Marvin Bagley III
- Thread starter jcassio
- Start date
- Status
I've been meaning to do this for a while, but haven't got around to it. I don't think lot of playoff teams are playing 3 bigs big or meaningful minutes. In some cases, it is the case of roster construction. Teams like Rockets, Warriors, Blazers, Wizards have their stars and money on players at the guard or wing positions. So bigs (with the possible exception of Capella with Rockets) have limited role there. Even teams like Cavs, that give good amount of minutes to players like Love and Korver, treat them more as perimeter players.
Apart from Pelicans, who had two major stars in Boogie and Davis, I can't think of any teams that have two significant assets at 4 and 5 (maybe Utah to some extent), and virtually no team has 3 (AFAIK).
Is it too premature of us to talk of 3 when we don't even have one proven one so far? Certainly yes. That said, the purpose of the draft is to project the team 3-4 years (and beyond) down the line, and not just next year. If we draft a big, and if the hype around Giles is real, we have two major assets up front. Can they become stars, stay healthy (for Giles, these questions will keep coming up until he proves otherwise), play with each other, help the team win, and hundred other questions will be answered over time. However, if the FO thinks they can, then we don't have space for a 3rd big, who is a major piece. It can be some kind of specialist who fills specific needs (most likely some kind of enforcer or a 3 pt shooter). I think Willie will be too good and expensive for that role, nor is he likely to be pleased with it.
This is one reason I'm not too keen to draft a big if Luka is available, unless the FO is convinced that the big is much better. If so, then you get him, and get SF through some other means. Else, if you think the big is better (say Bagley for this discussion), but not by much, you have to see if the combination of Willie/Luka is better, or that of Bagley/what we get for Willie.
Apart from Pelicans, who had two major stars in Boogie and Davis, I can't think of any teams that have two significant assets at 4 and 5 (maybe Utah to some extent), and virtually no team has 3 (AFAIK).
Is it too premature of us to talk of 3 when we don't even have one proven one so far? Certainly yes. That said, the purpose of the draft is to project the team 3-4 years (and beyond) down the line, and not just next year. If we draft a big, and if the hype around Giles is real, we have two major assets up front. Can they become stars, stay healthy (for Giles, these questions will keep coming up until he proves otherwise), play with each other, help the team win, and hundred other questions will be answered over time. However, if the FO thinks they can, then we don't have space for a 3rd big, who is a major piece. It can be some kind of specialist who fills specific needs (most likely some kind of enforcer or a 3 pt shooter). I think Willie will be too good and expensive for that role, nor is he likely to be pleased with it.
This is one reason I'm not too keen to draft a big if Luka is available, unless the FO is convinced that the big is much better. If so, then you get him, and get SF through some other means. Else, if you think the big is better (say Bagley for this discussion), but not by much, you have to see if the combination of Willie/Luka is better, or that of Bagley/what we get for Willie.
Actually, I think there won't be a place for Willie in the team if we draft a big because I think he's too good for the role of the 3rd big.
Just posted similar thoughts in another post in the same thread, so won't like to repeat. However, I'm making another assumption that the hype around Giles is real.
Just posted similar thoughts in another post in the same thread, so won't like to repeat. However, I'm making another assumption that the hype around Giles is real.
I spent 3/4 of last season as Willie's protector. But in the latter part of the season, when he was still unable to put together two good games in a row, I decided enough is enough. Time to move on and wish him luck. I don't hate him. I just find it frustrating that he can't play with more consistency after 3 years. Sometimes a player needs to be traded (away from his drafting team) in order to wake him up and get him on track. It's tempting to think it's the team's fault for not bringing out the best in a player and instead choosing to "give up on him." But I think - more often - it's just part of the process of growing up as a professional basketball player.
If I were WCS's manager or trusted confidant, I'd tell him to shut up and show what he's got on the court. Every night. Every play. No coasting.
If I were WCS's manager or trusted confidant, I'd tell him to shut up and show what he's got on the court. Every night. Every play. No coasting.
I don't think WCS has a nice, or good, mid range. It seemed quite erratic to me. Also, it seemed like he would go through some odd stretches where he didn't look for that mid range shot, implying a lack of confidence in the shot. If there are stats that contradict my viewpoint I'd be happy to change my mind.
True, Ayton will probably not dominate immediately. If KAT couldn't, Ayton won't, imo. Though it would be disappointing, imo, if he could not immediately average a rebound every three minutes of play. WCS averaged one rebound per 4 minutes of play last year. If you look at all the players in the NBA for rebounds per 36 minutes and omit those who played less than 800 minutes for the whole year, WCS has a 79th ranking, plus or minus a few (I did a pretty quick scan and could be off by a handful; see below). The problem with playing WCS and Ayton together would be on the offensive end. I don't see either one of them spreading the floor for Fox and the two other players on the floor. So in effect you would have two big guys who can't shoot the 3, and a point guard that is in the mediocre category at shooting the 3. In today's game, that's a big problem. That problem underscores a major problem with WCS's game - he doesn't have a legit low post game, and he doesn't have a consistent outside scoring game. He really can't be counted on to score whether inside or outside. For the above reasons, if the Kings draft Ayton, I just don't see them playing he and WCS together, and I doubt they see that as a realistic scenario either. One of them is going to be subordinate to the other. My money would be on Ayton as the top dog, starting from Day 1.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2018_per_minute.html
http://stats.nba.com/player/1626161/
https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2018_per_minute.html
http://stats.nba.com/player/1626161/
Players that rebound better than WCS:
Michael Beasley, Lauri Markkanen, Dejonte Murray, Dwight Powell, Omri Casspi, Meyers Leonard, JaMychal Green, PapaG, Tarik Black, and Joffrey Lauvergne.
All these guys are either considered scrubs, soft or just simply have business out rebounding a long athletic 7 footer.
Michael Beasley, Lauri Markkanen, Dejonte Murray, Dwight Powell, Omri Casspi, Meyers Leonard, JaMychal Green, PapaG, Tarik Black, and Joffrey Lauvergne.
All these guys are either considered scrubs, soft or just simply have business out rebounding a long athletic 7 footer.
Who would you put next to Bagley? Lets say he is a 20-10 guy and his defense is a 3/10. How would you build a team around that and do you think you could win with a player like that?
I'm trying to think of how he and the myth of Giles could work together and it would probably take about 10 variables going our way but if they did, they could be a formidable duo that could debunk the whole small ball, stretch 4's and 5's in the playoffs deal we have going on. The way you beat that is you are able to defend them on one end of the court and then punish them easily inside on the other end. Giles reportedly has elite lateral quickness for a SF and that was reported by one of those sports training facilities. He could possibly defend 4 positions but will he be able to punish them on the other end of the court?
Bagley, we're pretty sure he's going to be able to punish smaller players offensively but will he be able to defend them on the other end? His lateral quickness isn't bad at all but he's obviously a horrid defender all around. Lots of variables at play here that would have to go just right for it to work IMO.
I'm trying to think of how he and the myth of Giles could work together and it would probably take about 10 variables going our way but if they did, they could be a formidable duo that could debunk the whole small ball, stretch 4's and 5's in the playoffs deal we have going on. The way you beat that is you are able to defend them on one end of the court and then punish them easily inside on the other end. Giles reportedly has elite lateral quickness for a SF and that was reported by one of those sports training facilities. He could possibly defend 4 positions but will he be able to punish them on the other end of the court?
Bagley, we're pretty sure he's going to be able to punish smaller players offensively but will he be able to defend them on the other end? His lateral quickness isn't bad at all but he's obviously a horrid defender all around. Lots of variables at play here that would have to go just right for it to work IMO.
What you are looking for is can Bagley be part of a good team defense and I can see him getting there. He doesn't have to be a lock down defender, as long as he can be a solid team defender he does not become a liability at that end.
I think people sometimes read too much into someones defensive production as collage rookies. A lot of these guys have come into the collage as stars in HS whose main job was to score at will. Some HS programs (and collage for that matter) are not exactly great at teaching defense or defensive principles. In pros this is a different story. There is more time to practice, more attention is paid to defense and players provided that they want to do the work, will get better. Bagley might not get elite but he could be a solid team defender in a very good defensive scheme. It's rare that you get two way players these days, especially from big men.
I think people sometimes read too much into someones defensive production as collage rookies. A lot of these guys have come into the collage as stars in HS whose main job was to score at will. Some HS programs (and collage for that matter) are not exactly great at teaching defense or defensive principles. In pros this is a different story. There is more time to practice, more attention is paid to defense and players provided that they want to do the work, will get better. Bagley might not get elite but he could be a solid team defender in a very good defensive scheme. It's rare that you get two way players these days, especially from big men.
You still have to consider their strengths and weaknesses. To just say that this guy or that guy will become a better defender or be able to shoot or do whatever he can't do on the court just because he starts practicing it, isn't going to work out your way the majority of the time. Some guys improve their weaknesses and some guys don't but I'm not just going to assume that their weaknesses won't be a future problem because that doesn't always work out. If you draft Bagley, you have to go into it with a plan to work around his defense if it never comes around.
If you look down the standings, almost all the playoff teams have a defender at the center position. Capela, Draymond/McGee/Pachulia, Nurkic, Adams, Gobert, and Davis make up the first 6 seeds. Aldridge and KAT make up the last two seeds and they are the two weakest defenders on that list. Defense at the 5 is more important than some may think.
If you look down the standings, almost all the playoff teams have a defender at the center position. Capela, Draymond/McGee/Pachulia, Nurkic, Adams, Gobert, and Davis make up the first 6 seeds. Aldridge and KAT make up the last two seeds and they are the two weakest defenders on that list. Defense at the 5 is more important than some may think.
Being a copy cat does not get one far. Set your own example and force teams to follow you, not the other way around. If Bagley can get more consistent his jumper (especially to 3pt range) there is no reason why he cannot be your 4 especially if he can hang with the other players on the perimeter. His athletic profile allows him to do that. If Giles is as good as advertised then you have someone with tools to guard 4 positions and someone who can switch on anyone.
I am confortablbe with Bagley at 4. Has tremendous upside.
I am confortablbe with Bagley at 4. Has tremendous upside.
I'm not quite sure why he shouldn't be able to play the 4. He's quick enough and agile enough to not be stuck at the 5, he's got a better handle than needed at the 4, he hit .397 from three this year, so his jumper is plenty good to space the floor. It seems to me he can defend the 4 as well as he can defend the 5. I really kind of had Bagley pegged as more 4 than 5 for a while.
Many things come down to courage of conviction, and extrapolate from their. However, you are always starting off on a better foot when you start with a plan, and stick to it.
As for who we pick, I look at it this way.
Giles:
When you know you are about to give bad news to a bunch of people with vested interest, you ( I ) would do my best to soften the blow beforehand.
We hear little about Harry, and for those of us not in the radius of any PR, some NBA fans forgot we even drafted Harry. The F.O. knows whats up with Harry, and I think have a plan, about halfway done.
As for who we pick, I look at it this way.
Giles:
When you know you are about to give bad news to a bunch of people with vested interest, you ( I ) would do my best to soften the blow beforehand.
We hear little about Harry, and for those of us not in the radius of any PR, some NBA fans forgot we even drafted Harry. The F.O. knows whats up with Harry, and I think have a plan, about halfway done.
I'm not the only one who thinks he won't be able to play the 4. There are a number of articles that talk about it as well. Legitimate stretch 4's and big 3's should be able to defend him but he's not going to be able to defend them at all on the other end of the court. I don't see any way you could win with him at the 4 unless it's under specific circumstances. The game has changed and it's not played with two seven footers anymore. He's going to get spread out to the 3 point line and then blown by with ease if he plays at the 4.
In the last decade, the Kings have only been close enough to sniff the butthole of the playoffs once for half a season and people want to start a revolution here by going back to a style of play from years ago? I'm not saying its impossible, I'm just saying it would require a whole lot of things to go right in order for it to work and I think the odds of that are pretty low.
In the last decade, the Kings have only been close enough to sniff the butthole of the playoffs once for half a season and people want to start a revolution here by going back to a style of play from years ago? I'm not saying its impossible, I'm just saying it would require a whole lot of things to go right in order for it to work and I think the odds of that are pretty low.
I think the idea with Bagley would be to play off Fox and Giles and sell out for speed. With Giles, Bagley, and Cauley-Stein we'd have one of the top 5 fastest frontcourts in the league. Size and strength would be weaknesses but that might not matter if we're running circles around everyone. Fox has elite speed and elusiveness with the ball. Buddy and Bogie are both knockdown shooters. We'd need to add a SF who can fly up-court on breaks and cover all 3 perimeter players and then we just do everything faster than everyone else. Play the passing lanes to get steals and fastbreak all game long. As soon as the ball comes off the glass everybody is sprinting to the other end and the defense never has a chance to get set. If the initial layup isn't there you kick it back to your trailing shooters and take an open three. When we do end up in a halfcourt offense, Bagley and Fox pick-and-rolls are going to be hard to stop. If you give either guy an inch of daylight they're gone and now you've got secondary defenders trying to rotate over leaving our shooters wide open. On the offensive end that team would be a nightmare for other teams to contain.
The main defensive strategy there would be to wear the other team out chasing you up and down the floor. You want the switches to come so fast that the other team always feels like they got a hand in their face and another hand threatening their dribble. Every pass is a potential breakaway layup on the other end. I can picture this working and working consistently but only if everybody plays with max effort and plays together on defense. In fact, I'd have Bagley right after Ayton on my wishlist if he'd displayed even average defensive awareness at Duke. They played zone this season though and he was the guy consistently caught out of position on switches. They'll be some ugly growing pains getting the turbo engine revved up but with a good attitude and good coaching I can see Bagley becoming the All Star centerpiece of the fastest team in the league. A team that nobody wants to play because they never stop running.
The main defensive strategy there would be to wear the other team out chasing you up and down the floor. You want the switches to come so fast that the other team always feels like they got a hand in their face and another hand threatening their dribble. Every pass is a potential breakaway layup on the other end. I can picture this working and working consistently but only if everybody plays with max effort and plays together on defense. In fact, I'd have Bagley right after Ayton on my wishlist if he'd displayed even average defensive awareness at Duke. They played zone this season though and he was the guy consistently caught out of position on switches. They'll be some ugly growing pains getting the turbo engine revved up but with a good attitude and good coaching I can see Bagley becoming the All Star centerpiece of the fastest team in the league. A team that nobody wants to play because they never stop running.
Good post.
Ainge last year did the unholy of unholys and traded back to the 3rd spot from the 1st. If Angie can do that why should Vlade be banned from such a move?
Its all about what is offered. Hell yes i want valde to explore what thise offers are as well as thoroughly rank and grade each prospect.
For instance, kings could assign Doncic a 30% chance of being NBA 1st teamer, 75% chance of being a all star level but his floor is so high there is only 10% chanve he isnt a good starter
While Porter might have a 50% chance of being NBA 1st teamer, 60% chance of being a all star level but his floor is lower being 25 % chance of not being a good starter.
Porter could be viewed as more atar potential than doncic but more downside risk.
Kings may view a swing for fences with Porter as the better player, but could get him at 3 or 4th pick....so why NOT get something in return and still get your guy?
Ainge last year did the unholy of unholys and traded back to the 3rd spot from the 1st. If Angie can do that why should Vlade be banned from such a move?
Its all about what is offered. Hell yes i want valde to explore what thise offers are as well as thoroughly rank and grade each prospect.
For instance, kings could assign Doncic a 30% chance of being NBA 1st teamer, 75% chance of being a all star level but his floor is so high there is only 10% chanve he isnt a good starter
While Porter might have a 50% chance of being NBA 1st teamer, 60% chance of being a all star level but his floor is lower being 25 % chance of not being a good starter.
Porter could be viewed as more atar potential than doncic but more downside risk.
Kings may view a swing for fences with Porter as the better player, but could get him at 3 or 4th pick....so why NOT get something in return and still get your guy?
- Status