Who's the Better Prospect: Markelle Fultz or Ben Simmons?

[OldSchoolDude]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2713313-whos-the-better-prospect-markelle-fultz-or-ben-simmons

I'm not a big fan of the bleacher report, but I think this article is pretty good.  Here's a hint, they pick Fultz.

[KG Living Legend]

 TP for posting.

 Best part here

 He's the complete package of scoring, playmaking and shooting. Fultz was the only freshman in at least the last 25 seasons to average no fewer than 20 points and five assists per game and shoot over 40 percent from three-point range



 23 ppg 6 rpg 6 APG on over 40% from three. Dream prospect.

[celticsclay]

Most people would say Fultz if they don't have skin in the game.

[vjcsmoke]

Fultz can actually shoot.  That helps.  :-)

Prediction:  Fultz starts more games in his NBA career than Simmons does.

And they will be basically starting at the same time now even though Simmons was draft last year. 

[obnoxiousmime]

Shooting is just so important these days. Simmons deserves some time to prove he can't shoot, but for now Markelle has that critical edge.

However, if Simmons DOES develop an average/above average shot, WATCH OUT. That's why he was taken so high despite his undeveloped shooting. He and Embiid have ridiculously high ceilings but also big question marks for different reasons.

[The One]

Since Fultz is better in the half-court which is where the majority of the game is played...I go with Fultz.

[PAOBoston]

Simmons reminds me of Lamar Odom. Took Odom a while to figure out his 3pt shot.

[hpantazo]

Two things from that article describing Fultz really jump out: advanced shot creator and shot maker. Those are two things Ainge has been saying are a priority to acquire in virtually every interview in the past two years

[slamtheking]

I think Fultz currently has the more complete game but Simmons offers a very rare skillset for a forward.  he reminds me a lot of Magic when he's got the ball and driving up the court.  shoots poorly like Magic did when he first came to the league but he worked it out after several year. 

Fultz could be a multi-time All-Star but if Simmons puts it together, I think he could be a top 10 player in the league. 

[dreamgreen]

I've been wondering the same question it's nice to see Fultz getting higher marks.

Would you trade the #1 + AB for #3 and Simmons?

[bdm860]

TP for posting.

 Best part here

 He's the complete package of scoring, playmaking and shooting. Fultz was the only freshman in at least the last 25 seasons to average no fewer than 20 points and five assists per game and shoot over 40 percent from three-point range



 23 ppg 6 rpg 6 APG on over 40% from three. Dream prospect.

For anyone curious, 15 players have put up those numbers (notably Jay Williams as a Sophmore, Steve Nash as a Junior, Antonio Daniels, Damon Stoudamire, and Earl Boykins as Seniors) since '92-'93 (because that's how far back the site has stats for,  also the NCAA only officially introduced the 3-point shot in '87, so there's probably not many, if any people missing from that list).

[saltlover]

I think Fultz currently has the more complete game but Simmons offers a very rare skillset for a forward.  he reminds me a lot of Magic when he's got the ball and driving up the court.  shoots poorly like Magic did when he first came to the league but he worked it out after several year. 

Fultz could be a multi-time All-Star but if Simmons puts it together, I think he could be a top 10 player in the league.

I think if either put it together they have Hall of Fame potential.  Simmons has a unique skillset, which if he adds even reliable (but not elite) shooting to will make him an incredibly difficult player to contain.  Fultz, meanwhile, has the scoring ability to allow him to be a perennial top-scorer in the league once he gets his pro legs under him.  Playing even average defense similarly moves him to that true franchise status. 

Again, this is about the potential for both, not what will happen.  Adjusting to the pros can always be difficult, and they both share a trait in that their competitiveness is currently somewhat subject to question based on poor results from their college teams.

I would note the Fultz is practically two years younger than Simmons, which gives him more time to grow both physically and basketball-wise.

[max215]

Fultz by a fairly slim margin for me. I feel certain that Fultz will be no worse than a very good all-around offensive player. With Simmons, the only certainty is that he'll be an outstanding passer. Both are excellent prospects, but Markelle has the edge due to his higher floor and equivalent ceiling.

[GreenCoffeeBean]

Simmons is the better prospect without a doubt. His skill set is so rare. But none of that will matter if he doesn't stop growing and can't fit in an arena.

[tonydelk]

I think Simmons is an elite talent but he needs to be able to shoot to become a true superstar.  His game reminds me a lot of Evan Turner.  If he can hit 3's he will be a much better player then Evan.  If he can't shoot then His ceiling drops dramatically.  The NBA is a league of shooters now.  If you can't shoot your career will never reach the heights the player wants it to.  It's a shooters league right now and Markelle dominates Simmons in that area.

Now Simmons size, speed and athleticism is off the charts.  No one in the league can stop Lebron and Simmons has that type of size/athleticism combo.  I can see Simmons versus Fultz debated for the next 10 years on who is better. 

If I am building a team from scratch it would be a hard choice.  I think Fultz is more likely to reach his Ceiling but I think Simmons ceiling is a bit higher because of the things he can do at his size and he can guard 5 positions versus Fultz guarding 3.