RealGM

Fischella wrote:

reanimator wrote:And let me be clear, I think Buddy will be a good 3+D guy. Someone said Gary Harris..I see him as a better shooter,lesser defender but similar. I personally would not aim for that with the 1st 12 picks or so and like a few other SGs more due to their ball skills.

he is a worse athlete, Harris is quicker with similar strength.
The comp with McCollum is ridiculous, not nearly as smooth and crafty with the ball, McCollum moves much more naturally.

Buddy tends to stop, think and go, and when he moves he does it with decision and fast, but that hesitation is going to be seen miles ahead in the next level, I doubt he is ever more than a one drive, pull-up shooter guy.

If thats all you bring, along with okay D, you really need to excell at that, and like I said I have my reservations with some of that.

Buddy is bigger than McCollum and a much better shooter coming out, all I said is I like him more as a prospect and McCollum went 10th. Wasn't comparing their games, just saying there is no way Buddy is going in the 20's that's just ridiculous. Buddy looks to be at worst a good 3+D guy, something that every team needs

H2tObes wrote:

Fischella wrote:

reanimator wrote:And let me be clear, I think Buddy will be a good 3+D guy. Someone said Gary Harris..I see him as a better shooter,lesser defender but similar. I personally would not aim for that with the 1st 12 picks or so and like a few other SGs more due to their ball skills.

he is a worse athlete, Harris is quicker with similar strength.
The comp with McCollum is ridiculous, not nearly as smooth and crafty with the ball, McCollum moves much more naturally.

Buddy tends to stop, think and go, and when he moves he does it with decision and fast, but that hesitation is going to be seen miles ahead in the next level, I doubt he is ever more than a one drive, pull-up shooter guy.

If thats all you bring, along with okay D, you really need to excell at that, and like I said I have my reservations with some of that.

Buddy is a much better shooter coming out

Nah McCollum's pullup is lightyears ahead.

reanimator wrote:

H2tObes wrote:

Fischella wrote:he is a worse athlete, Harris is quicker with similar strength.
The comp with McCollum is ridiculous, not nearly as smooth and crafty with the ball, McCollum moves much more naturally.

Buddy tends to stop, think and go, and when he moves he does it with decision and fast, but that hesitation is going to be seen miles ahead in the next level, I doubt he is ever more than a one drive, pull-up shooter guy.

If thats all you bring, along with okay D, you really need to excell at that, and like I said I have my reservations with some of that.

Buddy is a much better shooter coming out

Nah McCollum's pullup is lightyears ahead.

Can you stop replying to every single one of my posts? I don't value your opinion or care about it

H2tObes wrote:

reanimator wrote:

H2tObes wrote:Buddy is a much better shooter coming out

Nah McCollum's pullup is lightyears ahead.

Can you stop replying to every single one of my posts? I don't value your opinion or care about it

You quoted me, idiot. I doubt anyone reads the trash you spew on here. "Buddy is a much better shooter"

reanimator wrote:

H2tObes wrote:

reanimator wrote:
Nah McCollum's pullup is lightyears ahead.

Can you stop replying to every single one of my posts? I don't value your opinion or care about it

You quoted me, idiot. I doubt anyone reads the trash you spew on here. "Buddy is a much better shooter"

Hield has better percentages from 3, FT, and the field and CJ only played in 12 games his senior year, so yes better shooter coming out.

I quoted Fischella, once again you're wrong. I just have zero interest in having a conversation with you. I wish there was a way I could block you from replying to me or something .

H2tObes wrote:

reanimator wrote:

H2tObes wrote:Can you stop replying to every single one of my posts? I don't value your opinion or care about it

You quoted me, idiot. I doubt anyone reads the trash you spew on here. "Buddy is a much better shooter"

I quoted Fischella, once again you're wrong. I just have zero interest in having a conversation with you. I wish there was a way I could block you from replying to me or something

Yes, you interjected yourself into our convo. Trust me, Fischella feels the same way about that mindless post. Move on.

reanimator wrote:

H2tObes wrote:

reanimator wrote:
You quoted me, idiot. I doubt anyone reads the trash you spew on here. "Buddy is a much better shooter"

I quoted Fischella, once again you're wrong. I just have zero interest in having a conversation with you. I wish there was a way I could block you from replying to me or something

Yes, you interjected yourself into our convo. Trust me, Fischella feels the same way about that mindless post. Move on.

I don't care about how anyone feels about my posts. I just don't want to have to hold a conversation with you, so I will ignore I guess. Goodbye friend

H2tObes wrote:

Fischella wrote:

reanimator wrote:And let me be clear, I think Buddy will be a good 3+D guy. Someone said Gary Harris..I see him as a better shooter,lesser defender but similar. I personally would not aim for that with the 1st 12 picks or so and like a few other SGs more due to their ball skills.

he is a worse athlete, Harris is quicker with similar strength.
The comp with McCollum is ridiculous, not nearly as smooth and crafty with the ball, McCollum moves much more naturally.

Buddy tends to stop, think and go, and when he moves he does it with decision and fast, but that hesitation is going to be seen miles ahead in the next level, I doubt he is ever more than a one drive, pull-up shooter guy.

If thats all you bring, along with okay D, you really need to excell at that, and like I said I have my reservations with some of that.

Buddy is bigger than McCollum and a much better shooter coming out, all I said is I like him more as a prospect and McCollum went 10th. Wasn't comparing their games, just saying there is no way Buddy is going in the 20's that's just ridiculous. Buddy looks to be at worst a good 3+D guy, something that every team needs

The big advantage McCollum had on Hield is his quickness and ball handling. McCollum is much more shiftier and his handles are much much better than Hield's. That combination allows McCollum to be able to create his shot on this level. I dont think Hield will be able to create his shot on a consistent bases in the NBA. Right now I think he is just going to be a really good shooter that runs off screens

Duke4life831 wrote:

H2tObes wrote:

Fischella wrote:he is a worse athlete, Harris is quicker with similar strength.
The comp with McCollum is ridiculous, not nearly as smooth and crafty with the ball, McCollum moves much more naturally.

Buddy tends to stop, think and go, and when he moves he does it with decision and fast, but that hesitation is going to be seen miles ahead in the next level, I doubt he is ever more than a one drive, pull-up shooter guy.

If thats all you bring, along with okay D, you really need to excell at that, and like I said I have my reservations with some of that.

Buddy is bigger than McCollum and a much better shooter coming out, all I said is I like him more as a prospect and McCollum went 10th. Wasn't comparing their games, just saying there is no way Buddy is going in the 20's that's just ridiculous. Buddy looks to be at worst a good 3+D guy, something that every team needs

The big advantage McCollum had on Hield is his quickness and ball handling. McCollum is much more shiftier and his handles are much much better than Hield's. That combination allows McCollum to be able to create his shot on this level. I dont think Hield will be able to create his shot on a consistent bases in the NBA. Right now I think he is just going to be a really good shooter that runs off screens

He undoubtedly has a better handle, I dont think he is quicker and he definitely is not faster than Hield though. Hield is also bigger, longer, better defender, and a better shooter. I dont know how anyone can think his shooting is not legit either, nobody can put the ball in the net the way he does and not be a legit shooter. Jesus. just watch how he puts the ball in the net from the foul line, how can you not see it, look at his percentages if the eye test doesnt work for you, 90% from the line, and over 50% from 3, it is undeniable, especially when the stat line matches up with what were seeing.

CJ may be better at getting his own shot with the ball in his hand, sure, but he is also a smaller player and should be playing at the point guard position with his stature. Hield is the type of player who is going to be able to fit in with any team and he is going to have to be accounted for at all times on the floor. Real dangerous player, he isnt a number 1 option, McCollum could be but do you really think a team with McCollum as their number 1 is winning anything? I dont. McCollum is a real nice 6th man to me, very valuable player but I dont know that he even should be on the floor with his type of game and stature in crunch time on a championship team. I do believe there is a place for Hield in crunch time though on a championship team. Different roles, I think they both are very good at there own. I would lean toward the guy I can play in crunch time though that fits in any lineup.

Cammo101 wrote:

Fischella wrote:

Worm Guts wrote:Some on the Wolves board really like him, he would fill the Wolves need for outside shooting and he has enough maturity that Wolves wouldn't need to wait 2-3 years for him to develop. My question is if he's good enough that he should even be on the radar considering how high the Wolves are going to pick. Is he good enough to be in the conversation at 5-6-7?

No, not even close to.

If thats the profile you want and you follow Korkmaz, who is a bit more of a SF in my book (but with Wiggins it doesnt matter) or Luwawu (less of a shooter but capable) should be the names to look at.
Even Wade Baldwin to a degree ahead of Hield.

I agree 5-7 is probably a bit early on Hield, but I think taking any of those guys you listed over Hield would likely be a mistake, especially for a team like Minny who has potential stars in place and really need a role player with Hield's exact skillset.

The thing is, Minnesota needs shooting, but from PG and SF where Rubio and WIggins are entrenched. Zach Lavine is really rounding into form lately and his shooting form is picture perfect. I'm not confident at all that you'd gain anything replacing Lavine w/ a rookie in the starting lineup, or that any of them have greater future potential - in which case you're drafting a bench player with a top 10 pick.

Unless they find a good reason not to take them, they need to look at one of the PFs like Rabb or Bender or somebody like that.

Hield is not only a great shooter, he's an elite shooter.. Quick smooth form.. I have no reason to believe he can't be successful in the NBA.. His form is pure

I think he has a chance to be a special

Here's one man's opinion on Hield:
Comparison: shorter version of Chris Mullins/Kyle Korver combo
6'4" with 6'9" wingspan makes him a fairly decent defender
Fairly good passer
Excellent Shooter
Most of all, he'll keep getting better because he's a total gym rat.

VelcroWY wrote:Here's one man's opinion on Hield:
Comparison: shorter version of Chris Mullins/Kyle Korver combo
6'4" with 6'9" wingspan makes him a fairly decent defender
Fairly good passer
Excellent Shooter
Most of all, he'll keep getting better because he's a total gym rat.

He's a 4 year college player who will turn 23 before the all star break of his Rookie year. Not sure how much upside there is there.

I see more JJ Reddick

Is he a good slasher because looking at some highlights he's able to get into the paint and make some good passes. That gives me the impression that he can do more on offense than run off screens and shoot.

I don't want to say he's James Harden because Harden was a better slasher and passer coming out of college while Buddy is the better shooter, but Buddy can be molded into one of the best scoring SGs in the league with his skillset.

doordoor123 wrote:

BoyzNTheHood wrote:I don't watch enough of him to tell, so what separates him offensively from Jimmer Fredette in college?

Go watch him enough

Jimmer was too tweener. Buddy is at least SG sized. Also pretty quick.

and not afraid to take the big shot

Potential, age, hype is reason why guys like Rubio and Flynn are drafted twice ahead of NCAA leading scorer and one of the best scorers to ever play NCAA ... Stephen Curry ... I have the same vibe about Buddy Heild, now I'm not saying he is gone win MVP and lead his team to NBA championship .. but I'm putting money on allot of team that pass up on him because of age, potential or other minor flaws will regret in couple years ... 25ppg +50FG% +503pt% at division one NCAA is amazing stats for any two guard

Old Man Game wrote:

VelcroWY wrote:Here's one man's opinion on Hield:
Comparison: shorter version of Chris Mullins/Kyle Korver combo
6'4" with 6'9" wingspan makes him a fairly decent defender
Fairly good passer
Excellent Shooter
Most of all, he'll keep getting better because he's a total gym rat.

He's a 4 year college player who will turn 23 before the all star break of his Rookie year. Not sure how much upside there is there.

Potential and age are overrated ... The improvement Heild made those 4 years should tell you this guy is Gym rat and will only get better ...

People all have their own opinions. Some say a Euro-player will need a few years in the NBA to become valuable and when you point out Porzingas or Jokic, they say "unusual". Others say a "one-and-done freshman" will be too young and if you point out a Towns or Okafer, they say "unusual". Others say a 22 year old college graduate is "too old" and if you mind them that used to be the norm or that most men do not reach their physical peak until around 25 or that most men do not reach their mature body weight around 22-23, they say "that doesn't always apply".

I just assume there are lots of folk that just like to whine and gripe and put others down - and I chuckle. I consider those people entertainment. Saciid - you are not entertaining, you are too intelligent.