Stars have magnetism and pull other stars and good role players to their team. That is the true value of drafting a star. The type of player you are describing is a role player that chases stars . Wiggins and Lopez (likely bridges at some point) left their teams to play with stars. Trevor Ariza made a living chasing stars. Someone CF is keen on comparing the #3 pick to. When picking high in the draft you need to land a player that can bring other players in. If you had said star, it wouldn’t be hard to sign a player with the skill ceiling you are describing. We literally see it all the time. If Jabari is not a star, he’ll likely leave Houston to play with a star. That’s the modern NBA
You are confusing problem with weakness. There's a difference. Problem is what is happening now. Weakness is what is always true about the guy. Shooting is not Jabari's weakness. We know he can shoot because we saw him shoot well all his life. It's his current problem. That's why it is very fixable. He just needs to make the shots he can normally make. Banchero has never been a good shooter in his career. That's not his current problem. That's his weakness. Since he has never been a good shooter, it is much more unlikely that it can be fixed. Smith's weakness is his handles. It's like Banchero's shooting, not likely to be fixed.
But Wiggins was traded away from Minny and so was Brook Lopez who spent 9 seasons who the Nets who drafted him. They didn't gravitate anywhere to any star. I don't know why people are so attached to a draft number, that really doesn't matter other than contract negotiations. There's no mold a top pick should go into, they could range from Thabeet to Michael Jordan, most people fall somewhere in between and you hope to get a useful player. The way I see it Jabari was what was left over of a shallow draft, it was a no brainer pick at the time, but it was also obvious he didn't have the athleticism or skillset to be a star. So instead of just b****ing and complaining, we should hope he turn into a super role player who do make differences on contenders. Worry about "gravity" of a star when you actually draft a star. Also a once in a generation talent like Luka has so far not gravitated anyone of use in his career.
Wiggins is playing with Curry. Lopez with Giannis. This is more for those who were adamant Jabari was the surefire #1 pick. Saying it was obvious he doesn’t have the athleticism or skill set of a star is speaking in hindsight. More than half the forum thought otherwise and that’s the truth. At any rate it’s not rocket science to expect role players to join stars. I mean what are we even discussing here? Which role players are going to want to come to play with Jabari Smith? I’m sure Dejounte Murray was traded to the hawks to play with Deandre Hunter. No? Or maybe Chris Paul was traded to phoenix to play with Mikal bridges. The bottom line is the players you are describing you can find in free agency when you actually have a team.
But they are literally shooting the same 3%. Not a good look. I asked over the summer who was the better scorer of the two and was told Jabari because of his ts% being a decimal point higher. Is that still the case or…?
Wiggins is playing with Curry because he was traded there for Russell, and mainly because GS can absorb Wiggins contract for a 1st round pick. Wiggins was going to be traded to anyone that was willing to take his contract at the time. So I ask again, how did Wiggins gravitate towards Curry, he didn't have a choice at all. Did you read his Jabari's Draft report. Most people on this forum was already celebrating Magic drafting Smith, because we thought we were going to get Banchero. It was almost consensus on every scouting report that Jabari had average athleticism, and almost non-existent finishing around the rim. But he was suppose to be a deadly shooter and a top defender. AKA a 3 and D player. Why do I even care about players gravitating towards Smith, what does that have to do with anything. I just have no issues with Smith turning into a super 3 &D PF, because that's useful on any team whether you keep him or trade him. Why would I need to find that good role player player in free agency when I have drafted one myself.
Wiggins was traded to GSW for the same reason Harden was traded to Philly, Gobert was traded to Minnesota, Paul was traded to phoenix, Murray was traded to Atlanta. To play with stars. Or did golden state intentionally want to mess up their cap space for nothing? Do you honestly think a contender would do that for a first round pick? LOL If you think the forum wanted banchero you weren’t paying attention. It was me and a few others vs. multitudes of Jabari smith is the best player by far because the pundits said so crowd. Heck, look at Clutch’s Twitter history. It’s embarrassing. Clutch and Jackson Gatlin acting like it was the greatest day of their lives that we didn’t get Banchero. Personally I care if the player you draft can get others to come to the team. It’s better than drafting a role player who will eventually leave. Good role players generally gravitate toward teams with stars. This shouldn’t be a hard concept to grasp. Teams with stars have more appeal to role players. It’s common sense and we’ve seen it for decades. The saddest thing is that we are at the point where everyone agrees Jabari is a role player. There isn’t even a debate about it at this juncture. That is a complete 180 from what I was perpetually hearing and arguing against only a few months ago. The same people are now saying “ we already knew he was raw”. 0 accountability which is not surprising in the least. All of this talk about sample size making him an elite shooter for sure when the dude shot like 3/19 in the biggest game of his career before the draft.
You don't look at 1/3 of a season and say that the two players are the same shooter. You look at their whole career. Banchero: Career 34%, now shooting 32% Smith: Career 42%, now shooting 32% Which of these players is likely become a 40% shooter? I don't know which of them will be a better scorer. Scoring is not just about shooting 3s. But I am quite certain that Smith is much more likely than Banchero in significantly upping his shooting percentage.
How many college games did Smith play in his one season at Auburn? How did he shoot when defenses keyed in on him in the postseason? Pretty soon Jabari will have played twice as many professional games as he did in his one college season. What is the actual sample size? 20 something games with far less length to shoot over, a much slower pace and a shorter 3 pt line? Or 40 NBA games? Spin it anyway you want, they both currently shoot the same 3%. Considering it was a strength of one and a weakness of the other, it’s a tough pill to swallow. Who’s to say who will be a better shooter? Al Horford is one of the leagues best shooters and didn’t attempt a 3 for like 9 years. There is no reason to assume Banchero won’t improve on his averages over time. The other thing that is glaringly obvious is that Banchero is generating his own offense. He’s not just bricking open shots and repeatedly missing layups let’s just be honest. I get it we all want Jabari to do well, but if his success still hinges on speculation midway through a full season it starts to ring hollow. I continuously compared Jabari to Deandre Hunter it’s very easy look up. Hunter was billed as the next great 3&D player and was taken in the top 5. He actually won DPOY and shot close to .440 from 3 in college. He hasn’t even come close to being a 40% 3pt shooter in the league in like 5 years and isn’t exactly a defensive stopper. Nothing is guaranteed.
He shot 37% in high school (41% senior year) in 116 games. The kid can shoot since he's 15 years old. His Auburn stats was not a fluke. What he's doing this season is an outlier. Nobody is saying it's guaranteed. You want to pick whatever player to compare it to whoever and come up with a conclusion? I can tell you how many players played like a star as a rookie and never amounted to anything. Nothing is guaranteed. Paolo is not guaranteed to have a stellar career either. We are talking about likelihood. Paolo is very likely to be a star. Jabari is very likely to be a better shooter than Paolo. But nothing is guaranteed.
I remember that but I think Clutch was really just damaged by the non shooting experience whose name was Russell Westbrook so he thought he wanted an 'elite shooter'.
To me it's non essential. Two bigs.... do I even care? It is their job to do well in all the other categories. If they end up shooting similar percentages, then Paolo wins either way. They don't have a career yet, college doesn't really count.
It's the wrong approach for an almost 7 footer to focus on shooting above anything. Tells you his dad knew little and was just a role player who didn't enjoy a lengthy career.
We're talking about shooting. Don't move the goal post if you really want a meaningful discussion and not just want to win an argument. I am not even trying to argue that Jabari is better than Paolo or will have a better career. I posted about not worrying about his shooting problem. You jumped in to compare Paolo's shooting to his. This comparison always baffles me. Smith's bad shooting is surprising. Banchero's bad shooting is confirming.
Not sure if I agree. I mean, what is the right approach for a tall kid? There are plenty of sharp shooting tall players. Not very many tall players with good handles. Developing a good shot seems to be more promising. I guess maybe he should have done both.
I get it, it’s just funny talking about high school. If you have to talk about an NBA players high school career it’s a pretty safe bet that player is having a terrible go in the NBA. I like Jabari just fine would have picked him at 3 as well. It’s just I wasted my summer talking to people who were convinced Sengun was already a better shooter than Paolo and that Jabari was already Klay Thompson. The fact that he shot 14% of his attempts at the rim as a big man didn’t alarm anyone. “He’ll just shoot over everyone like KD”. Meanwhile he bricks open shots for 40 games and can’t make layups but that is an aberration. In the NBA they both shoot the same 3% for now. That is just a fact. We don’t know what the future holds. We all lived through Ryan Anderson. Shooters can regress. Not everyone responds to the speed of the game or nba length the way we would hope. It doesn’t help that in the biggest moments in college when defenses keyed in on him, Jabari played his worst. I’m rooting for him every game and I do think he has a ton of potential but I’m also a realist. And your damn right I’m miffed about missing on Banchero.
He shot the lowest % of attempts at the rim for a big man in college basketball history. There are infinite amounts of players that became good 3 point shooters in the NBA. I can’t name a single player who developed a reliable handle after getting into the league. Especially true for bigs.
