Official 2025-2026 Regular Season Thread

[Blue_and_Whte]

Read on Twitter

?s=20

Man... the longer Paolo is out... even our GM had to step in to squash these nonsense?

This has happened almost every season since I started watching basketball over 30 years ago. A team playing well without their star, fans wonder if they’re better with out him. Then reality punches them in the nut sack and those same fans try to walk it back.
Good teams can survive with a star being out…. That’s what makes them good teams. What a novel concept.
AB has stepped up while TDS has leveled off, Bane is fully integrated, and they’ve all figured out how to play offensively.

[pepe1991]

Read on Twitter

?s=20

Man... the longer Paolo is out... even our GM had to step in to squash these nonsense?

When somebody from "top" has to address something, it just means that among "upper level" people there is lot of talk about certain thing.

Fact that this is now talked point from former players, GM, experts means that lot of people share different opinion.

This is nothing new in NBA world.

Zion was best young prospect in the world and most desired person to build team around for several years... Until chat around league started that it's pretty damn hard to build actual team around Zion, if goal is to win anything.

Trae Young was next Curry. Until 4 -5 years down the line chat didn't start about his playing style being pretty damn bad for winning aspirations.

Porzingis was "best young player" in eyes of many , many, many people. Fans. Experts. Coaches. Until 4 years down the line wind didn't start blowing in other direction. After honeymoon phase of "PorzinGod" you could hear chat around league about 7'3 player who can't play back to basket, is injury prone, depends on jumpshot and plays overrated defense.

If you go back to some not so far away history, people were ranking Jalen Green, Jalen Suggs, Kuminga Mobley as "future all stars". 5 years later, only one of them is all star, and even he is kind a under-performing expectations.

That is cycle of nba. Honeymoon stage of first 3 years where every upper level player from draft is next Jordan. Than sobriety phase and facing first actual crtics in years 4,5,6, and lot of players get so overhated over time that they become underrated. Best example of it is Haliburton.

He went from "oh my God this guy is awesome, future star", to allstar, to "most overrated nba player, voted by players" to "legendary playoffs" in span of only 5 seasons.
On other side of spectrum you have, from same draft, polar opposite thing with Lamelo. From "superstar", to all star, to one of best young players to "nobody wants this cancer". All this in 5 seasons & 1 month

NBA fans, fueled by media is always on never ending search for next big thing. Next big thing can't be that big, if in same league you have 400 other next big things. So people flip flop opinion on previous "next big thing" , so new one can feel special.
Like, literally, people talked how Victor is overrated within his rookie year. If you go on GB, you will see incredible amount of people argue how Cooper Flagg is overrated, 20 games into his pro career, at age of 18.

Or if you go to reddit, you will find out Bucks 14th man has Jordan potential... And basically every team has hidden Lebron deep in bench.

I had no intentions to write this long post, just got carried away
Anyhow, my point is: GMs, assistants, PoBo talk with each other. It is obvious that Magic latest surge without Banchero raised lot of eyebrows, given same thing repeated itself last year, on even greater sample. Just like i call Trae - Leprechaun, and often point out that he gives more than he brings and it is impossible to win playoffs with him, people who are way more involved + paid way more + know way more than me figured same trend. At some point you have to look at pile of evidence in front of you.
Some players are excellent players, talent vise, but for various reasons don't add much, if anything to winning basketball team. Case and point, Zach Lavine is guy who on it's own is excellent talent, one of best athletes nba ever had, career 39% 3 point shooter, basically automatic open 3- makes, type of guy, yet something about him ( BBIQ, defense) is so damn bad, that despite having crazy talent, he never turned into winning player.
Guy is hard worker, I watched some of his off season workouts, guy is worm. But his problems no coach can fix. Excellent talent. Dumb player. Unfixable.
Banchero isn't there yet, because he is still somewhat young. But once you pay guy max contract, you start holding him to greater regards, with different set of expectations.

We will see how his return will play out. But people will talk. As they should.

[zaymon]

Front office is protecting its assets. It would be insane if they said "well we picked him #1 and gave max extension but we are better without him".
They are also protecting themselves becouse they gave him max extension after 3 years of negative impact stats, very bad offense centered around him, most players having bad seasons next to him year after year.
I am not saying they shouldnt give him this extension, but they are also not mistake free.
I remember when Hammond said he doesnt rule out Fultz becoming allstar or they forced Clifford to give minutes to Bamba.
They are also known for being delusional about our players. Sometimes they hit, sometimes they miss but they historically acknowledge misses 1-2 years late.

This whole discussion is not to claim Paolo is bad player. Even i said before he got hurt that one of the options is reducing his role and usage. Problem is we never saw Paolo and good offense in the same room consistently. This is propably our longest stretch of good offense. If thats not concerning i dont know what is.
That doesnt mean we cant use Paolo effectively in the future. Will he agree if that means much lower usage ? Its up to him.

[VFX]

Front office is protecting its assets. It would be insane if they said "well we picked him #1 and gave max extension but we are better without him".
They are also protecting themselves becouse they gave him max extension after 3 years of negative impact stats, very bad offense centered around him, most players having bad seasons next to him year after year.
I am not saying they shouldnt give him this extension, but they are also not mistake free.
I remember when Hammond said he doesnt rule out Fultz becoming allstar or they forced Clifford to give minutes to Bamba.
They are also known for being delusional about our players. Sometimes they hit, sometimes they miss but they historically acknowledge misses 1-2 years late.

This whole discussion is not to claim Paolo is bad player. Even i said before he got hurt that one of the options is reducing his role and usage. Problem is we never saw Paolo and good offense in the same room consistently. This is propably our longest stretch of good offense. If thats not concerning i dont know what is.
That doesnt mean we cant use Paolo effectively in the future. Will he agree if that means much lower usage ? Its up to him.

This.

Paolo is an asset at the end of the day. Like every other player on every other roster. They need to figure out how to best utilize him without sacrificing what they’ve seen now as a much BETTER offense than they’ve seen for the last 3-4 years. They aren’t going to devalue their asset by making public claims or setbacks.

People said it at the beginning of the season.. the bench was trash. Like.. abysmally bad especially without Moe. Well now without Paolo, and some adjustments to shot distribution/role the bench looks better mysteriously. Significantly better.

People can clarify this a zillion times and the other side of the argument will still miss the point of bringing it up.

Orlando’s offense has been BAD for YEARS. So much so that signing KCP and trading 4 years of picks for Bane was the last option. Well, now the offense looks good and can to be further improved in the half court. Paolo needs to be a part of that now and prove it’s possible to maintain whether that’s shooting 12-18 times a game or not.

Teams are about system. It isn’t 2k where plugging random players, that don’t always compliment each other in a lineup, always equals positive flawless results.

That was the entire argument about KCP. Thats the argument now. It doesn’t mean those players are impossible to fold into a system. It means they have extremely specific skillsets and tendencies that must be catered to. It means your coaching staff has to figure it out and utilize them the best way possible, which is always the case.

Weltman had to address this because it’s glaringly noticeable. And he’s also not entirely wrong that Paolo’s profile makes him an asset (even if it’s overstated he can do ANYTHING on a court). Mosely’s seat will get hot if they can’t figure it out now without regressing.

[JoshuaPotter]

Front office is protecting its assets. It would be insane if they said "well we picked him #1 and gave max extension but we are better without him".
They are also protecting themselves becouse they gave him max extension after 3 years of negative impact stats, very bad offense centered around him, most players having bad seasons next to him year after year.
I am not saying they shouldnt give him this extension, but they are also not mistake free.
I remember when Hammond said he doesnt rule out Fultz becoming allstar or they forced Clifford to give minutes to Bamba.
They are also known for being delusional about our players. Sometimes they hit, sometimes they miss but they historically acknowledge misses 1-2 years late.

This whole discussion is not to claim Paolo is bad player. Even i said before he got hurt that one of the options is reducing his role and usage. Problem is we never saw Paolo and good offense in the same room consistently. This is propably our longest stretch of good offense. If thats not concerning i dont know what is.
That doesnt mean we cant use Paolo effectively in the future. Will he agree if that means much lower usage ? Its up to him.

This.

Paolo is an asset at the end of the day. Like every other player on every other roster. They need to figure out how to best utilize him without sacrificing what they’ve seen now as a much BETTER offense than they’ve seen for the last 3-4 years. They aren’t going to devalue their asset by making public claims or setbacks.

People said it at the beginning of the season.. the bench was trash. Like.. abysmally bad especially without Moe. Well now without Paolo, and some adjustments to shot distribution/role the bench looks better mysteriously. Significantly better.

People can clarify this a zillion times and the other side of the argument will still miss the point of bringing it up.

Orlando’s offense has been BAD for YEARS. So much so that signing KCP and trading 4 years of picks for Bane was the last option. Well, now the offense looks good and can to be further improved in the half court. Paolo needs to be a part of that now and prove it’s possible to maintain whether that’s shooting 12-18 times a game or not.

Teams are about system. It isn’t 2k where plugging random players, that don’t always compliment each other in a lineup, always equals positive flawless results.

That was the entire argument about KCP. Thats the argument now. It doesn’t mean those players are impossible to fold into a system. It means they have extremely specific skillsets and tendencies that must be catered to. It means your coaching staff has to figure it out and utilize them the best way possible, which is always the case.

Weltman had to address this because it’s glaringly noticeable. And he’s also not entirely wrong that Paolo’s profile makes him an asset (even if it’s overstated he can do ANYTHING on a court). Mosely’s seat will get hot if they can’t figure it out now without regressing.

I love how I said it after Houston game and have slowly walked it back.

Again, for us to be successful it actually has more to do with both Paolo + Franz developing a better dimension to their offensive games. Paolo to his credit is elite at generating free throws. We can use this. But him + Franz duplicity of skill set combined with a lack of offensive scheme is hurting the next 5 bench players.

Paolo has notably improved defense and rebounding thus far. There was also a short period where our starters had the greatest +- in the league. So there IS something to him being on the court with the squad.

[GelbeWand09]

Today gonna be interesting. Spurs winning ton of games without Wemby but they are on a back to back and we are rested.

[VFX]

Again, for us to be successful it actually has more to do with both Paolo + Franz developing a better dimension to their offensive games. Paolo to his credit is elite at generating free throws. We can use this. But him + Franz duplicity of skill set combined with a lack of offensive scheme is hurting the next 5 bench players.

Paolo has notably improved defense and rebounding thus far. There was also a short period where our starters had the greatest +- in the league. So there IS something to him being on the court with the squad.

The criticism of the offense has always been about stagnation and shot variety. I harped on a point guard specifically for years because the entire idea is to make Paolo more efficient and effective off ball like Pascal Siakam. That statement doesn’t mean that he can’t also be effective doing what he has been doing. It’s an additive property he needs to his game.

Splitting similar patterns on offense for the worst assist numbers, pace, and outside shooting for years was answered with “everything is fine we just need another shooter”.

Well no, turns out you just need a system that moves the ball from 2 total options that do the same exact thing on the floor. It’s even more difficult when your 1B has the same tendencies and weaknesses, albeit approached differently with quicker decision making. Well now we see a system that works in spite of that.

You are saying as a GM “these guys will all develop what we need them to develop at the same exact time whether it happens or not and because even if they are the entire offense, usage wise and with the ball, that’s a gamble worth taking.

Magic are in a good spot. But to pretend like every single case of a team looking better without a specific player is the same outcome is mind numbingly dumb.

This is to simplify things as “every system is the same. all talent is the same. all shot values are the same. players are all efficiently the same next to the same players.” Which is all obviously not true when your logic is past middle school level.

[tooler]

There are two things happening at once: Orlando trying to fix its offensive futility, and Paolo as a player. These two things interact but don’t necessarily correlate one to one.

Orlando’s offense has been utter garbage since Paolo Banchero was in elementary school. He has his own opinions on what’s wrong with it and the front office tried to address that over the offseason to mixed effect.

It’s great that we’ve had a positive stretch in the first quarter of the season. The team and some of its major stars still can’t shoot, so I’m still not ready to believe we’re even a top 15 offense until I see a larger sample size.

I think it does a disservice to mention Paolo’s name in the same breath as knucklehead guards like Zach Lavine and Trey Young. Let’s give him a chance to succeed in a new and better system. Don’t tell me Erik Spoelstra and Rick Carlisle couldn’t craft an effective offense around a 6’10” wing that draws consistent double teams. The thought is absurd.

At worst maybe he doesn’t have the processing speed for a 0.5 second style offense. Let’s see how he does when he gets back.

[Knightro]

Read on Twitter

[BadMofoPimp]

Read on Twitter

?s=20

Punchy will provem all wrong!!!

[BadMofoPimp]

I think we need a change to the starting lineup. Suggs/Bane/Franz/TDS/WCJ have 183 possessions and are -7.3 net rating. Paolo coming back will solve it but it is so bad we need a change before that.

Healthy, the Magic has a clear 10man rotation now:

Suggs/Jones
Bane/Black
F-Wagner/da Silva
Banchero/Isaac
Carter/Bitadze.

Clearly the weak links are Jones, da Silva and Isaac. But bench players by definition "have holes".

Not to mention Penda, Jett and Jase all being capable of filling in 5-15mpg pending injuries as backups.

[VFX]

Read on Twitter

Again, who splits numbers up this way?

Why not all games with Paolo vs all games without Paolo?

By the time he comes back we will have 12 games without him and 12 games with him probably.

[eyriq]

Read on Twitter

Again, who splits numbers up this way?

Why not all games with Paolo vs all games without Paolo?

By the time he comes back we will have 12 games without him and 12 games with him probably.

"Who" = People that know how to analyze data versus those that are pushing agendas

[VFX]

Read on Twitter

Again, who splits numbers up this way?

Why not all games with Paolo vs all games without Paolo?

By the time he comes back we will have 12 games without him and 12 games with him probably.

"Who" = People that know how to analyze data versus those that are pushing agendas

Yeah splitting 5 and 7 against 9 isn’t an agenda. Let’s take out 5 horrible blowouts to start the season out of the equation bc the data wouldn’t look good.

Start the upward trend against two terrible teams.

Zero agenda pushing would have been:
12 games with Paolo numbers vs 9 games without.

[eyriq]

Again, who splits numbers up this way?

Why not all games with Paolo vs all games without Paolo?

By the time he comes back we will have 12 games without him and 12 games with him probably.

"Who" = People that know how to analyze data versus those that are pushing agendas

Yeah splitting 5 and 7 against 9 isn’t an agenda. Let’s take out 5 horrible blowouts to start the season out of the equation bc the data wouldn’t look good.

Start the upward trend against two terrible teams.

Zero agenda pushing would have been:
12 games with Paolo numbers vs 9 games without.

You are saying that Paolo's presence or absence has a statistically significant impact on team performance. The starting point is to see if there are statistically different periods in performance to start with. There are, and Paolo played for most of one of them. If Paolo played for most of one of them and that period was a good period for team performance then the hypothesis that he has a negative impact looks a lot weaker wouldn't you think?

[VFX]

"Who" = People that know how to analyze data versus those that are pushing agendas

Yeah splitting 5 and 7 against 9 isn’t an agenda. Let’s take out 5 horrible blowouts to start the season out of the equation bc the data wouldn’t look good.

Start the upward trend against two terrible teams.

Zero agenda pushing would have been:
12 games with Paolo numbers vs 9 games without.

You are saying that Paolo's presence or absence has a statistically significant impact on team performance. The starting point is to see if there are statistically different periods in performance to start with. There are, and Paolo played for most of one of them. If Paolo played for most of one of them and that period was a good period for team performance then the hypothesis that he has a negative impact looks a lot weaker wouldn't you think?

No.

I’m saying there are numbers with and without Paolo.
Use those numbers.

Everything else is attempting to downplay those numbers to say that the team itself was significantly better in an extremely specific timeframe.

If you feel so confident about it why not use 11/4 as the starting point? So 11/4 - 11/10, during that same timeframe, 4 game stretch they go 2-2. But no, you will include 2 games prior because it’s agenda. Just like ORLMuse won’t just include all games with Paolo vs without in their infographic.

[eyriq]

Yeah splitting 5 and 7 against 9 isn’t an agenda. Let’s take out 5 horrible blowouts to start the season out of the equation bc the data wouldn’t look good.

Start the upward trend against two terrible teams.

Zero agenda pushing would have been:
12 games with Paolo numbers vs 9 games without.

You are saying that Paolo's presence or absence has a statistically significant impact on team performance. The starting point is to see if there are statistically different periods in performance to start with. There are, and Paolo played for most of one of them. If Paolo played for most of one of them and that period was a good period for team performance then the hypothesis that he has a negative impact looks a lot weaker wouldn't you think?

No.

I’m saying there are numbers with and without Paolo.
Use those numbers.

Everything else is attempting to downplay those numbers to say that the team itself was significantly better in an extremely specific timeframe.

If you feel so confident about it why not use 11/4 as the starting point? So 11/4 - 11/10, during that same timeframe, 4 game stretch they go 2-2. But no, you will include 2 games prior because it’s agenda. Just like ORLMuse won’t just include all games with Paolo vs without in their infographic.

Context matters, that's why.

[Bensational]

Again, who splits numbers up this way?

Why not all games with Paolo vs all games without Paolo?

By the time he comes back we will have 12 games without him and 12 games with him probably.

"Who" = People that know how to analyze data versus those that are pushing agendas

Yeah splitting 5 and 7 against 9 isn’t an agenda. Let’s take out 5 horrible blowouts to start the season out of the equation bc the data wouldn’t look good.

Start the upward trend against two terrible teams.

Zero agenda pushing would have been:
12 games with Paolo numbers vs 9 games without.

Ok then....

Starting lineup with Paolo (Suggs/Bane/Franz/Paolo/WCJ)
9 games played, 101 minutes played
Ortg 122.4 / Drtg 103.1 / Netrtg 19.3 / TS% 64%

Starting lineup without Paolo (Suggs/Bane/Franz/TDS/WCJ)
9 games played, 77 minutes
Ortg 105.9 / Drtg 114.4 / Netrtg -8.5 / TS% 57.4%

What do you think of that comparison?

[Knightro]

I think the key reason they split the games where they did - and the takeaway of the stats shared in general - is the fluctuations in pace.

[VFX]

"Who" = People that know how to analyze data versus those that are pushing agendas

Yeah splitting 5 and 7 against 9 isn’t an agenda. Let’s take out 5 horrible blowouts to start the season out of the equation bc the data wouldn’t look good.

Start the upward trend against two terrible teams.

Zero agenda pushing would have been:
12 games with Paolo numbers vs 9 games without.

Ok then....

Starting lineup with Paolo (Suggs/Bane/Franz/Paolo/WCJ)
9 games played, 101 minutes played
Ortg 122.4 / Drtg 103.1 / Netrtg 19.3 / TS% 64%

Starting lineup without Paolo (Suggs/Bane/Franz/TDS/WCJ)
9 games played, 77 minutes
Ortg 105.9 / Drtg 114.4 / Netrtg -8.5 / TS% 57.4%

What do you think of that comparison?

Where are you getting 9 games? It’s 12 games against 9.

It’s also measuring 3pt% assist% and pace overall and not a specific lineup.