I’d take Jabari over Ivey. I don’t like the fit with Green as neither are natural playmakers. I’d rather a true PG that can make Green better. A lot of redundancy in the backcourt and it could be an awkward fit. I could see a lot of iso ball. Ivey shot 9% this year from 10-15 feet out which is alarming. I think Jabari’s elite 3 point shooting and defensive upside is well worth #3 and a much better fit with Green.
How is Banchero more efficient? How do you define efficiency? FT shooting is a big part of being an efficient scorer. Ask James Harden. Even if you want to discount free throws, Smith's eFG% is still slightly higher than Banchero because the 3pt shot is more efficient unless your 2pt% is at the high-50% range. I am not saying that Jabari is a better player than Paolo. Paolo has other dimensions that Jabari doesn't have (and vice versa). But if you talk about scoring efficiency, the numbers are clear.
I actually prefer Paolo over Chet and Jabari. I feel like the ability to create offense for yourself and other is the most valuable NBA skill for foundational players (and you want a foundational piece with the 3rd pick). We can fill out shooting + defense role players around him.
I don't need to bring in any kind of advanced stats to know that shooting .429 for the year is toward the bottom of the league in terms of efficiency and that's a fact. If you are shooting that poorly, something is wrong. Jabari clearly has the edge on 3 point shooting and defense but at the end of the day he shot the worst 2% of any top 5 prospect in the last decade. First we have to look at true shooting percentage since it relies heavily on 3 point shots to make a case for Jabari. Consider the volume of 3 pointers Jabari shot. Almost half of his attempts were from 3. That will heavily influence TS% but no one is arguing he shoots 3 pointers well. How did that work for him in the tournament? What was his second option? Even when you factor everything slanted toward Jabari's obvious strength, its not like they Banchero was far behind. TS% .570 vs TS% 557. Their free throw rates weren't really that dissimilar. Jabari's .384 to Paolo's .366 It is also conceivable that these fouls leading to free throws happened all over the floor, not just attacking the rim. So after bringing up TS% which plays to Jabari's strength as much as possible and claiming that as the standard for efficiency, your argument is literally one percentage point in regards to eFG%. Paolo's .520 to Jabari's .521 lol it made me chuckle. We all know Jabari is an amazing 3 point shooter and it certainly helps him with these stats. It also becomes clear that Banchero is better by far at every other aspect of scoring. What is his second option as a scorer outside of shooting 3s? To be frank, ff Jabari had no 3 point shot, I'm not sure a 6'10 dude that shoots .430 from inside the arc even gets drafted. But here we are talking about the #1 pick. The other thing about efficiency is the ability to score efficiently at multiple levels and to create efficient offense. Banchero is the only player of the two who creates for others. If you consider how much Jabari scored off teammate assist % relative to Banchero, it is crazy that Banchero shot a better overall percentage and even came close in TS%. One of those guys scored efficiently creating his own shot. That is a big difference. The advanced stats will tell you pretty much what we already know. Jabari is efficient on a high volume of 3 pointers and terrible everywhere else on the floor. At the end of the day Banchero scored 17 ppg on .478 and Jabari did it on .429. If he is truly that good at 3 point shots then he is truly bad enough in other areas to where is overall efficiency is completely tanked. Thems the facts and a marginal difference in free throw shooting isn't going to make up for a disparity that large.
What? Since when have Klay and KD been considered mediocre defenders? Klay was an All Defensive 2nd teamer. He’s the ultimate 3&D player. KD is no slouch either. With his length and athleticism, he can bother anybody’s shot. Their only weakness is Curry.
TS% and EFG% are also better indicators of efficiency as well. There a few counting stats that favor Paolo over Jabari but ever advanced stat favors Jabari over Paolo. https://www.tankathon.com/players/compare?players=paolo-banchero--jabari-smith TS% Jabari .570 > Paolo .557 EFG% Jabari .521 > Paolo .520 FT% Jabari .799 > Paolo .729 3P% Jabari .420 > Paolo .334 PER Jabari 25.1 > Paolo 24.2 WS/40 Jabari .229 > Paolo .190 BPM Jabari 11.1 > Paolo 7.7 ORTG Jabari 116.5 > Paolo 113.8 DRTG Jabari 90.7 > Paolo 98.1
That is 1 area. Every other efficiency stat favors Jabari. You are exaggerating for effect now. Your argument can go the other way, Jabari was so inefficient shooting at 2P% it is a wonder that his 3P% is so elite that his TS% and eFG% was still higher than Paolo.
I get it. So your measurement of efficiency is FG%. That's not how you measure efficiency. TS% is a fairly simple advanced stat that approximates how many points you generate by taking a shot. Simply put, if you can score the same amount of points by taking fewer shots, you are more efficient. Again, I am not saying that Jabari is a better player than Paolo. And believe me, I am a vocal critic of the no-midrange offensive philosophy. But I understand scoring efficiency. Your claim that Banchero is more efficient is just not true. Actually, Jabari and Paolo would fit perfectly. Too bad we can't have them both.
This should end argument of who is most efficient. Clearly. Especially if the argument is that shots at rim are most important. 2nd most important shot is the 3P.
As you know, 3 point shots are worth more than 2 point shots is what eFG% is accounting for. To be devils advocate for a moment, if there were only 2 pointers Jabari would have less overall points per game than Banchero so in a way those shots are already reflected in the player's average. I’m not saying the importance of 3 point shooting shouldn’t be properly weighted. What I’m saying is that Banchero simply made more shots at a better rate. Not only did he make more shots but he maintained a better shooting percentage with more volume. You can argue that I’m just further explaining why 3 pointers are more efficient shots because you can average the same total points with less shots. I get that. Heres the thing. What I want to see out of a prospect is the ability to score in a variety of ways. Skill matters quite a bit in basketball. 2 point shooting % is one stat but there are numerous skills involved here. This includes the entire midrange game as well as layups, floaters, finishing through contact, dunking, being a lob threat, scoring in transition, hook shots you get the point. Chet is a very good lob threat and those kinds of plays are the epitome of efficiency. If this weren’t the case, why does the #1 TS% in the entire league belong to a guy who shoots exactly 0 3s per game? Like, if you are 6’10 isn’t it important to have that wrinkle in your game? Not only is Chet extremely efficient scoring at the rim, he is also a 40% 3 point shooter and he’s a better playmaker AND he’s likely a better defender. Wouldn’t you rather a more well rounded player who still shoots 3’s at a good clip? Who’s to say Chet won’t improve as a 3 point shooter? How can you possibly make the argument that Jabari is a better prospect than Chet unless the added volume on 3 pointers is really that significant? Banchero can finish layups with either hand. He has an arsenal of moves. Those things are really hard to learn. There are innumerable things to master inside the arc and it is a critical part of basketball games. So many superstars developed from the inside out but seldom it works the other direction. There are stars that are not great 3 point shooters, seldom are there stars that can’t convert efficiently on 2 point shots. I trust Banchero to improve his 3 point shot because more often than not players get better at shooting 3’s with work and his shooting form is fine. Look at the graph and notice what I said earlier about his shooting from the corners. Banchero shot .525 inside the arc and 70% at the rim. Those skills he used to score that efficiently tends to translate well at the NBA level. He created way more for himself than Jabari. I think that also needs to be accounted for. Whether those are good or bad shots, he took and converted more shots at a higher clip than Jabari. I’ll leave it to an NBA coach to put him in a position to succeed as a scorer. As a prospect I want to see what he can do and how he can score. One guy is obviously more skilled than the other guy. The ability to generate your own offense as well as offense for others is important. Paolo needs to work on his 3 point shot but he isn’t historically bad at anything. Some of those skills inside the arc are very hard to develop. It is also not easy to develop as a ball handler. It is also hard to develop a way to reliably create your own offense. Developing as a passer might be the hardest trait to develop. How is Jabari going to develop all of those things? Based on his percentages inside the arc he is extremely raw in a lot of areas that require the development of a lot of different skills that he just doesn’t have. I’d rather take the guy who already has those skills and is a natural passer. In time he will be even better at those things. I’ll take my chances his jumper improves and he plays defense at some point in his career. Its not like he doesn’t have the tools and his shooting form is already solid. Does Jabari have another skill on offense after shooting 3 pointers? I legitimately want to know. To me at least, the weaknesses aren’t of the same magnitude. This whole conversation started by examining Banchero’s midrange game and rim scoring. It is only fair that we look at both players 2%. There are holes in both players games but the holes in Jabari’s game are either some of the hardest things to learn or he is just so bad at it that it’s bizarre. When you are selecting #1 I don’t know why that wouldn’t at least give you pause. Paolo doesn’t have holes like that. Neither does Chet. It is bizarre to advocate for a guy who shot 18% in an elimination game to go #1 in the draft. Especially when the other guy shot 80% against the same team. If you shoot 18% in a tournament game when you are supposed to be the best player on the floor I think its appropriate to ask questions. Paolo has a much more diversified offense and you can’t take him out of his game by limiting one thing. If the 3 point shot is taken away how does Jabari help the offense? I can’t think of anything else that isn’t incredibly raw.
I completely agree with this. I also feel like Banchero wasn't used properly at Duke, which may have somehow decreased his value. I think he fits better with the Rockets than he did with Duke.
Considering the added weight of 3 point shooting it can logically be argued that for every made 3 point shot it would require multiple made 2 point shots. Their eFG% is one decimal point from each other. It can really go either way. The efficiency needed on the volume of shots from 2 pointers is greater than the volume of 3 point shots. Unless you are saying 3 point shooting is a harder skill to master or harder in general which would make the shot less efficient, it would be significantly harder to match the eFG% of a 3 point shooter with 2 point volume shooting than the other way around. That is why 3 point shots are supposed to be better shots. Paolo scored enough shots on way more volume to equal the eFG% of an elite 3 point shooter. All Jabari had to do was shoot a decent percentage from 2 to nullify this whole argument. The alternative is that Jabari had to have missed a higher volume of 2 point shots to bring his TS% to that level. Either way you look at it, Paolo made more shots on more volume. 2% is one area but it accounts for a lot of different skills that aren't needed in 3 point shots. Some of these skills like scoring at the rim should be extremely efficient shots, other skills determine how you can score on a fast break or what kind of layup package you possess or how you finish through contact or can you score downhill as a ball handler or do you have a reliable midrange game or what is your footwork like? I'm willing to bet that if your form is promising, consistently getting better at 3 point shooting is easier than learning all of the skills needed to take all of the 2 point shots Banchero made. The gap between them is significant. We are comparing an efficient 2 point scorer to a highly inefficient 2 point scorer. To get those skills as well as playmaking to Banchero's current level would take a long time. You can pretty much forget about doing any of those things at an elite level. As I mentioned before, there are stars that are bad 3 point shooters and great inside the arc. I can't name many that are the opposite. Again we are projecting upside and stars usually grow from the inside out not the other way around. If Jabari doesn't have those things in his game and he is as raw as the stats tell us, I'd feel a lot more comfortable if he could reliably make plays for others or reliably handle the ball enough to convince me he can create separation at the NBA level. Its just there are multiple weaknesses that compound the issue and if all he does is shoot 3's there will be games where he shoots 18% from the floor. As we blow over all of these glaring weaknesses that no one has any answer for, is it possible we are overvaluing 3 point shooting here? Considering Chet is also good from 3 with room to grow but also has an extremely efficient game in the paint where efficiency is king, I don't understand why you wouldn't want the prospect that does more things well. I can't think of an argument that puts Jabari above Chet. The NBA can value 3 point shooting and switchable defense as the most important things in the modern NBA and talk themselves into Jabari, yet there is a forward leading his team to 2 finals wins and averaging double digit assists in those wins. This is the modern NBA and if you can get your hands on a guy who has some of those traits or can play a similar role in your offense, you do it. There is only one guy that has the chance to do that and you have to gamble on upside. Paolo is 6'10 250 with comparable skills and tendencies. I really believe we are overthinking this and sometimes the most obvious answer is right in front of us. Thats my opinion at least.
You are for sure winning the argument here. The biggest take away is whose skill set will likely translate over the nba better? Jabari will likely be game planned for knowing he can’t score inside and will face much better defenses. His Efficiency will likely diminish as that is his only skill set and improving is 2% would require way more time and talent to bridge the gap between him and banchero. However banchero has a more versatile 2 point game that will allow him to maintain his efficiency by adapting to situations and defenses and it isn’t a singular skill set. He then only has to improve in one facet of the game, 3 pt shooting, to be a wildly better and efficient offensive player.
<Points produced has entered the chat> ... they keep saying this year's draft wont be as good as last years. Not so sure myself. Banchero = 665 pts Chet = 424 pts Jabari = 519 pts Ivey = 586 pts Last year of college: Cade = 518 pts Mobley = 532 pts Barnes = 283 pts Suggs = 454 pts
The only way Paolo fans will admit there is a better player than Paolo is If only there was someone this year that scored more than Paolo, was more efficient on 2 pointers, made more 2s, more efficient from 3, made more 3s, more efficient from the FT line, and made more FTs. Even then, it is unlikely Paolo fans would admit such player was better than Paolo. Edit: This isn't to say I hate Paolo. I don't view him in the same tier as Jabari and Chet, and he will likely be hard to build around similar to Sengun. As others view the odds of him being great in the NBA as much higher than myself, I'd value what the No. 3 pick in a trade to likely be more valuable than Paolo.
I don't know why you keep saying "if the 3 point" is taken away. You might as well say that if the dribbling is taken away. The 3pt shot is part of basketball and an important part in today's NBA. This is why 3pt shooters are in such a high demand, and bad 3pt shooters create spacing problems for every team. I actually agree with most of what you say. Like I said, I am not saying Jabari is a better player than Paolo. But you use the term "efficient" which means something when we talk basketball. Capela is a more efficient scorer than Harden. But nobody claims that Capela is the better player. Chet would clearly be the best prospect in this class if not for his body frame. Banchero would be the best prospect if not for his questionable defensive and 3pt shooting weaknesses. Jabari would be the best prospect if not for his lack of handle. All of them are great talents. All of them have real concerns that may render them a role player (or even a short career in Chet's case) rather than a cornerstone.
