Help me out with this logic, please

[kozlodoev]

Well, I didn't personally take a tape measure to either of them, so I'm a slave to ESPN, DraftExpress, the Washington Huskies, and every other public source that claims Fultz is now 6'4".  I don't see how one measurement at USA 2016 trumps every other measurement.

Even if it's 6 inches, my point stands.  6 inches might as well be 3 miles as an NBA defender.

Sure. Six inches is a lot, but we've now crept to a 9 inch estimate for something that might be really closer to 5 (Thomas has measured no shorter than 5'10.25 and as tall as 5'11). That's urban legend territory.

DraftExpress list three actual measurements for Fultz; note that measurements are different from a number the Huskies decided to put in a media guide. These are, in order of occurrence: 6'4, 6'4.75, and 6'3.5. Based on this, what his real height is is anyone's guess -- but there's no reason to doubt the 6'3.5 more or less than the 6'4.75.

I'm not losing sleep over a 1.25 inch disparity (at most).  It's clear that he's an NBA athlete with elite length and a savant when it comes to finishing around the rim.  That's where the 1 inch tends to matter and he's got it all locked up.  No worries at all about his size.  I think he's a good, not great athlete fwiw.

His defense and his drive are the only question marks for me.  He's such a virtuoso scorer that he dropped 23 a game largely settling for pull up jumpers off the bounce.  It's impressive, but he did treat the season like an NBA audition and his team lost a lot.

Sure, I agree. My reaction was mostly about Thomas and less about Fultz. Thomas is small, but he's not Muggsy Bogues, or Earl Boykins.

[kraidstar]

I keep reading that Fultz is like IT offensively, except 6'4". Most fans wouldn't be surprised to see Fultz someday put up 25 points and 6 assists.

I'm also reading that IT hurts our offense and that he should be a 6th man.

So, why are we taking Fultz again? Using the #1 pick on a 6th man who would stagnate our offense sounds like a horrible idea.

You're only mentioning the offensive side of the ball. On defense, where Thomas is constantly exploited, Fultz has the size, length, and athleticism to potentially be a plus defender.

It's like comparing Okafor and Horford and asking why one is a 4 time all-star, the other a bench player on a lowly team, yet their stats are fairly similar.

TP

THIS^^^

I just don't understand how some can't see the value of defense. That you're willing to ignore the fact that you have a player that is such a liability on defense, due to his size, that the remaining players on the floor must expend extra energy to cover for him. That he can't be left alone with a majority of NBA players because they easily and simply shoot over him.

I'm talking about winning a ring, not simply being in the playoffs.

Fultz also has a 6" 9 3/4" wingspan, which is huge for a guy his height. Compare that to Ball, who has only a 6' 7" wingspan, despite being two inches taller.That length will greatly aid Fultz on defense.

He has tons of potential on that end.

[action781]

I keep reading that Fultz is like IT offensively, except 6'4". Most fans wouldn't be surprised to see Fultz someday put up 25 points and 6 assists.

I'm also reading that IT hurts our offense and that he should be a 6th man.

So, why are we taking Fultz again? Using the #1 pick on a 6th man who would stagnate our offense sounds like a horrible idea.

If somebody tells you that IT hurts our offense, they just need to be directed here http://www.82games.com/1617/16BOS1.HTM#onoff

Offense: Pts per 100 Poss.
On court: 117.5
Off court: 103.3
Net:  +14.1


If they are talking about defense though, they would be correct.

Defense: Pts per 100 Poss.
On court: 113.0
Off court: 103.5
Net: +9.6

[rochrist]

I keep reading that Fultz is like IT offensively, except 6'4". Most fans wouldn't be surprised to see Fultz someday put up 25 points and 6 assists.

I'm also reading that IT hurts our offense and that he should be a 6th man.

So, why are we taking Fultz again? Using the #1 pick on a 6th man who would stagnate our offense sounds like a horrible idea.

Because he IS 6'4" (more like 6'5" pushing 6'6") and has all the tools to be an effective defensive player.

[mmmmm]

On Fultz' rapidly changing numbers in 2016 -- this is probably real.

The Hoop Summit happened in April, and USA Basketball -- in July. So if these are real, this means that Fultz shrank an inch and a quarter over two months. And his arms mysteriously grew in the process, because he only lost .5 inch in standing reach.

There's no way both of these are real.

Good point.  I didn't look at the exact chronology.  I just wouldn't be surprised to see his numbers changing over that span of time.

The Hoop Summit measurements are conducted in a similar manner to the Combine event.  I'm not sure about the USA Basketball ones.   That's the one that seems a bit odd.

[rochrist]

I keep reading that Fultz is like IT offensively, except 6'4". Most fans wouldn't be surprised to see Fultz someday put up 25 points and 6 assists.

I'm also reading that IT hurts our offense and that he should be a 6th man.

So, why are we taking Fultz again? Using the #1 pick on a 6th man who would stagnate our offense sounds like a horrible idea.

For the record, and you can check my posts.  I'm in the lonzo ball and josh Jackson camp.  I don't think fultz will do much in the NBA to be honest.  I think ball fills a need for scoring and passing as does Jackson.  Ideally:

Smart/It
Ball
Brown
Crowder
Zizic

With Nader, rozier, yabusle off the bench.  It won't be a 6th man and rightfully so as he's earned the right to start but man, the aforementioned crew would have a hard time scoring with him at the point.  That's why I say trade him and get some picks and maybe a big that we can bring in to work with Zizic.  Demarcus cousins maybe

Yuck. I hate every bit of this, from the analysis to the prescription.

Ball is one who will be lucky to be anything more than Rondo at best. Fultz has elite scorer written all over him and has all the tools to be a good defender as well.

[rochrist]

I don't know where you get the IT comparison like he is version 2.0 but even if he is he as an 18-year old is 8 inches taller which already gives him an edge.

I am hearing he could be a "James Harden" 2.0 or Russell Westbrook 2.0 which is even a step above.

I didn't realize Fultz grew to over 6'6 overnight.

He didn't. It was over a year and a half.

[tarheelsxxiii]

Roy starting a click bait thread to get all the "IT is a bench player" posters to all post in one thread....lol!!!

It's been incredibly effective, too. 

[kozlodoev]

I don't know where you get the IT comparison like he is version 2.0 but even if he is he as an 18-year old is 8 inches taller which already gives him an edge.

I am hearing he could be a "James Harden" 2.0 or Russell Westbrook 2.0 which is even a step above.

I didn't realize Fultz grew to over 6'6 overnight.

He didn't. It was over a year and a half.

I'm not going to repeat everything I said since that post. Please refer to the discussion above.

[rochrist]

Fultz was an average defender at best in college.  He gets some chasedown blocks and he gets in passing lanes due to his length and burst, but he wasn't locking anyone down.  If you watch the games, he wasn't that interested in playing D.  That said, he is 8-9 inches taller and can't be worse on D than IT.  He's very much an offensive player who projects as an average NBA defender IMO.

Really, didn't we have this discussion a page ago? This is just false. Fultz is 6 inches taller than Thomas. Perhaps less.

I'm arriving late, but Fultz is 6'4" and IT is 5'8".   Scal has suggested many times that IT might be less than 5'8".  Every source has Fultz at at least 6'4".  Hence, 8-9.

edit: Fultz is also 18 and may still grow

Nope. Thomas is over 5'10. That's pretty well established.

Scal may suggest that the moon is made of Swiss cheese, but I know it from a good source that they take actual, real measurements at the NBA combine -- and that's where came in at 5'0 1/4 in shoes.

Likewise incorrect on Fultz, who has measured at 6'3 1/2 in 2016. Also see my previous post on his curious shrinking case.

Clearly you've never actually looked at IT when he was standing next to anybody.

And why would you be surprised that a 17 year old in the middle of a growth spurt might have a different measurement a year later?

[kozlodoev]

On Fultz' rapidly changing numbers in 2016 -- this is probably real.

The Hoop Summit happened in April, and USA Basketball -- in July. So if these are real, this means that Fultz shrank an inch and a quarter over two months. And his arms mysteriously grew in the process, because he only lost .5 inch in standing reach.

There's no way both of these are real.

Good point.  I didn't look at the exact chronology.  I just wouldn't be surprised to see his numbers changing over that span of time.

The Hoop Summit measurements are conducted in a similar manner to the Combine event.  I'm not sure about the USA Basketball ones.   That's the one that seems a bit odd.

I'm not sure about the USA Basketball ones either. It's possible that they measured him at some point prior to the announcement? I doubt they typoed the height. And I still can't understand the standing reach.

[rochrist]

I don't know where you get the IT comparison like he is version 2.0 but even if he is he as an 18-year old is 8 inches taller which already gives him an edge.

I am hearing he could be a "James Harden" 2.0 or Russell Westbrook 2.0 which is even a step above.

I didn't realize Fultz grew to over 6'6 overnight.

He didn't. It was over a year and a half.

I'm not going to repeat everything I said since that post. Please refer to the discussion above.

I did. It wasn't convincing.

[kozlodoev]

Clearly you've never actually looked at IT when he was standing next to anybody.

The NBA does official measurements at the combine. Believe it or not -- these are public and very much real. Certainly more real than someone's "hey he looks small on TV, must be 5'6" assessment of height.

And why would you be surprised that a 17 year old in the middle of a growth spurt might have a different measurement a year later?

I'm surprised when a 17-year old in the middle of a growth spurt shrinks by an inch and a quarter in height over the course of two months, while his arms mysteriously grow three quarters of an inch longer. Aren't you?

[kozlodoev]

I don't know where you get the IT comparison like he is version 2.0 but even if he is he as an 18-year old is 8 inches taller which already gives him an edge.

I am hearing he could be a "James Harden" 2.0 or Russell Westbrook 2.0 which is even a step above.

I didn't realize Fultz grew to over 6'6 overnight.

He didn't. It was over a year and a half.

I'm not going to repeat everything I said since that post. Please refer to the discussion above.

I did. It wasn't convincing.

I'm sorry that facts don't seem convincing to you. Enjoy the rest of your evening.

[Irish Stew]

The size difference combined with that incredible explosive finishing ability at the rim distinguishes him from Thomas. This teenager's upside is virtually unlimited. Using Westbrook as a future potential comp seems valid. Whether he fulfills that comparison. who knows?