 assists across 39 games last season. He shot 41.3 percent from the field and 50 percent from 3-point range.
"Wendell Moore Jr. is one of those guys I feel I should like as a prospect. I tend to like those who have high feel for the game, are comfortable putting the ball on the deck, can pass and have made a high percentage of 3s. Moore also is a good defender," The Athletic's Sam Vecenie wrote in his scouting report.
"So why am I not quite as in as I feel like I should be? I worry about the intersection of lack of twitchy athleticism and questionable shooting. That can be a tough combination when it comes to carving out a role as an NBA rotation player. Moore seems to understand his role and does a good job of playing within the team. He is a trustworthy player who makes good decisions. If he shoots it at a reasonable level, he will stick in the NBA for a while."
There's been a lot more discussion on this board about Walker Kessler. I'm still not happy with that pick. But I wanted to focus a bit on the Wendell Moore pick at #26. I really like this pick for the following reasons:
1. I think he was at least arguably the best player on the board at 26, although I'd rank him behind Ty Ty Washington. Even at #19, Moore would have been one of what I considered the top three players on the board at that point behind Branham and Ty Ty. So this was a very good match between pick and value.
2. He's a multi-dimensional player. He's definitely a two-way player unless his shooting as a Junior was an aberration and he's actually more like the shooter he was his first two years at Duke. I think his shooting as a Junior is for real. In any event, there's no questioning his defense. He's an excellent defender and will be at the NBA level. He proved it with his play in college and he has all the ingredients that make a very good defender at the NBA level: (a) quick feet laterally; (b) quick hands; (c) physical strength; (d) high basketball IQ/defensive instincts; and (e) defensive competitiveness - i.e., he likes to play defense. So at a minimum, I think he's a two-way 3 & D guy. But the better news is that his not just a 3-point shooter on the offensive side of the ball. He's a three-level scorer with a nice mid-range shot and the ability to score at the rim. Even better is that he's not just a shooter. He's also a good passer and a good ball-handler, which gives him dribble penetration ability - an essential ingredient to being a good rotation guard or wing in the NBA.
3. He appears to have both a high basketball IQ and a competitive nature. These are the two key intangible ingredients to NBA success and I think he has them both.
4. He a good fit for the Wolves. I'm not big on fit when drafting, especially in the first round. But it's not totally irrelevant. So it's worth adding that Moore is a very good fit for the Wolves. He fits well in several ways. First, fills a need for 3 & D players on the roster. Right now, the Wolves have only one such player, Patrick Beverley, and between his age and lack of durability he's not nearly enough either long-term or even short term. Second, he fits the Wolves long-term need for rotation players who are good passers/playmakers to optimize the production and efficiency of our two stars, KAT and Ant, who are primarily scorers.
Yes, Moore has weaknesses and there are some uncertainties. He has trouble finishing over taller players at the rim and gets his shot blocked a lot down now. That will only get worse at the NBA level. But he did have an excellent vertical at the draft combine -- 32.5" standing vertical and 38.5 max vertical. So perhaps he just needs to work on harnessing that ability on the court with the ball.
In any event, all draft prospects have weaknesses, especially those available in the lower half of the 1st round and below. I like Moore's strengths and I like that he's on an upward trajectory. And although he was a Junior last season, he's still relatively young. I still think Ty Ty would have been a better pick based on upside. He certainly would have been a more exciting pick in my view. But I really like the Wendell Moore pick.
Re: Wendell Moore
Not too worried about Moore's finishing ability as it just isn't going to be a big part of his role. He has GOT to hit open 3's - that's ultimately the key - as it has been with countless other draft picks we've taken in the past umpteen years. Seems like his other skills are very transferable: Defense, passing, smarts.
He made 52 of 126 3s last year which is a pretty solid sample size. And in terms of free throws, he's never been under 80% over three seasons in college. So there is hope...
He made 52 of 126 3s last year which is a pretty solid sample size. And in terms of free throws, he's never been under 80% over three seasons in college. So there is hope...
Re: Wendell Moore
Q-was-here wrote:Not too worried about Moore's finishing ability as it just isn't going to be a big part of his role. He has GOT to hit open 3's - that's ultimately the key - as it has been with countless other draft picks we've taken in the past umpteen years. Seems like his other skills are very transferable: Defense, passing, smarts.
He made 52 of 126 3s last year which is a pretty solid sample size. And in terms of free throws, he's never been under 80% over three seasons in college. So there is hope...
I agree with you on the finishing ability issue, Q. I actually think he's a good finisher. Look at the video highlights. He's very crafty around the rim and he's not exactly ground bound. And in any event, if he turns out to be a good finisher, that's gravy. The key is his shooting and defense. If the shot is there, and I think it is, he's a very solid 3 & D guy from the get go. And that's going to help this team.
Re: Wendell Moore
lipoli390 wrote:Q-was-here wrote:Not too worried about Moore's finishing ability as it just isn't going to be a big part of his role. He has GOT to hit open 3's - that's ultimately the key - as it has been with countless other draft picks we've taken in the past umpteen years. Seems like his other skills are very transferable: Defense, passing, smarts.
He made 52 of 126 3s last year which is a pretty solid sample size. And in terms of free throws, he's never been under 80% over three seasons in college. So there is hope...
I agree with you on the finishing ability issue, Q. I actually think he's a good finisher. Look at the video highlights. He's very crafty around the rim and he's not exactly ground bound. And in any event, if he turns out to her a good finisher, that's gravy. The key is his shooting and defense. If the shot is there, and I think it is, he's a very solid 3 & D guy from the get go. And that's going to help this team.
Plus he averaged over 4 assists a game and under 2 turnovers.
Re: Wendell Moore
monsterpile wrote:lipoli390 wrote:Q-was-here wrote:Not too worried about Moore's finishing ability as it just isn't going to be a big part of his role. He has GOT to hit open 3's - that's ultimately the key - as it has been with countless other draft picks we've taken in the past umpteen years. Seems like his other skills are very transferable: Defense, passing, smarts.
He made 52 of 126 3s last year which is a pretty solid sample size. And in terms of free throws, he's never been under 80% over three seasons in college. So there is hope...
I agree with you on the finishing ability issue, Q. I actually think he's a good finisher. Look at the video highlights. He's very crafty around the rim and he's not exactly ground bound. And in any event, if he turns out to her a good finisher, that's gravy. The key is his shooting and defense. If the shot is there, and I think it is, he's a very solid 3 & D guy from the get go. And that's going to help this team.
Plus he averaged over 4 assists a game and under 2 turnovers.
That's what I mean. That stuff translates - the passing, smart decisions, etc. The shooting is the huge question mark. We've been burned before by supposedly good shooters that had nice college stats and then couldn't hit shit in the NBA. Fingers crossed on this guy!
Re: Wendell Moore
Q-was-here wrote:monsterpile wrote:lipoli390 wrote:Q-was-here wrote:Not too worried about Moore's finishing ability as it just isn't going to be a big part of his role. He has GOT to hit open 3's - that's ultimately the key - as it has been with countless other draft picks we've taken in the past umpteen years. Seems like his other skills are very transferable: Defense, passing, smarts.
He made 52 of 126 3s last year which is a pretty solid sample size. And in terms of free throws, he's never been under 80% over three seasons in college. So there is hope...
I agree with you on the finishing ability issue, Q. I actually think he's a good finisher. Look at the video highlights. He's very crafty around the rim and he's not exactly ground bound. And in any event, if he turns out to her a good finisher, that's gravy. The key is his shooting and defense. If the shot is there, and I think it is, he's a very solid 3 & D guy from the get go. And that's going to help this team.
Plus he averaged over 4 assists a game and under 2 turnovers.
That's what I mean. That stuff translates - the passing, smart decisions, etc. The shooting is the huge question mark. We've been burned before by supposedly good shooters that had nice college stats and then couldn't hit shit in the NBA. Fingers crossed on this guy!
The stuff that translates stems largely from his apparently high basketball IQ. That's something you either have or don't have when you get to the NBA. I'm certainly worried about whether the shooting is really there. But unlike Okogie, for example, Moore's shooting mechanics look good. Moreover, unlike Okogie (as an example), Moore shot over 50% from the filed while Okogie shot around 41% in his last college season. I don't see Moore as another shooting disappointment.
-
SameOldNudityDrew
- Posts: 3127
- Joined: Sat Jul 20, 2013 12:00 am
Re: Wendell Moore
I'm pretty excited about this guy. We've got too many one-way guys, and we picked up two more in Kessler and Minott, so having a guy who can legitimately play both ways and brings ballhandling, passing, and shooting on offense? Yes please!
I'm especially excited about his ability to playmake. I think we need more passing and shot creation off the dribble on this team, especially from a guy who can shoot it too. And from what I can tell, he's a willing passer who plays with a relatively high motor, so he can help us try to get away from DLO and Ant's tendency to dribble alone in place for a few seconds before swinging the ball.
FWIW, according to the draft combine, he's got big hands for a player his size.
He kind of reminds me a bit of Jalen Brunson. I know we always have a tendency to comp a guy to players who they physically look like, while we should always try to focus on actual playing style and stats. But in this case, I think they actually go together. He does kind of look like Brunson to me, but I also think his skillset and playing style are similar. Not saying he'll get to the same level of player as Brunson. But I do like what he brings to the table.
I'm especially excited about his ability to playmake. I think we need more passing and shot creation off the dribble on this team, especially from a guy who can shoot it too. And from what I can tell, he's a willing passer who plays with a relatively high motor, so he can help us try to get away from DLO and Ant's tendency to dribble alone in place for a few seconds before swinging the ball.
FWIW, according to the draft combine, he's got big hands for a player his size.
He kind of reminds me a bit of Jalen Brunson. I know we always have a tendency to comp a guy to players who they physically look like, while we should always try to focus on actual playing style and stats. But in this case, I think they actually go together. He does kind of look like Brunson to me, but I also think his skillset and playing style are similar. Not saying he'll get to the same level of player as Brunson. But I do like what he brings to the table.