Bagley will start soon

[Houdini]

first to say really nice, discussion.. I am glad to see being talked more about basketball, then just subjectiv opinion..

I will mainly reply to @hrdboild, not with quotation though, but with new post.

the game has changed, basketball science and human body has evolved and players are more automatic from range, thus more three points tried and made, game became more faster, so old school centers dissapeard, where as you mentioned you need to take a lot of time to set up low post attack, it is easier to play pick and roll and find an open man. but as game evolved you have now centers who also evolved, and big man with only low post moves is seriously hendicaped, best big man now have inside and outside scoring game.

now I was not talking about building a team around low post game, but I was talking about ballance, maybe even shifted little bit more towards outside, but ballance.. it is easy in regular season, when you lose it is ok, it is easy to shoot, less pressure.. but when real games come, and when you need to make your shoots it gets harder.. Houston lost last year, because they did not have a plan B, they were shooting and shooting, but when shoots did not fall they had no chance to win it.. when it really matters you need to have easy buckets and that is when inside scoring, second chance points matter..

now GSW is an anomaly, they just happend, but they are also able to score from inside when needed, you have KD who can get down, Green also.. but it would be interesting to see though Lakers with Shaq against them..

as for Bagley, I did not said he will be star, just that he has potential to be a star.. of course if he only stays player that can score from inside and after rebound he will not be a star, that goes without saying.. I am waiting like 4-5 years to see in which direction he is going, he is still just super raw, but if he gets his 3 point shooting going, and ball handling then yes he can be star.. now 20 years ago I would say it is imposible, but like I mention before, basketball science went so far, that you can see dramatical changes after one summer..

so if Bagley becomes all around player.. imagine a big, strong player, that can guard 3 or 4 positions and has all those tools in attack.. this is what I was saying.. will he be, I do not know, but has that potential.

as for no.1 option, I do not believe in no.1 options on a championship team.. you need to have 2-3 main options, and I do not believe Kings will ever have no.1 option, they will play as a team, like they do now.. through history of basketball games were decided mostly by backcourt player.. in vintage Kings team it was Bibby who made clutch shoots, it was not Shaq, but Kobe that made last seconds shot, so Bagley will not be that player who gets last shoot unless by second chance, but it will be Buddy, Fox, Bogi.. but he can be there as a very important piece..

 

[Livinthedream]

I posted a response in the wrong thread then deleted it. Anyway - here are some thoughts...

In general:
- While I don't disagree with prior comments, I don't support the notion that there is a single way to win. For example, each of the top eight teams in the western conference play a distinct style of basketball. Come playoff time, talent and circumstance will play as much of a role in determining the winner as employing the correct style. If San Antonio had a durable Anthony Davis instead of LaMarcus Aldridge, they would not need to change their mid range/ post up style that much to be contenders.
- New Orleans inability to win with Anthony Davis is evidence that, in the NBA, talent on its own is not enough to win. But their inability win with him is not an indication no one will ever win with a team constructed around a big man again.
- I'm too young to have been aware of any detail. But if I were to develop a formula for winning based on the small window of time that MJ and Pippen dominated (at the time - the 'new' NBA), I would conclude that you need great wings, not big men. Then Tim Duncan would come and win 5 rings. Shaq would win four. What was once new is now old and the post GS era is not far away. It's unclear how the next super power will be constructed.

Specific to Kings:
- That Boogie and the Kings were not competitive was not a forgone conclusion based on the new reality of basketball. The Kings were going through a difficult period with ownership uncertainty and transition, the trauma of which did linger and manifest on and off court. And Boogie is/ was a headcase.
- Phoenix were pretty close to being a championship team when they had a healthy Amare Stoudemire. Despite his relatively poor rebounding and defense. No reason MBIII can't play a similar-ish role.

I'm not sure what the original point was? That MBIII will have good stats but not necessarily win anything (an accusation that could be delivered to most All-Star players - as well as a good number of hall of famers?) Honestly, I don't know what I think of him. Talented basketball player. Hopefully he is happy enough in Sacramento that we can support him for some time. Also hope that his tennis parent does not steal too much of his youth - but his problem more than mine.

If you look back over the top NBA players of all times, the majority are wing players. Guys who handle the ball a lot. The exceptions on the list are some very dominant big men. The NBA formula has never changed. The SF/wing position is always huge. They are the swiss army knives on the team. They are mobile enough to handle the ball and score on multiple levels in multiple ways and guard multiple positions.

IMHO the game hasn't changed much other than the speed and athleticism of the athlete. Stats gurus are just trying to hack it to get around the ONE thing that wins titles. There is only one. Having the top player/players in the game of basketball. Having a guy that no matter what you throw at him, you can't stop him.

With the case of the Warriors, they had Steph, then added Durant. Still, a guy like Harden pushed them to the brink. Before the Warriors had Durant, Lebron being the best player in the world overcame a stacked 3pt shooting Warriors team with great players.

The Phoenix Suns of the KJ/Marley era, George Karl Denver Nuggets and right now the Boston Celtics are trying to hack the system. Not gonna happen. You have to have the best players. Celtics apparent interest in AD is an admission that a team full of good wings won't cut it. You need that one guy.

I don't care where that dominance comes from. It can come from the C, PF position if you allow it and the player is great. But greatness is the key.

 

[Gguod]

Bagley was #2 on my board. Behind Doncic, before Ayton...

In a redraft, I would still take him #2.

He's a 20/10 guy right now. And he's doing it based on just one hand and a motor. He's not a finished product. He's going to hit 2 to 3 threes per game. He's going to be able to face up and drive. Or shoot over players. And he'll be an average (at worse) passer. Those things are given for a 19 year old, who has always played levels above his age, who loves the game, has grandparents/parents warning of fast women and early fame, and ain't afraid to compete (see him competing against Blake?). And that's just his offense.

You're describing the best case scenario for Bagley. Atm he is very far from some of the things you say that he will be able to do. He might hit that best case scenario, he might get close to it but its hard to predict. For example Bagley hitting 3 threes a game would require massive improvement in his shooting. He wasnt a good shooter in college and he hasnt been a good shooter in the Nba. Per 36min hes currently hitting 0.5 threes a game on 1.7 attemps (28%). For him to hit 3 threes a game it would require him to improve his percentage about 10% and still attempt 7.9 a game. 3 threes a game sounds a bit much to me considering the data on his shooting ability.

Hoops is a two way game. Defense matters. Like Fox, Bagley always had the highest ceiling of any player in his draft class (even greater than Ayton), because of his two way impact. He has the feet and bounce and motor that is going to allow him to guard wings and bigs. Draft reports that questioned his defensive abilities were always faulty. Folks point to wingspan, which matters. But, on defense, what matters more is a players feet. Fox has it. Bags has it. Papa/Skal doesn't/didn't. (Side note: WCS has it too, but lacks the motor).

The reported issues on defense with him was his lack of defensive instincts/IQ and his limited wingspan. Athleticism helps a lot defensively but if a big man wants to be high impact defensively, it usually requires great rim protection and that requires great instincts and IQ. His athleticism certainly indicates that at least he can be effective when switching and thats obviously valuable.

 

[kb02]

You're describing the best case scenario for Bagley. Atm he is very far from some of the things you say that he will be able to do. He might hit that best case scenario, he might get close to it but its hard to predict. For example Bagley hitting 3 threes a game would require massive improvement in his shooting. He wasnt a good shooter in college and he hasnt been a good shooter in the Nba. Per 36min hes currently hitting 0.5 threes a game on 1.7 attemps (28%). For him to hit 3 threes a game it would require him to improve his percentage about 10% and still attempt 7.9 a game. 3 threes a game sounds a bit much to me considering the data on his shooting ability.



The reported issues on defense with him was his lack of defensive instincts/IQ and his limited wingspan. Athleticism helps a lot defensively but if a big man wants to be high impact defensively, it usually requires great rim protection and that requires great instincts and IQ. His athleticism certainly indicates that at least he can be effective when switching and thats obviously valuable.

On offense, the things that he needs to improve on are rooted in repetition. Folks think shooting n passing n dribbling are innate. They’re not. He has the skill set n the athletic base. And obviously has the drive. Only thing that is uncertain is whether he’ll ever lose his drive.

On defense, the reports we’re off. You take a fresh out hs teen with no practice, throw him into a zone, then rate his bbiq as substandard? As for length, it’s overrated. Feet is more important. He’s 6’10 with avg length (but still at least 6’10) and an incredible base (which is the reason for the second jump). Give me the nimble defender with avg length over the avg feet defender with length any day.

 

[Gguod]

On offense, the things that he needs to improve on are rooted in repetition. Folks think shooting n passing n dribbling are innate. They’re not. He has the skill set n the athletic base. And obviously has the drive. Only thing that is uncertain is whether he’ll ever lose his drive.

Its certainly not that simple I can guarantee you that. Otherwise every player would be a great shooter if its just about repetition and drive. You can make educated predictions on rookies shooting ability in the Nba based on how he has shot the ball before. For example college ft% is usually a reasonably good indicator wether you should expect the player to become a good high volume shooter in the Nba. Bagley was a low ft% guy in college and a low volume shooter overall in college. He has been a low ft% guy in the Nba, a low volume shooter in the Nba and and a low percentage shooter in the Nba.

Saying that its a fact that he will become so good shooter that he will make 3 threes a game and attempt 8 isnt fair to Bagley since it just sets unrealistic expectations. Based on the things we know, the data we know and how the data predicts things, we can make a prediction that Bagley could become a solid shooter in a way that you cant just leave him wide open but its unlikely that he will become a serious threat behind the arc. Everything is possible but to me thats the most probable outcome based on data and I dont want to bet on outliers or argue that being an outlier is the most probable outcome. I certainly hope he reaches that probable outcome and surpasses it.

On defense, the reports we’re off. You take a fresh out hs teen with no practice, throw him into a zone, then rate his bbiq as substandard? As for length, it’s overrated. Feet is more important. He’s 6’10 with avg length (but still at least 6’10) and an incredible base (which is the reason for the second jump). Give me the nimble defender with avg length over the avg feet defender with length any day.

For whatever reason, the lack of instincts and IQ was clearly seen on the college tape. He might become a solid instinct/IQ guy, but there was a reason for those reports. In order to become reallly impactfull defensively, Bagley would need to become a great rim protector. For being a rim protector he lacks some length and atm some IQ and instincts. He can easily be a net neutral or slight positive on defense but ist unfair to him to expect him becoming a high impact defensive big like Gobert, Embiid, Davis ect.

 

[sactowndog]

As of right now, the overwhelming majority of the successful teams out there are led by wings. KAT, Cousins, Embiid and AD only have 4 playoff appearances out of a combined 20 years. KAT only made it because Butler showed up. AD has 2 playoff appearances. Cousins none, but that will change this year and that's only because he's riding the Warriors coat tails. Embiid will probably be in the playoffs for a while but I'd be curious to see if he could make the playoffs if say, Eric Bledsoe was his PG instead of Simmons.

Until I see actual proof that big men have a real impact on the game anymore, I can't get in line with you guys that still think they are relevant. I haven't seen proof of it in years.

I think your point is a team must have 3 point shooting. And to Vlade’s credit the Kings do. The Kings are 3rd in 3 point percentage. The problem is they are 24th in 3 point attempts.

The Kings biggest problem is outside of Harry the Kings bigs often don’t pass. WCS has gotten better but he was among the worst last year. Bagley would still rather go 1 versus 3 than pass to open shooters. A big who can finish around the basket is great but what has changed is that big must be a good and willing passer.

 

[Jkbiker]

Guys, the solution is clear...play Bagley at SF so he can lead a team to a championship

Fox / Ferrell / Mason
Hield / Bogdanovic / McLemore
Bagley / Shumpert / Jackson
Giles / Bjelica / Labissiere
Cauley-Stein / Koufos / Randolph

Make it happen Joerger

Bjelica played at 3 in Minny
Everyone says we need Bjelica to space the floor
So play your best players

Fox,Ferrell,Mason
Buddy,Bogi,BenMac
Bjelica,Shump,Jackson
Bagley,Giles,Skal
WCS,Koufos,Zbo

On D Bagley defends paint,rebounds, WCS defends perimetr
On O Bagley and WCS need to pass to the three shooters, WCS takes the lobs, Bag Layups, putbacks, 10 ft
With Buddy and Beli spreading the floor, Fox can operate? If driving to basket he can dump ball
to either big?

Until we get a true starting SF that can shoot the 3 , and slide Bjelly to bench to score with Bogi
Everyone keeps saying it has to Be Bjelly scoring or Bagley our big of the future
WHY NOT BOTH!

 

[sactowndog]

Houston was and is fine as long as CP/Harden are there they win last year if Paul doesn’t get hurt

Houston shot an abysmal 31.4% from 3. Because in the play-offs teams pressed out on their 3 point shooting. What makes the warriors different is their ability to pass and move 1-5 so they always have an open shooter.

 

[sactowndog]

This is a good point. Those contradictions are certainly apparent in my thinking and I think they're the result of the collision of cold hard facts with a lifetime of experience watching the game as it once was. One part of my brain says that we need a defensive big because that's always been the case in the past while the other part of my brain says that post defense doesn't matter when everyone else is shooting threes. And you're right that a team still needs somebody who can go and get a shot with the game on the line and the defense already in position. Guys who bring you that are stars and guys who don't are role-players. In our case we're fortunate to have three guys already who have proven capable of just that.

I would change your bolded statement though to say that the advantage goes to the team whose players have a proven ability to score at will from somewhere, it doesn't matter if it's from down low or not. The Bearded One knows the answer... if your perimeter players can't hit a three they need to put the ball on the floor and get to the line. That's the inside/outside game now. But let's not stop there because The Bearded One knows another secret that turns my whole universe inside-out. It just might be the case now that Defense Doesn't Matter.

Now excuse me while I take a moment to rebuild my basketball soul...

I think what works in the regular season when teams don’t have the chance to lock in on any one team and what happens in a 7 game play-off series is different. The bearded one, as great as he is, has yet to play in the NBA finals.

 

[Gguod]

Bjelica played at 3 in Minny
Everyone says we need Bjelica to space the floor
So play your best players

Fox,Ferrell,Mason
Buddy,Bogi,BenMac
Bjelica,Shump,Jackson
Bagley,Giles,Skal
WCS,Koufos,Zbo

On D Bagley defends paint,rebounds, WCS defends perimetr
On O Bagley and WCS need to pass to the three shooters, WCS takes the lobs, Bag Layups, putbacks, 10 ft
With Buddy and Beli spreading the floor, Fox can operate? If driving to basket he can dump ball
to either big?

Until we get a true starting SF that can shoot the 3 , and slide Bjelly to bench to score with Bogi
Everyone keeps saying it has to Be Bjelly scoring or Bagley our big of the future
WHY NOT BOTH!

Bjelica isnt a SF. He isnt quick enough to defend opposing wings and offers almost nothing off the dribble against opposing wing defenders. The value that Bjelica provides is that he streches the floor at "pf" position, providing above average spacing. If you take that away and play him at SF with two non shooting bigs, you lessen the value he provides and he wont be a valuable player anymore.

 

[King Baller]

I think your point is a team must have 3 point shooting. And to Vlade’s credit the Kings do. The Kings are 3rd in 3 point percentage. The problem is they are 24th in 3 point attempts.

The Kings biggest problem is outside of Harry the Kings bigs often don’t pass. WCS has gotten better but he was among the worst last year. Bagley would still rather go 1 versus 3 than pass to open shooters. A big who can finish around the basket is great but what has changed is that big must be a good and willing passer.

I would add in addition to passing a Big needs to set good picks. This frees up those shooters for good looks at those threes.

 

[kb02]

Its certainly not that simple I can guarantee you that. Otherwise every player would be a great shooter if its just about repetition and drive. You can make educated predictions on rookies shooting ability in the Nba based on how he has shot the ball before. For example college ft% is usually a reasonably good indicator wether you should expect the player to become a good high volume shooter in the Nba. Bagley was a low ft% guy in college and a low volume shooter overall in college. He has been a low ft% guy in the Nba, a low volume shooter in the Nba and and a low percentage shooter in the Nba.

Saying that its a fact that he will become so good shooter that he will make 3 threes a game and attempt 8 isnt fair to Bagley since it just sets unrealistic expectations. Based on the things we know, the data we know and how the data predicts things, we can make a prediction that Bagley could become a solid shooter in a way that you cant just leave him wide open but its unlikely that he will become a serious threat behind the arc. Everything is possible but to me thats the most probable outcome based on data and I dont want to bet on outliers or argue that being an outlier is the most probable outcome. I certainly hope he reaches that probable outcome and surpasses it.



For whatever reason, the lack of instincts and IQ was clearly seen on the college tape. He might become a solid instinct/IQ guy, but there was a reason for those reports. In order to become reallly impactfull defensively, Bagley would need to become a great rim protector. For being a rim protector he lacks some length and atm some IQ and instincts. He can easily be a net neutral or slight positive on defense but ist unfair to him to expect him becoming a high impact defensive big like Gobert, Embiid, Davis ect.

2 to 3 threes per game is average not extraordinary. No one is saying Bags is going to be an elite three point shooter. He just needs to be competent in order to stretch defenders.

As for the whole it showed up on tape in college thing, you're looking at a sample size that is small and he's a freshman. What he's shown thus far in the pros seems to be much more representative of his defense potential than anything he showed at Duke.

The things that I am projecting him on, they're not based on pie in the sky, three standard deviation jumps. They're 1.5 deviations.

 

[BigVirg]

Houston shot an abysmal 31.4% from 3. Because in the play-offs teams pressed out on their 3 point shooting. What makes the warriors different is their ability to pass and move 1-5 so they always have an open shooter.

The warriors had 71 points in the paint the other night. You can live and die by the 3 during the regular season but come playoff time you better be able to get to the free throw line and get buckets in the paint

 

[Gguod]

2 to 3 threes per game is average not extraordinary. No one is saying Bags is going to be an elite three point shooter. He just needs to be competent in order to stretch defenders.

JJ Redick makes 3 threes a game and its the 6th most in the league. I would say its pretty unfair to Bagley if the excpectation is set anywhere near that considering the data on his shooting on college and in the Nba.

As for the whole it showed up on tape in college thing, you're looking at a sample size that is small and he's a freshman. What he's shown thus far in the pros seems to be much more representative of his defense potential than anything he showed at Duke.

As I said there was a reason it was in his scouting report. I'm not arguing anything else but that its also unfair to expect Bagley to become a high impact defensive player like Gobert or Embiid.

The things that I am projecting him on, they're not based on pie in the sky, three standard deviation jumps. They're 1.5 deviations.

Your projections are unrealistic. You are basically projecting an ultimate best case scenario as the most probable outcome and based on all the data we know, your predictions doesnt seem like the most probable outcomes

 

[kb02]

JJ Redick makes 3 threes a game and its the 6th most in the league. I would say its pretty unfair to Bagley if the excpectation is set anywhere near that considering the data on his shooting on college and in the Nba.



As I said there was a reason it was in his scouting report. I'm not arguing anything else but that its also unfair to expect Bagley to become a high impact defensive player like Gobert or Embiid.



Your projections are unrealistic. You are basically projecting an ultimate best case scenario as the most probable outcome and based on all the data we know, your predictions doesnt seem like the most probable outcomes

JJ Reddick is a bench player. 2 to 3 somehow became three. 50% increase. Gotcha.

The scouting report was wrong. His NBA play speaks for itself. Who said he would be an elite defensive anchor?

No, my projections are not unrealistic. He's already producing a double double as a bench player. On one hand and a motor. Add a few years of development and it's not hard to see him as a 20/10/3 player with 2 to 3 three pointers per game. I just don't get why you think shooting three is so damn hard when Brook Lopez and Myers Leonard are bombing threes nightly. It's not like Bags is going to get pushed out by defenders. He's going to have space, because he'll just beat his man off the bounce. Dude is going to be a nightmare for opposing teams. It'll happen. Watch.

 

[Livinthedream]

Houston shot an abysmal 31.4% from 3. Because in the play-offs teams pressed out on their 3 point shooting. What makes the warriors different is their ability to pass and move 1-5 so they always have an open shooter.

Yes. But not only passing. All of their key players can score at any level. 3pt, mid range, at the basket, off the dribble. You can't force them into a weakness.

 

[Swipa]

I just want to acknowledge that this thread had caught a stride there. The high-level analysis provided by @hrdboild and those responding to him is a big part of what make a forum like this so special. Thank you!

It's interesting to consider the case of Anthony Davis. He's the most dominant big man in the game today whose game is somewhat traditional. His supporting cast isn't great, but is it worse than what Harden or Lebron are/were willing to the post season? Jrue Holiday is a force on both sides of the ball, Mirotic is a threat when healthy, Randle and E'Twaun are legitimate NBA players..

So, why aren't the Pelicans a lock for the playoffs? Is it because of the fact that their best player doesn't shoot a high volume of 3's or generate a high enough volume of easy shots for his teammates? Something else that I'm missing?

 

[Kingz19]

The league is always a new “point of emphasis” away from completely changing the pace or most important positions of the game. We saw it in the late 80’s early 90s for physical defenses, the mid 90’s for Jordan, the early 2000’s for big men, and now we’re seeing it for the get as many open three pointers as possible era. A lot of it is just teams following trends trying to be GS 2.0 or 3.0 (I wonder why nobody can beat the original) and then the league caters to that. We’ve seen the game change accordingly without significant rule changes but simply how the rules are interpreted or enforced.

Either way, Bagley is not going to be a 90s big man. His template is of both an inside outside threat who will get to the line. I like his form and he already shoots with confidence...the three pointer and mid range shot will become a threat that will open up his drives to the basket. He will get to the line a lot as well.

What I’d like to see more of is him playing within the flow of the offense and passing out of double teams which we’ve seen flashes of. That can be a symptom of him thinking he has to get a certain amount in during his minutes or the fact that the jumper hasn’t really opened things up for him yet. As of now, he’s oretty much where guys like Bosh and Boogie were(as rookies) statistically as a reserve and without his skill being harnessed with timing and polish. I just love his ceiling.

I’m fine with his role in the bench for now. His minutes are increasing regardless.

More back to earlier topic(off topics) in this thread: you can still build around big men in this league. You just have to build around them. The Kings failed in the Boogie era because they never committed to being the team they had to be with Cousins. The roster turned over almost every season as well as the staff. NOP have also failed with Davis.

These failures aren’t on those guys ability to be the centerpiece and bigs also open the floor for those precious three pointers(points in the paint is also still extremely important as Kings fans should be able to attest to watching this season) as well as any penetrating guard or wing can..you just need guys who can make those three pointers. Is Marcus Thornton the best floor spacer Boogie had with him? Boogie himself was the most dependable perimeter shooter on the Kings. Imagine if Boogie ever had a stretch 4 like Bjeli or a SG like Buddy?

How good would the Bucks be if Giannis didn’t have shooters galore around him? He certainly wouldn’t be shooting and making them himself. What opens it up for his teammates is his ability to score in the paint.

 

[206Fan]

I don't think you can win in today's game with your best players being your bigs. Look at the Pelicans right now who have the best big man rotation in the entire league. Anthony Davis, Julius Randle, Nikola Mirotic, and Jahlil Okafor. Health has been a factor for Mirotic, but AD and Randle are the best big man tandem in the league, yet they're sitting at 22-28.

Davis: 29.3pts 13.3rebs 4.4asts 2.56blks 1.71stls on 50.8/32.5/81
Randle: 21.3pts 9.3rebs 3.0asts 0.76blks 1.66stls on 54.4/31.8/74
Mirotic: 16.7pts 8.3rebs 1.1asts 0.78blks 0.66stls on 44.7/36.8/84


And it's not like they don't have talent surrounding them. Holiday is a 2-way All-Star PG. 21.2pts 8.1asts 4.9rebs on 48.1/32.7/75. Etwan Moore is one of the better shooters in the league at 41.7%.

It's not AD's fault. He's played exceptional at a near MVP level. But in today's game, I don't think your best players can be bigs.

I've also always believed that the most important position in the NBA is the PG. QB of the offense.

 

[Gguod]

JJ Reddick is a bench player. 2 to 3 somehow became three. 50% increase. Gotcha.

7.Klay Thompson 2.9 3PM
8.Damian Lillard 2.8 3PM
9.D'angelo Russell 2.7 3PM
10.Nikola Mirotic 2.7 3PM
11. Eric Gordon 2.6 3PM
12 Kyrie Irving 2.6

Should I go on? Either you dont understand how good it is if you make 2,5 threes a game or more or you have really unrealistic expectations for a guy that has never been a good shooter in his career.

The scouting report was wrong. His NBA play speaks for itself. Who said he would be an elite defensive anchor?

You said that Bagley has a lot of defensive upside. I said that if Bagley is going to be a high impact defensive big man like Gobert or Embiid, he most likely has to become a great rim protector. And based on the things we know, I wouldnt bet on him becoming a rim protector of that level. As I said, he can have value defensively, just most likely not elite value.

No, my projections are not unrealistic. He's already producing a double double as a bench player. On one hand and a motor. Add a few years of development and it's not hard to see him as a 20/10/3 player with 2 to 3 three pointers per game. I just don't get why you think shooting three is so damn hard when Brook Lopez and Myers Leonard are bombing threes nightly. It's not like Bags is going to get pushed out by defenders. He's going to have space, because he'll just beat his man off the bounce. Dude is going to be a nightmare for opposing teams. It'll happen. Watch.

It is absolutely unrealistic to say as a fact that Bagley will make 2-3 threes in a game. Go look at the statistics, go look at what group you expect him to belong to. A guy that has never been a good shooter, a guy whose college+Nba stats suggest that he will most likely become a passable shooter and that is the most probable outcome. It is absolutely unrealistic to say that he will hit 2-3 threes a game.

 

[Livinthedream]

There can only be one best team and one best player at a time. For every big man we can list who didn't lead his team to a title this year, there are 30 other teams who also fell short. Lillard is outstanding and him and CJ can't get out of the 1st round. That's just as baffling if not more if this is a guard driven league.

 

[Gguod]

There can only be one best team and one best player at a time. For every big man we can list who didn't lead his team to a title this year, there are 30 other teams who also fell short. Lillard is outstanding and him and CJ can't get out of the 1st round. That's just as baffling if not more if this is a guard driven league.

In general guards and wings generate the most value, especially offensively since the most valuable players can create offense for themselves and others effectively. In general big men generate more value defensively and less value offensively and thats why its important that your center is a good defener rather than good post scorer or mie range shooter.

OBPM and ORPM is one way to look at it and this is a great post written by tyguy pre draft looking at this thing exactly in a context of which position generates most value offensively:

JJJ has an elite skill (defense) what elite skill does bagley have? It certainly isn't defense. The chance of him becoming an elite offensive player are slim to none also. The only players that are high impact game altering offensive players A. Create shots for themselves B. Create shots for others. B is out of the question, it's extremely rare for a big and Bagley has not shown the chops. As far as creating offense for himself, post offense is inefficient.

In fact, offense creation is the domain of wings and guards. Very, very few “bigs” can be high impact offensive game changers because they cannot create for themselves and they usually cannot create for others. There is historical proof of this.

—In NBA history having a Box Plus/Minus (OBPM) of +5 is the mark of an elite offensive player and +6 is the domain of the game changing offensive players. There have been 243 individual seasons in which a player has posted a Box +/- of +5 or higher and only 116 in which a player has had a +6 season.

—Here are all the non wings/guards to have a Box Plus/Minus season of +6 or higher

Barkley 4 times, Shaq 2, KAJ 1, KLove 1, DROB, Jokic, Karl Malone. That’s only 11 out of 116 times or about 9.5% of all such player seasons.
If you look at all the bigs who had a Box +/- of +5 or higher, you wind up with a total 32 out of 243 or about 13.2% of all such player seasons.

—Wings and guards have created the best offense (especially since 1980) but teams just didn’t know it. The highest all time OBPM for non wings and guards is Barkley at #13 and #21 all time. This was when he was in Philly and played like a big since he had far fewer assists than those at the top of this list. Kareem at #36 is the highest ranking traditional Big big.

The story is the same for offensive RPM.

2018: 16 players over +3 (Jokic and KAT the only bigs), 10 Over +4 (Jokic the only big), 5 Over +5 (ZERO bigs), 2 Over +6 (ZERO bigs).

2017: 24 players over +3, ( Blake, KAT, BOOGIE, Jokic), 14 over +4 (Jokic), 7 over +5 (ZERO bigs), 4 over +6 (ZERO bigs), 1 Over +7 (ZERO bigs)

2016: 16 players over +3 (Jokic), 9 over +4 (ZERO bigs), 7 over +5 (ZERO bigs), 4 over +6 (ZERO bigs), 2 over +7 (ZERO bigs)

2015: 22 players over +3 (LMA, AD), 13 over +4, (ZERO bigs), 5 over +6 (ZERO bigs), 3 over +7 (ZERO bigs). 1 Over +8 (ZERO bigs)

2014: 24 players over +3 (Ryno, Love, dirk, Frye), 13 over +4 (Dirk), 6 over +5 (ZERO bigs), 4 over +6 (ZERO bigs), 1 Over +8 (ZERO bigs)

ORPM TOTALS from 2014–2018: There’s never been a big with an ORPM over 5.

+3 ORPM: 92 player seasons overall, only 13 bigs (14.1%)
+4 ORPM: 59 player seasons overall, 3 bigs (5.1%)
+5 ORPM: 33 player seasons overall, ZERO bigs
+6 ORPM: 19 player seasons overall, ZERO bigs
+7 ORPM: 7 player seasons overall, ZERO bigs
+8: ORPM: 2 player seasons overall, ZERO bigs


A big HAS to become a defensive force to become a game changer because he won’t be on offense. A guy like KAT who can post (least useful in today’s game) and shoot like a guard (look at his %s on open threes) is going to cap out at a +4ish on offense unless he can create for others which seems unlikely. A guy like Jokic is a +4 to +5 Player on offense because of his passing ability. KAT isn’t a defensive anchor but is actually a liability relative to other centers. If KAT were a better defensive player, he’d be a top 3-5 player.

This doesnt suggest that every guard/wing is more valuable than any center, no. It suggests that more often its wings and guards producing the most value offensively compared to big men. Anthony Davis is still more valuable player than CJ Mccollum, Davis provides value defensively and CJ (like Davis) doesnt really create offense for others thus Anthony Davis provides more overall value.

 

[NME]

Bagley will rack up points and rebounds, but is lacking in most ancillary skills you look for in a modern big man. He doesn't stretch the floor, isn't a creator or a plus-passer, doesn't project as a defensive anchor, is not long or physical. The problem with taking a player like that at #2 is you've locked in one of your front court positions and you are behind the 8 ball in roster construction, because you need the other front court spots to bring some variety of unicorn.

By contrast, Jaren Jackson has similar basic production, but projects as a defensive anchor and a floor stretcher. Jackson has a stronger frame and more length, so he can impact the defense on a play-to-play basis, not just on his one or two blocks. That's why he's already in the elite tier in rim protection numbers. Marvin will get some blocks but they are dependent on his jumping ability and timing, and he has yet to show that he can be a deterrent when he isn't leaving his feet. Jackson is taking about 2 1/2 threes at 33%, but his arsenal includes step-back threes, not simply when he happens to get the ball wide at the arc with his set. He looks like the player more likely to be able to up his three point volume while maintaining a good percentage as he develops. Jackson's rebounding averages are lower, but advanced stats show he is good at contested rebounds and is deferring to Gasol to clean up the easy boards.

Marvin could improve in some of these areas, but we're betting on him developing skills that have not been hinted at in his basketball life.

 

[Kingster]

I just want to acknowledge that this thread had caught a stride there. The high-level analysis provided by @hrdboild and those responding to him is a big part of what make a forum like this so special. Thank you!

It's interesting to consider the case of Anthony Davis. He's the most dominant big man in the game today whose game is somewhat traditional. His supporting cast isn't great, but is it worse than what Harden or Lebron are/were willing to the post season? Jrue Holiday is a force on both sides of the ball, Mirotic is a threat when healthy, Randle and E'Twaun are legitimate NBA players..

So, why aren't the Pelicans a lock for the playoffs? Is it because of the fact that their best player doesn't shoot a high volume of 3's or generate a high enough volume of easy shots for his teammates? Something else that I'm missing?

How about maybe their best player isn't clutch down the stretch. I haven't done a statistical analysis of that guess, but my eye-ball test is that he's just not a dominant player in the 4th quarter when so many games are won or lost.

 

[mac]

It's rough sometimes seeing the changes before everyone else. My apologies because I'm sure I was one of the people arguing that you were wrong. I hated George Karl as the coach of this team while he was here... but his offensive strategy was working. And his "switch everything " defense is pretty much the norm now. The guy could have had a winning record here if he just had better diplomacy skills.



It's not exactly that big men as a group are irrelevant, it's more that the idea of The Big Man as a guy you build your team around has become irrelevant. In much the same way that saber-metrics have completely changed baseball over the last 15 years, the idea of Points Per Possession has swept through basketball and knocked the Low-Post scorer off their pedestal for good. The reason I say it's never going back is because the issue is simple mathematics. An elite big man like Shaq shoots 60% from the field and takes almost all of his shots near the basket. Elite three point shooters shoot 40% from three. If both players take the same number of shots, it's a wash. 2 points per basket at .600 is 1.2 PPP. 3 points per basket at a rate of .400 is the same 1.2 PPP. So that's your magic number, 40%. All things being equal, your three point shooter needs to knock down only 40% of their shots to equal the scoring output of a Hall of Fame big man.

Then you need to look at number of possessions in a game because the two situations are not equal. Shaq is putting the ball in the basket more often than not but it usually takes him half a shot clock to do it. First you need to run a play to get him the ball in the post. That's 5 or 6 seconds off the clock. Then he's going to initiate a move, draw the defender off balance, and power through for the dunk. That's another 5 or 6 seconds. In that same amount of time you're getting 2 good looks at a three, especially if you have multiple shooters on the floor. Maybe even three. So the team shooting only threes is scoring twice as many points as Shaq in the same amount of time. It takes Shaq 10 shots and 2 minutes of possession to get his 12 points. Your three point shooters need the same 10 shots but they only need 1 minute of possession to get them. No matter how you fudge the numbers to account for different situations, that's not a gap that the low post scorer can make up. Especially not when the entire league has already committed to the three point strategy.

It's crazy to think now that this is such a new idea when it should have been obvious to anyone with a basic knowledge of arithmetic since the three point shot was invented. This is where we get back to conventional wisdom though. Coaches like seeing the ball go through the basket. Shaq is damn near automatic down there, let's get him the ball! And if it takes him a whole shot clock to get one basket, that's great too because you're giving the other team less time to score. Get a stop of some kind then get the ball back to Shaq and have him score again. Every once in a while one of those dainty shooters will knock down a three and that's a fun novelty but those guys are barely even basketball players. In Shaq's heydey there were only a handful of 40% shooters and most of them were specialists who couldn't do anything else and only attempted 2-4 a game. Now that's almost 1/4 of the league's starters and the volume of shots is astronomical! That's game over man! The winner used to be the team who made a higher percentage of their shots. Teams win now just by taking more shots.

But you're right that big men can still be important, just not in the way that they used to be. Dirk is almost the Platonic ideal of what a modern big man should be. I say almost only because he didn't shoot the three enough throughout his career, though that had more to do with coaching strategies than ability. You still need someone setting picks to free up shooters and you still need someone to finish off defensive possessions with a rebound but neither of those skills are the exclusive domain of the big man. High percentage two point shots still matter provided you get them fast enough (like on the fast-break) and a big guy who can get out and run helps you there. Actually, the more I think about it... we're in great shape already in the frontcourt with Cauley-Stein, Bagley, Giles, and Bjelica. We'd be in better shape if Bjelica wasn't the only outside shooter in the group, but as long we stick to the run and gun act all we really need to do to elevate this group from pretty good to very good is add another reliable shooter on the wing.

And underscoring the math is that guys are shooting 40% from 3 in no small part because of the rules. Yes, the players themselves are now growing up taking and working on their 3s a lot more, but the space that they get to shoot in games is created by how the game is reffed. You similarly touched on drawing fouls in another post. So to be more precise, we won't see a Shaq if the rules don't change.

 

[Suicide King]

I think what works in the regular season when teams don’t have the chance to lock in on any one team and what happens in a 7 game play-off series is different. The bearded one, as great as he is, has yet to play in the NBA finals.

Not to be "that guy" but Harden played in the 2012 finals against Miami as a super 6th man for OKC. I am sure you meant as the franchise player for his team.

 

[sactowndog]

Not to be "that guy" but Harden played in the 2012 finals against Miami as a super 6th man for OKC. I am sure you meant as the franchise player for his team.

I did but thanks for the correction. Forgot about that.

 

[TaxMan]

I agree, no team has built a good team around a big man lately, perhaps last two decades.

I’m jumping into this thread so maybe I’m missing the point, but I don’t believe the kings are trying to build ‘around’ Marvin. Take it for what it is, but Vlade has said many times that he is trying to build a ‘team’. I take that as his approach is to create the sum that is greater than the individual parts. Fox will be the engine that drives that team.

 

[sono]

I’m jumping into this thread so maybe I’m missing the point, but I don’t believe the kings are trying to build ‘around’ Marvin. Take it for what it is, but Vlade has said many times that he is trying to build a ‘team’. I take that as his approach is to create the sum that is greater than the individual parts. Fox will be the engine that drives that team.

I didn't say the Kings are trying to build a team around Marvin.

 

[ockingsfan]

I don't think you can win in today's game with your best players being your bigs. Look at the Pelicans right now who have the best big man rotation in the entire league. Anthony Davis, Julius Randle, Nikola Mirotic, and Jahlil Okafor. Health has been a factor for Mirotic, but AD and Randle are the best big man tandem in the league, yet they're sitting at 22-28.

Davis: 29.3pts 13.3rebs 4.4asts 2.56blks 1.71stls on 50.8/32.5/81
Randle: 21.3pts 9.3rebs 3.0asts 0.76blks 1.66stls on 54.4/31.8/74
Mirotic: 16.7pts 8.3rebs 1.1asts 0.78blks 0.66stls on 44.7/36.8/84


And it's not like they don't have talent surrounding them. Holiday is a 2-way All-Star PG. 21.2pts 8.1asts 4.9rebs on 48.1/32.7/75. Etwan Moore is one of the better shooters in the league at 41.7%.

It's not AD's fault. He's played exceptional at a near MVP level. But in today's game, I don't think your best players can be bigs.

I've also always believed that the most important position in the NBA is the PG. QB of the offense.

Denver's best player is Nikola Jokic and they are in 2nd place in the West and the 76ers best player is Joel Embiid.

I think you can win in the NBA with a big as your best player, but you need to have the right supporting cast around them.

Fox is the "Batman" the Kings are building around right now and the Kings are hoping Bagley become his "Robin".