The (way too early) 2024 Draft thread. Woo! Tanking!

[TGW]

Topic has to be the guy at this point. Don't know what he's official measurements are, but the non-official measurements for him is 6'6 with a 7'0 wingspan. At 18 years old, and those [exaggerated] measurements, he's the best piece of clay IMO.

[nate33]

I specifically watched the UK game just to see if I was tripping on Sheppard and he couldn't have picked a worse game to flame out. I'll pass on him as a top 5 pick, but if he's there in the 20s, take the shot. If you're physically outmatched by juniors and seniors from OAKLAND UNIVERSITY, I cannot in good conscious think you'll be able to play against grown NBA men.

I'll pass on Dillingham too, 6'1 with a 6'2'' wingspan are just awful metrics.

Yeah, I think Sheppard moved down the draft board with that performance (and without the opportunity to have any good performances going forward).

[nate33]

Topic has to be the guy at this point. Don't know what he's official measurements are, but the non-official measurements for him is 6'6 with a 7'0 wingspan. At 18 years old, and those [exaggerated] measurements, he's the best piece of clay IMO.

If he really has a 7-foot wingspan, that's going to alleviate a lot of concerns about his defense. Teams will be able to hide him on off-ball forwards if he lacks the footspeed to guard at the point of attack. That 6-6 height measurement overstates his effective height though. The guy has a neck that's a foot long!

[NatP4]

I specifically watched the UK game just to see if I was tripping on Sheppard and he couldn't have picked a worse game to flame out. I'll pass on him as a top 5 pick, but if he's there in the 20s, take the shot. If you're physically outmatched by juniors and seniors from OAKLAND UNIVERSITY, I cannot in good conscious think you'll be able to play against grown NBA men.

I'll pass on Dillingham too, 6'1 with a 6'2'' wingspan are just awful metrics.

Yeah, I think Sheppard moved down the draft board with that performance (and without the opportunity to have any good performances going forward).

This always happens. People overreact to these NCAA tournament games. Kentucky is a bad team coached by a moron. They were totally lost on both ends and always play the most bizarre rotations. Sheppard was a total no show, buts it’s one game out of 40. That team is HORRENDOUS defensively. Kentucky didn’t have a single player play well. 5 stars like Edwards and Wagner contributed nothing. Ivisic was a liability. Reeves and Dillingham just chuck and play no defense. It’s a mess

On the other side, you have a handful of 24 year olds playing in their Super Bowl. You have the Jack Goelke dude turning into prime Reggie Miller. The nerves are high, playing quality competition. These poor performances happen all the time.

Unless you’re on a team like UConn, Auburn, or Houston, that is just stacked top to bottom, it happens.

[DCZards]

Kentucky ran into what has burned a lot of young teams with five-star kids in recent NCAA tournaments—an experienced team with chemistry and grown a** men.

I’m eager to see how UCONN’s Castle performs in the tourney. He’s in a tough situation being on a super team where he’s the third or fourth option most games.

I really like his physical make up, his D and his ability to get to anywhere on the floor that he wants to off the dribble. Shot has been questionable though.

I also like that Castle has mostly played within the system and hasn’t forced stuff. Shows a maturity.

[Rafael122]

I specifically watched the UK game just to see if I was tripping on Sheppard and he couldn't have picked a worse game to flame out. I'll pass on him as a top 5 pick, but if he's there in the 20s, take the shot. If you're physically outmatched by juniors and seniors from OAKLAND UNIVERSITY, I cannot in good conscious think you'll be able to play against grown NBA men.

I'll pass on Dillingham too, 6'1 with a 6'2'' wingspan are just awful metrics.

Yeah, I think Sheppard moved down the draft board with that performance (and without the opportunity to have any good performances going forward).

This always happens. People overreact to these NCAA tournament games. Kentucky is a bad team coached by a moron. They were totally lost on both ends and always play the most bizarre rotations. Sheppard was a total no show, buts it’s one game out of 40. That team is HORRENDOUS defensively. Kentucky didn’t have a single player play well. 5 stars like Edwards and Wagner contributed nothing. Ivisic was a liability. Reeves and Dillingham just chuck and play no defense. It’s a mess

On the other side, you have a handful of 24 year olds playing in their Super Bowl. You have the Jack Goelke dude turning into prime Reggie Miller. The nerves are high, playing quality competition. These poor performances happen all the time.

Unless you’re on a team like UConn, Auburn, or Houston, that is just stacked top to bottom, it happens.

For me its the eye test, they looked overmatched. That's not a coaching issue, that's just physicality. The dudes on Oakland probably ride the pine on a Power 5 school so I'm just looking at that and thinking if Sheppard and Dillingham look like this against that type of competition, how are they going to fare against NBA talent? It's a concern.

[payitforward]

Any interest in (or info on) Tucker DeVries??

Great numbers: https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/tucker-devries-1.html

Looks like a poor man's Luka:

Watch on YouTube

[nate33]

Kentucky ran into what has burned a lot of young teams with five-star kids in recent NCAA tournaments—an experienced team with chemistry and grown a** men.

I’m eager to see how UCONN’s Castle performs in the tourney. He’s in a tough situation being on a super team where he’s the third or fourth option most games.

I really like his physical make up, his D and his ability to get to anywhere on the floor that he wants to off the dribble. Shot has been questionable though.

I also like that Castle has mostly played within the system and hasn’t forced stuff. Shows a maturity.

The thing that bugs me about Castle is that he gets virtually no elevation when he jumps. He can bully ball skinny college kids, but he's actually not all that quick or explosive. It's not like he is prime Baron Davis, with the ability to get past defenders even though they aren't respecting his jumper.

So basically, he is a PG who can't shoot and can't really blow by people. That bully ball game can be easily negated by just putting a bigger player on him.

[NatP4]

Yeah, I think Sheppard moved down the draft board with that performance (and without the opportunity to have any good performances going forward).

This always happens. People overreact to these NCAA tournament games. Kentucky is a bad team coached by a moron. They were totally lost on both ends and always play the most bizarre rotations. Sheppard was a total no show, buts it’s one game out of 40. That team is HORRENDOUS defensively. Kentucky didn’t have a single player play well. 5 stars like Edwards and Wagner contributed nothing. Ivisic was a liability. Reeves and Dillingham just chuck and play no defense. It’s a mess

On the other side, you have a handful of 24 year olds playing in their Super Bowl. You have the Jack Goelke dude turning into prime Reggie Miller. The nerves are high, playing quality competition. These poor performances happen all the time.

Unless you’re on a team like UConn, Auburn, or Houston, that is just stacked top to bottom, it happens.

For me its the eye test, they looked overmatched. That's not a coaching issue, that's just physicality. The dudes on Oakland probably ride the pine on a Power 5 school so I'm just looking at that and thinking if Sheppard and Dillingham look like this against that type of competition, how are they going to fare against NBA talent? It's a concern.

Like Zards said above, Oakland is a team full of grown men with chemistry that just won the Horizon conference. Gohlke is a 24 year old 6th year senior, Lampan is a 5th year senior, Townsend is a 4 year starter, Conway is a 3 year starter and 4th year senior. DQ Cole is a 5th year senior, playing for his 3rd team, Rocket Watts played for Michigan State, Mississipi State, and now Oakland, 5th year senior.

Every rotation guy is 23/24/25 years old and has played in over 100 college basketball games. It's their super bowl, and final last chance to play the sport.

[nate33]

This always happens. People overreact to these NCAA tournament games. Kentucky is a bad team coached by a moron. They were totally lost on both ends and always play the most bizarre rotations. Sheppard was a total no show, buts it’s one game out of 40. That team is HORRENDOUS defensively. Kentucky didn’t have a single player play well. 5 stars like Edwards and Wagner contributed nothing. Ivisic was a liability. Reeves and Dillingham just chuck and play no defense. It’s a mess

On the other side, you have a handful of 24 year olds playing in their Super Bowl. You have the Jack Goelke dude turning into prime Reggie Miller. The nerves are high, playing quality competition. These poor performances happen all the time.

Unless you’re on a team like UConn, Auburn, or Houston, that is just stacked top to bottom, it happens.

For me its the eye test, they looked overmatched. That's not a coaching issue, that's just physicality. The dudes on Oakland probably ride the pine on a Power 5 school so I'm just looking at that and thinking if Sheppard and Dillingham look like this against that type of competition, how are they going to fare against NBA talent? It's a concern.

Like Zards said above, Oakland is a team full of grown men with chemistry that just won the Horizon conference. Gohlke is a 24 year old 6th year senior, Lampan is a 5th year senior, Townsend is a 4 year starter, Conway is a 3 year starter and 4th year senior. DQ Cole is a 5th year senior, playing for his 3rd team, Rocket Watts played for Michigan State, Mississipi State, and now Oakland, 5th year senior.

Every rotation guy is 23/24/25 years old and has played in over 100 college basketball games. It's their super bowl, and final last chance to play the sport.

There are two ways to look at Sheppard's overall low usage and occasional tendency to disappear for a game.

One view is that he is really just a complementary player who can't impose his will. So if teams focus on him, they can shut him down and there's not much he can do about it. If that's the case, then he is still a draftable player, but not a guy who should go in the high lottery. He's the next Donte Divincenzo.

The other view is that he is a talented and smart freshman playing on a team with lots of good offensive options and a few upperclassmen that deserve a little deference. In that scenario, he is just honestly trying to make the best play and move the ball around to get it to whomever has the best mismatch. It's not that doesn't have the capability of creating offense, it's that he honestly believes the smarter play is to move it to another good offensive player. If you believe that, then you believe he has the ability to take on much more usage and drive an offense consistently. If so, then he is a lotto pick because he might be a top tier offensive point guard in the Mark Price mold.

I'm not sure which view is accurate.

[tontoz]

Topic has to be the guy at this point. Don't know what he's official measurements are, but the non-official measurements for him is 6'6 with a 7'0 wingspan. At 18 years old, and those [exaggerated] measurements, he's the best piece of clay IMO.

That's where ive been for awhile. If he is available he has to be the pick. I would be willing to trade up to get him as well.

A primary scorer/playmaker with size would be really valuable. He can get to the rim and finish as well as set up other guys for easy look.

[NatP4]

Castle is the guy that has the most to gain from a deep run in the tournament. Uconn has a crazy difficult bracket, will need Castle to breakout and be the x factor if they are going to beat Auburn and Iowa State back to back.

Outside of that, we're in the home stretch, the top 10 is just about settled. The Ignite was a total disaster, it hurt Holland and Buzelis and is going away for good reason. I think this should be the top 10:

1. Nikola Topic
2. Reed Sheppard
3. Donovan Clingan
4. Collin Murray-Boyles
5. Matas Buzelis
6. Ron Holland
7. Stephon Castle
8. Kel'el Ware
9. Dalton Knecht
10. Devin Carter
Sarr, Risacher, Holmes, Simpson, Walter, Filipowski, and Furphy in some order after that.

[NatP4]

Respectfully disagree, Nate. The lower end outcome is just wrong. Sheppard as a freshman, was significantly more productive than DiVincenzo as a junior (on one of the best college teams of all time).

IMO, the two ways to look at it:

Lower end: Sheppard is more of a Divincenzo glue guy type of player. Not an isolation scorer or true primary option, but a true ELITE glue guy with historically great numbers for a freshman. Otto Porter level of glue guy numbers that got him drafted top 3. In the NBA, he turns into a high level impact player on both ends that does everything well and is an elite shooter. Guys like Brunson and Van Fleet are highly impactful NBA players.

Upper end: Carried low usage being the lower end recruit on the roster. Surrounded by talent. Reeves and Dillingham are total chuckers and isolation guys. You have a coach that would not even start Sheppard for whatever reason, and chooses to rotate players in randomly. Zero logic. Almost all UK guards have their value somewhat suppressed at UK, end up producing more in the NBA. Sheppard has shown elite high usage off the dribble shooting and playmaking at times this year. Again, give me a list of 19 year old freshman that averaged 15-5-5-3-1 on 70% TS and shot 52% from 3. Seriously, lets see it. It's unheard of. There's an elite superstar outcome in there.

I called Sheppard a top 5 pick on December 5th. Mocks had him as a early 2nd/late 1st pick at the time. Been consistent on this one, and sticking with it.

[doclinkin]

Topic has to be the guy at this point. Don't know what he's official measurements are, but the non-official measurements for him is 6'6 with a 7'0 wingspan. At 18 years old, and those [exaggerated] measurements, he's the best piece of clay IMO.

That's where ive been for awhile. If he is available he has to be the pick. I would be willing to trade up to get him as well.

A primary scorer/playmaker with size would be really valuable. He can get to the rim and finish as well as set up other guys for easy look.

He's going to have bizarre measurements. Long neck, short legs, long arms. He will have the most unusual ratio that results in wide wingspan and short standing reach. He uses it well with a low center of gravity and great ball control on offense, but so far that does not seem to translate into defense. Or ranged shooting, you can challenge his shot. The angles he can put on a pass are startling though. He reminds me of Rajon Rondo on offense. Another player with an aberrant length to reach ratio. I'd love it if he also developed Rondo's smarts on defense.

[pcbothwel]

Topic has to be the guy at this point. Don't know what he's official measurements are, but the non-official measurements for him is 6'6 with a 7'0 wingspan. At 18 years old, and those [exaggerated] measurements, he's the best piece of clay IMO.

If he really has a 7-foot wingspan, that's going to alleviate a lot of concerns about his defense. Teams will be able to hide him on off-ball forwards if he lacks the footspeed to guard at the point of attack. That 6-6 height measurement overstates his effective height though. The guy has a neck that's a foot long!

There is no shot in hell he has a 7'0 wingspan.
He is 6'5 with a ~6'8 wingspan, at best. His measurements at BWOB were clearly wrong. They have his standing reach as 8'2.5. You can look at the combine measurements for the last 10 years, and without fail, every player with a 8'2-8'4 standing reach is 6-6'3 with a 6'4-6'7 wingspan.

[AFM]

We need WizDynasty on this one. The case of the footlong neck. Maybe he has his shoulders a couple of inches too low. Or really short calves.

[Rafael122]

College basketball is so rough to watch.

[tontoz]

College basketball is so rough to watch.

Yeah i stopped watching years ago for the most part. I just watched a few games this year to check out draft prospects.

Back in the day college ball was so much better because even the best players stayed in school.

[nate33]

IMO, the two ways to look at it:

Lower end: Sheppard is more of a Divincenzo glue guy type of player. Not an isolation scorer or true primary option, but a true ELITE glue guy with historically great numbers for a freshman. Otto Porter level of glue guy numbers that got him drafted top 3. In the NBA, he turns into a high level impact player on both ends that does everything well and is an elite shooter. Guys like Brunson and Van Fleet are highly impactful NBA players.

I don't see him as a true elite role player because I don't think he is an elite defender. He is not a lockdown guy on the ball. He is too small and he gets blown by way too often. He is a smart defender and has good hands and knows how to patrol passing lanes, so that will help compensate for his lack of elite on-ball defense, but it doesn't turn him into a top tier elite defender.

An example of an ELITE role player is Suggs. Sheppard is no Suggs on defense.

Basically, I think the possibility exists that Sheppard is merely average on defense (above-average in help defense, below-average on ball) while being a great role playing shooter on offense. The problem is, most teams don't like to play short players unless they are true defense benders on offense. It's just not worth the loss in defensive flexibility otherwise. Sheppard isn't worthy of a high lotto pick unless he is a true defense bender as an offensive player. It's not good enough to be an efficient, opportunistic scorer like Otto Porter if you are 6-2.

[tontoz]

Otto was an off ball player. Sheppard is effective on or off the ball.