Fultz vs Ball... Traditional Talent vs Unicorn Talent

[coffee425]

The top two prospects in this draft have been undoubtedly Markelle Fultz (Washington) and Lonzo Ball (UCLA). They are absolutely amazing elite talent within a pretty tough power conference, and I don't think Danny would pass up either one just because of a roster logjam.

Anyway, the point of this post is to ask the question of what type of talent you are willing to risk taking with a top pick. Would you rather a traditional elite talent (Fultz) with lower risk/lower reward or a unicorn type talent (Ball) with higher risk/higher reward? I'll explain....

Fultz is your all-around guard talent. He is above average to elite in almost every category. Shooting, scoring, ball-handling, playmaking, defensive instincts, point-guard instincts, and decent athleticism. You almost know for sure that he will be a starting PG in the league. However, we have seen players play like him, even if they're not an elite talent like he is. In other words, i think he is a sure-fire starter (maybe allstar) but he doesn't cause a nightly mismatch for all other 29 teams.

Ball is a completely different animal. Everything about him screams unorthodox and unpredictable. He shoots weird, but makes his shots with huge range. He's 6'6 but has the shiftiness and ballhandling of an And1 player. He's a skinny rail but has SF length on defense. Oh and he's the best dunker on his UCLA team. And I dont think i have to talk about his passing and basketball IQ.  I have no idea if his unorthodox play will translate to the NBA, but if it does, this kid would be a complete mismatch for all 29 teams. You cant guard him with a smaller guard because he'll just pass and shoot over them, but he's athletic enough to blow by any bigman (or jump over them).  I know he's been compared to Jason Kidd but this kid is more athletic IMO.

All this talk about unicorns, and he is the only one in this draft class that would fit this category. But man, talk about risky. I think at no.1 pick, I'll take the unicorn. But I'll probably change my mind a hundred more times between now and the draft.

[Csfan1984]

I think if you want to have a system guy you take Fultz. If you want a young running team that can run a vet team out the gym you take Ball. Examples

Wolves take Ball #1
C's take Fultz #1
Suns take Ball #1
Heat take Fultz #1
Mavs take Ball ...
Lakers take Fultz ...
Nuggets take Ball...
76ers take which ever one needs surgery and will sit out his rookie year.

[CelticGuardian]

The top two prospects in this draft have been undoubtedly Markelle Fultz (Washington) and Lonzo Ball (UCLA). They are absolutely amazing elite talent within a pretty tough power conference, and I don't think Danny would pass up either one just because of a roster logjam.

Anyway, the point of this post is to ask the question of what type of talent you are willing to risk taking with a top pick. Would you rather a traditional elite talent (Fultz) with lower risk/lower reward or a unicorn type talent (Ball) with higher risk/higher reward? I'll explain....

Fultz is your all-around guard talent. He is above average to elite in almost every category. Shooting, scoring, ball-handling, playmaking, defensive instincts, point-guard instincts, and decent athleticism. You almost know for sure that he will be a starting PG in the league. However, we have seen players play like him, even if they're not an elite talent like he is. In other words, i think he is a sure-fire starter (maybe allstar) but he doesn't cause a nightly mismatch for all other 29 teams.

Ball is a completely different animal. Everything about him screams unorthodox and unpredictable. He shoots weird, but makes his shots with huge range. He's 6'6 but has the shiftiness and ballhandling of an And1 player. He's a skinny rail but has SF length on defense. Oh and he's the best dunker on his UCLA team. And I dont think i have to talk about his passing and basketball IQ.  I have no idea if his unorthodox play will translate to the NBA, but if it does, this kid would be a complete mismatch for all 29 teams. You cant guard him with a smaller guard because he'll just pass and shoot over them, but he's athletic enough to blow by any bigman (or jump over them).  I know he's been compared to Jason Kidd but this kid is more athletic IMO.

All this talk about unicorns, and he is the only one in this draft class that would fit this category. But man, talk about risky. I think at no.1 pick, I'll take the unicorn. But I'll probably change my mind a hundred more times between now and the draft.

I'm starting to think that this draft is almost too stacked, in the sense that all those guys in the top 10 look like they could have gone #1 in 2013. C's are really going to need to do their homework. It's pretty much looking like Fultz is 1A and Ball 1B, with other players such as Josh Jackson and Harry Giles coming in at 1C and 1D lol It's just too many prospects that look like they can be special. There must be like 3 players worth that number 1 pick right now.

But on topic, Ball vs Fultz. I'm going on a limb and gonna tell you that Fultz will be better because I feel like wherever Lonzo goes he's going to need a set of circumstances to be just right for his talent to really flourish. His future coach is going to have to adapt to his style, he is at his best storming down the court at warp speed with defenders not knowing if he's going to attack, pull up(he rarely does btw) or pass. For that he's going to need good spacing (UCLA is shooting 44% from deep) most of his assist comes from whipping the ball quickly to shooters, most bad teams in the NBA do not have a plethora of shooters. Also, his future coach must give him the green light for shots way behind the three point line, because if he can't stretch the defense that far out then his fastbreak style of offense is not going to work in the NBA.

Fultz, has this thing about him that assures me he'll be at least a 'good' scorer at the next level and that is his conviction on shots. When he looks to score it, he is going to. There's not a shot I seen him take that was half assed or a desperation attempt and he does this because of how fearless he is initiating contact from defenders and still getting shots off (Ball doesn't do this) , this tells me he can be unfazed by a defense and will be getting to the foul line a lot in his NBA career, especially considering how tight his handle is at 18. All great scorers, like James Harden for example, have these attributes.

[Ogaju]

The top two prospects in this draft have been undoubtedly Markelle Fultz (Washington) and Lonzo Ball (UCLA). They are absolutely amazing elite talent within a pretty tough power conference, and I don't think Danny would pass up either one just because of a roster logjam.

Anyway, the point of this post is to ask the question of what type of talent you are willing to risk taking with a top pick. Would you rather a traditional elite talent (Fultz) with lower risk/lower reward or a unicorn type talent (Ball) with higher risk/higher reward? I'll explain....

Fultz is your all-around guard talent. He is above average to elite in almost every category. Shooting, scoring, ball-handling, playmaking, defensive instincts, point-guard instincts, and decent athleticism. You almost know for sure that he will be a starting PG in the league. However, we have seen players play like him, even if they're not an elite talent like he is. In other words, i think he is a sure-fire starter (maybe allstar) but he doesn't cause a nightly mismatch for all other 29 teams.

Ball is a completely different animal. Everything about him screams unorthodox and unpredictable. He shoots weird, but makes his shots with huge range. He's 6'6 but has the shiftiness and ballhandling of an And1 player. He's a skinny rail but has SF length on defense. Oh and he's the best dunker on his UCLA team. And I dont think i have to talk about his passing and basketball IQ.  I have no idea if his unorthodox play will translate to the NBA, but if it does, this kid would be a complete mismatch for all 29 teams. You cant guard him with a smaller guard because he'll just pass and shoot over them, but he's athletic enough to blow by any bigman (or jump over them).  I know he's been compared to Jason Kidd but this kid is more athletic IMO.

All this talk about unicorns, and he is the only one in this draft class that would fit this category. But man, talk about risky. I think at no.1 pick, I'll take the unicorn. But I'll probably change my mind a hundred more times between now and the draft.

You are giving too much credit to Ball. Ball needs to go all out against college competition where Fultz is toying with them. Fultz has more upside. Fultz has another gear, Ball is showing you all he has.

[Androslav]

Fultz is a sure thing. Possibly could be the best player on a contender.
Ball seems as a great role player in the nba. Won't be the best primary ballhandler, player on a contender, but he could knock down spot ups and offer great passing. Some switchability also. I like the comparison of Korver that passes briliantly, but has ugly looking and more blockable shot.

[CelticGuardian]

The top two prospects in this draft have been undoubtedly Markelle Fultz (Washington) and Lonzo Ball (UCLA). They are absolutely amazing elite talent within a pretty tough power conference, and I don't think Danny would pass up either one just because of a roster logjam.

Anyway, the point of this post is to ask the question of what type of talent you are willing to risk taking with a top pick. Would you rather a traditional elite talent (Fultz) with lower risk/lower reward or a unicorn type talent (Ball) with higher risk/higher reward? I'll explain....

Fultz is your all-around guard talent. He is above average to elite in almost every category. Shooting, scoring, ball-handling, playmaking, defensive instincts, point-guard instincts, and decent athleticism. You almost know for sure that he will be a starting PG in the league. However, we have seen players play like him, even if they're not an elite talent like he is. In other words, i think he is a sure-fire starter (maybe allstar) but he doesn't cause a nightly mismatch for all other 29 teams.

Ball is a completely different animal. Everything about him screams unorthodox and unpredictable. He shoots weird, but makes his shots with huge range. He's 6'6 but has the shiftiness and ballhandling of an And1 player. He's a skinny rail but has SF length on defense. Oh and he's the best dunker on his UCLA team. And I dont think i have to talk about his passing and basketball IQ.  I have no idea if his unorthodox play will translate to the NBA, but if it does, this kid would be a complete mismatch for all 29 teams. You cant guard him with a smaller guard because he'll just pass and shoot over them, but he's athletic enough to blow by any bigman (or jump over them).  I know he's been compared to Jason Kidd but this kid is more athletic IMO.

All this talk about unicorns, and he is the only one in this draft class that would fit this category. But man, talk about risky. I think at no.1 pick, I'll take the unicorn. But I'll probably change my mind a hundred more times between now and the draft.

You are giving too much credit to Ball. Ball needs to go all out against college competition where Fultz is toying with them. Fultz has more upside. Fultz has another gear, Ball is showing you all he has.

TP, I think you're on the money here.

[csfansince60s]

I really don't get all this Futz anointing here.Anybody watch him play or just reading reports, box scores and highlight mixes.

 He has the skills no doubt, and maybe he will eventually prove deserving of the number one pick in this draft, but right now I don't see the heart, will to win and the ability or willingness to make others around him better. Not even close to being a leader yet, unlike Ball who checks ALL of the above boxes.

Last night vs Cal and New Years Night vs rival WSh State, he folded like a cheap suit in crunch time. He couldn't finish on two drives late in the game in both games.he also threw up (maybe both ways), by hoisting an uncontested WAY off the mark three.
.
I'd like to see him at crunch time in more close games before I rate him higher than Ball

[BlackCeltic]

I like Fultz because he can play SG at the next level for us. I think the only other option for us is Josh Jackson, who I dont think is worth the #1 pick at the moment.

[coffee425]

The top two prospects in this draft have been undoubtedly Markelle Fultz (Washington) and Lonzo Ball (UCLA). They are absolutely amazing elite talent within a pretty tough power conference, and I don't think Danny would pass up either one just because of a roster logjam.

Anyway, the point of this post is to ask the question of what type of talent you are willing to risk taking with a top pick. Would you rather a traditional elite talent (Fultz) with lower risk/lower reward or a unicorn type talent (Ball) with higher risk/higher reward? I'll explain....

Fultz is your all-around guard talent. He is above average to elite in almost every category. Shooting, scoring, ball-handling, playmaking, defensive instincts, point-guard instincts, and decent athleticism. You almost know for sure that he will be a starting PG in the league. However, we have seen players play like him, even if they're not an elite talent like he is. In other words, i think he is a sure-fire starter (maybe allstar) but he doesn't cause a nightly mismatch for all other 29 teams.

Ball is a completely different animal. Everything about him screams unorthodox and unpredictable. He shoots weird, but makes his shots with huge range. He's 6'6 but has the shiftiness and ballhandling of an And1 player. He's a skinny rail but has SF length on defense. Oh and he's the best dunker on his UCLA team. And I dont think i have to talk about his passing and basketball IQ.  I have no idea if his unorthodox play will translate to the NBA, but if it does, this kid would be a complete mismatch for all 29 teams. You cant guard him with a smaller guard because he'll just pass and shoot over them, but he's athletic enough to blow by any bigman (or jump over them).  I know he's been compared to Jason Kidd but this kid is more athletic IMO.

All this talk about unicorns, and he is the only one in this draft class that would fit this category. But man, talk about risky. I think at no.1 pick, I'll take the unicorn. But I'll probably change my mind a hundred more times between now and the draft.

You are giving too much credit to Ball. Ball needs to go all out against college competition where Fultz is toying with them. Fultz has more upside. Fultz has another gear, Ball is showing you all he has.

TP, I think you're on the money here.

I completely disagree. When i watch UCLA game, Ball doesn't even look like he's sweating. If anything, I would love to see him attack the basket more instead of just pulling up from 30ft

[green_bballers13]

James Hardenish/Lillardish vs Jason Kiddish. Very rough comps.

I'll take Lillardish over Kiddish. We need another top scorer. If Lillardish can play the #2 effectively, I'll take him.

I want Fultz with #1. I would take Ball after Jackson and Tatum.

[CelticGuardian]

I really don't get all this Futz anointing here.Anybody watch him play or just reading reports, box scores and highlight mixes.

 He has the skills no doubt, and maybe he will eventually prove deserving of the number one pick in this draft, but right now I don't see the heart, will to win and the ability or willingness to make others around him better. Not even close to being a leader yet, unlike Ball who checks ALL of the above boxes.

Last night vs Cal and New Years Night vs rival WSh State, he folded like a cheap suit in crunch time. He couldn't finish on two drives late in the game in both games.he also threw up (maybe both ways), by hoisting an uncontested WAY off the mark three.
.
I'd like to see him at crunch time in more close games before I rate him higher than Ball

To be fair, Ball plays alongside another high lotto pick in TJ Leaf. Fultz literally has zero help aside from a 6 foot sophomore guard that can shoot a little bit. But we are in luck because they play in the same conference! So Feb 4th, will be an interesting day as UCLA and Washington faces off.

[Granath]

I'm starting to think that this draft is almost too stacked...

Ain't no such thing when you're holding the #1 lottery position by 2 games. 

[tankcity!]

I really don't get all this Futz anointing here.Anybody watch him play or just reading reports, box scores and highlight mixes.

 He has the skills no doubt, and maybe he will eventually prove deserving of the number one pick in this draft, but right now I don't see the heart, will to win and the ability or willingness to make others around him better. Not even close to being a leader yet, unlike Ball who checks ALL of the above boxes.

Last night vs Cal and New Years Night vs rival WSh State, he folded like a cheap suit in crunch time. He couldn't finish on two drives late in the game in both games.he also threw up (maybe both ways), by hoisting an uncontested WAY off the mark three.
.
I'd like to see him at crunch time in more close games before I rate him higher than Ball

You could say that about a lot of college players. Jaylen Brown for example, who didn't really look like he put much effort at times. Bill Simmons did compare him to Jeff Green when we drafted him. Ben Simmons as well who was taken #1.  Hard to judge a player's compete level when he's not on a great college team and the coaches have a lot more say.

I think from watching Fultz, it's rather obvious the kid is a stud. His game is very polished, hard to complain.

[sdceltsfan]

I'm not as convinced that Ball's game will transfer to the NBA as easily as Fultz. Ball also has a very strange looking release on his jumper and I wonder how often he will get space against NBA-caliber defenders to complete shots.

Ball is the superior driver, but not by a lot.

I personally don't even see the comparison. Fultz is the #1 pick, even if a team has a CP3/Curry/Wall starting PG. Fultz is such a complete player, and his ability to get off quick turnaround jump shots, stop on a dime and get a square shot off, and just having such a perfect looking release every time just screams direct translation in to the NBA. His game is a combination of Curry/Wall. Not at all as skilled of a driver as Wall, and obviously not as deadly accurate from anywhere on the court as Curry, but he possesses both skill-sets and looks very smooth and in control while doing it.

You know that Philly is drooling over this guy. I'm sure they consider Ball a fine consolation prize too. My hope is they end up with the #3 or 4 pick, where they have no guarantee of getting either player. I would love to see them with that #3/4 pick, and the Lakers pick somewhere in the 6-8 range, and try to get both picks and maybe a future selection or also Okafor. We can then take Josh Jackson, Tatum or Giles, and have an insanely athletic and young rotation. Trade chips for days in 2017-2018 to make a consolidation type of trade. Hard not to be excited about this off-season. It's looking like a no-lose situation for the Celtics!

[csfansince60s]

I really don't get all this Futz anointing here.Anybody watch him play or just reading reports, box scores and highlight mixes.

 He has the skills no doubt, and maybe he will eventually prove deserving of the number one pick in this draft, but right now I don't see the heart, will to win and the ability or willingness to make others around him better. Not even close to being a leader yet, unlike Ball who checks ALL of the above boxes.

Last night vs Cal and New Years Night vs rival WSh State, he folded like a cheap suit in crunch time. He couldn't finish on two drives late in the game in both games.he also threw up (maybe both ways), by hoisting an uncontested WAY off the mark three.
.
I'd like to see him at crunch time in more close games before I rate him higher than Ball

To be fair, Ball plays alongside another high lotto pick in TJ Leaf. Fultz literally has zero help aside from a 6 foot sophomore guard that can shoot a little bit. But we are in luck because they play in the same conference! So Feb 4th, will be an interesting day as UCLA and Washington faces off.

Keep an eye on Fultz's movement when the ball is not in his hands (where it really should be if he is that good a player and his roster sucks). His movement is almost non-existent, and he looks very disinterested.