I’m not sure why people keep mentioning Reed and Curry in the same sentence. Reed has NOWHERE near the handles Curry has or even had entering the league. Also nowhere near the same finisher as Curry. I get that Reed is the shiny new toy coming out of the factory, but please let’s be realistic. Other than the shooting, they’re very different.
Couple of things. Sheppard after one year of college is further along than Curry was after one year of college across the board. Steph Curry has never been able to handle full time PG duties, he's always needed someone like Draymond to handle most of that for him. I'm not sure why people seem to forget that... but Steph has NEVER been some CP3 or Steve Nash "point god" type. He's always been an undersized SG.
htownrox1 didn't say Curry was a point god, only that he was very different from Sheppard. Curry was much more proven in being able to create his own offense. That's not to say that Sheppard can't, but his "low" volume of shooting leaves the question open of his ultimate ceiling in that regard. He had literally less than half of Curry's three point attempts as a freshman. Scoring is the core of Curry's game, it's not for Sheppard's. It's fair to say they are different players even though they are both elite shooters.
The thing about the Reed discourse is that if you believe what his supporters are saying, then he is a better prospect than Curry coming out. Sheppard is suppose to have the passing ability of a PG and Curry's not the greatest passer in the world mostly just capable enough. Sheppard has a 42 inch vertical and therefore very good athleticism that some worry about him once in the NBA. Curry's not an otherworldly athlete either. Sheppard has amazing steals+blocks numbers so his defense is probably better than Curry as a prospect? And his shot was hindered by Kentucky's system so he was unable to put up like 8 3s a game like Curry. But he shot a higher percentage hitting 52% of his 3s there. If you assume all the above statements are true, he actually should be considered Curry 2.0 prospect.
They had different roles, Curry being on a mid major as "the guy" and Sheppard being just one of the guys on a stacked Kentucky squad.... you could also argue that the choice to not feature Sheppard more lead to an early exit from the tournament. If you watch the games, he shows the skill and could have gotten his shot off any time he wanted, he just wasn't given the role he'd have been given if he went to Davidson instead of Kentucky.
Reed cannot shoot like Curry or have the handles. Reed’s defense would be average and we have Amen and Cam to be our future guards. Amen is a elite passer and defender and Cam is a bucket and shooter….
Amen is nowhere near an elite passer, and I’m really high on Amen. He’s more forward than guard. And Sheppard is a top tier defender, he won’t have the switch ability that longer guys have but can be a PBev/Caruso type defender
The reason Curry and Sheppard are being compared mostly because of two things: 1. Size. 2: Shooting. Their physical measurements are very similar and they both are great shooters. The differences: 1. Curry was the featured scorer in college from day one. He was able to shoot a lot with high efficiency. We can assume that he got more attention from opposing defenses. Sheppard played behind and with several good prospects. In other words, Sheppard played on a better team and his role was somewhat limited because of that. He also played in a better conference against higher level of competition. Even though he is not technically a starter and not the focal point of their offense like Curry was, he played the third most minutes, scored the third most points, and had the highest assist numbers on a very talented team. Summary: It is very difficult to compare their offensive styles because of the very different situations they were in. 2. Curry was not a great athlete, although he was quick enough and had good enough handles to be an NBA PG. Sheppard is a better athlete than Curry, having better hop and quicker hands. His ball handling is hard to gauge because he was not the sole ball handler for his team like Curry was. But his passing and court awareness looked good enough to be at least a decent passer in the NBA. Summary: Physically Sheppard has more tools than Curry to be successful in the NBA, especially on the defensive side. It is very easy to be biased toward Curry because of hindsight from what he has accomplished in the NBA. It is not likely that Sheppard will have similar achievement. But one can say that when Curry came out of college, it wasn't very likely that he was going to be what he is today. Curry should be given credit for working hard to get to where he is. Sheppard's work ethic is going to be an important factor. It is somewhat like the Jokic-Sengun situation. It is not likely that Sengun will become as good as Jokic, but it was also not very likely that Jokic would become what he is when he first came into the league. The biggest questions/unknown about Sheppard are: (1) Is his high shooting percentage a product of his relatively low usage, him not being the focal point of the offense? I think it is reasonable to assume that it is at least a factor and it is highly unlikely that he will be able to shoot over 50% from 3 in the NBA. However, the fact that he has been shooting at a fairly good volume at one of the best conferences in college means that his shooting ability is real and that he will very likely to be a very good shooter in the NBA. (2) Can he create his own shot and finish at a high percentage at rim like Curry does? From the eye test, Curry has much better handles and is quite crafty getting to the rim and finishing. But IIRC, Curry's handles improved after he turned pro. So there is hope that Sheppard can get better. I don't have Curry's college data of shooting distances. He is very good at finishing in the NBA. Sheppard's at-rim shots consist of about 1/4 of all his shots. That seems to indicate that he is not afraid to drive to the hoop and is quite successful at the college level. (3) Will Sheppard be a defensive liability against bigger guards in the NBA? His size is certainly a limitation. A lot of similar-sized guards (e.g. Curry, Young, Lillard) are bad defenders. But he has shown good defensive instinct in college. He has quick hands, good anticipation, and good hop. His steal and block numbers are at an elite level for a guard. I think he will be a very good close out contester, and very good recovering chaser on defense. The biggest concern might be his lateral foot speed.
When you consider his low, 18.5% usage rate, Amen's assist rate is actually incredibly high. If you scaled up his minutes and usage to match elite passers from the forward positions in their rookie seasons, like LeBron, Iggy, and Draymond, Amen's numbers would be higher. Of course it doesn't quite work like that, his assists wouldn't increase in a linear fashion per touch of the ball and minute played, but you get my point. Basically I'm going to stake my claim now and say "yes he is an elite passer if he's a forward, and at least an average one if he's a point guard".
Flashing the skills to be "the guy" and actually doing it on a nightly basis are two different things. Jalen Brunson and Mikal Bridges were super efficient with their former teams and went to teams with an expanded role last season. Brunson massively increased his output while improving his efficiency with the Knicks, and was an MVP candidate this season. Bridges had a nice flash after the trade last year, but this season his efficiency tanked and his legs look dead tired. He's clearly not "the guy". If Curry and Sheppard had different roles, then maybe Sheppard should be compared to someone with a similar role instead. Even just stylistically they are different. You said that Curry's never been a Steve Nash "point god" type and that's 100% true. Curry's led the league in scoring twice, Nash led the league in assists five times. Those are two very different approaches to the game. Yet, Sheppard often gets compared to both despite not showing the capability of playing either role yet. And I'm a very pro-Sheppard guy.
A lot of smaller sized guards are good defenders too. Patrick Beverley is shorter than Sheppard, and you'd be a fool to say he wasn't a really good defender. Kenny Smith was another great Rockets defender, and was only 6' 3".
He's shorter up top but he has a 6'7 wingspan. Length is a lot more important than height from the top of the head. I'd bet Bev is functionally taller (shoulder height) too. Reed has a huge head. The height from shoulders up contributes nothing to basketball.
With all due respect, Kenny was a TERRIBLE defender. PGs often posted their career highs against him. As matter of fact, I’d take my chances on Reed Sheppard’s defense before Kenny’s. And Reed hasn’t played a second yet.
I'm gonna be honest, I don't really respect college basketball too much. Whenever I'd see Luka Garza clapping on Minny's bench all playoffs, I'd question the translation of college basketball to the pros. Too many people on those rosters who'll never play competitive basketball again. I feel like college ball is closer to the YMCA than it is to the NBA.
