re: Combine Thread

quote:

---

They don't call it a crapshoot for nothing. Hield, based on his athleticism and other measurables are close to maxed out.

---

Then by this logic Murray's ceiling is below what Hield is at right now. After all, Murray has similar athleticism, a smaller frame and shorter height/wingspan.

But we know that isnt the case. There is no hard and fast rule that a person with X athleticism and height has a hard ceiling. Hield is boringly average in most of his measurables. Murray, slightly below average. Yet the case is being made that the guy with less measurables will develop into a better Buddy Hield?

That is where this logic gets a bit lost on me. It seems to stem solely from the assumption Murray will project out on a similarly strong trajectory and push past Hield over the long term. I'm not convinced because I haven't seen Murray prove he can do that yet. Hield I have. Which is a pretty important component of NBA transition, the ability to improve and round out your game.

History honestly doesnt have a ton of Buddy Hield's to compare him with. Most of these 4 year busts are guys that didn't do what Hield did while still having NBA measurables. Nylon Calculus has done a couple investigations and he seems to be in some interesting, elite company in terms of 2 year plus SG's, but like everything in the lottery, the data also contains a couple less flattering case studies.


This is again, all to say I like both guys and they are much closer to me then apart in terms of my preference.