The Case for Buddy

[Lipoli390]

I like Dunn, Murray and Hield at #5. I've gone back and forth as I've read more and looked repeatedly at their highlight videos and college stats. I'd be happy with any of those three, but my final verdict has Hield as my favorite.

In a nutshell, it boils down to this. He brings an elite skill to the table day one -- 3-point shooting -- and that skill is a critical one in today's NBA as well as a skill particularly missing from the Wolves roster. Buddy is an elite perimeter shooter with terrific length for his position and good athleticism. Of the three, he's proven to be the best shooter and he has the biggest wing span. He appears to be a better athlete than Murray. All three are known to have good character, but Buddy seems to have the most exceptional work ethic. I like that he kept improving every year. I also like that, unlike Dunn, he doesn't have any injury history.

Interestingly, Buddy's stats last year compare favorably to Klay's stats in his last year of college ball. In nearly the same number of minutes, Buddy had more points per game (25 v. 21.6), slightly more rebounds (5.7 v. 5.2), a substantially better FG% (50.1 v. 43.6) and a significantly better 3-point percentage (45.7% v. 39.8%). Buddy had more 3-point attempts (8.7 v. 7.2) and the same number of free throw attempts. Buddy also had slightly fewer turnovers (3.1 v. 3.4). Klay's only significant statistical edge was assists (3.7 v. 2.0). Buddy has shown NBA range in college and his release is every bit as quick as Klay's.

There appear to be two raps on Buddy - his age and defense. I think the age thing is way overblown. Age matters more in the absence of production. But Buddy has produced and done so at an elite level as a shooter. And I think his rebounding has been glossed over. 5.4 rebounds from a college SG is impressive and bodes well for production beyond scoring at the NBA level. Defensively, I think Buddy's being way undervalued. He has a terrific wing span and he's athletic enough to grab 5.7 rebounds a game. He's a hard worker and very coachable. So I think he'll end up becoming a good defender in the NBA, especially under a coach like Thibs.

Klay Thompson is the 2nd or 3rd best player on the best or second best team in the League. Looking at what Buddy has produced in college, comparing his stats to Klay's college stats and considering Buddy's length, work ethic, high character and spotless health record, I think he emerges as the best of the three and the guy the Wolves should take at #5.

[Shumway]

Thanks for the perspective Lip.

I had been just starting to lean towards Murray, but maybe you have me back with Hield.

As a few people have mentioned, there seem to be a great range of really intriguing and quite compelling options... Hield, Murray, Dunn, Bender, trade for any number of intriguing options.

I just can't decide.

[Lipoli390]

Shumway -- Although I favor taking Buddy, I can honestly say I'd be very happy with Dunn or Murray. I just don't have a good feel for Bender, but if the Wolves take him I have enough confidence in Thibs to get excited about that pick as well.

[KiwiMatt]

For me it's between Hield and Murray and I'll be stoked with either. I think both will be great players.

[BizarroJerry [enjin:6592520]]

Well said Lip. I agree completely. I also believe he has a presence and leadership quality that would be contagious. Go back and listen to what Thorpe said about how much the fans loved him. It's gonna happen tonight!

[Mr. Brightside [enjin:16464947]]

I've been saying his floor is a more athletic Redick and his ceiling is Thompson. Dude will be a stud.

[bleedspeed]

I am going to break up this Buddy love fest. I think 5 is to early for him. I think he is a bench player moving forward. I think at 5 we are looking at Bender, Murray, or Brown. I hope Dunn or Chriss goes before us.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

Well stated Lip.

I think we could all write a pretty good argument for any number of guys that will likely be available at #5. I can get behind a few different options, although Brown, Chriss, and Bender are the three guys I'd be leery about, but for different reasons.

Brown I just don't think will be very good. Chriss and Bender seem like home run swings, meaning they could eventually be very good, but a) it will take a few years to get there, and b) they may end up as busts. I certainly wouldn't want either of these two in the top 8 or 9 of our rotation next season. We would need to play the long game with them.

Murray, Hield, and Dunn all seem capable of playing rotation minutes next season, but hopefully we don't find ourselves in a position where any of them would have to step into a starting role due to injuries. None seem capable of that as rookies.

[AbeVigodaLive]

While I dig Hield and would welcome him on the Wolves for many of the reasons Lip outlined... it's a bit dangerous to draw favorable comparisons to a 2-time All NBA player just based on college stats, right?

I dunno. Maybe I'm just not knowledgeable enough about these college kids, but it's such a crapshoot most of the time. And we can't assume they'll all improve and progress on the same trajectory with each other... or players before them.

Regardless of work ethic. Some guys get there... others don't. Simple as that.

[khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]]

While I dig Hield and would welcome him on the Wolves for many of the reasons Lip outlined... it's a bit dangerous to draw favorable comparisons to a 2-time All NBA player just based on college stats, right?

I dunno. Maybe I'm just not knowledgeable enough about these college kids, but it's such a crapshoot most of the time. And we can't assume they'll all improve and progress on the same trajectory with each other... or players before them.

Regardless of work ethic. Some guys get there... others don't. Simple as that.

So do you just think we shouldn't compare guys to anyone then? Or bother with projections? You basically treat it like a total crapshoot so why bother thinking about what they might look like at the next level. Just pick a name out of a hat because we don't know how or if the guy we would have picked anyway would pan out or not and the hat guy has just as good a chance. Otherwise it's not a total crapshoot if you believe players are in different tiers in terms of whether they can make it or not and it makes sense to try to use as much data as possible including player comparisons at the same time in development to try to make the best pick.