Reed Sheppard - 2024 NBA Draft Prospect

[scott]

Out of curiosity, what is the historical results of a 50% college 3P shooter translating to the NBA? 50% is such an astronomical number and if someone could put that up reliably in the NBA they’d be an unstoppable weapon and would easily justify #1.

I’m unable to look right now but I’d be curious at other college players who shot 50% from 3 on similar volume and how they ended up doing in the NBA

[z0sa]

Castle to me is an upside swing with high motor and good work ethic, who will still probably be a very solid bench player in the worst case that he never develops a respectable three point shot. Though I'm going to bet on improvement from him. You always hope for a surer thing at #4 but not really happening this draft. Though I like Sheppard a lot here too since he should have a very respectable floor. Glad to be at #4 where the Spurs can get one of them instead of #7 where they'd get neither.

The mind goes back and forth between the likely options. I like Castle in every other aspect but his at ude about only playing PG and his outside shot. I want to believe! But this last regular season has me doubting a lot of other factors I never did before. Example, how we were able to turn hard working players with iffy jumpshots into shooters with an ace assistant coach, like we did with TP and even moreso Kawhi. Running plays through our best players repeatedly like we did during the Tim Duncan and end of the Kawhi era, et cetera. There's too much up in the air to feel confident even with hard work, we'll be the "right place" (unfortunately) to turn Castle into a player with true triple threat potential. Again, I want to believe, not be negative.

Our defense would be a lot better than with Dillingham, though, of course. Probably Castle would impact more on the defensive side of the court than Reed, as well, though he (Reed) obviously grades out at a high level despite his size. And if Castle develops a shot, he's the pick (if Risacher et al aren't available). It's so tough. Hard to go all-in on anyone.

[BatManu20]

Agreed, you're getting one of Sarr, Risacher, Castle or Sheppard and that kinda puts me at peace

Until PATFO outsmart themselves and take Salaun at 4 in fear that he won't be there at 8

[Mr. Body]

Out of curiosity, what is the historical results of a 50% college 3P shooter translating to the NBA? 50% is such an astronomical number and if someone could put that up reliably in the NBA they’d be an unstoppable weapon and would easily justify #1.

I’m unable to look right now but I’d be curious at other college players who shot 50% from 3 on similar volume and how they ended up doing in the NBA

A player has shot over .500 from range only eight seasons in NBA history and Steve Kerr is three of them.

[SpursBills]

Out of curiosity, what is the historical results of a 50% college 3P shooter translating to the NBA? 50% is such an astronomical number and if someone could put that up reliably in the NBA they’d be an unstoppable weapon and would easily justify #1.

I’m unable to look right now but I’d be curious at other college players who shot 50% from 3 on similar volume and how they ended up doing in the NBA

Hard to say just because of the rarity of his shooting season.

Bart Jorvik query - >50% from 3, >130 3s attempted, >80% FT comes up with 1 guy who was drafted - John Diebler drafted in 2011 achieved this during his senior year

Relaxing the query a little bit - >45% from 3, >130 3s attempted, >80 FT sorted by BPM:
11 hits among drafted players - senior Cam Johnson, senior Buddy Hield, senior John Diebler, junior Doug McDermott as your top 4
Below that you have specialty shooters like senior Jack McClinton, sop re Sam Merrill, and sop re Doron Lamb

Rating by BPM, Sheppard would be 3rd on this list sandwiched between senior year Hield and jr year McDermott

[Mr. Body]

Of all those plus-.500 from three seasons, the most recent is from 2009-2010 (Kyle Korver), almost fifteen years ago. The most recent overall is Luke Kennard in 2022-2023. He shot .4944. Then you get another Kyle Korver year 2014-2015.

Then you go down to 28th place to find a year that was relatively recent, 2020-2021 with Joe Harris, who shot .4752.

Dell Curry has a better single season percentage than Steph Curry. Steph Curry's best single seasons appear as 71st and 72nd on the list, at a touch above 45%, and those are 2011-2012 and 2015-2016. His next one is 2012-2013. They're all ancient. For the most part, the top 100 seasons are dominated by years before the pace and space era really took off. A ton of shooters in the 1990s.

Of course this is impacted by volume. Pre-Warriors and Pre-Harden, threes were still a specialty, shot when open and at the end of certain plays or actions. After a certain point, the three-point shot diet changed completely and the point was to jack up as many as possible.

[Mr. Body]

Steve Kerr shot .573 from deep in his senior year at Arizona.

[DPG21920]

Of all those plus-.500 from three seasons, the most recent is from 2009-2010 (Kyle Korver), almost fifteen years ago. The most recent overall is Luke Kennard in 2022-2023. He shot .4944. Then you get another Kyle Korver year 2014-2015.

Then you go down to 28th place to find a year that was relatively recent, 2020-2021 with Joe Harris, who shot .4752.

Dell Curry has a better single season percentage than Steph Curry. Steph Curry's best single seasons appear as 71st and 72nd on the list, at a touch above 45%, and those are 2011-2012 and 2015-2016. His next one is 2012-2013. They're all ancient. For the most part, the top 100 seasons are dominated by years before the pace and space era really took off. A ton of shooters in the 1990s.

Of course this is impacted by volume. Pre-Warriors and Pre-Harden, threes were still a specialty, shot when open and at the end of certain plays or actions. After a certain point, the three-point shot diet changed completely and the point was to jack up as many as possible.

That part that makes Reed unique is not just the shooting, but if you put in their his steal rate on top of the shooting? I would venture you would not get a single player maybe ever that pops up beside Reed.

[DPG21920]

Im pretty firmly in the “my dream scenario” is Reed + Holland draft. I would love to get a third pick for a shot at Castle/Carter/Bub/Dillingham as well

[R. DeMurre]

It is kinda crazy to think that even allowing for a variance of ~10% downward, Sheppard would still be shooting 42% from three and 50% from two, with something like a 63% TS%.

[R. DeMurre]

That part that makes Reed unique is not just the shooting, but if you put in their his steal rate on top of the shooting? I would venture you would not get a single player maybe ever that pops up beside Reed.

Yeah, and steal rates tend to be one of the most translatable stats when comparing NCAA and NBA outcomes.

[SouthernFryd]

Sheppard at 4...Knecht at 8

If sheppard is gone by 4, take knecht at 4 then Best available PG at 8. There should be a few of them still around...

[SpursBills]

That part that makes Reed unique is not just the shooting, but if you put in their his steal rate on top of the shooting? I would venture you would not get a single player maybe ever that pops up beside Reed.

Reed combines elite shooting, good playmaking, and high steals generation - so basically a guy with playmaking vision with elite shooting and high bball IQ for steal generation. His thresholds are pretty high, but interestingly enough this type of prospect is relatively common this year.

So setting thresholds a little more conservatively - >40% 3P% minimum 125 attempts, >80% FT, >2.5 STL%, >2:1 AST:TO gives you senior Payton Pritchard of past draftees
This year, there are 3 guys like this: Sheppard, Cam Spencer, and KJ Simpson - all three of whom I'm higher than consensus on
Weird thing about Reed is he's doing this as a freshman as opposed to a jr/sr, whether or not you think that matters - Cam Spencer is 24, KJ Simpson is turning 22, and Sheppard is turning 20

[Vienna]

Out of curiosity, what is the historical results of a 50% college 3P shooter translating to the NBA? 50% is such an astronomical number and if someone could put that up reliably in the NBA they’d be an unstoppable weapon and would easily justify #1.

I’m unable to look right now but I’d be curious at other college players who shot 50% from 3 on similar volume and how they ended up doing in the NBA

Sam Hauser had a season that was close to 50%.

and yeah……Bryn Forbes was a career 47% shooter in college.

[DPG21920]

Reed combines elite shooting, good playmaking, and high steals generation - so basically a guy with playmaking vision with elite shooting and high bball IQ for steal generation. His thresholds are pretty high, but interestingly enough this type of prospect is relatively common this year.

So setting thresholds a little more conservatively - >40% 3P% minimum 125 attempts, >80% FT, >2.5 STL%, >2:1 AST:TO gives you senior Payton Pritchard of past draftees
This year, there are 3 guys like this: Sheppard, Cam Spencer, and KJ Simpson - all three of whom I'm higher than consensus on
Weird thing about Reed is he's doing this as a freshman as opposed to a jr/sr, whether or not you think that matters - Cam Spencer is 24, KJ Simpson is turning 22, and Sheppard is turning 20

Nice - thanks for that data

[objective]

I know some people knock Sheppard for not having a high enough usage or shooting enough. I wonder if the weird Kentucky guard situation played into that, with 2 lotto picks forced to come off the bench due to starting promises by the now former coach.

In the one game Dillingham missed, Sheppard took 12 fga (still as a reserve) instead of his season average of 8.

I also checked out the games he started (5 as starter, 28 off the bench)

as a starter he averaged 13.8 fga (5 starts) compared to just 6.75 fga as a reserve

As a starter he averaged 18.4 pts, 5.0 assists, 6.6 rebounds, 2.0 steals, 1.4 blocks in 37 mpg shooting 42.8% from 3

I do wonder what kind of numbers he could have put up had he just been a starter on a team without so many big time recruits jumbled together demanding attention and oxygen.

[scott]

Thanks for the data SpursBills. Definitely piques my interest in Sheppard even more, maybe to the point where he is the only Guard I’d take at 4. I like Dillingham (and I’d say I like him rather a lot), but I’d rather take a wing at 4 and hope Dillingham is there at 8. Sheppard on the other hand, I have no hope he’ll be there at 8 (and may not even be there at 4)

[SpursBills]

Thanks for the data SpursBills. Definitely piques my interest in Sheppard even more, maybe to the point where he is the only Guard I’d take at 4. I like Dillingham (and I’d say I like him rather a lot), but I’d rather take a wing at 4 and hope Dillingham is there at 8. Sheppard on the other hand, I have no hope he’ll be there at 8 (and may not even be there at 4)

I think the thing that you really have to believe in for Sheppard if you dig into the numbers is how he affects winning even if he's not putting up counting stats. The shooting is great and everything, but that's not his true appeal to me. For me, his superpower is being able to read the game at an elite level. My eye test is not good enough to figure out exactly how he has such a huge differential in on/off compared to everyone else on his team (+30/100 possessions), and whether that's noise or something that's translatable to the pros. Usually when something like that is the case, you think collinearity or some kind of confounding factor due to playing in more talented lineups or with another star player, but for Sheppard it's regardless of who he's playing with. That suggests that he's probably doing a lot of the little things, recognizing advantages created by opponent double teams, mismatches, knowing where to be for rebounds, making correct rotations in advance, things that probably don't show up in the box score that nonetheless have a huge effect on winning small margins.

If that's the case, that's the kind of thing that translates exceptionally well to the pros. Cam Spencer also does a ton of this which makes me higher on him than consensus, except Reed is like 4.5 years younger so he has a much longer runway to work on his two primary weaknesses: 1) a handle that is merely adequate as opposed to great, and 2) a poor ability to respond to contact on either end - he gets swallowed up by long/physical defenders and picks up his dribble or turns it over, or he dies on a screen where he is otherwise positionally very solid

He can't be a primary initiator because he is unable to make something from nothing, but he is smart enough to recognize tiny advantages on both ends and capitalize on them instantly. THat's a very powerful skill when you pair that with the soon to be best two way advantage creator in the game.

[jesterbobman]

I think the thing that you really have to believe in for Sheppard if you dig into the numbers is how he affects winning even if he's not putting up counting stats. The shooting is great and everything, but that's not his true appeal to me. For me, his superpower is being able to read the game at an elite level. My eye test is not good enough to figure out exactly how he has such a huge differential in on/off compared to everyone else on his team (+30/100 possessions), and whether that's noise or something that's translatable to the pros. Usually when something like that is the case, you think collinearity or some kind of confounding factor due to playing in more talented lineups or with another star player, but for Sheppard it's regardless of who he's playing with. That suggests that he's probably doing a lot of the little things, recognizing advantages created by opponent double teams, mismatches, knowing where to be for rebounds, making correct rotations in advance, things that probably don't show up in the box score that nonetheless have a huge effect on winning small margins.

If that's the case, that's the kind of thing that translates exceptionally well to the pros. Cam Spencer also does a ton of this which makes me higher on him than consensus, except Reed is like 4.5 years younger so he has a much longer runway to work on his two primary weaknesses: 1) a handle that is merely adequate as opposed to great, and 2) a poor ability to respond to contact on either end - he gets swallowed up by long/physical defenders and picks up his dribble or turns it over, or he dies on a screen where he is otherwise positionally very solid

He can't be a primary initiator because he is unable to make something from nothing, but he is smart enough to recognize tiny advantages on both ends and capitalize on them instantly. THat's a very powerful skill when you pair that with the soon to be best two way advantage creator in the game.

Like you, a big fan (I think he's 2nd overall on my board behind Sarr, but there's a big jumble at the top).

Without digging into it too much (I don't know where to look)...

I think the big +/- data is a mix of:
Obvious things (shooting % and shooting gravity, secondary creation, steals),
Luck, and
I think he does a lot of the things that Lowry / Lonzo have had a lot of value in, as guys who just push the ball ahead in semitransition, which transforms efficiency up as a team, both by increasing transition opportunities, and by setting up the half court attack to be more full of mismatches. Steals play a big part in this too.
As he's so efficient, the loop of allowing his team to set up defense more often has the opposite effect on opponents, who have fewer transition opportunities as a result.

I think those things will still exist at the NBA level.

The downside is basically is the 1:1 defense is bad enough to cancel those out and make him unplayable at high levels, where he'd get matchup hunted to death.

I'd still make the bet at 4.

[z0sa]

I think the thing that you really have to believe in for Sheppard if you dig into the numbers is how he affects winning even if he's not putting up counting stats. The shooting is great and everything, but that's not his true appeal to me. For me, his superpower is being able to read the game at an elite level. My eye test is not good enough to figure out exactly how he has such a huge differential in on/off compared to everyone else on his team (+30/100 possessions), and whether that's noise or something that's translatable to the pros. Usually when something like that is the case, you think collinearity or some kind of confounding factor due to playing in more talented lineups or with another star player, but for Sheppard it's regardless of who he's playing with. That suggests that he's probably doing a lot of the little things, recognizing advantages created by opponent double teams, mismatches, knowing where to be for rebounds, making correct rotations in advance, things that probably don't show up in the box score that nonetheless have a huge effect on winning small margins.

If that's the case, that's the kind of thing that translates exceptionally well to the pros. Cam Spencer also does a ton of this which makes me higher on him than consensus, except Reed is like 4.5 years younger so he has a much longer runway to work on his two primary weaknesses: 1) a handle that is merely adequate as opposed to great, and 2) a poor ability to respond to contact on either end - he gets swallowed up by long/physical defenders and picks up his dribble or turns it over, or he dies on a screen where he is otherwise positionally very solid

He can't be a primary initiator because he is unable to make something from nothing, but he is smart enough to recognize tiny advantages on both ends and capitalize on them instantly. THat's a very powerful skill when you pair that with the soon to be best two way advantage creator in the game.

Is he going to be the guy who can create offense when it's NOT running, though? He might affect winning, but he was on a winning team with a great system. The Spurs suck. How's he going to be when the offense is disjointed and he's forced to make some plays? That's why I take Dillingham. Just saying.

[SpursBills]

Is he going to be the guy who can create offense when it's NOT running, though? He might affect winning, but he was on a winning team with a great system. The Spurs suck. How's he going to be when the offense is disjointed and he's forced to make some plays? That's why I take Dillingham. Just saying.

Yeah, I don't think he's going to be able to create something from nothing like Dillingham can, just two totally different types of players. It's really about what you feel this team needs more of, and how well you think each of those players can play that role.

[z0sa]

Yeah, I don't think he's going to be able to create something from nothing like Dillingham can, just two totally different types of players. It's really about what you feel this team needs more of, and how well you think each of those players can play that role.

Fair enough. I don't have the confidence you do that we'll be able to do without an actual playmaker. I hope you're right, because Sheppard should bring it on both sides of the court as opposed to Dillingham essentially being guaranteed to have a target on his back.

[SpursGuy91]

People seem to ignore the fact he’s not actually a fundamentally sound defender setting aside his physical limitations. The guy had an exceptional number of steals because he was constantly gambling and putting himself out of position and consistently leaving shooters open for uncontested jumpers. As a POA defender, he was also poor - halfway out of stance and lazily sliding his feet consistently, mediocre college players often getting the better of him. All of hat coupled with his below average ball handling skills makes me wonder how on earth he’s being considered for a top 5 selection, this archetype should be going in the late lottery at best.

[DAF86]

People seem to ignore the fact he’s not actually a fundamentally sound defender setting aside his physical limitations. The guy had an exceptional number of steals because he was constantly gambling and putting himself out of position and consistently leaving shooters open for uncontested jumpers. As a POA defender, he was also poor - halfway out of stance and lazily sliding his feet consistently, mediocre college players often getting the better of him. All of hat coupled with his below average ball handling skills makes me wonder how on earth he’s being considered for a top 5 selection, this archetype should be going in the late lottery at best.

That's simply not true.

[buttsR4rebounding]

Is he going to be the guy who can create offense when it's NOT running, though? He might affect winning, but he was on a winning team with a great system. The Spurs suck. How's he going to be when the offense is disjointed and he's forced to make some plays? That's why I take Dillingham. Just saying.

Kentucky did not have a great system. Caiipari is an elite recruiter, but quite frankly a below-average X’s and O’s guy. That’s why Dillingham was so important to the team because the offense frequently stagnated when it couldn’t overwhelm the defense with superior talent alone.