Markelle Fultz Sports Science ESPN

[j804]

http://es.pn/2sC2pqB

 

[cousytoheinsohn]

Great find and share. Much appreciated.

It's impossible not to like the kid after watching this.

[positivitize]

Edited.  Profanity and masked profanity are against forum rules and may result in discipline..

[Atzar]

I'm sure that's choreographed, but [dang] if it isn't impressive.

[CelticsElite]

They should do a Sport science on why Jackson's shot is so bad looking, and why his free throw percent is at such a record low %

Almost every sport science I've seen is done in a future star or starter. People like rondo, IT, john wall have an episode

[Ilikesports17]

They should do a Sport science on why Jackson's shot is so bad looking, and why his free throw percent is at such a record low %

Almost every sport science I've seen is done in a future star or starter. People like rondo, IT, john wall have wposode

I didn't see the episode but perhaps they address why Markelle only shot 65% from the stripe?

Also the second sentence is one of the dumbest things I've read on this blog.

[tarheelsxxiii]

I could watch Fultz play dodgeball all day long.  And what a great chuckle he has.

I hate my life.

[chilidawg]

They should do a Sport science on why Jackson's shot is so bad looking, and why his free throw percent is at such a record low %

Almost every sport science I've seen is done in a future star or starter. People like rondo, IT, john wall have wposode

Also the second sentence is one of the dumbest things I've read on this blog.

And of late that's been a high bar.

[CelticsElite]

They should do a Sport science on why Jackson's shot is so bad looking, and why his free throw percent is at such a record low %

Almost every sport science I've seen is done in a future star or starter. People like rondo, IT, john wall have wposode

I didn't see the episode but perhaps they address why Markelle only shot 65% from the stripe?

Also the second sentence is one of the dumbest things I've read on this blog.

if 65% is bad, what's 51%?  Not even d-league worthy?


How is it a dumb statement? Sports science focuses on players with elite physical measurements and ability to play the sport. Nice job not being able to defend your statement

[Ilikesports17]

They should do a Sport science on why Jackson's shot is so bad looking, and why his free throw percent is at such a record low %

Almost every sport science I've seen is done in a future star or starter. People like rondo, IT, john wall have wposode

I didn't see the episode but perhaps they address why Markelle only shot 65% from the stripe?

Also the second sentence is one of the dumbest things I've read on this blog.

if 65% is bad, what's 51%?  Not even d-league worthy?


How is it a dumb statement? Sports science focuses on players with elite physical measurements and ability to play the sport. Nice job not being able to defend your statement

Jackson shot 56.6% from the stripe, which sucks, but let's at least be accurate.

Why was the sports science comment dumb? Because they either do proven stars or the top prospects. Last year they did Bender Simmons and Ingram because those were 3 of the top few guys.

A few years ago they did one on derrick Williams. Are you really suggesting we should use this video of Markelle Fultz dodging balls as evidence that he won't be a bust? Great athletes bust a lot. Like Danny singe should be sitting in the war room about to pull the trigger on a trade but then he realizes John Brenkus and his boys made a sports science episode on the guy and immediately throw the offer
Out the window and demands collangelo raise the price because everyone knows John Brenkus is an elite NBA talent evaluator.