Who do you want us to take at #1?

[Nyce_1]

Was Rashard Lewis worth a max deal? Hell no! But look how his presence elevated our team and thrusted us into contention.

Someone can say why spend the #1 pick on a 3&D PF. I agree that, in a vacuum, that type of player isn't worth such a valuable pick. But big picture, what would Jabari's presence do to our team? If it translate, his ability to shoot can be elite. His defense can be elite. Franz/Jabari combo gives me serious Turk/'Shard vibes, but with potential to be more lethal. If you believe in Markelle & Wendell, and I strongly do, then Jabari is the right pick. Luckily, Jabari can be effective today, in a simple role, but has good enough potential to warrant the pick and be excited.

[MAGICian619]

I was leaning toward Jabari until the recent days. Something that worries me about him is his lack of a vertical game. For someone who is such a great athlete, why does he struggle jumping?

You really see it when he is attacking the basket. A lot of the time he ends up barley getting off the ground and falls awkwardly which had led to his crazy low 2p%.

Someone talk me past this issue.

[bigdogdylan5]

Was Rashard Lewis worth a max deal? Hell no! But look how his presence elevated our team and thrusted us into contention.

Someone can say why spend the #1 pick on a 3&D PF. I agree that, in a vacuum, that type of player isn't worth such a valuable pick. But big picture, what would Jabari's presence do to our team? If it translate, his ability to shoot can be elite. His defense can be elite. Franz/Jabari combo gives me serious Turk/'Shard vibes, but with potential to be more lethal. If you believe in Markelle & Wendell, and I strongly do, then Jabari is the right pick. Luckily, Jabari can be effective today, in a simple role, but has good enough potential to warrant the pick and be excited.

To pick him at one you have to believe his handle will only get better. It isn’t awful right now but it needs to be better. Whoever we pick has to at the very very minimum have a path to being a number one option star. After looking at his handle it isn’t bad but it’s still limited

[VFX]

The longer I think about this question the more I think it comes down to whoever will work best next to Franz.

[zaymon]

Was Rashard Lewis worth a max deal? Hell no! But look how his presence elevated our team and thrusted us into contention.

Someone can say why spend the #1 pick on a 3&D PF. I agree that, in a vacuum, that type of player isn't worth such a valuable pick. But big picture, what would Jabari's presence do to our team? If it translate, his ability to shoot can be elite. His defense can be elite. Franz/Jabari combo gives me serious Turk/'Shard vibes, but with potential to be more lethal. If you believe in Markelle & Wendell, and I strongly do, then Jabari is the right pick. Luckily, Jabari can be effective today, in a simple role, but has good enough potential to warrant the pick and be excited.

You could counter that we actually drafted our star in Howard and then lured Rashard Lewis not the other way around. Drafting Smith feels like drafting Lewis instead of Howard. We would never signed Howard if our centerpiece was Rashard.
In other words you just made a case to draft Banchero.

[swarlesbarkley]

Just for funsies... here's a stat comparison between two players:

Paolo Banchero (per 40):
Points: 20.9 (53% from 2, 34% from 3)
Rebounds: 9.5
Assists: 3.9 (Turnovers: 2.9)
Steals: 1.3
Blocks: 1.1

Cade Cunningham @ OSU (per 40):
Points: 22.8 (46% from 2, 40% from 3)
Rebounds: 7
Assists: 3.9 (Turnovers: 4.6)
Steals: 1.8
Blocks: .9

If Cade was a consensus #1 last year, and most of us wanted him pre-lotto last year, why isn't Paolo an easy #1 this year? Paolo is 4-5 inches taller than Cade and is just as much of a playmaker as Cade - with fewer turnovers. Sure, Paolo doesn't shoot the 3 as good as Cade (though Cade only shot 31% his rookie year), but 34% is still respectable and he can get easier buckets in the paint when shots aren't falling because of his size.

[zaymon]

Just for funsies... here's a stat comparison between two players:

Paolo Banchero (per 40):
Points: 20.9 (53% from 2, 34% from 3)
Rebounds: 9.5
Assists: 3.9 (Turnovers: 2.9)
Steals: 1.3
Blocks: 1.1

Cade Cunningham @ OSU (per 40):
Points: 22.8 (46% from 2, 40% from 3)
Rebounds: 7
Assists: 3.9 (Turnovers: 4.6)
Steals: 1.8
Blocks: .9

If Cade was a consensus #1 last year, and most of us wanted him pre-lotto last year, why isn't Paolo an easy #1 this year? Paolo is 4-5 inches taller than Cade and is just as much of a playmaker as Cade - with fewer turnovers. Sure, Paolo doesn't shoot the 3 as good as Cade (though Cade only shot 31% his rookie year), but 34% is still respectable and he can get easier buckets in the paint when shots aren't falling because of his size.

Thats why i am on crusade right now, its unbelieveble !!! I love Holmgren but come on, Banchero is obvious number one pick for us. Everybody is crying for 10 years that only thing we need is to hit on oversized playmaker. When the luck is on our side and we have opportunity to draft a prospect whose stats are comparable or better than last years "phenom" or "young wonder" Tatum we just overhype 6'10 shooter who cant dribble, pass or finish at the rim. I dont understand it.

[tiderulz]

Just for funsies... here's a stat comparison between two players:

Paolo Banchero (per 40):
Points: 20.9 (53% from 2, 34% from 3)
Rebounds: 9.5
Assists: 3.9 (Turnovers: 2.9)
Steals: 1.3
Blocks: 1.1

Cade Cunningham @ OSU (per 40):
Points: 22.8 (46% from 2, 40% from 3)
Rebounds: 7
Assists: 3.9 (Turnovers: 4.6)
Steals: 1.8
Blocks: .9

If Cade was a consensus #1 last year, and most of us wanted him pre-lotto last year, why isn't Paolo an easy #1 this year? Paolo is 4-5 inches taller than Cade and is just as much of a playmaker as Cade - with fewer turnovers. Sure, Paolo doesn't shoot the 3 as good as Cade (though Cade only shot 31% his rookie year), but 34% is still respectable and he can get easier buckets in the paint when shots aren't falling because of his size.

Thats why i am on crusade right now, its unbelieveble !!! I love Holmgren but come on, Banchero is obvious number one pick for us. Everybody is crying for 10 years that only thing we need is to hit on oversized playmaker. When the luck is on our side and we have opportunity to draft a prospect whose stats are comparable or better than last years "phenom" or "young wonder" Tatum we just overhype 6'10 shooter who cant dribble, pass or finish at the rim. I dont understand it.

would you call up Houston? move back to 3 (i think most people see Jabari and Chet going #1 and #2) and another pick (next years or their later pick) and grab Banchero there?

[3ddman23]

Just for funsies... here's a stat comparison between two players:

Paolo Banchero (per 40):
Points: 20.9 (53% from 2, 34% from 3)
Rebounds: 9.5
Assists: 3.9 (Turnovers: 2.9)
Steals: 1.3
Blocks: 1.1

Cade Cunningham @ OSU (per 40):
Points: 22.8 (46% from 2, 40% from 3)
Rebounds: 7
Assists: 3.9 (Turnovers: 4.6)
Steals: 1.8
Blocks: .9

If Cade was a consensus #1 last year, and most of us wanted him pre-lotto last year, why isn't Paolo an easy #1 this year? Paolo is 4-5 inches taller than Cade and is just as much of a playmaker as Cade - with fewer turnovers. Sure, Paolo doesn't shoot the 3 as good as Cade (though Cade only shot 31% his rookie year), but 34% is still respectable and he can get easier buckets in the paint when shots aren't falling because of his size.

Thats why i am on crusade right now, its unbelieveble !!! I love Holmgren but come on, Banchero is obvious number one pick for us. Everybody is crying for 10 years that only thing we need is to hit on oversized playmaker. When the luck is on our side and we have opportunity to draft a prospect whose stats are comparable or better than last years "phenom" or "young wonder" Tatum we just overhype 6'10 shooter who cant dribble, pass or finish at the rim. I dont understand it.

Same here, this is why banchero has been creeping up my board. You watch film or games and you can clearly see he has more edge to him then the other 2, in terms of creation.

I have no clue which way to lean but i think banchero for some reason is getting a unfair hand in terms of #1. He is pretty comparable to cade in how they play but cade is viewed more as a guard/foward and banchero is seen as a big forward.

Thats why i never understood the wendell carter/ juwan howard comparisons he has been getting. He moves so much better and fluid then guys like that. Sure you can look at julius randel But i feel like his again is more advance already then randle at the same age not mention his playmaking ability which is far superior at the same age. Idk who it will be but banchero should be considred as much as jabari and chet.

[thelead]

Just for funsies... here's a stat comparison between two players:

Paolo Banchero (per 40):
Points: 20.9 (53% from 2, 34% from 3)
Rebounds: 9.5
Assists: 3.9 (Turnovers: 2.9)
Steals: 1.3
Blocks: 1.1

Cade Cunningham @ OSU (per 40):
Points: 22.8 (46% from 2, 40% from 3)
Rebounds: 7
Assists: 3.9 (Turnovers: 4.6)
Steals: 1.8
Blocks: .9

If Cade was a consensus #1 last year, and most of us wanted him pre-lotto last year, why isn't Paolo an easy #1 this year? Paolo is 4-5 inches taller than Cade and is just as much of a playmaker as Cade - with fewer turnovers. Sure, Paolo doesn't shoot the 3 as good as Cade (though Cade only shot 31% his rookie year), but 34% is still respectable and he can get easier buckets in the paint when shots aren't falling because of his size.

Thats why i am on crusade right now, its unbelieveble !!! I love Holmgren but come on, Banchero is obvious number one pick for us. Everybody is crying for 10 years that only thing we need is to hit on oversized playmaker. When the luck is on our side and we have opportunity to draft a prospect whose stats are comparable or better than last years "phenom" or "young wonder" Tatum we just overhype 6'10 shooter who cant dribble, pass or finish at the rim. I dont understand it.

Same here, this is why banchero has been creeping up my board. You watch film or games and you can clearly see he has more edge to him then the other 2, in terms of creation.

I have no clue which way to lean but i think banchero for some reason is getting a unfair hand in terms of #1. He is pretty comparable to cade in how they play but cade is viewed more as a guard/foward and banchero is seen as a big forward.

Thats why i never understood the wendell carter/ juwan howard comparisons he has been getting. He moves so much better and fluid then guys like that. Sure you can look at julius randel But i feel like his again is more advance already then randle at the same age not mention his playmaking ability which is far superior at the same age. Idk who it will be but banchero should be considred as much as jabari and chet.

I'm open to the idea of Paolo but you can't just dismiss the difference in 3pt shooting in this era. Being able to hit step-back 3's is very important today as a playmaker so you can't overlook the long shooting difference between Banchero and Cade.

[tiderulz]

Thats why i am on crusade right now, its unbelieveble !!! I love Holmgren but come on, Banchero is obvious number one pick for us. Everybody is crying for 10 years that only thing we need is to hit on oversized playmaker. When the luck is on our side and we have opportunity to draft a prospect whose stats are comparable or better than last years "phenom" or "young wonder" Tatum we just overhype 6'10 shooter who cant dribble, pass or finish at the rim. I dont understand it.

Same here, this is why banchero has been creeping up my board. You watch film or games and you can clearly see he has more edge to him then the other 2, in terms of creation.

I have no clue which way to lean but i think banchero for some reason is getting a unfair hand in terms of #1. He is pretty comparable to cade in how they play but cade is viewed more as a guard/foward and banchero is seen as a big forward.

Thats why i never understood the wendell carter/ juwan howard comparisons he has been getting. He moves so much better and fluid then guys like that. Sure you can look at julius randel But i feel like his again is more advance already then randle at the same age not mention his playmaking ability which is far superior at the same age. Idk who it will be but banchero should be considred as much as jabari and chet.

I'm open to the idea of Paolo but you can't just dismiss the difference in 3pt shooting in this era. Being able to hit step-back 3's is very important today as a playmaker so you can't overlook the long shooting difference between Banchero and Cade.

well, Tatum had questions about his 3 pt shot too and look at him now

[crazytown]

I haven't been on here much since it's been a brutal 10+ years with this team. But this is the first time in a looooooong time there's some glimmer of hope. The future is NOW!!

[thelead]

Same here, this is why banchero has been creeping up my board. You watch film or games and you can clearly see he has more edge to him then the other 2, in terms of creation.

I have no clue which way to lean but i think banchero for some reason is getting a unfair hand in terms of #1. He is pretty comparable to cade in how they play but cade is viewed more as a guard/foward and banchero is seen as a big forward.

Thats why i never understood the wendell carter/ juwan howard comparisons he has been getting. He moves so much better and fluid then guys like that. Sure you can look at julius randel But i feel like his again is more advance already then randle at the same age not mention his playmaking ability which is far superior at the same age. Idk who it will be but banchero should be considred as much as jabari and chet.

I'm open to the idea of Paolo but you can't just dismiss the difference in 3pt shooting in this era. Being able to hit step-back 3's is very important today as a playmaker so you can't overlook the long shooting difference between Banchero and Cade.

well, Tatum had questions about his 3 pt shot too and look at him now

Paolo is skilled, no doubt.... but he also used his size to be effective. That won't be as big of an advantage in the pros. Taking the 3 out of the equation to compare Paolo and Tatum, I prefer Tatum's handle and agility to Paolo's physical strength.

[MagicTownBaller]

"On the morning of November 14, 2021, Banchero was charged with aiding and abetting DWI after Duke teammate Michael Savarino, grandson of coach Mike Krzyzewski, was arrested on DWI charges. He is due to appear in court at a later date."

Okay, so Orlando ain't going to draft Paolo now that I saw this

[Knightro]

well, Tatum had questions about his 3 pt shot too and look at him now

Tatum and Cunningham also had better indicators that they were more natural shooters in college, namely a significantly better FT% than Banchero.

Tatum and Cade were both 85% FT shooters on high volume, whereas Banchero was just under 73%. That's a significant difference and shows a pretty wide gap in natural shooting touch.

[tiderulz]

well, Tatum had questions about his 3 pt shot too and look at him now

Tatum and Cunningham also had better indicators that they were more natural shooters in college, namely a significantly better FT% than Banchero.

Tatum and Cade were both 85% FT shooters on high volume, whereas Banchero was just under 73%. That's a significant difference and shows a pretty wide gap in natural shooting touch.

true, but at 19, he can improve.

[jayrehme]

Banchero's game uses size and athleticism combination too much to be affective. At the next level when everyone else is strong and athletic, it could be less affective, which is his entire game. With Chet and Jabari, you have glue guys that make the entire team better with all the little things and off the ball plays. I'd go with Chet or Jabari.

[tiderulz]

Banchero's game uses size and athleticism combination too much to be affective. At the next level when everyone else is strong and athletic, it could be less affective, which is his entire game. With Chet and Jabari, you have glue guys that make the entire team better with all the little things and off the ball plays. I'd go with Chet or Jabari.

worked pretty well for Lebron, Kawhi, etc. he does have solid footwork, an inside game and improving outside shot, as well as good handles. he isnt just strength and athleticism, he is very skilled too

[fateis007]

Banchero's game uses size and athleticism combination too much to be affective. At the next level when everyone else is strong and athletic, it could be less affective, which is his entire game. With Chet and Jabari, you have glue guys that make the entire team better with all the little things and off the ball plays. I'd go with Chet or Jabari.

It's funny, i actually see it the opposite. He played PF at duke, of course he was banging around. I am not sure why he is pegged as some bruiser only.

But if were talking skill sets, i think he's the best all around player. Chef being his only competition, who is much less agile, less explosive, better defensively.

You can actually run pick and rolls with Banchero as the ball handler or the screener. He just wasn't used that way at Duke. Can't really blame them, he has turned into a beast and was having his way in the post.

If I am picking anyone and it has to be the top 3, it's between Banchero and Chet, but why take the chance and gamble on his frame? Either way I will trust in management and their work outs, but I do find people overlooking him at the #1 pick baffling and wont be surprised to hear his name called out.

[IllMagic04]

well, Tatum had questions about his 3 pt shot too and look at him now

Tatum and Cunningham also had better indicators that they were more natural shooters in college, namely a significantly better FT% than Banchero.

Tatum and Cade were both 85% FT shooters on high volume, whereas Banchero was just under 73%. That's a significant difference and shows a pretty wide gap in natural shooting touch.

Thats fair and I agree. I think its more likely then not he improves though. Maybe not to their level but still good. Elfrid Payton was like a 60% ft shooter while shooting 26% from 3. Thats a clear indicator of a bricklayer. Aaaron Gordon is a guy who was really raw offensively in college and shot 42% from the ft line. Surprisingly he shot 35 from 3. The point is those guys were clear longshots to become good shooters in the NBA. I actually don't think AG gets enough credit. I didn't think his offensive game would have gotten even where it did. Palao is 73% from the line and 33 from 3. Its not ideal but that's not horrific to the point of thinking its not going to improve. If he can get up to 77-80% from the line and 35ish from 3 with the other stuff he can do that's a all star. I don't think that's a long shot

Banchero's game uses size and athleticism combination too much to be affective. At the next level when everyone else is strong and athletic, it could be less affective, which is his entire game. With Chet and Jabari, you have glue guys that make the entire team better with all the little things and off the ball plays. I'd go with Chet or Jabari.

I gotta push back at the idea that everyone in the NBA is strong and athletic. There are forwards in the NBA that I think Palao could push around and get to the basket on with ease right now. He also doesn't rely on size and athleticism as much as you might think though. He really only spams that when he's being guarded by someone he believes he can overwhelm. So yea I have watched games where thats all he did and its not the most fun to watch but it was effective ( at times)