I doubt Luka has ever been passive and Luka is just a more improvisational and natural scorer as well as a more instinctual playmaker. 95% of college athletes are not passive, especially basketball ball players that have the hype that Banchero does, this is not a knock on Banchero at all it just shows me he will do whatever the team needs. Chet is definitely more passive and Smith as well I am much more worried about those 2.
He is a below average rim protector. But you already knew that. Do your Tucker Carlson schtick with someone else.
He is not a C and should not asked to play C for defensive purposes so why does rim protection matter so much to you? Since you like RAPM so much and think rim protection s so important check this out. "The analytic numbers are actually fairly kind to Banchero. His defensive RAPM is in the top eleven in this class! His on-off impact was much greater for Duke’s defense than that of Mark Williams. While stats like this do have some flaws and outliers from time, the presence of such a number makes it hard to say that Banchero is a poor defender — or at least one that would make it costly for his team to have him out there." Do you really think Rim protection is more important than shot creation and playmaking? The myth that Banchero is a liability on defense has been shattered yet you keeping on rim protection it really makes no sense. WTF does Tucker Carlson have to do with me continuing to bring facts to this discussion? Would you not take Tatum or Brown because of rim protection?
I don't know that Chet is really that passive on defense though. He's constantly doing a lot of little things that don't show up in the box score. Offensively I understand he can be passive but on defense he's anything but passive and his ability to constantly gauge where he is in relation to the ball and put himself in the best position is impressive. Some players just put their stamp on the game when it matters most, especially big games. I see that in Banchero. Jabari has come up short. Game to game though, being consistent with rebounding and defense, looking to make plays and not taking plays off, I'd say Chet is pretty active.
I'm talking about offense obviously, I have no issue with Chet's defense I just question if it will be as valuable in the NBA because he will be going up against much more skilled and better athletes. I value perimeter defense much more than rim protection, yes its a plus but it's not what I am looking for at the top of the draft, I question Chet's ability to guard on the perimeter in crunch time but I am not saying he can't do it at a plus level.
Hard to imagine Banchero couldn’t be Tatum considering there is a very real argument that he performed better in college. It’s not as if Tatum was the consensus #1 pick. Boston’s best player is a forward who had 13 assists in a game one finals victory.
how a player performs in college isn't really that indicative of what happens at the next level of the nba. There's a reason why a lot of players who can seemingly play at a high level in college, yet are not even nba caliber players
I agree but what are we looking at to make assessments and projections? I think it makes more sense for me at least to take a guy that consistently shows up in big games instead of a guy who shot .188 in an elimination game on a team that was the clear favorite.
you look at what they are able to do individually to make assessments and projections. that's what makes them capable of being at the nba level and being able to translate that while taking the chance there's more to see. comparing situations that are different and corresponding roles which is also significantly different, isn't much of an indication of what lies ahead moving forward
I have never really seen a good comprehensive article on the stats correlation on this. I'm sure there's tons of nuance, and I'm sure the teams have all kinds of data. Eg. by year/age, by each individual category of performance (all offensive items, all defensive items), by conference, by strength of teammates and opponents, by position, by height, by reach, by speed, by upbringing, by likelihood of specific type of skill improvement, you name it... When that RAPM tweet came out the other day, some dude was quick to followup to note the R-squared on RAPM college to pros is pretty low, although the DRAPM had the highest correlation (think R-squared was like 28% on that... which is still low). Surprised there isn't somewhere to get this data summarized...not that it should be the be-all, end-all as I'm sure there are TONS and TONS of exceptions to the data, but as a good thing to consider in one's analysis, especially if talking about VERY closely rated players.
I like Spinella but he's been a Banchero shill to an extreme. Low effort and lack of focus are huge red flags to coaches but he dismisses it ... just because. DRAPM is a good advanced stat but it's just ONE stat, not the end all and be all. All advanced stats should confirm one another as well as counting stats to eliminate any mitigating factors. For example, Chet checks EVERY advanced stat AND counting stat box, especially on defense, which confirms the eye test. It's easy to build false narratives by basing conclusions on ONE stat. For example, list of top 10 DRTG: Chet Holmgren 78.7 Walker Kessler 83.0 Tari Eason 83.2 Christian Koloko 88.6 Jaylin Williams 89.3 Jeremy Sochan 89.8 Jabari Smith Jr 90.7 Peyton Watson 91.6 Jalen Duren 91.9 Kennedy Chandler 92.1 Next best 10 (top 20): Andrew Nembhard 93.0 Mark Williams 93.2 Josh Minott 93.7 Jabari Walker 93.8 Kofi Cockburn 94.2 Dalen Terry 94.6 Kendall Brown 95.2 Johnny Davis 95.8 Josh Laravia 95.9 Keegan Murray 96.8 Ben Mathurin 96.8 Next best 10 (top 30): Christian Braun 96.9 David Roddy 97.0 Julian Champagnie 97.5 Justin Lewis 97.6 Paolo Bachero 98.1 Alondes Williams 98.2 TyTy Washington 98.4 Ochai Agbaji 99.0 Johnny Juzang 99.3 Jordan Hall 99.7 Below top 30: EJ Liddell 100.0 Blake Wesley 101.1 Wendell Moore 101.2 Ron Harper Jr 101.7 Michael Foster Jr 102.1 AJ Griffin 102.3 Jaden Ivey 102.5 Jalen Williams 102.6 Patrick Baldwin Jr 102.7 Iverson Molinar 103.1 Trevor Keels 103.2 Moussa Diabate 104.1
If you are in college and you don’t have a role that allows you to take over a game and will your team to a win, it’s very difficult to see that changing in the hardest league in the world. This is a discussion about the #1 overall pick. I don’t know why you’d want a player who either A. Is incapable of doing it so he’s put in a different role or B. Disappears when the pressure is on. Are we just saying he was a role player in college? And if we don’t look at specific games or even numbers for these guys this season, what do we have to go on? Looking at the individual skills of a player? In that case I’m going with the guy who’s more skilled. I don’t mean to be this harsh on Jabari. I like him a lot but the #1 pick is an extremely high standard. There are no excuses. I can’t think of one #1 overall pick in the history of the league who was relegated to a role that prohibited him from leading a team and taking over games. The number of excuses for a guy who was inefficient the entire year and didn’t show up in the biggest moments is interesting. I’m really being told not to bring up stats, players who actually have a history of winning and showing up in games don’t count and one player being more skilled than another at the same age makes no difference. I’m not saying Banchero will translate but I’m taking that shot considering we’ll likely never be in this spot again for the foreseeable future. If Paolo is Marcus Morris we are going to wish we drafted Mikal Bridges. I just don’t think that kind of player is worth #1 and it historically has never been worth that. I think Jabari has the highest floor and will be the most immediate impact guy but a lot of people are banking on a ton of hypotheticals that we’ve never seen. In many of those instances, all we’ve seen is the exact opposite of what we want to see in a league where the #1 overall pick should and historically has dominated.
Tucker Carlson double talk - pure bullshet. "I'm not saying, just saying ... I'm just asking questions." Paolo is an underrated perimeter defender, not good on switches and late to recognize rotations mainly because he is not engaged, but he has upside in this area - however Chet is still the better perimeter defender and much better in switch and rotation because he is longer, higher IQ defensively but most importantly he is locked in and high effort on this side of ball.
So why do you think NBA teams have Jabari (and even Chet) ranked higher than Paolo? Are all these NBA teams just incompetent? Going by what we've read on CF shouldn't Paolo be the unanimous #1 overall like Cade was last draft?
I mean the players that end up being the best players in the league aren't always the ones who "take over a game". Again how a legit nba prospect performs in college isn't that indicative of what he could become at the next level. People take how these guy play on their respective teams and their roles way too literally. They shouldn't. Once again it's not about what they did or how they played for Duke, Zaga, Auburn etc. that makes them elite prospects. A ton of players are able to "take over" games in college but are no where near nba caliber players. It's what they can already do individually as players and what they can potentially add onto that, that makes these guys top picks to be able to translate to the next level.
