Safe to say, Chet "Hologram" Holgrem > Paolo Banchero

[Rainwater]

Paolo is making the leap in his sophomore season, which is crazy. Him being a top 15-20 player in the NBA by the end of the season is very possible.

The NBA is doing a pathetic job promoting him & the Orlando Magic in general the past couple seasons. It's disrespectful.

I don't know if disrespect, lol. This is only his second year and the Magic weren't all that good last year. And the Magic weren't expected to be all that good this year.

We haven't had a televised game since Paolo has joined, even with him being a near unanimous ROY & putting up 20/7/4 as a rookie.

We weren't good last season, but we improved by 12 games, and played above .500 ball after the 5-20 start

The real reason Paolo hasn't gotten coverage is because the NBA & sport networks skipped promoting the current #1 pick at the time to start promoting Wemby early

I don't know if i agree with this but I do believe Paolo will be getting plenty of Air time next season.

[ogmagicfan]

Why is being a first option so important? Cade Cunningham is a first option. You still have to be impactful in that role for it to matter.

Right now, Paolo is an inefficient volume scorer with terrible impact metrics. His on/off for the season is a whopping -12.0! He's not a better player than Chet just because he takes more shots.

Name checks out

Great players win rings, not "first options." You're not a great player if you don't have a positive impact on the floor.

Advanced stats arent the be all & end all of determing which player is better than the other. There are gaps in every advanced stat measure. They can sometimes help paint a picture in moderation, but if you're not watching the player play, alot is gonna go over your head.

[zero rings]

Name checks out

Great players win rings, not "first options." You're not a great player if you don't have a positive impact on the floor.

Advanced stats arent the be all & end all of determing which player is better than the other. There are gaps in every advanced stat measure. They can sometimes help paint a picture in moderation, but if you're not watching the player play, alot is gonna go over your head.

There's nothing advanced about +/- and scoring efficiency. They are very basic measures and highly correlated with winning.

They also capture things we can see on the court, like Paolo not being a great shooter or finisher. If he were as good as you guys say he is, his team wouldn't be 12 pts/100 better with him on the bench.

[CIN-C-STAR]

Great players win rings, not "first options." You're not a great player if you don't have a positive impact on the floor.

Advanced stats arent the be all & end all of determing which player is better than the other. There are gaps in every advanced stat measure. They can sometimes help paint a picture in moderation, but if you're not watching the player play, alot is gonna go over your head.

There's nothing advanced about +/- and scoring efficiency. They are very basic measures and highly correlated with winning.

They also capture things we can see on the court, like Paolo not being a great shooter or finisher. If he were as good as you guys say he is, his team wouldn't be 12 pts/100 better with him on the bench.

Perfect example, actually.
Scoring efficiency, like any stat, is best understood with additional context.
Like 97% of Chet's 3s are assisted. I don't know what Banchero's numbers are, but it's a safe bet that it is well below that.
Comparing FG%s of two players isn't a one-to-one comparison because they aren't taking the same shots. Not all 3s are equivalent in difficulty or likelihood of success, for example, even though on paper they are all recordedas 3s.
You need guys who can make shots, but you also need guys who can create them, for themselves or others.
Shai does that for Chet, and Paolo does that for himself and for his teammates.
It's different.

[thelead]

Paolo is 21 years old, averaging 23ppg while leading a top 6 eastern conference team on 46/39/71 splits (29ppg on 44/41/75 splits over the last 10 games) and we’re talking about his ‘terrible’ efficiency?



If he was more efficient at his age, he’d start garnering some MVP talk already

[FarBeyondDriven]

classic realgm. Always in a rush to make outlandish declarations that are false when they're made and then embarrassing with the passage of time.

[zero rings]

Advanced stats arent the be all & end all of determing which player is better than the other. There are gaps in every advanced stat measure. They can sometimes help paint a picture in moderation, but if you're not watching the player play, alot is gonna go over your head.

There's nothing advanced about +/- and scoring efficiency. They are very basic measures and highly correlated with winning.

They also capture things we can see on the court, like Paolo not being a great shooter or finisher. If he were as good as you guys say he is, his team wouldn't be 12 pts/100 better with him on the bench.

Perfect example, actually.
Scoring efficiency, like any stat, is best understood with additional context.
Like 97% of Chet's 3s are assisted. I don't know what Banchero's numbers are, but it's a safe bet that it is well below that.
Comparing FG%s of two players isn't a one-to-one comparison because they aren't taking the same shots. Not all 3s are equivalent in difficulty or likelihood of success, for example, even though on paper they are all recordedas 3s.
You need guys who can make shots, but you also need guys who can create them, for themselves or others.
Shai does that for Chet, and Paolo does that for himself and for his teammates.
It's different.

You're acting like Chet doesn't have to make those shots. He gets credit for creating them by being a 7-footer with range, certainly more credit than Shai does for throwing him the ball.

Shot creation also isn't the end-all-be-all, especially when it isn't paired with great efficiency. If Paolo's shot creation were so valuable the Magic wouldn't be better with him on the bench.

[RookieStar]

There's nothing advanced about +/- and scoring efficiency. They are very basic measures and highly correlated with winning.

They also capture things we can see on the court, like Paolo not being a great shooter or finisher. If he were as good as you guys say he is, his team wouldn't be 12 pts/100 better with him on the bench.

Perfect example, actually.
Scoring efficiency, like any stat, is best understood with additional context.
Like 97% of Chet's 3s are assisted. I don't know what Banchero's numbers are, but it's a safe bet that it is well below that.
Comparing FG%s of two players isn't a one-to-one comparison because they aren't taking the same shots. Not all 3s are equivalent in difficulty or likelihood of success, for example, even though on paper they are all recordedas 3s.
You need guys who can make shots, but you also need guys who can create them, for themselves or others.
Shai does that for Chet, and Paolo does that for himself and for his teammates.
It's different.

You're acting like Chet doesn't have to make those shots. He gets credit for creating them by being a 7-footer with range, certainly more credit than Shai does for throwing him the ball.

Shot creation also isn't the end-all-be-all, especially when it isn't paired with great efficiency. If Paolo's shot creation were so valuable the Magic wouldn't be better with him on the bench.

I normally enjoy inteligent debates/discussions BUT i have to draw the line at this slander.

[GelbeWand09]

There's nothing advanced about +/- and scoring efficiency. They are very basic measures and highly correlated with winning.

They also capture things we can see on the court, like Paolo not being a great shooter or finisher. If he were as good as you guys say he is, his team wouldn't be 12 pts/100 better with him on the bench.

Perfect example, actually.
Scoring efficiency, like any stat, is best understood with additional context.
Like 97% of Chet's 3s are assisted. I don't know what Banchero's numbers are, but it's a safe bet that it is well below that.
Comparing FG%s of two players isn't a one-to-one comparison because they aren't taking the same shots. Not all 3s are equivalent in difficulty or likelihood of success, for example, even though on paper they are all recordedas 3s.
You need guys who can make shots, but you also need guys who can create them, for themselves or others.
Shai does that for Chet, and Paolo does that for himself and for his teammates.
It's different.

You're acting like Chet doesn't have to make those shots. He gets credit for creating them by being a 7-footer with range, certainly more credit than Shai does for throwing him the ball.

Shot creation also isn't the end-all-be-all, especially when it isn't paired with great efficiency. If Paolo's shot creation were so valuable the Magic wouldn't be better with him on the bench.

Context is the magic word here. Because he played with 2 non shooters/scorers in Black/Fultz + Goga in the starting lineup+ Suggs wasnt as hot from 3 & wasnt guarded like he can shoot --> no spacing (+ Franz shooting below 30% from 3 over large part of the season too), while on the other side we had the best bench in the leaque til the injuries (because of simple synergie effect of perfect combi of defense (Isaac), shooting/spacing (Harris, Joe, Caleb), playmaking (Joe), post scoring & pick'n'roll (Joe + Moe) unlike the starting lineup had).
Like every star player, Paolo (& Franz) need spacing around them, which our starting unit not delivered. Now with shooters around him, he is a daily 30ppg Triple Double threat.

[J-Mezzy]

I’ll say a few things about this comparison

1) they both ended up in the right situations. I don’t know how Paolo would fit in OKC while Chet is perfect there. And I don’t know how Chet would handle having the pressure of being the number 1 option. Might be too much for his body


2) Really proud of Paolo for improving his 3%. Shows he is a player willing to work to improve his game.

3) they are both studs so let’s just enjoy them

[FrightCoward]

There's nothing advanced about +/- and scoring efficiency. They are very basic measures and highly correlated with winning.

They also capture things we can see on the court, like Paolo not being a great shooter or finisher. If he were as good as you guys say he is, his team wouldn't be 12 pts/100 better with him on the bench.

Perfect example, actually.
Scoring efficiency, like any stat, is best understood with additional context.
Like 97% of Chet's 3s are assisted. I don't know what Banchero's numbers are, but it's a safe bet that it is well below that.
Comparing FG%s of two players isn't a one-to-one comparison because they aren't taking the same shots. Not all 3s are equivalent in difficulty or likelihood of success, for example, even though on paper they are all recordedas 3s.
You need guys who can make shots, but you also need guys who can create them, for themselves or others.
Shai does that for Chet, and Paolo does that for himself and for his teammates.
It's different.

You're acting like Chet doesn't have to make those shots. He gets credit for creating them by being a 7-footer with range, certainly more credit than Shai does for throwing him the ball.

Shot creation also isn't the end-all-be-all, especially when it isn't paired with great efficiency. If Paolo's shot creation were so valuable the Magic wouldn't be better with him on the bench.

His efficiency is fine, he’s shooting a very respectable 46% from the field and over 38% from 3. His TS suffers because of his FT shooting, but it’s been slowly climbing up and those fouls he draws on the opposition still helps get the other team in foul trouble. That counts for something. His +/- is bad because his starting unit simply isn’t that good outside of Franz and they have a deep bench. Hell, they’ve gone nearly 3-0 without Wagner and Banchero playing with a bunch of subpar players in the starting lineup, lol. Not sure what your argument is trying to be, but it’s flawed.

[timO]

paolo is balling lately, but chet still have 10%TS more

[basketballRob]

Just let it play out for the season. OKC has gotten off to a hot start in advanced stats. They have 48 games left with 10 B2Bs, and those numbers will start coming back down to earth.

Sent from my SM-G781U using RealGM mobile app

[basketballRob]

paolo is balling lately, but chet still have 10%TS more

Goga has a higher TS than anyone on OKC. So he must be better?

Sent from my SM-G781U using RealGM mobile app

[Logicjbr]

Especially with how the NBA is changing over the years.

Advantages Chet over Paolo:
- Can scale well offensively with ball-dominamt teammates
- Can actually shoot 3s at high volume
- Legit rim-protector

Paolo:
- can better create his own offense and also for others? But he needs the ball in his hands to have impact on the game.


Paolo is still going to a decent or even great player, but Chet looks "generational", especially if he manages to fill up his frame. Magic done goofed.

i'm sure the magic knew this. I think they are hedging their bets that Paolo availability will be higher than Chet's. I think Chet is looked at as more injury risk than Paolo.

[hardenASG13]

Especially with how the NBA is changing over the years.

Advantages Chet over Paolo:
- Can scale well offensively with ball-dominamt teammates
- Can actually shoot 3s at high volume
- Legit rim-protector

Paolo:
- can better create his own offense and also for others? But he needs the ball in his hands to have impact on the game.


Paolo is still going to a decent or even great player, but Chet looks "generational", especially if he manages to fill up his frame. Magic done goofed.

i'm sure the magic knew this. I think they are hedging their bets that Paolo availability will be higher than Chet's. I think Chet is looked at as more injury risk than Paolo.

They both look great and you can argue either side. Don't you want your superstar to have the ball in his hands though? I have no doubt Paolo will be able to shoot 3s at volume. Paolo is also huge, and likely will continue to improve, as we are seeing this season, just as chet will.

[MoneyTalks41890]

paolo is balling lately, but chet still have 10%TS more

Goga has a higher TS than anyone on OKC. So he must be better?

Sent from my SM-G781U using RealGM mobile app

Goga’s is the same as Chet’s at 65%, which is again a testament to how absurd Chet has been. Paolo at 55% has them at the opposite ends of the efficiency pole.

[timO]

paolo is balling lately, but chet still have 10%TS more

Goga has a higher TS than anyone on OKC. So he must be better?

Sent from my SM-G781U using RealGM mobile app

who? wtf is that ****

sheit like his name is knowed, your only dunks scrub center? 7-6-1?

[Rainwater]

Maybe I am getting old but people need to stop watching the stats and start watching the game.

[AaronB]

Maybe I am getting old but people need to stop watching the stats and start watching the game.

Yep, and if I am rebuilding a team, I would pick Paolo over Chet 7 days a week and twice on Sunday.

It really is not that close.

It is closer, but I would pick Paolo over SGA also.

6-10, 250, handles the ball like a guard, shoots the 3 at 39%, attacks the paint off the dribble, breaks down defenses.