Castle last season averaged 0.6 blocks per game. That is almost Reed Sheppard numbers!!! ... and should give everybody here a slight chub. Castle has combine listed height of 6'5.5", so stop it already with the 6'4" numbers. Castle thinks he is a PG while Reed Sheppard is more reluctant to make that assertion. Castle's defense viz-a-viz Sheppard passes the eye test. Castle's quickness and length should be more NBA ready than Sheppard's. I have no idea what the Rockets are looking for. If they want to trade down in this draft, they will have say that they are seriously looking at Player X or Player Y to get the other team to bite. I expect them to play that game up until the draft.
The more I watch, the more his high BBIQ is apparent on both sides of the ball. I think what is throwing some off is that he wasn't asked to consistently do a lot of the things he's capable of so there's fewer examples of it, but they are definitely there. Topic is definitely crafty too but I worry that he might be somewhat injury prone and while I'd bet he's eventually a plus shooter, it's not a given. If we get either, I won't complain, but I think Sheppard is better.
No to Castle. Absolute no to any guard or wing who shot under .3 from 3. In fact, I don’t really want any guard of wing prospect who shot under .36 or so. I think Stone said once that a team can’t have duplicative weaknesses.
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5497156/2024/05/16/rockets-gm-rafael-stone-exclusive-nba-draft/ When you hear this draft class described as lacking a true No. 1 guy or blue-chip prospect — as many times as it’s been said already — does that impact your scouting? I think it’s a really talented draft, and there will be very good players in it. Historically, what we’ve seen is that people do not do a very good job predicting how good a draft is or is not. There are kind of unicorn-type players that occasionally appear in drafts and that signal early on in their lives that they have a chance to be extraordinarily special. And you see teams kind of falling over themselves to get themselves in positions to pick No. 1 in those drafts, even though the way everything’s set up, that’s a pretty impossible task. In that sense, there’s not someone like that in this draft. But I do think that there’s a lot of talent. It’s a really cool thing that our game has become such a worldwide game, played everywhere. I do think it makes it more challenging to evaluate guys because it’s just much less apples-to-apples. Some guys are playing professionally at different levels. Some guys are playing collegiately. The college game itself has changed remarkably. And all of those things are things you have to factor in. One thing that happens is the harder the analysis gets, the more people want to say it’s just bad. This is one of the harder drafts to do an analysis in recent memory, but that doesn’t mean the draft is bad. It just means that you’re gonna have to put in a little bit more work to figure it out. You’re gonna have to do a little bit of apples-to-oranges comparison and figure out what you got. You guys have talked at length about shooting as a premium. Knowing that and understanding the crop of draft hopefuls, does that influence any direction you take next month? Or do you view shooting as an improving skill with those already on the roster? We do expect to shoot better next year with no external changes. One enormously important aspect of shooting is shot selection. You can highlight players with equivalent shots and one guy will shoot 33 percent, one guy will shoot 43 percent, because the guy shooting 43 percent is taking much easier shots than the guy shooting 33 percent. As our team matures and figures out their spots and makes the right play, shooting percentages will rise. Similarly, the one constant trend through the history of basketball is that as guys go on in their careers, they become better shooters. So as our young players get a year older, they should all individually improve. Notwithstanding it, of all the skills in the NBA, shooting is probably the one everybody pays a premium for. So we’ll look at that both in terms of people we bring in as free agents and people we draft. As an organization, you have always expressed a willingness to have multiple conversations with other teams. Compared to the other years where you had a top pick, do you expect more or fewer conversations, given the outside perception of the overall class quality? I’m gonna guess it’s going to be the same, honestly. There are going to be teams that are more interested and teams less interested. They may not be the teams that we would anticipate. I think it’s getting easier for us to be flexible. The last couple of years, it’s made a ton of sense for us to draft, because we’ve needed this infusion of young talent. It’s a little easier (now) to be more diversified in terms of pushing draft picks out, taking veteran players. Our optionality is we always wanted to keep an open mind in case there was something that we needed to do. But because we like our current roster so much, it actually provides us with more flexibility to explore creative deals of all sorts. We weren’t foreclosing things two or three years ago, but it’s gotten easier.
Our biggest need is shooting. Castle doesn't help there. Other than Thompson, every one of our wings is substantially better 3pt shooter than than Castle's 26.7%. In fact, even Sengun also shoots better than that. I don't see him being that appealing to them.
I agree on taking BPA. I agree that 3PT shooting is the easiest/most likely thing to improve over time. But I think the Best Player Available is Sheppard. It's inconsistent how people project certain guys to get better at shooting, but don't do the same for already good shooters. Even if you don't project Reed to get better at shooting threes, we're talking about a guy that's starting out multiple standard deviations away from average 3pt shooters. Having elite shooting on the court is so much more than the points we get when he shoots, it's the warping of the defense that makes everyone else more effective. Reed is by far the best shooter, no one is close. He is the best outlet passer. You can project other guys to be better defenders because of their attributes, but by what's happened on the court so far, he's one of the better defenders in this draft, and I think the project him to be a plus defender in the league. All that said, the perfect fit is a great bonus for us, and if we needed a tie-breaker that would suffice.
Castle was 18-of-25 (72%) for 3 pointing shooting at the combine, which are number one can not fake. Castle has got good 3 point shooting in his bag, which should be able to translate into game action.
I actually wouldn't be mad at that. We were planning on getting the #9 pick, so that would feel like adding Marcus Smart for free. Especially since it's unlikely we will have minutes for Tate or Landale next season. I have heard that the Grizzlies view Smart as a really big part of what they're trying to do though so I'm not sure how likely this would be. Smart is very much an Udoka type player though. Would be wild to have Smart and Van Vleet in the backcourt rotation. Two of the toughest little guards in the league.
No offense, but I have a hard time taking an assessment on a guy seriously if it's made by someone who doesn't know the guy's name. His name is Dillingham, not Dillinger.
Shooting well in a glorified practice once is great, but it's not necessarily indicative that they'll shoot well when it matters. Dwight Howard was reportedly amazing quite often in practice shooting FT's and never put it together when it mattered. Jalen Green had 8 games where he shot 47% from 3.... and is still only a 32-33% 3 point shooter. If you look at him when it matters, he's not comfortable at all behind the arc and has to be all but dared to shoot a 3 in the first place. Defenders sag far off of him because they know he's scared to shoot. He could put it all together, but we can't just pretend that's not a concern.
People confuse being a PG with being a playmaker. They are different. Floor generals dictate game pace. Playmakers pop off the screen with their skill but they don't dictate the pace of the game quite like floor generals do. Tari Eason, Jabari Smith, Cam Whitmore and Jalen Green are all guys we drafted that are very skilled at certain aspects of the game but they aren't processors of the game. Amen/Sengun are. In this class there are two of those guys. Topic and Sheppard. A really weird comp for Sheppard to me is bizarro Ausar Thompson. What if Ausar was the best shooter on the planet but was 4 inches shorter? That's kinda what Reed Sheppard is.
Ok, so I have done my homework. And by that I mean, I have watched 10 minute scouting videos of each the top prospects, so I consider myself an expert now (never having seen them play a real game before). Here is my ranking of the guys I‘d like to add: 1. Alex Sarr - the way he moves, handles the ball and shoots at his size is just too intriguing for me, plus he would fit in pretty good with out core so far. We could go really big with him, Sengun and Jabari on the court together. He is raw, but he also seems to have the most upside. 2. Reed Sheppard - unbelievable shooter, great defender, good facilitator. Kind of a strange guy, short, not ultraquick but really athletic. If he adds strength I don‘t see his size as a major weakness on D - and his shooting range and craftiness close to the basket could turn him into a star. Plus he is very young and has a lot of time left to develop. 3. Nikola Topic - I kinda struggled of who to put at 2, Sheppard or Topic. I prefer Sheppard a little because of the elite shooting we are lacking (and his great defense despite his small site) and also because he is the kinda guy I really like to root for. But Topic is the better passer and better at creating his own shot, especially close to the basket. His combination of playmaking, size and his young age make him a real intriguing prospect. His shooting worries me a bit though - without a 3 pointer it will also be tougher for him to drive to the basket. And then we already have a PG that can‘t shoot and is great at driving to the basket and facilitating. —- the rest of the guys are in a tier below for me: 4. Donovan Clingan - great size, defense and offensive weapon close to the basket. But his shooting worries me a whole lot. And he seems to be injury prone. Drafting him would make it the most difficult for our roster, since playing him and Sengun together may be tough. 5. Zacchari Risacher - great size and shooting for a 3, really good defense. But he struggles with his handles and when driving to the basket. Kinda reminds me of Jabari in that regard. Right now I expect him to become a great 3&d player, but I preferred Jabari as a prospect. I really like his upside though. 6. Rob Dillingham - it would be really fun to see him in an Udoka practice. His offense looks spectacular to me - but also like hero ball. His defense looks historically bad and he is really small. Still, if he is coachable, I see a lot of upside due to his offensive power. — I don‘t want these guys at 3: 7. Dalton Knecht - his shooting will translate, but he will struggle with most other areas of the game in the NBA, plus he is older than most of our young core already. 8, Matas Butelis - looks like he should be better at everything than he is. I still see some upside, but he looks really disappointing 9. Stephon Castle - looking uncomfortable when handling the ball outside the 3pt line is a red flag for me So, if we take Sarr, Sheppard or Topic I am happy, if we take Clingan, Risacher or Dillingham I am cautiously excited, if we take somebody else I will be disappointed and hope, they prove my expertise (after watching 10 minute videos) wrong.
If you assume Castle will end up shooting ok then I wouldn’t mind that, and I feel better about his shooting than say Ron Holland, though aside from position issues it’s also that we have a group of young guys that’s all theoretical shooters or slightly above that, I think Castle can get to solid shooter but the odds that he turns into a truly great one is slim , at some point one of the main guys or two will have to be high level shooters, you can either pray that one of these theoretical guys get there, or just take one that’s most likely that already Saar, yeah if for some inexplicable reason he and Reed are both there I’d have to really think about it, I doubt that happens though
Out of curiosity, where are you getting this from about Reed? IIRC he was asked if he would play PG, and he said he'd do whatever (including bringing water to the guys). He threw out Steve Nash as a comp (way too high, but hey at least he's dreaming big). And I've seen interviews with him where he just goes on and on about enjoying getting the ball to guys like Dillingham when they're hot (and watching them work). If anything, I kinda wish he was more aggressive and less deferential to his teammates, but at least on this team that's not necessarily a bad thing. To be clear, I don't think he's necessarily a PG savant (see all my complaints about his PG game), but I think he has the mindframe to be an effective PG. I also believe "PG" is evolving, and honestly I'm not sure there really is much difference between PG and SG in the modern NBA. I think you just have playmaking guards, which can definitely apply to both guys. FWIW, I *do* like Castle quite a bit too (probably in my top 5?), and given different roster construction, I could see taking him over Reed. Others have already commented on this, but these results should really be taken with a huge grain of salt (if not ignored completely). If you ask me, they should just remove these drills altogether. I certainly couldn't do it, but some former basketball folks act like it is actually quite easy to put up those numbers (Bryce Simon and Sam Vecenie were talking about this on their combine episode). We have stats and tape from actual game action for these guys. Let's use that. Hell, I'd rather take Sengun's Feburary/March 3pt shooting (~39%) over the results of a drill like this...and we know that sample isn't likely to hold up either. To throw out the Bronny example again (with updated stats), I believe he put up similar numbers in the drill, yet he was 2/9 in the 2 scrimmages. As an aside, I saw Reed talking about this drill, and they discussed how he runs hard on these drills, trying to take things at "game speed." I'm 95% sure this was just fluff, but I do wonder if different guys take it at different speeds (and of course "game speed" is harder). No shade on Jalen, but I recall him working out with KD last summer and seemingly realizing you need to do all your practice reps at game speed (I'm happy to blame Silas, G League Ignite, etc for Jalen's mentality there vs Jalen directly FWIW).
I didn't say he was bad, just not great. Most college PGs could do the things he did. The highlights you posted didn't really show much of his ball handling and play making. It's mostly his shooting, which was otherworldly great.
I thought the same thing, until I realized how awful he's on defense. Now, if some other team really wants him as part of a trade package, then it would be another story. What do you think about that?
