Challenge: Convince me Paulo Banchero will be good

[babyjax13]

i like the late Blake comp too...guess who late Blake compares to? Julius Randle now.

Griffin was a lot more cerebral as a player in that era than Randle and more skilled at everything.

may I remind everyone Randle averaged 6apg and 5apg last two years in New York, even more than Blake in his prime.

While in general being a net negative on the court and having pretty poor decision making. ID take Blake's 3 to 4 assists per game over Randles 5 to 6 because he keeps the offense moving really well. More to court vision and passing than assists.

[GoBobs]

The good is that he plays with his head up and has a very good BBIQ for a freshman. He is probably going to have to make some adjustments in his game at the next level but no reason to think he can't figure it out. I think a good comparison is Grant WIlliams on the Celtics. PB stats as a freshman are very comparable to Grant WIllimam's stats as a Junior when he was one of the best players in college basketball. PB is like 3 inches taller than Williams so even though you are not looking for Grant Williams at the top of the draft PB has much higher ceiling. f

There is a tendency to look at body type when making comparisons but what makes a player successful in the NBA is 90% between the ears.

The bad is that he is mostly a below the rim scorer. He won't be a dominant scorer at the NBA level, at least not at first. He is a solid peice though with a good all around game and is more likely to figure it out than most of the other players in this draft.

[BostonCouchGM]

I think the first mistake people make is trying to shoehorn him into a 5 role when that likely will never be his thing. He's nothing like those types of players (Bam, Horford) He's essentially a 6'10" 3 who will play the 4 like a Tatum, KD, or Isaac. He'll have no issues defending 4s or 5s on switches. His issue will be defending smaller guys on switches. But that's true for almost every player in the NBA whether due to ability or conservation of energy for offense. His defense therefore is a non-issue imho.

As to who he is, I think he can be a better Tatum because he's bigger, stronger, faster and has a higher BBIQ. The only question will be does he have the work ethic like Tatum he'll need to ensure his three ball is at an above average rate because If he does, he'll be a star and potentially all-NBA. Blake Griffin DET (25-8-5 36% from three) is what I expect at minimum. And yes, that makes him an elite prospect. He's a better prospect than Tatum. Remember, he's 19 y/o. He still needs to develop a better handle, some go to moves and dedicate himself on defense. But he has all the tools to do it if he wants it bad enough.

He's also NOT a below the basket only scorer. You rarely see guys dunking all over the place in college because spacing is garbage. He has pretty elite athleticism considering his size. He gets up big time.

Watch on YouTube

[K_chile22]

I would absolutely not say he's faster than Tatum, but he's two inches taller and 40 lbs heavier.


I think he needs to figure out his playing weight. When he was thinner in HS he moved much better and was more explosive. Seems like he over-bulked for college. He needs to find a happy medium. Heard some say they think it was affecting his shot too since he was a 35%+ from 3, 80+% from the line guy before duke

[CptCrunch]

I think Paolo should trim down by 10-15 lbs. Focus on SF/PF early career. Follow the positional path of Melo/LeBron, SF early on, PF late career. The PF/C route isn't ideal for him as he is a skill player with power; it would a waste of his talent playing C full time by mid-career (bc he decide to keep weight or bulk up).

I am skeptical that he is faster than Tatum, but Paolo is quite fast for his size. In general, I am more afraid of big heavy players like him suffering from injuries as opposed to 200-something lb wings. Trimming down could in theory reduce injury risk.

[EMG518]

Preciate the insight. I agree with you about fitting in as an offensive player, but I've found the vast majority of versatile 4/5 guys are high level defenders. Horford, JJJ, Bam... All different archetypes within that umbrella but All-Defensive types across the board. If he doesn't scale as a defender then I imagine his ceiling would be relatively low. Randle is a nice player but not exactly the guy you want as a "best scenario" when drafting that high.

I don't get why people throw out the name Randle other than they both have big bodies.

Randle isn't as tall, has no standing reach, is less athletic, and less skilled at the same age so how can that be a comp.

I would take Paolo after the All star break once he is acclimated his rookie year over Randle now.

I think the defensive concerns are way overstated also.

practically the same exact size and same athletic profile and Paolo projects to be a similar archetype with similar offensive skills. it's a pretty straightforward comp.

Not really straight forward. That's why we have a disagreement.

Paolo is definitely taller and longer. Randle has trex arms.

I believe Paolo will be above average defensively, has the length, the size to hold his position and moves better than Randle and can stay in front of players.

I don't know how they are the same athletic profile, how many lobs above the rim have you seen Randle grab?

How many times have you seen Randle out run everyone on the court with the ball in his hand?

Paolo has a way better feel for the game, plays within the offense, can handle the ball and is a plus passer. He has point forward tools.

Randle had 1.4 assists in college.

Paolo has shown shot attempts that Randle would never even attempt, turn around fade away jumpers? Common.

By the end of year 1 this will be a dead conversation as Paolo will contribute more to winning than Randle.

[tmorgan]

Paolo’s still my favorite guy in this draft, although he wouldn’t rank that high in most years.

I get the reservations. Is he big 3, a 4, or a potential 5? Will he play defense and bang for boards, or just create from outside against guys his size that can’t keep up?

He isn’t a tweener in the traditional sense of the word. He’s clearly a 4. But in terms of play style, it’s hard to know exactly what he’s going to truly excel at. That bothers people, and even scares people off him as a near elite prospect. But it shouldn’t.

The thing is, he has a well-rounded game with no clear weaknesses other than defensive focus. He moves well, can handle, can shoot, has a strong frame, passion for the game, and a good but not elite athletic profile. Instead of wondering what he’ll do well as a pro, understand you can develop him into almost whatever you need. He’s that talented, and he doesn’t come with any glaring weakness or physical issue like the other two guys projected to go above him.

Just take Paolo.

[shangrila]

https://www.tankathon.com/players/compare?players=paolo-banchero--jayson-tatum

There.

Honestly, of the top guys he's the only one with a good chance of being a true 3 level, offensive hub kind of guy.

[Curtis Lemansky]

Is a better version of Rui Hachimura a good comp?

[rpa]

I think Paolo has the lowest floor and highest ceiling of the top 3.

Lowest floor because if his ability to create his own shot and score (reasonably) efficiently doesn't translate then he's got next to no off-ball skills to fall back on. Chet and Jabari can both fall back on defense and shooting. Paolo does't really have either.

Highest ceiling because shot creation, playmaking, and scoring are insanely valuable and Paolo has those 3 in spades (assuming the lynchpin translates) to go along with no gaping holes in his game on that end of the floor.

I think if you're drafting Paolo you're convinced his creation and scoring translates and he's a 1A/1B offensive player on a good team.

I totally get why there's a contingent out there that's apoplectic that he's not getting more run for going 1st overall--and I sort of agree.

[God Squad]

I've now seen Jabari Smith and Paolo Banchero player comped to Jason Tatum.

Must be the the new Flavor of the month.

[K_chile22]

I'm not near as concerned about the defense. He has great size, verticle pop, moves like a wing, just needs to trim down some and focus more and he'll be totally fine, at the very least. It's the jumper that's concerning. Really did not shoot as well on middies as you would like and just 34% on 3s when a big chunk were assisted, 37% on catch and shoots which is fine but not amazing. FT% also wasn't great.

[SelfishPlayer]

Banchero is a natural basketball player and can do a lot of things. He plays like Blake Griffin should have been allowed the freedom to play earlier in his career rather than being pushed towards concentrating on being an athletic finisher while the guards create. His game resembles the less athletic Blake Griffin with the freedom from coaches to create. His shooting touch from distance is ahead of Griffin's, as it should be given the vast difference in finishing ability. EJ Liddell blocking Banchero's turnaround jump shot is a concern. The NBA is filled with lengthy players with grown man strength that can pull off the same thing and more.

[HotelVitale]

I think the first mistake people make is trying to shoehorn him into a 5 role when that likely will never be his thing. He's nothing like those types of players (Bam, Horford) He's essentially a 6'10" 3 who will play the 4 like a Tatum, KD, or Isaac. He'll have no issues defending 4s or 5s on switches. His issue will be defending smaller guys on switches. But that's true for almost every player in the NBA whether due to ability or conservation of energy for offense. His defense therefore is a non-issue imho.

As to who he is, I think he can be a better Tatum because he's bigger, stronger, faster and has a higher BBIQ. The only question will be does he have the work ethic like Tatum he'll need to ensure his three ball is at an above average rate because If he does, he'll be a star and potentially all-NBA. Blake Griffin DET (25-8-5 36% from three) is what I expect at minimum. And yes, that makes him an elite prospect. He's a better prospect than Tatum. Remember, he's 19 y/o. He still needs to develop a better handle, some go to moves and dedicate himself on defense. But he has all the tools to do it if he wants it bad enough.

He's also NOT a below the basket only scorer. You rarely see guys dunking all over the place in college because spacing is garbage. He has pretty elite athleticism considering his size. He gets up big time.

He COULD be better than Tatum but Tatum has had one of the best shooting developments/progressions of any prospect in the last 20 years, so it's extremely shaky to assume Banchero will follow that path. And Tatum isn't one of the best shooters in the NBA because he 'wants it' or puts in extra time, he's one of the best shooters in the NBA because his body permits him to be a great in-game shooter with the training he puts in. Most players have very very good work ethics and would give their left nut to become great NBA players, but there's no amount of shooting practice or training that will let them become phenomenal in-game shooters off the dribble and with great defenders trying to stop them like Tatum. The training and practice will help hone and sharpen what you're able to do but it can't really do anything more than that, or at least not in a straightforward 'time put in --> direct skill mastery' way. Just like in most things where there's tense competition, a few people become elite, most show some improvement but don't become elite masters, and a few fail to progress much at all after a certain age. Almost all of them are working really hard to try though.

I'm not sure why people have such a big block on the idea of talent when it comes to NBA prospects. We see everyday that some people are both better naturally and learn/develop more easily at everything, and the NBA couldn't possibly be a clearer example of that given how clearly some lesser prospects distinguish themselves and vice versa. Yet we still have a major tendency to say 'nope, the best players just want it more' or think there has to be some simple moral reason for everything.

(EDIT sorry that became a rant. Also I don't think I've ever heard anyone think Banchero will be a 5 in the NBA or comp him to Horford, he's always considered a creator who'll work from the perimeter.)

[Marcus]

Is a better version of Rui Hachimura a good comp?

no sir. better athlete, more skilled, more advanced at the same stage, higher potential. I always saw Rui as best case a peak value Morris twin. I think Banch is a legit number one for a decent team or an elite number two for a contender with the right pieces around them.

[Marcus]

I watched a handful of his games at Duke and no doubt he's a skilled offensive player, but is he really cut out to be a difference maker in the NBA? It's hard for me to envision him as a competent defender- either he's forced into heavy switching at the 4 or sacrificing rim protection at the 5. I realize that's an oversimplification but I can't envision a scenario where he isn't at least somewhat of a minus on that end of the floor.

Offensively, he has some range but it's not like he projects to be a true floor spacing big. His ball-handling/passing are probably my favorite parts about his game but that can't be the calling card of a #3 pick big man in a deep draft. Good scorer in the post yet that skillset doesn't carry the same weight that it use to.

Naturally, NBA scouts are a lot more qualified than I am to make these assessments. Can you guys help me see what they see?

For me the defense all comes down to whether or not he decides he wants to. I think the physical profile with the athleticism should provide him with more than enough to be a good non-negative on that end of the floor IF he wants to channel enough dog to consistently lock in. I've always put weight on environment and coaching when it comes to this level of talent with a kid. If he's pushed and accepts the responsibility of staying locked in he has enough there to make concerns nonexistent.

Offensively there's a lot to work with, some number one potential with the playmaking, 2 level, potentially 3 level scoring. Skilled enough to initiate from a standstill or on the move and will likely eat on mismatch of choice due to versatility. You asked if that basically equates to wins, honestly i don't see him being impactful enough to culture change but i don't think this class has one of those in general. I do think a guy with number 1 capabilities slated as a second option could be his role if he ever plays for a contender though.

Been high on Banch for a few years now, think he's one of the safer day one picks in this class.

[cupcakesnake]

I think people who are low on Banchero see an offense only 4 man, which is not a valuable NBA commodity. Randle, Mike Beasley, Derrick Williams, Blake, Rui Hachimura... a bunch of guys with varying levels of NBA success/failure, but all kind of an awkward fit on a good team.

People who are high on Banchero are high on his potential as a passer and solid defender. They think he'll be quite solid guarding on the wing and banging in the paint. I definitely don't see a liability on that end when I watch tape. I don't see elite tools either: below average length, a bit upright in his stance, but the mobility is pretty good in general.

Banchero has an overwhelming and effortless pull-up game. I think that's where the comps to college Beasley and Tatum come in. That kind of scoring juice tends to translate. Tatum was getting compared to Derozan a lot when he was getting drafted. Beasley ended up being just not really big enough to be overwhelming at the NBA level. Pablo looks a lot bigger than Beasley, and if you believe in his passing or his defense, I think his ceiling gets pretty high. Like what if Carmelo Anthony was 6'10" with huge shoulders and could pass?

[clyde21]

I think people who are low on Banchero see an offense only 4 man, which is not a valuable NBA commodity. Randle, Mike Beasley, Derrick Williams, Blake, Rui Hachimura... a bunch of guys with varying levels of NBA success/failure, but all kind of an awkward fit on a good team.

People who are high on Banchero are high on his potential as a passer and solid defender. They think he'll be quite solid guarding on the wing and banging in the paint. I definitely don't see a liability on that end when I watch tape. I don't see elite tools either: below average length, a bit upright in his stance, but the mobility is pretty good in general.

Banchero has an overwhelming and effortless pull-up game. I think that's where the comps to college Beasley and Tatum come in. That kind of scoring juice tends to translate. Tatum was getting compared to Derozan a lot when he was getting drafted. Beasley ended up being just not really big enough to be overwhelming at the NBA level. Pablo looks a lot bigger than Beasley, and if you believe in his passing or his defense, I think his ceiling gets pretty high. Like what if Carmelo Anthony was 6'10" with huge shoulders and could pass?

i think the bigger problem is where he projects defensively, he's kinda in no mans land on that side, he can defend 4s at a decent level I guess but he has not proven he's a good man defender or switch guy overall, and no idea really if he's gonna scale as a small ball 5 on the defensive end.

he'll be a 20ppg game no problem who can score on multiple levels and possibly be a 2ndary/3rd playmaking hub on a team but his ceiling is gonna depend on where he lands defensively imo.

[cupcakesnake]

I think people who are low on Banchero see an offense only 4 man, which is not a valuable NBA commodity. Randle, Mike Beasley, Derrick Williams, Blake, Rui Hachimura... a bunch of guys with varying levels of NBA success/failure, but all kind of an awkward fit on a good team.

People who are high on Banchero are high on his potential as a passer and solid defender. They think he'll be quite solid guarding on the wing and banging in the paint. I definitely don't see a liability on that end when I watch tape. I don't see elite tools either: below average length, a bit upright in his stance, but the mobility is pretty good in general.

Banchero has an overwhelming and effortless pull-up game. I think that's where the comps to college Beasley and Tatum come in. That kind of scoring juice tends to translate. Tatum was getting compared to Derozan a lot when he was getting drafted. Beasley ended up being just not really big enough to be overwhelming at the NBA level. Pablo looks a lot bigger than Beasley, and if you believe in his passing or his defense, I think his ceiling gets pretty high. Like what if Carmelo Anthony was 6'10" with huge shoulders and could pass?

i think the bigger problem is where he projects defensively, he's kinda in no mans land on that side, he can defend 4s at a decent level I guess but he has not proven he's a good man defender or switch guy overall, and no idea really if he's gonna scale as a small ball 5 on the defensive end.

he'll be a 20ppg game no problem who can score on multiple levels and possibly be a 2ndary/3rd playmaking hub on a team but his ceiling is gonna depend on where he lands defensively imo.

I agree and I don't have a strong opinion on his defensive projection. Like I said above: upright stance and average length. Those short arms problems are exacerbated by some pretty lazy contesting (not getting a hand up much). There were a lot of plays where guards would drive at him, he'd stick with them but do absolutely nothing with his arms and hands, allowing them to finish over his size quite easily. He also didn't seem to have a big motor on defense or great focus.

But I think some of those things are correctable, and that his quick feet and decent hip flexibility will allow for him to become a good rotational help defender. His big body is a plus. Defense is crazy demanding in the NBA nowadays, so I can't imagine Banchero not improving on some of these obvious things. But he's never going to be great in terms of lengths or with his hands.

[Madhouse]

I can't.