I had a similar thought while reading your piece: if he creates good offense by moving, finishing and inspiring confidence in his teammates' passing, he'd be a perfect 2nd or 3rd option in the most systems.
That's the Klay direct comparison that passes the eye test & is confirmed by your analysis. I think Siakam is another positive-energy prototype, with lower-tier shooting.
Yeah I’m a big Siakam fan, although his skill set requires a more particular supporting cast than Markkanen, who fits in nearly everywhere! But both are two of my favorites.
I was reading an article recently on a potential trade to OKC involving Markkanen for essentially a ton of draft picks, Giddey and/or Cason Wallace. With what you wrote here, I hope Presti finds a way to keep their big 3 intact and pull the trigger on that (while keeping at least one of the two in giddey and wallace). Maybe they'll continue to nail draft picks and they do have time, but imo, they should push for win now while they can afford all these players and while they're healthy.
Markkanen would be an awesome fit on the Thunder, I think. Would love to see a move there, but I also just like watching Markkanen be the focal point of a unique offensive system! So I’m torn.
Fascinating piece, Mike. Do you think a lot of his success, then, comes from Hardy's offense system revolving around getting him the ball? And do you think he'd see a drop off in production/efficiency if he was traded somewhere with less ball movement?
Yes, I do think his success is predicated heavily on his usage and an offensive system where he is simultaneously the go-to guy and pressure release valve.
If he went somewhere else, his raw stats would definitely drop. He’d be the second or third option, but almost every team in the league has at least one passer better than anyone on the Jazz. So I’d imagine raw numbers drop down, but efficiency maintains (can’t really improve!).
I’d have to think that any team trading for him would see the success he’s had in this role and basically use him similarly, if at a smaller scale.
That's a great point - he relies so much on others getting the ball, but plays on a team where no individual player is *great* at getting him the ball. The Jazz don't really make sense and I love them for it
Look at Lauri's time in Chicago. On paper his skill set merges perfectly with the Bulls roster and offense. The reality was completely opposite. The Bulls wanted him to either stand in the corner or in the dunker spot and wait for passes that never came or came too late.
It makes you wonder how many other corner spacer non-threats could become movement shooters. Not all of them, and probably not most of them; but some percentage can and should be given a more difficult shot diet to see who can emerge.
I had a similar thought while reading your piece: if he creates good offense by moving, finishing and inspiring confidence in his teammates' passing, he'd be a perfect 2nd or 3rd option in the most systems.
That's the Klay direct comparison that passes the eye test & is confirmed by your analysis. I think Siakam is another positive-energy prototype, with lower-tier shooting.
Yeah I’m a big Siakam fan, although his skill set requires a more particular supporting cast than Markkanen, who fits in nearly everywhere! But both are two of my favorites.
I was reading an article recently on a potential trade to OKC involving Markkanen for essentially a ton of draft picks, Giddey and/or Cason Wallace. With what you wrote here, I hope Presti finds a way to keep their big 3 intact and pull the trigger on that (while keeping at least one of the two in giddey and wallace). Maybe they'll continue to nail draft picks and they do have time, but imo, they should push for win now while they can afford all these players and while they're healthy.
Markkanen would be an awesome fit on the Thunder, I think. Would love to see a move there, but I also just like watching Markkanen be the focal point of a unique offensive system! So I’m torn.
Fascinating piece, Mike. Do you think a lot of his success, then, comes from Hardy's offense system revolving around getting him the ball? And do you think he'd see a drop off in production/efficiency if he was traded somewhere with less ball movement?
Hmm, good question.
Yes, I do think his success is predicated heavily on his usage and an offensive system where he is simultaneously the go-to guy and pressure release valve.
If he went somewhere else, his raw stats would definitely drop. He’d be the second or third option, but almost every team in the league has at least one passer better than anyone on the Jazz. So I’d imagine raw numbers drop down, but efficiency maintains (can’t really improve!).
I’d have to think that any team trading for him would see the success he’s had in this role and basically use him similarly, if at a smaller scale.
That's a great point - he relies so much on others getting the ball, but plays on a team where no individual player is *great* at getting him the ball. The Jazz don't really make sense and I love them for it
Look at Lauri's time in Chicago. On paper his skill set merges perfectly with the Bulls roster and offense. The reality was completely opposite. The Bulls wanted him to either stand in the corner or in the dunker spot and wait for passes that never came or came too late.
It makes you wonder how many other corner spacer non-threats could become movement shooters. Not all of them, and probably not most of them; but some percentage can and should be given a more difficult shot diet to see who can emerge.
What do you think?