Marvin Bagley

[King Ken]

Thus being a "rich man's" Faried. Bagley is taller and faster. He doesn't have the most polished offensive skillset and his inability to use the right hand is going to limit him. He dominates college bigs because of his mere physical gifts but might struggle to do the same against most NBA starting bigs, who are bigger and smarter.

He can shoot the 3 but he's not gonna be a threat from out there in the NBA, at least for now. He shot a low volume in college and mostly only really wide open ones so it's hard to gauge how this will translate at the pro level. And Marcus Smart will shoot the 3 but I really wish he doesn't, cause more often than not, his percentages end up being detrimental to the team. Sticking to your strengths is an underrated skill in the NBA.

But I think Bagley is probably the "safest" pick in the top 5. He's gonna be a solid player at the very least if only because of his athletic ability and high motor. A high floor player though his ceiling likely won't be as high as the likes of Ayton, Doncic or even Bamba, who could all be franchise-changers.

If this is the only response to a substantiated post you can come up with then maybe you just shouldn't respond at all. It's simply disrespectful to the poster who put effort into his post and elaborated on his point, even if you still happen to disagree. @Duke4life831, perhaps Bagley's biggest fan, provides a good example of how to respond when you disagree with someone who holds a different but substantiated opinion.

I laughed because what you wrote was a hyberbole and it was garbage. I didn't bother to read the rest at the time because I knew you don't know what you are talking about.

Bagley has great offensive feel in the paint. He just lacks post moves. Now this can be problematic in general but his elite first step and his elite quickness will be his saving grace. We seen Bosh who early on lacked post moves rely on a good first step and good quickness as well as a great feel to score in the post and it translated. So this idea that it will not for Bagley is foolish. Which is why the Faried comparison is nonsense off the top. Not to mention Bagley has excellent body control and WR(Football) hands in terms of catching the ball.

His first step and quickness is generational, if anything, it's more deadly in the NBA where there is space and less zone defenses. Like I said in here before, the BIGGEST issue with Marvin Bagley to naysayers is a complete lack of understanding how ATHLETIC he is. Most think he's quick and athletic but like quick and athletic. They don't realize that he's GENERATIONAL quick and his first step for his size is GENERATIONAL. Anyone over 6'10 isn't as quick as Malik Monk nor are they even close. He is. Anyone over 6'10 doesn't have De'Aaron Fox first step nor are they even in the same area code, he is. That's what is special about Bagley. He doesn't have freak athletic ability like Griffin or Kemp. He is a generational freak athlete. Meaning, there are only a few like him every 50 years. Westbrook, MJ, Rose. These do not come around almost at all. That's why Bagley is the best prospect to me in the draft. He's the easiest to make elite because this athletic combination is EXTREMELY rare. Most players don't have elite first step, quickness, lateral quickness, agility, speed, and acceleration. That's unheard of the few that got it have won MVPs. He is also the first big to have it which makes him something NO ONE has seen before. He's kinda like MJ in 1984. You really don't know what he is, but he's really really athletic. Too small to be a SF, can't really run an offense, can't shoot so he's not a SG, what's his position? He doesn't have one. MJ created one. So we just don't know as we never seen anyone like him athletically.

As well as simply not being impressed by his frame. He looks like WCS, Thad Young, Chris Bosh, Hakeem O, Chris McCullough, M. Chriss. Most of these guys are not stars in the NBA. Most are underwhelming. The one superstar of the bunch was extremely skilled. It's basically a football WR frame. Doesn't really work in the paint like that. All are really athletic as how else you gonna make the NBA with this frame. Add that Bagley only has 2+ wingspan, that's a downer for some. AD had a 6+ wingspan. This is a freak league, Bagley isn't a freak body wise.

Lastly, it's an extremely talented draft. So guys are pumping their guys. It could be Bamba, Young, JJJ, Carter Jr, Doncic, Porter Jr, etc. Everyone is pumping their guys and dumping on those who aren't their guys.

So you ask me why Bagley is my #1 guy. There are a lot of reasons but simply put, he's a generational athletic, with a great feel for scoring, has high BBIQ on offense, great at movement, and highly coachable. That's why he's my #1 guy. I do feel like he has the potential to be one of the best to play this game. I feel like if you pass on him, you are making a mistake for a lifetime. That's how I feel.

[Sactowndog]

The question on Bagley is his defensive IQ. He has to know when to switch and be able to guard multiple positions. If he can the Kings bigs will be lethal.

Giles went and tested after his rehab and supposedly had lateral quickness of an elite small forward with a nasty streak. If you pair him with Bagley the Kings will be able to switch pretty effectively.

[King Ken]

The question on Bagley is his defensive IQ. He has to know when to switch and be able to guard multiple positions. If he can the Kings bigs will be lethal.

Giles went and tested after his rehab and supposedly had lateral quickness of an elite small forward with a nasty streak. If you pair him with Bagley the Kings will be able to switch pretty effectively.

WIP. While he has the tools and has proved to be a good switch defender. He gets lost in space often. Doesn't aggressively play the passing lanes to take advantage of his wingspan 7 - 7'1 which is long if you are on the perimeter nor is athletic ability. He plays athletic defensively on the ball but not in space. The game moves faster than it should mentally for him. Works hard on defense v. better opponents. Motor is off and on playing D. If he attacking his defensive assignments, like he attacks the defensive boards, he could be the next Rodman defensively. But he attacks his defensive assignments similar to Andrew Wiggins and his BBIQ on defense is a big reason. He just hasn't really had to play defense better outside of the paint. When he does, he's not that good but his paint protecting abilities is poor as well. Even though he's a shot blocker regardless of the stats due to our system, he doesn't really do a good job of protecting the paint.

[Sactowndog]

The question on Bagley is his defensive IQ. He has to know when to switch and be able to guard multiple positions. If he can the Kings bigs will be lethal.

Giles went and tested after his rehab and supposedly had lateral quickness of an elite small forward with a nasty streak. If you pair him with Bagley the Kings will be able to switch pretty effectively.

WIP. While he has the tools and has proved to be a good switch defender. He gets lost in space often. Doesn't aggressively play the passing lanes to take advantage of his wingspan 7 - 7'1 which is long if you are on the perimeter nor is athletic ability. He plays athletic defensively on the ball but not in space. The game moves faster than it should mentally for him. Works hard on defense v. better opponents. Motor is off and on playing D. If he attacking his defensive assignments, like he attacks the defensive boards, he could be the next Rodman defensively. But he attacks his defensive assignments similar to Andrew Wiggins and his BBIQ on defense is a big reason. He just hasn't really had to play defense better outside of the paint. When he does, he's not that good but his paint protecting abilities is poor as well. Even though he's a shot blocker regardless of the stats due to our system, he doesn't really do a good job of protecting the paint.

The bolded part is my biggest fear with him.

[The-Power]

If this is the only response to a substantiated post you can come up with then maybe you just shouldn't respond at all. It's simply disrespectful to the poster who put effort into his post and elaborated on his point, even if you still happen to disagree. @Duke4life831, perhaps Bagley's biggest fan, provides a good example of how to respond when you disagree with someone who holds a different but substantiated opinion.

I laughed because what you wrote was a hyberbole and it was garbage. I didn't bother to read the rest at the time because I knew you don't know what you are talking about.

I wasn't even the one you responded to, dude. Anyhow, this seems like a petty attitude – reacting to a post with a laughing smiley without even reading it in full and listening to the arguments it brings forward. I appreciate you took the time to respond in more detail and less disrespectful way, though. Keep it up!

[realEAST]

I find it funny how everybody who balks at Bagley -Faried comparisons forgot Faried hype from his first few seasons in the league when he was almost 15-15 machine with non stop motor. He was even on Team USA. He didn't develop his post D or perimeter offensive game. Now Bagley has better starting position as handler, but if he fails to develop consistent outside shot on NBA level and doesn't become positive defender, he could very well end up being that type of player. Not saying he won't, but if he doesn't...

[Duke4life831]

I find it funny how everybody who balks at Bagley -Faried comparisons forgot Faried hype from his first few seasons in the league when he was almost 15-15 machine with non stop motor. He was even on Team USA. He didn't develop his post D or perimeter offensive game. Now Bagley has better starting position as handler, but if he fails to develop consistent outside shot on NBA level and doesn't become positive defender, he could very well end up being that type of player. Not saying he won't, but if he doesn't...

My biggest thing with the Faried comparison is Faried as a freshman put up 10 and 8 in the Ohio Valley Conference. Faried as a grown 21 year old man put up 17 and 14 in the Ohio Valley Conference. Bagley as an 18 year old freshman put up 21 and 11 in the toughest conference in college basketball. The skill set shown by Bagley this past year is a more versatile skill set than Faried has ever shown, especially if we are comparing Bagley to a freshman Faried. If Bagley forgets how to shoot and never improves and forgets how to dribble and never improves, then I can start to see the Faried comparison.

[JMac1]

If this is the only response to a substantiated post you can come up with then maybe you just shouldn't respond at all. It's simply disrespectful to the poster who put effort into his post and elaborated on his point, even if you still happen to disagree. @Duke4life831, perhaps Bagley's biggest fan, provides a good example of how to respond when you disagree with someone who holds a different but substantiated opinion.

I laughed because what you wrote was a hyberbole and it was garbage. I didn't bother to read the rest at the time because I knew you don't know what you are talking about.

I wasn't even the one you responded to, dude. Anyhow, this seems like a petty attitude – reacting to a post with a laughing smiley without even reading it in full and listening to the arguments it brings forward. I appreciate you took the time to respond in more detail and less disrespectful way, though. Keep it up!

I find this give and take funny.....I guess it ain't me.

[realEAST]

I find it funny how everybody who balks at Bagley -Faried comparisons forgot Faried hype from his first few seasons in the league when he was almost 15-15 machine with non stop motor. He was even on Team USA. He didn't develop his post D or perimeter offensive game. Now Bagley has better starting position as handler, but if he fails to develop consistent outside shot on NBA level and doesn't become positive defender, he could very well end up being that type of player. Not saying he won't, but if he doesn't...

My biggest thing with the Faried comparison is Faried as a freshman put up 10 and 8 in the Ohio Valley Conference. Faried as a grown 21 year old man put up 17 and 14 in the Ohio Valley Conference. Bagley as an 18 year old freshman put up 21 and 11 in the toughest conference in college basketball. The skill set shown by Bagley this past year is a more versatile skill set than Faried has ever shown, especially if we are comparing Bagley to a freshman Faried. If Bagley forgets how to shoot and never improves and forgets how to dribble and never improves, then I can start to see the Faried comparison.

I was trying to point out more how Faried was at one time regarded as high level player, but didn't develop some major parts of the game and that capped his ceiling as his athleticism faded (and league changed, especially at PF and C positions, in the meantime). That's why I wrote that Bagley has better starting position, and I still think that, but mainly as handler.

I think he is worse shooter than his % suggest - still better than Faried ever was (I don't think Bagley is top5 prospect without a reason), but if he doesn't improve this isn't level that would make him a threat in NBA - along his FT%, he shot only wide open 3s and was rather "concussion" of his shooting stats - he'd stop shooting even open 3s if he risked he'd fall bellow 30ish% - or that was my impression at least.

Just to be clear, I actually like Bagley and think he could reach his potential since he has motor, willingness and work ethic to improve, and he already showed strides in mostly all areas of the game during his college season. But I just wanted to paint both sides of that Faried comparison because I think that is good example of type of player he could become (not level, even if Bagley ends up not developing overall, he still should be better player than Faried). At the same time it might serve as floor to project Bagley from - if he develops and adds some or all of shooting, handling and defense.

[nolang1]

Okay I'm stopping with the Faried comparisons before I upset more people.

Sure, there's no reason to think Bagley won't develop an outside shot in the pro level (poor college FT% notwithstanding), but until he does, I see him as a tweener who'll be most effective playing as a C on offense, but would be overmatched on defense.

This still doesn't answer what a 'rich man's Faried' actually means. If Faried were closer to Capela or Amare Stoudemire in terms of not needing as clear a runway around the basket to take off and dunk on people, that would have a pretty significant impact on not only his individual productivity but on the attention he would command from the defense. It's not a stretch to say that Bagley has shown more passing ability and post footwork as an 18-19 year old than Faried has to date. Regular Faried has averaged 16 and 12 per 36 for his career; where does that put the 'rich man's Faried?' version of Bagley who regresses as a shooter and only shoots twos? 20 and 14? 60 percent from the field?

As Duke4life831 described eabove, Bagley is "a big that is lethal in transition, an elite lob target, spot up shooter and scores on broken plays (offensive rebounds and other plays like that) type of big." Except for the spot up shooter part, isn't that essentially what Faried is?

Of course Bagley is just 19 and can certainly develop his shooting and even defense, among other things, but if we're sticking to what his current strengths are as a prospect, which is high motor and athleticism, then I find the Faried comparison reasonable.

No, you are being willfully obtuse. Faried is 6'7" and not even close to being an elite finisher/lob target. Faried has shot 60% from 0-3 feet for his career, per basketball-reference. Plenty of players are regularly above 70% from that range, even perimeter players like LeBron and Durant. To put it in even simpler terms, a player like Faried is twice as likely to miss a close-range shot as an actual elite finisher like Clint Capela would be. That makes an enormous difference in terms of scoring efficiency, not just at the individual level but at the team level due to how much more space that player's teammates have when the defense is forced to be that much more vigilant about the threat of a lob/putback. Faried's ability to score on lobs and broken plays only stands out as elite relative to his nonexistent passing/ballhandling/posting up/three-point shooting ability.

You seem to be trying to couch this in some faux-clever "well he's just doing this against college kids and you never know how he will develop in the NBA" way, but as Duke4life also pointed out (which you ignored) Bagley would have to regress rather than not develop to get to Faried's level in some of these areas based on what Bagley did in 1 year at Duke vs. what Faried did in any of his 4 years playing against much worse college kids in the Ohio Valley Conference.

You also seemingly skipped entirely over what I wrote, which is that identifying a player's strengths and weaknesses is extremely simplistic and provides little information as to whether a player is actually good (and when it comes to weaknesses, I explained quite clearly that with all else being equal, there's a massive difference between a player who's able to shoot threes but potentially doesn't hit a high percentage of them and one who has zero ability to take or make threes). I can describe the strongest/weakest aspects of Steph Curry's and Seth Curry's games in a way that makes them seem like basically the same player, but that just amounts to making up a dumb riddle/word game and accomplishes nothing.

[Sactowndog]

I find it funny how everybody who balks at Bagley -Faried comparisons forgot Faried hype from his first few seasons in the league when he was almost 15-15 machine with non stop motor. He was even on Team USA. He didn't develop his post D or perimeter offensive game. Now Bagley has better starting position as handler, but if he fails to develop consistent outside shot on NBA level and doesn't become positive defender, he could very well end up being that type of player. Not saying he won't, but if he doesn't...

My biggest thing with the Faried comparison is Faried as a freshman put up 10 and 8 in the Ohio Valley Conference. Faried as a grown 21 year old man put up 17 and 14 in the Ohio Valley Conference. Bagley as an 18 year old freshman put up 21 and 11 in the toughest conference in college basketball. The skill set shown by Bagley this past year is a more versatile skill set than Faried has ever shown, especially if we are comparing Bagley to a freshman Faried. If Bagley forgets how to shoot and never improves and forgets how to dribble and never improves, then I can start to see the Faried comparison.

Assuming Giles is as good as rumored how do you think they will fit.

[Duke4life831]

I find it funny how everybody who balks at Bagley -Faried comparisons forgot Faried hype from his first few seasons in the league when he was almost 15-15 machine with non stop motor. He was even on Team USA. He didn't develop his post D or perimeter offensive game. Now Bagley has better starting position as handler, but if he fails to develop consistent outside shot on NBA level and doesn't become positive defender, he could very well end up being that type of player. Not saying he won't, but if he doesn't...

My biggest thing with the Faried comparison is Faried as a freshman put up 10 and 8 in the Ohio Valley Conference. Faried as a grown 21 year old man put up 17 and 14 in the Ohio Valley Conference. Bagley as an 18 year old freshman put up 21 and 11 in the toughest conference in college basketball. The skill set shown by Bagley this past year is a more versatile skill set than Faried has ever shown, especially if we are comparing Bagley to a freshman Faried. If Bagley forgets how to shoot and never improves and forgets how to dribble and never improves, then I can start to see the Faried comparison.

Assuming Giles is as good as rumored how do you think they will fit.

Going off of Giles in high school, I think at first its going to be a rough fit. I think its going to take Bagley a couple years until that 3pt shot is a legit consistent threat. Once that happens I think they can fit pretty well with each other. Rebounding wouldnt be an issue, those two guys are elite rebounders with non stop motors when it comes to grabbing boards. Just like the shooting, I think its going to take a couple years to get both of their awareness up and to teach them good solid fundamentals. Athletically/physically I think they can definitely work defensively. Bagley needs to improve his footwork defensively but he definitely has the athletic ability to be a 4 and guard out on the perimeter, while Giles should be a good defensive 5.

Again I think the first year or 2 would be rough, but if Giles can get back to where he was before and stay healthy and both guys can progress like many think. Ya 2 years down the road I think you could have a pretty damn good 4-5 duo with those guys.

[King Ken]

My biggest thing with the Faried comparison is Faried as a freshman put up 10 and 8 in the Ohio Valley Conference. Faried as a grown 21 year old man put up 17 and 14 in the Ohio Valley Conference. Bagley as an 18 year old freshman put up 21 and 11 in the toughest conference in college basketball. The skill set shown by Bagley this past year is a more versatile skill set than Faried has ever shown, especially if we are comparing Bagley to a freshman Faried. If Bagley forgets how to shoot and never improves and forgets how to dribble and never improves, then I can start to see the Faried comparison.

Assuming Giles is as good as rumored how do you think they will fit.

Going off of Giles in high school, I think at first its going to be a rough fit. I think its going to take Bagley a couple years until that 3pt shot is a legit consistent threat. Once that happens I think they can fit pretty well with each other. Rebounding wouldnt be an issue, those two guys are elite rebounders with non stop motors when it comes to grabbing boards. Just like the shooting, I think its going to take a couple years to get both of their awareness up and to teach them good solid fundamentals. Athletically/physically I think they can definitely work defensively. Bagley needs to improve his footwork defensively but he definitely has the athletic ability to be a 4 and guard out on the perimeter, while Giles should be a good defensive 5.

Again I think the first year or 2 would be rough, but if Giles can get back to where he was before and stay healthy and both guys can progress like many think. Ya 2 years down the road I think you could have a pretty damn good 4-5 duo with those guys.

Is it me but there seems to be a vendetta v. Bagley by the online community of some sort.

[doordoor123]

Assuming Giles is as good as rumored how do you think they will fit.

Going off of Giles in high school, I think at first its going to be a rough fit. I think its going to take Bagley a couple years until that 3pt shot is a legit consistent threat. Once that happens I think they can fit pretty well with each other. Rebounding wouldnt be an issue, those two guys are elite rebounders with non stop motors when it comes to grabbing boards. Just like the shooting, I think its going to take a couple years to get both of their awareness up and to teach them good solid fundamentals. Athletically/physically I think they can definitely work defensively. Bagley needs to improve his footwork defensively but he definitely has the athletic ability to be a 4 and guard out on the perimeter, while Giles should be a good defensive 5.

Again I think the first year or 2 would be rough, but if Giles can get back to where he was before and stay healthy and both guys can progress like many think. Ya 2 years down the road I think you could have a pretty damn good 4-5 duo with those guys.

Is it me but there seems to be a vendetta v. Bagley by the online community of some sort.

The online community hates everyone. They hate Ayton, Doncic, Bagley, Jackson, Bamba, etc. Since there isn’t one guy that stands out everyone hates everyone else. I would say out of all of them Jackson gets the least amount of hate, but I also think he’s least expected to go top 2 of the big names among the online community.

[Duke4life831]

Going off of Giles in high school, I think at first its going to be a rough fit. I think its going to take Bagley a couple years until that 3pt shot is a legit consistent threat. Once that happens I think they can fit pretty well with each other. Rebounding wouldnt be an issue, those two guys are elite rebounders with non stop motors when it comes to grabbing boards. Just like the shooting, I think its going to take a couple years to get both of their awareness up and to teach them good solid fundamentals. Athletically/physically I think they can definitely work defensively. Bagley needs to improve his footwork defensively but he definitely has the athletic ability to be a 4 and guard out on the perimeter, while Giles should be a good defensive 5.

Again I think the first year or 2 would be rough, but if Giles can get back to where he was before and stay healthy and both guys can progress like many think. Ya 2 years down the road I think you could have a pretty damn good 4-5 duo with those guys.

Is it me but there seems to be a vendetta v. Bagley by the online community of some sort.

The online community hates everyone. They hate Ayton, Doncic, Bagley, Jackson, Bamba, etc. Since there isn’t one guy that stands out everyone hates everyone else. I would say out of all of them Jackson gets the least amount of hate, but I also think he’s least expected to go top 2 of the big names among the online community.

Ya its just a part of the cycle. This year seems to be a little more heat towards the top guys, but I think theyre seeing a little more hate because theyre big men. This time of year we tend to see the top guys get a lot of hate while the guys in the 2nd tier get a little more love.

I also think we tend to see defensive 1st guys get less heat than the offensive guys. We saw this last year with Fox and especially Isaac. I think we tend to see people project defensive 1st guys that are either raw or bad at offense, as better 2 way potential guys over offensive 1st guys that are raw or struggle on defense.

I actually tend to think it is easier for offensive guys who are raw or bad defensively to become average-good defenders, than it is for defensive guys that are raw/bad offensively to become average-good offensive players. This is why I tend to always rank offensive guys pretty high on my lists, and I tend to have guys like Isaac or Jaren Jackson lower than a lot of other people.

[flintsky21]

I find it funny how everybody who balks at Bagley -Faried comparisons forgot Faried hype from his first few seasons in the league when he was almost 15-15 machine with non stop motor. He was even on Team USA. He didn't develop his post D or perimeter offensive game. Now Bagley has better starting position as handler, but if he fails to develop consistent outside shot on NBA level and doesn't become positive defender, he could very well end up being that type of player. Not saying he won't, but if he doesn't...

This is what I've been saying. The biggest selling points for Bagley at the moment are his athleticism and high motor, the same things that made Kenneth Faried a solid starter for a few years. Of course Bagley could develop his outside shot, defense, passing, etc., but we should be looking at prospects at what they currently are and how their strongest skills could possibly translate in the NBA, not what they could become because that's hard to tell. So saying that Bagley is sure to be better than Faried just because he's got the "potential" to develop the things that Faried never did is also discounting the fact that he could fail to do so. Faried is his floor, not his ceiling. Could he be Amare? Possibly. Could he be the best player in the world? Maybe. But is Bagley really such a surebet that the possibility of becoming a 14ppg - 9rpg (Faried's best year) player at the pro level at the worst case is considered downright blasphemous?

[GimmeDat]

Bagley has Faried production right now as an absolute minimum. His jumpshot is already better than Faried's, his fluidity on the ball creating for himself in face up and post up (albeit with a left hand dependency at this stage) situations is miles ahead of Faried, while Bagley's feel can seem hit or miss he's shown much more promise as a passer than Faried has, and his ball handling is also ahead.

Just because Bagley isn't a refined offensive threat, and is production through primarily motor and athleticism, doesn't mean he's your stock standard rim runner/garbage guy. The man has an insane feel for the nuances of rebounding and interior scoring, it's an overlooked skill because it's hard to define. He's also much more dynamic athletically from a stand-still.

If you want to question something about Bagley, it's his defense. Offensively I think he's just going to be fine.

[JMac1]

This draft was great before all of the over-analysis. Half of the league was tanking for a chance at Ayton Bagley and Doncic, but now the negatives seem more important than the positives.

Ayton
Doncic
Bagley are studs. The concerns are legit but not enough to beat up on their potential IMO. But the Faried comparisons are so way off it isn’t even funny.

These guys are pups, but keep getting compared to seasoned players...

[King Ken]

This draft was great before all of the over-analysis. Half of the league was tanking for a chance at Ayton Bagley and Doncic, but now the negatives seem more important than the positives.

Ayton
Doncic
Bagley are studs. The concerns are legit but not enough to beat up on their potential IMO. But the Faried comparisons are so way off it isn’t even funny.

These guys are pups, but keep getting compared to seasoned players...

You would think Doncic is Bogdan and Bagley is Faried and not these once in a lifetime prospects. Tragic

[nolang1]

I find it funny how everybody who balks at Bagley -Faried comparisons forgot Faried hype from his first few seasons in the league when he was almost 15-15 machine with non stop motor. He was even on Team USA. He didn't develop his post D or perimeter offensive game. Now Bagley has better starting position as handler, but if he fails to develop consistent outside shot on NBA level and doesn't become positive defender, he could very well end up being that type of player. Not saying he won't, but if he doesn't...

This is what I've been saying. The biggest selling points for Bagley at the moment are his athleticism and high motor, the same things that made Kenneth Faried a solid starter for a few years. Of course Bagley could develop his outside shot, defense, passing, etc., but we should be looking at prospects at what they currently are and how their strongest skills could possibly translate in the NBA, not what they could become because that's hard to tell. So saying that Bagley is sure to be better than Faried just because he's got the "potential" to develop the things that Faried never did is also discounting the fact that he could fail to do so.

No, what people are saying is that Bagley is already a more skilled offensive player than the NBA starter version of Faried. This is not a high bar to clear since Faried is a player who has averaged 1 assist per game and made 0 three-pointers in his NBA career. Saying Faried didn't develop much in the NBA is basically irrelevant as he was a four-year college player; he clearly developed a ton from Bagley's age to age 22 by going from a part-time starter at Morehead State to a conference POY and second team all-American who was good enough to get drafted in the first round and then start in the NBA.

Bagley has Faried production right now as an absolute minimum. His jumpshot is already better than Faried's, his fluidity on the ball creating for himself in face up and post up (albeit with a left hand dependency at this stage) situations is miles ahead of Faried,

Even the alleged lack of a post game is quite overblown. It's like when people said Blake Griffin had no post game and then you'd look at the actual numbers and he'd be top 5 in the league in points per possession on post-ups; what they should've said was that Griffin's post game wasn't aesthetically pleasing to them. If you can jump higher and get off the ground more quickly than the player guarding you, then you should be attempting a dunk or a basic jump hook the vast majority of the time rather than overcomplicating things for no real reason. Missing a jump hook and then getting your own offensive rebound and laying it back in counts just the same as pulling off some triple pump-fake reverse pivot up-and-under move.