Challenge: Convince me Paulo Banchero will be good

[Creativetran]

Is he really 6'10'' though? It appears to me that Franz Wagner looks taller than him, and not by 1 or 2 inches too.

Some Magic fans say Franz is now a legit 6'11

[SeattleJazzFan]

there just haven't been a lot of dudes with paolo's size, athleticism and skillset (assuming the skillset continues to evolve and improve) come around. at a legit 6'10 260 (or whatever he weighs these days), he can do everything and score from everywhere - not a great ballhandler or shooter at this point, but the base skillset is there to where if he continues an upward trajectory in those areas he can be pretty elite.

[Duke4life831]

Ill have this be my final "K hasnt been a good coach in quite sometime" post. I still have a hard time grasping K force feeding Trevor Keels to be an on ball player last year. K has had an issue for quite sometime when it comes to a lack of running the PnR, Im not sure Paolo ran the PnR as the ball handler more than 5 times last season. As of right now, 25% of his plays in the NBA he is running the PnR as the ball handler.

[The Moose]

Ill have this be my final "K hasnt been a good coach in quite sometime" post. I still have a hard time grasping K force feeding Trevor Keels to be an on ball player last year. K has had an issue for quite sometime when it comes to a lack of running the PnR, Im not sure Paolo ran the PnR as the ball handler more than 5 times last season. As of right now, 25% of his plays in the NBA he is running the PnR as the ball handler.

One thing I’ll say about Paolo. I can’t help but feel he has a lot more juice that he didn’t get to show at Duke. Especially as a jumbo initiator/creator.

I think playing at Duke with a more traditional system with some very capable players surrounding him actually hid some of Paolo's potential.
Firstly I think Paolo can be a legit threat as a pnr handler, he very rarely got to show this at Duke. Its certainly not out of the question that this can be a part of his offense at the NBA level.
At Duke he only got to be the pnr handler on 5% of his possessions. Funnily enough Coach K used Tatum in a similar way who also only had 5% possessions as a pnr handler.
Now in the NBA , Tatum has regularly been at 20%+ possessions as the pnr handler.

Secondly, I think Paolo can be a serious grab and go/coast to coast threat in transition ala Simmons. Maybe not to that level, but certainly think it’s a serious threat for him.
He rarely got the chance to show this at Duke who consistently play in the half court and run Coach K's sets. They are not an uptempo team by any stretch

Read on Twitter

Just look at some of these clips
A more nba style, contemporary coached ncaa team might have

Yeah , I mentioned this pre draft in one of the other draft threads , but Coach K used Tatum in the same way, he doesn’t seem to get that much out of his big wings , at least not as much as he could

[Duke4life831]

Ill have this be my final "K hasnt been a good coach in quite sometime" post. I still have a hard time grasping K force feeding Trevor Keels to be an on ball player last year. K has had an issue for quite sometime when it comes to a lack of running the PnR, Im not sure Paolo ran the PnR as the ball handler more than 5 times last season. As of right now, 25% of his plays in the NBA he is running the PnR as the ball handler.

One thing I’ll say about Paolo. I can’t help but feel he has a lot more juice that he didn’t get to show at Duke. Especially as a jumbo initiator/creator.

I think playing at Duke with a more traditional system with some very capable players surrounding him actually hid some of Paolo's potential.
Firstly I think Paolo can be a legit threat as a pnr handler, he very rarely got to show this at Duke. Its certainly not out of the question that this can be a part of his offense at the NBA level.
At Duke he only got to be the pnr handler on 5% of his possessions. Funnily enough Coach K used Tatum in a similar way who also only had 5% possessions as a pnr handler.
Now in the NBA , Tatum has regularly been at 20%+ possessions as the pnr handler.

Secondly, I think Paolo can be a serious grab and go/coast to coast threat in transition ala Simmons. Maybe not to that level, but certainly think it’s a serious threat for him.
He rarely got the chance to show this at Duke who consistently play in the half court and run Coach K's sets. They are not an uptempo team by any stretch

Read on Twitter

Just look at some of these clips
A more nba style, contemporary coached ncaa team might have

Yeah , I mentioned this pre draft in one of the other draft threads , but Coach K used Tatum in the same way, he doesn’t seem to get that much out of his big wings , at least not as much as he could

Ya Ive been pretty vocal the last few years on just how much time had caught up to K. And just looking back with how much he force fed Trevor Keels with on ball duties just blows my mind. Trevor Keels role with Duke from day 1 shouldve just been 3&D wing, nothing more. But know for some reason K just fell in love with having the ball in Keels hands. The only reason Duke went as deep in the tournament as they did was because K benched Keels (which was the obvious thing to do with how much better they played when Keels missed games late in the season).

But ya really hoping Scheyer coaches with a much more modern approach. The amount of talent that went through Duke the last 5-7 years and the lack of any actual success is pretty mind blowing.

[Hal14]

Is he really 6'10'' though? It appears to me that Franz Wagner looks taller than him, and not by 1 or 2 inches too.

Some Magic fans say Franz is now a legit 6'11

Paolo looks more like 6'9" to me..

[nicnac215]

Is he really 6'10'' though? It appears to me that Franz Wagner looks taller than him, and not by 1 or 2 inches too.

Some Magic fans say Franz is now a legit 6'11

Paolo looks more like 6'9" to me..

He is so thick he looks shorter but he is a legit 6’10”

[NO-KG-AI]

Paolo is even better starting very far from the basket than I thought he'd be, especially so soon.

[Jamaaliver]

Kid is a monster. An unholy cross between Giannis and Chris Webber.

It's not even fair...

Read on Twitter

[clyde21]

hes really good, my only concern with Paolo long term is we might be closer to his ceiling than a lot of people think. in that will the Paolo 5 years from now look vastly different than what we're seeing now?

I said the same thing about Ben Simmons his rookie year and it came true, the guy came in on an unbelievably high floor for a young guy and was already a lot closer to what his ceiling was gonna end up being. we'll see but that's my biggest question for him now.

[Big J]

hes really good, my only concern with Paolo long term is we might be closer to his ceiling than a lot of people think. in that will the Paolo 5 years from now look vastly different than what we're seeing now?

I said the same thing about Ben Simmons his rookie year and it came true, the guy came in on an unbelievably high floor for a young guy and was already a lot closer to what his ceiling was gonna end up being. we'll see but that's my biggest question for him now.

Paolo's could easily develop into the alpha on a top 5 team in a few years. I don't see him just being content to go to the lottery year after year. His competitiveness reminds me a lot of rookie Luka's.

[NO-KG-AI]

hes really good, my only concern with Paolo long term is we might be closer to his ceiling than a lot of people think. in that will the Paolo 5 years from now look vastly different than what we're seeing now?

I said the same thing about Ben Simmons his rookie year and it came true, the guy came in on an unbelievably high floor for a young guy and was already a lot closer to what his ceiling was gonna end up being. we'll see but that's my biggest question for him now.

If his shooting continues to progress and he tightens up his ball handling, improves his playmaking, adds some ticks to a post game/off ball game, he'll get a lot better. Small incremental improvements all over help a lot.

Ben's problem is that he had no ability or desire to improve at all. Even average progression for an NBA player as a shooter would have leveled him up a lot, but he's a lazy bum. Is Paolo going to get lazy? guess we'll find out.

[SeattleJazzFan]

hes really good, my only concern with Paolo long term is we might be closer to his ceiling than a lot of people think. in that will the Paolo 5 years from now look vastly different than what we're seeing now?

I said the same thing about Ben Simmons his rookie year and it came true, the guy came in on an unbelievably high floor for a young guy and was already a lot closer to what his ceiling was gonna end up being. we'll see but that's my biggest question for him now.

i said it about scottie barnes and while it's still early on barnes, he's regressed this season and i'm fairly confident we've seen pretty much who barnes is and will be.

having said that, banchero has more pop as a shooter than simmons and barnes and if guys can shoot (in addition to the other skills these top guys possess), they tend to get better. it's when you can't shoot that you become limited.

[clyde21]

hes really good, my only concern with Paolo long term is we might be closer to his ceiling than a lot of people think. in that will the Paolo 5 years from now look vastly different than what we're seeing now?

I said the same thing about Ben Simmons his rookie year and it came true, the guy came in on an unbelievably high floor for a young guy and was already a lot closer to what his ceiling was gonna end up being. we'll see but that's my biggest question for him now.

If his shooting continues to progress and he tightens up his ball handling, improves his playmaking, adds some ticks to a post game/off ball game, he'll get a lot better. Small incremental improvements all over help a lot.

Ben's problem is that he had no ability or desire to improve at all. Even average progression for an NBA player as a shooter would have leveled him up a lot, but he's a lazy bum. Is Paolo going to get lazy? guess we'll find out.

well yea, no one's saying the dude is done developing or improving, but he already has an NBA body so it's not a situation of waiting until he grows into his body, and already has a sophisticated and developed offensive game beyond his yrs. that's part of what made him a great prospect, but on the other end it could mean he's closer to his ceiling that many think.

it's much more of a Ben Simmons situation than a Jayson Tatum one.

[Duke4life831]

I guess Paolo is closer to his ceiling compared to the rest of the rookies, but I think thats more because he has just been so much better than the rest of the rookies.

100% willing to toss this up to being a homer, but I dont think he's all that close to his ceiling. I think role wise and how he is being used he is close to how we will most likely see him (28 USG%, around a 5-5.5 Time Per Possession), I just think he has a ton of room to grow doing what he's doing. He is already playing better defense than I thought he would play within his first few seasons in the league and he can get better there. Then offensively, him being able to get to the FT line has been huge for him, but the rest his shot and efficiency from the field still has plenty of room to grow.

I definitely think he's closer to Tatum than Simmons when it comes to being a young prospect and how close they were to their ceiling as a rookie because Simmons always had the issue with the jumper that was always going to be a major limit on his ceiling. Paolo doesnt have that issue.

[Big J]

hes really good, my only concern with Paolo long term is we might be closer to his ceiling than a lot of people think. in that will the Paolo 5 years from now look vastly different than what we're seeing now?

I said the same thing about Ben Simmons his rookie year and it came true, the guy came in on an unbelievably high floor for a young guy and was already a lot closer to what his ceiling was gonna end up being. we'll see but that's my biggest question for him now.

If his shooting continues to progress and he tightens up his ball handling, improves his playmaking, adds some ticks to a post game/off ball game, he'll get a lot better. Small incremental improvements all over help a lot.

Ben's problem is that he had no ability or desire to improve at all. Even average progression for an NBA player as a shooter would have leveled him up a lot, but he's a lazy bum. Is Paolo going to get lazy? guess we'll find out.

well yea, no one's saying the dude is done developing or improving, but he already has an NBA body so it's not a situation of waiting until he grows into his body, and already has a sophisticated and developed offensive game beyond his yrs. that's part of what made him a great prospect, but on the other end it could mean he's closer to his ceiling that many think.

it's much more of a Ben Simmons situation than a Jayson Tatum one.

Paolo is already better than Simmons ever was. His improvements from here on out will be measured by team success rather than individual accolades.

[threethehardway]

Only in the NBA, a 20 year old rookie being developed and polished and a starter level player is seen as a negative vs. guys who are 4 years away from being 4 years away.

Paolo needs to improve his shooting, ball-handling and passing so he can play more like a jumbo-sized guard. He needs to some Luka. Watch some James Harden. He can definitely along those lines since he is so advanced with his foot-work for his age.

But like, seriously, "He's too advanced, he most likely won't improved compared to this 19 year old 6'10 twig that needs 4 years of weight training in order to make contact layups."

This mentality is only in the NBA. Only in the NBA fandom people imagine All-Star futures on by looking at 18 to 20 years that can't even bench press 100 pounds and literally are the worst players in the NBA and rather than appreciate 18 to 20 year olds guys that come into the league ready to play.

[NO-KG-AI]

hes really good, my only concern with Paolo long term is we might be closer to his ceiling than a lot of people think. in that will the Paolo 5 years from now look vastly different than what we're seeing now?

I said the same thing about Ben Simmons his rookie year and it came true, the guy came in on an unbelievably high floor for a young guy and was already a lot closer to what his ceiling was gonna end up being. we'll see but that's my biggest question for him now.

If his shooting continues to progress and he tightens up his ball handling, improves his playmaking, adds some ticks to a post game/off ball game, he'll get a lot better. Small incremental improvements all over help a lot.

Ben's problem is that he had no ability or desire to improve at all. Even average progression for an NBA player as a shooter would have leveled him up a lot, but he's a lazy bum. Is Paolo going to get lazy? guess we'll find out.

well yea, no one's saying the dude is done developing or improving, but he already has an NBA body so it's not a situation of waiting until he grows into his body, and already has a sophisticated and developed offensive game beyond his yrs. that's part of what made him a great prospect, but on the other end it could mean he's closer to his ceiling that many think.

it's much more of a Ben Simmons situation than a Jayson Tatum one.

If he improves 1%, he'll be closer to Tatum level of improvement than Ben.

I kinda get what you're saying, but Ben didn't improve at all, and it wasn't because his ceiling was capped or there wasn't room for improvement. It was because he's lazy and doesn't care at all about basketball.

[Jamaaliver]

Read on Twitter

[HotelVitale]

hes really good, my only concern with Paolo long term is we might be closer to his ceiling than a lot of people think. in that will the Paolo 5 years from now look vastly different than what we're seeing now?

I said the same thing about Ben Simmons his rookie year and it came true, the guy came in on an unbelievably high floor for a young guy and was already a lot closer to what his ceiling was gonna end up being. we'll see but that's my biggest question for him now.

i said it about scottie barnes and while it's still early on barnes, he's regressed this season and i'm fairly confident we've seen pretty much who barnes is and will be.

having said that, banchero has more pop as a shooter than simmons and barnes and if guys can shoot (in addition to the other skills these top guys possess), they tend to get better. it's when you can't shoot that you become limited.

In general there's no way to know what a guy will or won't pick up in the NBA, we see such massive variation in that every year that it's fool's errand to pretend you can guess almost anything about it. But I agree somewhat with your points on both Barnes and Simmons, since both came in with certain clear limitations and certain clear translatable strengths (though Simmons' strengths were definitely going to translate very very well and with Barnes there was more uncertainty). So they were able to immediately do a few things and create a niche for themselves, but then had big gaps between that and becoming more dangerous well-rounded players. The shooting is the obvious weakness for both but also consistent general shot creation (for themselves or others) in the half court. Neither of those things is easy to pick up: players have already had like 13 years of organized ball to develop basics for them and they're simply very difficult, precise things to level up from rudimentary to ready-for-NBA-defenders. Prospects who aren't good at them sometimes learn them but not at as good of a rate as say learning to make most reads and passes in the NBA spread court, or leveling up from meh shooter with okay form to perfectly serviceable (or even good/very good) shooter.

With Paolo, though, I don't see the same situation. He doesn't have any major general weaknesses on offense (those his strengths are at very varying levels), and he's already shown that his basic strengths translated and that he has some other skills that have plenty of high-level upside. I think it makes sense to doubt that he maximizes all of them--most prospects don't come close--but I also don't think there's any particular reason to be skeptical of him or to lower his stock based on limited ceiling. There's no reason he can't improve his driving angles, improve his passing on the move, improve his ability to manipulate and read defenses, improve his 3pt pull-up, etc, he'll be a much better player. All of those things seem very possible, too, and I agree with the takes that don't see any reason to set Paolo's ceiling short of elite superstar (even if I would trust the mean and not bet on that happening).