Matas Progress Tracker

[sco]

The guy who I think he should model his game after is Tatum.

No need to be Tatum. I dont want him to be Tatum. Guy is fakest NBA personality in entire NBA.

Did I say BE Tatum? No, but Tatum is a 3/4 who can score from 3, off the dribble, playmake and defend. He is similarly built and skilled and sized. He is a top 5 player in the NBA. Seems to check the boxes of who Matas should model his game after.

[MGB8]

Paul George is and has always been very much a wing. Buz is a forward, even if he is mobile and pulls wing-ish moves. For current players to compare to, I think more Siakam, Aaron Gordon, Jerami Grant, Avdija, even Banchero and Barnes (though not as strong, not quite the offensive upside).

Wings are forwards.

No, not really. Forwards can be wings, but so can guards. Typically describe a wing as a guard-forward - a 2/3. Buz is closer to a modern 4 than a modern 3, to the extent that they are differentiable now (which is slight). Buz for now is a 3/4, though will likely eventually be primarily a 4. Just like George was a 2/3, now just a pure 3.

You have plenty of wings that are more 2 than 3, including guys like LaVine. Kobe was a wing.

[sco]

Paul George is and has always been very much a wing. Buz is a forward, even if he is mobile and pulls wing-ish moves. For current players to compare to, I think more Siakam, Aaron Gordon, Jerami Grant, Avdija, even Banchero and Barnes (though not as strong, not quite the offensive upside).

Wings are forwards.

No, not really. Forwards can be wings, but so can guards. Typically describe a wing as a guard-forward - a 2/3. Buz is much closer to a modern 4 than a modern 3, to the extent that they are differentiable now (which is slight). At most, he is a 3/4. George was a 2/3, now just a pure 3.

You have plenty of wings that are more 2 than 3, including guys like LaVine. Kobe was a wing.

The distinction seems arbitrary. I look at the distinction being between:
1) Guys who can playmake
2) Guys who can score at all 3 levels facing the basket
3) Guys who can play back-to-the-basket in the paint

You can be all 3 (Joker, LBJ, etc), but if you are just #3, you're a 4 because you can't be a 3 and be that limited. Matas looks like he can be at least the first 2. That doesn't mean he can't play the 4.

[Jcool0]

Paul George is and has always been very much a wing. Buz is a forward, even if he is mobile and pulls wing-ish moves. For current players to compare to, I think more Siakam, Aaron Gordon, Jerami Grant, Avdija, even Banchero and Barnes (though not as strong, not quite the offensive upside).

Wings are forwards.

No, not really. Forwards can be wings, but so can guards. Typically describe a wing as a guard-forward - a 2/3. Buz is closer to a modern 4 than a modern 3, to the extent that they are differentiable now (which is slight). Buz for now is a 3/4, though will likely eventually be primarily a 4. Just like George was a 2/3, now just a pure 3.

You have plenty of wings that are more 2 than 3, including guys like LaVine. Kobe was a wing.

"Buzelis is a big wing/guard with a versatile skill set who is playing with the G League Ignite."

https://nbadraftroom.com/matas-buzelis/

"Strengths: 6’10 wing … Although his length isn’t great relative to height, he has good size considering position with a 6’10.25 wingspan and 8’8 standing reach … "

https://www.nbadraft.net/players/matas-buzelis/

"A versatile 6-foot-9 wing, Buzelis will bulk up the frontcourt alongside center Nikola Vučević. Buzelis averaged 14.3 points and 6.9 rebounds last year for G League Ignite, the NBA’s attempt at a pre-professional league that folded after four seasons."

https://sports.yahoo.com/chicago-bulls-choose-matas-buzelis-012100289.html

"Buzelis, just a bony 19 years old and barely 200 pounds, has a distance to go to gain strength and shooting accuracy. But he projects not so difficultly as a model NBA wing player with the size the Bulls have lacked and a game that pro scouts say could rival players like Orlando’s Franz Wagner or veteran Nic Batum and past NBA players like Lamar Odom and Hedo Türkoğlu. They’re all lanky big men with a variety of skills to excel in transition and in matchups given the size and speed."

"Today, it's an exciting day, another Chicago kid,” said Karnišovas. “Very versatile wing. We're very happy to add him. I take my role of reshaping this team very seriously, and tonight was an important step in that direction."

https://www.nba.com/bulls/news/matas-buzelis-brings-size-athleticism-versatility-to-bulls

[dougthonus]

Paul George is and has always been very much a wing. Buz is a forward, even if he is mobile and pulls wing-ish moves. For current players to compare to, I think more Siakam, Aaron Gordon, Jerami Grant, Avdija, even Banchero and Barnes (though not as strong, not quite the offensive upside).

Wings are forwards.

No, not really. Forwards can be wings, but so can guards. Typically describe a wing as a guard-forward - a 2/3. Buz is closer to a modern 4 than a modern 3, to the extent that they are differentiable now (which is slight). Buz for now is a 3/4, though will likely eventually be primarily a 4. Just like George was a 2/3, now just a pure 3.

You have plenty of wings that are more 2 than 3, including guys like LaVine. Kobe was a wing.

Might be the most semantic debate ever, but I usually view a wing as 3/4 tweener. I don't know that there's a standard definition, but I usually think of a SF that would play up to PF in some lineups. More or less 3/4 tweener where you aren't sure they have the physicality / size to be the four. That said, if you asked me this 10 years ago, I'd have thought more of a 2/3 that doesn't have the ball skills / passing skills to be a passer / dribble attacker. I think the way the term has been used has changed a lot over time, especially with teams going smaller and requiring more perimeter skills from all players.

Paul George has played 12% of his minutes at SG, 65% at SF, 21% at PF, 1% at C over his career (per basketball-reference anyway), so is more of a PF than SG over his career, FWIW.

To me, Matas seems like a classic "wing" definition player, he's got a lot of the ball skills of a perimeter player and the speed / athleticism to play the three but the size to also potentially play the four.

[Jcool0]

Wings are forwards.

No, not really. Forwards can be wings, but so can guards. Typically describe a wing as a guard-forward - a 2/3. Buz is closer to a modern 4 than a modern 3, to the extent that they are differentiable now (which is slight). Buz for now is a 3/4, though will likely eventually be primarily a 4. Just like George was a 2/3, now just a pure 3.

You have plenty of wings that are more 2 than 3, including guys like LaVine. Kobe was a wing.

Might be the most semantic debate ever, but I usually view a wing as 3/4 tweener. I don't know that there's a standard definition, but I usually think of a SF that would play up to PF in some lineups. More or less 3/4 tweener where you aren't sure they have the physicality / size to be the four. That said, if you asked me this 10 years ago, I'd have thought more of a 2/3 that doesn't have the ball skills / passing skills to be a passer / dribble attacker. I think the way the term has been used has changed a lot over time, especially with teams going smaller and requiring more perimeter skills from all players.

Paul George has played 12% of his minutes at SG, 65% at SF, 21% at PF, 1% at C over his career (per basketball-reference anyway), so is more of a PF than SG over his career, FWIW.

To me, Matas seems like a classic "wing" definition player, he's got a lot of the ball skills of a perimeter player and the speed / athleticism to play the three but the size to also potentially play the four.

FWIW:

In the past, even when positions were more clear-cut, differentiating between a shooting guard and a small forward (or “3”) was tricky. Both players usually play on the outside of an offense, close to the half-court line on either side of the point guard, as they bring the ball up the court. That’s why shooting guards and small forwards are called “wing players.”

https://www.nike.com/a/positions-in-basketball

[GoBlue72391]

Matas doesn't really have any major holes in his game.
He looks to be a good on ball defender, a very good help defender. Shooting seems like it's gonna be solid. He's a willing passer, moves without the ball, elite athlete, solid handles especially at his size, and he's gonna be good in transition
Imo his biggest issues are post defense and getting knocked off the ball on the dribble. Strength fixes both of those hopefully.

Once he adds muscle it’s game over.

We are talking young Giannis take over.

Buz obviously way more skilled and better shooter without the Hercules body.

I think this kid can become a true #1.

Thinking he's going to be a better shooting Giannis is certainly optimistic. Save some kool-aid for the rest of us.

[MGB8]

Wings are forwards.

No, not really. Forwards can be wings, but so can guards. Typically describe a wing as a guard-forward - a 2/3. Buz is closer to a modern 4 than a modern 3, to the extent that they are differentiable now (which is slight). Buz for now is a 3/4, though will likely eventually be primarily a 4. Just like George was a 2/3, now just a pure 3.

You have plenty of wings that are more 2 than 3, including guys like LaVine. Kobe was a wing.

Might be the most semantic debate ever, but I usually view a wing as 3/4 tweener. I don't know that there's a standard definition, but I usually think of a SF that would play up to PF in some lineups. More or less 3/4 tweener where you aren't sure they have the physicality / size to be the four. That said, if you asked me this 10 years ago, I'd have thought more of a 2/3 that doesn't have the ball skills / passing skills to be a passer / dribble attacker. I think the way the term has been used has changed a lot over time, especially with teams going smaller and requiring more perimeter skills from all players.

Paul George has played 12% of his minutes at SG, 65% at SF, 21% at PF, 1% at C over his career (per basketball-reference anyway), so is more of a PF than SG over his career, FWIW.

To me, Matas seems like a classic "wing" definition player, he's got a lot of the ball skills of a perimeter player and the speed / athleticism to play the three but the size to also potentially play the four.

I have always seen listing of wings be interchangeable with lists of guard-forwards, in fantasy league categorizations, etc. And that made sense in terms of movement skills, short area quickness, and where on the court they play on both ends. On the “wing,” i.e., perimeter but not point of attack. When you think about a point as setting up at the top, then controlling ball and being most on ball player, the 2 having the most perimeter off ball play, 2nd most on-ball, and defending the 3-line more so than inside, a 5 being the low post and interior defense, with the 4 being high post more than the others and such defense, and the 3 in between the 2 and 4….

Paul George played as a classic 3 but how perimeter oriented he was on both ends has him as a wing, as compared to Luol Deng who played a bit more inside on both ends (a 3 to 3/4, later a 4-3). Scottie - another 3. And Ron Artest. While Ray Allen, Kobe, Reggie, Spree as classic 2s. 4s like Horace, Elton, Rasheed, KG, Jermaine ONeil. Kukoc as a 3/4, Larry Johnson too. And AK.

As guys slow down a little bit with age, but also get stronger, they tend to play outside a bit less, a bit more inside - bringing position classification along with it. So DDR was a 2-3, now a 3. LaVine was a 2, now a 2-3. Lebron a 3, the a 3-4, now a 4-3. Etc.

Small forward is 3. Power forward is 4. But the wing is occupied by 2s and 3s (primarily), not both forwards positions.

Yes, semantics - but I’ve never seen wing refer to 4s. Always to 2-3, g-fs - 2s, 3s, and blends of 2 and 3.

[WindyCityBorn]

These recent games against the Lakers and Mavericks make think maybe Matas might be ready to be mid to upper teens scorer next season. 3rd year out of high school is usually when guys really start to show what they are. Really depends on how consistent his 3 point is. He relies on it a lot right now as a mostly off ball player for us.

[wolffy]

Matas doesn't really have any major holes in his game.
He looks to be a good on ball defender, a very good help defender. Shooting seems like it's gonna be solid. He's a willing passer, moves without the ball, elite athlete, solid handles especially at his size, and he's gonna be good in transition
Imo his biggest issues are post defense and getting knocked off the ball on the dribble. Strength fixes both of those hopefully.

Once he adds muscle it’s game over.

We are talking young Giannis take over.

Buz obviously way more skilled and better shooter without the Hercules body.

I think this kid can become a true #1.

Thinking he's going to be a better shooting Giannis is certainly optimistic. Save some kool-aid for the rest of us.

He's not gonna be Giannis but i would like him to try to play downhill like him.

Get stronger and use his length and athleticism to finish thru contact. He has the skill to do it but can he develop the strength?

[Chi town]

Matas doesn't really have any major holes in his game.
He looks to be a good on ball defender, a very good help defender. Shooting seems like it's gonna be solid. He's a willing passer, moves without the ball, elite athlete, solid handles especially at his size, and he's gonna be good in transition
Imo his biggest issues are post defense and getting knocked off the ball on the dribble. Strength fixes both of those hopefully.

Once he adds muscle it’s game over.

We are talking young Giannis take over.

Buz obviously way more skilled and better shooter without the Hercules body.

I think this kid can become a true #1.

Thinking he's going to be a better shooting Giannis is certainly optimistic. Save some kool-aid for the rest of us.

Yep. That’s exactly what I said. GOAT. Better than Jordan.

[Muzbar]

So is anyone still wholly unimpressed by Matas and very upset that the Bulls drafted him at 11?

I think majority of us were happy with the pick, potential, size, BBIQ, attitude - all was there.

There is no single person on this board or in that draft thread who was unimpressed by Bulls getting Matas at 11. It was like winning lottery and moving into top 4. Albeit in a weak draft but still moving up.

Matas was at one point mocked to go #1 out HS. One year in a G-league shooting bit weaker from perimeter doesnt change perspective of that prospect.

That's actually not true.

There were at least 2 people that were upset that the Bulls picked Matas or could potentially pick Matas.

A lot of people were worried about his shooting (and rightfully so) but there was definitely some that were not happy with the pick.

[Chi town]

Once he adds muscle it’s game over.

We are talking young Giannis take over.

Buz obviously way more skilled and better shooter without the Hercules body.

I think this kid can become a true #1.

Thinking he's going to be a better shooting Giannis is certainly optimistic. Save some kool-aid for the rest of us.

He's not gonna be Giannis but i would like him to try to play downhill like him.

Get stronger and use his length and athleticism to finish thru contact. He has the skill to do it but can he develop the strength?

Bingo.

But also keep pulling those 3s

[Ice Man]

In the past, even when positions were more clear-cut, differentiating between a shooting guard and a small forward (or “3”) was tricky. Both players usually play on the outside of an offense, close to the half-court line on either side of the point guard, as they bring the ball up the court. That’s why shooting guards and small forwards are called “wing players.”

https://www.nike.com/a/positions-in-basketball

Exactly. 1&2s are guards, 3s&4s are forwards. But what do we call 2s&3s? We need a name when we are talking about duos like Jordan/Pippen or Butler/Deng or LaVine/DeMar. That name is "wing."

And Matas is very much in that spirit, despite his height, because he's a perimeter player with handles who drives to the hoop, not a guy who looks for post-ups. He's a wing. I mean, you can play him with a big and four guards and call him a modern #4, that's OK. But he's still a wing.

[KissedByaRose1]

Biggest thing we need to see outside of jumper falling more is him as primary PnR ball handler 5+ times a game now. That will give him good reps and let us know what we really have ceiling-wise.

[NecessaryEvil]

Read on Twitter

[Chi town]

Biggest thing we need to see outside of jumper falling more is him as primary PnR ball handler 5+ times a game now. That will give him good reps and let us know what we really have ceiling-wise.

Last game he got some reps in PNR.

Totally agree. He needs PNR as handler and screener. He needs DHOs and needs to bring the ball up. I bet that is part of Billy’s plan as he gets more confident. Would love to see more in our final games.

Think Buz will only show us more here because he’s so smart and is a good passer.

[sco]

Read on Twitter

His ability to score or pass off the dribble was something I really didn't expect. Those passes were sweet.

His upside is so high, if you average the his pick with PWill's, you'd still say "good drafting".

[jnrjr79]

Wings are forwards.

No, not really. Forwards can be wings, but so can guards. Typically describe a wing as a guard-forward - a 2/3. Buz is closer to a modern 4 than a modern 3, to the extent that they are differentiable now (which is slight). Buz for now is a 3/4, though will likely eventually be primarily a 4. Just like George was a 2/3, now just a pure 3.

You have plenty of wings that are more 2 than 3, including guys like LaVine. Kobe was a wing.

Might be the most semantic debate ever, but I usually view a wing as 3/4 tweener. I don't know that there's a standard definition, but I usually think of a SF that would play up to PF in some lineups. More or less 3/4 tweener where you aren't sure they have the physicality / size to be the four. That said, if you asked me this 10 years ago, I'd have thought more of a 2/3 that doesn't have the ball skills / passing skills to be a passer / dribble attacker. I think the way the term has been used has changed a lot over time, especially with teams going smaller and requiring more perimeter skills from all players.

Paul George has played 12% of his minutes at SG, 65% at SF, 21% at PF, 1% at C over his career (per basketball-reference anyway), so is more of a PF than SG over his career, FWIW.

To me, Matas seems like a classic "wing" definition player, he's got a lot of the ball skills of a perimeter player and the speed / athleticism to play the three but the size to also potentially play the four.

I guess here is my view. A "wing" is generally a perimeter player who is switchable on defense due to size.

PG = generally not a wing
SG = often a wing, but an undersized guy might not be described as one
SF = basically always a wing
PF = used to be more of a banger and not a wing, but these days more typically a wing
C = not a wing

I view Matas as a wing, but not a guard. I feel like the most typical NBA lineup these days is a PG, 3 wings, and a C. There probably isn't a "real" definition of it, I suppose.

[jnrjr79]

In the past, even when positions were more clear-cut, differentiating between a shooting guard and a small forward (or “3”) was tricky. Both players usually play on the outside of an offense, close to the half-court line on either side of the point guard, as they bring the ball up the court. That’s why shooting guards and small forwards are called “wing players.”

https://www.nike.com/a/positions-in-basketball

Exactly. 1&2s are guards, 3s&4s are forwards. But what do we call 2s&3s? We need a name when we are talking about duos like Jordan/Pippen or Butler/Deng or LaVine/DeMar. That name is "wing."

And Matas is very much in that spirit, despite his height, because he's a perimeter player with handles who drives to the hoop, not a guy who looks for post-ups. He's a wing. I mean, you can play him with a big and four guards and call him a modern #4, that's OK. But he's still a wing.

Right - a "modern" 4 is a wing. Karl Malone is not.