The official Wendell Moore Jr. thread

[KGdaBom]

Maybe the highest-end for a comparison: How about Brandon Roy?

Roy was so much better in college. He was a basketball genius and more skilled than Moore.

I could see Brogdon as an absolute, but unlikely, ceiling. Brogdon shot 40% from three this year, but that was one year and if you look at that form, I’m not convinced it will translate to the longer line and against more length. Form matters. Let’s not forget that Josh Okogie shot 38% from three in back-to-back college seasons while also being excellent from the line. Culver also shot over 38% from three one year in college. Moore’s shot is still a little funky. I have hope though.

Moore also isn’t a stud athlete. He’s fairly smooth, especially on defense, but isn’t explosive either in first step or at the rim.

I would love if he became a defensive point guard that can be a secondary initiator next to Ant (Brogdon-ish). At the 26th pick, however, I’d be happy if he can become a rotation piece in a playoff series.

Depends what you mean by athlete. He's big, strong and extremely physical. That's something I love about him. As for not explosive take a look at some of his dunks. Many of them were very explosive.

As for his 3% yeah he just had one good college year shooting the 3. The other 2 were poor. I'm hoping he can shoot closer to 40% than 30% in the NBA. That remains to be seen.

[Krapinsky]

Maybe the highest-end for a comparison: How about Brandon Roy?

Roy was so much better in college. He was a basketball genius and more skilled than Moore.

I could see Brogdon as an absolute, but unlikely, ceiling. Brogdon shot 40% from three this year, but that was one year and if you look at that form, I’m not convinced it will translate to the longer line and against more length. Form matters. Let’s not forget that Josh Okogie shot 38% from three in back-to-back college seasons while also being excellent from the line. Culver also shot over 38% from three one year in college. Moore’s shot is still a little funky. I have hope though.

Moore also isn’t a stud athlete. He’s fairly smooth, especially on defense, but isn’t explosive either in first step or at the rim.

I would love if he became a defensive point guard that can be a secondary initiator next to Ant (Brogdon-ish). At the 26th pick, however, I’d be happy if he can become a rotation piece in a playoff series.

I suppose by his senior year, sure. But years 1-3 Roy was nothing to write home about.

The guy that reminds me of Roy is the guy we passed on -- Malaki Branham. What he did his last 10 games as an 18 year old Freshman was nothing short of sensational.

[KGdaBom]

Maybe the highest-end for a comparison: How about Brandon Roy?

Roy was so much better in college. He was a basketball genius and more skilled than Moore.

I could see Brogdon as an absolute, but unlikely, ceiling. Brogdon shot 40% from three this year, but that was one year and if you look at that form, I’m not convinced it will translate to the longer line and against more length. Form matters. Let’s not forget that Josh Okogie shot 38% from three in back-to-back college seasons while also being excellent from the line. Culver also shot over 38% from three one year in college. Moore’s shot is still a little funky. I have hope though.

Moore also isn’t a stud athlete. He’s fairly smooth, especially on defense, but isn’t explosive either in first step or at the rim.

I would love if he became a defensive point guard that can be a secondary initiator next to Ant (Brogdon-ish). At the 26th pick, however, I’d be happy if he can become a rotation piece in a playoff series.

I suppose by his senior year, sure. But years 1-3 Roy was nothing to write home about.

The guy that reminds me of Roy is the guy we passed on -- Malaki Branham. What he did his last 10 games as an 18 year old Freshman was nothing short of sensational.

Just to show we are capable of agreeing if we had kept pick 19 I would have been quite happy with Branham. However, getting Kessler and Moore IMO was a much better overall outcome. It did cost us some second round draft picks which we recouped a couple later passing on fan favorite EJ Liddell trading pick 40 for the pick we took Minott with. If Liddell turns out to be a nice player Connelly will have egg on his face over that one unless Minott turns out to be just as nice. However, Liddell was passed over 40 times in the Draft. NBA teams were underwhelmed with him.

[Krapinsky]

Roy was so much better in college. He was a basketball genius and more skilled than Moore.

I could see Brogdon as an absolute, but unlikely, ceiling. Brogdon shot 40% from three this year, but that was one year and if you look at that form, I’m not convinced it will translate to the longer line and against more length. Form matters. Let’s not forget that Josh Okogie shot 38% from three in back-to-back college seasons while also being excellent from the line. Culver also shot over 38% from three one year in college. Moore’s shot is still a little funky. I have hope though.

Moore also isn’t a stud athlete. He’s fairly smooth, especially on defense, but isn’t explosive either in first step or at the rim.

I would love if he became a defensive point guard that can be a secondary initiator next to Ant (Brogdon-ish). At the 26th pick, however, I’d be happy if he can become a rotation piece in a playoff series.

I suppose by his senior year, sure. But years 1-3 Roy was nothing to write home about.

The guy that reminds me of Roy is the guy we passed on -- Malaki Branham. What he did his last 10 games as an 18 year old Freshman was nothing short of sensational.

Just to show we are capable of agreeing if we had kept pick 19 I would have been quite happy with Branham. However, getting Kessler and Moore IMO was a much better overall outcome. It did cost us some second round draft picks which we recouped a couple later passing on fan favorite EJ Liddell trading pick 40 for the pick we took Minott with. If Liddell turns out to be a nice player Connelly will have egg on his face over that one unless Minott turns out to be just as nice. However, Liddell was passed over 40 times in the Draft. NBA teams were underwhelmed with him.

Time will tell. I can't help but draw comparison to the 2013 draft where we passed on a stud SG in McCollum, only to trade our pick for a wing (Shabazz) and center depth (Dieng). Dieng ended up being good value at the spot, but we passed on a much better player.

I wouldn't have minded Liddell at 40 (or Kessler even for that matter), but would have balked at picking him at 22. Minott seems like a fund project to develop.

[minimus]

I remember how smooth Jamal Murray was in bubble, especially his acrobatic layups. I wonder if he was so athletic, shifty from very beginning of his NBA career, or he improved during his first years?

https://youtu.be/VKCyitXJIqA


I would be more than happy if Moore can develop such handles, because I feel like he he is already a good jumper, but mostly on straight line layups / dunks.

[Klomp]

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

[KGdaBom]

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

He's got a good handle for a wing, but IMO it's subpar for a guard.

[shangrila]

I suppose by his senior year, sure. But years 1-3 Roy was nothing to write home about.

The guy that reminds me of Roy is the guy we passed on -- Malaki Branham. What he did his last 10 games as an 18 year old Freshman was nothing short of sensational.

Just to show we are capable of agreeing if we had kept pick 19 I would have been quite happy with Branham. However, getting Kessler and Moore IMO was a much better overall outcome. It did cost us some second round draft picks which we recouped a couple later passing on fan favorite EJ Liddell trading pick 40 for the pick we took Minott with. If Liddell turns out to be a nice player Connelly will have egg on his face over that one unless Minott turns out to be just as nice. However, Liddell was passed over 40 times in the Draft. NBA teams were underwhelmed with him.

Time will tell. I can't help but draw comparison to the 2013 draft where we passed on a stud SG in McCollum, only to trade our pick for a wing (Shabazz) and center depth (Dieng). Dieng ended up being good value at the spot, but we passed on a much better player.

I wouldn't have minded Liddell at 40 (or Kessler even for that matter), but would have balked at picking him at 22. Minott seems like a fund project to develop.

I never got the Branham hype. He seems far more Malik Beasley than Brandon Roy or CJ McCollum. Not much playmaking, even less defence, doesn't get to the rim much, very mid-range heavy (47% of shots were 2pt Js per Hoop-Math). I wasn't blown away when I was scouting Ohio St.

I'm sure he can be a decent role player but I don't see stud.

[Krapinsky]

Just to show we are capable of agreeing if we had kept pick 19 I would have been quite happy with Branham. However, getting Kessler and Moore IMO was a much better overall outcome. It did cost us some second round draft picks which we recouped a couple later passing on fan favorite EJ Liddell trading pick 40 for the pick we took Minott with. If Liddell turns out to be a nice player Connelly will have egg on his face over that one unless Minott turns out to be just as nice. However, Liddell was passed over 40 times in the Draft. NBA teams were underwhelmed with him.

Time will tell. I can't help but draw comparison to the 2013 draft where we passed on a stud SG in McCollum, only to trade our pick for a wing (Shabazz) and center depth (Dieng). Dieng ended up being good value at the spot, but we passed on a much better player.

I wouldn't have minded Liddell at 40 (or Kessler even for that matter), but would have balked at picking him at 22. Minott seems like a fund project to develop.

I never got the Branham hype. He seems far more Malik Beasley than Brandon Roy or CJ McCollum. Not much playmaking, even less defence, doesn't get to the rim much, very mid-range heavy (47% of shots were 2pt Js per Hoop-Math). I wasn't blown away when I was scouting Ohio St.

I'm sure he can be a decent role player but I don't see stud.

For starters, one of the best shooters in the draft: he shot 50-41-83 as a freshman in the big ten.

He's not a facilitator, but he made strides as a playmaker as the season went along. Over the last 10 games he had a streak where he had at least 4 FTA in 9 straight games. In 3 of his last 6 games he had 4 assists. This is as an 18 year old freshman mind you. He was on a very old Ohio State team - they had 9 seniors, and Liddel a junior -- so he wasn't handed the keys from day one. He had to earn it over the course of the year emerged to be their second best player.


Contrast his numbers with the age 18 Freshman seasons of the Big Ten guys that went ahead of him:

Malaki Branham (14 points per game on 50-41-83 as an 18 year old freshamn)
Jaden Ivey (11 points per game on 40-25-73 as an 18 year old freshman)
Keegan Murray (7 points per game on 50-35-75 as a 19 year old freshman)
Johnny Davis (7 points per game on 44-39-73 as an 18 year old freshman)

[shangrila]

Time will tell. I can't help but draw comparison to the 2013 draft where we passed on a stud SG in McCollum, only to trade our pick for a wing (Shabazz) and center depth (Dieng). Dieng ended up being good value at the spot, but we passed on a much better player.

I wouldn't have minded Liddell at 40 (or Kessler even for that matter), but would have balked at picking him at 22. Minott seems like a fund project to develop.

I never got the Branham hype. He seems far more Malik Beasley than Brandon Roy or CJ McCollum. Not much playmaking, even less defence, doesn't get to the rim much, very mid-range heavy (47% of shots were 2pt Js per Hoop-Math). I wasn't blown away when I was scouting Ohio St.

I'm sure he can be a decent role player but I don't see stud.

For starters, one of the best shooters in the draft: he shot 50-41-83 as a freshman in the big ten.

He's not a facilitator, but he made strides as a playmaker as the season went along. Over the last 10 games he had a streak where he had at least 4 FTA in 9 straight games. In 3 of his last 6 games he had 4 assists. This is as an 18 year old freshman mind you. He was on a very old Ohio State team - they had 9 seniors, and Liddel a junior -- so he wasn't handed the keys from day one. He had to earn it over the course of the year emerged to be their second best player.


Contrast his numbers with the age 18 Freshman seasons of the Big Ten guys that went ahead of him:

Malaki Branham (14 points per game on 50-41-83 as an 18 year old freshamn)
Jaden Ivey (11 points per game on 40-25-73 as an 18 year old freshman)
Keegan Murray (7 points per game on 50-35-75 as a 19 year old freshman)
Johnny Davis (7 points per game on 44-39-73 as an 18 year old freshman)

That's...nice, but still not "stud".

As I said, I'm sure he'll have a nice career. But I doubt he's someone we turn around 5 years from now and curse the team for not drafting.

[moss_is_1]

Read on Twitter

Pretty good article here.

[Baseline81]

End of the day, the Wolves need Dell to be a hit from this draft.

[Slim Tubby]

End of the day, the Wolves need Dell to be a hit from this draft.

Agreed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jscott]

A “hit” is pretty subjective.

If he is a quality rotational player, I’d say that’s a hit at 26. He looks like he has the tools. I’m excited to see how he can contribute. I feel he will give us quality minutes this season.

[KGdaBom]

End of the day, the Wolves need Dell to be a hit from this draft.

Do his friends and teammates call him Dell? Was Dell Curry actually a Wendell Curry?

[Baseline81]

Do his friends and teammates call him Dell? Was Dell Curry actually a Wendell Curry?

Apparently, Dell is what he was called at Duke.

[KGdaBom]

Do his friends and teammates call him Dell? Was Dell Curry actually a Wendell Curry?

Apparently, Dell is what he was called at Duke.

That's what I was guessing. I once played Doubles Tennis against Wendell Anderson former governor and senator from the great state of Minnesota. My partner and I beat them 6-0, 6-0 in the USTA tennis league. Since that went so fast I teamed up with Wendell and he and I beat my partner and his. This has nothing to do with the Timberwolves, but I wanted to manufacture the opportunity to tell the story.

[minimus]

I find this a very interesting comparison. Wendell Moore > Royce O'Neale.

Royce O'Neale isn't very explosive (25" standing vertical), but he's a fluid athlete. At 6'6", 215 pounds with a 6'10" wingspan, there isn't much to nitpick regarding his physical profile.

Read on Twitter

Moore also jumped 38.5 inches on his max vertical jump at the combine

Read on Twitter

Note: Moore has 32.5 standing vertical

So, I believe that by the end of this season Moore might play similar to O'Neal role as best perimeter on ball defender. But I hope that he can grow into Joe Ingles type of player: smart defender, knockdown 3pt shooter, solid ballhandler AND excellent passer.

Hopefully he will learn quick and have solid SL and preseason.

[Dewey]

I like him as a rookie prospect… his defensive issue is (watching videos, games) he struggles to keep himself over the ball versus body and is a little flat-footed. I’m never one to not-pick but these two things stand out and bug me and will force him to drop step to the basket too easy - give up a lot of easy j-shots. If they can help him here, he has a lot of smoothness to his offensive game that could surprise.

[minimus]

I like him as a rookie prospect… his defensive issue is (watching videos, games) he struggles to keep himself over the ball versus body and is a little flat-footed. I’m never one to not-pick but these two things stand out and bug me and will force him to drop step to the basket too easy - give up a lot of easy j-shots. If they can help him here, he has a lot of smoothness to his offensive game that could surprise.

As ISO defender he definitely will struggle in NBA against quick guys. But my hope is that he learns how to use Gobert presence to be efficient defender