Isiah Reed Sheppard, #1 pick for 2024

[RyugaFan]

I would be surprised if he ends up being a better player than JJ Reddick.

Reed's a better shot creator, defender and passer than Redick was.

[NotACat]

I'm surprised so many people are low on him. He's my #1 as well, I view him as a franchise-cornerstone type talent

[FarBeyondDriven]

I'm surprised so many people are low on him. He's my #1 as well, I view him as a franchise-cornerstone type talent

so many people? 90% think he's a top 3 talent. I've seen maybe a handful (out of hundreds) that are "low" on him like me.

[Jcool0]

I'm surprised so many people are low on him. He's my #1 as well, I view him as a franchise-cornerstone type talent

so many people? 90% think he's a top 3 talent. I've seen maybe a handful (out of hundreds) that are "low" on him like me.

Would i love if he fell to the Bulls at 11... Hell yeah. Would i be apprehensive of taking a 6'1" SG in the top 5, probably.

[Dat2U]

What's holding me back is the ball-handling. Go look at one of Steph Curry's games at Davidson if you think Curry is a realistic comparison. It's night and day. Curry has the ball on a string allowing him to create space despite the size. I don't see the shot creation. I see a quick release and elite shot making as a secondary or tertiary option. I think most assume the shot making will translate but the biggest questions are at what volume? Can he be on ball enough to be a weapon there?

[The Box Office]

I declared him as my Top 3 pick on May 13, 2024 in the RealGM Bulls forum. I officially declared him as the number one pick in this draft a day later on May 15, 2024 in the Bulls forum.

But majority of Bulls forum disagree with me.

Then again, the majority of them didn't want Tyrese Haliburton.

Reed Sheppard really does look like the top kid. He has most of the tools and advanced metrics in his favor. Any GM passing up on him in this draft is making a massive mistake.

[Chi town]

Don’t think Reed gets by Rockets at 3.

[SelfishPlayer]

What's holding me back is the ball-handling. Go look at one of Steph Curry's games at Davidson if you think Curry is a realistic comparison. It's night and day. Curry has the ball on a string allowing him to create space despite the size. I don't see the shot creation. I see a quick release and elite shot making as a secondary or tertiary option. I think most assume the shot making will translate but the biggest questions are at what volume? Can he be on ball enough to be a weapon there?

From what I've seen he wants to use his speed to get downhill, so he's not attempting to be a Steph or Kyrie in having a huge arsenal of moves to go left or right to get by a defender. Reed is taking the Dame approach, which can also be a Westbrook approach when you don't have a jump shot. LeBron also approaches the game the same way as opposed to a guy like Wade who is more like Steph and Kyrie. Maxey looked to simply get downhill or shoot too, but he is developing so much that he is becoming more and more like Steph and Kyrie so guys can get better these days. They normally pay dedicated trainers unlike even 10 years ago.

[louc1970]

I've got him as a late 1st maybe early 2nd round talent. I'm alone on the island (per usual) so I'm either going to very wrong or very right and a whole lot of you wrong.

I would agree in a regular quality draft he is a late first. But someone in the top 8 is going to take a shot with him and I the long term, going to get little value.
He is a shooter with poor handles. And not enough strength or quickness to be a good defender.
A high draft pick wasted on a role player.

[FarBeyondDriven]

I've got him as a late 1st maybe early 2nd round talent. I'm alone on the island (per usual) so I'm either going to very wrong or very right and a whole lot of you wrong.

I would agree in a regular quality draft he is a late first. But someone in the top 8 is going to take a shot with him and I the long term, going to get little value.
He is a shooter with poor handles. And not enough strength or quickness to be a good defender.
A high draft pick wasted on a role player.

feels like in order to justify him going in the top 10 he'll either have to become a starting point guard or he'll need to shoot threes like he did in college.

Here's the problem with that. He has the BBIQ and passing but doesn't have the handle (yet) to suggest he can run point. You're essentially taking a massive leap of faith projecting him to become a starting point guard. And he'll no longer be afforded wide open threes and won't be defended by guys smaller than him like he was in college all the while his coach being okay that he was a poor on-ball defender. I just can't imagine his looks will be as clean and his defense will be good enough to keep him on the floor.

But there is promise that down the road he might have an adequate handle to allow him to play backup point guard. There is also a chance he can hit threes at a high enough rate that for stretches, off the bench, he can play 2 guard. Which is why you want to draft him late 1st or early 2nd where teams usually draft end of rotation role players at.

[CptCrunch]

Are you guys also running the same analysis on Sarr being a non-offensive player in that case you re using the #1 pick to draft a role player, a Derek Lively in the best case, a smarter James Wiseman in the worst case?

Or Risacher being a complete non-shooter. Or how about drafting a known role playing in Clingan, who has been reported to be in play at #1? What are we projecting Clingan as?

[RollingWave]

Do people view this kid as a SG or PG?

I can maybe see him as a starting PG, but he's not going to survive at SG at 6'1.

The downside case for him is that he's a 3rd guard who can't really handle / create enough to be a starting PG and can't generate enough volume on his own or defend enough to be a starting SG. (though it does depend on who the other guard is, if you have a big PG or something that might work.)

The upside case for him is that he can be a starting PG, in which case assuming his shooting is not some sort of massive mirage, then he's probably between a low-end all-star/very high-end starter (think Fred VanVleet) to ..... Steve Nash? or anything in between.

Given the stats and the way he plays, he's likely going to be between a solid to good defensive player in the league in the regular season at least, but obviously with that size, there are some risks to be targeted and there are more limits to who you can play him with.

Reed probably won't go one, aside from the obvious part of him being a small white guy, the bigger problem is also that Atlanta has a small half white guy playing 35 minutes as their franchise player, and as much as I actually like Sheppard's defense, it is assuming that he is playing next to a semi-credible SG sized guy.

Washington at 2 is a bit more debatable but I do get that if you are just asking for who has the most chance to be a on-ball primary, especially in just one or two year, the case for other players are more pronounced. And while you're not drafting because you have Jordan Poole, that you have Jordan Poole on a immovable contract probably does have to play some consideration into this if it's remotely close.

Houston / San Antonio / Detroit all have very good cases to draft Sheppard IMHO.

------------------------------

Anyone can fail, so I won't just bet the farm and say that Reed is going to be good/great, but I agree with the general premise that any sort of stats-based model would have Reed Sheppard as the #1 pick in his own tier type.

From the eye test, the way he finds transition passes and reads transition, in general, screams a guy who can be a point guard. Right now, his handle is not close to being able to do that, especially if you ask him to do it as the only creator from day one, but if he manage to get to like a TJ McConnell or Fred VanVleet level sort of it doesn't look flashy but no one is stripping them (and Sheppard very rarely turns it over from the dribble, most of them are on passes because while he sees a lot of great passes he also tends to pick up the dribble to early and thus telegraph his pass quite a bit in the half court.

[The Moose]

He's been in my top 3 or 4 since about January when we got into conference play and he was still off the charts analytically.

Also on top of stellar BPM and general box score numbers, worth noting he was top 5 in the country for RAPM vs t100 teams this season.

Only underclassmen in the top 5 RAPM vs t100 teams in the last 5 years

Zion
Franz
Eason
Miller

In a more abstract sense, he's like the guard version of propsect Franz, who I had at no.5 in 2021 and really liked because of how much he popped analytically.

[FarBeyondDriven]

Are you guys also running the same analysis on Sarr being a non-offensive player in that case you re using the #1 pick to draft a role player, a Derek Lively in the best case, a smarter James Wiseman in the worst case?

Or Risacher being a complete non-shooter. Or how about drafting a known role playing in Clingan, who has been reported to be in play at #1? What are we projecting Clingan as?

difference is they have NBA size, length and athleticism for their position and their roles are more defined.

[JMAC3]

Love the hype he is getting because TJ McConnell at age 31 and 9 yrs into the league has had a few decent playoff series. Let's just ignore he is a 7 ppg who has never even been worth the MLE in FA... but yes let's take someone top 5 in the draft because of it lol

[louc1970]

I've got him as a late 1st maybe early 2nd round talent. I'm alone on the island (per usual) so I'm either going to very wrong or very right and a whole lot of you wrong.

I would agree in a regular quality draft he is a late first. But someone in the top 8 is going to take a shot with him and I the long term, going to get little value.
He is a shooter with poor handles. And not enough strength or quickness to be a good defender.
A high draft pick wasted on a role player.

feels like in order to justify him going in the top 10 he'll either have to become a starting point guard or he'll need to shoot threes like he did in college.

Here's the problem with that. He has the BBIQ and passing but doesn't have the handle (yet) to suggest he can run point. You're essentially taking a massive leap of faith projecting him to become a starting point guard. And he'll no longer be afforded wide open threes and won't be defended by guys smaller than him like he was in college all the while his coach being okay that he was a poor on-ball defender. I just can't imagine his looks will be as clean and his defense will be good enough to keep him on the floor.

But there is promise that down the road he might have an adequate handle to allow him to play backup point guard. There is also a chance he can hit threes at a high enough rate that for stretches, off the bench, he can play 2 guard. Which is why you want to draft him late 1st or early 2nd where teams usually draft end of rotation role players at.

I see Shepherd being a ceiling of Herro. More closely he will be Heild or Dallas version of Brunson.

[louc1970]

Do people view this kid as a SG or PG?

I can maybe see him as a starting PG, but he's not going to survive at SG at 6'1.

The downside case for him is that he's a 3rd guard who can't really handle / create enough to be a starting PG and can't generate enough volume on his own or defend enough to be a starting SG. (though it does depend on who the other guard is, if you have a big PG or something that might work.)

The upside case for him is that he can be a starting PG, in which case assuming his shooting is not some sort of massive mirage, then he's probably between a low-end all-star/very high-end starter (think Fred VanVleet) to ..... Steve Nash? or anything in between.

A better shooting Rozier with worse handles.

[SeattleJazzFan]

Do people view this kid as a SG or PG?

I can maybe see him as a starting PG, but he's not going to survive at SG at 6'1.

The downside case for him is that he's a 3rd guard who can't really handle / create enough to be a starting PG and can't generate enough volume on his own or defend enough to be a starting SG. (though it does depend on who the other guard is, if you have a big PG or something that might work.)

The upside case for him is that he can be a starting PG, in which case assuming his shooting is not some sort of massive mirage, then he's probably between a low-end all-star/very high-end starter (think Fred VanVleet) to ..... Steve Nash? or anything in between.

A better shooting Rozier with worse handles.

rozier is a scorer. a more pure shooting rozier, who also can't score. doesn't do you much good to shoot if you can't get your shot off. he was such a liability offensively against oakland down the stretch they had to pull him. most important game of the season and they couldn't afford to have him on the floor.

[Upperclass]

It would be like taking Kirk Hinrich #1.. would it be a useful pick.. sure.. can you get a higher-end talent at the pick.. most likely.. its up to actual scouts to identify who that will be.. but picking Reed #1 is setting the bar for production really low

[CptCrunch]

https://www.reddit.com/r/NBA_Draft/comments/1d3g7y0/reed_sheppard_3_point_shooting_statistics_and/