Minnesota Sports Forum

Hield's been one of the top players in college ball all season

mrhockey89 wrote:

TRKO wrote:I think what I like most about Hield is that he worked his butt off to really improve his game. You want players like that on your team. He would greatly improve the bench as well. A ton of options for the wolves to go in the draft.

Ricky needs a Buddy.

In all honesty though, Buddy might be able to start over LaVine due to high basketball IQ, overall game, and defense. Either way, we'd be in good shape in our backcourt going forward if we had a rotation including Rubio, LaVine, Tyus, and Hield.

We'd remain thin at forward depth, but there are bigs you can get to fill in those backup roles out there.

Ehh, I wouldn't go that far, especially with what we've seen from LaVine as the starting SG. He's not only producing volume offense with good/great efficiency, his defense is improving with every game. He also has multiple physical advantages over Hield.

I like Hield and he has grown on me over the course of the college season, but LaVine might be a decade-plus starter at SG for us moving forward. His game just keeps taking positive leaps. He also just turned 21 and has two years of NBA experience. Hield turns 23 next December as a rookie.

Camden wrote:

mrhockey89 wrote:

TRKO wrote:I think what I like most about Hield is that he worked his butt off to really improve his game. You want players like that on your team. He would greatly improve the bench as well. A ton of options for the wolves to go in the draft.

Ricky needs a Buddy.

In all honesty though, Buddy might be able to start over LaVine due to high basketball IQ, overall game, and defense. Either way, we'd be in good shape in our backcourt going forward if we had a rotation including Rubio, LaVine, Tyus, and Hield.

We'd remain thin at forward depth, but there are bigs you can get to fill in those backup roles out there.

Ehh, I wouldn't go that far, especially with what we've seen from LaVine as the starting SG. He's not only producing volume offense with good/great efficiency, his defense is improving with every game. He also has multiple physical advantages over Hield.

I like Hield and he has grown on me over the course of the college season, but LaVine might be a decade-plus starter at SG for us moving forward. His game just keeps taking positive leaps. He also just turned 21 and has two years of NBA experience. Hield turns 23 next December as a rookie.

I am very happy with what we've seen of LaVine in the 2nd half of this season, but I do take issue with a couple things you mentioned. To say LaVine's defense has been improving really isn't saying much, and it's arguable as well. As much as LaVine has improved greatly this season, it's all been on the offensive end. LaVine is taller and longer than Hield, I'll give you that, but LaVine will never have as much strength as Hield, and Hield is clearly already a much better defender than LaVine. The other thing I think he has on LaVine is basketball IQ. He's older, yes, but he's also NBA ready.

The Wolves offense is not a problem, but getting an offensive threat like Hield who can also play defense. To me though, it's not about whether he starts or LaVine stars, that will sort itself out. The more important thing is that we'd have another guy who can CLEARLY become a net positive for the team whenever he's on the floor going forward. We need more net positive players on this team so that we can build a winning squad.

Camden wrote:One game shouldn't alter how you see a prospect. See: Andrew Wiggins vs Stanford (2014).

It hasn't been just one game. He's been on another level all season. Its just icing on the cake seeing him elevate his game in the tournament. I think he was always in the conversation as the 5th or 6th best guy since midseason, but after seeing him really step up today and seeing others like Brown flop, he'll definitely be in the conversation now for 3rd overall.

TeamRicky wrote:

Camden wrote:One game shouldn't alter how you see a prospect. See: Andrew Wiggins vs Stanford (2014).

It hasn't been just one game. He's been on another level all season. Its just icing on the cake seeing him elevate his game in the tournament. I think he was always in the conversation as the 5th or 6th best guy since midseason, but after seeing him really step up today and seeing others like Brown flop, he'll definitely be in the conversation now for 3rd overall.

Hield does have that big moment gene. He seems to rise to the occasion late in games and in big games. That is my perception and I have done zero research to back it up.

If we keep the pick we have to pick our highest rated guy despite position. Injuries do happen. Regression does happen. Better players are easier to trade for needs to. If Hield is their highest rated player, then they need to pick him and have the rest sort itself out.

For the Wolves to pick a shooting guard that player has to be a no-brainer of a talent over the next guy down because the Wolves have 2 guys to play there in Lavine and Wiggins. I've never read that Buddy is any type of special defender so I wouldn't get to excited about him clearly being better than Lavine there. 2-3 years from now Lavine could look like Doug Christe and be plenty physically gifted enough to defend.

Now let's talk about what I like about Heild based on what I have seen in this tourney. He seems to pick his spots he doesn't just force things. That's a very good skill and as it has been mentioned high BBIQ. He deserves all the credit in the world for taking his game to this level. How much higher can he go? I wouldn't put him as a top 3 and maybe not even top 5 but that's my opinion and I value some guys higher it's not a knock on Buddy.

If Hield was a great defender he'd be guaranteed the 3rd best prospect in the draft because of his shooting prowess. His age wouldn't even matter. That would be an elite 3 and D wing right out of the gate. His defense isn't that good. He has good length, but he is far from having the athleticism to be an elite defender.

mrhockey89 wrote:

Camden wrote:

mrhockey89 wrote:

TRKO wrote:I think what I like most about Hield is that he worked his butt off to really improve his game. You want players like that on your team. He would greatly improve the bench as well. A ton of options for the wolves to go in the draft.

Ricky needs a Buddy.

In all honesty though, Buddy might be able to start over LaVine due to high basketball IQ, overall game, and defense. Either way, we'd be in good shape in our backcourt going forward if we had a rotation including Rubio, LaVine, Tyus, and Hield.

We'd remain thin at forward depth, but there are bigs you can get to fill in those backup roles out there.

Ehh, I wouldn't go that far, especially with what we've seen from LaVine as the starting SG. He's not only producing volume offense with good/great efficiency, his defense is improving with every game. He also has multiple physical advantages over Hield.

I like Hield and he has grown on me over the course of the college season, but LaVine might be a decade-plus starter at SG for us moving forward. His game just keeps taking positive leaps. He also just turned 21 and has two years of NBA experience. Hield turns 23 next December as a rookie.

I am very happy with what we've seen of LaVine in the 2nd half of this season, but I do take issue with a couple things you mentioned. To say LaVine's defense has been improving really isn't saying much, and it's arguable as well. As much as LaVine has improved greatly this season, it's all been on the offensive end. LaVine is taller and longer than Hield, I'll give you that, but LaVine will never have as much strength as Hield, and Hield is clearly already a much better defender than LaVine. The other thing I think he has on LaVine is basketball IQ. He's older, yes, but he's also NBA ready.

The Wolves offense is not a problem, but getting an offensive threat like Hield who can also play defense. To me though, it's not about whether he starts or LaVine stars, that will sort itself out. The more important thing is that we'd have another guy who can CLEARLY become a net positive for the team whenever he's on the floor going forward. We need more net positive players on this team so that we can build a winning squad.

I think defensive improvement of any kind is a big deal, especially for a second year player that is often at a weight/strength disadvantage in his position matchup. His improvement has come in technique and defensive IQ. I don't think this should be ignored because his potential on defense is high despite the fact that we don't talk about it.

Also, there's no way that Hield is a better NBA defender than LaVine is right now. You can't compare defending college guards to NBA guards. If I recall correctly, LaVine's isolation defense was pretty good statistically in college as he forced opponents to shoot less than 30% from the field against him (fact check me on the exact number). Hield will have a learning curve to overcome as he enters the league just as LaVine and all rookies have. Lastly, being NBA-ready does not beat having NBA experience. LaVine will have two years of taking lumps to learn from as he enters next year. I'd bet his defense only better and better as he gets stronger, which he will.

As for your comparison of their bodies (strength), it's not really a fair criticism, IMO. Hield's had four years of participating in a college weight room program. He entered OU as a 6'4, 185 freshman and he's now 214 lbs. LaVine showed up to UCLA at 6'5, 180 lbs, according to their team website. He played at that weight his rookie season in the NBA and has since added ten pounds. He just turned 21. Still has a lot of time to improve his body and I'd argue he has a better frame to work with than Hield does.

Note: I'm not anti-Hield. As I said previously, he's really grown on me, but LaVine's making big leaps in production and understanding of the game. He's still my preferred SG of the future moving forward, no disrespect to Hield.

Yeah most guys right out of college struggle on the defensive end no matter their skill set. It just takes time. Hield has a great skill set for a league that emphasizes three point shooting. Personally if we go with the G and both Hield and Murray are there I take Murray. He has the higher upside and by all accounts is a high character guy too. I think both bring the same element to the team. Would love to have either one on my team.

TeamRicky wrote:

Camden wrote:One game shouldn't alter how you see a prospect. See: Andrew Wiggins vs Stanford (2014).

It hasn't been just one game. He's been on another level all season. Its just icing on the cake seeing him elevate his game in the tournament. I think he was always in the conversation as the 5th or 6th best guy since midseason, but after seeing him really step up today and seeing others like Brown flop, he'll definitely be in the conversation now for 3rd overall.

I agree, he has been in the discussion for top-five after his remarkable and historic college regular season, but you're willing to move him up to top-three after his game today, as you just said in the quoted post. I don't think that's how executives think and operate their big board. Same goes for Jaylen Brown. If you liked him a lot based on his season's work and what you think he might be at the next level, then watching him struggle severely against Hawaii and Utah shouldn't greatly impact your thoughts on his as a prospect. Judge a player based on his season, not by a game here or a game there. Hield could have shot 1-30 today from the field and I'd still say he's a consideration in the top five. Am I making my point clear or is there a different way I need to put this?