What's new
By:

2024 NBA Draft Mega Thread

Elizah Huge said:
Well yeah… one was a senior and one was a freshman lol.
Click to expand...
My point was about how much you can project and how certain you can be based on sample size. 600 shots approaches the number you need to be pretty sure about what level of shooter a player is(I think I read a while ago some analysis that you need about 750-800 shots to know with good certainty). 150 shots is ... in relative terms - nothing. Now his FT% is pretty good too, so if I had to guess he would be a good shooter, but IMO it's very debatable just how good of a shooter he will be - again, will he be 38% good or 45% good? Because there is a serious difference in those. And also - what TYPE of 3p shots are those going to be? Will he shoot 40% predominantly on the catch or 40% with healthy diet of off the dribble shots... because, again, it matters and those are very different types of shooters and the value is very different. For example, will he be able to shoot it coming off pick n' roll? Will he be able to shoot it at high rate off the dribble in iso? Or coming off screens?

Lets leave aside the extremes ... and even the average outcome. What is the type of player he will be if he hits his 75th percentile outcome? Is that player worth a top 10 pick? And maybe in this draft he is worth it, I just am thinking out loud and trying to make my mind on him, because there are definitely things to like about him, but there is also good chance that his game just fits much better the college game than the league and even in good case outcomes he's not all that valueable(again, we talking about top 3 pick according to a few people here). Can he be like... some version of George Hill or Mike Conley I guess?
 
Last edited:
stitches said:
With Shep it's about how good it is going to be? As in - is it going to be 38% or 45% good.
With Castle it's ... is it going to be average?
Click to expand...

I'm going to stand by what I said before and not get into this percentage discussion because I don't find it useful. One shooter's 38% is not another's 38%. But the point is the same, Shep is an elite shooting prospect so his scale of outcomes is based on that. Castle is a bad shooter and becoming an average shooter would be a high end outcome for him. If we afford that same optimism with Shep, what does a high end shooting outcome mean? If an elite shooting prospect turns into one of the best shooters in the league is that really a high end outcome? Or is it just expectation. Either way, Shep is on that scale as a shooter where he can be one of the elite shooter. Besides his percentages, his film looks great. Terrific release as @Saint Cy of JFC has pointed out. He has no problem shooting them from very deep and large chunk of those makes are off the dribble/unassisted. It also doesn't hurt his projection that he has a coach who is well known to limit his guards in his system. If all these indicators beyond the raw percentages went against Shep, I could understand more of the skpeticism...but the deeper I dive the more I find things that make me believe in his shooting.

And just for the record, I really like Castle. I keep brining him up because I think a lot of the reasons why I like Shep go hand in hand with Castle. The big one would be their roles on their respective teams. For Castle, playing within a system in a smaller usage role is a virtue. It's one of the main things people say they like about him. With Sheppard, playing in a role is why he cannot be considered a top prospect and instead the conversation is why he can't be a heavy ballhandler. We don't even talk about Castle in that context of being a star player. While I think the question mark on Shep is fair on it's own, I think there's a double standard with how we view the role player stuff in college, the value of being a role player in the NBA, and how we're projecting the shooting.
 
Elizah Huge said:
I don’t like the McConnell comparison either. TJ is a pure floor general. Sheppard I think will have a much more complete offensive game.
Click to expand...

That's why we say TJ with a laser. If TJ was a great shooter, his world of possibilities would be expanded. I guess TJ is just generally more dibbly and would still be so even with a jumper, but no comparison is perfect.

Defensively, I think you can draw some similarity as well. TJ is/was a big steals guy and that has made him a decent defender for his career. You might not want him to switch onto Tatum or whatever, but there is value to creating turnovers and creating the chaos he does. McConnell/Jones brothers is kind of a model for how his defense might go. Not sure he's physically strong enough to be Lowry/CP3/FVV....but maybe with time.
 
KqWIN said:
I'm going to stand by what I said before and not get into this percentage discussion because I don't find it useful. One shooter's 38% is not another's 38%. But the point is the same, Shep is an elite shooting prospect so his scale of outcomes is based on that. Castle is a bad shooter and becoming an average shooter would be a high end outcome for him. If we afford that same optimism with Shep, what does a high end shooting outcome mean? If an elite shooting prospect turns into one of the best shooters in the league is that really a high end outcome? Or is it just expectation. Either way, Shep is on that scale as a shooter where he can be one of the elite shooter. Besides his percentages, his film looks great. Terrific release as @Saint Cy of JFC has pointed out. He has no problem shooting them from very deep and large chunk of those makes are off the dribble/unassisted. It also doesn't hurt his projection that he has a coach who is well known to limit his guards in his system. If all these indicators beyond the raw percentages went against Shep, I could understand more of the skpeticism...but the deeper I dive the more I find things that make me believe in his shooting.

And just for the record, I really like Castle. I keep brining him up because I think a lot of the reasons why I like Shep go hand in hand with Castle. The big one would be their roles on their respective teams. For Castle, playing within a system in a smaller usage role is a virtue. It's one of the main things people say they like about him. With Sheppard, playing in a role is why he cannot be considered a top prospect and instead the conversation is why he can't be a heavy ballhandler. We don't even talk about Castle in that context of being a star player. While I think the question mark on Shep is fair on it's own, I think there's a double standard with how we view the role player stuff in college, the value of being a role player in the NBA, and how we're projecting the shooting.
Click to expand...
I just don't know how to project him in the league. I just don't see him as an explosive athlete and I don't see him as having the size and length to be great in the NBA. This is where him and Castle diverge significantly... well... there and in the shooting. But players have shown they can improve shooting in the league. Players do not gain 5 inches of wingspan and vertical... he's a below the rim athlete... he's short AND SMALL... especially if you are not going to be playing him at PG. That's why I've been asking... give me a realistic high end outcome(like 75-80th percentile)... what would he look like? What would his role be? Give me a player with similar physical and athletic tools and skills that was more than a shooting specialist with limited use and role.
 
I'm pretty confident that Sheppard can develop into a Hornacek type of player. Hornacek is a little bigger but I think they have a similar skillset.
 
sip said:
I'm pretty confident that Sheppard can develop into a Hornacek type of player. Hornacek is a little bigger but I think they have a similar skillset.
Click to expand...
That might be a good one that's leaning more towards the shooting(off-ball) guard type. I've been trying to fit him in PG mold simply because I just think he's too small and short to be playing with another small'ish and short'ish player.
 
stitches said:
I just don't know how to project him in the league. I just don't see him as an explosive athlete and I don't see him as having the size and length to be great in the NBA. This is where him and Castle diverge significantly... well... there and in the shooting. But players have shown they can improve shooting in the league. Players do not gain 5 inches of wingspan and vertical... he's a below the rim athlete... he's short AND SMALL... especially if you are not going to be playing him at PG. That's why I've been asking... give me a realistic high end outcome(like 75-80th percentile)... what would he look like? What would his role be? Give me a player with similar physical and athletic tools and skills that was more than a shooting specialist with limited use and role.
Click to expand...

FVV and Mike Conley would be the two that most represent a high outcome IMO. Now, you can rip apart the comparison because no comparison is perfect, Shep is better/worse than at different things for those guys....but the overall level is how I see it. Makes 1-2 all star games, does so by being a great PnR player....no necessarily an élite 1 on 1 creator. Defensively is undersized, but finds a way to add value despite obvious flaws.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top