Reply With Quote
Man, back in the day, 6"3 used to be considered good size for a point guard. Now it's "slight frame." That's today's NBA for you.
As was stated, maybe we get a starter but if a Dilly or Castle ends up being a bench spark plug, that can still play out as a successful draft pick. We don’t have to hit home runs, though that would surely be nice, as much as avoid any potential busts such as the jury still being very much out on a Branham, Wesley, etc. being worth rookie year option exercising or not.
Man, back in the day, 6"3 used to be considered good size for a point guard. Now it's "slight frame." That's today's NBA for you.
what makes Dillingham intriguing are his elite handles and off the dribble pull up ability. We need a PG who can draw multiple defenders so he can create open shots. You also want that player to be a 3-point threat, so defenders can't go under. Dillingham is exactly that guy and can create shots for himself. The question is, how much of his scoring can translate when he's matched up with taller players. He could turn out to be a DeAron Fox (who has the same height), but this could also turn into a Johnny Davis situation. He's not the best finisher at the rim and often disengaged on defense. The combine will also be very telling when it comes to his true height. He is worth a gamble though.
I consider Dilly & Castle "safe picks". But like was stated, the combine will tell. If the draft deals us a player that's better than we have, I consider that a success. The second round is where the spurs really really need to do their homework to get anything of value to the team especially in this draft.
I think Sheppard has just enough game to be a point guard but he is not remotely as crafty as nash when it comes to handling or passing. Nash parlayed his handling skills into a lethal pull-up shooting game as well. It’s a huge leap between Sheppard and Nash. I think with Sheppard you are looking at a more FVV/Lowry type player
Are we sure we want PG's to fall instead of wings in this particular draft?
Sheppard is closer to Jamaal Murray than he is Steve Nash in archetype.
Sarr at 7. If available, Spurs would have to consider him. Gotta factor he French too. . A fellow countrymen teammate for Victor.
Last edited by Slippy; 1 Week Ago at 07:34 PM.
Sheppard unlocks so many things on offense next season if he’s our starting PG. His mid range pull up is also underrated. Having a PG that deadly at any point he picks up his dribble is going to provide so much spacing and easy shots for everyone. Dilly’s the other guy who can do this for the team but I have so much more faith in Sheppard’s defense than Dilly’s.
Sheppard is deadly when he gets a good look but he has a much harder time getting himself open than Dillingham because he's nowhere near as fast or skilled a ballhandler, multiple times at the end of Kentucky games you'd see Sheppard catch and pass because he couldn't get himself a good look. If he needs someone to set him up then that defeats the purpose, I trust Dillingham much more in that regard.
There is definitely an aspect of Sheppard’s game that’s reliant on others, but I do feel there is untapped potential in Sheppard’s self-creation ability that he wasn’t able to develop much during his college campaign. I say this because I feel like he did show glimpses of utilizing his solid decision-making to score when he noticed his defender have bad footing. I don’t necessarily think he needs quickness if he continues to harness his smarts by making good reads consistently.
I do feel the Spurs lean in on having more of a team concept with its offense than running a 2 man game between Wemby and one other player. Though obviously, they’ll run that 2 man game with Vassell before any rookie. Given that, I think running a Denver-model offense is definitely in Sheppard’s favor and will allow him to develop at a pace better than any other rookie would because he doesn’t need to exert very much ISO plays early on.
I will say this:
In the scenario that Dilly gets drafted, it must mean the Spurs are confident they can hide his defensive deficiencies. There’s a lot to be excited about if he is drafted than if any other rookie was drafted, because you know right away he’ll be able to score bunches right away vs. hoping he develops it at some point like other rookies: Reed, Risacher, Castle… almost every young rookie that wasn’t exposed to being “the man” on his team at college level or above. And… they won’t get the chance to be “the man” on the Spurs to even get that opportunity to develop ISO skills with Wemby (and likely Vassell) here. It almost sounds like the Spurs should be forced to take a player that is already so good at self-creation because they won’t be able to develop it here once they’re drafted. I’m of the opinion that you only develop those skills if you’re given those touches… kind of like what they did with the Vassell the past two seasons now.
This new thought process is making me swing back on the Dilly bandwagon over the Reed one.
My only real question re: Shephard is if he can handle and see the court well enough to be a starting PG. IF he can, then he'd be at the top of the board. Im not convinced, but I'm hoping we get some feel for that from individual workouts.
Go watch the end of the Mississippi State game..
We wouldn’t know whose better between Reed and Rob because they alway come in tandem in Kentucky. Perhaps the stats when one sits. Then if we should consider in the nearest future, who should fit in tandem with tre jones between the two? Who will be the better point guard. Calipari trust the playmaking to Reed most but when he needed points badly he turns to Rob as the gunner.
Playing a second PG in tandem with Tre Jones seems like the least of our concerns. It would be a rarity to play two smaller Gs when the objective of getting another PG is to make Jones the backup PG.
Watched it, was his best game. Just checked and took 7 3s, made 4: all open, 3 of them off the catch. Again, he's extremely accurate, has a fast release, but against NBA level defenders (faster, longer, stronger) it isn't going to be as easy to get it off.
Look, I like Sheppard, he's SUPER smart and extremely efficient, I'd be shocked if he doesn't have a long and productive NBA career. The point is trying to figure out who checks most boxes in terms of Spurs needs, and to me that's Dillingham (on offense). On defense he's going to be bad, but I think he showed improvements towards the end of the year (mostly effort and a bit more awareness) and I think he's got more physical tools than, say, Trae. And if most of this board was drooling over Trae despite his matador defense (literally), then I think Dillingham shouldn't be discounted because of it. But if he's not there by the time the Spurs pick, then sure, I'd take Sheppard.
Oh, and for the record... I fully expect the Spurs to have Sheppard and Castle over Dillingham.
In that game, Reed logged 35 min vs 16 min for Rob. Towards the end of the conference, Coach Cal played Reed more, manifesting trust in Reed playmaking.
You think Sheppard really is 6'3"? He looks was smaller than 6'4" JJ Red did.
Chris Paul is pretty close to 6’0 but he’s a baller. I’m not especially concerned who is 6-1 or 3 if they can ball. Dilly windmill dunk highlight tells the tale, he’s dynamic. Meanwhile, Sheppard has excellent instincts and hands. It’s apples and oranges, but either can contribute to a nice fruit salad.
Sheppard looks more like a legit (in shoes) 6'3'' than Dillingham to me.
Paul was/is the rare small guard who isn't a defensive liability because he's stout, among other things.
Dillingham measured at 6'0.75" without shoes in OTE and Sheppard is a hair taller, I'd say 6'1.5" as the absolute most.
No way Dilly is 1 in their board. Zach , Castle , Cody. Getting defensive versatility you can develop should be more than palatable in this draft. They are focused on 2025.
Literally?
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)
Posting Permissions
