Author Topic: Convince Me Markelle Fultz isn't #1 Pick...  (Read 9491 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Convince Me Markelle Fultz isn't #1 Pick...
« Reply #45 on: April 25, 2017, 05:52:26 PM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • NCE
  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20000
  • Tommy Points: 1323
Quote
Quote
Watch the Lakers take Fultz and leave us hanging with Ball and his daddy

If Ainge trusts him enough, I trust his ability to evaluate guards.  But I think we need some frontcourt help.

Re: Convince Me Markelle Fultz isn't #1 Pick...
« Reply #46 on: April 25, 2017, 06:13:39 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58470
  • Tommy Points: -25640
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
I think Fultz is a great prospect, but I've seen him labeled by members as "the best prospect since Lebron" and a future top-5 player.

What separates him from a guy like Kyrie and launches him into Harden / Westbrook / Durant territory?


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: Convince Me Markelle Fultz isn't #1 Pick...
« Reply #47 on: April 25, 2017, 06:27:44 PM »

Offline Granath

  • NCE
  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2154
  • Tommy Points: 567
My biggest issue is how everyone around here is so convinced that Fultz is the best prospect by a mile, when he barely had any national exposure on TV. Like I said, I only recall Washington being on National TV once, and that was against Ball and UCLA. You would think Fultz had games on ESPN and CBS twice a week with the way people praise him so much in these forums. It's one thin to watch a player and another to just read a draft report. I don't recall reading when you said you have seen him play, which was basically the only question I had in my entire post.

Like I said in my post, I don't want to hear about the so-called inferior talent on the Washington team. You mentioned how Washington lost Andrews, Murray, and Chriss. If I recall, didn't they have one of the highest ranked prospects initially commit to them next year before ultimately changing his mind? It seems to me that Washington is not struggling to get talent to their school. How many schools in the nation can claim they had as many NBA players drafted between last year and this upcoming draft? The answer, not many. Was is just a massive coincidence that this Washington team had the best player in college basketball, but decided to recruit JV talent that wouldn't start on a Division III team?

I'm sorry, but I find it almost impossible for a so called number 1 pick, who arguably plays the most important position in college basketball, to only lead his team to 9 wins. I just think we need to pump the brakes on Fultz, and look past the numbers because intangibles also matter when your in a position to draft in the top 4.

When I referred to the highlight reel, I was basically referencing that he seems to be more of a scoring PG than a pure PG. Besides Stephen Curry two years ago, when was the last team to win a title, where their PG was the leading scorer? I have always been of the mindset, that your PG can not be your go to scorer, and have any hopes of winning a championship.

Having lived in DC last year, I saw Fultz play HS ball at DeMatha who always has a great team and pro prospects. I also caught a few of his games regionally while on the the road this year. So yes, to answer your question, I have seen him play. He looks to be [dang] good. Bad teams don't get national TV exposure. 

If you "don't want to hear" about the truth then fine I'll lie to you. Fultz is 8 feet tall and plays like Zeus. Better? To use your logic, Anthony Davis sucks because the Pels can't win. Or that somehow he's driving off pending FAs. Neither works. The Huskies recruited a bunch of good froshes and unexpectedly had them all leave for the NBA. They were gutted and didn't recruit well enough to backfill. This happens with mid-tier teams. Fultz got the short end of the stick on that one.

Again, you've already admitted you've never seen him play. You don't know a thing beyond the Huskies miserable record and a couple of stats you can read on Basketball Reference. Do you really want to argue with someone who actually has seen him play? Do you really think your thinly veiled allusions to somehow Fultz driving off potential recruits with no evidence to back it up somehow works as logic around here?

I'll tell you what. Here's a link to a complete game - probably Fultz's worst all year that I saw him play and one of Ball's best: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXj3uzlcEQ8  Watch it and then tell us what you think about the various talent that surrounds each player.

Dude, chill out. Why are you taking so offense to me questioning this overwhelming notion that Fultz is by far and away the #1 pick? I never said I didn't want the Celtics to pick Fultz. Well, thanks to you, I went onto nbadraft.net and saw the D'Angelo Russell comparison. Needless to say, I just threw up in my mouth. But you saw him in high school, so he must be great.

You're ignorant. That's not a problem. But that you seem revel wallowing in it like a hog in his own crap is not going to further the disucssion. Don't come here professing your ignorance, repeatedly state that you don't want to know the truth and then proceed to argue with people who actually know more than you do. You asked the question and now you don't like the answer you got. So don't tell me to "chill out". Instead, go learn something so you can actually contribute.

There is never a guaranteed lock coming out of college (Oden) but Fultz ticks off virtually every box on the checklist. The difference between Ball and Fultz? Ball may very well need a system built around him to succeed. With Fultz you can use him to build the system.

PS - the De'Angelo Russell comparison is really a lousy one. Russell doesn't have anywhere near the same athleticism or shot creation skills. It's an absolute crap comparison only made because they're both 6'5". They might as well be comparing Yabu to Draymond Green.
Jaylen Brown will be an All Star in the next 5 years.

Re: Convince Me Markelle Fultz isn't #1 Pick...
« Reply #48 on: April 25, 2017, 06:42:11 PM »

Offline Granath

  • NCE
  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2154
  • Tommy Points: 567
I think Fultz is a great prospect, but I've seen him labeled by members as "the best prospect since Lebron" and a future top-5 player.

What separates him from a guy like Kyrie and launches him into Harden / Westbrook / Durant territory?

Hard work and three inches?

Kyrie just put up 25ppg a game to go along with 5 assists. That's not anything to scoff at. So we're starting at a high level. But what's the difference between those kinds of guys? It's the work they put in.

Beyond that, the biggest knock on Irving was his lack of durability and the limited amount of games he played before he turned pro. The durability thing has turned out to be somewhat true, playing in fewer than 60 games in half of his 6 seasons. Kyrie also is a massive defensive liability and doesn't see the court particularly well. His college stats bear that out - averaging fewer than 5 assists - and was an exceptionally poor rebounder (3.4). I also think that with his limited exposure scouts didn't get to really analyze his BBIQ whereas they're high on both Fultz and Ball in that regard.

Fultz is a bit more athletic and significantly longer. He shouldn't have as much of a problem getting his shot off. But ultimately - like every other gifted player - he's going to be a 2nd tier All-Star unless he puts in the work. There's no NBA combine test for heart. Westbrook put in the work every year for the past 8. He's doubled his rebounding rate. He's greatly improved his assist rate. He actually has a 3 point shot now. He worked his butt off. Harden did something similar. He improved his rebounding and assist rate every year while actually not becoming a total liability on the defensive end. While this years' stats actually look like abnormalities rather than natural growth, the work was put in and you could see the improvement in his game every year. I don't get the same feeling from Kyrie - he just seems too content to let King James do the heavy lifting and coasts on defense. But then again the same thing was said about Harden and look at him now.

Personally, I'm just [dang]ed happy to have a top 4 pick. That's just a beautiful thing.
Jaylen Brown will be an All Star in the next 5 years.

Re: Convince Me Markelle Fultz isn't #1 Pick...
« Reply #49 on: April 25, 2017, 06:47:26 PM »

Offline chilidawg

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2009
  • Tommy Points: 261
I think Fultz is a great prospect, but I've seen him labeled by members as "the best prospect since Lebron" and a future top-5 player.

What separates him from a guy like Kyrie and launches him into Harden / Westbrook / Durant territory?

Hard work and three inches?

Kyrie just put up 25ppg a game to go along with 5 assists. That's not anything to scoff at. So we're starting at a high level. But what's the difference between those kinds of guys? It's the work they put in.

Beyond that, the biggest knock on Irving was his lack of durability and the limited amount of games he played before he turned pro. The durability thing has turned out to be somewhat true, playing in fewer than 60 games in half of his 6 seasons. Kyrie also is a massive defensive liability and doesn't see the court particularly well. His college stats bear that out - averaging fewer than 5 assists - and was an exceptionally poor rebounder (3.4). I also think that with his limited exposure scouts didn't get to really analyze his BBIQ whereas they're high on both Fultz and Ball in that regard.

Fultz is a bit more athletic and significantly longer. He shouldn't have as much of a problem getting his shot off. But ultimately - like every other gifted player - he's going to be a 2nd tier All-Star unless he puts in the work. There's no NBA combine test for heart. Westbrook put in the work every year for the past 8. He's doubled his rebounding rate. He's greatly improved his assist rate. He actually has a 3 point shot now. He worked his butt off. Harden did something similar. He improved his rebounding and assist rate every year while actually not becoming a total liability on the defensive end. While this years' stats actually look like abnormalities rather than natural growth, the work was put in and you could see the improvement in his game every year. I don't get the same feeling from Kyrie - he just seems too content to let King James do the heavy lifting and coasts on defense. But then again the same thing was said about Harden and look at him now.

Personally, I'm just [dang]ed happy to have a top 4 pick. That's just a beautiful thing.

This is such a good point.  With any of these players we're projecting what they will become, and that comes with hard work and being in a good situation.  It's why the draft is such a crapshoot.