NBA - Main

12 readers

1 users here now

Game analysis, highlights and everything else that is happening in the NBA.

founded 11 months ago

MODERATORS

communick@nba.space

Put Wemby on the OKC Thunder, are they better or worse? (alien.top)

submitted 9 months ago by PumpkinHead555@alien.top to c/nba@nba.space

39 comments fedilink hide all child comments

There’s been a lot of talk about Chet vs Wemby, and as of late people seem to actually be leaning towards Chet being a better player. However Chet has a much better roster than Wemby, and more importantly better guard play.

So is Chet actually better than Wembanyama? And would OKC gets worse if the roles were reversed

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Clemsontigger16@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Better, you lose some shooting efficiency but you gain a better vertical threat, all the crazy disruption he causes on defense and you allow him to play in a much more simplified way which cuts out so much of the awkwardness we see with him on the Spurs.

Unless the Thunder are that dependent on having their 5 be a plus shooter that it would outweigh all the crazy benefits that Wemby brings, then it should be Wemby. I think Wemby is a mid 30’s 3 point shooter in a similar role fyi, not elite like Chet has been but certainly a lot better than his percentages on the Spurs would suggest.

I think it’s close though, even with my argument the Thunder would be better, it would be marginal…whereas the Spurs would be a lot worse with Chet instead of Wemby. Chet would be asked to do a lot more and wouldn’t have everything served up to him by great guards and facilitators anymore.

[–] 504090@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Chet’s had better verticality since their pre-NBA careers. That’s a massive reason why he’s maintaining a 70% TS; he’s essentially already elite at rimrunning and timing cuts. Wemby might be taller, but he doesn’t position himself as well and focuses a bit more on isolation.

The shooting disparity is also pretty big - most of Wemby’s 3s are wide open as is, and he’s not hitting them. His 3P% wouldn’t really change on the Thunder.

[–] Clemsontigger16@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Wrong on all accounts, Wemby’s verticality is inhuman, the plays he makes around the rim when guys just throw it up there are insane. And his hands are so big he can just catch the ball with one have like it’s a softball almost.

He takes so many moving, step in 3’s, out of rhythm 3’s…he has the shooting mechanics, he would be a league average shooter at least if he was in a lower volume role getting all his 3’s off the catch. He also obviously wouldn’t be playing the same style or role on the Thunder, so he wouldn’t be iso’ing…that’s the whole point of this post.

[–] 504090@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

Wrong on all accounts, Wemby’s verticality is inhuman, the plays he makes around the rim when guys just throw it up there are insane. And his hands are so big he can just catch the ball with one have like it’s a softball almost.

Which applies to Chet as well. Like I said, that’s a major part of his production. It might not look as fancy, but he gets it done. Chet’s also notably faster in a straight-line, so that opens up more lob/rimrunning opportunities.

He takes so many moving, step in 3’s, out of rhythm 3’s…he has the shooting mechanics, he would be a league average shooter at least if he was in a lower volume role getting all his 3’s off the catch. He also obviously wouldn’t be playing the same style or role on the Thunder, so he wouldn’t be iso’ing…that’s the whole point of this post.

I’ve watched Spurs games, and statistics also show that he’s shooting 31% on open 3s.
What I meant is he’s always been more of an iso-driven player than Chet. Their instincts on the court have always been different, regardless of the caliber of their rosters in the last 2-3 years.