As I have said, I really like WCJ as a player, and think he has a high upside as modern day C. I think he can play C in all circumstances, including when other teams go small. My issues have to do with the fit between him and Lauri. Both are natural small ball C's, but one of them is going to have to defend small ball 4's. Thus, I have been arguing that the Bulls would have been better off taking JJJ, another upside big, whose elite agility would allow him to play the 4 in a small ball situation next to Lauri. I really question whether both Lauri and Wendell can stay on the floor at the same time when teams go small. I understand that others don't share my concern.
Now, I am about to head into blasphemy: when you look at the stats and the eye test, I am prepared to argue that WCJ is a higher upside NBA player than Lauri. Here is a chart that compares the numbers of Lauri and WCJ during their freshman years in college (I added JJJ for good measure). Although Lauri was one year older than WCJ, WCJ was better than Lauri in just about every area other than 3 point shooting. Some key stats for me (all per 36):
Assists: Lauri 1.0; WCJ 2.7
Blocks: Lauri .6; WCJ 2.8
Steals: Lauri .5; WCJ 1.1
http://www.tankathon.com/players/compare?players=lauri-markkanen--wendell-carter--jaren-jackson-jrLauri's deficits in these areas carried over to his rookie year in the NBA - his per 36 averages for these stats were 1.4, .7 and .7 respectively. I think it's clear that WCJ is a better passer and a better rim defender.
Given what I have seen from the tape, I would put them about equal in terms of defending on the perimeter. I think that both have above average lateral agility for a player of their size (and thus each can play small ball 5), but not unicorn type ability like JJJ has. Both will benefit from improved technique.
Offensively, WCJ has a better post game. I would say that neither is elite in terms of creating their own shot out on the floor, but both have demonstrated some potential in that area.
As for 3 point shooting, Lauri is clearly elite and better. His form is a thing of beauty and he shoots it like a star SF. But WCJ is no slouch either. He shot 41% on 3's at Duke on relatively low volume, and his tape shows a good form. We have seen multiple big men in recent years go from zero to good in a few years in terms of three point shooting - Embiid, KAT and AD come to mind. So there is plenty of reason to believe that WCJ has strong upside here. Not Lauri upside, but like I said, no slouch either.
In terms of intangibles, both have great makeups and are extremely coachable and likeable. And both have extraneous reasons to be hopeful about their upside: Lauri went straight from Finland junior ball to Arizona, which was a big leap, and he exceeded expectations last year (which is significant - we have seen Lauri play in the league and have seen what he can do); on the other hand, WCJ was a year younger in college than Lauri was and subjugated his game to Bagley last year for the good of the team.
At this point, I am not going to advocate that anything be done in light of this analysis. I just throw it out there to the forum for debate. Who is likely to be the better NBA player: Lauri or WCJ?
Now I will go into hiding for a couple of weeks.
