Marvin Bagley

[Duke4life831]

Bagley would be a great fit in the 90s or the 2000s, but I doubt how much an inside scoring power forward can impact in the modern NBA where the most valuable types of players are scoring guards, 3&D wings, and stretch bigs. His best position would probably be center but I think he's too small for that right now. He's a rich man's Kenneth Faried in my eyes, but I've been wrong many times before.

Im just not seeing this, Bagley's game has basically been built for today's game. Its a fast pace, spread out league right now. That is kind of ideal for a 6'11 guy that runs the floor like a gazelle. He is also not a pound the ball on the low block and do some low post moves to score type of big either. He 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. That is kind of the ideal big offensively. I get he's not a sharpshooter right now, but the guy still ended up shooting 39% on 2 attempts from 3 a game at just 18 years old. While yes 2 attempts is not a huge sample size, its a pretty solid one for an 18 year old that is 6'11. Just to compare his shooting with some other bigs that are considered modern bigs that can spread the floor.

Bagley on the season made 23 3s on 39% shooting in 33 games (62% from the line)

Horford/Embiid/KAT/Cousins/AD/Lopez/Blake combined in college:
13 made on 19% shooting in 375 games
Horford FT% as a Fr: 58%
Emiid FT%: 68%
KAT FT%: 81%
Cousins FT%: 60%
AD FT%: 71%
Lopez FT%: 69%
Blake FT%: 59%

Kevin Love who the past few seasons has had his 3pt rate be around 45% since coming to Cleveland and this past year shot 41% on over 5 attempts a game. He made 29 3s on a 35% clip, his 1 year in college.

While Kenneth Faried played 4 years and 136 games in college and 7 seasons and 441 games in the NBA. If you combine all of his college and NBA stats, he has made 5 out of 32 3s in his career. Bagley isnt the rich man's version of Faried, he has a completely different playing style.

[Kolkmania]

Im just not seeing this, Bagley's game has basically been built for today's game. Its a fast pace, spread out league right now. That is kind of ideal for a 6'11 guy that runs the floor like a gazelle. He is also not a pound the ball on the low block and do some low post moves to score type of big either. He 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. That is kind of the ideal big offensively. I get he's not a sharpshooter right now, but the guy still ended up shooting 39% on 2 attempts from 3 a game at just 18 years old. While yes 2 attempts is not a huge sample size, its a pretty solid one for an 18 year old that is 6'11. Just to compare his shooting with some other bigs that are considered modern bigs that can spread the floor.

Bagley on the season made 23 3s on 39% shooting in 33 games (62% from the line)

Horford/Embiid/KAT/Cousins/AD/Lopez/Blake combined in college:
13 made on 19% shooting in 375 games
Horford FT% as a Fr: 58%
Emiid FT%: 68%
KAT FT%: 81%
Cousins FT%: 60%
AD FT%: 71%
Lopez FT%: 69%
Blake FT%: 59%

Kevin Love who the past few seasons has had his 3pt rate be around 45% since coming to Cleveland and this past year shot 41% on over 5 attempts a game. He made 29 3s on a 35% clip, his 1 year in college.

Not sure if you can really compare modern bigs with guys like Horford, at that time no premium was put on shooting and most of these guys started focusing on it later on in their careers. Bagley however has been bombing 3's since early in his high school career and it's the lack of improvement that's worrisome to me.

I remember a similar argument with you during the season and you stated that his FT% was trending upwards. However it still remained at 62% with more than 200 attempts (far better predictor than 60 3PA).

I do agree with you that he'll probably develop a serviceable three point shot, perhaps not league average, but at least in the 30's and who knows where it will be when he's 30 year old. As a versatile garbage man I can see the value of Bagley, but is that really worth a top pick? That's what I struggle with.

[The-Power]

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.

[PLO]

Im just not seeing this, Bagley's game has basically been built for today's game. Its a fast pace, spread out league right now. That is kind of ideal for a 6'11 guy that runs the floor like a gazelle. He is also not a pound the ball on the low block and do some low post moves to score type of big either. He 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. That is kind of the ideal big offensively. I get he's not a sharpshooter right now, but the guy still ended up shooting 39% on 2 attempts from 3 a game at just 18 years old. While yes 2 attempts is not a huge sample size, its a pretty solid one for an 18 year old that is 6'11. Just to compare his shooting with some other bigs that are considered modern bigs that can spread the floor.

Bagley on the season made 23 3s on 39% shooting in 33 games (62% from the line)

Horford/Embiid/KAT/Cousins/AD/Lopez/Blake combined in college:
13 made on 19% shooting in 375 games
Horford FT% as a Fr: 58%
Emiid FT%: 68%
KAT FT%: 81%
Cousins FT%: 60%
AD FT%: 71%
Lopez FT%: 69%
Blake FT%: 59%

Kevin Love who the past few seasons has had his 3pt rate be around 45% since coming to Cleveland and this past year shot 41% on over 5 attempts a game. He made 29 3s on a 35% clip, his 1 year in college.

Not sure if you can really compare modern bigs with guys like Horford, at that time no premium was put on shooting and most of these guys started focusing on it later on in their careers. Bagley however has been bombing 3's since early in his high school career and it's the lack of improvement that's worrisome to me.

I remember a similar argument with you during the season and you stated that his FT% was trending upwards. However it still remained at 62% with more than 200 attempts (far better predictor than 60 3PA).

I do agree with you that he'll probably develop a serviceable three point shot, perhaps not league average, but at least in the 30's and who knows where it will be when he's 30 year old. As a versatile garbage man I can see the value of Bagley, but is that really worth a top pick? That's what I struggle with.

You make some good points; I think the argument over his 3 point shot is sort of moot though in a lot of ways just because of the position he'll play. Like as a non-wing/guard its not vital for him to be able bomb it from range just as long as he has some sort of threat from there.

However he is a flawed prospect in a top 10 full of them, I have him top 5, but Duke4life thinks Bagley the best prospect since AD, which is a very interesting take. I'll call him "Buckets" Bagley because he's going to score a lot of them on one end and give up a lot of them on the other.

[Kolkmania]

You make some good points; I think the argument over his 3 point shot is sort of moot though in a lot of ways just because of the position he'll play. Like as a non-wing/guard its not vital for him to be able bomb it from range just as long as he has some sort of threat from there.

However he is a flawed prospect in a top 10 full of them, I have him top 5, but Duke4life thinks Bagley the best prospect since AD, which is a very interesting take. I'll call him "Buckets" Bagley because he's going to score a lot of them on one end and give up a lot of them on the other.

Well I do think he will shoot some threes in the NBA, but that's not where he'll provide +++ value on the offensive end as a floor spacer. In high school he showed more ball handling abilities than he did at Duke, so perhaps he'll blossom in the NBA in a less restricted role. However, in the half court I've always questioned his ability to create his own shot and certainly for others.

So if he's best fitted as a low usage big man who provides extra possessions due to OREB, I want to see massive value on the other end of the floor. That's my problem, aside from some switching ability I don't see him do much. Not very active in the passing lanes, doesn't read the floor well enough to provide rim protection, not overly physical and long to bother guys around the basket and not quick and agile enough to run around screens (and function as a wing).

Unless he shows an unprecedented development curve I don't see the value to pick in him the top 5.

[PLO]

You make some good points; I think the argument over his 3 point shot is sort of moot though in a lot of ways just because of the position he'll play. Like as a non-wing/guard its not vital for him to be able bomb it from range just as long as he has some sort of threat from there.

However he is a flawed prospect in a top 10 full of them, I have him top 5, but Duke4life thinks Bagley the best prospect since AD, which is a very interesting take. I'll call him "Buckets" Bagley because he's going to score a lot of them on one end and give up a lot of them on the other.

Well I do think he will shoot some threes in the NBA, but that's not where he'll provide +++ value on the offensive end as a floor spacer. In high school he showed more ball handling abilities than he did at Duke, so perhaps he'll blossom in the NBA in a less restricted role. However, in the half court I've always questioned his ability to create his own shot and certainly for others.

So if he's best fitted as a low usage big man who provides extra possessions due to OREB, I want to see massive value on the other end of the floor. That's my problem, aside from some switching ability I don't see him do much. Not very active in the passing lanes, doesn't read the floor well enough to provide rim protection, not overly physical and long to bother guys around the basket and not quick and agile enough to run around screens (and function as a wing).

Unless he shows an unprecedented development curve I don't see the value to pick in him the top 5.

I roughly sort of agree with you - I don't really rate his handle at all but he's not a lost cause there. He'll never ever be at the same level of an AD or Simmons though and to think he will be is completely fanciful IMO. I also agree about his D, but I actually think there is some hope there because his stance/footwork in a lot of situations is terrible and that is correctable because its a technical problem. I doubt he'll ever have plus awareness though.

The reason I have him top 5 is because like I said the other prospects are flawed and his upside is much much higher than say a Mikal. I have Bagley higher than someone you probably don't in Trae given I can't see any way Trae would be playable in the later playoff series we saw this season, although Trae's upside is very high.

I mean who do you put above Bagley in the top 5? He's a notch above Bamba for me, and I honestly don't think MPJ should be picked in the lottery now let alone top 5. Doncic, Ayton, JJJ I can see very good arguments to be above Bagley, but who else would you have above him?

[Kolkmania]

You make some good points; I think the argument over his 3 point shot is sort of moot though in a lot of ways just because of the position he'll play. Like as a non-wing/guard its not vital for him to be able bomb it from range just as long as he has some sort of threat from there.

However he is a flawed prospect in a top 10 full of them, I have him top 5, but Duke4life thinks Bagley the best prospect since AD, which is a very interesting take. I'll call him "Buckets" Bagley because he's going to score a lot of them on one end and give up a lot of them on the other.

Well I do think he will shoot some threes in the NBA, but that's not where he'll provide +++ value on the offensive end as a floor spacer. In high school he showed more ball handling abilities than he did at Duke, so perhaps he'll blossom in the NBA in a less restricted role. However, in the half court I've always questioned his ability to create his own shot and certainly for others.

So if he's best fitted as a low usage big man who provides extra possessions due to OREB, I want to see massive value on the other end of the floor. That's my problem, aside from some switching ability I don't see him do much. Not very active in the passing lanes, doesn't read the floor well enough to provide rim protection, not overly physical and long to bother guys around the basket and not quick and agile enough to run around screens (and function as a wing).

Unless he shows an unprecedented development curve I don't see the value to pick in him the top 5.

I roughly sort of agree with you - I don't really rate his handle at all but he's not a lost cause there. He'll never ever be at the same level of an AD or Simmons though and to think he will be is completely fanciful IMO. I also agree about his D, but I actually think there is some hope there because his stance/footwork in a lot of situations is terrible and that is correctable because its a technical problem. I doubt he'll ever have plus awareness though.

The reason I have him top 5 is because like I said the other prospects are flawed and his upside is much much higher than say a Mikal. I have Bagley higher than someone you probably don't in Trae given I can't see any way Trae would be playable in the later playoff series we saw this season, although Trae's upside is very high.

I mean who do you put above Bagley in the top 5? He's a notch above Bamba for me, and I honestly don't think MPJ should be picked in the lottery now let alone top 5. Doncic, Ayton, JJJ I can see very good arguments to be above Bagley, but who else would you have above him?

That's a fair point. I personally prefer Doncic, JJJ, Ayton, Miles Bridges and Wendell Carter, but after that I can see a scenario in which you take him and take his production for granted and some potential upside as a ball handler. Depends on team situation though.

[PLO]

Well I do think he will shoot some threes in the NBA, but that's not where he'll provide +++ value on the offensive end as a floor spacer. In high school he showed more ball handling abilities than he did at Duke, so perhaps he'll blossom in the NBA in a less restricted role. However, in the half court I've always questioned his ability to create his own shot and certainly for others.

So if he's best fitted as a low usage big man who provides extra possessions due to OREB, I want to see massive value on the other end of the floor. That's my problem, aside from some switching ability I don't see him do much. Not very active in the passing lanes, doesn't read the floor well enough to provide rim protection, not overly physical and long to bother guys around the basket and not quick and agile enough to run around screens (and function as a wing).

Unless he shows an unprecedented development curve I don't see the value to pick in him the top 5.

I roughly sort of agree with you - I don't really rate his handle at all but he's not a lost cause there. He'll never ever be at the same level of an AD or Simmons though and to think he will be is completely fanciful IMO. I also agree about his D, but I actually think there is some hope there because his stance/footwork in a lot of situations is terrible and that is correctable because its a technical problem. I doubt he'll ever have plus awareness though.

The reason I have him top 5 is because like I said the other prospects are flawed and his upside is much much higher than say a Mikal. I have Bagley higher than someone you probably don't in Trae given I can't see any way Trae would be playable in the later playoff series we saw this season, although Trae's upside is very high.

I mean who do you put above Bagley in the top 5? He's a notch above Bamba for me, and I honestly don't think MPJ should be picked in the lottery now let alone top 5. Doncic, Ayton, JJJ I can see very good arguments to be above Bagley, but who else would you have above him?

That's a fair point. I personally prefer Doncic, JJJ, Ayton, Miles Bridges and Wendell Carter, but after that I can see a scenario in which you take him and take his production for granted and some potential upside as a ball handler. Depends on team situation though.

Agreed, if you had anyone above him apart from the obvious it would also be Carter and Miles.

[The-Power]

[...]

[...]

I agree with both your assessments for the most part and cannot help but feel as if the point of disagreement is nothing but semantics.

If Top 5 is roughly used synonym to 'potential franchise player' then I would also say that Bagley is not that. Basically, he does not do enough impactful stuff on offense and on defense to be the best player on a good team unless something unexpected happens. At least this is the way I see it, although I know some strongly disagree with me on this.

Anyhow, if we look at the actual Top 5 then Bagley is borderline with a decent argument to be made that he indeed deserves to be picked this high. This is because while I do like this draft for its first round depth with respect to role players, I do not see many franchise changing pieces in it – if they are there beyond the two to four players I have in mind, they have yet to reveal themselves. So the opinion that Bagley is not a franchise changer himself does not automatically preclude him from getting consideration as a top five pick.

[nolang1]

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.

It's pretty borderline in terms of being substantiated. I'm not even a Celtics fan but saw like four different outlets do a deep dive this season into how Smart helps the Celtics' offense by being willing to take three-pointers when open as 1) it makes the defense go out and guard him and 2) if you're late in the shot clock or the defense is giving you an outside shot it's obviously better to take a three than a long two.

Not exactly going out on a limb to say Bagley will shoot threes better than Marcus Smart (who again still shoots threes well enough to provide spacing), and it's disingenuous to ding Bagley because he shot 40% on a low volume of "mostly only really wide open threes" and then in the very next sentence claim Smart shooting too many threes is detrimental to the team because of low percentages. Because somehow Bagley shooting only 2 threes a game when he led major conference players in offensive rebounds per game and was one of the best finishers in the country doesn't count as sticking to one's strengths, I suppose.

And then the reductive "rich man's ________" kind of stuff does deserve to be dismissed when it contains no analysis of whether such a player would actually be good. I could call Steph Curry a rich man's Seth Curry who's just quicker and better at passing, but it's obviously a worthless comparison that does nothing but identify that the best aspect of each player's game is three-point shooting.

[flintsky21]

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.

Not saying Bagley is going to be a bad player at all. I just have a hard time picking him over someone like Jaren Jackson, who's already shown to be a good defender, outside shooter and just as athletic.

[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?

Also from watching the playoffs I've seen plenty of players such as PJ Tucker, Kevon Looney, and Tristan Thompson used at center and nobody's confusing any of them for Rudy Gobert. Bagley can play the center in some matchups and power forward in others. You are really overrating the shooting ability of the average NBA PF (JaMychal Green, Thaddeus Young, Markieff Morris) if you think Bagley is going to kill a team's spacing so much that it would cancel out the things he excels at. If for some reason he happens to not improve at all and be such a bad shooter to necessitate a floor-spacing 5, this isn't 2010; a team can find a fair number of such players. Even Aron Baynes can hit a wide-open corner three these days.

[TheSuzerain]

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.

Not saying Bagley is going to be a bad player at all. I just have a hard time picking him over someone like Jaren Jackson, who's already shown to be a good defender, outside shooter and just as athletic.

I definitely see Faried/John Collins as well. That's a reasonable projection imo.

[flintsky21]

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.

[GimmeDat]

I think Bagley's floor is an uber-John Collins. If he adds defense or an advanced offensive arsenal/range to his game, then the sky is the limit, but who knows if he develops in those areas.

[kobyz]

antonio mcdyess is his floor...

[Homerclease]

He’s the closest thing to Shawn Kemp since Shawn Kemp. Kid is gonna be a star as long as he doesn’t turn into a coke head and gain 100 pounds

[King Ken]

As someone who's watched both players, he's far more like a young Chris Bosh than John Collins. He didn't really run many PnR at Duke. For the most part, his game was face-up, movement, isos, back to the basket, mid range isos, shooting threes, and rim running not to mention putbacks.

Collins game is mainly limited to PnR's, putbacks, and movement. He's a young Shawn Kemp.

Bagley is more like a young Bosh with generational athleticism. He has a lot more in his repertoire.

[King Ken]

Im just not seeing this, Bagley's game has basically been built for today's game. Its a fast pace, spread out league right now. That is kind of ideal for a 6'11 guy that runs the floor like a gazelle. He is also not a pound the ball on the low block and do some low post moves to score type of big either. He 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. That is kind of the ideal big offensively. I get he's not a sharpshooter right now, but the guy still ended up shooting 39% on 2 attempts from 3 a game at just 18 years old. While yes 2 attempts is not a huge sample size, its a pretty solid one for an 18 year old that is 6'11. Just to compare his shooting with some other bigs that are considered modern bigs that can spread the floor.

Bagley on the season made 23 3s on 39% shooting in 33 games (62% from the line)

Horford/Embiid/KAT/Cousins/AD/Lopez/Blake combined in college:
13 made on 19% shooting in 375 games
Horford FT% as a Fr: 58%
Emiid FT%: 68%
KAT FT%: 81%
Cousins FT%: 60%
AD FT%: 71%
Lopez FT%: 69%
Blake FT%: 59%

Kevin Love who the past few seasons has had his 3pt rate be around 45% since coming to Cleveland and this past year shot 41% on over 5 attempts a game. He made 29 3s on a 35% clip, his 1 year in college.

Not sure if you can really compare modern bigs with guys like Horford, at that time no premium was put on shooting and most of these guys started focusing on it later on in their careers. Bagley however has been bombing 3's since early in his high school career and it's the lack of improvement that's worrisome to me.

I remember a similar argument with you during the season and you stated that his FT% was trending upwards. However it still remained at 62% with more than 200 attempts (far better predictor than 60 3PA).

I do agree with you that he'll probably develop a serviceable three point shot, perhaps not league average, but at least in the 30's and who knows where it will be when he's 30 year old. As a versatile garbage man I can see the value of Bagley, but is that really worth a top pick? That's what I struggle with.

You mention an ideal. The issue is, it's just that. An ideal. We have seen improvement over the season in Bagley's shooting across the board. Not to mention, he's playing 33+ MPG. You do not think stamina has something to do with this considering he didn't even have a full off-season in Duke's strength and conditioning program?

Not saying you concerns aren't legit, but this ideal that you can project his shooting better than us is BS. This is something he can work on. How will he develop his shooting is highly depending upon his ability to get up reps. I've seen far worse shooters become good shooters and he's a better shooter with range than Bosh was at the same stage.

Let's just say to you, he is a versatile garbage man with elite athletic ability right now. Why is it so hard to think he can vastly improve? Why are you assuming he won't improve? That's my question to you.

[King Ken]

He’s the closest thing to Shawn Kemp since Shawn Kemp. Kid is gonna be a star as long as he doesn’t turn into a coke head and gain 100 pounds

The closest thing to Kemp is Collins. Collins is a replica of Kemp. He just doesn't have the hands Kemp had but Kemp didn't have the BBIQ of Collins.