The Official Monte Morris thread

[winforlose]

Monte Morris is so good. I am so glad we were able to acquire him without giving up actual valuable asset(s).

His +/- numbers are excellent [always have been his entire career], he is so savvy and crafty yet under complete control. He understands where to be on the court on both ends, which has allowed him to come in and fit in seamlessly [The 1st game was the only awkward game]. Finch is able to play around with line-ups and is falling in love with the Morris/Conley/ANT/Reid/KAT or Gobert line-ups, specifically the Conley/Morris pairing when teams don't have the personnel to attack the lack of size.

Morris can play with anyone and defend either guard spot. That means Finch has even more versatility. When Monte figures out his conditioning his shot will return, and then he will be scary good.

[Klomp]

Monte Morris is so good. I am so glad we were able to acquire him without giving up actual valuable asset(s).

His +/- numbers are excellent [always have been his entire career], he is so savvy and crafty yet under complete control. He understands where to be on the court on both ends, which has allowed him to come in and fit in seamlessly [The 1st game was the only awkward game]. Finch is able to play around with line-ups and is falling in love with the Morris/Conley/ANT/Reid/KAT or Gobert line-ups, specifically the Conley/Morris pairing when teams don't have the personnel to attack the lack of size.

Morris can play with anyone and defend either guard spot. That means Finch has even more versatility. When Monte figures out his conditioning his shot will return, and then he will be scary good.

Since the all-star break, Morris is 4-of-10 (40%) on 3-pointers

[Mamba4Goat]

I don't think I fully appreciated how beneficial Monte's scoring abilities were going to be for the bench. Morris filling the playmaker, spacing, and scoring need off the bench when called on is great.

[Klomp]

Read on Twitter

[TimberKat]

He is really what we hoping to get from Milton. Would like to see attack the basket a little more.

[winforlose]

Monte Morris is so good. I am so glad we were able to acquire him without giving up actual valuable asset(s).

His +/- numbers are excellent [always have been his entire career], he is so savvy and crafty yet under complete control. He understands where to be on the court on both ends, which has allowed him to come in and fit in seamlessly [The 1st game was the only awkward game]. Finch is able to play around with line-ups and is falling in love with the Morris/Conley/ANT/Reid/KAT or Gobert line-ups, specifically the Conley/Morris pairing when teams don't have the personnel to attack the lack of size.

Morris can play with anyone and defend either guard spot. That means Finch has even more versatility. When Monte figures out his conditioning his shot will return, and then he will be scary good.

Since the all-star break, Morris is 4-of-10 (40%) on 3-pointers

Fair, but I am talking more game by game. He should shoot above his career percentage from his sweet spots when wide open. He just doesn’t seem as smooth as his old clips… YET.

[winforlose]

He is really what we hoping to get from Milton. Would like to see attack the basket a little more.

He is more than we wanted from Milton. His passing is on a different level, and his judgement is way better.

[winforlose]

Quoting from a Canis Hoopus article. Link below. Jack Borman is the author.

“ But Morris’s impact has steadily grown game over game, culminating in a +13 on Wednesday — his highest mark as a Wolf. Morris was advertised as a king of the assist-to-turnover ratio game, and he’s certainly followed through in that department. Through the win over the Grizzlies, he has 21 assists and one turnover since arriving in Minnesota. That is tied for the best mark in the NBA in that span.

Minnesota’s points per 100 plays (ORTG minus put-backs) rises by 3.6 with Morris on the floor (78th percentile), and the Wolves are converting opponent misses into transition scores much more efficiently with Morris out there, as their points per 100 transition plays is 33 points higher with Monte involved (100th percentile).

He has also proven to have excellent chemistry with Reid (+13.0 net rating in 91 minutes), Alexander-Walker (+17.3 NET in 67 minutes), Edwards (+26.4 NET in 64 minutes), Towns (+34.1 NET in 44 minutes), and Anderson (+19.7 NET in 42 minutes). Morris looks more and more comfortable offensively as he gains each game of experience, from where his new teammates like the ball, to how they cut, and where his scoring can fit in alongside all of them.”

https://www.canishoopus.com/2024/2/29/24086638/wolves-bench-rotation-naz-reid-monte-morris-nickeil-alexander-walker-kyle-anderson-chris-finch

[minimus]

I wonder what is Connelly plan regarding Morris. Here couple of notes about whole PG situation:

- I saw a stat saying that Conley is making floaters with very low % (cant find this stat right now, maybe someone has it). He is still shooting elite % from 3PT, but his struggles with finishing around the rim leave us with only Edwards and Towns as two semi-reliable scorers. If this is sign of physical decline that Conley will be more and more spot-up, pick-n-roll, side step shooter than scorer.

Read on Twitter

- when Monte was healthy he was a surprisingly good finisher, but it is a good question whether he can regain his physical shape. That said, I'd say that Monte biggest strength as scorer is his pull up mid range shot. Outside of him, only Edwards and Towns (rarely!) take those mid range shots

I wonder if Connelly and Monte will agree on extension before playoff. I also hope that this will be a team friendly deal

[NebWolvesFan]

I wonder what is Connelly plan regarding Morris. Here couple of notes about whole PG situation:

- I saw a stat saying that Conley is making floaters with very low % (cant find this stat right now, maybe someone has it). He is still shooting elite % from 3PT, but his struggles with finishing around the rim leave us with only Edwards and Towns as two semi-reliable scorers. If this is sign of physical decline that Conley will be more and more spot-up, pick-n-roll, side step shooter than scorer.

Read on Twitter

- when Monte was healthy he was a surprisingly good finisher, but it is a good question whether he can regain his physical shape. That said, I'd say that Monte biggest strength as scorer is his pull up mid range shot. Outside of him, only Edwards and Towns (rarely!) take those mid range shots

I wonder if Connelly and Monte will agree on extension before playoff. I also hope that this will be a team friendly deal

With is ties to Morris, I wouldn't be surprised if Monte and TC had a framework of a deal worked out before the trade. That being said, with Conley already signed if Minnesota does move Towns this summer and a PG is part of the deal, I could see Morris moving on. At this point, I see it as if Towns stays, Morris stays. If Towns gets moved, Morris may end up somewhere else.

[winforlose]

I wonder what is Connelly plan regarding Morris. Here couple of notes about whole PG situation:

- I saw a stat saying that Conley is making floaters with very low % (cant find this stat right now, maybe someone has it). He is still shooting elite % from 3PT, but his struggles with finishing around the rim leave us with only Edwards and Towns as two semi-reliable scorers. If this is sign of physical decline that Conley will be more and more spot-up, pick-n-roll, side step shooter than scorer.

Read on Twitter

- when Monte was healthy he was a surprisingly good finisher, but it is a good question whether he can regain his physical shape. That said, I'd say that Monte biggest strength as scorer is his pull up mid range shot. Outside of him, only Edwards and Towns (rarely!) take those mid range shots

I wonder if Connelly and Monte will agree on extension before playoff. I also hope that this will be a team friendly deal

Around the deadline, and shortly after it, I was reading that TC badly wanted Morris in the offseason. Having missed out on him, he made MM a priority at the trade deadline. TC obviously has plans for MM. from MMs perspective, Mike Conley is 36 and next year will be 37. There will be plenty of opportunities for Morris to start or finish games next year (when Mike rests or is off.) The following year, Morris is the likely full time starter. If he likes the coach, and likes the players, then the only thing that might be an issue is the money. Thankfully, MM’s struggles with injury and his performance issues coming back from it, should depress his price tag a bit. Also, our having his bird rights is valuable and a motivation for him to stay at least in the short term. I could see a 2 year 20 with a player option or maybe a 2 year 22 without one. A lot depends on whether we extend him before the playoffs, and if not, how he performs in the playoffs. All of that being true, I think it is fair to say we have long term plans for MM.

[Klomp]

I think the only caution I have around Morris is that we feel so confident about him to a point to where we stop looking at other longterm PG possibilities. I think he can step in as the starting PG after Conley, but I don't feel confident that he could be that guy for 3-4 years. Thankfully, the potential financial commitment shouldn't be so high to a point where it feels like an inevitability.

[Loaf_of_bread]

He is nothing more than mediocre backup on a good team. Only thing that intrigues me is his elevated numbers in the playoffs. Let's see if he can repeat that.

[shrink]

The thing to remember about Monte is that he’s likely the best vet PG .. we can AFFORD.

We spent our payroll to have top players at the SG, PF and C positions. We paid our SF well in a supporting role. This means that a PG in the 23-35 range is expected. The way other teams maximize talent is to find a player who’s on an artificially-lowered salary because of rookie scale, but we don’t have lottery picks, great trade assets for a promising rookie, and we don’t have the time to develop a starting point guard when we want to win now.

Most nights, Monte will be worse than the opposing PG we face, but we’ll often have advantages at three other positions.

[Klomp]

The thing to remember about Monte is that he’s likely the best vet PG .. we can AFFORD.

We spent our payroll to have top players at the SG, PF and C positions. We paid our SF well in a supporting role. This means that a PG in the 23-35 range is expected. The way other teams maximize talent is to find a player who’s on an artificially-lowered salary because of rookie scale, but we don’t have lottery picks, great trade assets for a promising rookie, and we don’t have the time to develop a starting point guard when we want to win now.

Most nights, Monte will be worse than the opposing PG we face, but we’ll often have advantages at three other positions.

Key word being veteran.

I'm just hoping we at least keep an eye out for younger talent through the draft. A 2024 1st round draft pick wouldn't hit his rookie extension until after KAT's current deal is off the books.

[shrink]

The thing to remember about Monte is that he’s likely the best vet PG .. we can AFFORD.

We spent our payroll to have top players at the SG, PF and C positions. We paid our SF well in a supporting role. This means that a PG in the 23-35 range is expected. The way other teams maximize talent is to find a player who’s on an artificially-lowered salary because of rookie scale, but we don’t have lottery picks, great trade assets for a promising rookie, and we don’t have the time to develop a starting point guard when we want to win now.

Most nights, Monte will be worse than the opposing PG we face, but we’ll often have advantages at three other positions.

Key word being veteran.

I'm just hoping we at least keep an eye out for younger talent through the draft. A 2024 1st round draft pick wouldn't hit his rookie extension until after KAT's current deal is off the books.

Exactly. And we can keep an eye out in the secondary market, for a third year player that never achieved his potential. Sometimes PGs take a little time. Also, Ant will develop into a better playmaker as he gets older too, reducing the need for an expensive, highly skilled PG, and maybe making Jaylen Clark (or NAW) a possible defensive back court mate.

[frankenwolf]

The thing to remember about Monte is that he’s likely the best vet PG .. we can AFFORD.

We spent our payroll to have top players at the SG, PF and C positions. We paid our SF well in a supporting role. This means that a PG in the 23-35 range is expected. The way other teams maximize talent is to find a player who’s on an artificially-lowered salary because of rookie scale, but we don’t have lottery picks, great trade assets for a promising rookie, and we don’t have the time to develop a starting point guard when we want to win now.

Most nights, Monte will be worse than the opposing PG we face, but we’ll often have advantages at three other positions.

My question is, do you think bite-bite is better than the opposing PG most nights? Looking at a ranking from THE SPORTING NEWS, MC is the 21st best PG in the NBA. A couple above him I have a problem with, but even if I'm right, that still makes him about 18th. (If you are interested, they ranked D'Lo at 26). So then, most nights we are worse off at PG right now. Watching Monte, he provides what Mike does, which is all we want anyway, right? Keeping Monte will (should) allow the FO to either groom a PG that we currently have or draft one.

[winforlose]

The thing to remember about Monte is that he’s likely the best vet PG .. we can AFFORD.

We spent our payroll to have top players at the SG, PF and C positions. We paid our SF well in a supporting role. This means that a PG in the 23-35 range is expected. The way other teams maximize talent is to find a player who’s on an artificially-lowered salary because of rookie scale, but we don’t have lottery picks, great trade assets for a promising rookie, and we don’t have the time to develop a starting point guard when we want to win now.

Most nights, Monte will be worse than the opposing PG we face, but we’ll often have advantages at three other positions.

My question is, do you think bite-bite is better than the opposing PG most nights? Looking at a ranking from THE SPORTING NEWS, MC is the 21st best PG in the NBA. A couple above him I have a problem with, but even if I'm right, that still makes him about 18th. (If you are interested, they ranked D'Lo at 26). So then, most nights we are worse off at PG right now. Watching Monte, he provides what Mike does, which is all we want anyway, right? Keeping Monte will (should) allow the FO to either groom a PG that we currently have or draft one.

The problem with ranking is it ignores role. For example, SGA is a great facilitator, but he is expected to score 25+ on any given night. To get those 25+ he is expected to take a large number of shots. The same is true of Brunson or Hali. Mike is capable of being that type of PG when he needs to. But, even shooting 44.5% from deep this season, that just isn’t his role. Mike’s role is to get Ant, Karl, Rudy, and whoever else going and to only really take a handful of shots per game. In fact that handful is so limited that Finch had to tell him to shoot more.

What I love about Mike and Monte is that they are capable shooters who rarely turn the ball over. JMAC is in the same mold, and his shooting is improved this year. But, JMAC lacks the consistency and history that the other PGs have and as a result doesn’t always draw a defender. When our PG draws a defender things get easier for Ant and KAT as doubling or tripling gets much harder.

One final thought on Monte Morris. If he got struck by lightning and became the offensive equivalent of Luka or Hali then he would both be higher usage and outside our price range. While I wouldn’t mind having an all star starting 5, with the new CBA I understand that we cannot truly have that. If we cannot have significant money at the PG, then we don’t necessarily want a high volume scorer at PG. I say this because Jaden is already struggling to get his own shots, and Finch has had to address the fact that there is not more pie for him right now. Mike is struggling to balance his own share of the pie with the offense Finch and the team needs from him. We need Monte to be efficient with the shots he does take, judicious with his shot selection, and an excellent facilitator that makes as few mistakes as possible. So far that is what we have in him. The only issue thus far is his shooting percentage, but that will come with time.

[shrink]

The thing to remember about Monte is that he’s likely the best vet PG .. we can AFFORD.

We spent our payroll to have top players at the SG, PF and C positions. We paid our SF well in a supporting role. This means that a PG in the 23-35 range is expected. The way other teams maximize talent is to find a player who’s on an artificially-lowered salary because of rookie scale, but we don’t have lottery picks, great trade assets for a promising rookie, and we don’t have the time to develop a starting point guard when we want to win now.

Most nights, Monte will be worse than the opposing PG we face, but we’ll often have advantages at three other positions.

My question is, do you think bite-bite is better than the opposing PG most nights? Looking at a ranking from THE SPORTING NEWS, MC is the 21st best PG in the NBA. A couple above him I have a problem with, but even if I'm right, that still makes him about 18th. (If you are interested, they ranked D'Lo at 26). So then, most nights we are worse off at PG right now. Watching Monte, he provides what Mike does, which is all we want anyway, right? Keeping Monte will (should) allow the FO to either groom a PG that we currently have or draft one.

My previous point, “Is your PF better than our PF” was reductionist to show my salary point. The NBA competes on TEAM wins.

Mike has some surprising stats (like top 20 in ORtg!), but overall, I’d say 18-22 is about right. However he is better than that .. for our team. WinforLose is spot on about role - Conley fills our team’s specific weaknesses (maturity, three point shooting, turnovers), and I think he helps our team win more than a “better” PG that doesn’t fit as perfectly. And Monte may fill the Conley role later.

[winforlose]

The thing to remember about Monte is that he’s likely the best vet PG .. we can AFFORD.

We spent our payroll to have top players at the SG, PF and C positions. We paid our SF well in a supporting role. This means that a PG in the 23-35 range is expected. The way other teams maximize talent is to find a player who’s on an artificially-lowered salary because of rookie scale, but we don’t have lottery picks, great trade assets for a promising rookie, and we don’t have the time to develop a starting point guard when we want to win now.

Most nights, Monte will be worse than the opposing PG we face, but we’ll often have advantages at three other positions.

My question is, do you think bite-bite is better than the opposing PG most nights? Looking at a ranking from THE SPORTING NEWS, MC is the 21st best PG in the NBA. A couple above him I have a problem with, but even if I'm right, that still makes him about 18th. (If you are interested, they ranked D'Lo at 26). So then, most nights we are worse off at PG right now. Watching Monte, he provides what Mike does, which is all we want anyway, right? Keeping Monte will (should) allow the FO to either groom a PG that we currently have or draft one.

My previous point, “Is your PF better than our PF” was reductionist to show my salary point. The NBA competes on TEAM wins.

Mike has some surprising stats (like top 20 in ORtg!), but overall, I’d say 18-22 is about right. However he is better than that .. for our team. WinforLose is spot on about role - Conley fills our team’s specific weaknesses (maturity, three point shooting, low turnovers), and I think he helps our team win more than a “better” PG that doesn’t fit as perfectly. And Monte may fill the Conley role later.

This, plus you can see how other players game’s can change when they get a new role on a new team. Some of it might be growth like Burnson and Sabonis, but others like Harden just shift their role and try to be what the team needs. Is Harden better than the individual numbers he gives the Clippers, maybe. But are the Clippers more successful when Harden takes fewer shots and makes more passes, probably.