Banchero: “Yall think i’m a center?”
- Thread starter RunninRichie
- Start date
they said Duke fans didn’t know basketball well I believe it now.
He can play some center but that is not where he is going to spend most of his time.
Once again, K and the Duke staff filling a kid’s head with a bunch of non-sense and BS.
Small-ball five, stretch four at most; this kid doesn’t belong at the point.
K must have lied his butt off to convince Paolo to commit.
Apparently, Cal and our coaching staff were straight forward and wanted to keep him closer to the block ... where he belongs. It’s a shame their honesty about his abilities and what position he would play going forward is what lost them this recruitment.
He’ll be a fine player, but I’m still amazed they [Duke] sold him on bringing up the ball. I can’t even...
Last edited:
How did you come to the conclusion that he was sold on brining up the ball by him saying he is not a 5. I think he will be best suited to work out of the high post and to run the offense through him at times because he is a great passer for his size.
Allegedly, that is what the Duke staff sold him on, and that is the reason he committed. He would work from the high post in college and fluctuate into the low post; but, Duke looking to make him more of a wing who handles the ball was the selling point.
Well, he has already said Shiteshefski told him he would play him Pt-forward.
So we all know Shiteshefski told him he will have the ball in hands making plays like a pt guard.
How these kids fall
For this BS is amazing. Wasn’t Vernon Cary told the same thing, and we all watched his draft stock fall like Okafor’s career.
Duke seems to be trying their hardest to win the "who has the most top5's in a given class" contest, at the cost of team chemistry and what's actually needed to win a Final 4.
I can kind of see that but I also don’t think it’s “BS”. What Banchero wanted is have the freedom to roam around the court and not be locked into one position and I don’t really see a problem with Duke using that in their pitch.
We're missing on bigs because modern big men don't wanna play with their back to the basket.
I don't know if these kids aren't paying attention or what but K isn't developing these kids into anything. He struggles at coaching young talent.
They're probably thinking Tatum but that will take way more than a year
They're probably thinking Tatum but that will take way more than a year
Exactly! I believe it was Jack Pilgrim—or it was Travis Graff—that said the Duke staff compared Paolo’s role to that of Zion ... how?! Athletically they are not even the same caliber.
Paolo is a very skilled four or five who would float between the high-post and low-post.
A talented and skilled player? Absolutely! An overwhelming athlete? Not really. He’s not ready for a role as a wing, and an athletic player who is also a tenacious defender could easily lock him up around the perimeter.
Think it's time to move on guys. Banchero made his decision, and only thing that came of it is he wasn't leaving the Northwest to go to a place like Tennessee. He was going to play at a blueblood if he decided to leave. Whatever was stated to him, worked or resonated with him and his family.
I'm in minority, but can always understand a player selecting Duke/UNC and I'd have had a much harder time digesting a package deal to play for Rick Barnes and Vols, having to face him 2/3 times in a season. He'll be a fine college player and do well at Duke. Onto the guys who are still available and like UK.
I'm in minority, but can always understand a player selecting Duke/UNC and I'd have had a much harder time digesting a package deal to play for Rick Barnes and Vols, having to face him 2/3 times in a season. He'll be a fine college player and do well at Duke. Onto the guys who are still available and like UK.
![[laughing]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/laugh.r191677.gif "Laughing [laughing]")
I may be in the minority here, but I no longer give a shit about Banchero. He is old news.
You’re correct, it’s not a problem to sell that. But, it is BS when a coach of K’s [alleged] caliber sells a kid on an idea that doesn’t accurately portray his skill or ability.
Paolo doesn’t belong solely in the block, but he can and should float between the low and high-post.
But, he doesn’t have the necessary skill or athleticism right now to compete as primary ball handler against high-level competition. Could that change? Of course! But, you are what you are ... and I don’t know if that will change much for him.
Well that is his natural position and the position that he has openly requested to change too in the NBA.And Wendell Carter is a 4
Thats what K told him during recruitment
I definitely think he can develop into the place where he control the ball at times, I think what Banchero was really looking for was more of the freedom aspect and not being confined somewhere.
But K coached LeBron and look at him now, he’s running point for the Lakers! Good lord
This is hilarious because that's absolutely what he is if they get Baldwin to go with AJ Griffin.
It is certainly possible, but I don’t see that coming to fruition until some years later once he is in the NBA—if it does occur.
And, that also seems to be something he was looking for in terms of freedom of movement. That is also something that Duke allegedly used against Cal to push him away from UK.
I understand kids want that freedom of movement and ability to roam the perimeter, but that is also something they have to develop, which will take much more than a year in college.
I know people criticize Cal about his use of big men, but I think a lot of Cal’s philosophy is not to restrict players or hold them back, but to develop essential low-post skills that give them a competitive pathway into the NBA, where they can then refine those skills as they work to develop their game farther from the basket.
Essentially, he helps build the foundation that will then give them the skills they need to build the entire house. I see it as part of his “players first” mantra that he believes is in their best interest.
K has had his most success with a natural SF at the 4 spot.
Battier in ‘01. Singler in ‘10. Winslow in ‘15.
He played a versatile big man there in ‘18 (Bagley) and ‘19 (Williamson- short for the position, but still a power guy) and those teams didn’t live up to their hype.
Battier in ‘01. Singler in ‘10. Winslow in ‘15.
He played a versatile big man there in ‘18 (Bagley) and ‘19 (Williamson- short for the position, but still a power guy) and those teams didn’t live up to their hype.
Exactly. So they play Griffin and Baldwin at the 2 and 3 with Banchero at the 4 and whatever big man they have at the 5?
That’s another ‘19 looking team with square pegs in round holes. A less talented big 3, though.
Lately it seems like K has said, “I just want the top players regardless of fit and position, and hope I can out talent everyone.”
I don’t think it’s fair to point to Zion and Bagley playing the 4 as reasons they didnt win the championship.
1- Roach, 2- Keels/ Steward, 3- Baldwin, 4- Banchero, 5- Williams is a damn good lineup.
K's hatred for Cal has been on full display ever since the spotlight was on us.
True; I’m sure there are other reasons that attributed to that.
But, it does illustrate that when K recruits certain players based on promises—to simply secure a commitment—to allow them to play a different position that doesn’t necessarily align with their skillset or talent ... then it hurts the overall chemistry and performance of the team.
I disagree, Zion playing the 4 was the best position he could of played In college and both the Bagley team and Zion team were great teams that lost deep into a tournament where the best team usually doesn’t win it. I can kind of agree on I think it would of been better to not reclass Bagley as him and Wendell playing together wasn’t the greatest fit.
What's funny is that the team before Zion's team was an even bigger disappointment.
You just offered more evidence of them being a disappointment.
The hype around Zions team was far greater than Bagley’s without a doubt. It’s also unfair to judge teams in college basketball solely on rather they win the championship due to the nature of March madness.
I agree with your last sentence, but there will always be clueless fans that base everything on championships because they don't know what they're talking about.
Shut up. Can I judge them on the fact neither team improved a lick from November on? Or that without the refs, Zion would have been bounced in the 2nd and 3rd rounds?
Get out of here.
Similar threads
