We see things differently. I have more faith in his abilities than you do. I also have little hope for a Rockets team that shoots so bad, and doesn't draft a great 3 PT shooter who could end up being better than some of our starters. We have some serious issues. Shot proficiency is our biggest weakness by far!!
It's not just shooting a lot of 3s. The Celtics are obviously the best 3pt shooting team and the best offensive team. But look at the Pacers. They are the 2nd best offensive team and 3rd at TS% efficiency, but only 15th in 3pt attempts. OKC is similar. They have the third best offense, 2nd at TS%, but only 16th in 3pt attempts. Denver is 5th in offense, 11th in TS%, but dead last in 3pt attempts. You need good 3pt shooters, and you need diverse ways to score. The fallacy is that since the 3pt shot is the most efficient shot, teams should avoid all other options and concentrate on creating 3pt shots. That just tells your opponents to concentrate on defending the 3pt shot. All good offensive teams have multiple lethal weapons so that the opponent has to pick their poison. After Harden abandoned the midrange shot and only attempted 3s and layups, his TS% did not increase. That tells you that shooting exclusively the most efficient shots does not automatically increase your efficiency.
Token white guy: Jimmer Fredette/Austin Reaves ESPN High end: Steve Nash Low end: Payton Pritchard CBS Davion Mitchell Ringer Derrick White BR Donte DiVincenzo HoopsHype reminiscent of Kirk Hinrich in style Anonymous NBA exec to HoopsHype Monte Morris Sporting News High end: Kyle Lowry Median: Derrick White Low end: Patty Mills NBADraft.net Mark Price/Jimmer Fredette CF Steph Curry, Steve Nash, John Stockton
And its OK to disagree. However, I see it differently. For instance, look at Boston, their most proficient 3pt shooters are role players off the bench. Brown and Tatum aren't great at 3pt shooting and Porzingas is good, only when he's available. So, in saying that, I prefer to upgrade our 3pt shooting in Free Agency. Get better role/bench players. Im of the belief that a player picked in the Top 5 should be a cornerstone and I just don't see that in Reed Sheppard.
This is a point that needs making more often. Yes the 3pt shot is more efficient than the mid-range, but our "masterplan" for beating the Warriors actually just gave them the easy solution to beat us - defend the 3, let James wear himself out. We never had a chance after the first couple seasons doing it, by the end D'Antoni seemingly lost any ability to think up anything other than James dribbling the ball to death with everybody else stood still. Anybody who still thinks shooting nothing but 3's after 27 straight misses is crazy.
There are no cornerstone stars available at any point in the draft, so your belief is mostly invalid this year.
Let's compare JJ Reddick's assist to turnover ratio to Sheppard's. Now let's compare their usage.... Hmm, seems like one dominated the ball and was as likely to turn the ball over as to get an assist. Now let's compare their defense.... Hmm, seems like one was a defensive liability even in college and the other was a very good defender. Now let's compare their athleticism. Hmm, seems like one is quite plus athlete and the other is a pretty awful athlete. Looks like exactly the same player... wonder why one was a 4 year college player and the other was one and done before being a top of the lottery type player.
Can we please stop with the Curry comparison! Reed is the best pure shooter in the draft and shooting is what we desperately need!! If he ends up being half as good as Curry…. Fabuloso!! I am really stoked about the possibility of drafting him with what he’s been able to do as a freshman!! They say speed kills, well being an accurate shooter is even more lethal!! ~ Doc Holliday Go Rockets!!! ……. ……. …….
Passing and defense are the main things that set them apart. Reddick had a terrible AST/TO in college. Sheppard's AST/TO was 4.5/2. He also averaged 3.2 stocks. Reddick never came close to that.
EXACTLY! So, if you're going to GAMBLE, any reasonable GM, SCOUT or BASKETBALL PROFESSIONAL will tell you to gamble on height and length because thats the one thing that can not be taught.
Would 1/2 of Curry be a bench player? I know what you mean. This draft is not as strong as past drafts and if we can get a future piece Im good with it. However, because its a more risky draft, I rather gamble on someone with size.
I think something like this is true traditionally speaking, but I also think gambling on those things has led to some huge busts. I used to be like that, but I'm kinda becoming more of a feel/high level processor/BBIQ guy now (which also can't be taught). I'll gamble on guys that excel in those areas above pretty much anything else, though yes you probably need to have some sort of minimum athleticism, size, etc. The hard part is figuring out what those minimums should be I think. So yeah I'm high on Reed because of stuff like that. And FWIW, that type of processing is mostly what appealed to me about Amen, even if he also has great size and athleticism.
Draft enthusiast: Madison Moore Low end: Jared Butler, Pablo Prigioni Mid outcome: Payton Pritchard, Patty Mills High end: Mike Conley, Fred Vanvleet.
It's not just attempts at the 3 that matter. It's proficiency. Out of the teams you named, they were all top 10 in making those 3's attempted. OKC 1 BOS 2 PHX 5 IND 9 DEN 10
Very good breakdown! But I go back to what the NBA SCOUT is saying about Reed Sheppard, rather than everyday fans. And they are saying because he played under 30 mins, it allowed him to have favorable stats. Also, they are saying that he scoring was spotty/inconsistent; 20 on game, 5 the next. Mind you, we have to think about the competition he was playing against, when he was having his better games vs the competition he was playing against when he was having his bad games. If he was the star player on Kentucky or even a STARTER and played more mins, I would be more on board
The Pacers were 9th in 3pt fg% and OKC was 1st. Shoot a lot of 3s, shoot a high efficiency and an average amount of 3s, or both. The Rockets last year were medium volume on bad efficiency. It's not a super complex analysis, nor does it need to be. They have to get way better at the long-distance game.
Now that you say that.... has there ever been a bust fit any other reason than gambling on athleticism or measurables? Has there ever been a bust "gambling" on a highly skilled player?
