KG4Ever wrote: ↑Thu Nov 02, 2023 1:10 am
LOL, Milton got two steals and took a charge and was a bench leading plus ten, made his free throws but missed his three shots (one of which Jim Pete said should have been a goaltend) and some of you think he's trash. I guess I'm the only one who likes Shake. He tends to play better with more touches, so I'm looking forward to seeing him play more when Conley sits.
I put zero stock in single game +\- way to much of a noisy stat. Also I didn’t give him an F I have him a C. Thought his defense was solid, offense his shot didn’t fall but in the flow of the offense (the anti Nowel). I’m also not calling for his minutes to be taken 4 games in. He was just meh last night
I think you gave Shake your worst grade and two others dissed Shake. "I put zero stock in a single game". That I agree with. So what is point of thread? LOL
But if you are putting stock in a single game, then plus/minus is a very fair thing to bring up and I'll bring it up every time it gets glossed over. I also undersold Shake's performance, I found it really impressive when he chased down an errant pass that was heading out of bounds and saved the Wolves a possession. When he gets so few shots sometimes his shot falls and sometimes it doesn't. Remember back to preseason when shot over 60%. I didn't see him take a bad shot tonight and he played well otherwise. He essentially ended three opponent possessions with two steals and drew a charge, so decent game for him even if he is underappreciated.
KG4Ever wrote: ↑Thu Nov 02, 2023 1:10 am
LOL, Milton got two steals and took a charge and was a bench leading plus ten, made his free throws but missed his three shots (one of which Jim Pete said should have been a goaltend) and some of you think he's trash. I guess I'm the only one who likes Shake. He tends to play better with more touches, so I'm looking forward to seeing him play more when Conley sits.
I put zero stock in single game +\- way to much of a noisy stat. Also I didn’t give him an F I have him a C. Thought his defense was solid, offense his shot didn’t fall but in the flow of the offense (the anti Nowel). I’m also not calling for his minutes to be taken 4 games in. He was just meh last night
I think you gave Shake your worst grade and two others dissed Shake. "I put zero stock in a single game". That I agree with. So what is point of thread? LOL
But if you are putting stock in a single game, then plus/minus is a very fair thing to bring up and I'll bring it up every time it gets glossed over. I also undersold Shake's performance, I found it really impressive when he chased down an errant pass that was heading out of bounds and saved the Wolves a possession. When he gets so few shots sometimes his shot falls and sometimes it doesn't. Remember back to preseason when shot over 60%. I didn't see him take a bad shot tonight and he played well otherwise. He essentially ended three opponent possessions with two steals and drew a charge, so decent game for him even if he is underappreciated.
I think the problem with Shake is that it appears there is literally nothing he is above average at. Then again, he's not downright horrible at anything. He's where Wendell Moore Jr.'s absolute best-case ceiling would be. Is he better than Austin Rivers or Nowell? Hopefully, but those are pretty low bars.
I put zero stock in single game +\- way to much of a noisy stat. Also I didn’t give him an F I have him a C. Thought his defense was solid, offense his shot didn’t fall but in the flow of the offense (the anti Nowel). I’m also not calling for his minutes to be taken 4 games in. He was just meh last night
I think you gave Shake your worst grade and two others dissed Shake. "I put zero stock in a single game". That I agree with. So what is point of thread? LOL
But if you are putting stock in a single game, then plus/minus is a very fair thing to bring up and I'll bring it up every time it gets glossed over. I also undersold Shake's performance, I found it really impressive when he chased down an errant pass that was heading out of bounds and saved the Wolves a possession. When he gets so few shots sometimes his shot falls and sometimes it doesn't. Remember back to preseason when shot over 60%. I didn't see him take a bad shot tonight and he played well otherwise. He essentially ended three opponent possessions with two steals and drew a charge, so decent game for him even if he is underappreciated.
I think the problem with Shake is that it appears there is literally nothing he is above average at. Then again, he's not downright horrible at anything. He's where Wendell Moore Jr.'s absolute best-case ceiling would be. Is he better than Austin Rivers or Nowell? Hopefully, but those are pretty low bars.
He can shoot well above average when given the opportunity and is a capable passer. He was a 42% plus three point shooter in all three years of college at SMU. As a starter in 11 games, he shot better than 50%, 40% and 90%, with more than 20 ppg. He also showed that in 19 of his heaviest minute games (those where he got 28 minutes or more) that he can pass, with 5.94 assists. Philly was 15-4 when Shake got 28 minutes or more. Shake was primary ballhandler when Harden and Maxey both sat and Philly was 7-4 in those games. Some guys need higher usage to show what they can do and Shake appears to be one of those guys.
KG4Ever wrote: ↑Thu Nov 02, 2023 9:54 am
I think you gave Shake your worst grade and two others dissed Shake. "I put zero stock in a single game". That I agree with. So what is point of thread? LOL
But if you are putting stock in a single game, then plus/minus is a very fair thing to bring up and I'll bring it up every time it gets glossed over. I also undersold Shake's performance, I found it really impressive when he chased down an errant pass that was heading out of bounds and saved the Wolves a possession. When he gets so few shots sometimes his shot falls and sometimes it doesn't. Remember back to preseason when shot over 60%. I didn't see him take a bad shot tonight and he played well otherwise. He essentially ended three opponent possessions with two steals and drew a charge, so decent game for him even if he is underappreciated.
I think the problem with Shake is that it appears there is literally nothing he is above average at. Then again, he's not downright horrible at anything. He's where Wendell Moore Jr.'s absolute best-case ceiling would be. Is he better than Austin Rivers or Nowell? Hopefully, but those are pretty low bars.
He can shoot well above average when given the opportunity and is a capable passer. He was a 42% plus three point shooter in all three years of college at SMU. As a starter in 11 games, he shot better than 50%, 40% and 90%, with more than 20 ppg. He also showed that in 19 of his heaviest minute games (those where he got 28 minutes or more) that he can pass, with 5.94 assists. Philly was 15-4 when Shake got 28 minutes or more. Shake was primary ballhandler when Harden and Maxey both sat and Philly was 7-4 in those games. Some guys need higher usage to show what they can do and Shake appears to be one of those guys.
...but we need him to be effective in a lower usage role. I get that he had his moment with the Sixers. Well, even Jaylen Nowell had his moment with the Wolves the season before last when he got significant minutes due to injury. He looked great during that stretch!
And never quote me college shooting numbers, as we've seen countless great college shooters come to the Wolves (whether via draft or free agency) and look terrible. Shake's NBA shooting has been up and down, with no discernible trend.
No discernable trend? You could say that about pretty much every NBA player. Jamal Murray misses 13 in a row to start NBA career and started with 11 misses last night and he's considered an above average point guard despite his erratic shooting. Shake shot over 42% on threes in all three college years and in over 45 NBA starts. That is nice consistency at a high level. He shot 50.0%, 42.5% and 85.6% in 45 NBA starts. Sure in small sample sizes, like he is getting, his shooting might appear inconsistent, but Shake is doing fine as a role player and he's shown at Philly that he's very capable of filling as a starter when called upon to do so and performing at a high level. What better point guard was available at $5 million per year to fill a role? I can't think of any.
KG4Ever wrote: ↑Thu Nov 02, 2023 10:35 am
No discernable trend? You could say that about pretty much every NBA player. Jamal Murray misses 13 in a row to start NBA career and started with 11 misses last night and he's considered an above average point guard despite his erratic shooting. Shake shot over 42% on threes in all three college years and in over 45 NBA starts. That is nice consistency at a high level. He shot 50.0%, 42.5% and 85.6% in 45 NBA starts. Sure in small sample sizes, like he is getting, his shooting might appear inconsistent, but Shake is doing fine as a role player and he's shown at Philly that he's very capable of filling as a starter when called upon to do so and performing at a high level. What better point guard was available at $5 million per year to fill a role? I can't think of any.
KG4 - you are a good poster and I'm writing this with respect. I'm getting the impression you are a big Shake fan and there is nothing wrong with that. But the advanced stats I look at do match what others are saying. He and NAW appear to be two guys that haven't played great (so far). That doesn't mean they are bad players or won't get better. We are only four games in. I think guys are understandably just reacting to what they've seen so far in a Wolves' uniform. And so far he's shooting .300 or about .150 points below his career average. I'm not giving up on him. But I think it's fair to point out he has had a poor start. And none of us will be shocked if he starts shooting better based on his track record. In the meantime - they call it like they see it.
KG4Ever wrote: ↑Thu Nov 02, 2023 10:35 am
No discernable trend? You could say that about pretty much every NBA player. Jamal Murray misses 13 in a row to start NBA career and started with 11 misses last night and he's considered an above average point guard despite his erratic shooting. Shake shot over 42% on threes in all three college years and in over 45 NBA starts. That is nice consistency at a high level. He shot 50.0%, 42.5% and 85.6% in 45 NBA starts. Sure in small sample sizes, like he is getting, his shooting might appear inconsistent, but Shake is doing fine as a role player and he's shown at Philly that he's very capable of filling as a starter when called upon to do so and performing at a high level. What better point guard was available at $5 million per year to fill a role? I can't think of any.
I don't think he was some terrible signing, but so far he has been underwhelming and it makes me wonder if we'd be just as good or even better off if a now healthy Jordan McLaughlin had all those minutes. Something to ponder.
(I get that Jordan McLaughlin becomes problematic in a playoff series, where he'd surely get targeted, but he seems to thrive in a low usage, regular season backup PG role).
KG4Ever wrote: ↑Thu Nov 02, 2023 10:35 am
No discernable trend? You could say that about pretty much every NBA player. Jamal Murray misses 13 in a row to start NBA career and started with 11 misses last night and he's considered an above average point guard despite his erratic shooting. Shake shot over 42% on threes in all three college years and in over 45 NBA starts. That is nice consistency at a high level. He shot 50.0%, 42.5% and 85.6% in 45 NBA starts. Sure in small sample sizes, like he is getting, his shooting might appear inconsistent, but Shake is doing fine as a role player and he's shown at Philly that he's very capable of filling as a starter when called upon to do so and performing at a high level. What better point guard was available at $5 million per year to fill a role? I can't think of any.
KG4 - you are a good poster and I'm writing this with respect. I'm getting the impression you are a big Shake fan and there is nothing wrong with that. But the advanced stats I look at do match what others are saying. He and NAW appear to be two guys that haven't played great (so far). That doesn't mean they are bad players or won't get better. We are only four games in. I think guys are understandably just reacting to what they've seen so far in a Wolves' uniform. And so far he's shooting .300 or about .150 points below his career average. I'm not giving up on him. But I think it's fair to point out he has had a poor start. And none of us will be shocked if he starts shooting better based on his track record. In the meantime - they call it like they see it.
I am a Shake fan and that's not based on anything personal but that he performed well when given the chance and getting him for $5 million I think was an absolute steal. I honestly don't think he's had a "poor start" and while his shooting in four regular season games has been subpar, his overall game has been fine, not great, but definitely not poor. He hasn't been a liability when on the court based on his plus 11. I think he'll be fine with more games, though my main worry is that the Wolves offense get too sticky and he gets shut out offensively. It kind of what happened to Jaden when DLO was here. Jaden didn't get that many touches, but with Conley that has improved. We'll see. Very little risk with high upside. I like that kind of bet that TC made with NAW and Shake.
