CelticsStrong

Around the League => The Draft => Topic started by: mr. dee on October 28, 2017, 05:43:52 AM

Title: Marvin Bagley Thread
Post by: mr. dee on October 28, 2017, 05:43:52 AM
I just watched a highlights from exhibition game. It could be some rookie jitters but he wasn't impressive. He's less polished than I imagined.
Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
Post by: Somebody on October 28, 2017, 06:14:00 AM
When he fills out he'll probably be a PF/C instead of a combo forward so his polish is ok to me imo.
Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
Post by: loco_91 on October 28, 2017, 03:19:08 PM
Luka he ain't
Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
Post by: CelticsElite on November 05, 2017, 01:47:03 PM
Dropped 25 pts and 10 rb: Highlights https://youtu.be/Uto8TBoywZo
Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
Post by: CelticsElite on November 11, 2017, 03:20:18 AM
Season opener.

He dropped 25 pts and 10 rebounds again

https://youtu.be/ZoQKttYTPMU


Pretty impressive. His game is mostly all inside though, so it may not be built for modern nba
Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
Post by: mr. dee on November 11, 2017, 07:12:35 AM
His post-ups doesn't looked much efficient. There are more misses that I saw than makes in this highlights. He's a threat in transition, though and moves like a wing in the perimeter which is a huge positive, especially in today's NBA.

He's an easy lob target like Deandre Jordan so he could be a solid player, but I'm not seeing the "generational thing" yet that people raved about.
Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
Post by: Big333223 on November 11, 2017, 07:46:26 AM
Geez does he look raw. But the raw material is about as impressive as it could be. If someone can teach him basketball he could be everything he's hyped to be.
Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
Post by: trickybilly on November 11, 2017, 08:05:07 AM
Kinda poor man's Simmons..
Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
Post by: Big333223 on November 11, 2017, 08:19:38 AM
Kinda poor man's Simmons..
How so?

Simmons is a passing savant with a smooth offensive game. Bagley is a hyper-athletic banger.
Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
Post by: Who on November 11, 2017, 08:20:31 AM
Bagley looks amazing. To have that ball-handling and fluidity at that center position --- man he is going to be a matchup nightmare. Combine that with rebounding ability on both ends. Willingness to play defense. To anchor a defense. Length, leaping ability, shot blocking skills. Willingness to post up and play physical in the paint. Strong motor. Multiple effort plays. He can pass. Both in stand still and off the dribble. He is terrific.

Most impressive center play I've seen in NCAA since Anthony Davis.
Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
Post by: CelticsElite on November 12, 2017, 10:08:42 PM
He put up 24/10/2 yesterday
https://youtu.be/ww7akR0L7s8
Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
Post by: Phantom255x on November 12, 2017, 10:12:05 PM
When you see Bagley do so well, but remember there's a great chance that Lakers Pick doesn't convey...

(https://i.giphy.com/media/hppWdK8gcmzXq/giphy.webp)
Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
Post by: liam on November 12, 2017, 10:14:37 PM
He put up 24/10/2 yesterday
https://youtu.be/ww7akR0L7s8

Wow, he looks amazing!
Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
Post by: gouki88 on November 12, 2017, 10:18:35 PM
When you see Bagley do so well, but remember there's a great chance that Lakers Pick doesn't convey...

(https://i.giphy.com/media/hppWdK8gcmzXq/giphy.webp)
Man he looks smooth.

Him or Ayton would be a dreamy young big next to Al
Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
Post by: nickagneta on November 12, 2017, 10:26:24 PM
If the LA pick conveys at 2 or 3 the players I hope the Celtics get are

1. Doncic
2. Porter
3. Bagley

Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
Post by: CELTICSofBOSTON on November 12, 2017, 10:36:03 PM
Ayton has been terrific!!!

https://youtu.be/QMn52maTVV8

I️ was a Bagley guy all summer but Ayton plays with a motor that I️ didn’t expect since that was considered a major weakness.  Also, Bagley looks a lot less skilled than I️ thought.

Anyways, I’d be happy if the pick conveys this year and would be beyond elated to draft either one of those bigs.
Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
Post by: KG Living Legend on November 12, 2017, 11:09:49 PM
Bagley looks amazing. To have that ball-handling and fluidity at that center position --- man he is going to be a matchup nightmare. Combine that with rebounding ability on both ends. Willingness to play defense. To anchor a defense. Length, leaping ability, shot blocking skills. Willingness to post up and play physical in the paint. Strong motor. Multiple effort plays. He can pass. Both in stand still and off the dribble. He is terrific.

Most impressive center play I've seen in NCAA since Anthony Davis.



 Holy crap Who. That's a tp for being so bold. He looks better than I thought.
Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
Post by: trickybilly on November 12, 2017, 11:43:13 PM
If the LA pick conveys at 2 or 3 the players I hope the Celtics get are

1. Doncic
2. Porter
3. Bagley

Interesting. I'm interested in Bamba and Ayton
Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
Post by: slightly biased bias fan on November 13, 2017, 12:56:30 AM
I don't think Bagley is attainable given we only get the Lakers pick if it drops past 1. Given his potential and that he's only 18, I can't see a team passing on him unless there is some type of injury red flag. Porter, Doncic, Ayton look like great prospects but none have the ceiling that Bagley has...he may not reach it but his ceiling his much higher.
Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
Post by: CELTICSofBOSTON on November 13, 2017, 02:33:13 AM
I don't think Bagley is attainable given we only get the Lakers pick if it drops past 1. Given his potential and that he's only 18, I can't see a team passing on him unless there is some type of injury red flag. Porter, Doncic, Ayton look like great prospects but none have the ceiling that Bagley has...he may not reach it but his ceiling his much higher.

I️ disagree.  It is super duper early but I️ can easily see 3 guys go ahead of Bagley (Ayton, Porter, Doncic).  They are are all terrific prospects as well especially Ayton and Porter.  I️ don’t think Bagley will fall too far obviously but at this point he isn’t head and shoulders above everyone else in this draft.  That top tier is really good and they are all equal prospects at this point.  In my opinion, it will be Ayton who separates himself by the time the 2018 NBA draft comes around.  However,  I️ certainly would not be surprised if it’s Bagley.  Kid is special !!
Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
Post by: Androslav on November 13, 2017, 03:19:26 AM
Bagley looks amazing. To have that ball-handling and fluidity at that center position --- man he is going to be a matchup nightmare. Combine that with rebounding ability on both ends. Willingness to play defense. To anchor a defense. Length, leaping ability, shot blocking skills. Willingness to post up and play physical in the paint. Strong motor. Multiple effort plays. He can pass. Both in stand still and off the dribble. He is terrific.

Most impressive center play I've seen in NCAA since Anthony Davis.

 Holy crap Who. That's a tp for being so bold. He looks better than I thought.

From what I saw in these videos, I'm not that impressed TBH.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ww7akR0L7s8&feature=youtu.be
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoQKttYTPMU&feature=youtu.be

I could only see that the game is easier for athletic players, it is even more pronounced in college. He didn't show much shooting touch inside (air-balled a running hook from 3ft) or any right hand on his finishes. He did show poor footwork on closeouts and that his jumper has a long way to go.
He does play in perfect position as a small ball 5 and should be feasting on the added spacing.

The season is young though, guys improve a lot in a year.
Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
Post by: jdz101 on November 13, 2017, 03:50:21 AM
I dont want a bar of luka doncic
Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
Post by: slightly biased bias fan on November 13, 2017, 03:57:58 AM
I dont want a bar of luka doncic

Doncic reminds me a lot of an advanced version of Gallinari and before the injuries Gallo was seen as a potential All-Star but not a 1st pick level talent. I can see him having problems in the NBA though given he seems to lack explosion and has a slow first step, something that is suicide in the current NBA.
Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
Post by: Androslav on November 13, 2017, 04:55:01 AM
I dont want a bar of luka doncic

Doncic reminds me a lot of an advanced version of Gallinari and before the injuries, Gallo was seen as a potential All-Star but not a 1st pick level talent. I can see him having problems in the NBA though given he seems to lack explosion and has a slow first step, something that is suicide in the current NBA.
I remember when Harden was slow coming into the league and how he won't be able to get to the rim. LOL
In mock drafts, skill is often undervalued in favor of athleticism.
The thing Dončić and Gallo have in common is the Euro background and similar height.
Dončić is a point forward (3), Gallo wants to score (4), it is in his blood.[/list]
Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
Post by: playdream on November 13, 2017, 05:11:55 AM
    I dont want a bar of luka doncic

    Doncic reminds me a lot of an advanced version of Gallinari and before the injuries, Gallo was seen as a potential All-Star but not a 1st pick level talent. I can see him having problems in the NBA though given he seems to lack explosion and has a slow first step, something that is suicide in the current NBA.
    I remember when Harden was slow coming into the league and how he won't be able to get to the rim. LOL
    In mock drafts, skill is often undervalued in favor of athleticism.
    The thing Dončić and Gallo have in common is the Euro background and similar height.
    Dončić is a point forward (3), Gallo wants to score (4), it is in his blood.[/list]
    Doncic and Harden is like ground and sky though, Harden is so strong to cover his speed which Doncic simply lack of, he will have a hard time finish in the NBA
    Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
    Post by: Androslav on November 13, 2017, 06:32:40 AM
      I dont want a bar of luka doncic

      Doncic reminds me a lot of an advanced version of Gallinari and before the injuries, Gallo was seen as a potential All-Star but not a 1st pick level talent. I can see him having problems in the NBA though given he seems to lack explosion and has a slow first step, something that is suicide in the current NBA.
      I remember when Harden was slow coming into the league and how he won't be able to get to the rim. LOL
      In mock drafts, skill is often undervalued in favor of athleticism.
      The thing Dončić and Gallo have in common is the Euro background and similar height.
      Dončić is a point forward (3), Gallo wants to score (4), it is in his blood.[/list]
      Doncic and Harden is like ground and sky though, Harden is so strong to cover his speed which Doncic simply lack of, he will have a hard time finish in the NBA
      Please read carefully and you will see that I never compared their dribble-drive games.
      Merely pointing out that skill is undervalued in mock drafts. I feel like Larry Bird would be a 20th-30th pick in these mock drafts, as he "doesn't have the body to bang under the rim", "can't outrun anyone" and "his jump hardly gives us time to slide daily newspapers beneath him".

      EDIT:
      Please don't read in that I compared Luka to Larry here.
      I am still a few games away from that :)
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: GreenShooter on November 15, 2017, 12:05:23 PM
      If this is still a Marvin Bagley thread then I'd like to point out that he caught a finger in his eye from his own player in the MSU game last night. It looked nasty from the top of backboard camera replay but Coach K said it's a scratch and that he should be fine.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: gift on November 15, 2017, 12:44:40 PM
      I've got Bagley and Ayton as my top two. 1a and 1b right now. Bamba is a good concession with Doncic a very useful player too. I think for Porter to max his potential, he needs to score. I'm not sure I see him developing on this team with Tatum and Hayward ahead of him. Probably best as a trade asset. But may be worth more to another team, which could help move one of those other guys down. Really want that Lakers pick this year. I don't think next year has the same amount of talent at the top.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: CelticsElite on November 17, 2017, 05:00:12 PM
      Day in the life of marvin Bagley: https://youtu.be/U8Tg-N1RcoQ
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: CelticsElite on November 29, 2017, 12:57:17 PM
      David Robinson thinks bagley is like Tim Duncan
      http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/21606895/david-robinson-compares-marvin-bagley-iii-tim-duncan
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: chilidawg on November 29, 2017, 01:45:52 PM
      David Robinson thinks bagley is like Tim Duncan
      http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/21606895/david-robinson-compares-marvin-bagley-iii-tim-duncan

      Interesting comparison.  The Admiral would know.  I think he'd look ideal next to Horford, two mobile bigs with perimeter and interior skills.   Right now I'd guess he's going #1, but I haven't seen Ayton.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: slightly biased bias fan on December 04, 2017, 04:05:35 AM
      Marvin Bagley III vs South Dakota

      19 Points, 12 Rebounds, 2 Assists, 3 Blocks

      https://youtu.be/w3t929UBtKk
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Roy H. on December 04, 2017, 07:00:04 AM
      This kid is the primary reason I'm still in wait and see mode on the Kyrie trade.  He's got legit super-duper-star potential.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Ilikesports17 on December 04, 2017, 07:14:05 AM
      This kid is the primary reason I'm still in wait and see mode on the Kyrie trade.  He's got legit super-duper-star potential.
      total side-bar here, but when does wait and see mode end?

      Like does it end when the season ends? Does it end on lottery night? Does it end on draft night? Does it end when the player acquired with that pick reaches his prime?

      I think its really hard to decide when the fair time to judge a deal is.

      I mean Danny Ainge acquired the Nets picks with no idea that theyd result in a #1 pick, a #3 pick and another presumed top 10 pick. Yet he gets tons of credit for it.

      If Brown and Tatum were megabusts would he get the same level of credit for those trades? I mean the trade itself had nothing to do with the selections Danny made.

      Another example is the KG trade. We sent Minny the pick they used to select Johnny Flynn.

      When we look back at that trade it looks like KG for Big Al and whole bunch of nuthin. But what if you crossed out Johnny Flynn's name and penciled in Steph Curry?

      All of a sudden its not the robbery its made out to be.

      I think its interesting.

      You can only evaluate a GM on the facts he had available at the time. Len Bias wasnt a bad pick because of his tragic death, but Ainge cant control that any more than he can control the ping pong balls in the lottery machine, or the decisions the Nets FO makes. Do you judge a trade based on the results, or the possible results, or some combination of the two?

      This has been a rambling somewhat incoherent post, but I think its an interesting thing to think about if anyone can parse through my horribly constructed post and get the gist of what Im getting at.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: A Future of Stevens on December 04, 2017, 07:39:23 AM
      This kid is the primary reason I'm still in wait and see mode on the Kyrie trade.  He's got legit super-duper-star potential.

      Barring some crazy lotto luck, he is going to be awesome for the Hawks, Bulls or Suns.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Roy H. on December 04, 2017, 08:02:05 AM
      Quote
      When we look back at that trade it looks like KG for Big Al and whole bunch of nuthin. But what if you crossed out Johnny Flynn's name and penciled in Steph Curry?

      As an aside, Minnesota didn’t get that pick in the KG trade. I know basketball-reference lists it, but they’re incorrect.

      This kid is the primary reason I'm still in wait and see mode on the Kyrie trade.  He's got legit super-duper-star potential.

      Barring some crazy lotto luck, he is going to be awesome for the Hawks, Bulls or Suns.

      I sure hope so. If the Nets don’t move up, I’ll thrilled.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Big333223 on December 04, 2017, 11:11:50 AM
      Quote
      When we look back at that trade it looks like KG for Big Al and whole bunch of nuthin. But what if you crossed out Johnny Flynn's name and penciled in Steph Curry?

      As an aside, Minnesota didn’t get that pick in the KG trade. I know basketball-reference lists it, but they’re incorrect.
      It looks like the pick used on Flyyn was originally Minnesota's, traded to Boston in the Szczerbiak trade in 2006 and then reacquired by Minnesota in the Garnett trade. So basketball-reference is correct in the tracking of that pick.

      Quote
      It is believed the deal also calls for the Celtics to ship youngsters Gerald Green, Sebastian Telfair and Ryan Gomes to Minnesota, along with a future first-round draft pick and the return of a first-rounder the Wolves surrendered in the Wally Szczerbiak-Ricky Davis trade in January 2006.
      http://www.espn.com/nba/news/story?id=2954127
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Roy H. on December 04, 2017, 11:21:54 AM
      Quote
      When we look back at that trade it looks like KG for Big Al and whole bunch of nuthin. But what if you crossed out Johnny Flynn's name and penciled in Steph Curry?

      As an aside, Minnesota didn’t get that pick in the KG trade. I know basketball-reference lists it, but they’re incorrect.
      It looks like the pick used on Flyyn was originally Minnesota's, traded to Boston in the Szczerbiak trade in 2006 and then reacquired by Minnesota in the Garnett trade. So basketball-reference is correct in the tracking of that pick.

      Quote
      It is believed the deal also calls for the Celtics to ship youngsters Gerald Green, Sebastian Telfair and Ryan Gomes to Minnesota, along with a future first-round draft pick and the return of a first-rounder the Wolves surrendered in the Wally Szczerbiak-Ricky Davis trade in January 2006.
      http://www.espn.com/nba/news/story?id=2954127

      No, they’re not. That pick was heavily protected, and never would have ended up conveying.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Big333223 on December 04, 2017, 04:10:35 PM
      Quote
      When we look back at that trade it looks like KG for Big Al and whole bunch of nuthin. But what if you crossed out Johnny Flynn's name and penciled in Steph Curry?

      As an aside, Minnesota didn’t get that pick in the KG trade. I know basketball-reference lists it, but they’re incorrect.
      It looks like the pick used on Flyyn was originally Minnesota's, traded to Boston in the Szczerbiak trade in 2006 and then reacquired by Minnesota in the Garnett trade. So basketball-reference is correct in the tracking of that pick.

      Quote
      It is believed the deal also calls for the Celtics to ship youngsters Gerald Green, Sebastian Telfair and Ryan Gomes to Minnesota, along with a future first-round draft pick and the return of a first-rounder the Wolves surrendered in the Wally Szczerbiak-Ricky Davis trade in January 2006.
      http://www.espn.com/nba/news/story?id=2954127

      No, they’re not. That pick was heavily protected, and never would have ended up conveying.
      This is what I could find on the protections of that pick:

      Quote
      if Timberwolves send first round pick owed to Clippers in 2007, pick is protected top 14 in 2009, top 5 in 2010, top 3 in 2011; if Timberwolves send first round pick owed to Clippers in 2008, pick is protected top 14 in 2010, top 5 in 2011; if Timberwolves send first round pick owed to Clippers in 2009, pick is protected top 14 in 2011; if Timberwolves send first round pick owed to Clippers in 2010, pick is unprotected for 2012)
      https://www.prosportstransactions.com/basketball/DraftTrades/Years/2009.htm

      This reads to me like it would've taken a long time but it would've conveyed eventually. I don't understand why you say the pick "never would have ended up conveying."

      Regardless of what protections were on the pick, Minnesota did trade a conditional draft pick to Boston in 2006 and Boston traded that pick back in 2008 as part of the KG deal. It wasn't, specifically, the 2009 pick but 2009 is the earliest the pick could've conveyed if the conditions were met and after the KG deal those conditions were no longer in place (since the pick just belonged to Minnesota again, outright) so Basketball-reference seems to be correct in listing Jonny Flynn as the player taken with that pick and this site Pro Sports Transactions lists it the same way.

      It's weird because Minnesota would never have had to give Boston the #6 pick in 2009 as part of that 2006 deal but when tracking who was taken with the pick involved in those 2 trades, the answer does seem to be Jonny Flynn.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: nickagneta on December 04, 2017, 04:17:25 PM
      Quote
      When we look back at that trade it looks like KG for Big Al and whole bunch of nuthin. But what if you crossed out Johnny Flynn's name and penciled in Steph Curry?

      As an aside, Minnesota didn’t get that pick in the KG trade. I know basketball-reference lists it, but they’re incorrect.
      It looks like the pick used on Flyyn was originally Minnesota's, traded to Boston in the Szczerbiak trade in 2006 and then reacquired by Minnesota in the Garnett trade. So basketball-reference is correct in the tracking of that pick.

      Quote
      It is believed the deal also calls for the Celtics to ship youngsters Gerald Green, Sebastian Telfair and Ryan Gomes to Minnesota, along with a future first-round draft pick and the return of a first-rounder the Wolves surrendered in the Wally Szczerbiak-Ricky Davis trade in January 2006.
      http://www.espn.com/nba/news/story?id=2954127

      No, they’re not. That pick was heavily protected, and never would have ended up conveying.
      This is what I could find on the protections of that pick:

      Quote
      if Timberwolves send first round pick owed to Clippers in 2007, pick is protected top 14 in 2009, top 5 in 2010, top 3 in 2011; if Timberwolves send first round pick owed to Clippers in 2008, pick is protected top 14 in 2010, top 5 in 2011; if Timberwolves send first round pick owed to Clippers in 2009, pick is protected top 14 in 2011; if Timberwolves send first round pick owed to Clippers in 2010, pick is unprotected for 2012)
      https://www.prosportstransactions.com/basketball/DraftTrades/Years/2009.htm

      This reads to me like it would've taken a long time but it would've conveyed eventually. I don't understand why you say the pick "never would have ended up conveying."

      Regardless of what protections were on the pick, Minnesota did trade a conditional draft pick to Boston in 2006 and Boston traded that pick back in 2008 as part of the KG deal. It wasn't, specifically, the 2009 pick but 2009 is the earliest the pick could've conveyed if the conditions were met and after the KG deal those conditions were no longer in place (since the pick just belonged to Minnesota again, outright) so Basketball-reference seems to be correct in listing Jonny Flynn as the player taken with that pick and this site Pro Sports Transactions lists it the same way.

      It's weird because Minnesota would never have had to give Boston the #6 pick in 2009 as part of that 2006 deal but when tracking who was taken with the pick involved in those 2 trades, the answer does seem to be Jonny Flynn.
      The hilarious part about that draft is the Timberwolves drafted 3 PGs in the 1st round of that draft and had two shots at drafting Steph Curry and didn't.

      KAHHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNNNN!!!
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Roy H. on December 04, 2017, 05:00:29 PM
      Quote
      When we look back at that trade it looks like KG for Big Al and whole bunch of nuthin. But what if you crossed out Johnny Flynn's name and penciled in Steph Curry?

      As an aside, Minnesota didn’t get that pick in the KG trade. I know basketball-reference lists it, but they’re incorrect.
      It looks like the pick used on Flyyn was originally Minnesota's, traded to Boston in the Szczerbiak trade in 2006 and then reacquired by Minnesota in the Garnett trade. So basketball-reference is correct in the tracking of that pick.

      Quote
      It is believed the deal also calls for the Celtics to ship youngsters Gerald Green, Sebastian Telfair and Ryan Gomes to Minnesota, along with a future first-round draft pick and the return of a first-rounder the Wolves surrendered in the Wally Szczerbiak-Ricky Davis trade in January 2006.
      http://www.espn.com/nba/news/story?id=2954127

      No, they’re not. That pick was heavily protected, and never would have ended up conveying.
      This is what I could find on the protections of that pick:

      Quote
      if Timberwolves send first round pick owed to Clippers in 2007, pick is protected top 14 in 2009, top 5 in 2010, top 3 in 2011; if Timberwolves send first round pick owed to Clippers in 2008, pick is protected top 14 in 2010, top 5 in 2011; if Timberwolves send first round pick owed to Clippers in 2009, pick is protected top 14 in 2011; if Timberwolves send first round pick owed to Clippers in 2010, pick is unprotected for 2012)
      https://www.prosportstransactions.com/basketball/DraftTrades/Years/2009.htm

      This reads to me like it would've taken a long time but it would've conveyed eventually. I don't understand why you say the pick "never would have ended up conveying."

      Regardless of what protections were on the pick, Minnesota did trade a conditional draft pick to Boston in 2006 and Boston traded that pick back in 2008 as part of the KG deal. It wasn't, specifically, the 2009 pick but 2009 is the earliest the pick could've conveyed if the conditions were met and after the KG deal those conditions were no longer in place (since the pick just belonged to Minnesota again, outright) so Basketball-reference seems to be correct in listing Jonny Flynn as the player taken with that pick and this site Pro Sports Transactions lists it the same way.

      It's weird because Minnesota would never have had to give Boston the #6 pick in 2009 as part of that 2006 deal but when tracking who was taken with the pick involved in those 2 trades, the answer does seem to be Jonny Flynn.

      That’s incomplete. Here are the actual details, from Celtics.com:

      Quote
         Aside from our own picks, the Celtics are likely entitled to receive a future first-round pick from the Minnesota Timberwolves. Due to a league rule prohibiting teams from ever placing themselves in a situation where two consecutive future first-round picks have been traded away, the Celtics cannot receive the first round pick the Timberwolves owe from the Ricky Davis/Wally Szczerbiak trade until two years after the Timberwolves send a pick to the Clippers (from the Sam Cassell/Marko Jaric trade). However, because the Clippers trade involved top 10 "protection," Minnesota only has to send the pick to the Clippers if the pick falls outside the top 10 picks in the draft. Therefore, in future years, Celtics fans should be rooting for Minnesota to win (when, of course, they're not playing against the Celtics) until the Timberwolves finish a season out of the bottom ten, and send their pick to the Clippers. Two years after this occurs, the Timberwolves will send their first-round pick to the Celtics, subject to some "protection" which decreases annually after the first year in which we could receive the pick.*

          The situation is further complicated by a league rule that prevents any deals being made involving drafts more than 7 drafts into the future; as a result the Celtics cannot receive Minnesota's pick after the 2012 draft, since the Ricky/Wally trade was made before the 2006 draft. Therefore, if the Timberwolves do not send a pick to the Clippers by the end of the 2010 draft, the Celtics will be unable to receive the Timberwolves' first-round pick in 2012, and will instead receive a second-round pick in 2012.

      * For those die-hard draft fans who want all the details, here's how the protection on this pick works: If the Timberwolves send a pick to the Clippers in 2007, we receive the Timberwolves' pick in 2009 if it falls outside of the top 14, in 2010 if it falls outside of the top 5, in 2011 if it falls outside of the top 3, or in 2012 unconditionally. If the Timberwolves send a pick to the Clippers in 2008, we receive the Timberwolves' pick in 2010 if it falls outside of the top 14, in 2011 if it falls outside of the top 5, or in 2012 unconditionally. If the Timberwolves send a pick to the Clippers in 2009, we receive the Timberwolves' pick in 2011 if it falls outside the top 14, or in 2012 unconditionally. Finally, if the Timberwolves send a pick to the Clippers in 2010, we receive the Timberwolves' pick in 2012 unconditionally.

      The pick sent to Minnesota ended up being Minnesota’s own 2012 second round pick. That wasn’t Johnny Flynn.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Vermont Green on December 04, 2017, 05:17:45 PM
      Interesting debate about the Minni pick.

      So in this case, it is true to say that Minni got Flynn in the trade but it is not true to say the Celtics gave up Flynn.  And it is also true that Minni would have gotten Flynn in either case as the protections would have prevented the pick from being conveyed.

      What was the question again and what does this have to do with the Kyrie trade?
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Celtics4ever on December 04, 2017, 05:54:26 PM
      He looks rock solid.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Csfan1984 on December 04, 2017, 06:32:24 PM
      As of right now I see a Chris Webber "light" big man playing in a weak big man era. He should definitely still be top 5 but he isn't worth the hype.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: jdz101 on December 04, 2017, 07:59:59 PM
      Purely from a very limited eye test, I'm more excited about Ayton.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Big333223 on December 05, 2017, 02:46:39 PM
      Interesting debate about the Minni pick.

      So in this case, it is true to say that Minni got Flynn in the trade but it is not true to say the Celtics gave up Flynn.  And it is also true that Minni would have gotten Flynn in either case as the protections would have prevented the pick from being conveyed.

      What was the question again and what does this have to do with the Kyrie trade?
      Yeah, that's how I see it.

      The pick sent to Minnesota ended up being Minnesota’s own 2012 second round pick. That wasn’t Johnny Flynn.
      How do you figure?

      EDIT: I think I get what you're saying because that's what the Celtics pick would've been if they had held onto the pick but the act of trading the pick back to Minnesota negated those conditions.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Roy H. on December 05, 2017, 03:27:10 PM
      Interesting debate about the Minni pick.

      So in this case, it is true to say that Minni got Flynn in the trade but it is not true to say the Celtics gave up Flynn.  And it is also true that Minni would have gotten Flynn in either case as the protections would have prevented the pick from being conveyed.

      What was the question again and what does this have to do with the Kyrie trade?
      Yeah, that's how I see it.

      The pick sent to Minnesota ended up being Minnesota’s own 2012 second round pick. That wasn’t Johnny Flynn.
      How do you figure?

      EDIT: I think I get what you're saying because that's what the Celtics pick would've been if they had held onto the pick but the act of trading the pick back to Minnesota negated those conditions.

      It didn’t really negate any conditions. If we traded the pick that turned into Flynn to Minnesota, that means we could have used that pick but for the trade, and that Minnesota wouldn’t have had the pick but for the trade.  Neither is true.

      Rather, but for the trade, we would have had Minny’s 2012 #2 pick. Instead, Minnesota got that pick. We traded a conditional pick that never vested, leaving us - and thus Minnesota - with a second rounder.

      It’s a simple concept: you can’t trade a pick that you never had a right to. We never, ever owned the Flynn pick, so we couldn’t trade it.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Big333223 on December 05, 2017, 04:38:31 PM
      Interesting debate about the Minni pick.

      So in this case, it is true to say that Minni got Flynn in the trade but it is not true to say the Celtics gave up Flynn.  And it is also true that Minni would have gotten Flynn in either case as the protections would have prevented the pick from being conveyed.

      What was the question again and what does this have to do with the Kyrie trade?
      Yeah, that's how I see it.

      The pick sent to Minnesota ended up being Minnesota’s own 2012 second round pick. That wasn’t Johnny Flynn.
      How do you figure?

      EDIT: I think I get what you're saying because that's what the Celtics pick would've been if they had held onto the pick but the act of trading the pick back to Minnesota negated those conditions.

      It didn’t really negate any conditions. If we traded the pick that turned into Flynn to Minnesota, that means we could have used that pick but for the trade, and that Minnesota wouldn’t have had the pick but for the trade.  Neither is true.

      Rather, but for the trade, we would have had Minny’s 2012 #2 pick. Instead, Minnesota got that pick. We traded a conditional pick that never vested, leaving us - and thus Minnesota - with a second rounder.

      It’s a simple concept: you can’t trade a pick that you never had a right to. We never, ever owned the Flynn pick, so we couldn’t trade it.
      When the Celtics traded the pick back to Minnesota, the conditions no longer applied since the conditions could not be applied to Minnesota because, you know, they are themselves.

      While the Celtics never could've owned the #6 pick in 2009 they certainly could've owned picks 15-30. So to say the Celtics "never owned the Flynn pick" ignores that the pick could have fallen elsewhere in the draft and been a player who wasn't Jonny Flyyn.

      I'm sorry to have dragged this Bagley thread this far into the weeds. Suffice it to say these two web sites are in agreement and I agree with their tracking of the pick.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Roy H. on December 05, 2017, 04:48:50 PM
      Interesting debate about the Minni pick.

      So in this case, it is true to say that Minni got Flynn in the trade but it is not true to say the Celtics gave up Flynn.  And it is also true that Minni would have gotten Flynn in either case as the protections would have prevented the pick from being conveyed.

      What was the question again and what does this have to do with the Kyrie trade?
      Yeah, that's how I see it.

      The pick sent to Minnesota ended up being Minnesota’s own 2012 second round pick. That wasn’t Johnny Flynn.
      How do you figure?

      EDIT: I think I get what you're saying because that's what the Celtics pick would've been if they had held onto the pick but the act of trading the pick back to Minnesota negated those conditions.

      It didn’t really negate any conditions. If we traded the pick that turned into Flynn to Minnesota, that means we could have used that pick but for the trade, and that Minnesota wouldn’t have had the pick but for the trade.  Neither is true.

      Rather, but for the trade, we would have had Minny’s 2012 #2 pick. Instead, Minnesota got that pick. We traded a conditional pick that never vested, leaving us - and thus Minnesota - with a second rounder.

      It’s a simple concept: you can’t trade a pick that you never had a right to. We never, ever owned the Flynn pick, so we couldn’t trade it.
      When the Celtics traded the pick back to Minnesota, the conditions no longer applied since the conditions could not be applied to Minnesota because, you know, they are themselves.

      While the Celtics never could've owned the #6 pick in 2009 they certainly could've owned picks 15-30. So to say the Celtics "never owned the Flynn pick" ignores that the pick could have fallen elsewhere in the draft and been a player who wasn't Jonny Flyyn.

      I'm sorry to have dragged this Bagley thread this far into the weeds. Suffice it to say these two web sites are in agreement and I agree with their tracking of the pick.

      This off-shoot started when it was suggested that the KG trade would look different if the Wolves had taken Steph Curry with the pick they got from us. That never could have happened. We never owned the right to that pick.  That’s simply a fact.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: chilidawg on December 06, 2017, 09:26:09 AM
      Interesting debate about the Minni pick.

      So in this case, it is true to say that Minni got Flynn in the trade but it is not true to say the Celtics gave up Flynn.  And it is also true that Minni would have gotten Flynn in either case as the protections would have prevented the pick from being conveyed.

      What was the question again and what does this have to do with the Kyrie trade?
      Yeah, that's how I see it.

      The pick sent to Minnesota ended up being Minnesota’s own 2012 second round pick. That wasn’t Johnny Flynn.
      How do you figure?

      EDIT: I think I get what you're saying because that's what the Celtics pick would've been if they had held onto the pick but the act of trading the pick back to Minnesota negated those conditions.

      It didn’t really negate any conditions. If we traded the pick that turned into Flynn to Minnesota, that means we could have used that pick but for the trade, and that Minnesota wouldn’t have had the pick but for the trade.  Neither is true.

      Rather, but for the trade, we would have had Minny’s 2012 #2 pick. Instead, Minnesota got that pick. We traded a conditional pick that never vested, leaving us - and thus Minnesota - with a second rounder.

      It’s a simple concept: you can’t trade a pick that you never had a right to. We never, ever owned the Flynn pick, so we couldn’t trade it.
      When the Celtics traded the pick back to Minnesota, the conditions no longer applied since the conditions could not be applied to Minnesota because, you know, they are themselves.

      While the Celtics never could've owned the #6 pick in 2009 they certainly could've owned picks 15-30. So to say the Celtics "never owned the Flynn pick" ignores that the pick could have fallen elsewhere in the draft and been a player who wasn't Jonny Flyyn.

      I'm sorry to have dragged this Bagley thread this far into the weeds. Suffice it to say these two web sites are in agreement and I agree with their tracking of the pick.

      This off-shoot started when it was suggested that the KG trade would look different if the Wolves had taken Steph Curry with the pick they got from us. That never could have happened. We never owned the right to that pick.  That’s simply a fact.

      Shouldn't you guys take this arcane, irrelevant debate somewhere else so the rest of us can talk about Marvin Bagley?
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: JHTruth on December 06, 2017, 09:46:53 AM
      Bagley w 34/15 vs Bamba, 30/15 vs Florida. Guy looks like a lock for the no 1 to me..
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: coffee425 on December 06, 2017, 10:16:27 AM
      For all of his strengths, Bagley (and Bamba) are probably the two least versatile players in the projected "top 5" of the draft.

      Bagley is a pure power forward. On defense, he isn't physical enough, nor protect the rim well enough, to play Center. On offense, he can't shoot well enough to space the floor nor pass enough to initiate an offense.

      I'm still not sure how to feel about him. I guess he can be compared to Andre Drummond who is just as bad on defense. Maybe in time, Bagley can extend his offense to where Lamarcus Aldridge is now?

      For my Celtics perspective, this lack of versatility sounds like something Ainge would trade down from ;)
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Big333223 on December 06, 2017, 11:55:41 AM
      For all of his strengths, Bagley (and Bamba) are probably the two least versatile players in the projected "top 5" of the draft.

      Bagley is a pure power forward. On defense, he isn't physical enough, nor protect the rim well enough, to play Center. On offense, he can't shoot well enough to space the floor nor pass enough to initiate an offense.

      I'm still not sure how to feel about him. I guess he can be compared to Andre Drummond who is just as bad on defense. Maybe in time, Bagley can extend his offense to where Lamarcus Aldridge is now?

      For my Celtics perspective, this lack of versatility sounds like something Ainge would trade down from ;)
      I'm also not totally sold on Bagley but disagree with your assessment of him. He's incredibly versatile on defense and he's been a very physical player. He's still only 18 and he can definitely get stronger but his willingness to play physical and mix it up under the basket is unquestionable.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: CelticsElite on December 06, 2017, 09:30:21 PM
      Having Bagley would be a good problem to hawb if you view him as that
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: chilidawg on December 07, 2017, 10:45:02 PM
      For all of his strengths, Bagley (and Bamba) are probably the two least versatile players in the projected "top 5" of the draft.

      Bagley is a pure power forward. On defense, he isn't physical enough, nor protect the rim well enough, to play Center. On offense, he can't shoot well enough to space the floor nor pass enough to initiate an offense.

      I'm still not sure how to feel about him. I guess he can be compared to Andre Drummond who is just as bad on defense. Maybe in time, Bagley can extend his offense to where Lamarcus Aldridge is now?

      For my Celtics perspective, this lack of versatility sounds like something Ainge would trade down from ;)

      When looking at prospects I like to look at 3 things, what they can do, what they clearly can't do, and what they show flashes of that they might develop.

      For me Bagley looks like he currently can score in the paint and rebound.  He's showing flashes of ball handling and shooting (7-20 from 3).   He's showing flashes defensively, but I worry more about that developing.  I'm not seeing much that I think he'll never be able to do.  I think in fact he'll turn out to be a very versatile player because he has length, motor and burgeoning skill.  But it's very much about the projection.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Monkhouse on December 12, 2017, 01:58:20 PM
      For all of his strengths, Bagley (and Bamba) are probably the two least versatile players in the projected "top 5" of the draft.

      Bagley is a pure power forward. On defense, he isn't physical enough, nor protect the rim well enough, to play Center. On offense, he can't shoot well enough to space the floor nor pass enough to initiate an offense.

      I'm still not sure how to feel about him. I guess he can be compared to Andre Drummond who is just as bad on defense. Maybe in time, Bagley can extend his offense to where Lamarcus Aldridge is now?

      For my Celtics perspective, this lack of versatility sounds like something Ainge would trade down from ;)

      Just curious... Have you actually watched any of his highlights? Because I have never ever heard that comparison, and honestly Bagley has the body to play center or stick to PF, and runs the floor like an gazelle..
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Monkhouse on December 12, 2017, 02:00:37 PM
      For all of his strengths, Bagley (and Bamba) are probably the two least versatile players in the projected "top 5" of the draft.

      Bagley is a pure power forward. On defense, he isn't physical enough, nor protect the rim well enough, to play Center. On offense, he can't shoot well enough to space the floor nor pass enough to initiate an offense.

      I'm still not sure how to feel about him. I guess he can be compared to Andre Drummond who is just as bad on defense. Maybe in time, Bagley can extend his offense to where Lamarcus Aldridge is now?

      For my Celtics perspective, this lack of versatility sounds like something Ainge would trade down from ;)

      When looking at prospects I like to look at 3 things, what they can do, what they clearly can't do, and what they show flashes of that they might develop.

      For me Bagley looks like he currently can score in the paint and rebound.  He's showing flashes of ball handling and shooting (7-20 from 3).   He's showing flashes defensively, but I worry more about that developing.  I'm not seeing much that I think he'll never be able to do.  I think in fact he'll turn out to be a very versatile player because he has length, motor and burgeoning skill.  But it's very much about the projection.

      He's the consensus number one pick, he eerily reminds me of KAT, in that same sense that he wasn't clearly the first pick originally, but is going to end up eventually taking that spot.

      I like Doncic, but I'm not so sure his game will translate as well as people think... But then again, I could be wrong.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: konkmv on December 12, 2017, 02:42:54 PM
      Are the Lakers a bottom 5 team?
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Monkhouse on December 12, 2017, 02:58:36 PM
      Are the Lakers a bottom 5 team?

      They will be by next month lol.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: SparzWizard on December 30, 2017, 07:17:03 PM
      Marvin Bagley 32 points and 21 rebounds tonight in win over FSU.

      Just a beast within.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: mr. dee on December 30, 2017, 07:36:22 PM
      Having Bagley would be a good problem to hawb if you view him as that

      Having any player picked within the top 5 is a good problem to have.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: chilidawg on December 30, 2017, 10:06:05 PM
      Are the Lakers a bottom 5 team?

      They will be by next month lol.

      Didn't take that long.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Sophomore on December 30, 2017, 11:25:01 PM
      Are the Lakers a bottom 5 team?

      They will be by next month lol.

      Didn't take that long.

      Seems like their slide in the standings coincides with Lopez going down - their one decent veteran and big. He'll most likely be back before long, at which point the Lakers will probably start winning at least a few games. Given how tightly bunched the teams are, it won't take much for them to move up - just by winning their next game they could move from 3d worst to 6th.

      For the Lakers to stay at the bottom, we'll probably need to see more signs of life from the other bottom feeders - which we kind of have, recently. Chicago, Dallas, maybe Memphis will probably look better over the second half - which would be very good news for the Cs. 

      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Sophomore on December 31, 2017, 12:02:42 AM
      Marvin Bagley 32 points and 21 rebounds tonight in win over FSU.

      Just a beast within.

      What I really, really like about him is his motor and some of his drives - some of them reminded me of Tatum, the way he used his length and body control to get under or around defenders to the rim. That kind of ability is likely going to translate.

      Today's game plan gave us a pretty limited view of his potential, though. When Duke had the ball, a lot of the time he just set up on the block waiting for an entry pass or a shot to go up. Camping out on the block alongside Carter, another lottery-level talent, set him up for rebound after rebound and plenty of putback opportunities against shorter, less athletic players. He won't be doing that in the NBA.

      I still think he should be a plus rebounder - his physical tools are better than Tatum's, and he's got miles of desire. He's probably more of a go-and-get-it guy than someone with the bulk to box out the Enes Kanters and Marcin Gortats of the world. I wouldn't count on him being a truly elite rebounder unless he really grows into it. What else he brings on offense was harder to see.  Based on a few drives, it looks like he should definitely be able to attack a closeout or get to the rim if the defense is scrambling. But can he shoot? That's the 100 million dollar question, which would open everything up. He just wasn't asked to do that today. Hopefully, if the Cs get him, he's doing the same drills as Tatum!

      Here's a weird question out of today's game - can he set a good screen and then roll?  That seems like a very teachable skill, but it may be one he'll need to develop. I didn't see anything useful develop from the few high screens he set; not sure if that's on him or the guards. Let's just say he didn't look anything like Horford or Baynes, or even Theis; defenders easily slipped every screen. Surely if Theis can do it, Bagley can learn - and I see no reason he can't be a deadly roll man.

      On defense Duke spent a lot of time in zone. He showed good energy closing out on shooters,and he seemed to recover well on p and r defense a few times they were in man; I don't remember him standing out on the defensive end, or being challenged much, but I might have missed a few plays.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Boise To Boston on January 04, 2018, 03:32:40 PM
      As of right now I see a Chris Webber "light" big man playing in a weak big man era. He should definitely still be top 5 but he isn't worth the hype.

      That's probably the best comp I've seen for Bagley.  I agree - their bodies and the way they move are eerily similary.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: saltlover on January 04, 2018, 03:56:39 PM
      As of right now I see a Chris Webber "light" big man playing in a weak big man era. He should definitely still be top 5 but he isn't worth the hype.

      That's probably the best comp I've seen for Bagley.  I agree - their bodies and the way they move are eerily similary.

      I’m not sure I agree with the Webber comp.  That said, I think C-Webb was borderline Hall of Famer if he didn’t get hurt in the prime of his career (had just turned 30 and was in the middle of a five-year All-NBA run).  And he’s the player from another era I’d most like to see in the current era of stretch bigs.

      Webber being a good Bagley comp would elevate Bagley in my eyes (he’s already 1B for me with Doncic at 1A).
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Roy H. on January 04, 2018, 04:18:08 PM
      As of right now I see a Chris Webber "light" big man playing in a weak big man era. He should definitely still be top 5 but he isn't worth the hype.

      That's probably the best comp I've seen for Bagley.  I agree - their bodies and the way they move are eerily similary.

      If Bagley is the next Chris Webber, he’s worth the hype.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Androslav on January 04, 2018, 05:08:59 PM
      As of right now I see a Chris Webber "light" big man playing in a weak big man era. He should definitely still be top 5 but he isn't worth the hype.

      That's probably the best comp I've seen for Bagley.  I agree - their bodies and the way they move are eerily similary.

      If Bagley is the next Chris Webber, he’s worth the hype.

      Definitely, Webber was such a rare talent blessed with great tools. Top 10 overall talent out of all the players drafted since him ('93.) in my eyes. He would be 1st pick in this years draft, due to such safe high floor/ceiling.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Celtics4ever on January 04, 2018, 05:45:12 PM
      Quote
      If Bagley is the next Chris Webber, he’s worth the hype.

      The little bit I have seen him reminds me of Okafor 2.0 which scares me.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: CelticsElite on January 05, 2018, 01:17:09 AM
      The more I see Bagley play the more I like him. I think his defense is better than what it shown because of coach Ks outdated defense. Tatum looked lost on defense in coach Ks system the same way
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: trickybilly on January 05, 2018, 02:48:27 AM
      Quote
      If Bagley is the next Chris Webber, he’s worth the hype.

      The little bit I have seen him reminds me of Okafor 2.0 which scares me.

      I don't mean this snarkily at all, but you really need to watch more Bagley
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: gouki88 on January 05, 2018, 04:21:10 AM
      Quote
      If Bagley is the next Chris Webber, he’s worth the hype.

      The little bit I have seen him reminds me of Okafor 2.0 which scares me.
      Not really remotely similar
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Sophomore on January 05, 2018, 12:43:18 PM
      Quote
      If Bagley is the next Chris Webber, he’s worth the hype.

      The little bit I have seen him reminds me of Okafor 2.0 which scares me.
      Not really remotely similar

      I agree - Bagley has a much lighter frame, a very high motor, very fluid.

      Not totally sold on him, but on balance I think he's worth the pick. My main worries with him are about where he slots in. He should develop into a plus defender at the 4 - he moves so well - but I wonder if he has the strength to play small-ball 5. He's great around the bucket in college, but how much of that is athleticism, where he won't have the same edge in the pros. And can he play as a true stretch four, with shooting and ability to attack closeouts. Again, I see enough to think he probably can do this- he's not a pure straight-line driver like Josh Jackson, and his shot doesn't look broken - but we're still projecting potential.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: chilidawg on January 08, 2018, 12:52:17 PM
      Quote
      If Bagley is the next Chris Webber, he’s worth the hype.

      The little bit I have seen him reminds me of Okafor 2.0 which scares me.
      Not really remotely similar

      I agree - Bagley has a much lighter frame, a very high motor, very fluid.

      Not totally sold on him, but on balance I think he's worth the pick. My main worries with him are about where he slots in. He should develop into a plus defender at the 4 - he moves so well - but I wonder if he has the strength to play small-ball 5. He's great around the bucket in college, but how much of that is athleticism, where he won't have the same edge in the pros. And can he play as a true stretch four, with shooting and ability to attack closeouts. Again, I see enough to think he probably can do this- he's not a pure straight-line driver like Josh Jackson, and his shot doesn't look broken - but we're still projecting potential.

      This is pretty much what I see as well.   Development of the perimeter skills is what I'll be watching for this year.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley Thread
      Post by: footey on January 08, 2018, 01:39:55 PM
      Sort of reminds me of a taller Josh Jackson.  In terms of his body, especially.  Worry that he doesn't have the frame to fill out.  Obviously a better prospect than Jackson, though.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley
      Post by: Tr1boy on January 08, 2018, 02:19:40 PM
      Quote
      If Bagley is the next Chris Webber, he’s worth the hype.

      The little bit I have seen him reminds me of Okafor 2.0 which scares me.
      Not really remotely similar

      I agree - Bagley has a much lighter frame, a very high motor, very fluid.

      Not totally sold on him, but on balance I think he's worth the pick. My main worries with him are about where he slots in. He should develop into a plus defender at the 4 - he moves so well - but I wonder if he has the strength to play small-ball 5. He's great around the bucket in college, but how much of that is athleticism, where he won't have the same edge in the pros. And can he play as a true stretch four, with shooting and ability to attack closeouts. Again, I see enough to think he probably can do this- he's not a pure straight-line driver like Josh Jackson, and his shot doesn't look broken - but we're still projecting potential.

      exactly

      just nothing stands out.    He could turn out to be , another Horford ...which is not a bad thing

      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley Thread
      Post by: vjcsmoke on January 12, 2018, 08:29:57 PM
      I really have not seen bagley shoot the three ball with any frequency.   It makes you question if he can play modern nba stretch 4.  Physically top tools though.   Capable of going 20/20 on any given night.

      Bagley  doesn't show amazing defensive rim protection though.  To me he is more of a taller zbo.   He will get you buckets but I'm not convinced he can be the #1 guy on a championship team.  More of a McHale light in terms of scoring but no where near the defensive disruption.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley Thread
      Post by: chilidawg on January 12, 2018, 10:18:09 PM
      I really have not seen bagley shoot the three ball with any frequency.   It makes you question if he can play modern nba stretch 4.  Physically top tools though.   Capable of going 20/20 on any given night.

      Bagley  doesn't show amazing defensive rim protection though.  To me he is more of a taller zbo.   He will get you buckets but I'm not convinced he can be the #1 guy on a championship team.  More of a McHale light in terms of scoring but no where near the defensive disruption.

      Weren't "they" saying the same thing about Tatum, re the 3 ball?  Point is you have to judge these guys on projection to what they'll be, not what they are.  Always a challenge to do that, but have to keep that in mind.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley Thread
      Post by: CelticsElite on January 13, 2018, 02:39:22 AM
      I really have not seen bagley shoot the three ball with any frequency.   It makes you question if he can play modern nba stretch 4.  Physically top tools though.   Capable of going 20/20 on any given night.

      Bagley  doesn't show amazing defensive rim protection though.  To me he is more of a taller zbo.   He will get you buckets but I'm not convinced he can be the #1 guy on a championship team.  More of a McHale light in terms of scoring but no where near the defensive disruption.

      Weren't "they" saying the same thing about Tatum, re the 3 ball?  Point is you have to judge these guys on projection to what they'll be, not what they are.  Always a challenge to do that, but have to keep that in mind.
      excellent point. Its the same with the defense . The coach k defense system make players look bad. Tatum and bagley both look worse at duke than they actually are 
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley Thread
      Post by: GreenEnvy on January 13, 2018, 03:42:36 AM
      Just let that MFing pick convey.

      I’ll be happy with the runt of the top 5. Getting to pick between 2-4 of those prosepcts would be a bonus.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley Thread
      Post by: Androslav on January 30, 2018, 06:14:58 AM
      Here is an insider article on Bagley from "Cleaning the glass".
      Originally there were video clips between paragraphs.

      When it comes to the NBA draft, “wingspan” feels like an overused term. You hear it everywhere. There’s so much focus on whether a player is long that it turned into a draft night drinking game.

      But there’s a reason for all of that focus: because it matters. Perhaps to a degree we still haven’t fully realized. If we look at the 200+ players who measured at least 6-feet 9-inches barefoot at the Draft Combine in the last 16 years, there are 12 players who made the All-Star team at least once. If we sort this group by the ratio of their wingspan to their height, we find something startling.

      Of the 50 players with the longest wingspans relative to their height we find 8 of those All-Stars: Andre Drummond, Anthony Davis, DeMarcus Cousins, DeAndre Jordan, Kevin Durant, Dwight Howard, LaMarcus Aldridge, and Brook Lopez. (Plus six more players who have started the majority of their career games played: Hassan Whiteside, Rudy Gobert, Nene, Brendan Haywood, Myles Turner, and Nikola Vucevic.)

      Of the 50 players with the shortest wingspans relative to their height we find one All-Star (Chris Kaman) and three other players who started the majority of their career games (Mason Plumlee, Cody Zeller, and Troy Murphy).

      Think about that. All we know about these players is their height, the length of their arms, and that they were good enough to be measured at the Draft Combine. We don’t know how well they played in the past. We don’t know how high they can jump, or how quickly they can move. We don’t know whether they can shoot, whether they can dribble, whether they can think the game, whether they have off court issues, whether they have medical red flags. Yet with one simple rule we can pretty effectively find the ones who ended up All-Stars.

      What does this have to do with Marvin Bagley III? Well, certainly not everything. But something.
      5 seconds that sum up the potential of Marvin Bagley III:

      A 6-11 power forward comes out high and slides easily defending the pick-and-roll, recovers quickly to his man, swims around the post up to get the steal, then gets out in transition, handling the ball with speed and ease, takes off from more than halfway up the paint, and hangs in the air a beat longer than should be physically possible to slam it home with two hands. Whew.

      All of the players projected to go at the top of the draft have special qualities: Doncic’s skill and smarts, Ayton’s power and agility, Bamba’s length. For Bagley it’s the easy athleticism demonstrated in that clip. He’s nimble, smooth, fluid, quick, and explosive.

      Watch how high off the floor Bagley gets on some of these finishes, and how quickly he achieves that height:

      Watch how quickly he jumps multiple times on this rebound (for context, watch the players around him)

      Watch how he elevates on his hook shots. This level of elevation is not normal. On this hook he almost has to shoot it down into the rim from his release point:

      But Bagley isn’t just a raw athlete. He also has great touch around the rim, with floaters, shots from odd angles off the glass, and the ability to get attempts to drop even after contorting his body through traffic:

      That’s why Bagley has converted an absurd 75% of his shots at the rim so far this year, according to Synergy Sports, a FG% that ranks 9th out of the 272 players in Division I who have attempted more than 75 such shots.

      At Duke most of Bagley’s offense has come either out of post ups and isolations or playing off of rebounds and transition. Notably, Bagley has only taken 17 shots rolling out of the pick-and-roll all season. That has led some to wonder if he is a member of a dying breed, a post up big man in an NBA era when the post up has never been less important.

      But following the rookie season of another ACC double-double machine is instructive: John Collins went from getting 46% of his offense through post ups in his last season at Wake Forest, with only one shot per game as a roller out of the pick-and-roll, to 26% of his offense coming as a roll man with the Atlanta Hawks so far this year (and only 13 shots out of the post all season).

      Collins’ college post game told us more than that he could post up. The footwork, athleticism, and touch that Collins displayed in the post are clear in how he scores in the NBA now:

      The same is likely true of Bagley, which we’ve already caught glimpses of:

      Bagley seems like the type of player where you glance up at the scoreboard near the end of the fourth quarter and think: “wait, when did he get 20 points?” Efficient scoring out of transition, putbacks, rolling to the rim, and playing off the pass isn’t as easily noticed, but it adds up.

      To develop into a go-to scorer, though — a player where every one of his 20 points is noticed, a player who defenses have to scheme for, who can create efficient shots both for himself and his teammates — will require growth. Bagley has made some nice passes:

      But he doesn’t seem like a natural passer. His instinct is to go to the rim and do what he can to score there, not to draw the defense and find the open man.

      Beyond passing, to really put defenses on edge Bagley will need to score outside of the paint. And that is one of two huge questions that surround Bagley and will go a long way toward determining his value. His stroke doesn’t look bad.

      But only about 15% of his field goal attempts have been from beyond the arc so far this season, and he’s made just 14 of those 42 tries. Additionally, Bagley has hit just 63% of his 147 free throw attempts, and past studies have found that free throw percentage is a valuable source of information for predicting a player’s NBA three point shooting. That’s been true prior to his time at Duke as well: according to MaxPreps, in 29 games in high school Bagley made 29% of 49 attempts from three and hit 67% of his 169 free throws. So even if Bagley were to catch fire and hit a high rate through the end of the year, we’d still be right to be suspicious of his long-range accuracy.

      We don’t even have to look much further than the last few years at Duke for good examples of this. Both Brandon Ingram and Justise Winslow hit over 40% of their threes in college while attempting many more than Bagley is on pace for. But both had free throw percentages in the mid-to-high 60s, and sure enough both have struggled from beyond the line early in their careers. Ingram hasn’t even attempted many threes this season and has made just 30% of his career hoists, and Winslow is in a similar boat. How they develop as their careers continue is of course an open question, but they do illustrate the principle that a player with numbers like Bagley is one that we can’t count on to be able to hit a high rate of threes early in his career.

      Which brings us to the second question: how good of a defender can Bagley be? If Bagley could play center, the shot is a moot point — or a bonus if he develops it. He could dive out of every screen and put enormous pressure on the rim with elite finishing. The only measurements I could find for Bagley put him at 6 foot, 9.5 inches without shoes at the age of 15. Even if he hasn’t grown since then, that’s taller than Anthony Davis, Dwight Howard, Nene, and Larry Sanders measured at the Draft Combine, the same height as DeMarcus Cousins, and in the range of Myles Turner, DeAndre Jordan, and Andre Drummond (who all measured at 6-9.75 barefoot). So he certainly seems tall enough to man the middle in the NBA.

      But playing center is about more than height, of course. It’s about using that height to defend the rim and rebound, and that’s where we should have real concerns. If you’ve heard much about Bagley, you know that defense is the main blemish on his resume, and for good reason: there are many examples of plays you’d want someone with his size and athleticism to make that he just doesn’t.

      It may be useful to look at Bagley’s defense through the “can’t/won’t/doesn’t know how” lens I laid out in Making the Transition:

      I like to divide players’ defensive issues into three categories: “can’t”, “won’t”, and “doesn’t know how”. Some players are negatives defensively due to physical limitations: they might be too small or have short arms or limited quickness. That’s “can’t”. Some players hurt their teams because they just won’t defend: they don’t care enough about that end of the floor or don’t want to deal with the physicality or aren’t in good enough shape. And some players simply don’t have the habits and knowledge to be in the proper spots, to anticipate, to execute.

      This framework is helpful because some of these limitations are more changeable than others. A team can’t get a player’s arms to grow. A head coach might be able to impact how much a player cares by emphasizing defense more, and allotting playing time based on performance at that end of the floor, though this doesn’t always work. But a coaching staff at least has a good chance of creating habits through film and practice.

      There’s a lot of “doesn’t know how” in what we see with Bagley. Mistakes like this, where he shows a lack of awareness or technique:

      But while these are bad plays, Bagley needs to be graded on a curve: he’s a freshman learning the intricacies of complex pick-and-roll defense. Relative to his peers, these mistakes aren’t especially glaring, and there seems to be evidence of improvement as the season has gone on. Growth is possible, and even expected — that’s why “doesn’t know how” is the least [dang]ing of the three categories.

      Bagley’s defensive effort also appears fairly strong, so there’s not a ton of “won’t”. It’s hard to find plays in the halfcourt where he appears lazy or uncaring. His transition defense, though, leaves a lot to be desired:

      He can run when he needs to, as he shows on the next possession
      But he often will pause for a second or two before changing directions, and this has burned his team
      This is a habit that will need to be broken. And that’s possible — his effort and improvement defensively in other areas gives one hope — but it’s far from a given.

      The biggest concern with Bagley’s defensive struggles, though, is that they might fall mostly in the “can’t” bucket. And that’s where the discussion of wingspan comes in. That list of centers who were the same height as Bagley? Every single one of them measured with a wingspan of at least 7-feet 4-inches. 15-year-old Marvin Bagley measured at 7-foot flat. Even if he’s grown since then, Bagley’s reach doesn’t approach that of most centers, and, as we saw, those few inches really matter.

      Bagley has blocked 3% of opponent two attempts so far this season, but it’s not necessarily because of poor positioning or lack of effort. Sometimes it’s just about those extra few inches that make the difference between a block and a whiff:

      NBA players who had a similar block rate in college include: Zach Randolph, DeJuan Blair, Carl Landry, Blake Griffin, David Lee, Jared Sullinger, David West, and Jabari Parker. That is not an encouraging list, and points very strongly toward the idea that Bagley cannot provide adequate rim protection at center. It’s possible Bagley could develop his basketball IQ to the point that he could use his lateral and vertical quickness to hold his own, but there’s not much evidence of that right now.

      So that’s where we’re caught. Because of the defensive limitations, it feels like Bagley is a stone-cold PF. But without a legitimate three point shot or paired with a rim protecting center who can shoot (a rare breed), that’s a recipe for cramped spacing on offense.

      It comes down to this, then: a bet on Bagley is a bet on his shot or his mind.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley Thread
      Post by: chilidawg on January 31, 2018, 09:03:12 AM
      Thanks for posting that.  I agree that a bet on Bagley is a bet that he'll develop an outside shot.  His shot looks good to me, so I'd make that bet.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley Thread
      Post by: vjcsmoke on May 10, 2018, 05:41:16 AM
      A lineup of Irving, Brown, Tatum, Bagley, and Horford could be mouthwatering.  Bagley's rebounding makes up for Horfords lack thereof.  And Horford's rim protection makes up for Bagley's weakness in that area.  Not to mention Bagley is quite an explosive athlete at the 4.  The Celtics would be playing above the rim a LOT with that lineup!

      Also having 3 Duke players in Irving, Tatum, and Bagley on one NBA team has probably never been done.

      Just a thought exercise for now.  The Lakers need to move into the top 5 of the draft without winning the lottery for this to even be possible.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley Thread
      Post by: Androslav on June 05, 2018, 04:39:30 AM
      Here is a prediction:

      Any GM that takes Bagley before Dončić in this draft will be fired before their rook deals are up.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley Thread
      Post by: DefenseWinsChamps on June 05, 2018, 09:33:53 AM
      For me, it's

      1. Doncic
      2. Bagley
      3. Ayton
      4. Bamba
      5. Jackson

      Bagley is one of those prospects who did everything anyone asked of him, but he came in the season with such hype that now everyone nitpicks his game.

      Somehow, different narratives formed around him that have prevented him from being at the top of this year's draft. Here are my responses:

      1. He doesn't have elite length. The truth is, he has great length, but he doesn't have Bamba/Ayton length. His length is comparable to Horford and Love.
      2. He isn't a great shooter. The truth is, he shot 40% from three at Duke this season.
      3. He isn't a great defender. The truth is, while he doesn't have the gaudy block numbers other prospects have, he plays good position defense. He is every bit as versatile of a defender as Jackson, without the block numbers inside.
      4. He is too left-hand dominate. The truth is, no one says that about right-handed players at a similar stage of development, but it is more noticeable when the player is left-handed. He has an elite knack for finishing in a variety of different angles with his left-hand. Any player with that kind of feel will be successful at the next level.
      5. He is not a great passer. The truth is, I've watched enough of him this year to know that he makes advanced reads on the opposing defense. He isn't fully developed, but the raw ability is definitely there. The problem was that Duke struggled to capitalize due to their poor outside shooting.

      Bagley is a full 8 months younger than Ayton, has a higher free throw rate than any player in the top 10 (including Ayton), and did all of this stuck on a Duke team that had terrible spacing issues.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley Thread
      Post by: Csfan1984 on June 05, 2018, 09:36:45 AM
      Here is a prediction:

      Any GM that takes Bagley before Dončić in this draft will be fired before their rook deals are up.
      What if he slides to 6? Would that excempt a gm if more of them passed on him?

      One could argue upside or need for Ayton, Bamba, Porter, Jackson and Bagley
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley Thread
      Post by: gouki88 on June 05, 2018, 09:39:32 AM
      For me, it's

      1. Doncic
      2. Bagley
      3. Ayton
      4. Bamba
      5. Jackson

      Bagley is one of those prospects who did everything anyone asked of him, but he came in the season with such hype that now everyone nitpicks his game.

      Somehow, different narratives formed around him that have prevented him from being at the top of this year's draft. Here are my responses:

      1. He doesn't have elite length. The truth is, he has great length, but he doesn't have Bamba/Ayton length. His length is comparable to Horford and Love.
      2. He isn't a great shooter. The truth is, he shot 40% from three at Duke this season.
      3. He isn't a great defender. The truth is, while he doesn't have the gaudy block numbers other prospects have, he plays good position defense. He is every bit as versatile of a defender as Jackson, without the block numbers inside.
      4. He is too left-hand dominate. The truth is, no one says that about right-handed players at a similar stage of development, but it is more noticeable when the player is left-handed. He has an elite knack for finishing in a variety of different angles with his left-hand. Any player with that kind of feel will be successful at the next level.
      5. He is not a great passer. The truth is, I've watched enough of him this year to know that he makes advanced reads on the opposing defense. He isn't fully developed, but the raw ability is definitely there. The problem was that Duke struggled to capitalize due to their poor outside shooting.

      Bagley is a full 8 months younger than Ayton, has a higher free throw rate than any player in the top 10 (including Ayton), and did all of this stuck on a Duke team that had terrible spacing issues.
      Especially good point regarding the left hand dominance vs right handed players where it's never mentioned. Only ever brought up because it looks weird to most people, as the vast majority of players are right handed.

      Do you think he's strong enough to play the 5 off the bat, or would he take a year or two to get there?

      I agree with your rankings too.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley Thread
      Post by: DefenseWinsChamps on June 05, 2018, 10:05:31 AM
      For me, it's

      1. Doncic
      2. Bagley
      3. Ayton
      4. Bamba
      5. Jackson

      Bagley is one of those prospects who did everything anyone asked of him, but he came in the season with such hype that now everyone nitpicks his game.

      Somehow, different narratives formed around him that have prevented him from being at the top of this year's draft. Here are my responses:

      1. He doesn't have elite length. The truth is, he has great length, but he doesn't have Bamba/Ayton length. His length is comparable to Horford and Love.
      2. He isn't a great shooter. The truth is, he shot 40% from three at Duke this season.
      3. He isn't a great defender. The truth is, while he doesn't have the gaudy block numbers other prospects have, he plays good position defense. He is every bit as versatile of a defender as Jackson, without the block numbers inside.
      4. He is too left-hand dominate. The truth is, no one says that about right-handed players at a similar stage of development, but it is more noticeable when the player is left-handed. He has an elite knack for finishing in a variety of different angles with his left-hand. Any player with that kind of feel will be successful at the next level.
      5. He is not a great passer. The truth is, I've watched enough of him this year to know that he makes advanced reads on the opposing defense. He isn't fully developed, but the raw ability is definitely there. The problem was that Duke struggled to capitalize due to their poor outside shooting.

      Bagley is a full 8 months younger than Ayton, has a higher free throw rate than any player in the top 10 (including Ayton), and did all of this stuck on a Duke team that had terrible spacing issues.
      Especially good point regarding the left hand dominance vs right handed players where it's never mentioned. Only ever brought up because it looks weird to most people, as the vast majority of players are right handed.

      Do you think he's strong enough to play the 5 off the bat, or would he take a year or two to get there?

      I agree with your rankings too.

      I think the question of "Is he strong enough to play the 5 off the bat" is a bit antiquated (not trying to offend). In other words, I think he will be fine. Any center big enough to bully him down low will also have to defend him in space (he is pretty quick) and close out to his 3s.

      I think Bagley could provide the rim-diving vertical threat option the Cs haven't really had under CBS, but Bagley is not just a rim-diver. He is an extremely skilled and high IQ basketball player.

      The bigger question about his defense is his positioning. Even the best defensive prospects struggle with rotations early on, especially big men. The college game is so different than the NBA game in defensive rotations. He will likely struggle with that, but so will Ayton, Jackson, and Bamba. If he can switch and force guards and wings into long 2s without fouling, he will be able to stay on the court.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley Thread
      Post by: gouki88 on June 05, 2018, 10:20:46 AM
      For me, it's

      1. Doncic
      2. Bagley
      3. Ayton
      4. Bamba
      5. Jackson

      Bagley is one of those prospects who did everything anyone asked of him, but he came in the season with such hype that now everyone nitpicks his game.

      Somehow, different narratives formed around him that have prevented him from being at the top of this year's draft. Here are my responses:

      1. He doesn't have elite length. The truth is, he has great length, but he doesn't have Bamba/Ayton length. His length is comparable to Horford and Love.
      2. He isn't a great shooter. The truth is, he shot 40% from three at Duke this season.
      3. He isn't a great defender. The truth is, while he doesn't have the gaudy block numbers other prospects have, he plays good position defense. He is every bit as versatile of a defender as Jackson, without the block numbers inside.
      4. He is too left-hand dominate. The truth is, no one says that about right-handed players at a similar stage of development, but it is more noticeable when the player is left-handed. He has an elite knack for finishing in a variety of different angles with his left-hand. Any player with that kind of feel will be successful at the next level.
      5. He is not a great passer. The truth is, I've watched enough of him this year to know that he makes advanced reads on the opposing defense. He isn't fully developed, but the raw ability is definitely there. The problem was that Duke struggled to capitalize due to their poor outside shooting.

      Bagley is a full 8 months younger than Ayton, has a higher free throw rate than any player in the top 10 (including Ayton), and did all of this stuck on a Duke team that had terrible spacing issues.
      Especially good point regarding the left hand dominance vs right handed players where it's never mentioned. Only ever brought up because it looks weird to most people, as the vast majority of players are right handed.

      Do you think he's strong enough to play the 5 off the bat, or would he take a year or two to get there?

      I agree with your rankings too.

      I think the question of "Is he strong enough to play the 5 off the bat" is a bit antiquated (not trying to offend). In other words, I think he will be fine. Any center big enough to bully him down low will also have to defend him in space (he is pretty quick) and close out to his 3s.

      I think Bagley could provide the rim-diving vertical threat option the Cs haven't really had under CBS, but Bagley is not just a rim-diver. He is an extremely skilled and high IQ basketball player.

      The bigger question about his defense is his positioning. Even the best defensive prospects struggle with rotations early on, especially big men. The college game is so different than the NBA game in defensive rotations. He will likely struggle with that, but so will Ayton, Jackson, and Bamba. If he can switch and force guards and wings into long 2s without fouling, he will be able to stay on the court.
      No offence taken at all! The more I think about it, the more I'm coming around to Bagley. Pre-2017 draft I thought Tatum was a bit too unathletic, and he has proven me wrong countless times. I'm not saying he and Bagley are the same, but some of the general notes on them are similar.

      I reckon on the offensive end the main thing he should focus on is free throws, which should come pretty easily. His form is solid, and as you mentioned gets to the line with ease, so that shouldn't be a problem.

      If he can learn anything about defending the perimeter from Al he could be a frightening presence. If we could nab him while keeping Kyrie, JB, Gordon and JT together I'd be beyond ecstatic. Don't see it as likely, but DA does many things I never see coming
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley Thread
      Post by: td450 on June 05, 2018, 10:45:03 AM
      For me, it's

      1. Doncic
      2. Bagley
      3. Ayton
      4. Bamba
      5. Jackson

      Bagley is one of those prospects who did everything anyone asked of him, but he came in the season with such hype that now everyone nitpicks his game.

      Somehow, different narratives formed around him that have prevented him from being at the top of this year's draft. Here are my responses:

      1. He doesn't have elite length. The truth is, he has great length, but he doesn't have Bamba/Ayton length. His length is comparable to Horford and Love.
      2. He isn't a great shooter. The truth is, he shot 40% from three at Duke this season.
      3. He isn't a great defender. The truth is, while he doesn't have the gaudy block numbers other prospects have, he plays good position defense. He is every bit as versatile of a defender as Jackson, without the block numbers inside.
      4. He is too left-hand dominate. The truth is, no one says that about right-handed players at a similar stage of development, but it is more noticeable when the player is left-handed. He has an elite knack for finishing in a variety of different angles with his left-hand. Any player with that kind of feel will be successful at the next level.
      5. He is not a great passer. The truth is, I've watched enough of him this year to know that he makes advanced reads on the opposing defense. He isn't fully developed, but the raw ability is definitely there. The problem was that Duke struggled to capitalize due to their poor outside shooting.

      Bagley is a full 8 months younger than Ayton, has a higher free throw rate than any player in the top 10 (including Ayton), and did all of this stuck on a Duke team that had terrible spacing issues.

      I agree with some of your points. Bagley's length is not an issue, because he makes up for it with super quick hops. He's going to score like crazy in the NBA.

      However, saying he is every bit as versatile a defender as Jackson? Bagley is not a plus defender right now, and Jackson is easily the best big defender in this draft.

      He's really young and athletic, but he does not have a body that is likely to fill out much. The danger with drafting him is that he becomes a scorer, but doesn't make his team much better.

      Several of the bigs in this draft have spectacular talent in one area, but also have major flaws. Its a tough group to evaluate. That's why I prefer Carter. He may not quite have the upside some of these guys have but he's the safest bet by a significant margin, and will likely be the easiest one to get.





      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley Thread
      Post by: Monkhouse on June 05, 2018, 11:00:19 AM
      For me, it's

      1. Doncic
      2. Bagley
      3. Ayton
      4. Bamba
      5. Jackson

      Bagley is one of those prospects who did everything anyone asked of him, but he came in the season with such hype that now everyone nitpicks his game.

      Somehow, different narratives formed around him that have prevented him from being at the top of this year's draft. Here are my responses:

      1. He doesn't have elite length. The truth is, he has great length, but he doesn't have Bamba/Ayton length. His length is comparable to Horford and Love.
      2. He isn't a great shooter. The truth is, he shot 40% from three at Duke this season.
      3. He isn't a great defender. The truth is, while he doesn't have the gaudy block numbers other prospects have, he plays good position defense. He is every bit as versatile of a defender as Jackson, without the block numbers inside.
      4. He is too left-hand dominate. The truth is, no one says that about right-handed players at a similar stage of development, but it is more noticeable when the player is left-handed. He has an elite knack for finishing in a variety of different angles with his left-hand. Any player with that kind of feel will be successful at the next level.
      5. He is not a great passer. The truth is, I've watched enough of him this year to know that he makes advanced reads on the opposing defense. He isn't fully developed, but the raw ability is definitely there. The problem was that Duke struggled to capitalize due to their poor outside shooting.

      Bagley is a full 8 months younger than Ayton, has a higher free throw rate than any player in the top 10 (including Ayton), and did all of this stuck on a Duke team that had terrible spacing issues.

      TP.

      People talk about Bagley's wingspan, but his motor is 100x better than Ayton's. I think Ayton is one of the most overrated prospect we have seen. And I'll gladly eat crow, but I don't see his potential or ceiling anymore than a less enthused, and no defense playing lite version of DMC.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley Thread
      Post by: DefenseWinsChamps on June 05, 2018, 12:23:11 PM
      For me, it's

      1. Doncic
      2. Bagley
      3. Ayton
      4. Bamba
      5. Jackson

      Bagley is one of those prospects who did everything anyone asked of him, but he came in the season with such hype that now everyone nitpicks his game.

      Somehow, different narratives formed around him that have prevented him from being at the top of this year's draft. Here are my responses:

      1. He doesn't have elite length. The truth is, he has great length, but he doesn't have Bamba/Ayton length. His length is comparable to Horford and Love.
      2. He isn't a great shooter. The truth is, he shot 40% from three at Duke this season.
      3. He isn't a great defender. The truth is, while he doesn't have the gaudy block numbers other prospects have, he plays good position defense. He is every bit as versatile of a defender as Jackson, without the block numbers inside.
      4. He is too left-hand dominate. The truth is, no one says that about right-handed players at a similar stage of development, but it is more noticeable when the player is left-handed. He has an elite knack for finishing in a variety of different angles with his left-hand. Any player with that kind of feel will be successful at the next level.
      5. He is not a great passer. The truth is, I've watched enough of him this year to know that he makes advanced reads on the opposing defense. He isn't fully developed, but the raw ability is definitely there. The problem was that Duke struggled to capitalize due to their poor outside shooting.

      Bagley is a full 8 months younger than Ayton, has a higher free throw rate than any player in the top 10 (including Ayton), and did all of this stuck on a Duke team that had terrible spacing issues.

      I agree with some of your points. Bagley's length is not an issue, because he makes up for it with super quick hops. He's going to score like crazy in the NBA.

      However, saying he is every bit as versatile a defender as Jackson? Bagley is not a plus defender right now, and Jackson is easily the best big defender in this draft.

      He's really young and athletic, but he does not have a body that is likely to fill out much. The danger with drafting him is that he becomes a scorer, but doesn't make his team much better.

      Several of the bigs in this draft have spectacular talent in one area, but also have major flaws. Its a tough group to evaluate. That's why I prefer Carter. He may not quite have the upside some of these guys have but he's the safest bet by a significant margin, and will likely be the easiest one to get.

      Good thoughts.

      Bagley showed he can defend the perimeter and inside. I think Jackson will be a good defender, but as far as the versatility to defend multiple position, I haven't seen a difference in their game.

      I've also heard the narrative that he doesn't have a body that will fill out. I just disagree with this. He may not have wide shoulders, but to think that he can't add 15-25 pounds to his core, base, and shoulders -- i just don't agree. Add that much, and he is around 240, which is the normal playing weight for a lot of athletic centers. He won't be Dwight Howard, but I don't think weight or strength will be an issue.

      As far as the scoring thing goes -- I get it. CBS has a way of leveraging talent into wins. Bagley has talent. I don't think he would be an empty stats guy with a good coach.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley Thread
      Post by: liam on June 05, 2018, 12:52:17 PM
      For me, it's

      1. Doncic
      2. Bagley
      3. Ayton
      4. Bamba
      5. Jackson

      Bagley is one of those prospects who did everything anyone asked of him, but he came in the season with such hype that now everyone nitpicks his game.

      Somehow, different narratives formed around him that have prevented him from being at the top of this year's draft. Here are my responses:

      1. He doesn't have elite length. The truth is, he has great length, but he doesn't have Bamba/Ayton length. His length is comparable to Horford and Love.
      2. He isn't a great shooter. The truth is, he shot 40% from three at Duke this season.
      3. He isn't a great defender. The truth is, while he doesn't have the gaudy block numbers other prospects have, he plays good position defense. He is every bit as versatile of a defender as Jackson, without the block numbers inside.
      4. He is too left-hand dominate. The truth is, no one says that about right-handed players at a similar stage of development, but it is more noticeable when the player is left-handed. He has an elite knack for finishing in a variety of different angles with his left-hand. Any player with that kind of feel will be successful at the next level.
      5. He is not a great passer. The truth is, I've watched enough of him this year to know that he makes advanced reads on the opposing defense. He isn't fully developed, but the raw ability is definitely there. The problem was that Duke struggled to capitalize due to their poor outside shooting.

      Bagley is a full 8 months younger than Ayton, has a higher free throw rate than any player in the top 10 (including Ayton), and did all of this stuck on a Duke team that had terrible spacing issues.

      TP.

      People talk about Bagley's wingspan, but his motor is 100x better than Ayton's. I think Ayton is one of the most overrated prospect we have seen. And I'll gladly eat crow, but I don't see his potential or ceiling anymore than a less enthused, and no defense playing lite version of DMC.

      Ayton looks like he should be dominant on both ends but seems to only want to play the one side. The Days of the offense only big man is over. You can't win with those guys.
      Title: Re: Marvin Bagley Thread
      Post by: DefenseWinsChamps on June 08, 2018, 07:58:28 PM
      For me, it's

      1. Doncic
      2. Bagley
      3. Ayton
      4. Bamba
      5. Jackson

      Bagley is one of those prospects who did everything anyone asked of him, but he came in the season with such hype that now everyone nitpicks his game.

      Somehow, different narratives formed around him that have prevented him from being at the top of this year's draft. Here are my responses:

      1. He doesn't have elite length. The truth is, he has great length, but he doesn't have Bamba/Ayton length. His length is comparable to Horford and Love.
      2. He isn't a great shooter. The truth is, he shot 40% from three at Duke this season.
      3. He isn't a great defender. The truth is, while he doesn't have the gaudy block numbers other prospects have, he plays good position defense. He is every bit as versatile of a defender as Jackson, without the block numbers inside.
      4. He is too left-hand dominate. The truth is, no one says that about right-handed players at a similar stage of development, but it is more noticeable when the player is left-handed. He has an elite knack for finishing in a variety of different angles with his left-hand. Any player with that kind of feel will be successful at the next level.
      5. He is not a great passer. The truth is, I've watched enough of him this year to know that he makes advanced reads on the opposing defense. He isn't fully developed, but the raw ability is definitely there. The problem was that Duke struggled to capitalize due to their poor outside shooting.

      Bagley is a full 8 months younger than Ayton, has a higher free throw rate than any player in the top 10 (including Ayton), and did all of this stuck on a Duke team that had terrible spacing issues.

      About his length, I'm gonna add a few thoughts. He has better or comparable wingspan (with similar or greater height) than Horford, Griffin, Gordon, Anthony, Randle, Kuzma, Markannen, Saric, Portis, Morris, Olynyk, Kaminsky, Johnson, Collins, and Lyles. That's 15 of the top 30 scoring power forwards this year in the NBA. He also has better or comparable wingspan than Love, Kanter, Sabonis, Powell, Plumlee, or Zeller. That's 6 of the top 32 scoring centers this last year.

      It's not that wingpsan doesn't matter -- it definitely helps. It's just that it is pretty overblown. What matters is feel and skill. Bagley has both, and I'd suggest he has more than any other big man prospect in this draft.