The issue with this draft is that there is not a clear cut #1 or #1 and #2 in the draft. That doesn't mean that there won't be all stars in this draft, and maybe even a franchise player or two... no one can identify them easily though. Sarr would fit the Rockets the best because he can play the 5-spot next to Sengun and has a 7'5" wingspan, can cut to the basket, defend the lane and fits what the Rockets need from a 5 outside of him 3 point shot not being developed yet. I am sure the Rockets could find a spot for Nikola Topic as well, if he is there when they pick. He has nice size and a nasty skill set. Can play multiple positions. Dalton Knecht and Reed Sheppard, Matas Buzelis and Holland all could be possible fits as well.
He did, and Sheppard is better IMO. He is probably a better natural shooter than JJ and definitely a better defender. Sheppard is weird when it comes to athleticism. He looks like a poor athlete, and I wouldn't call him a good one.... but he just has amazing hands coupled with an excellent feel for the game.
I think it's a def a weak draft but even weak drafts had Blake Griffin and James Harden so it is expected there will be a couple gems here and there. This draft also has lots of Keegan Murray types who will likely have solid careers but won't turn out into stars. For example if Tari Eason was in this draft he will def be in the top 10.
I haven’t watched him, but the description (short, adequate athlete, active hands, good feel, good but not volume shooter, good but not creative passer, high IQ) sounds like our own FVV. Or ideally the Raptor version of FVV.
Sheppard is 6'3 though and not athletic but certainly more athletic than FVV. Certainly shows better potential to attack close outs and finish. That makes a big difference. I would rate FVV the better passer though.
The NBA is a talent driven league. While there are good players usually taken at other spots, not having a #1 and #2 pick caliber player is like taking about 15% (probably more than 10%, but not 20%) of the value of a draft away. Saying a draft doesn't have a clear cut #1 or #2 pick is the same as saying the draft is weak in my opinion unless there is solid evidence there are about 30 guys that are lottery guys in a normal year. (this might be a slight exaggeration, but I have no idea how many of the top X number of 2024 FRPs it would take for the Spurs to trade Wemby). Versus last year, I don't think there is a #3 or a #4 pick as well. There are way too many guys rated highly without 3 point shots suggesting this draft is a little more project based in the late lottery, mid 1st round (project=weak as teams are having to make riskier picks earlier). I've heard late 1st round and 2nd round are fine. Maybe this draft surprises me, but I'm going to say the 2023 draft has a ton more talent (i.e., 2023 was a strong draft and 2024 is a weak draft). Sure, there will be guys that are good NBA players, but not knowing who they are makes the upper draft picks worth less without making the lower picks worth more.
I think we have to do BPA. Our roster is actually pretty sound in terms of holes and needs. Do we need shooting? Absolutely. But we kind of don't have a ton of pathways to minutes. For me, I would really like to see some sort of taller, dynamic scorer that can really give us a different look at the 3/4 spot. Our 5 is currently loaded with Sengun,Jock,Adams... our 4 is basically just Jabari. I like the idea of Sheppard/Buzelis and letting them develop in the G League for an entire year. Adding a taller, rim-protecting 5 doesn't do it for me post-adams trade.
Of course this draft at this point will be viewed weaker than lets say the draft last year. There is no Victor or Miller or even Scoot. However, outside of the top 3, this draft is similar to most drafts - and I would argue while it is more volatile, there will be a few players that will be franchise or close to franchise players that emerge - there is just no general agreement on who these players are. If you are picking in the top 3 of this draft - then this is not NEARLY as good a draft as last years draft, or most draft years. However, if you are picking outside of the top 3 - in that 5-15 range, this draft is not bad.... and in that area is where the Rockets are likely to pick. It will require a lot of good scouting, but there are talented players in that 5-15 range that will develop and end up being very good. Everything is in the eye of the beholder. If the Rockets "win the lottery" and end up with a #3 pick, then there will be some degree of lament that it wasn't in last years draft or some of the other top heavy drafts. If the Rockets are picking 6-7, then I will not have any issues with this draft as there are talents in that range that are a little less polished, but are capable of a high outcome. This draft reminds me some of the 2017 and 2018 NBA drafts.
We'll see. The 75% ceiling is that this is a weak draft because it lacks the top end talent even if the 5-15 picks are as good if not better than you say. I'm just going to say there are not a lot of guys with three point shooting and good marks defensively in the mock drafts online as there usually are at this time (though the ones that shoot well, shoot really well). Vecenie has 5 guards/wings in his Top 10 that aren't good shooters. Last year it was 3 if memory serves, and those 3 were much better playmakers than this years group. Maybe this is the year the Johnny Davis's shock the world. Caveat: This isn't to suggest there aren't going to be good players.
I’m on the record for stating this in January. Sheppard is HIM. Downside, solid role player. Upside, John Stockton. His advanced stats scream star player while his outer appearance will undervalue him in the draft, just like Sengun and Luka.
There is no telling how far Sheppard would fall in a normal draft. What would you consider Sheppard's spot in a normal draft and in this draft?
I like Sheppard a lot, but I will say that I don't really see Stockton-level ballhandling or playmaking in his future. He is okay in both areas, maybe if he develops them he can play point guard. Again, I go back to FVV as a comp (Sheppard will probably be a better shooter). Sheppard is around the level Fred was at when he first entered the league in terms of his ballhandling and passing. Fred pretty much maximized his potential by working incredibly hard, and now he's a good, but not elite, starting point guard. He can't really make incredible reads or high-difficulty passes, but he's solid all around. That's also Sheppard's upside in that area IMO. Stockton of course was one of the best pure point guards of all time. The real question with Sheppard's upside comes down to just how elite his shooting ends up being. It's always hard to tell off these small college sample sizes. Right now it is looking about as good as anybody, but we'll have to see how it translates. Never going to bank on a guy being an all-timer like Curry in that area until he does it at the NBA level.
It’s not a perfect comparison, just the combination of shooting, play making and steals. Stockton is better in play making, Sheppard could be a better shooter and take more 3s. This is an absolute upside comp, Fvv is a much more reasonable baseline comp, which is an allstar caliber player still.
It doesn't necessarily lack top end talent though - it lacks known top end talent at this point in time. There are a lot players with question marks at this point in time - but it doesn't necessarily mean that they won't become elite players. IT means that there are more projects though. Sheppard is a very unique player so it is hard to say. If he tests really well, he could go in the 5-8 area of this draft. Last year he would have gone in the 5-10 range of the draft. What is the value of a short, but really good defensive guard that gets lots of steals, shoots a very high range from 3 and has a very high basketball IQ but isn't a point guard? The ability to defend and play smart and hit a high level of 3's gets you noticed - especially when you are at 53% from 3.
I see the Stockton comp. My only question is how a John Stockton type player fits in today's NBA. The game has changed in the last 25+ years.
So weak top end of the draft, and then a lot of projects...I'd call that weak. Question marks don't mean a player won't become elite. It only means there is less of chance. The chance of winning a lottery doesn't mean buying lottery tickets is a stronger investment than the stock market. Not knowing who will be good makes a draft be perceived as weaker. Maybe it ends up being as strong as a normal draft, but even if that is the case, it likely means there is more talent drafted 15-60 than normal as the teams with the 1-15 picks didn't know who would be good.
It is only weak for the Rockets because they lack superstars but for teams that have one and looking for a 3rd option or a 6th Man.... The Rockets have tons of 2nd and tertiary options on the team.....but none is really a Batman other than Sengün.....but he is also not someone that can get you to the Playoffs by himself. The Draft is not that bad at all....it all depends on what you have and are looking for....
