In many ways, this piece is building off the spectacular work Cole Zwicker did earlier in the year on the importance of big-man pull-up shooting. I highly recommend you read that piece if you haven’t already.

A cursory look at DeAndre Ayton and Marvin Bagley’s offensive production in college suggests they are similarly good offensive players.

Both players were similarly dominant high-efficiency, high-usage scorers with middling creation numbers. Most mock drafts have the two of them close together, with Ayton generally anywhere between 1-3 and Bagley anywhere between 2-5. Maybe I’m misinterpreting things, but I think the general idea is that they are similarly good offensive prospects and Ayton’s more traditional center size make him an easier fit with greater defensive upside, thus Ayton is the better prospect.

Again, this piece is not going to focus on the defensive side of things. Rather, while the prevailing notion that Ayton and Bagley are similarly good offensive prospects makes sense based on their production, a look at the way each player got their production suggests different things about their ability to develop as NBA scorers.

Ayton is a traditionally dominant low-post scorer. He is massive and powerful, which allows him to establish great position on duck-ins and seals. A lot of his points in the college game stemmed solely from this combination. 6-foot-8, 210 pound NCAA forwards simply weren’t able to prevent him from catching the ball and powering it up to the hoop.

However, Ayton is not just giant and athletic. DeAndre Jordan and Andre Drummond are both giant and athletic. There is a reason Ayton was so much more dominant as a college scorer than either of them.

Ayton combines his size with nimble and coordinated feet. He does a great job positioning himself on post-catches, and has the footwork and quickness to score in more classical post-up settings. This play does a good job capturing why Ayton was so dominant at the NCAA level.

First, he catches the ball matched up against someone 5 inches shorter than him. Then, he has the agility to deftly spin baseline around him and create a good look. It doesn’t matter that he misses because he is simply too strong and big and gets the ball back and draws a foul.



This is a legitimate skill. There are few bigs in the NBA with Ayton’s combination of feet and size. The only guys I can think of who are somewhat comparable are DeMarcus Cousins, Joel Embiid, Jonas Valancunias, Jusuf Nurkic, and Nikola Vucevic.

Thinking of Ayton in regards to these player types is useful. Even in a less post-up heavy NBA, Ayton is going to be able to score with volume and efficiency. However, clearly there is something that separates these guys in offensive effectiveness. They are all big and coordinated, but they are not identically so.

Cousins is the standout of this group. His handle and footwork in face-up situations at his size is unreal.

Embiid doesn’t have Cousins’ handle, but he is the next closest in terms of agility on the move. He also has the ability to shoot off-the-dribble some like Cousins, which as Cole’s piece suggests is a very important skill for offensive dynamism in bigs.

Vucevic and Valancunias are both an echelon below Embiid and Cousins in this respect. You can see here that Valancunias has some ability to score off the faceup.

But that type of inside 15-feet straight line drive is more characteristic of their ability than the advanced change of direction Cousins and Embiid possess.

So where does Ayton fall on this spectrum? Obviously, he’s only a freshman. Ayton can and will continue to develop as a handler and face-up player. Yet, even with continued improvement Ayton seems more on track to be similar to Valancunias than he does to Embiid or Cousins.

Ayton didn’t get a ton of opportunities to face-up in the college game, but when he did catch the ball in situations that required on-the-move coordination he did not excel. The one move he does have down is the one-dribble spin.



He flashed that move a number of times throughout the year, but it seems more like an isolated area of comfort than a sign of larger face-up ability. Here you see him catch the ball in a nearly identical situation and not really have anything to go to.



This time he catches the ball on the short-roll with plenty of space to take a dribble and extend to the hoop, but he settles for a jumper instead.



Here Ayton does actually try and take his man off-the-dribble, but you can tell he is awkward in this situation. He dribbles the ball too robotically to fluidly beat his man and flings up a low-percentage shot.



On this play, Ayton goes to his patented one-dribble spin, but his lack of natural fluidity causes him to lose his balance.



This is one of the best examples I could find. Ayton just clearly isn’t comfortable playing off-the-bounce on drives to the hoop. The stiffness with which he goes into his shot here is concerning.



Next, instead of taking his man off the dribble, Ayton opts to awkwardly half-back his man down from the three-point line. The results aren’t pretty.



I think Ayton is limited by both his handle and his on-the-move agility. Many of the other plays were a combination of the two, but on this one you can see how it’s not just his handle that gives him problems. He lacks the natural coordination to sidestep defenders on the move.



This play is probably the best that demonstrates his handling deficiencies. It’s only a couple dribbles, but Ayton clearly can’t yet dribble under control at high-speeds.



Put all this together, and I hope you can see why Valancunias makes more sense as an offensive comparison than Cousins or Embiid. Ayton will improve, but improvement will likely make him similar to Valancunias as a face-up guy.

Excuse the terrible video quality, but for reference, here is what Cousins looked like dribbling in transition as a college player.



That’s just different.

Now, Ayton does have other ways to add value that can make him better offensively than Valancunias. He’s much more athletic as a rim-runner, and his overall quickness and power can make him even better in the post. He also is a more promising passer than Valancunias was at the same age.

All of those things make a difference, but it still remains hard to see Ayton’s path to being one of the league’s elite offensive centers. He is athletic as a rim-roller, but he is not the complete outlier that DeAndre Jordan was. He also is one of the single worst screen-setter’s I have ever seen.

Another underrated thing that will prevent him from providing gravitational value as a rim-roller is his lack of instincts for cutting to space. Ayton’s worst habit defensively is his tendency to stand and watch. Occasionally, that same inclination hurts him on the offensive end. Here, he has gobs of open space to dive to the rim and make himself available, but just stands still instead.



Again, my issue with Ayton is I’m just not sure how he can end up bringing high-end impact on the offensive end. He can absolutely be one of the game’s best post-scorers who contributes with shooting and rim-rolling, but without elite face-up, shooting, or rim-rolling skills his ceiling is going to be capped.

That is not the case with Bagley. Both as a face-up player and as a rim-roller, Bagley has more obvious paths to stardom. You might be thinking, Bagley should be expected to be better than Ayton as a face-up guy. Ayton is 7-foot, 250 pounds. Bagley is 6-foot-11, 230 pounds. You’re not wrong. Bagley is not going to provide the same sort of post-up behemoth value Ayton will, and it is logical that he would be better as a face-up guy. But the degree of difference between the two and obvious room for development in Bagley’s game really stands out.

Here’s a good starting point. Bagley loses the handle on the behind-the-back move, but you can see how special his handle has the chance to be.



What makes Bagley’s face-up potential so enticing is his combination of nascent handling and outlier movement coordination. He fools you into not noticing how ridiculous his fluidity is because he makes it look so easy. The way he casually steps around the defender here at high speeds is not something 19-year-old 6-foot-11 bigs are supposed to be able to do.



On this play, Bagley ultimately misses the shot, but his in-and-out and then instinctual euro-step sequence is pretty freaky.



Bagley’s handle is still a little too high to execute dribble moves in the half-court, but his on-the-move coordination allows him to be successful nonetheless. The combination of quickness to blow by his man and then fluidity and elevation on the finish here is beautiful.



The thing with Bagley is how much obvious room for improvement he has. Right now, he absolutely cannot finish with his right hand. See here.



He very well might not improve in that respect, but his effectiveness despite his high-handle and no-right limitations indicates potential growth. That last play also shows off something about him that is underrated — his flexibility and ability to contort his body on his finishes is absolutely outstanding.

Here again he wildly contorts his body due to his lack of right-hand but somehow makes it work.



Bagley’s potential as a face-up mismatch extends to both bigs and smalls. Against a smaller player, he has the stride length and elevation to create easy looks.



Facing almost any bigger player, Bagley is going to be simply too quick to contain.



At Duke, Bagley mostly showcased this in-space scoring either in isolation or transition. He will be able to do a fair amount of each in the NBA, and having a big who can push in transition remains an advantage, but where he projects to be most dynamic is rolling to the hoop.

His speed and bounce make him a natural lob target, and his on-the-move ability will make him special. Specifically, if Bagley plays the five in a spread pick-and-roll scheme he is going to be dominant.

Amare Stoudemire on the Suns is a good analog for the destruction Bagley could wreak. He isn’t quite as unbelievably powerful a finisher, but his fluidity and second-jump are at a level STAT’s were not.

Blake Griffin is another frequent comparison. I would have loved to see what Griffin would have done in a small-ball 5 role next to four shooters. Bagley is an inch taller than Griffin, and with the NBA’s embrace of small-ball will likely get a chance to play the five.

In all likelihood, I think Bagley will be a similar offensive player to Griffin/Stoudemire. He’s not the exact same as either guy, but it is easy to project him as a devastating rim-roller who can create some in iso as well.

That outcome is already a more enticing one than what I expect from Ayton, but the largest gap lies in their potential ceilings. Bagley is similar to Griffin/Stoudemire, but each of them are much more powerful and compact. Bagley’s combination of graceful and long fluid strides with his quickness around the rim isn’t quite like anyone I’ve ever seen.

This is a very subjective take, but when I watch him move and attack the basket he just seems dripping with room for improvement. The always great Javier Pesquera had a great tweet on this:

and Bagley has been used as a finisher mainly, Winslow and Tatum had other roles to fill in, it’s difficult to make a read one way or another, with Bagley is almost like a blank canvas with some parts of his game really — JPesquera (@Pesquerj) March 26, 2018

The descriptor of Bagley as a “blank canvas” seems very apt to me. He’s not the same player by any means, but it reminds me of the way Anthony Davis was coming out of college. Bagley isn’t guaranteed to make the same sort of development strides Davis has. In fact, he’s quite unlikely to. Particularly, his shooting touch is less promising than Davis’s was.

But like Davis, Bagley seems like he’s oozing with room to grow as a handler and shooter that could allow him to catapult his offensive game to another level. This play got a lot of press earlier in the year, and I think deservedly so.



Bagley flashes incredible plays like that, and combines it with his high-motor, interior finishing and rebounding that give him a high-floor to work with. I don’t expect Bagley to put it all together, but there is a path to offensive stardom visible in him I don’t see in Ayton.

This optimistic projection of Bagley’s is contingent on him getting to play the five in the NBA. He can absolutely be a productive offensive player as a four-man, but it is much easier to envision an elite offensive ecosystem with him at the five.

One interesting reference point for the Bagley/Ayton distinction is the recent Karl Towns/Jahlil Okafor debate. I’m not suggesting Bagley is at all the same as Towns or Ayton is exactly like Okafor, but the general trend of valuing the big who can play in space and relies on face-up ability over back-to-the-basket scoring applies.

In summary, Bagley has a more realistic path to offensive stardom than Ayton does. His combination of rim-rolling dynamism and face-up skill has the potential to elevate an offense in ways Ayton’s more post-centric game simply cannot.

This does not necessarily mean Bagley is the better prospect. If you don’t believe Bagley can hold up at the 5 defensively, or if you do believe in Ayton’s potential to dramatically improve as a defender, Ayton very well might still be the better pick.

This piece isn’t going to dive into those questions in detail. But, spoiler alert, I think Bagley can hold up at the five for a significant portion of his minutes (see Capela, Clint), and I don’t see reason to believe Ayton is a significantly better defensive prospect, even at the center position. As a result, if I were drafting a flawed defensive big for their offensive upside, I would take Marvin Bagley.