I'm calling it...our #3 draft pick for 2016. Buddy Hield. Boom.

[PhoSita]

If buddy has such great peripheral abilities aside from shooting, why wasn't he drafted sooner? It's not like with Lillard or McCollum where they were dominating at lower tier schools.

Buddy played for a pretty high level program and didn't stand out as a draft prospect until his senior year. Why is that?

Does it matter?   Guy can ball.

Sure it matters.

Is he on the radar as an NBA prospect because he jacked up his scoring average so much in his fourth year, as so many seniors do, or did he add some peripheral elements to his game that weren't there before? Did he develop physically in a big way? Grow a couple inches?

[MBunge]

If buddy has such great peripheral abilities aside from shooting, why wasn't he drafted sooner? It's not like with Lillard or McCollum where they were dominating at lower tier schools.

Buddy played for a pretty high level program and didn't stand out as a draft prospect until his senior year. Why is that?

Does it matter?   Guy can ball.

Sure it matters.

Is he on the radar as an NBA prospect because he jacked up his scoring average so much in his fourth year, as so many seniors do, or did he add some peripheral elements to his game that weren't there before? Did he develop physically in a big way? Grow a couple inches?

You know, there are thousands of words out there at multiple different draft sites that answer each and every question you ask.

In brief...

1.  Buddy was the best player and leading scorer on a team that made the NCAA three years in a row

2.  If he had come out as a junior, he would have likely have been drafted but perhaps not in the lottery.

3.  He has significantly improved in several different areas of his game while in college, to the point where he's probably the only prospect in the draft where no one has any serious questions about any aspect of his game.  Simmons can't shoot.  Ingram makes Tayshawn Prince look like Mr. Olympia.  And there are legitimate concerns about whether Murray or Bender can even play in the league.

Mike

[Celtics18]

If buddy has such great peripheral abilities aside from shooting, why wasn't he drafted sooner? It's not like with Lillard or McCollum where they were dominating at lower tier schools.

Buddy played for a pretty high level program and didn't stand out as a draft prospect until his senior year. Why is that?

Does it matter?   Guy can ball.

Sure it matters.

Is he on the radar as an NBA prospect because he jacked up his scoring average so much in his fourth year, as so many seniors do, or did he add some peripheral elements to his game that weren't there before? Did he develop physically in a big way? Grow a couple inches?

He became more well-rounded offensively in his senior year.  He added a driving game to his already lethal perimeter shooting game.

[IDreamCeltics]

Couple things:

1.  You guys know that McDermott is only in his second year and shot .425% from 3 point land this year right? 

2.  Despite what this thread might lead you to believe Buddy did play a Sophomore and Junior season.  He didn't just go from a terrible freshman year, to a magnificent Senior season.  In his Junior year he was Big 12 Player of the Year, shot .359% from three (down from .386 in his sophomore year) had a PER of 22.6, an offensive rating of 112 and a defensive rating of 94 (net difference +18).

3.  People keep comparing Buddy to guys who can't shoot off the dribble.  This is silly. 

4.  Buddy's defensive woes are exaggerated.  His O-rating this year was 123 and his d-rating was 101.  That's a net positive of 22.  His net +/- over the last two seasons is +20.  Not saying he'll be a defensive stopper, but from a team standpoint he's bringing a lot more to the table than he's taking off of it.

[chambers]

If buddy has such great peripheral abilities aside from shooting, why wasn't he drafted sooner? It's not like with Lillard or McCollum where they were dominating at lower tier schools.

Buddy played for a pretty high level program and didn't stand out as a draft prospect until his senior year. Why is that?

Does it matter?   Guy can ball.

Sure it matters.

Is he on the radar as an NBA prospect because he jacked up his scoring average so much in his fourth year, as so many seniors do, or did he add some peripheral elements to his game that weren't there before? Did he develop physically in a big way? Grow a couple inches?

Well it's fair to say he dominated and made his team a top school this year. Who did he have to help? Isaiah Cousins?
I guess the answer to your question is that he had a breakout year.
We could also ask why Curry, Klay weren't drafted sooner...or are you saying the reason they weren't drafted was because of schools?
You could also say he took an above average program  to an elite level this year after building on his game and it all clicking at once.

[Ilikesports17]

I have some Hield Questions.

I know Hield scored 8ppg in like 25 mpg his freshman year on a decent Oklahoma team that made the tourney as a 10 seed.

He shot like 24% from 3, so he wasnt there as a sharpshooter. Was he in the game for defense?

Question 2. I know Hield played much more and played and scored well his junior and sophomore seasons. In his senior year he played out of this world. I have seen on this blog, it written that Hield was a sharpshooter sophomore through senior year but only added the driving game this year, which made his shot more lethal. Heres my question: Was Hield a slasher with a solid 3pt shot in his sophomore/junior seasons who then improved his shooting to become elite? or was he a 3 point marksman who took 3 years to learn how to seperate and get his shot?

[crimson_stallion]

If buddy has such great peripheral abilities aside from shooting, why wasn't he drafted sooner? It's not like with Lillard or McCollum where they were dominating at lower tier schools.

Buddy played for a pretty high level program and didn't stand out as a draft prospect until his senior year. Why is that?

Does it matter?   Guy can ball.

If buddy has such great peripheral abilities aside from shooting, why wasn't he drafted sooner? It's not like with Lillard or McCollum where they were dominating at lower tier schools.

Buddy played for a pretty high level program and didn't stand out as a draft prospect until his senior year. Why is that?

That part doesn't bother me.  Why do some NBA players make a leap after a few years?

Hield taking four years to stand out does matter. For one, he was a 22-year-old whose superior competition was presumably a bunch of 19-year-old underclassmen. That leaves the possibility that Buddy only dominated because of a significant physical advantage, which he will certainly not have in the pros. Also, if it was simply a skill-translation problem, if it took Hield 3 years to adjust to college basketball, how long will it take him to adjust to NBA basketball? If his ceiling is JJ Reddick and it takes him 3-4 years to reach that ceiling, what will people be saying on this board for the next three years? What if he doesn't hit his ceiling or it takes longer than 3 years? How old is Hield then? What happens in-between? Because then you're at a situation where Bender or some other developmental prospect with a higher ceiling looks like a better selection. It's where the "OMG why didn't we take Giannis the GREEK FREAK over solid role player Kelly Olynyk?" threads come from.

Brown, Simmons, Ingram and Labissiere are probably have probably the most physically gifted players in the draft lottery, and those guys are all young...so how in god's name would Hield's age give him a 'superior physical advantage' over the younger players??

It doesn't. 

Hield has the physical tools (size, length, strength, quickness) to excel at the NBA level, but he is by no means physically "dominant".

The reason Hield has made such a huge jump is because he has an incredible work ethic, and her has worked tirelessly on improving on his weaknesses.  He's worked on his ball handling, his decision making, his shooting, his ability to create offense off the dribble and finish at the basket. 

These are all areas Hield has worked hard on, and has dramatically improved on as a result.  It's these massive improvements that have pushed him from being a solid player, to being an absolutely dominant one. 

There isn't a single player in the draft who dominated the college game offensively the way Hield did - not even the physically elite guys (like Simmons, Ingram and Brown) came close to impacting the game offensively as much as Hield did.  You can argue about whether you feel that will translate or not, but you'd be a fool to ignore it entirely. 

See, you look at Hield and you see a guy who has proven he's willing to work to get better.  A guy who has shown he will not 'settle'.  A guy who has a clear desire to be great, and the willingness to work to make that happen.  There is no fear of him not doing that, because he's already shown it.

You look at guys like Murray however - he really hasn't proven he's got the skills to be able to produce against NBA defence.  People fall back on the fact that he's 19, but we really haven't seen any evidence that he's going to put in the effort to get better - or that he's even capable of become much more than he is now.

[chambers]

If buddy has such great peripheral abilities aside from shooting, why wasn't he drafted sooner? It's not like with Lillard or McCollum where they were dominating at lower tier schools.

Buddy played for a pretty high level program and didn't stand out as a draft prospect until his senior year. Why is that?

Does it matter?   Guy can ball.

If buddy has such great peripheral abilities aside from shooting, why wasn't he drafted sooner? It's not like with Lillard or McCollum where they were dominating at lower tier schools.

Buddy played for a pretty high level program and didn't stand out as a draft prospect until his senior year. Why is that?

That part doesn't bother me.  Why do some NBA players make a leap after a few years?

Hield taking four years to stand out does matter. For one, he was a 22-year-old whose superior competition was presumably a bunch of 19-year-old underclassmen. That leaves the possibility that Buddy only dominated because of a significant physical advantage, which he will certainly not have in the pros. Also, if it was simply a skill-translation problem, if it took Hield 3 years to adjust to college basketball, how long will it take him to adjust to NBA basketball? If his ceiling is JJ Reddick and it takes him 3-4 years to reach that ceiling, what will people be saying on this board for the next three years? What if he doesn't hit his ceiling or it takes longer than 3 years? How old is Hield then? What happens in-between? Because then you're at a situation where Bender or some other developmental prospect with a higher ceiling looks like a better selection. It's where the "OMG why didn't we take Giannis the GREEK FREAK over solid role player Kelly Olynyk?" threads come from.

Brown, Simmons, Ingram and Labissiere are probably have probably the most physically gifted players in the draft lottery, and those guys are all young...so how in god's name would Hield's age give him a 'superior physical advantage' over the younger players??

It doesn't. 

Hield has the physical tools (size, length, strength, quickness) to excel at the NBA level, but he is by no means physically "dominant".

The reason Hield has made such a huge jump is because he has an incredible work ethic, and her has worked tirelessly on improving on his weaknesses.  He's worked on his ball handling, his decision making, his shooting, his ability to create offense off the dribble and finish at the basket. 

These are all areas Hield has worked hard on, and has dramatically improved on as a result.  It's these massive improvements that have pushed him from being a solid player, to being an absolutely dominant one. 

There isn't a single player in the draft who dominated the college game offensively the way Hield did - not even the physically elite guys (like Simmons, Ingram and Brown) came close to impacting the game offensively as much as Hield did.  You can argue about whether you feel that will translate or not, but you'd be a fool to ignore it entirely. 

See, you look at Hield and you see a guy who has proven he's willing to work to get better.  A guy who has shown he will not 'settle'.  A guy who has a clear desire to be great, and the willingness to work to make that happen.  There is no fear of him not doing that, because he's already shown it.

You look at guys like Murray however - he really hasn't proven he's got the skills to be able to produce against NBA defence.  People fall back on the fact that he's 19, but we really haven't seen any evidence that he's going to put in the effort to get better - or that he's even capable of become much more than he is now.

How do you feel about taking Hield at #3?
I too am not convinced on Murray but I won't be shattered if we take him at #3, although I'd prefer Hield or Bender.

 But yeah, it's Hield's work ethic that stands out above everyone to me.
Here's a guy that is in the Kobe/Ray Allen department of tireless workers who spend every waking minute trying to get better and improve their games.

[guava_wrench]

If buddy has such great peripheral abilities aside from shooting, why wasn't he drafted sooner? It's not like with Lillard or McCollum where they were dominating at lower tier schools.

Buddy played for a pretty high level program and didn't stand out as a draft prospect until his senior year. Why is that?

Does it matter?   Guy can ball.

If buddy has such great peripheral abilities aside from shooting, why wasn't he drafted sooner? It's not like with Lillard or McCollum where they were dominating at lower tier schools.

Buddy played for a pretty high level program and didn't stand out as a draft prospect until his senior year. Why is that?

That part doesn't bother me.  Why do some NBA players make a leap after a few years?

Hield taking four years to stand out does matter. For one, he was a 22-year-old whose superior competition was presumably a bunch of 19-year-old underclassmen. That leaves the possibility that Buddy only dominated because of a significant physical advantage, which he will certainly not have in the pros. Also, if it was simply a skill-translation problem, if it took Hield 3 years to adjust to college basketball, how long will it take him to adjust to NBA basketball? If his ceiling is JJ Reddick and it takes him 3-4 years to reach that ceiling, what will people be saying on this board for the next three years? What if he doesn't hit his ceiling or it takes longer than 3 years? How old is Hield then? What happens in-between? Because then you're at a situation where Bender or some other developmental prospect with a higher ceiling looks like a better selection. It's where the "OMG why didn't we take Giannis the GREEK FREAK over solid role player Kelly Olynyk?" threads come from.

Brown, Simmons, Ingram and Labissiere are probably have probably the most physically gifted players in the draft lottery, and those guys are all young...so how in god's name would Hield's age give him a 'superior physical advantage' over the younger players??

It doesn't. 

Hield has the physical tools (size, length, strength, quickness) to excel at the NBA level, but he is by no means physically "dominant".

The reason Hield has made such a huge jump is because he has an incredible work ethic, and her has worked tirelessly on improving on his weaknesses.  He's worked on his ball handling, his decision making, his shooting, his ability to create offense off the dribble and finish at the basket. 

These are all areas Hield has worked hard on, and has dramatically improved on as a result.  It's these massive improvements that have pushed him from being a solid player, to being an absolutely dominant one. 

There isn't a single player in the draft who dominated the college game offensively the way Hield did - not even the physically elite guys (like Simmons, Ingram and Brown) came close to impacting the game offensively as much as Hield did.  You can argue about whether you feel that will translate or not, but you'd be a fool to ignore it entirely. 

See, you look at Hield and you see a guy who has proven he's willing to work to get better.  A guy who has shown he will not 'settle'.  A guy who has a clear desire to be great, and the willingness to work to make that happen.  There is no fear of him not doing that, because he's already shown it.

You look at guys like Murray however - he really hasn't proven he's got the skills to be able to produce against NBA defence.  People fall back on the fact that he's 19, but we really haven't seen any evidence that he's going to put in the effort to get better - or that he's even capable of become much more than he is now.

So Hield has proven he is willing to work to get better and Murray hasn't? Hield averaged 17.4 PPG his junior year. Murray averaged 20 PPG his freshman year. Seems Murray worked harder in one year than Hield did in three years. Murray shot 45% his freshman year. Hield shot 41% his junior year. Murray shot 41% from 3. Hield only shot 36% from 3 his junior year.

I don't see how Hield has some special drive to improve when he only distinguished himself as an elite college scorer after 4 years. But even in his 3rd college season, he was way behind where Murray was his first. Why should anyone doubt that Murray can easily catch up to Hield and surpass him considering his freshman season beat Hield's junior season?

[alldaboston]

If buddy has such great peripheral abilities aside from shooting, why wasn't he drafted sooner? It's not like with Lillard or McCollum where they were dominating at lower tier schools.

Buddy played for a pretty high level program and didn't stand out as a draft prospect until his senior year. Why is that?

Does it matter?   Guy can ball.

If buddy has such great peripheral abilities aside from shooting, why wasn't he drafted sooner? It's not like with Lillard or McCollum where they were dominating at lower tier schools.

Buddy played for a pretty high level program and didn't stand out as a draft prospect until his senior year. Why is that?

That part doesn't bother me.  Why do some NBA players make a leap after a few years?

Hield taking four years to stand out does matter. For one, he was a 22-year-old whose superior competition was presumably a bunch of 19-year-old underclassmen. That leaves the possibility that Buddy only dominated because of a significant physical advantage, which he will certainly not have in the pros. Also, if it was simply a skill-translation problem, if it took Hield 3 years to adjust to college basketball, how long will it take him to adjust to NBA basketball? If his ceiling is JJ Reddick and it takes him 3-4 years to reach that ceiling, what will people be saying on this board for the next three years? What if he doesn't hit his ceiling or it takes longer than 3 years? How old is Hield then? What happens in-between? Because then you're at a situation where Bender or some other developmental prospect with a higher ceiling looks like a better selection. It's where the "OMG why didn't we take Giannis the GREEK FREAK over solid role player Kelly Olynyk?" threads come from.

Brown, Simmons, Ingram and Labissiere are probably have probably the most physically gifted players in the draft lottery, and those guys are all young...so how in god's name would Hield's age give him a 'superior physical advantage' over the younger players??

It doesn't. 

Hield has the physical tools (size, length, strength, quickness) to excel at the NBA level, but he is by no means physically "dominant".

The reason Hield has made such a huge jump is because he has an incredible work ethic, and her has worked tirelessly on improving on his weaknesses.  He's worked on his ball handling, his decision making, his shooting, his ability to create offense off the dribble and finish at the basket. 

These are all areas Hield has worked hard on, and has dramatically improved on as a result.  It's these massive improvements that have pushed him from being a solid player, to being an absolutely dominant one. 

There isn't a single player in the draft who dominated the college game offensively the way Hield did - not even the physically elite guys (like Simmons, Ingram and Brown) came close to impacting the game offensively as much as Hield did.  You can argue about whether you feel that will translate or not, but you'd be a fool to ignore it entirely. 

See, you look at Hield and you see a guy who has proven he's willing to work to get better.  A guy who has shown he will not 'settle'.  A guy who has a clear desire to be great, and the willingness to work to make that happen.  There is no fear of him not doing that, because he's already shown it.

You look at guys like Murray however - he really hasn't proven he's got the skills to be able to produce against NBA defence.  People fall back on the fact that he's 19, but we really haven't seen any evidence that he's going to put in the effort to get better - or that he's even capable of become much more than he is now.

So Hield has proven he is willing to work to get better and Murray hasn't? Hield averaged 17.4 PPG his junior year. Murray averaged 20 PPG his freshman year. Seems Murray worked harder in one year than Hield did in three years. Murray shot 45% his freshman year. Hield shot 41% his junior year. Murray shot 41% from 3. Hield only shot 36% from 3 his junior year.

I don't see how Hield has some special drive to improve when he only distinguished himself as an elite college scorer after 4 years. But even in his 3rd college season, he was way behind where Murray was his first. Why should anyone doubt that Murray can easily catch up to Hield and surpass him considering his freshman season beat Hield's junior season?

Exactly. I think using age as a way of saying Hield has dedication but Murray doesn't is a poor excuse to take Hield. Murray, from what I've seen, has shown a ton of dedication and effort to get even better. I see it with Hield too, but Murray shows it as well. You can't say Murray doesn't have it just because he's 19 and Hield has it because he's 22 or whatever.

[Sixth Man]

If buddy has such great peripheral abilities aside from shooting, why wasn't he drafted sooner? It's not like with Lillard or McCollum where they were dominating at lower tier schools.

Buddy played for a pretty high level program and didn't stand out as a draft prospect until his senior year. Why is that?

Maybe because he didn't begin to blossom until this season?  I'm tempted to add to that, but I'll pass this time...

[Sixth Man]

If buddy has such great peripheral abilities aside from shooting, why wasn't he drafted sooner? It's not like with Lillard or McCollum where they were dominating at lower tier schools.

Buddy played for a pretty high level program and didn't stand out as a draft prospect until his senior year. Why is that?

Maybe it's because he didn't developed his game until his senior year? But that standard, Jimmy Butler shouldn't be an all-star, nor is Draymond Green and Damian Lillard.

Flawless logic.

No worse than yours! 

[crimson_stallion]

So Hield has proven he is willing to work to get better and Murray hasn't? Hield averaged 17.4 PPG his junior year. Murray averaged 20 PPG his freshman year. Seems Murray worked harder in one year than Hield did in three years. Murray shot 45% his freshman year. Hield shot 41% his junior year. Murray shot 41% from 3. Hield only shot 36% from 3 his junior year.

I don't see how Hield has some special drive to improve when he only distinguished himself as an elite college scorer after 4 years. But even in his 3rd college season, he was way behind where Murray was his first. Why should anyone doubt that Murray can easily catch up to Hield and surpass him considering his freshman season beat Hield's junior season?

Because Murray lacks the physical tools to compete at the NBA level, and he lacks the skill set to overcome those physical limitations.

If Murray was 6'6" with a 6'9" wingspan then I would say he should be fine, as heh as the size to get his shot off against NBA shooting guards.

If Murray was his current size but was an above average run/jump athlete, then I would say he should be fine, as he has the quickness to beat his man off the dribble and get to the basket - this in turn would force NBA players to respect his quickness and sag off abit, which would allow him to get his shot off.

If Murray has his current level of size and athleticism but was an outstanding ballhandler (e.g. Kyrie) then I would say he should be fine, as he has the ball handling moves to freeze the defence, hence creating space so he can get his jumper off.

The problem is that Murray has neither one of those tools.  Against college competition he is perfectly fine, but against NBA competition he lacks the size, length, athleticism and ball handling skills to be able to get his shot off against superior NBA defenders.

He's not going to grow taller, he's not going to grow longer, and he's not going to get more explosive athletically - so the only way Murray really has a hope of being able to create his own shot against NBA defence is if he can develop into an exceptional ball handler.  So far he hasn't show even the slightest indication that he's capable of that.  Even if he becomes an above average ball handler, that still might not be enough for him to be able to score on anything beyond running off screens and hitting catch-and-shoot threes off screens.

When it comes to Hield:

1) We already know that he has the size (6'5" height, 6'9" wingspan) to shoot over a lot of NBA shooting guards

2) He's not an elite athlete, but he is a very good one.  He's quick and strong enough that teams cannot afford to overplay him on the perimeter - if they close out too hard he CAN put the ball on the court, blow by them and get to the basket.  Teams need to respect the fact that he is a threat to drive, and that will help him get space to get his shots off.

3) Hield isn't just a catch and shoot guy.  He has gotten very good at shooting off the dribble from three and from midrange.  If he drives and you play him for the drive, then he can stop on a dime and pull up from midrange - something he's very effective at.

All of these things are made possible because Hield is a multi-dimensional threat offensively.  He can score from deep three point range, from midrange, off the dribble, off the catch, at the basket, and in transition.  You need to pick your poison when guarding him, which Is why he absolutely tore up the competition this year. 

Hield already has the physical tools AND the shooting/scoring ability.  His only real limitations are his ball handling, playmaking and defensive consistency - all things that he should be perfectly capable of improving on with experience if he puts in the work (which we know he's willing to do). 

Murray is only 19, which would indicate high potential if his biggest weaknesses were skills that can easily be improved on.  Unfortunately his biggest weakenesses are physical attributes that almost certainly will NOT improve with age/experience, so that limits how relevance his youth actually is.  The only limitations he has that can have potential to improve are his ball handling and passing - neither is likely to be enough to propel him to stardom.

Simmons, Ingram, Brown - those guys are all in the same boat as Hield.
* Simmons weakness is his shooting, something that can be improved with training
* Ingram's weakness is his thin physique, something easy enough to remedy with training
* Brown's weakness is his shooting - again, something easy enough to work on

Of all the guys projected to go top 6, Murray is probably the only guy who has significant limitations (size/length and athleticism) that he cannot improve on.  Even Bender (who is seen as a high risk prospect) has the potential to improve on all his weaknesses.   

[CelticSooner]

I have some Hield Questions.

I know Hield scored 8ppg in like 25 mpg his freshman year on a decent Oklahoma team that made the tourney as a 10 seed.

He shot like 24% from 3, so he wasnt there as a sharpshooter. Was he in the game for defense?

Question 2. I know Hield played much more and played and scored well his junior and sophomore seasons. In his senior year he played out of this world. I have seen on this blog, it written that Hield was a sharpshooter sophomore through senior year but only added the driving game this year, which made his shot more lethal. Heres my question: Was Hield a slasher with a solid 3pt shot in his sophomore/junior seasons who then improved his shooting to become elite? or was he a 3 point marksman who took 3 years to learn how to seperate and get his shot?

It was the latter. His first two seasons he was mainly a defender that could hit shots. By his junior year he was a good player and by last season a great one. Here's a little video showing some of his progression. If anybody says he was doing it against a bunch of freshman just don't know how deep the Big 12 was the past two seasons.

https://youtu.be/5w_DVvCmYAQ

[chambers]

Pho watch the video that Celticsooner posted above.
Answers your questions better than anyone can.