What to do with Bagley?
- Thread starter Capt. Factorial
- Start date
He’s always had ability. Those w/o ability don’t typically get drafted #2. Anybody suggesting he doesn’t have ability is being disingenuous. Or they just have no clue.
The big issues have been and continue to be his health and dedication/ability to improve his body.
The NBA is always littered with athletes that have seemingly endless ability and potential. The great separators are health, work ethic and drive. Those are still big question marks with several of the team’s players, Bagley included.
The big issues have been and continue to be his health and dedication/ability to improve his body.
The NBA is always littered with athletes that have seemingly endless ability and potential. The great separators are health, work ethic and drive. Those are still big question marks with several of the team’s players, Bagley included.
I spent a lot of days defending my "defense" of Bagley, when I simply saw the situation for what it was. Luke was a bad coach with what looked like something personal against Bagley. Politics were being played and Luke held all the cards. Working harder was not going to save Bagley. Only a change of situation.
This is 100% correct. I believe in Bagley because I have seen what he did in high school and what he did in one year at UNC and I think that should, in principle, translate to the NBA. That doesn't mean it WILL translate, just that it SHOULD translate, but yes Bagley has to put in the work to make that happen.
I think - MY take - that Walton didn't give Bagley the chance to develop his skills at the NBA level. He's still only 22 years old, he's still got the potential, and 100% he has NOT shown what we need to see. And my thinking is that we've got 60+ games left to figure out what Bagley can be before we have to make a pretty big decision on his QO.
As that is clearly true, I want to see a LOT of Bagley. I want him to prove he's worth the QO, and then move from there. If he's not that guy, so be it. But what I don't want to see is for us to give up on him and then see another team reap the benefits off of it. I think we all know that the Kings can't really afford to burn a #2 pick (best pick we had since 1989, for what it's worth). So we need to set Bagley free minutes-wise and see what we've got. Maybe we have a bust. But maybe we have a solid NBA player. We need to know which it is.
I think - MY take - that Walton didn't give Bagley the chance to develop his skills at the NBA level. He's still only 22 years old, he's still got the potential, and 100% he has NOT shown what we need to see. And my thinking is that we've got 60+ games left to figure out what Bagley can be before we have to make a pretty big decision on his QO.
As that is clearly true, I want to see a LOT of Bagley. I want him to prove he's worth the QO, and then move from there. If he's not that guy, so be it. But what I don't want to see is for us to give up on him and then see another team reap the benefits off of it. I think we all know that the Kings can't really afford to burn a #2 pick (best pick we had since 1989, for what it's worth). So we need to set Bagley free minutes-wise and see what we've got. Maybe we have a bust. But maybe we have a solid NBA player. We need to know which it is.
I didn't see it with Luke, he got playing time to start the season in Y2 then got hurt, played when he was ready, got hurt... Played quite a bit early in Y3 and then got hurt again that's when it really seemed to go way sour, and his dad started taking shots from the twitters. And then Marvin himself seemed to develop a bad attitude. That was the point I finally turned.
I think it's obvious Luke is a really bad coach, but this team did try. I guess we never really put him with players he could succeed with, and it sure seems Gentry has made sure Bagley is out there with others that don't get in his space/vice versa. And that problem wasn't isolated to Marv.
I just hope that if we put him in the place to succeed all can be forgiven. It does seem the paying fans at G1 are happy for him.
I think it's obvious Luke is a really bad coach, but this team did try. I guess we never really put him with players he could succeed with, and it sure seems Gentry has made sure Bagley is out there with others that don't get in his space/vice versa. And that problem wasn't isolated to Marv.
I just hope that if we put him in the place to succeed all can be forgiven. It does seem the paying fans at G1 are happy for him.
Oh - you're right and I expected him to play this season and get major minutes then we opened up with the trade demand. Of course that was on the heels of Luke telling him explicitly he would not play opening night (though to be fair he missed time in preseason). Obviously IT WAS a peeing contest between them, but then Marvin got on the court a few nights later and looked completely lost. Then wouldn't check in.
Still I absolutely called on Gentry to play Marvin thinking it would just be so that we could start selling players at fair value. Turns out that I really undersold how bad bad bad Luke was. Like I thought he was a 2.5/10 but he is actually like a -5/10.
Still I absolutely called on Gentry to play Marvin thinking it would just be so that we could start selling players at fair value. Turns out that I really undersold how bad bad bad Luke was. Like I thought he was a 2.5/10 but he is actually like a -5/10.
There is a difference in getting playing time and getting playing time in the right situation. You said as much in your post.
I can't stress this point enough. Counting how many starts Marvin had is meaningless if it was a bad situation. A bad mix of players. A faulty offensive and defensive scheme, or lack of coaches that can communicate what is needed.
I'm still waiting to see how it plays out when Holmes is healthy again though.
I can't stress this point enough. Counting how many starts Marvin had is meaningless if it was a bad situation. A bad mix of players. A faulty offensive and defensive scheme, or lack of coaches that can communicate what is needed.
I'm still waiting to see how it plays out when Holmes is healthy again though.
Agree. Would like to say one thing though. Much as I dislike the idea of a tankathon, there are times when it can make sense. Some conditions (needless to say, it depends on the team's situation that year) are
- Very strong draft class. If you win the lottery when a Tim Duncan/LeBron James is available, it's likely worth tanking. Such classes are rare though. Sure, most years will present a good chance to pick a star with a top 3 pick, but there is a difference between a generational player and a very good player, even if you draft well.
- Your team is built around 1 star player and you have no clear path of improving. This is very often the case with mediocre teams. They get one star player, who is good enough to keep them in the playoff hunt, but not enough to push them in that territory (few are: even Bron needs help). Teams keep picking in late lottery, sign vets to keep the star happy/not waste his prime, and hope that somehow they will strike gold. We ourselves faced this situation with DMC. I loved him, and was really sad to see him go, but eventually accepted that moving on was probably the best option, particularly in that year (explained below).
- How much to pay the star: DMC was eligible for super max, something which we probably didn't wan to pay (with reasonable justification I would say, though can understand counter arguments to that). The risk was having a star on the roster who takes up a large part of the cap, or feels disrespected.
- Getting potentially multiple top level draft picks: I think this is the most important. The year we traded DMC, we risked losing our draft pick, and would have certainly lost it had we not traded him, since he was good enough to get us more wins forcing us to give up our pick. While the returns we received were poor, it allowed us to keep our pick, which we turned into Fox. Had we not shot ourselves in the foot after that, we would be in good shape right now.
- Your star is injured: Teams built around a star, instead of depth, can do it more easily. This is what the Spurs did to get TD. This was before I came to US or followed BB, but read that David Robinson was healthy enough to play at one stage, but Spurs shut him down to improve their odds of landing TD, since playoffs were unlikely anyway. That set them up for the next 20 years.
The problem with that is that the recently-changed lottery odds make it harder to tank and still be "guaranteed" a good draft position to get a consensus top player (not to re-hash the whole lottery odds discussion, etc., or debate the obvious fact that a higher draft position is always enviable):
NBA Draft Lottery: Schedule, odds and how it works | NBA.com
As such, the drive to "tank" has been lessened by the lottery changes.
NBA Draft Lottery: Schedule, odds and how it works | NBA.com
As such, the drive to "tank" has been lessened by the lottery changes.
The biggest difference I’ve seen since given a chance is that he is absolutely now playing team ball. Filling a role on offense and not forcing shots. His first few years he seemed to always be trying to prove he’s a superstar. I’m not sure if it’s Christie’s influence, but he now actually looks like a team basketball player. If this is his new mindset, I really do wonder how his career could turn out. Maybe he’s just been humbled, but he could have a very very successful nba career by building on this new foundation.
Don’t sell yourself short either. You have also believed in him and defended him. Though there are some that have given up on him, most still wanted him to do well while wearing a kings jersey but due to injury or attitude, some were at the end of their ropes. It seems there are some on this board that would rather be right, even though if true, it would hurt the team. In this situation I’m glad you and cap being right means bagley is helping the team.
Count me in the crowd that gave up on him. The player he showed his first 3 years was just not an NBA talent. The way he's played since joining the rotation, especially on defense makes me want to see more. Because I think if he can stay healthy and keep up this play consistently for the whole season, he's verging on being a starter level player.
We'll see though, him staying healthy is most important.
We'll see though, him staying healthy is most important.
His defense looked improved last night. He had one horrendous defensive stand in one of the OTs that gave up an easy bucket for the Lakers but Fox and Hield had the same mental breakdowns as well in crunch time. Overall he looked like he was very capable of at least playing man defense when asked.
Timely rebounds and playing his offense within the offensive system was nice to see as well. No more of the usual "gotta get mine" shot attempts and it's a big reason why he went 5-5 instead of 6-12.
Need to see if he can sustain it before I believe it. We've all seen Marvin play much better than this for stretches so a couple of solid roleplayer type games doesn't wipe away 3 years of mostly poor ball.
Not having Walton around looks like it has helped the overall team effort.
Timely rebounds and playing his offense within the offensive system was nice to see as well. No more of the usual "gotta get mine" shot attempts and it's a big reason why he went 5-5 instead of 6-12.
Need to see if he can sustain it before I believe it. We've all seen Marvin play much better than this for stretches so a couple of solid roleplayer type games doesn't wipe away 3 years of mostly poor ball.
Not having Walton around looks like it has helped the overall team effort.
EXACTLY right. Three of his numbers from last night exemplify the point: 5 shot attempts and 4 assists in 35 minutes. Yes, awesome that he made all his attempts, etc. But only 5 FGA in 30 min? Marvin Bagley?! FOUR assists? AND solid defense? For one big game, at least, he answered every major concern about his game (health obviously a different issue).
