If Rockets had drafted Mobley, then ANY of the top 10 picks would have been excellent fits next to him. Mobley-Chet>Green-Chet Mobley-Jabari>Green-Jabari Mobley-Banchero>Green-Banchero Mobley-Ivey>Green-Ivey Mobley-Sharpe>Green-Sharpe Mobley-Griffin>Green-Griffin He is a connector due to his position versatility, IQ and 2 way game. Throw in Sengun and results are same. Mobley-Sengun-FRP > Green-Sengun-FRP DEFENSE MATTERS But this argument is moot anyway, we have to play the hand we're dealt and it's rather obvious that Rockets NEED to draft either Chet or Jabari. PERIOD. No other options will fit as well next to Green and Sengun. Especially because of the current lack of length and how historically poor the Rockets are defensively.
Chet doesn't have Mobley's explosiveness or as good a first step. But Chet has similar high IQ and his first step is LONG. So Chet, unlike Mobley, will struggle getting by wing defenders on perimeter but he can always shoot over them, his length is as ridiculous as the accuracy of his 3ball. But will not cry if pick is Jabari. As long as the pick is either Chet or Jabari, I'm good.
I really want Paolo or Jabari because of the offense potential but Chet could really help our defense. I can see Chet scoring 12 points a game next year, 2 blocks and 9 rebounds as well. Honestly, I would like Jabari and Williams from Duke. Although, Jabari does not have any handles yet but Coach Lucas can help him with that.
I watched the game specifically to watch him, and he was in the game about 5 minutes (I rewound) and was amazed I had not noticed him and that was with most of Memphis big men in foul trouble. I also noticed he was quick to give up his dribble and never tried to drive.
Mobley had fewer question marks than Chet coming out. You could argue Chet might have slightly higher standout attributes (i.e. shot-blocking), but after Mobley's great Rookie season, I think he's proven himself to be the more well-rounded player as of this moment. I'm not writing off Chet by any means, I just think that OP saying he's more talented than Mobley might be a stretch. Chet's offensive game is varied and efficient, but it is almost purely complementary. He gets most of his points in the flow of the game -- off drop-offs, P&R lobs, P&P and spot-ups in transition. He can create on his own, but it's never a "go get us a bucket, Chet" situation, as Timme is clearly that guy for Zaga, with a few others ahead of Chet in that pecking order. In a tough game against Memphis, Chet struggled to make any impact on O. Mobley was knocked for not always being the most assertive at USC, but he's shown the ability to get a bucket for Cleveland when needed, and part of that is the fact that his body can withstand contact, while Chet's cannot. Now, he has been incredibly efficient, and has a knack for being in the right place on O and D, which is an underrated skill. Defensively, he's going to make an impact. But one underrated point I've seen brought up is that offensive players can get to the rim on Chet, and most aren't intimidated by him, which equals more FGA at the rim for opponents. Now, he's damn good at blocking shots once they're down there, but it's a trend I see continuing and even increasing at the NBA level. Guys are going to muscle him inside, which is not a good thing, no matter how good you are at blocking shots and avoiding fouls (which he's admittedly very good at). But all this being said, I could do similar writeups for Jabari Smith and Banchero. All 3 have major question marks. That's not to say they wouldn't fit here -- I just don't think we're going to find our Franchise Savior this year. As for the chances of adding another cornerstone to Green/Sengun etc? I think we have a good shot.
What do you consider a major question mark for Banchero? I think he has some weaknesses but not really major.
To be honest I agree, in terms of strengths/weaknesses anyways. I think many people have nitpicked his game. He does have some question marks on D, but that mostly comes from his off-ball focus wavering. He moves well and has a strong frame, so even if he'll never be a great rim-protector, he should be solid on that end if he puts in the effort. But I'd say his biggest question mark is in his fit. Smith and Holmgren should fit anywhere. They don't have to be high-USG players, Smith is going to stretch the defense on O and be able to switch on multiple positions on D, while Holmgren can block shots and cover a lot of ground on D, while playing off playmakers on O. If either one adds more to their offensive game, it's icing on the cake. Basically both guys might end up as ceiling-raisers/elite role-guys, while Banchero might end up being more of a floor-raiser/mid-level go-to guy. He's easily the most complete offensive talent of the three, but he excels with the ball in his hands. He hasn't shown a ton of ability to play off of a top perimeter creator (granted Duke doesn't really have a great PG situation), and when he does get fed the ball, he can be prone to taking tougher shots than he has to (considering he can get to the rim on most anyone at the CBB level). So I guess you could say the stakes are higher for him because he's going to have to shoulder more of an offensive load than the other two to make up for the "complementary" advantages the other two have over him. In a nutshell: The cake for Smith: Being a knockdown shooter and super switchable defender Icing on top: Any growth in offensive creation The cake for Holmgren: Being an elite weakside shotblocker and a strong P&R/P&R option Icing on top: Also being able to create offense on his own/adding weight The cake for Banchero: Being a 3-level go-to scorer who you can run an offense through Icing on top: More defensive effort/improved off-ball O
Fits? Why should this team be worried about how anybody fits with these players, and why do Smith and Holmgren fit better than Banchero? Why would you want a fit instead of the hub? I understand some criticism of Banchero, but fit is not one of them, with his skill set he can fit in anywhere and like the others but also has a chance of being a go-to guy as well as the best facilitator for everyone else. If anything I would like to see Banchero be more assertive offensively not if he can play with another creator, I think he would excel with another smart creator of offense. I think we agree on most of this, I just believe you go with playmaker creator multi skilled guy over the elite roll player. I also don't understand why Holmgrens shot blocking ability is supposed to put him over the guy who is skilled at all 3 levels offensively and a very good rebounder.
Mobley doesnt get a bucket when needed for the Cavs, 65% of his 2 pts and 95% of his 3s are assisted. Majority of his offense is set up by his teammates. There's a recency bias with Mobley since he translated to the NBA you're automatically gonna think as a prospect he showed more than Chet. But in reality Mobley didnt put up eye popping efficiency like Chet, he only shot 57% from the field and 30% from 3. As far as prospects go without knowing how Mobley would perform in the NBA Chet is ranked higher than him. The lack of muscle mass were seen ss problems for both of them, its not like Mobley managed to bulk up in the NBA he is still thin AF.
Paolo has issues with motor and defensive intensity. He also has major issues with not having a 3 pt shot and being an inefficient mid range scorer. Is there any star PF in the league who cant shoot 3s?
No he does not, you are just pulling **** out of your ass. He is shooting 48% having a bad shot and being an inefficient mid-range scorer, so he must be doing something to compensate. So know we are saying he can't improve on any of this as a 19-year-old and we should look at these guys as finished projects? It's amazing how many bad takes you spout as if you know anything.
I already showed you all the scouting reports saying it lol. Why are you denying it and why are you getting all defensive? Arent you the one pulling **** out of your ass denying it? Who said they are finished prospects? Your post is asking questions about Banchero and I told you the questions. You bolding your reply and insulting me doesnt make these questions go away.
No you did not. The fact that you think he is a defensive liability and does not try hard shows you don't know ****. It's very telling you for the most part don't have a clue when it comes to basketball, so I respond accordingly. You are the one telling us that Banchero should be downgraded because of your imagined scouting report but for some reason ignore the weaknesses of the others as if they can improve but Banchero cannot.
I never said Banchero is a defensive liability, I said people are questioning his motor and defensive intensity. Why are you so obsessed with Banchero? Are you a BoF? You so sucking Banchero's nuts so hard you pull out all the stops to defend him, from straw man arguments to ad hominem to gaslighting LMAO what a joke. As for "imagining" questions on Banchero's defensive intensity: "Paolo doesn’t project as an elite defender and could even be a minus on the defensive end. He doesn’t offer much rim protection and can get scored over. There are times when he needs to be more engaged and aware on D." https://nbadraftroom.com/p/paolo-banchero/ "Stat Weakness: Def Rating, Def Win Shares" https://www.tankathon.com/players/paolo-banchero "but sometimes, it seems like he picks and chooses when to play as hard as he can." https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nba...anchero-jabari-smith/oa5xmslpsvire8kj9ubtnktx So you think I wrote all these or what? Did I just imagine it or are you sucking Banchero's nuts a little too hard and you lose your **** every time you see any criticism of Banchero? For the record I don't have any bias on these prospects, I just want the Rox to get the best available talent for them. All of these players have questions to them that they need to answer, however somebody like Ivey or Jabari have far less issues they need to address over someone like Banchero. Sure Banchero can develop a 3 pt shot, but Jabari, Chet and Ivey already have a working 3 pt shot.
I posted this last season, multiple times, to no avail. Box +/- has been a very good predictor of how play will translate to NBA.
Meh. By that logic all the BPM leaders in NCAA would turn into good pros in the NBA. Luke Garza, Gary Clark, Frank Kaminsky and KJ mcdaniels have even higher BPM than those guys: https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/leaders/bpm-player-yearly.html
