Here is Parker in the 01 Summer League
Whereas this is Dilly a couple of weeks after turning 19.
I'm much more scared of the Spurs falling in love with Topic's size when he has no outside shot and no in-between game and the shooting coach is in OKC.
The two of us are going down as the biggest Topic haters in here.
We're in too deep, got to keep downplaying his potential now, too late to take it all back.
As I've said many times, if he's not an outside threat, he just can't share the floor with Jeremy or any other non-shooter on guard/wing positions.
And if he's not good off the ball, then he's useless since he can't shoot or move.
If the Spurs really aren’t scouting him, then that means either they’re not interested at all, or they’ve made up their minds and he’s the guy.The two of us are going down as the biggest Topic haters in here.
We're in too deep, got to keep downplaying his potential now, too late to take it all back.
As I've said many times, if he's not an outside threat, he just can't share the floor with Jeremy or any other non-shooter on guard/wing positions.
And if he's not good off the ball, then he's useless since he can't shoot or move.But probably the former.
Tbh, after all those reports about RC going to Slovenia a handful of times and still drafting Samanic, idk if their scouting is to be trusted.If the Spurs really aren’t scouting him, then that means either they’re not interested at all, or they’ve made up their minds and he’s the guy.
Dillingham is very short and slight. I'm not entirely sure I buy him as taller than six foot. With shoes? Sure.
But I'm not sure what the appreciable difference between Parker, Sheppard, Dillingham, or Young is in terms of size.
What does size impact? Rebounding. Ability to guard bigs on switches.
That's... that's pretty much it. And none of those players are/were great rebounders or could guard an Embiid on a switch anyway. So what does it matter that Trae Young or Sheppard might be a little bit bigger or more muscular?
Of the four, I think Sheppard and Parker had a better base and could hold off at least some stronger players, but then I don't think Sheppard has the quickness to stay with a lot of guards in the league.
In the end, we have to pick a player who exists in this draft. I'm still not sure I want to take an iffy bigger player if I can get an absolutely needed skill set, some of which is elite. Maybe down the line there are sequences where a team starts targeting him deep in the playoffs, but we ain't there yet. I think I'd rather get that skillset, risk losing a handful of possessions due to positional size if I can win many more possessions on the other end.
When it comes to shooting a lot of this has to do with the degree of difficulty. Of course any smart and unselfish player will avoid taking a shot if they think there is a better one to be had by moving the ball, but sometimes that devolves into a game of hot potato where a player avoids taking a shot because it's not good in abstract eventhough it's unlikely the team will get a better one in that posession (e.g. deep 3s very late in the shot clock).
I'm not saying Sheppard is consciously avoiding risks to his team's detriment, but I have seen him catch and pass back when maybe he could have done more but he often seems too self aware (like Chet does at times), and I'd like to see a breakdown of his 3s by degree of difficulty (open / contested, off the catch / off the dribble) because the eye test tells me a significant part of his shooting efficiency is explained not only by his shooting proficiency (which is VERY real) but also by his role and how selective he is.
Dillingham on the other hand was tasked with having the ball in his hands during the most decisive moments and often had to take tougher shots (especially off the dribble) and the same goes for other prospects. As a son former bball players, he was probably very well trained early on into playing to his strengths and conceiling his shortcomings and that makes it harder to tell if there's some selfishness behind his (very high) iq.
Or you could say that Sheppard has good shot selection.
Sure, but the point is whether he's selecting good shots for his team or for himself, and those 2 are not necessarily the same thing. Sometimes you taking a suboptimal shot may be the best route for your team.
Last edited by Ariel; 3 Weeks Ago at 12:43 PM. Reason: typo
For Sheppard’s likely role, he wouldn’t be called upon to create too much. So the shot discipline is what you’d want.
Sheppard was playing about 30 minutes per game and averaged 4.6 3pa per game, which is a lower rate on a per minute basis than, say, champagnie (about 5.5 per 30 minutes)
dillingham played less minutes than sheppard but shot as many 3's. if you adjusted the numbers to reflect the minutes, he took about 5.9 3's per 30.
i still like sheppard quite a bit (more than Topic), but im not deluding myself into thinking there's a sound reason to pick him over dilingham for offensive purposes. the reason you'd take sheppard over dilly is you are banking on him continuing to be an impactful defender due to his activity, instinct, timing, etc, even if he isnt that amazing at the point of attack
If by role you mean 6'1.5" off ball guard who thrives on open, catch and shoot 3s, then sorry but that kills the appeal for me when we're talking top 7/8. Again, very efficient, very fast release, clearly has a lot of range, super smart, very good passer, but I need to see a glimpse of tough shot making off the dribble as well to really get excited about drafting that kind of player, which is why I prefer Dillingham.
7/8 in this draft is the equivalent of 15/16 in an average draft.
I want to believe in Dillingham. Maybe he has spent the time since the tournament bulking up and building strength and will weigh in at 180 and assuage concerns about his size.
Honestly it's not so much about believing in Dillingham as it is thinking he's one of the better options of an extremely underwhelming draft class and at a position of critical need. Though the odds are pretty decent he'll be gone by the time the Spurs pick anyways.
If you watched enough Kentucky, you saw that Sheppard could or did not get his shot off against pressure. He was a very good off-ball shooter, a potentially incredible one. This was a reason why Dillingham was much more responsible in getting the offense going.
Dillingham was not often disrupted by contests. He'd drive past and pop or reposition for a three from a different angle. A lot of his clutch hits were with hands in his face.
I'm curious how workouts will go. Sheppard's hands on defense will shine on 2-on-2s. Dillingham may be hard for most players to cover.
IMO, Sheppard being excellent on catch and shoot 3’s may be enough if his passing shines as well as I think it will. His passing is a tier above Dillingham’s and may be the reason he stands shoulder to shoulder with him offensively.
I beg to differ, Sir. I was passionately hating on Topic here when you mom still hadn't met your daddy...The two of us are going down as the biggest Topic haters in here.
We're in too deep, got to keep downplaying his potential now, too late to take it all back.
As I've said many times, if he's not an outside threat, he just can't share the floor with Jeremy or any other non-shooter on guard/wing positions.
And if he's not good off the ball, then he's useless since he can't shoot or move.
but yeah, Topic is THE one guy I don't want spurs to pick either.
yeah i think sheppard will be just fine as a pick and roll handler with the ability to pull up in those situations if the defense ever goes under or sags too much. but if the shot clock is winding down and the ball finds its ways into his hands, that's going to be a scenario where he will struggle early on. he's still quite young, so its not like its impossible for him to improve his handle and footwork to get better at it though. it just requires more projection
Reading all of your thoughts on guards is definitely selling me on the idea of taking wings (even in a double up scenario if TOR conveys). At this point, I'd even be more supportive of a Wing + Clingan/Filipowski draft over taking any of these guards.
Problem is that critical need is not just finding a PG, but a solid starter at PG, and I'm really not sure that's what Dilly is. A good back up maybe, but not long term starter imo. So you have to ask yourself if it is really pertinent to add another back up/meh PG to this roster to develop next to Tre and Blake.
Topic is only a thing because he's 6'7. No outside shot, questionable defense and athleticism but hey at least he's 6'7 and can pass.
He'll end up at PF sooner than later.
No centers. We already got one in Wemby with Barlow and Bassey coming off the bench. If we're talking C then Sarr should be at the top of the discussion.
We are still better than GSW tbh :
All these guys hating on Topic, whereas I think he's the best guard prospect in the draft...
Barlow is a G-Leaguer and Bassey has no knees. I can understand not wanting to take a center, but if it's because we have Barlow and Bassey... we can do better (and I'm practically the president of the Bassey fan club).
And I'm talking about taking Clingan or Filipowski with the TOR pick, not a top 3 pick (like you'd have to do with Sarr). If Sarr were available at #8, then sure.
The more compelling reason not to take a C is that we've foolishly (in hindsight) invested $35MM over the next two years to one already. But if we can (hopefully) move off of him, it would be nice to have a backup C who isn't a massive negative swing when Wemby has to sit.
8 points, 6 assists and 4 rebounds today for Topic in the ABA league semi-final, btw.
There are currently 37 users browsing this thread. (6 members and 31 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
