Usually teams with the most talent win the most. Why Duke and Banchero aren't getting lambasted for not winning it all and being labeled as chokers is beyond me. Ivey and Jabari get tagged as such. Duke has a chance to have 5 players drafted in the first round this year: Banchero (top 5) AJ Griffin (top 10) Mark Williams (top 20) Wendell Moore (top 20) Keels (first round?) How do you key or double team a player? Very carefully as Wendell Moore and AJ Griffin were deadly 3-pt shooters (40+%) and Mark Williams was a lob threat. Banchero was ranked 6th on the team with points or FGA's in the paint. 5th was Mark Williams. I'm sure you will find AJ Griffin and Wendell Moore with higher percentages (as shorter players) And it takes two to tango as it takes two to get assists. If teammates don't put the ball through the hoop......no assist. No matter how fancy the pass is.
Did not advocate for Chet over Paolo because he took easier shots. I advocate for Chet. Period. Because of the following: 1. Potentiality - Chet has highest ceiling in entire 2022 draft class. Best chances of being generational player in his draft class. 2. Productivity - Chet is a proven 2 way Unicorn. 7 foot elite rim protector and plus perimeter defender with guard skills and 39% 3P and +80% FG% at the rim. Double double machine. Elite in transition: grab and go, outlet passer and elite finisher. Analytics freak, super efficient. 3. Personality - Chet is skinny as a nail, but just as tough. Likes to be coached hard. Ultra competitive and physical, especially around the rim. Trash talker and uber confident. Work ethic thru the roof to the point his college coach had to limit his gym and weight training time. Chet is extremely self aware and knows what he does well. Chet has been the alpha in HS and international competition, winning championships, tournaments, MVPs and #1 player rankings. He knows he is the man. But he also allows himself to be coached, to take backseat for betterment of team. With Zags he had to earn becoming the 2nd option. If Zags had longer season or progressed further in tournament, HC would or should have handed reins to Chet. This does not just speak to Chet's mindset but his versatile skillset. I have no problem taking Banchero with #3 if either Chet or Jabari (still having an internal debate) are off the board. And I have no problem with honest debate between prospects. I just have no patience with suspension of disbelief arguments, whataboutism or what-ifs.
I see Patrick Baldwin Jr name there. Some people are going to owe me an apology if Baldwin's performs admirably as a pro with greater spacing. Saw a mock draft today with the Warriors picking Baldwin at the end of the first round. I hate the Warriors but I respect them. They know how to win. Trends and all from Defensive Zones to getting players with size for their wings who have ability to shoot. Here is a tidbit on PBJ I saw today. SB Nation: Patrick Baldwin Jr. fell from a top NBA Draft prospect. Now he’s trying to build himself back up. https://www.sbnation.com/nba/2022/6...patrick-baldwin-jr-milwaukee-high-school-mock
I agree with all of this regarding Chet. The argument was that Banchero made 70% of his shots at the rim whereas Chet made 88% of his shots at the rim. The argument against you was that Banchero took a higher degree of difficult shots to get that 70% mark where as Chet took easier shots and as a result had a higher %. As a counter to this assessment you posted some really nice information on page 32 of this thread regarding the importance of easy shots and efficiency. I am in full agreement with your assessment here. Why then would we penalize Banchero for taking easier shots than Jabari took? Regardless of where it is on the floor, Banchero took and made more shots at a higher clip than Jabari in part because of his ability to generate easier shots. That ability takes skill. Just the same as Chet scoring inside at a higher % than Paolo for the very same reason. Thats all I'm trying to say.
FYI - Based on Pelton and game vid I had Sengun and Cam Thomas as the the most advanced offensive players in their draft class. It was also via all stats that I noticed how effective Sengun was defensively, his STOCKS (steals & blocks) were much better than his length and athleticism led you to believe. Because Sengun has high IQ, deceptively quick hands and has sky high motor. That motor especially convinced me that he could become an average NBA defender or better. That dawg mentality is not learned, its earned. With sweat equity and inner fire. It's not something you can switch on and off, it's on all the time. Jabari has it. Chet has it. Banchero has it, but just on offense.
Not penalizing Paolo at all. Easy more efficient shots are good. Especially at rim, should be easiest most efficient shot in basketball. But we are talking about apples and oranges. There is no support for Jabari being inefficient at the rim. He needs to be better in this area. Period. I was arguing that Jabari's 3P was so elite that it was able to compensate for the lack of volume and efficiency from 2P. In modern NBA, +40% 3P is a GOD, especially with volume. Now add 6'10 with unblockable shot due to quick release, technique and ice cold water in that shooter's veins. On top of that, 6'10 who is dog on defense and can switch 1-4. That's not just a 3-D player. That is the ULTIMATE 3-D player. If he learns to dribble and become a triple threat, that's Durant level.
We can certainly talk about Paolo's defense and FWIW I remember you pumping up Sengun's defense because we were at that time both actively pumping up Sengun and getting a lot of flack for it. This discussion was specifically based on offense. I think if all 3 players are really that close that no one has a clear edge and Paolo's defense is significantly worse, it would only make sense that something about his offense would be significantly better or that something about the other prospect's offense is significantly worse. I wasn't as high on Cam. I had him as the 24th ranked prospect. I was higher on Bouknight. I had him ranked #6 overall (Sengun #7). If you'd like to see my draft board from last year, I'm happy to share it. Looking back just now, I had a few hits and quite a few cringeworthy definite misses but in true spooner fashion I wrote a lot about the projections of each player and none of them were too egregiously off base so far I would say. Regardless, part of the reason I'm very wary of being critical toward Chet is because he's the type of guy who could absolutely make you look foolish in hind sight. Paolo and Chet are the 1a and 1b for me in this draft and it is because of their upside to become superstar players. I still have Jabari comfortably third on my board and that isn't changing. Jabari could be a star but to me at least, the least impactful one of the 3 if they all reach their ceiling.
That's absolutely fair. And I do admit being biased towards defensive players, all things being equal or even close. But I also favor 2 way players with at least 1 elite trait. And you are right, Cam was not as good as I thought he'd be. But I would not have drafted him because he wasn't a 2 way player or have any elite measurables. Also loved Herb Jones and Bones Hyland but they were both drafted way higher than I imagined. Was hoping to trade or purchase SRP to steal one of them. Draft is crazy man.
Dude, you don't have to explain all the skills about those players. I don't disagree with most of what you say. But please do not use the word "efficiency" when you are talking about FG% because that is not what it is. And you have been talking exclusively about offense. What about the concern about Banchero's defense? We all know that in the NBA, an unswitchable big man is a liability unless his offense is as good as guys like Jokic and Embiid. I don't know if you have noticed that in almost every post I reply to you, I have a disclaimer that I AM NOT SAYING JABARI IS A BETTER PLAYER THAN PAOLO. You, on the other hand, seem to see all the holes in Jabari's game and think Paolo as a perfect player who will be a surefire star. I've been warning people from last year's draft. Don't talk about draft prospects like you have crystal ball knowing exactly what the future will look like. The NBA are littered with busts who were hyped to be "can't miss" prospects. The best we can do is some educated guessing.
I'm not arguing with any of this except the fact that Durant was much further along with a ton of skills and a lot of those skills are really hard to learn. He was considered a generational talent for a reason. If Jerami Grant can become a shot creator though, no reason to think its impossible Jabari could play the same role more efficiently. I'm not sure his 3 point shot was good enough to compensate for his overall field goal percentage because that simply isn't a good field goal percentage any way you slice it. If we assume TS% truly is the best way to gauge efficiency and we agree to ignore a ton of other factors regarding role and skillset, it needs to be understood that Jabari's strength is weighted more heavily in this assessment and that this strength of his needs significantly less volume to boost TS% percentage than the other way around. This would logically explain why 3 pointers are more important or in part why Banchero shot an overall much better field goal percentage but I digress. Even though Paolo and Chet were compared in the paint, thats not necessarily what I was going for. It would seem to me Paolo took easier shots from 3 and anywhere inside the arc including midrange. Part of what made them easier were at times certain skills that only Paolo has between the two. It also speaks to how impressive it is to score efficiently from 3 while tightly guarded on Jabari's part. I think it can be argued fairly easily that Paolo can create better shots for himself and as he grows as a shooter his efficiency will continue to improve. Generating those looks is harder I would think than getting better at shooting because it is working on one skill vs many skills. That is why if we were to compare Jabari to Durant I think it would be well within reason to say that Paolo is already much closer to Tatum than Jabari is to Durant. That doesn't mean Jabari doesn't have a higher floor right off the bat. Regarding efficiency, I'm more comfortable with a guy creating better looks for himself than a guy shooting through people in tightly guarded spaces. If Jabari isn't hitting tightly contested shots his percentages can be really rough and while defensive players are faster in the NBA at cutting of driving lanes and protecting the rim, they are also generally much longer and we'll see how that length affects Jabari. I believe Paolo has more at his disposal to compensate but I'm still not sure what Jabari does if he can't shoot through NBA defenders the way he did in college. On a side note plenty of players regress with shooting. Ryan Anderson was Ryan Anderson until he wasn't. Thats highly unlucky to happen to Jabari but its a reason that if I'm projecting who I think could be a star, I'd want to see as many skills as possible in a player coming out of college.
We were talking specifically about offense thats why. I would love to talk about defense for a change and I have Paolo clearly the worst of the 3 and its not even close. I believe Jabari has the highest floor and unlikely to bust and that Paolo could very well end up as Marcus Morris, but I'd rather take that chance if I believe the upside is that much higher in the player. Can we agree that Seth Curry is the more efficient Curry? Can you tell me what FG% is used for? Can we agree Banchero shot a better percentage of shots relative to a larger volume of shots than the other 2 prospects?
So tell me, dumbass, if another nba team can unlock Tatum, why is it the Rockets are getting the best Paolo could ever be? Oh right, anything that paints Paolo in a positive light is dumbass, and anything negative about Chet impossible.
Hey, this time I agree 100%. I too believe that Jabari has the highest floor and the lowest ceiling. FG% is pretty much useless when talking about efficiency. Yes, volume matters. But Banchero's volume is not that much different from Jabari's. If you count FTA, you can tell they take about the same amount of shots each game. (BTW, I still don't understand why Paolo's FTA is lower than Jabari's when Paolo is supposed to be better at penetration. I also don't understand why Jabari's rim accuracy is so low.) The difference is the type of shots they take. Again, efficiency by definition is how many points you produce by when you attempt a shot. That's why the long 2pt shot is deemed very inefficient. But as you have pointed out, efficiency needs context. Capela is more efficient than Harden because he is spoon fed while Harden creates for himself and others. Same about Seth and Steph but less extreme.
Im still confused about something though and pardon my ignorance here - Isn’t a higher volume of made 3 pointers already factored into a point total? If there were only 2 pointers, Jabari would average less points per game than Banchero and both shooting percentages would be unchanged. This is because Banchero made more shots and had to do it on more volume than a 3 point shooter. I personally can’t fault Banchero for simply making a better percentage of his shots on more volume. The skill required to do that or to shoot 3 pointers is subjective and debatable. This in itself shows the value of 3 point shooting. Your score goes up with less shots and that is already reflected in a basic box score. Why is it we need to further weight those shots? I doubt it has to do with difficulty of 3 point shooting since I’m sure anything that is more difficult is also as a result less efficient. The easiest and most efficient shot seems to take place at the rim. If we look at a list of the best TS% players in the league, the top 10 are all centers and most don’t even attempt 3 pointers. If that is the most efficient shot in basketball, why isn’t it weighted as an efficient shot the way 3 point shooting is? Is it because 3 is worth more than 2? Because that is already reflected in the players point total. It just seems like double dipping if you catch my drift. How can we possibly call Jabari efficient if he was historically bad at the most efficient shot and how is that reflected appropriately in TS% if it’s truly about shooting the most efficient shots? Im not trying to be contrarian but I’ve always been confused by this and I don’t think I’m properly understanding something. It really seems like according to eFG% 3 point shots would always be the most efficient shot regardless of circumstance or the fact that scoring at the rim is technically more efficient. I have trouble believing anything is that black and white. Since 3 is already worth more than 2, wouldn’t it make more sense to simply look for a correlation between points and shot attempts and then factor in free throw attempts? There would be no need to weight any shot in this instance. Is that already what eFG% kind of does and I’m just not seeing it?
We have a thread called "Building around Paolo and liking it" and yet the discourse is Paolo vs Chet vs Jabari like we are magically ORL and have the 1st pick in the draft and have to make this decision. There is no decision to be made. Rockets are taking the prospect that is left. Likely Paolo. This draft can't come soon enough.
Doubtful it will happen. Like, last year when we were debating Jalen Green and Evan Mobley that made sense, we had a decision. We didn't debate Jalen Green and Cade Cunningham as Cade was never an option. Was pointless. The decision is Paolo Banchero or Jaden Ivey.
Teams overthink drafting players every single year. Looking back it’s always silly. Corey Kispert or Chris Duarte getting overhyped the month before the draft and going before players like Sengun and Jalen Johnson. Then you have Sam Presti or the Spurs going completely against consensus and sticking to their boards. It always seems like the prospects change order after the season is over when there is nothing to base any assessment on but hype. Derrick Stingley was as high as the consensus #2 pick at end of the college season and then by draft night Sauce Gardner had so much hype that fans were upset we ended up with Stingley at 3 over Sauce. On draft lottery night, I truly believed that Chet was the consensus #1 pick based on what the media was saying and Jabari a close second. Perhaps Orlando’s thinking changed this but what exactly changed the consensus when 0 games were played in that time frame? I agree with you and I also believe with not having a clear consensus #1 there is a legit argument made by not only experts but posters here as well for any of the candidates. That is why it is one of the more frustrating years to agree on anything regarding this draft. We all seem to agree on Tari Eason though which is refreshing.
