"Wemby's efficiency is bad!" "He takes bad shots!" He's also spending most of his minutes without a real PG.
In the 192 minutes Wemby has spent with Tre Jones on the floor, he averages 26ppg/36 on 58%TS. That's also 33.2p/100 for those curious. This is actually an astoundingly strong blend of volume and efficiency for a rookie.
What's the other factor holding Wemby back? He's playing PF next to Cs clogging the paint and taking away some mismatch opportunities. Wemby has only gotten 124 minutes at Center this season, but when he does? He averages a whopping 33ppg/36 on 62%TS. That's with or without Tre Jones at PG even.
These numbers are absolutely absurd. When the Spurs put him in a position to succeed - either with an actual PG or at his best position - he dominates. He's already been scoring at an all-star level. If you're down on this kid, questioning his scoring and efficiency, I think you need to watch a bit closer.
Source(free account needed)
All the more reason to put Wembanyama in other positions/roles. For rookies, it's usually not their best skills that limit them, it is their worse skills that need development. It's not like we are putting Wemby at somewhere he'll never play (PG?), he is just playing PF role. They know he can dominate as C, they don't need proof, Spurs aren't winning this year anyway, some extra W isn't going to help Spurs. Fixing Wemby's flaws so that he can have a complete game will only accelerate the whole winning process, it's more like a luxury.
This is also why so many rookies in good teams are more prone to be "bust". They don't have the luxury to fix their flaws, their teams only put the rookies at their best roles to keep the team winning chances.
Thank you lol. I can't believe people get on here and go "huh, I wonder if Gregg Popovich hasn't noticed this super obvious difference in how the Spurs play basketball. Maybe someone should point out to him that they need a better PG or that he shouldn't let Wemby shoot so many jump shots, surely he hasn't thought of that."
I remain unconvinced that the best method to develop players is to simply place them in circumstances that are detrimental to their performance and keep losing.
This is just life and the professional workforce management. For example, When I'm working with a junior, I have 2 choices to make. Do I want this to be done good and fast and do the majority of it myself, or do I want this to be a learning lesson. Product won't have the same "shine", but long term the team gets a bit stronger because the junior is a bit better.
Same concept. You put Wemby in the PF role to develop his PF intuition and skillset. When he eventually goes back to C, he will have a better feel on what the opposing PF role want to do, and how to defend them because he himself was in that role.