Celtics should only draft guys that have upside to be an NBA star. I would understand Isaac for that reason. But Jackson? Idk, maybe he will work hard enough to be Scottie Pippen, but I don't see it. I see Iggy at best. And Iggy is no Scottie Pippen. Iggy is great though.
You just convinced yourself iggy is good lol
Listen there is no durant from this draft
An iggy calibre talent is an amazing addition. Dont forget how good he was vs lebron 2 years ago
He's good, but Fultz and Ball should be stars. So let's just not include them because I honestly don't know if we will be able to draft them. We're really looking at the #3 spot. So imo, Harry Giles can be an all star. Isaac has huge upside. So does Patton. I think all those players can be better than Jackson. Dennis Smith is better. I would rather draft him, hope he turns into an all star and then trade him.
Jackson is the safer bet, but we need to shoot for the moon like we did with Jaylen Brown.
Nobody knows... Did fultz do well vs Allen(strong team) the last game.. He shot 8-23, 16 pts. Did not look like a #1 pick
I think he is a good talent but Beal/McCollum good... Nothing crazy like you think
If he was a mega superstar , he would carry his mediocre to wins
That is what durant , wade, duncan did for their college teams
I would recommend this read before making any conclusions about Fultz. I think it's an insult to compare him to Beal/McCollum lol. But that's just me.
https://theringer.com/scouting-possible-no-1-pick-markelle-fultz-in-person-6e2fdcf3d727#.bpnzkjm9k
Unless he can perform well against top schools or even help his mediocre team beat other mediocre teams, how do you know he will be a mega star? Better than Beal(who is an all star btw)
Because he is averaging good stats against mediocre teams, he is going to be the next something special?
He has played well against good competition. You are talking about one game as if players dont have below average games. You are putting alot of emphasis on college numbers in which guys only stay one year. College is not the same as it used to be where you are facing so many high level teams.
Anyways, as a side note, the trainer for Bradley Beal whom you just called an all star said Tatum whom he also trains should go #1 so take that however you want it.
Want to give an example of this? They've played 3 ranked teams and he hasn't had a particularly good game against any of them.
In each of those games he scored at least 16. He doesnt ahve to dominate in those games to be considered a good player considering the players that he has next to him. Its not like he has a physical advantage over guys.
These games arent the only big games he has played. He has played far more on the HS and international level in which he has had no problem.
I dont look at college games the way i think many do. Im looking to see what skills a player has vs given competition. Heild put up crazy number and what he he done? CAn guys make plays and what skills do they have are my evaluation tools. Its also what has a guy done over time. You mention 3 games, im talking about what has he done over 2 years.
So basically you are saying... who cares if they actually win games in college
as long as they play for themselves, pad stats..... as long as they can show that they can dribble stop and pop....jump shot looks smooth.... looks functional on defense....
why don't these players just hold several private workouts for NBA teams then?
No. Im saying that a team winning and losing is not the end all be all. Fultz could have gone to any school. If he goes to a program with more talent then we wouldnt be having this question.
I dont expect his team to win against the best teams because he isnt a physically dominate player. As just when he is playing in big college games what I want to see are skills being shown. The player showing skills is not team dependent nor does it have anything to do with stats. I dont put much stock in stats because you can pad stats.
When I look at a player i look at what they have been able to do over the course of the time I have seen them. What areas have they improved or not improved. I look at each game to see if they offer something that I didnt already know about the player.
For instance, with the Cs, Jaylen has had all power dunks driving right and finishing right, but if you saw most of his Cal games there were a few games that he got up and finished hard left. This tells me he is explosive at the rim and has ability to finish with either hand which he has showed.
This observation has nothing to do with stats or if they won those games but i think they did because one was against Richmond and the other i cant remember.
Bottom line is I dont put the same level of emphasis on his play against big schools nor the results of the games. Do I look at how he plays in those games, sure but unless I see a pattern of not beig able to do something against elite players its just a blip along the evel process.
