Buddy Hield, per source, hit 85 of 100 3's in front of Celtics brass today

[Eddie20]

On the locked on podcast, with Mike Schmitz they mention how guys who dominate the ball often struggle in the NBA where they don't get the ball as much (they used Jimmer as an example)

Heard the same podcast. Really good, too.

Murray can jump, but he doesn't have lateral quickness. He's better than Buddy coming off picks, but he's not better athletically. He also has a low release point, which will be a major issue on the next level. Hield has a much better looking shot, with a higher release point and a quicker release.

Hield didn't have the same role he had as a senior. He obviously improved his game a lot, but his role equally changed. He was actually more of a defensive guy his first couple of years, which lends itself to the opinion that his offensive burden is reduced he will be completely capable of being a high end 3 and D guy on the next level. One that is a notoriously hard worker, has excellent character, and is the quintessential team guy. The jury is out, as the podcast alluded to, if Murray will be able to make the transition to not being the focal point offensively. That's something he has never had to do. The adjustment might not be a smooth one. 

[Vermont Green]

They are both nice players.  Murray probably has higher potential ceiling but Heild probably a higher floor.  Heild is more complete and will probably see more play right away, Murray has more holes to fill in before he will likely be able to be a regular at the NBA level.

I would be happy to trade down and get one of these guys but I am not going to pretend that I know which one is the better pick.  You never know when drafting, nobody does.  Not scouts, GMs, coaches, nobody.  There is an element of chance with every draft pick.

If I could see enough of Murray to feel like I was sure he had enough athleticism, I would probably pick him.  If I had doubts about that. I would probably go safe and take Heild.  Or I might flip a coin and have a better chance at getting the player that is ultimately better.

[vjcsmoke]

Yup.  I don't get it.  Buddy knocks down 6 more shots and people rip him.  Can't we just acknowledge that he just performed much better in the drill than Murray just did?

What I would have loved to see is Buddy going against Murray head to head in the drill.  But it didn't happen, that would have brought out the competitiveness in both of them.

And also for the people who are ripping Buddy for being 22, why are these same people banging on the very same keyboard to advocate we draft Dunn who is also one of the oldest guards in this draft age-wise, he's also an "ancient" age 22.  He's only 3 months younger than Buddy Hield.

Dunn DOB 3/18/1994
Hield DOB 12/17/1993

Now, I do like Murray as far as overall upside better, but I feel we tend to exaggerate the age factor on this board.  And then to pile on the hypocrisy we conveniently ignore the age factor when we want to bash prospects, see Bender, aka youngest prospect in the entire NBA draft.

[RedClaw33]

It only took reddick 3 years of college ball to produce stats per game that it took murray in 1 year

Jj reddick also cant leap very high/dunk.  Murray can play above the rim

Murray is a better talent

I think you are the only person on Earth who ever connected Jamal Murray with the the phrase "above the rim."

Mike

Not Russel Westbrook but not completely below the rim like JJ.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEPiuyfzc4A

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pmT_T6ublk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXEhp4SOURY

Did you listen to the audio on the first video?
Teammate: "I haven't actually seen you throw one down in a while."

Every young NBA guard prospect over 6 feet tall can throw down a hard dunk in practice. I think you are misunderstanding the difference between "athletic" and top NBA prospect NBA athletic. By NBA prospect standards, Murray is molasses right now. Hopefully he improves.

I'm pretty confident I have a better understanding than most....but lets not get into an opinion based argument.  Did you watch all the videos?  Did you pay attention to the context.  As I said before...he's not an elite level athlete but he is more athletic than JJ Reddick.  That was the comparison made earlier. 

Lets check combine numbers for comparisons.

[LarBrd33]

Jeff Goodman ‏@GoodmanESPN 9m9 minutes ago

Jamal Murray hit 79 of 100 3’s in Boston last week. Buddy Hield, per source, hit 85 of 100 in front of Celtics brass today in California.
168 retweets 116 likes

But the question is, how many threes would jamal Murray hit 3 years from now?

Based on wonky math...

Hield shot an uncharacteristic .457% from three this season (surrounded by other great three point shooters... only shot .359% last season)... he managed to hit 85 of 100 open shots.  Considering that he only shot .238% from three as a Freshman, we can guesstimate that Hield would hit 44/100 when he was the same age as Murray.

Meanwhile, Murray shot .408% as a Freshman and made 79 of 100 open shots.  If Murray saw a similar jump in 3P% to Hield (from .238 to .457 = 1.92x greater), Murray would see his 3P% jump from .408% to .783% by his Senior year... and thus, if Murray was the same age as Hield, he'd hit 152 out of 100 open shots.

Pretty definitive.   

I think you are being sarcastic, but with you, I can never quite tell.  Nice going!!

Me neither

[max215]

Jeff Goodman ‏@GoodmanESPN 9m9 minutes ago

Jamal Murray hit 79 of 100 3’s in Boston last week. Buddy Hield, per source, hit 85 of 100 in front of Celtics brass today in California.
168 retweets 116 likes

But the question is, how many threes would jamal Murray hit 3 years from now?

Based on wonky math...

Hield shot an uncharacteristic .457% from three this season (surrounded by other great three point shooters... only shot .359% last season)... he managed to hit 85 of 100 open shots.  Considering that he only shot .238% from three as a Freshman, we can guesstimate that Hield would hit 44/100 when he was the same age as Murray.

Meanwhile, Murray shot .408% as a Freshman and made 79 of 100 open shots.  If Murray saw a similar jump in 3P% to Hield (from .238 to .457 = 1.92x greater), Murray would see his 3P% jump from .408% to .783% by his Senior year... and thus, if Murray was the same age as Hield, he'd hit 152 out of 100 open shots.

Pretty definitive.   

Hilarious, TP!

[LarBrd33]

Yup.  I don't get it.  Buddy knocks down 6 more shots and people rip him.  Can't we just acknowledge that he just performed much better in the drill than Murray just did?

What I would have loved to see is Buddy going against Murray head to head in the drill.  But it didn't happen, that would have brought out the competitiveness in both of them.

And also for the people who are ripping Buddy for being 22, why are these same people banging on the very same keyboard to advocate we draft Dunn who is also one of the oldest guards in this draft age-wise, he's also an "ancient" age 22.  He's only 3 months younger than Buddy Hield.

Dunn DOB 3/18/1994
Hield DOB 12/17/1993

Now, I do like Murray as far as overall upside better, but I feel we tend to exaggerate the age factor on this board.  And then to pile on the hypocrisy we conveniently ignore the age factor when we want to bash prospects, see Bender, aka youngest prospect in the entire NBA draft.

I thought people wanted to shy away from Dunn for the same reason.  College stats from old men like Dunn and Hield can't be trusted.  Usually, you should take Senior stats with a grain of salt.  This is why people want to take someone like Murray instead.  He'd likely outperform Hield if he stayed 4 years... he's not staying 4 years, because unlike Hield, he doesn't need to.

[LarBrd33]

Jeff Goodman ‏@GoodmanESPN 9m9 minutes ago

Jamal Murray hit 79 of 100 3’s in Boston last week. Buddy Hield, per source, hit 85 of 100 in front of Celtics brass today in California.
168 retweets 116 likes

But the question is, how many threes would jamal Murray hit 3 years from now?

Based on wonky math...

Hield shot an uncharacteristic .457% from three this season (surrounded by other great three point shooters... only shot .359% last season)... he managed to hit 85 of 100 open shots.  Considering that he only shot .238% from three as a Freshman, we can guesstimate that Hield would hit 44/100 when he was the same age as Murray.

Meanwhile, Murray shot .408% as a Freshman and made 79 of 100 open shots.  If Murray saw a similar jump in 3P% to Hield (from .238 to .457 = 1.92x greater), Murray would see his 3P% jump from .408% to .783% by his Senior year... and thus, if Murray was the same age as Hield, he'd hit 152 out of 100 open shots.

Pretty definitive.   

True. Although to be fair, Hield appears to double every 3 years, so three years from now he'll be making ~190 and approaching the sacred 6 pps.

To be fair, Hield saw his 3p% drop from sophomore to junior years and it's pretty likely a large part of his success as a Senior had to do with experience, age, and additional elite shooters surrounding him.  And based on the evidence that players make the more significant progression before the age of 24, Hield has about a year to continue any major progress.   Murray has 4.

Sure, except some pretty flawed assumptions:

1) That 19 year old players will typically improve on their single *strongest* attribute (as opposed to their many weaknesses). Murray will probably become a better all-around player, yes. Whether his shooting changes much is highly questionable. Keep in mind if he never did improve on defense etc, he might not even belong in the NBA.

2) Hield suddenly benefiting from his teammates as a Senior. Who knows... clearly the age and experience helped him, but a) he maximized those factor, not everyone does; and b) Age is already factored in a bit here. Hield was a significantly better college player last year.

3) Player growth is probably a mixture of actual age, and experience. They both have zero NBA experience, where a lot of that growth happens. A player that makes the leap to the NBA 4 years sooner doesn't just pick up an extra 4 years of development at the pro level. I'd say it's condensed a bit.

To me, the biggest thing people are missing is not that Murray is young (which certainly DOES imply a lot of upside remaining), but that he's also not a very good all-around player yet, and could easily be 2 years behind Hield right now, which mitigates the age thing a good amount. Whether Hield can continue to grow is of course highly subjective.

Well I think ultimately, if what experts are saying is true, both Hield and Murray will be role players at best.  Whoever drafts them will be hoping the guy will be more McDermott than Jimmer.  So it probably doesn't matter.  If what they are saying is true, hopefully we trade the pick in a massive package for an impact star and don't have to worry about one of them busting on our watch.

But if given a choice between the 19 year old and the 23 year old who both put up comparable stats on the College level (though the 23 year old sucked as a 19 year old), you usually go with the 19 year old.  Which is probably why most mocks still have Murray going ahead of Hield.

[vjcsmoke]

But if given a choice between the 19 year old and the 23 year old who both put up comparable stats on the College level (though the 23 year old sucked as a 19 year old), you usually go with the 19 year old.  Which is probably why most mocks still have Murray going ahead of Hield.

Buddy Hield is 22 not 23.
I have Murray ahead of Hield long term, but right now Hield is the better shooter and player.

Buddy deserves props for his workout results.  Bottom line he performed better.
Would I still take Murray ahead of him, yes.  But I'm not as sure as you seem to be that Murray will hit that higher ceiling, even though "potentially" it's there.

Buddy Hield will at the very least be a very useful player, maybe on the JJ Reddick level.

[MBunge]

Underclassmen taken before senior Damian Lillard in 2012, after unanimous #1 Anthony Davis was picked.

Thomas Robinson.
Dion Waiters.
Bradley Beal.
Michael Kidd-Gilchrist.

When exactly is all that superior upside supposed to kick in?

Mike

[LarBrd33]

But if given a choice between the 19 year old and the 23 year old who both put up comparable stats on the College level (though the 23 year old sucked as a 19 year old), you usually go with the 19 year old.  Which is probably why most mocks still have Murray going ahead of Hield.

Buddy Hield is 22 not 23.
I have Murray ahead of Hield long term, but right now Hield is the better shooter and player.

Maybe that's true.  Maybe not.  A lot of it may have had to do with system and surrounding talent.  Hield had better shooters around him. 

Even if Hield is a "better player" right now, it might not mean anything.  Our rookies were some of the best in D-League.  It didn't mean crap on the NBA level, though.  Being marginally better on the College level (despite having 3 extra years of experience) might be enough to get you selected for a single-day College-level pick-up game, but if both are going to struggle as rookies on the NBA level, you probably want the guy with the higher ceiling. 

[Eja117]

I heard about this guy that played till his senior year once. All he could really do was shoot and hustle. Maybe pass a little. He had a terrible freshman year. About as bad as possible actually. Very low ceiling due to a low level of athleticism. There were probably freshman that year that projected better than him. He was player of the year, but still. Worked out though. I think his name was Larry something.

[Beat LA]

Yup.  I don't get it.  Buddy knocks down 6 more shots and people rip him.  Can't we just acknowledge that he just performed much better in the drill than Murray just did?

What I would have loved to see is Buddy going against Murray head to head in the drill.  But it didn't happen, that would have brought out the competitiveness in both of them.

And also for the people who are ripping Buddy for being 22, why are these same people banging on the very same keyboard to advocate we draft Dunn who is also one of the oldest guards in this draft age-wise, he's also an "ancient" age 22.  He's only 3 months younger than Buddy Hield.

Dunn DOB 3/18/1994
Hield DOB 12/17/1993

Now, I do like Murray as far as overall upside better, but I feel we tend to exaggerate the age factor on this board.  And then to pile on the hypocrisy we conveniently ignore the age factor when we want to bash prospects, see Bender, aka youngest prospect in the entire NBA draft.

I thought people wanted to shy away from Dunn for the same reason.  College stats from old men like Dunn and Hield can't be trusted.  Usually, you should take Senior stats with a grain of salt.  This is why people want to take someone like Murray instead.  He'd likely outperform Hield if he stayed 4 years... he's not staying 4 years, because unlike Hield, he doesn't need to.

Wow, dude .  Wow.

[Beat LA]

I heard about this guy that played till his senior year once. All he could really do was shoot and hustle. Maybe pass a little. He had a terrible freshman year. About as bad as possible actually. Very low ceiling due to a low level of athleticism. There were probably freshman that year that projected better than him. He was player of the year, but still. Worked out though. I think his name was Larry something.

Yeah, plus he was white and played against 'inferior competition'. Draftexpress said that he had 'solid role player potential' .

[mctyson]

I want either Murray of Hield, at #4, after a trade down with Phoenix to get their other lottery pick so we can take Poetl.