Reply With Quote
His shooting stroke is very consistent.
Kinda resemble those great shooters such as Peja, Nash, Stockton.
https://www.spurstalk.com/reed-shepp...draft-lottery/
Spurs Ceiling Comparison: Smaller, More Aggressive Brent Barry
Spurs Floor Comparison: Stubbier Bryn Forbes
His shooting stroke is very consistent.
Kinda resemble those great shooters such as Peja, Nash, Stockton.
Wouldnt mind him at all....Would be a upgrade over branham,And should mean branham should be gone.
Spurs comparison is Terry Porter
Ugh, that floor......
I don't think he will be picked top 3, as some mocks suggest, but I'm also not sure that he will be there at 8. he makes to much sense with the Hornets, my guess is, they will pick him.
Payton Pritchard is currently doing fine with the C's and Sheppard seems like a rich man's version of PP.
if the Spurs somehow end up picking Castle at 4 and Sheppard at 8, this might work nice in a future back court, as both might be able balance each others weakness.
John Stockton if John Stockton was good.
So torn on this kid.
I personally love him. Shooting, smarts, effort. He’s a coach’s dream.
The concerns though…
The Spurs should have more than enough data available to determine what kind of a shooter he really is and how he compares to touted prospects prior such as Desmond Bane and Corey Kispert.
One funny (useless?)tidbit I saw on him when watching the 2023 McDonalds All-American game was he doesn’t play any video games. Almost unheard of in this day and age. Not sure if that changed when he went to College but I doubt it.
I don't think his standing reach deserves the attention that it gets, just like the exact vertical number
Just about everyone at the combine suggested be was gaming his vertical numbers by intentionally under stretching on the reach measurement to give a bogus inflated vertical to 'win' the narrative.
I don't agree with his characterization as an average passer. He's a really good passer, you can see this in transition where he had incredible passes that show advanced court vision and accurate delivery. The problem is when the defense is set, he doesn't create much (for himself or others) because he is an underwhelming ball handler with little burst, he can't shake his man off easily, and that makes things difficult for him.
This in stark contrast to Dillingham who excels at it, which is why a lot of the time Kentucky found themselves in a close, halfcourt game, you'd see Sheppard struggle to get anything going and it would be Dillingham who'd make things happen. This is critical to me, and as a result I'd rather go with Dilly, in spite of all of his defensive limitations (as long as the FO has a reasonable belief he'll be commited to put effort into it).
Not athletic enough to create his offense when the defense is set like Ariel says above. Underwhelming ball handler. Spurs don't need more of this on the roster.
He isn't anything more than a set shooter, a player who comes off the bench as a role player shooter. Spurs do need to add shooting but not at the expense of the other areas.
Forbes was a traffic cone defensively. Sheppard will almost certainly be a much better defender than Forbes ever was. His defensive metrics were off the charts this year at Kentucky, though his lack of size and length will no doubt hinder him at the next level. I see a slightly shorter Kirk Hinrich -- a very good, high-IQ role player who's a great shooter and a plus defender.
Thanks for the write up!
I would have to agree fully, and reading between the lines, I’m guessing it’s a no from timvp, atleast w the 4th pick. To have to pigeon hole sheppard into the point guard spot to me looks like putting too many eggs in one basket, and something i dont think the spurs can afford to gamble when every move matter in keeping victor for the long run. Would be great if we got castle at 4 and sheppard at 8, and see who sticks.
Supercharged Jon Sunvold.
The "controversy" about whether or not Sheppard fully extended on the standing reach test is interesting. I just read a thread on reddit where a bunch of guys self tested and found the difference would generally be about 3" if you hold your arm straight up as opposed to maximum stretching. So let's assume Reed did that, shortening his standing reach by 3" while also adding 3" to his max vertical leap. His adjusted numbers would then be a standing reach of 8' 1/2" and a vertical of 39".
For comparison's sake, note that Dillingham's standing reach measured at 7'11", and I haven't seen a single mention of that in any analysis of his game. Dillingham's standing reach is identical to that of Patty Mills.
https://www.nba.com/stats/draft/comb...STANDING_REACH
Last edited by R. DeMurre; 1 Day Ago at 10:02 AM.
The spurs have valued length, youth and untapped upside in recent drafts, and other than Wemby and Devin, maybe its time to go in a different direction by going with the pick based on talent rather than on potential. We've been pretty much at the bottom with that strategy. Maybe by going with a safer pick we can finally move up in the standings.
Sheppard could easily push Branham or Wesley to the 3rd string or completely off the team. Even with his short comings (which all players in this draft have) , he would improve our team. We need a decent guard in the worst way. We have a golden opportunity to improve our team. Lets not blow it by drafting some guy that's years away from contributing. I doubt Wemby wants to be in this same position next year - and his voice will count for something.
Rich man's Oscar Robertson.
I see his ceiling as a solid, rotation quality role player and there is nothing wrong with that. Every successful team needs several of them. Pop would probably dust off the old Forbes playbook to get Sheppard clean looks off of multiple screens. But he likely won't be there at 8 so do you use 4 on this type of possibly limited ceiling? I'm not a pro scout and he may prove me wrong but do we go one safe pick and one high risk/reward or do we take two moon shots since we may be able to get our role players in free agency?
Gaming the standing reach was genius. For the rest of his career he'll be described as this great leaper every single game.
Church Lady version of White Chocolate, White White.
Come on man, he is not going to be a dunker in the NBA.
Although he obviously might not get to 4, if he does he's the no brainer pick. A malleable player who stands a good chance of at least being a quality 6th man, which is more than I can say for any of the other realistic options at 4.
No thanks. He's tiny and he's white. WTF are we going to do with a 6 foot shooter?
200 IQ as well?!?!
There are currently 17 users browsing this thread. (4 members and 13 guests)
Posting Permissions
