So the premise of your argument isnt against the fact that bad defending big men arent very valuable rather than Bagley not being one or him having a chance to become one of those truly dominant outliers?
Statistical data is very usefull part of scouting or in general building a team. And as is the case with Bagley you combine it with eye test. But demeaning the value of analytics and statistical data is just wrong. It certainly has value. Analytics is a big reason why the game has developed to the state its in now. Playing with a spaced floor, posting up a lot less, using pick n roll heavily, switching becoming the dominant way of defending ect, all things that analytics suggest teams should be doing and thats exactly whats happened.
With Bagleys defending, both eye test and statistical data suggest that he is not a good defender. Having to play zone really exposed his lack of insticts defensively. To me evaluating college defense is mostly about tools and instincts, effort isnt the most important to me. You saw Tatum last year with bad effort, Ben Simmons with bad effort ect but Tatum had the tools and maybe some instincts and Simmons had both even more and you could predict they are able to become good enough defensively.
According to eye test Bagleys instincts are well below JJJ, Bamba, Carter ect. He also doesnt have elite tools to compensate that with. He has some lateral quickness but very mediocre wingspan. Only way he isnt going to become a complete liability is him just switching everything but with better wingspan I would be a lot more confident with that since he could close out on shooters better and challenge shots from behind after he gets beat up 1-1.
I somewhat agree on that last sentence. If you read Mpj thread, its brutal. But in this case the critisism on Bagley isnt on his ability per se. Its about the value of his type of players in general. On Porter thread its mostly "hes trash, he cant do this or that and even his personality is this or that". In here its mostly quoting 31 years worth of statistical data trying to figure out the value of players similar to Bagley.
Well thats your opinion and you most certainly are entitled to it. He might become a good shooter or not but statistically the chances are pretty slim. Ft% and the low number of jumpshots in general are red flags when trying to predict wether the shooting will translate to Nba.
Yes, personally I'm quite confident on my evaluation. The main things with Bagley to me is his defense and his shooting. His defense because in general bad defending big men arent that valuable and shooting because obviously shooting is an important thing for a player that is mainly a scorer. Also the offensive effectivenes overall goes down with more than one non shooter on the floor and goes up with more shooters on the floor.
Im quite sure of his defense because Its pretty rare that a player goes from lack of defensive instincts to having good instincts. Also his mediocre wingspan doesnt help him as a switch defender.
Shooting I talked about above why I'm bot betting on him becoming a good shooter.
Statistical data is very usefull part of scouting or in general building a team. And as is the case with Bagley you combine it with eye test. But demeaning the value of analytics and statistical data is just wrong. It certainly has value. Analytics is a big reason why the game has developed to the state its in now. Playing with a spaced floor, posting up a lot less, using pick n roll heavily, switching becoming the dominant way of defending ect, all things that analytics suggest teams should be doing and thats exactly whats happened.
With Bagleys defending, both eye test and statistical data suggest that he is not a good defender. Having to play zone really exposed his lack of insticts defensively. To me evaluating college defense is mostly about tools and instincts, effort isnt the most important to me. You saw Tatum last year with bad effort, Ben Simmons with bad effort ect but Tatum had the tools and maybe some instincts and Simmons had both even more and you could predict they are able to become good enough defensively.
According to eye test Bagleys instincts are well below JJJ, Bamba, Carter ect. He also doesnt have elite tools to compensate that with. He has some lateral quickness but very mediocre wingspan. Only way he isnt going to become a complete liability is him just switching everything but with better wingspan I would be a lot more confident with that since he could close out on shooters better and challenge shots from behind after he gets beat up 1-1.
I somewhat agree on that last sentence. If you read Mpj thread, its brutal. But in this case the critisism on Bagley isnt on his ability per se. Its about the value of his type of players in general. On Porter thread its mostly "hes trash, he cant do this or that and even his personality is this or that". In here its mostly quoting 31 years worth of statistical data trying to figure out the value of players similar to Bagley.
Well thats your opinion and you most certainly are entitled to it. He might become a good shooter or not but statistically the chances are pretty slim. Ft% and the low number of jumpshots in general are red flags when trying to predict wether the shooting will translate to Nba.
Yes, personally I'm quite confident on my evaluation. The main things with Bagley to me is his defense and his shooting. His defense because in general bad defending big men arent that valuable and shooting because obviously shooting is an important thing for a player that is mainly a scorer. Also the offensive effectivenes overall goes down with more than one non shooter on the floor and goes up with more shooters on the floor.
Im quite sure of his defense because Its pretty rare that a player goes from lack of defensive instincts to having good instincts. Also his mediocre wingspan doesnt help him as a switch defender.
Shooting I talked about above why I'm bot betting on him becoming a good shooter.
Let them process their pain. Once Bagley posts 20/15 next month the healing process will accelerate.
