Would have preferred to bring back Ridnour for half the price. Provided he was used correctly, unlike his previous tenure here where he was our starting SG.
But Mo can hit the deep ball and can't be any worse than Barea and Shved.
KiwiMatt wrote:Would have preferred to bring back Ridnour for half the price. Provided he was used correctly, unlike his previous tenure here where he was our starting SG.
But Mo can hit the deep ball and can't be any worse than Barea and Shved.
I think I would have preferred Luke to Mo also, Kiwi, mainly because I think he would have accepted his role easier than Mo will. The Wolves have a good chance of finally building some good team chemistry with Love and Barea likely to be gone, and Mo may not be helpful in that endeavor.
Having said that, Orlando committed $5.5 million to Luke over two years, while the Wolves are only on the hook for $3.7. The flexibility of the Williams deal probably makes more sense than 2 more years of Luke.
Agreed and thanks for the link Tim. Remember when Love was hurt for that long stretch a couple years ago, and how well we played without him? I do.
You mean when we went 9-9 in the 18 games he played in and 22-42 in the other 64 games he didn't play in? Pass the flask, I could use a swig of whatever it is you're drinking!
KiwiMatt wrote:Would have preferred to bring back Ridnour for half the price. Provided he was used correctly, unlike his previous tenure here where he was our starting SG.
But Mo can hit the deep ball and can't be any worse than Barea and Shved.
I'm kind of meh on the Mo signing, but I do like him better than Luke. For whatever reason, Ridnour was a very good jump shooter all the way out to just before 3 point arc. His accuracy fell off the second he was behind that damn line.
I really hope Mo's 3-point shooting pops back up after a slight deterioration the over the past couple of years. The last thing we need is yet another perimeter player that struggles with his shot. As Britt mentions in his article, freakin' JJ Barea had a near career-worst year with us. Knowing our luck, Mo will either incur a major injury in pre-season or stay healthy but put up career worst numbers.
Q. I've always had the impression that Ridnour was not a good 3-point shooter, but I was surprised to see his career 35% puts him at almost exactly the league mean. Williams is better at 38.5%, but if salaries were equal I would still prefer Luke because of the steadiness and stability he provides. Williams has a little of the JJ Hero Ball tendency in him, although in all fairness his career numbers are better than JJ in almost every category.
But since Flip was able to limit his Williams' risk to a one-year contract and Luke was looking for something longer, I'm on board with the signing. If Williams chooses to play outside the team concept (as JJ often did), Flip may be confident enough in LaVine to give him more minutes at the backup PG position.
Long, The issue with Ridnour is look at how he shot in his last two seasons with us - a pathetic 32% and 31% respectively from beyond the arc. Another maddening case is Martell Webster, who shot 34% for us in his final season and has since been a 40% shooter from beyond the arc. Barea is the latest in a long line of former Timberwolves who progressively got worse shooting the 3-ball when playing with us.
The statistician in me says this stuff is random variability, but why do we always end up with the career low years!?
Q12543 wrote:Long, The issue with Ridnour is look at how he shot in his last two seasons with us - a pathetic 32% and 31% respectively from beyond the arc. Another maddening case is Martell Webster, who shot 34% for us in his final season and has since been a 40% shooter from beyond the arc. Barea is the latest in a long line of former Timberwolves who progressively got worse shooting the 3-ball when playing with us.
The statistician in me says this stuff is random variability, but why do we always end up with the career low years!?
Hmmm...that explains why my perception of Luke's 3-point shooting is worse than it really is...because he performed poorly for us. I tend to agree with you that it's likely random variability, but perhaps it also has something to do with Adelman's system. Running his offense through a big man at the point maybe doesn't lead to the best chance for 3-point success (although it certainly was an impressive offense at times). Flip favors a more point guard dominant offense which seems to jive with Rubio's talents too, so I'm excited to see if letting Ricky be Ricky leads to more open 3-point looks.
Agreed and thanks for the link Tim. Remember when Love was hurt for that long stretch a couple years ago, and how well we played without him? I do.
You mean when we went 9-9 in the 18 games he played in and 22-42 in the other 64 games he didn't play in? Pass the flask, I could use a swig of whatever it is you're drinking!
I stand corrected Q. I didn't think it was that bad. But you see, we didn't even have a winning record in games he played?
