Bender vs. Chriss

[3rdside]

You watch clips, you don't even see suns games in their entirety?

With difficulty - I live in London

 

[3rdside]

...and we don't get virtually any nba games so it's online feeds only, and they're at awkward hours with work and all.

 

[CardsSunsDbacks]

My argument for why those stats don't mean anything for Bender is that he will become a physically different player over the next few years. If you watch the games he is essentially playing SF out there. That is a lot to ask for 7'1" player. However it is about all he can do until he gets stronger because everyone pushes him around down low. I think when he gets stronger he will be able to play more against bigger players and that will allow him to look less awkward.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

If you watch a pickup game you know who can play THAT day. But for a kid you have NO idea what he's going to become as he physically develops and learns additional skill sets.

When I entered college as an 18 year old freshman I had good athleticism but poor basketball IQ and skills. By the first year of law school I had an effective post game (at 5'11), had a streaky but effective three point shot, could put the ball on the floor and had become a savvy defender utilizing my powerful base and leaping ability to defend guys who were 6 inches taller than me in the post and my lateral quickness and acquired basketball knowledge and intelligence to stay in front of, and cut of more athletic players favored moves. In other words, had you watched me play pickup ball at 18 or 19 you would have had literally ZERO idea about the playground baller I would become. None.

Bender is so young we have to discount what we are seeing today. Stats in his case are stupid.

 

[3rdside]

I hear you in the pick up game analogy, it was a bad one but....would you bet your life savings on bender being good based on what you see statistically?

No freakin' way, small sample size or otherwise.

He has to hit the three ball to not be a bust and that is a huge ask from where we stand.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[CardsSunsDbacks]

If you watch a pickup game you know who can play THAT day. But for a kid you have NO idea what he's going to become as he physically develops and learns additional skill sets.

When I entered college as an 18 year old freshman I had good athleticism but poor basketball IQ and skills. By the first year of law school I had an effective post game (at 5'11), had a streaky but effective three point shot, could put the ball on the floor and had become a savvy defender utilizing my powerful base and leaping ability to defend guys who were 6 inches taller than me in the post and my lateral quickness and acquired basketball knowledge and intelligence to stay in front of, and cut of more athletic players favored moves. In other words, had you watched me play pickup ball at 18 or 19 you would have had literally ZERO idea about the playground baller I would become. None.

Bender is so young we have to discount what we are seeing today. Stats in his case are stupid.

Agreed. Also I have seen comments suggesting that he will slow down when he puts on weight, but it is quite possible that adding 15 pounds of muscle or so that he will actually become quicker and more explosive than he currently is. While adding weight can slow you down so can not having enough weight on you as well or lack of strength.

 

[JCSunsfan]

I hear you in the pick up game analogy, it was a bad one but....would you bet your life savings on bender being good based on what you see statistically?

No freakin' way, small sample size or otherwise.

He has to hit the three ball to not be a bust and that is a huge ask from where we stand.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There is an eye test that Bender passes. You see it in his court awareness, competitiveness, and skill set. Its something you never saw in Goodwin or Len for that matter. He has the size, speed, skill set, and there is just an athletes's brain that he has. Chriss has it too. So does Booker. I don't see it as much in TJ. TJ seems more intuitive than competitive.

 

[CardsSunsDbacks]

I hear you in the pick up game analogy, it was a bad one but....would you bet your life savings on bender being good based on what you see statistically?

No freakin' way, small sample size or otherwise.

He has to hit the three ball to not be a bust and that is a huge ask from where we stand.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The point is that nothing on the stats sheet should be enough information to assume he will be a bust at this point. Bender is different from guys like Booker who was already physically developed enough at 18/19 years old to hang with NBA talent. Bender was always going to struggle this year because of his lack of physical development to this point. As for his 3p shooting he has only taken 88 3s this year and made about 31% of them. That to me isn't a cause for concern as I would venture to guess that his percentage will go up from there as he continues to work on it. It is already close to being respectable at 33% and solid at about 36%.

 

[CardsSunsDbacks]

There is an eye test that Bender passes. You see it in his court awareness, competitiveness, and skill set. Its something you never saw in Goodwin or Len for that matter. He has the size, speed, skill set, and there is just an athletes's brain that he has. Chriss has it too. So does Booker. I don't see it as much in TJ. TJ seems more intuitive than competitive.

This along with knowing that he will benefit from adding more strength is why I am not really concerned about him being a bust. He just doesn't look lost out there and legitimately looks like he knows what he is doing on both ends of the floor.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I hear you in the pick up game analogy, it was a bad one but....would you bet your life savings on bender being good based on what you see statistically?

No freakin' way, small sample size or otherwise.

He has to hit the three ball to not be a bust and that is a huge ask from where we stand.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I wouldn't bet my life savings on anything sports related. And I think EVERY draftee is higher bust potential than success (other than like a lebron).

But I don't think his success will Ben predicated solely on becoming a successful 3 point shooter and I think it's WAY too early to claim he's destined to be a bust.

You yourself stated that he has great movement skills and then you concurrently say he's a stiff in the post. Nothing I've seen from him indicates he's a stiff. In fact just the opposite.

 

[Dan H]

There is an eye test that Bender passes. You see it in his court awareness, competitiveness, and skill set. Its something you never saw in Goodwin or Len for that matter. He has the size, speed, skill set, and there is just an athletes's brain that he has. Chriss has it too. So does Booker. I don't see it as much in TJ. TJ seems more intuitive than competitive.

Could you expand on that bolded part? Are you saying he plays more on instinct than actual knowledge/understanding of the game, or am I misunderstanding you?

 

[3rdside]

Having had time to think about it Ouchie I think I have to settle on somewhere in between the eye test and the stats, still somewhat leaning towards the stats because they are appalling.

That being said, if I'm putting a lot of his success on his 3pt% then there have been plenty of cases of bad shooting % in yr one to turn it around and .314% is not too bad all things considered.

He has great mechanics on his shot and as he's a relatively less confident euro, he probably needs he needs more time to get confident.

More evidence needed in other words to make a confident statement on the guy.

Don't look now but my handle is coming into it's own..

 

[Krangodnzr]

I caught most of last nights game against OKC and I was pleasantly surprised by Bender.

Very competitive, moves like a guy that is 6'7. If his shot improves markedly, I think he could be pretty good. Had some nice moves in the post but yeah he obviously needs to get a lot stronger.

 

[elindholm]

In other words, had you watched me play pickup ball at 18 or 19 you would have had literally ZERO idea about the playground baller I would become. None.

The problem with that analogy is that you leapfrogged a bunch of guys who weren't working hard to improve. In the NBA, everyone works hard, so it's much more difficult to rise through the pecking order, especially if you're operating with a severe talent deficit.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

The problem with that analogy is that you leapfrogged a bunch of guys who weren't working hard to improve. In the NBA, everyone works hard, so it's much more difficult to rise through the pecking order, especially if you're operating with a severe talent deficit.

It's not about leapfrogging other players. It's about physical development and development of skills. If those two things occur and you have good basketball IQ and and an advantage (like being 7'1 and long) you're likely going to be successful (and certainly not a bust). Just no guarantee those two things occur.

 

[elindholm]

It's not about leapfrogging other players.

Yes it is. To be a rotation player in the NBA, you have to be one of the (roughly) best 250 players in the league. If you're at #300, that's 50 guys you have to pass, all of whom are working hard just like you are. You might gain a bit on the old vets who are winding down, but you have to fend off the hot young talent at the same time. The bottom line is that if you're on the outside looking in, you can't just improve, but you have to improve more than your peer group.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Yes it is. To be a rotation player in the NBA, you have to be one of the (roughly) best 250 players in the league. If you're at #300, that's 50 guys you have to pass, all of whom are working hard just like you are. You might gain a bit on the old vets who are winding down, but you have to fend off the hot young talent at the same time. The bottom line is that if you're on the outside looking in, you can't just improve, but you have to improve more than your peer group.

I get what you're arguing but it's kinda of a silly argument bc it's not solely relevant to bender, but every player ever drafted, every young player, and every veteran. You're saying you have to be good enough. But a younger player hasn't developed as much physically as the vets and has more room to do so. They haven't spent as many years working in their game, so they've got more room for growth. Unless they're lazy, in which case they weren't going to make it anyway.

 

[devilalum]

Yes it is. To be a rotation player in the NBA, you have to be one of the (roughly) best 250 players in the league. If you're at #300, that's 50 guys you have to pass, all of whom are working hard just like you are. You might gain a bit on the old vets who are winding down, but you have to fend off the hot young talent at the same time. The bottom line is that if you're on the outside looking in, you can't just improve, but you have to improve more than your peer group.

Sorta

Last couple of years i felt like the Suns had maybe one or two of the 300 best players in the league.

Somebody's gotta play?

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[Yuma]

The Suns have three rookies who all need minutes to develop, but Chriss has been the one to make the most of his opportunity so far.

Tyler is making a case at the finish line!

 

[elindholm]

Bump, a year after the last post, and with only a year and a half until the Time of Reckoning. Any vote changers out there?

 

[ColdPickleNachos]

Bump, a year after the last post, and with only a year and a half until the Time of Reckoning. Any vote changers out there?

I'll change my vote to Chriss, but if you ask me again in a week, I might go the other way again.

I have switched back and forth on this one several times, as the evidence keeps changing. If I'm being honest with myself, the third answer might be the best one.

I argued adamantly a year ago that it was far too early to label Bender a bust. I still think it's too early, but we're getting there...

 

[elindholm]

I'll change my vote to Chriss, but if you ask me again in a week, I might go the other way again.

I have switched back and forth on this one several times, as the evidence keeps changing. If I'm being honest with myself, the third answer might be the best one.

What's weird to me is how we have a consensus on one player but not on the other.

We're all (more or less) in agreement on Chriss. Plenty of talent and athleticism, shows glimpses of brilliance, but has a serious problem with attitude, discipline, focus, you name it. The question with him is whether he can get his mind to support his physical gifts. We have differing degrees of optimism, but we all agree on what the question is, and we agree that we don't know the answer.

It's the complete opposite with Bender. Some people see brilliance waiting to assert itself, and others see cluelessness. We agree that he has a minimal offensive game beyond erratic three-point shooting, but past that, there's no consensus at all. Some see a versatile defender with good instincts; others see a disoriented beanpole with the game whizzing by him. Some see an impressive awareness of picks, spacing, and team ball movement; others see someone who knows he can't make plays and is trying to minimize the negative impact of his limitations. Some see tantalizing development for a player so young; others see a fundamental passiveness that won't be outgrown.

It isn't just that we disagree on the players, but that we disagree on what we can even agree on.

 

[ColdPickleNachos]

What's weird to me is how we have a consensus on one player but not on the other.

It isn't just that we disagree on the players, but that we disagree on what we can even agree on.

I think Winston Churchill said it best when commenting on Bender:

"I cannot forecast to you the action of Bender. He is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma; but perhaps there is a key. That key is a coach who doesn't suck."

 

[AzStevenCal]

I originally chose both as busts, I've seen nothing to change my opinion. They both have some strengths but their weaknesses are far more prevalent at this stage. Maybe they'll both make it but it's doubtful either will be effective a year from now and we'll likely still be debating which player is better (or less horrible).

 

[AsUpRoDiGy]

I think Chriss has a much better chance of sticking around than Bender. If Chriss can mature and get a dose of humility...I think he can at least contribute to some degree. Bender, on the other hand, is just naturally way too passive. He has no confidence in his game, and he almost looks scared half the time...it's odd. Maybe a new coach can change their fortunes, but right now it's looking like Chriss will never amount to anything more than a bench player, and Bender will be playing in Europe again within 3 years.