Publisher Thomas Nelson
Not as good as Ashley's NICOT volume in my opinion, but still a good commentary, which spends more time on critical issues Ashley, but sometimes gets a little distracted from doing interpretation. Also, the WBC format is less accessible that NICOT. But, for a scholarly, critical commentary, I do like this one.
Philip Budd's WBC (1984) is not as well regarded as many other entries in the series. It is being replaced in the next year or so by a new WBC by John Sailhamer. Budd is heavily focused on linguistic and source-critical issues, spending not as much time on other concerns. He thinks the book was put together in the post-exilic period with the priestly/temple concerns of that period in mind. Budd is interested in the history of interpretation, which you won't find as much of in most commentaries. He does treat theology to some degree, but his reconstruction of the context of the book probably makes that less useful to those like me who take the book to be directed toward a much earlier period. In any case, he does not generally receive high marks from reviewers on his biblical theology, which is what I think is most helpful in a commentary. [Full Review]
Important exegetical commentary with awareness of the critical issues. [Full Review]