Wembanyama. I'm concerned

[BetterCallSaul]

he's 7'5. he's already unguardable. he's a 7'5 player who makes things difficult on himself by playing like he's 6'4. he doesn't need moves, he can just stand straight and tall and shoot from anywhere whenever he feels like it. no moves no nuttin' necessary. he's puts on a move, puts the ball on the floor,,,THEN he becomes guardable

he has height.....he doesn't use it

It's the NBA, being 7'5 doesn't make you unguardable at all. He's getting ready to go face to face with guys like Giannis and Embiid in the playoffs. He wants to take them out of the paint into where he's more comfortable. If he has to take contact and bang around in the paint with them he's playing to their game. He's trying to develop something that will make him unguardable at the highest level, not at LA Fitness. In case you haven't noticed, he's extremely skinny. I don't see the value in putting him at risk of injury by forcing him to be more "efficient" on a team that has 5 wins. Maybe they'd have 7 if he did. If Pop wanted, I'm sure he could find many ways to squeeze out another 5 wins from this team. What's the point?
I think the vision will always be to see if this guy can hit 3+ threes a game and then start driving into open lanes after a pump fake.

so you're saying sas wants to cultivate a 7'5 wing
okay, we're revisit this in 3yrs

like, you know why kd and kat and lauri are unguardable. not only are they 7' but they shoot 3s with the best of them. they both were shooting 3s off the dribble since college at least - and both near 40%

so here's my math. by my reckoning wemby MUST shoot 3s at a similar ELITE clip or,,,what's the point. that is, what is the point of a 7'5 player shooting 3s at an average % - he has to be at least as good as kd/lauri/kat. anything less is not worth it because of the very fact that he's 7'5. 7'5 makes you untouchable. are you taking advantage of being untoucahable if you can only be average when 7'5 inherently makes you well above average in almost anything you do, and fully capable of MUCH MORE. does shooting 3s mean they have to "respect your outside game?" WHY?,,,you're 7'5.

what i'm saying is,,,7'5 changes everything. it's NOT being only 7'. it's not like giannis facing a wall so he had to expand his game(which btw i still think he would be better served to develop an 12foot game). as far as i can see. wemby shooting a 3 is a turnover

Have you checked KD and KAT's three point shooting numbers in their rookie year? KAT shot it better but barely shot any at all. KD shot worse or the same as Wemby but with way less volume. While I agree that him developing a 3-15 foot toolbox will make him unstoppable, so will him developing pull up/trailer threes from 23+ feet out. We can't predict how his in between game will work out. However, 35% of his shots currently come from 10 feet and in. That's comparable to Durant's rookie year (38%). Main difference is Durant took way more long twos than threes as a rookie.
Despite the fact that he plays most like a 7'4 KD at this time, he actually doesn't play like any of these guys. Like I said, you really can not predict what his version of greatness will look like. At a certain point, all you need to know is that a guy will be great. It's not that hard to see star power when it's there. How great will he be? What will end up being his niche? We're guessing.

I don't think digging this up in three years will help your case but I'm willing to say I could be wrong. So far, the dude is putting up 19/10/3/3 on below average efficiency and too many turnovers. He's as much to blame for Spurs losses as anyone else. I agree that people are glossing over that. But he's a young superstar on a losing team, this is the best environment for him to explore his play at the lowest inhibited level. I'm sure the coaches are going over film to try and help him find those bad habits and curb them as he continues playing.

It's crazy how much these conversations remind me of people who were using stats and picking on KD's rookie year and all I really felt like saying about him was: He's gonna be great, lol. Why pick on him as a 19 year old? No 19 year old is ever going to spearhead a championship team.

[Slim Charlez]

With all due respect, I am not impressed with his stats if his team is losing. At what point is it better for him to pass that 3 point shot to an open guard who shoots better than him?

If he's losing, he's contributing to a loss.

This is why net rating is so important. It's the only metric that matters.

You mean like last night when he got Jones a wide open 3 to tie and he missed it?

Have you even watched the Spurs this year by any chance or are you just talking for the sake of talking? Because not very many guys can make an open 3 on that garbage roster.

If he's making the team better, why are they just as bad (if not worse) than last year's? The lineup is pretty much the same except the addition of him.

If winning is not the end goal, then what is it?

I'd lay the blame entirely on Pop and the FO, he's not the one that was playing an unskilled PF at PG, he's not the one that decided to come into the season with Mcdermott and Cedi Osman as the main vets on the team, he's not the one putting himself on a minutes restriction, he's coming into a new country and new league and breaking records for a teenager. Whether that be due to blatant tanking or incompetence is another question, to put it into context, Chet was getting upset in the NCAA tournament at the same age.

[lebootz21]

You mean like last night when he got Jones a wide open 3 to tie and he missed it?

Have you even watched the Spurs this year by any chance or are you just talking for the sake of talking? Because not very many guys can make an open 3 on that garbage roster.

If he's making the team better, why are they just as bad (if not worse) than last year's? The lineup is pretty much the same except the addition of him.

If winning is not the end goal, then what is it?

I'd lay the blame entirely on Pop and the FO, he's not the one that was playing an unskilled PF at PG, he's not the one that decided to come into the season with Mcdermott and Cedi Osman as the main vets on the team, he's not the one putting himself on a minutes restriction, he's coming into a new country and new league and breaking records for a teenager. Whether that be due to blatant tanking or incompetence is another question, to put it into context, Chet was getting upset in the NCAA tournament at the same age.

I understand your point. To each their own.

I just can't take Wemby seriously until he starts winning. It's easy to pad stats when you are losing. It's quite different when you are winning.

All the greats made their bad teams better in their first year.

Why does Wemby get a pass?

[sikma42]

My point is if he wants to be a KD type player, I just don't see it. I can see him being better on defense, but KD is better than him in every advance metrics on the offensive end even in his rookie year if you take net rating as a factor.

I don't see how you can say he is better when his team net rating is absymal.

I can easily argue he's stat padding.

KD is a pretty steep comparison--he's one of the best offensive players ever--but net rating is a goofy thing to include in this argument. Too hard to make any case for it, too much else contributing to noise there.

Also 'stat padding' isn't going to be a helpful framework. What both KD and Wemby are doing is taking more shots than they should/would in a normal disciplined offense. They don't really know what the best shots are, or even what a good shot is for them, so they're just taking a lot of shots. Anything they can get off they're firing up. Coaches are certainly encouraging them to do this, and the point is to mess around some, especially since their teams are clearly not trying to win at all costs atm.

With all due respect, I am not impressed with his stats if his team is losing. At what point is it better for him to pass that 3 point shot to an open guard who shoots better than him?

If he's losing, he's contributing to a loss.

This is why net rating (team and individual) is so important. It's the only metric that matters.

If I put peak Shaq or Jordan out there with a bunch of 12 year olds they would lose.

That same player in another situation wins 3 straight titles.

Acting like anyone that loses must have their contributions painted as a “contributor to a loss” is silly and reductive.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[lebootz21]

KD is a pretty steep comparison--he's one of the best offensive players ever--but net rating is a goofy thing to include in this argument. Too hard to make any case for it, too much else contributing to noise there.

Also 'stat padding' isn't going to be a helpful framework. What both KD and Wemby are doing is taking more shots than they should/would in a normal disciplined offense. They don't really know what the best shots are, or even what a good shot is for them, so they're just taking a lot of shots. Anything they can get off they're firing up. Coaches are certainly encouraging them to do this, and the point is to mess around some, especially since their teams are clearly not trying to win at all costs atm.

With all due respect, I am not impressed with his stats if his team is losing. At what point is it better for him to pass that 3 point shot to an open guard who shoots better than him?

If he's losing, he's contributing to a loss.

This is why net rating (team and individual) is so important. It's the only metric that matters.

If I put peak Shaq or Jordan out there with a bunch of 12 year olds they would lose.

That same player in another situation wins 3 straight titles.

Acting like anyone that loses must have their contributions painted as a “contributor to a loss” is silly and reductive.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

How is it silly? His team is losing. It is fair to question whether or not he is a winner when he is clearly losing.

[tsherkin]

I just can't take Wemby seriously until he starts winning. It's easy to pad stats when you are losing. It's quite different when you are winning.

This is a bit of a daft post, tbh. Rebounding is rebounding. The blocks are coming with evident defensive impact, he's just trying to bootstrap a truly awful team. And Chicago was actually a WORSE relative offense in Jordan's rookie year than the season prior. And a 38-win squad (although granted, they'd won 27 the year prior). They also went from 10th to 20th on D.

Offense is a major driving force, for sure, but a single player can only do so much.

All the greats made their bad teams better in their first year.

And Wemby is making the D a lot better, but his team is worse than most of the teams you're describing. I'm not sure why this isn't processing, but San Antonio was the 2nd-worst offense and the worst defense last year. A single player was only ever going to do so much for that team. Particularly in 29 mpg. They've also had significant turnover in their starting lineup, basically don't draw fouls (worst FTr in the league), can't protect the ball, are the 2nd-worst 3pt shooting team in the league...

You'd dead-ass have to be deluding yourself to think that a rookie was going to do a lot for that team. Jordan, Lebron, KD, whomever.

KD's Sonics won THREE more games than the season before, and began starting Earl Watson. Plus they'd added Jeff Green and they got a good year from Nick Collison.

The Chicago Bulls stopped starting Dave Greenwood, got a full year out of Steve Johnson (mid-season trade the year before). They played Dave Corzine off the bench half the season. They got rid of Mitchell Wiggins, they mostly pulled Ennis Whatley out of the starting lineup. So there were some consequential roster shifts there as well.

Cleveland switched coaches to Paul Silas. They stopped having Ricky Davis take 18 FGA/g. They started Carlos Boozer full-time. They did even less with Dajuan Wagner. Lebron, of course, was more of an offensive force than Wemby even then, which helped a lot. But that's still more than what San Antonio has enjoyed. No concurrent positive changes besides Wemby.

And you're laying into him like he should be doing more with this garbage squad, which is a little bit much at this point, especially given your unwillingness to acknowledge his actual strength: defense.

[sikma42]

With all due respect, I am not impressed with his stats if his team is losing. At what point is it better for him to pass that 3 point shot to an open guard who shoots better than him?

If he's losing, he's contributing to a loss.

This is why net rating (team and individual) is so important. It's the only metric that matters.

If I put peak Shaq or Jordan out there with a bunch of 12 year olds they would lose.

That same player in another situation wins 3 straight titles.

Acting like anyone that loses must have their contributions painted as a “contributor to a loss” is silly and reductive.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

How is it silly? His team is losing. It is fair to question whether or not he is a winner when he is clearly losing.

I think it’s silly that you’re being reductive.


It doesn’t matter one bit if this team is losing as currently constructed and the way it’s currently being coached. Spurs aren’t trying to win games, it’s been obvious to anybody that has watched.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[lebootz21]

If I put peak Shaq or Jordan out there with a bunch of 12 year olds they would lose.

That same player in another situation wins 3 straight titles.

Acting like anyone that loses must have their contributions painted as a “contributor to a loss” is silly and reductive.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

How is it silly? His team is losing. It is fair to question whether or not he is a winner when he is clearly losing.

I think it’s silly that you’re being reductive.


It doesn’t matter one bit if this team is losing as currently constructed and the way it’s currently being coached. Spurs aren’t trying to win games, it’s been obvious to anybody that has watched.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

I'm sorry I value net rating. He needs to start winning if he wants to be in the same tier as Lebron, Jordan, Duncan, Shaq, etc.

I'm not saying he can't. I'll believe it when I see it. I don't deal with hypotheticals and guesses.

[holdenwait]

net rating-ed out just reading the last 4-5 pages of this thread

[lebootz21]

I apologize if it seems like I'm trolling. I really am not. I mean I understand the enthusiasm around Wemby, so I'll just shut up.

Sorry.

P.S. All haters are secret fans.

[Chanel Bomber]

I'm speaking from an objective standpoint. What metrics are you using? How can you even argue against net rating?

Please explain.

Maybe I'm an idiot. Please educate me.

Net rating is a lineup stat, not an individual impact metric. You can sometimes see trends on who drives those ratings by comparing individual ratings of players who share a lot of their minutes on the court, and great players on good teams tend to drive strong net ratings, but otherwise this stat is often times too noisy to draw any conclusions on individual play because it doesn't filter out context.

Net rating has nothing to do with impact?

How can you say that with a straight face? It has everything to do with impact. It does not matter if it's individual or team net rating, it is the most important metric.

If you disagree, what other metric is better? Why do we only care about stats and highlights and not win%? It's all backwards to me.

Maybe I'm really an idiot and missing something.

Please educate me.

You are missing something, but that doesn't make you an idiot lol.

Individual net rating is a lineup stat with one player on the floor, not an individual metric. Because it measures how one player with the 4 teammates he shares the court with fares per 100 possessions. So the quality of the teammates, plus the quality of the opposition, have a massive affect on those numbers.

Some examples to illustrate:
- Dwyane Wade had a +3.6 net rating in 2008-09. He had a +10.4 net rating in 2010-11. Did he improve as an individual player to become +6.8 points per 100 possessions better within two seasons? Or did his supporting cast improve? In 2008-09, the two players he shared the most minutes with were Mario Chalmers and Udonis Haslem. In 2010-11, they were LeBron James and Chris Bosh. Context.

- Kevin Garnett had a -0.1 net rating in 2006-07. He had a +16.0 net rating a year later. Did he transform from one year to the next? Or did something happen in the summer of 2007 that can explain this gap? Context.

- Josh Hart last season had a +11.9 net rating. SGA had a +2.7 net rating. Who was the most impactful player? The reality is that one came off the bench and was really effective playing with two other elite bench players in Quickley and Hartenstein - and killing other bench units. The other was leading what was still a fairly average starting lineup against NBA starters every night. So different quality of teammates relative to the opposition. Context.

Net rating does not extract context. It's all baked into the data.

There are some interesting metrics that do take lineup data (+/-, on/off...) as a starting point and then adjust using tracking data and other statistics to extract the noise that is inherent to lineup data. These metrics - from EPM to RAPTOR to LEBRON to RAPM - do a pretty remarkable job of measuring individual impact.

[Ursusamericanus]

Going to be curious to see how many blocks per game he's getting in a few years.

I wouldn't expect big jumps. Block numbers often don't really increase as deterrence effects come more into play and the shot blocker becomes more selective in trying to block shots (young players are often a bit too eager to block shots at the expense of other parts of defense).

Victor is a bit different in that fouling has not been a major concern for him unlike most Rookies and he's not overly eager to block everything in his vicinity. He also gets a lot of blocks without jumping which should help sustain his numbers. But a major increase? I doubt it. It's also not really useful to compare Victor's numbers to Hakeem's, Robinson's, Dikembe's etc. because there are simply fewer shot blocking opportunities for Centers these days.

Yeah I guess the point of my comparison was that, despite those fewer opportunities in this era, he's still blocking at a high rate. I do think we'll see quite a jump even if it might not reach Bol or Eaton levels. He seems to alter and block shots very well while remaining disciplined.

[sikma42]

How is it silly? His team is losing. It is fair to question whether or not he is a winner when he is clearly losing.

I think it’s silly that you’re being reductive.


It doesn’t matter one bit if this team is losing as currently constructed and the way it’s currently being coached. Spurs aren’t trying to win games, it’s been obvious to anybody that has watched.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

I'm sorry I value net rating. He needs to start winning if he wants to be in the same tier as Lebron, Jordan, Duncan, Shaq, etc.

I'm not saying he can't. I'll believe it when I see it. I don't deal with hypotheticals and guesses.

sounds like you don't add much value to conversions. If you lack the ability to project talent beyond regurgitating a metric then I don't see the point. Is your argument that he isn't projecting to be Lebron or Jordan? He doesn't have to be as good as those guys, I just don't see what you are arguing against.

[zimpy27]

Going to be curious to see how many blocks per game he's getting in a few years.

I wouldn't expect big jumps. Block numbers often don't really increase as deterrence effects come more into play and the shot blocker becomes more selective in trying to block shots (young players are often a bit too eager to block shots at the expense of other parts of defense).

Victor is a bit different in that fouling has not been a major concern for him unlike most Rookies and he's not overly eager to block everything in his vicinity. He also gets a lot of blocks without jumping which should help sustain his numbers. But a major increase? I doubt it. It's also not really useful to compare Victor's numbers to Hakeem's, Robinson's, Dikembe's etc. because there are simply fewer shot blocking opportunities for Centers these days.

Yeah I guess the point of my comparison was that, despite those fewer opportunities in this era, he's still blocking at a high rate. I do think we'll see quite a jump even if it might not reach Bol or Eaton levels. He seems to alter and block shots very well while remaining disciplined.

Blocks per game haven't changed really, over the history of the NBA. Just as many blocks now as when these other guys played.

Steals on the other hand have dropped over time.

[Ursusamericanus]

I wouldn't expect big jumps. Block numbers often don't really increase as deterrence effects come more into play and the shot blocker becomes more selective in trying to block shots (young players are often a bit too eager to block shots at the expense of other parts of defense).

Victor is a bit different in that fouling has not been a major concern for him unlike most Rookies and he's not overly eager to block everything in his vicinity. He also gets a lot of blocks without jumping which should help sustain his numbers. But a major increase? I doubt it. It's also not really useful to compare Victor's numbers to Hakeem's, Robinson's, Dikembe's etc. because there are simply fewer shot blocking opportunities for Centers these days.

Yeah I guess the point of my comparison was that, despite those fewer opportunities in this era, he's still blocking at a high rate. I do think we'll see quite a jump even if it might not reach Bol or Eaton levels. He seems to alter and block shots very well while remaining disciplined.

Blocks per game haven't changed really, over the history of the NBA. Just as many blocks now as when these other guys played.

Steals on the other hand have dropped over time.

I thought blocks have declined quite a bit - that's not the case? Are blocks just more "spread out" now, i.e., centers aren't hogging them as much? I had the impression at least that league-leading BPG numbers have fallen a lot compared to e.g. the 90s.

[Lalouie]

It's the NBA, being 7'5 doesn't make you unguardable at all. He's getting ready to go face to face with guys like Giannis and Embiid in the playoffs. He wants to take them out of the paint into where he's more comfortable. If he has to take contact and bang around in the paint with them he's playing to their game. He's trying to develop something that will make him unguardable at the highest level, not at LA Fitness. In case you haven't noticed, he's extremely skinny. I don't see the value in putting him at risk of injury by forcing him to be more "efficient" on a team that has 5 wins. Maybe they'd have 7 if he did. If Pop wanted, I'm sure he could find many ways to squeeze out another 5 wins from this team. What's the point?
I think the vision will always be to see if this guy can hit 3+ threes a game and then start driving into open lanes after a pump fake.

so you're saying sas wants to cultivate a 7'5 wing
okay, we're revisit this in 3yrs

like, you know why kd and kat and lauri are unguardable. not only are they 7' but they shoot 3s with the best of them. they both were shooting 3s off the dribble since college at least - and both near 40%

so here's my math. by my reckoning wemby MUST shoot 3s at a similar ELITE clip or,,,what's the point. that is, what is the point of a 7'5 player shooting 3s at an average % - he has to be at least as good as kd/lauri/kat. anything less is not worth it because of the very fact that he's 7'5. 7'5 makes you untouchable. are you taking advantage of being untoucahable if you can only be average when 7'5 inherently makes you well above average in almost anything you do, and fully capable of MUCH MORE. does shooting 3s mean they have to "respect your outside game?" WHY?,,,you're 7'5.

what i'm saying is,,,7'5 changes everything. it's NOT being only 7'. it's not like giannis facing a wall so he had to expand his game(which btw i still think he would be better served to develop an 12foot game). as far as i can see. wemby shooting a 3 is a turnover

Have you checked KD and KAT's three point shooting numbers in their rookie year? KAT shot it better but barely shot any at all. KD shot worse or the same as Wemby but with way less volume. While I agree that him developing a 3-15 foot toolbox will make him unstoppable, so will him developing pull up/trailer threes from 23+ feet out. We can't predict how his in between game will work out. However, 35% of his shots currently come from 10 feet and in. That's comparable to Durant's rookie year (38%). Main difference is Durant took way more long twos than threes as a rookie.
Despite the fact that he plays most like a 7'4 KD at this time, he actually doesn't play like any of these guys. Like I said, you really can not predict what his version of greatness will look like. At a certain point, all you need to know is that a guy will be great. It's not that hard to see star power when it's there. How great will he be? What will end up being his niche? We're guessing.

I don't think digging this up in three years will help your case but I'm willing to say I could be wrong. So far, the dude is putting up 19/10/3/3 on below average efficiency and too many turnovers. He's as much to blame for Spurs losses as anyone else. I agree that people are glossing over that. But he's a young superstar on a losing team, this is the best environment for him to explore his play at the lowest inhibited level. I'm sure the coaches are going over film to try and help him find those bad habits and curb them as he continues playing.

It's crazy how much these conversations remind me of people who were using stats and picking on KD's rookie year and all I really felt like saying about him was: He's gonna be great, lol. Why pick on him as a 19 year old? No 19 year old is ever going to spearhead a championship team.

implicit in the comparison of kd's early numbers is your assumption that if he did it wemby can. i prefer to go with the %s that wemby CAN'T.

no one guards the 3. everyone puts up their hands up, that's all because no one wants to foul a 3. so the idea of the 3 making someone even more unstoppable is ridiculous.

i think inevitably this is going back to how i feel about the 3 as an efficient shot. i wont get into it,,,but suffice it to say the analytics are taking cumulative numbers to justify the 3. the 3 on a per play basis is still 10-15% less accurate than the 2. it also affects how players USE IT. ie how many times have you seen a player take a 38%(if he's good) 3 when the team only needs 1 or 2 - that is the game right there

with very little effort, this 7'5 dude can become a 60% or higher scoring mofo. that's equivalent to 40% from the 3. unless he goes home crying to mommy that the nba is beating him up inside

[Bornstellar]

I think it’s silly that you’re being reductive.


It doesn’t matter one bit if this team is losing as currently constructed and the way it’s currently being coached. Spurs aren’t trying to win games, it’s been obvious to anybody that has watched.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

I'm sorry I value net rating. He needs to start winning if he wants to be in the same tier as Lebron, Jordan, Duncan, Shaq, etc.

I'm not saying he can't. I'll believe it when I see it. I don't deal with hypotheticals and guesses.

sounds like you don't add much value to conversions. If you lack the ability to project talent beyond regurgitating a metric then I don't see the point. Is your argument that he isn't projecting to be Lebron or Jordan? He doesn't have to be as good as those guys, I just don't see what you are arguing against.

Seriously. 30 games into his rookie year: "He needs to win to be in the same tier as Jordan and LeBron!" You can't make these horrible takes up

[tsherkin]

Blocks per game haven't changed really, over the history of the NBA. Just as many blocks now as when these other guys played.

Steals on the other hand have dropped over time.

Yeah, teams are averaging 5.2 bpg so far in 2024; in 1998, they were averaging 5.1. In 1990, the same.

There are 14 player-seasons of 4+ bpg (and 50+ GP) in the three-point era, and only 7 in the 90s, the last of which was Dikembe Mutombo in 1996.

From 2000 forward, there are 7 player-seasons of 3.5+ bpg, the last of which was Hassan Whiteside in 2016. If you drop that to 3+ bpg, it becomes 19 player-seasons since 99-00, and Jaren Jackson last year is the most recent after Whiteside. Marcus Camby had 4, Ben Wallace had 3, Theo Ratliff had 4, Ibaka had 2. Shaq, Deke, Zo, Kirilenko, Whiteside and Jaren Jackson complete that list.

It's not a common thing at all. It's only happened four times since the end of the 2008 season. So what we're seeing from Wemby is a little wild, especially only 3 of them happened in < 30 mpg the way Wemby is managing right now.

[zimpy27]

Blocks per game haven't changed really, over the history of the NBA. Just as many blocks now as when these other guys played.

Steals on the other hand have dropped over time.

Yeah, teams are averaging 5.2 bpg so far in 2024; in 1998, they were averaging 5.1. In 1990, the same.

There are 14 player-seasons of 4+ bpg (and 50+ GP) in the three-point era, and only 7 in the 90s, the last of which was Dikembe Mutombo in 1996.

From 2000 forward, there are 7 player-seasons of 3.5+ bpg, the last of which was Hassan Whiteside in 2016. If you drop that to 3+ bpg, it becomes 19 player-seasons since 99-00, and Jaren Jackson last year is the most recent after Whiteside. Marcus Camby had 4, Ben Wallace had 3, Theo Ratliff had 4, Ibaka had 2. Shaq, Deke, Zo, Kirilenko, Whiteside and Jaren Jackson complete that list.

It's not a common thing at all. It's only happened four times since the end of the 2008 season. So what we're seeing from Wemby is a little wild, especially only 3 of them happened in < 30 mpg the way Wemby is managing right now.

Yeah JJJ last year had 5 blocks per 100, Wemby is doing that as a rookie.

Hakeem, DRob maxed out at 5.8 or something. Mutombo was 6.4 at max.
Only comps to Wemby are the other monster guys like Manute Bol and Mark Eaton. Though Manute got to 9 blocks per 100 and Mark got to 8.

I'd be interested in a poll on how many DPOYs people think Wemby will get. I'm guessing 4.

[Ursusamericanus]

Blocks per game haven't changed really, over the history of the NBA. Just as many blocks now as when these other guys played.

Steals on the other hand have dropped over time.

Yeah, teams are averaging 5.2 bpg so far in 2024; in 1998, they were averaging 5.1. In 1990, the same.

There are 14 player-seasons of 4+ bpg (and 50+ GP) in the three-point era, and only 7 in the 90s, the last of which was Dikembe Mutombo in 1996.

From 2000 forward, there are 7 player-seasons of 3.5+ bpg, the last of which was Hassan Whiteside in 2016. If you drop that to 3+ bpg, it becomes 19 player-seasons since 99-00, and Jaren Jackson last year is the most recent after Whiteside. Marcus Camby had 4, Ben Wallace had 3, Theo Ratliff had 4, Ibaka had 2. Shaq, Deke, Zo, Kirilenko, Whiteside and Jaren Jackson complete that list.

It's not a common thing at all. It's only happened four times since the end of the 2008 season. So what we're seeing from Wemby is a little wild, especially only 3 of them happened in < 30 mpg the way Wemby is managing right now.

Ah ok, I see. Amazing. Well, I'm expecting multiple DPOYs for Wemby over the course of his career (not just due to his shot-blocking of course).