SI Video on Bender

[DefenseWinsChamps]

The list of playoff power forwards from earlier in this thread, both starters and backups, would beg to differ with your assessment. It's not just about Green. It's about the entire NBA.

The list of power forwards you provided is as follows:

Love? Frye? Green? Barnes? Patterson? Carroll? Ibaka? Deng? Williams? C Zeller? Dirk? Harris? George?

Love and  Ibaka (and even Dirk) have more inside than outside skills. Zeller and George didn't play PF except in spot minutes. Guys like Frye, Harris, Carroll, Williams, and Deng are simply mediocre/bit players. I'm not sure what this list is indicative of, except that the best PFs from the lot are competent inside players.

I think you are shading things to make your point. Offensive, they are mostly around the 3 point line. They can do other things, but the vast majority of their game is outside.

This is the list of the power forwards on the teams in the NBA. It shows us that that position on successful teams is a position of versatility, shooting, and play-making, not primarily inside banging.

[fubar089]

I wouldn't have the stones to take him @ 3 if I was Ainge that's for sure.

[Eddie20]

I don't dismiss them. I'm trying to redefine what it means to be a successful power forward according to the modern NBA. In the past, banging and rebounding were the necessary qualities for a successful power forward, and shooting was a nice secondary skill. Every playoff team had bangers for power forwards, and if you had a soft, stretch four, it was a major liability.

Today, it is exactly opposite. The primary power forward skills necessary to be successful in the NBA are shooting, distributing, and defensive versatility. Secondary skills are post defense and rebounding. In today's NBA, teams like the Nets, Clippers, Jazz, Grizzles, Nuggets, Bucks, and Sixers (Wizards too until they traded for Morris) are considered fundamentally flawed if they have bangers with little or no perimeter skills. The Spurs (and to a lesser extent Clippers) prove that it is possible to still be successful in that brand of basketball, but you must have elite players, or outliers at their position.

Successful basketball is not a static thing. It is ever-changing. If we don't evaluate players based on their potential for success in the modern NBA (rather than doing it the "right way" like how old school guys think modern basketball isn't true basketball), then we are building a fundamentally flawed team.

Bender has the primary abilities to be successful as a modern 4 and has shown some ability (and tons of potential) to be successful in the secondary abilities.

That's an awful lot of words just to imply that because Draymond Green exists, everyone should be starting a Draymond Green.

I have already conceded that you need to be able to do something with the ball outside of 15 feet to be a successful PF. However, there's no way that a PF that has mediocre rebounding and post defense won't be considered just as fundamentally flawed. Heck, even most PFs that lack inside scoring game typically are viewed as limited.

Bender's post D is only going to get better as his body matures. Unless you're implying that there is some sort of technical flaw in his post D that will prevent him from ever being solid. Regardless, who cares about post D from your PF anyways? Can you actually name exactly how many PF's nowadays make you shiver with the thought of stopping them in the post?

Your argument for not picking Bender is really backwards thinking on how the game used to be played.  Not to mention you failing to acknowledge that as his 18 year old body matures and he gets into a proper strength and conditioning regimen his body/game will only get better. The game has changed and you need to stop looking in the rearview because Bender's style doesn't fit your preconceived notion of what a PF should play like.

[kozlodoev]

Bender's post D is only going to get better as his body matures. 

I'm implying that everyone seems to take this for granted, and it isn't.

date=1466030944]Unless you're implying that there is some sort of technical flaw in his post D that will prevent him from ever being effective solid. Regardless, who cares about post D from your PF anyways? Can you actually name exactly how many PF's nowadays make you shiver with the thought of stopping them in the post?

"Post D" doesn't just mean posting up. It includes defensive adjustments, closing space, challenging shots, cleaning up the glass, and not being taken out of plays by guys your size. There's a reason why teams won't just field 2 SFs.

Your argument for not picking Bender is really backwards thinking on how the game used to be played.  Not to mention you failing to acknowledge that as his 18 year old body matures and he gets into a proper strength and conditioning regimen his body/game will only get better. The game has changed and you need to stop looking in the rearview because Bender's style doesn't fit your preconceived notion of what a PF should play like.

I get it, we're all reactionary idiots here who fail to see how Dragan Bender will redefine the NBA. Well, either that, or he will be Andrea Bargnani, the hardcover second edition.

[ChillyWilly]

That's it...I'm off the Brown wagon and back on the Bender train!!   

I'll take 1 first class seat please!

[Eddie20]

Bender's post D is only going to get better as his body matures. 

I'm implying that everyone seems to take this for granted, and it isn't.

date=1466030944]Unless you're implying that there is some sort of technical flaw in his post D that will prevent him from ever being effective solid. Regardless, who cares about post D from your PF anyways? Can you actually name exactly how many PF's nowadays make you shiver with the thought of stopping them in the post?

"Post D" doesn't just mean posting up. It includes defensive adjustments, closing space, challenging shots, cleaning up the glass, and not being taken out of plays by guys your size. There's a reason why teams won't just field 2 SFs.

Your argument for not picking Bender is really backwards thinking on how the game used to be played.  Not to mention you failing to acknowledge that as his 18 year old body matures and he gets into a proper strength and conditioning regimen his body/game will only get better. The game has changed and you need to stop looking in the rearview because Bender's doesn't fit your preconceived notion of what a PF should play like.

I get it, we're all reactionary idiots here who fail to see how Dragan Bender will redefine the NBA. Well, either that, or he will be Andrea Bargnani, the hardcover second edition.

But the ironic thing about your claims is that Bender's strength IS his D. So your Bargnani comparison, along with you questioning his rotations, closing out, providing help D, etc. holds absolutely no weight.  It's this international stereotype that you're trying to pass on because offensively he's a perimeter based player. That does not mean that he's a defensive liability. The two aren't mutually exclusive despite him being European.

[kozlodoev]

The list of playoff power forwards from earlier in this thread, both starters and backups, would beg to differ with your assessment. It's not just about Green. It's about the entire NBA.

The list of power forwards you provided is as follows:

Love? Frye? Green? Barnes? Patterson? Carroll? Ibaka? Deng? Williams? C Zeller? Dirk? Harris? George?

Love and  Ibaka (and even Dirk) have more inside than outside skills. Zeller and George didn't play PF except in spot minutes. Guys like Frye, Harris, Carroll, Williams, and Deng are simply mediocre/bit players. I'm not sure what this list is indicative of, except that the best PFs from the lot are competent inside players.

I think you are shading things to make your point. Offensive, they are mostly around the 3 point line. They can do other things, but the vast majority of their game is outside.

This is the list of the power forwards on the teams in the NBA. It shows us that that position on successful teams is a position of versatility, shooting, and play-making, not primarily inside banging.

As I mentioned, the list of power forwards includes a good amount of bit NBA players. The full-time NBA PFs are a lot more like LaMarcus Aldridge (full-time bigs with extra skills and athleticism) and a lot less like Luol Deng (SF with size).

Here's another list, the starting PFs of the top 5 regular season teams on each side:
Draymond Green, LaMarcus Aldridge, Serge Ibaka, Blake Griffin, Noah Vonleh.
Kevin Love, Luis Scola, Luol Deng, Paul Millsap, Amir Johnson.

[kozlodoev]

Bender's post D is only going to get better as his body matures. 

I'm implying that everyone seems to take this for granted, and it isn't.

date=1466030944]Unless you're implying that there is some sort of technical flaw in his post D that will prevent him from ever being effective solid. Regardless, who cares about post D from your PF anyways? Can you actually name exactly how many PF's nowadays make you shiver with the thought of stopping them in the post?

"Post D" doesn't just mean posting up. It includes defensive adjustments, closing space, challenging shots, cleaning up the glass, and not being taken out of plays by guys your size. There's a reason why teams won't just field 2 SFs.

Your argument for not picking Bender is really backwards thinking on how the game used to be played.  Not to mention you failing to acknowledge that as his 18 year old body matures and he gets into a proper strength and conditioning regimen his body/game will only get better. The game has changed and you need to stop looking in the rearview because Bender's doesn't fit your preconceived notion of what a PF should play like.

I get it, we're all reactionary idiots here who fail to see how Dragan Bender will redefine the NBA. Well, either that, or he will be Andrea Bargnani, the hardcover second edition.

But the ironic thing about your claims is that Bender's strength IS his D. So your Bargnani comparison, along with you questioning his rotations, closing out, providing help D, etc. holds absolutely no weight.  It's this international stereotype that you're trying to pass on because offensively he's a perimeter based player. That does not mean that he's a defensive liability. The two aren't mutually exclusive despite him being European.

It's only ironic if you completely ignore the fact that people are going gaga about his alleged perimeter defense. For everything else, the jury is out until he gets to play guys with NBA-type of strength and athleticism in a man-to-man defense.

[Eddie20]

Bender's post D is only going to get better as his body matures. 

I'm implying that everyone seems to take this for granted, and it isn't.

date=1466030944]Unless you're implying that there is some sort of technical flaw in his post D that will prevent him from ever being effective solid. Regardless, who cares about post D from your PF anyways? Can you actually name exactly how many PF's nowadays make you shiver with the thought of stopping them in the post?

"Post D" doesn't just mean posting up. It includes defensive adjustments, closing space, challenging shots, cleaning up the glass, and not being taken out of plays by guys your size. There's a reason why teams won't just field 2 SFs.

Your argument for not picking Bender is really backwards thinking on how the game used to be played.  Not to mention you failing to acknowledge that as his 18 year old body matures and he gets into a proper strength and conditioning regimen his body/game will only get better. The game has changed and you need to stop looking in the rearview because Bender's doesn't fit your preconceived notion of what a PF should play like.

I get it, we're all reactionary idiots here who fail to see how Dragan Bender will redefine the NBA. Well, either that, or he will be Andrea Bargnani, the hardcover second edition.

But the ironic thing about your claims is that Bender's strength IS his D. So your Bargnani comparison, along with you questioning his rotations, closing out, providing help D, etc. holds absolutely no weight.  It's this international stereotype that you're trying to pass on because offensively he's a perimeter based player. That does not mean that he's a defensive liability. The two aren't mutually exclusive despite him being European.

It's only ironic if you completely ignore the fact that people are going gaga about his alleged perimeter defense. For everything else, the jury is out until he gets to play guys with NBA-type of strength and athleticism in a man-to-man defense.

Again, he is 18 years old so the draft in general is about having forward thinking about how he will develop as well as how his game will translate on the next level. Both are major pluses for him. I don't even think the biggest Bender supporter is suggesting he will make an immediate impact. But is being patient on him really so surprising? How many 18 year olds throughout history have made an immediate impact in the NBA? The list is short and saved for the truly all-time greats.

[The Oracle]

The list of playoff power forwards from earlier in this thread, both starters and backups, would beg to differ with your assessment. It's not just about Green. It's about the entire NBA.

The list of power forwards you provided is as follows:

Love? Frye? Green? Barnes? Patterson? Carroll? Ibaka? Deng? Williams? C Zeller? Dirk? Harris? George?

Love and  Ibaka (and even Dirk) have more inside than outside skills. Zeller and George didn't play PF except in spot minutes. Guys like Frye, Harris, Carroll, Williams, and Deng are simply mediocre/bit players. I'm not sure what this list is indicative of, except that the best PFs from the lot are competent inside players.

I think you are shading things to make your point. Offensive, they are mostly around the 3 point line. They can do other things, but the vast majority of their game is outside.

This is the list of the power forwards on the teams in the NBA. It shows us that that position on successful teams is a position of versatility, shooting, and play-making, not primarily inside banging.

As I mentioned, the list of power forwards includes a good amount of bit NBA players. The full-time NBA PFs are a lot more like LaMarcus Aldridge (full-time bigs with extra skills and athleticism) and a lot less like Luol Deng (SF with size).

Here's another list, the starting PFs of the top 5 regular season teams on each side:
Draymond Green, LaMarcus Aldridge, Serge Ibaka, Blake Griffin, Noah Vonleh.
Kevin Love, Luis Scola, Luol Deng, Paul Millsap, Amir Johnson.

The Spurs don't have a true stretch big nor do the Clips.  Portland was way better with Leonard.  Toronto was way better with Patterson.  Cleveland posted even better numbers with Frye.  Miami lost Bosh.  The Celtics were way better with Olynyk. 

The future of the NBA PF position are stretch bigs.  Teams preform way better with them than without.  Rebounding and post defense hold a lot less value than they used to.  Rebounding is becoming more and more of a team concept rather than relying on your bigs.  Check how few times PF's had to defend the post this year it is a very small number in comparison to the number of shots defended outside 15 ft.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Koz - no one is denying that he is a risk, but all you do is throw shade at him. Tell me that you can see some potential, no matter how small in your mind, for him to become a really good player. Even if you don't see it as likely, you have to see some potential. Honestly if you don't, I'm not sure your assessment of any player is worth much.

The obvious potential is there, no matter how hard you work to write his career before his 19th birthday.

Tell me you see at least some potential. Like best case scenario, if everything goes perfectly, what is his ceiling comparison?

[kozlodoev]

Koz - no one is denying that he is a risk, but all you do is throw shade at him. Tell me that you can see some potential, no matter how small in your mind, for him to become a really good player. Even if you don't see it as likely, you have to see some potential. Honestly if you don't, I'm not sure your assessment of any player is worth much.

The obvious potential is there, no matter how hard you work to write his career before his 19th birthday.

Tell me you see at least some potential. Like best case scenario, if everything goes perfectly, what is his ceiling comparison?

What do you want me to tell you? If everything goes perfectly, he'll be a Kevin Love/Ben Wallace hybrid that's 5 inches taller. Realistically, he'll probably be a Kelly Olynyk clone who looks more aesthetically pleasing running the court.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Koz - no one is denying that he is a risk, but all you do is throw shade at him. Tell me that you can see some potential, no matter how small in your mind, for him to become a really good player. Even if you don't see it as likely, you have to see some potential. Honestly if you don't, I'm not sure your assessment of any player is worth much.

The obvious potential is there, no matter how hard you work to write his career before his 19th birthday.

Tell me you see at least some potential. Like best case scenario, if everything goes perfectly, what is his ceiling comparison?

What do you want me to tell you? If everything goes perfectly, he'll be a Kevin Love/Ben Wallace hybrid that's 5 inches taller. Realistically, he'll probably be a Kelly Olynyk clone who looks more aesthetically pleasing when he runs the court.

Come on man. Don't hide behind sarcasm. What's your best case scenario comparison? Or stat line? Or projection? And what are the chances he reaches it.

[kozlodoev]

Koz - no one is denying that he is a risk, but all you do is throw shade at him. Tell me that you can see some potential, no matter how small in your mind, for him to become a really good player. Even if you don't see it as likely, you have to see some potential. Honestly if you don't, I'm not sure your assessment of any player is worth much.

The obvious potential is there, no matter how hard you work to write his career before his 19th birthday.

Tell me you see at least some potential. Like best case scenario, if everything goes perfectly, what is his ceiling comparison?

What do you want me to tell you? If everything goes perfectly, he'll be a Kevin Love/Ben Wallace hybrid that's 5 inches taller. Realistically, he'll probably be a Kelly Olynyk clone who looks more aesthetically pleasing when he runs the court.

Come on man. Don't hide behind sarcasm. What's your best case scenario comparison? Or stat line? Or projection? And what is the chances he reaches it.

I've given you my best case scenario. The chance that he reaches it is less than 1 percent.

[GratefulCs]

Koz - no one is denying that he is a risk, but all you do is throw shade at him. Tell me that you can see some potential, no matter how small in your mind, for him to become a really good player. Even if you don't see it as likely, you have to see some potential. Honestly if you don't, I'm not sure your assessment of any player is worth much.

The obvious potential is there, no matter how hard you work to write his career before his 19th birthday.

Tell me you see at least some potential. Like best case scenario, if everything goes perfectly, what is his ceiling comparison?

What do you want me to tell you? If everything goes perfectly, he'll be a Kevin Love/Ben Wallace hybrid that's 5 inches taller. Realistically, he'll probably be a Kelly Olynyk clone who looks more aesthetically pleasing when he runs the court.

but that's the thing


Realistically none of us know how he'll 'probably' work out


So it's kind of unreasonable at this point to take a hard stance on whether or not he reaches his potential