Author Topic: Why Did Philly Take Fultz over Tatum?  (Read 1676 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Why Did Philly Take Fultz over Tatum?
« on: November 14, 2017, 12:21:27 PM »

Offline green_bballers13

  • NCE
  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1473
  • Tommy Points: 225
They must have thought that Tatum had some major flaws, right?

They drafted Ben Simmons as their point guard, then drafted Fultz the next year, as their point guard?

Tatum is already better than Saric. Better than Okafor, Reddick, and Fultz.

Obviously we have a new perspective that Fultz has limped out of the gates, but Fultz didn't win in Washington, and Tatum won at Duke. Tatum has a more refined offensive game, and would have been a perfect fit next to Simmons and Embiid.

Did they think Fultz would play the 2 guard? How good is he without the ball in his hands?

Re: Why Did Philly Take Fultz over Tatum?
« Reply #1 on: November 14, 2017, 12:38:22 PM »

Offline triboy16f

  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19110
  • Tommy Points: 452
They must have thought that Tatum had some major flaws, right?

They drafted Ben Simmons as their point guard, then drafted Fultz the next year, as their point guard?

Tatum is already better than Saric. Better than Okafor, Reddick, and Fultz.

Obviously we have a new perspective that Fultz has limped out of the gates, but Fultz didn't win in Washington, and Tatum won at Duke. Tatum has a more refined offensive game, and would have been a perfect fit next to Simmons and Embiid.

Did they think Fultz would play the 2 guard? How good is he without the ball in his hands?

Bc they thought he was the consensus #1
 
They were wrong

And the mistep by them was .... If they knew Celts didnt want him at #1, why not just sit tight at #3 and draft him anyways? 

Lakers drafting Ball was in the bag....

Their gm is garbage. 76ers roster has no design. Just a collection of talent that step on each other toes. No shooters

Re: Why Did Philly Take Fultz over Tatum?
« Reply #2 on: November 14, 2017, 12:43:08 PM »

Offline Green-18

  • Marcus Smart
  • Posts: 246
  • Tommy Points: 25
Fultz was highly skilled in college with a ton of raw talent.  The kid clearly has the ability to be an elite scorer in the NBA.  The win/loss argument isn't great when you are comparing Washington to Duke.  If you remove intangibles from the equation then Fultz is a prospect with the upside to be an elite NBA player.  I don't believe that the 76ers organization places the same value on character/work ethic as the Celtics do.  To be honest I'm not sure how many organizations trust the ability of their coaches to maximize the talent of high draft picks.  This leads to the perceived ceiling of players like Tatum to be much lower.  Fultz appeared to be the closest to a transcendent talent at face value. 

By no means am I saying that this is the right approach but I think it explains why Philly moved up in the draft.

Re: Why Did Philly Take Fultz over Tatum?
« Reply #3 on: November 14, 2017, 12:46:26 PM »

Offline slamtheking

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17852
  • Tommy Points: 8765
Philly seems to pick according to the general-consensus draft board. 

They wouldn't have been the only ones to take Fultz at number one.  I suspect there are only a handful of GMs who wouldn't have an even fewer who had Tatum at the top of their draft rating.

Picking the consensus BPA at the time of their pick would explain them taking Okafor over Porzingis as well.  with Noel and Embiid already in the fold, Porzingis would seem like a better forward to pair with them.

Re: Why Did Philly Take Fultz over Tatum?
« Reply #4 on: November 14, 2017, 12:47:38 PM »

Offline triboy16f

  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19110
  • Tommy Points: 452
Fultz was highly skilled in college with a ton of raw talent.  The kid clearly has the ability to be an elite scorer in the NBA.  The win/loss argument isn't great when you are comparing Washington to Duke.  If you remove intangibles from the equation then Fultz is a prospect with the upside to be an elite NBA player.  I don't believe that the 76ers organization places the same value on character/work ethic as the Celtics do.  To be honest I'm not sure how many organizations trust the ability of their coaches to maximize the talent of high draft picks.  This leads to the perceived ceiling of players like Tatum to be much lower.  Fultz appeared to be the closest to a transcendent talent at face value. 

By no means am I saying that this is the right approach but I think it explains why Philly moved up in the draft.

Coupled with a ton of losses and no interest in playing strong D

KD was a raw talent but also was a winner. Showed intensity




Re: Why Did Philly Take Fultz over Tatum?
« Reply #5 on: November 14, 2017, 12:48:12 PM »

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17711
  • Tommy Points: 2368
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
I think they figured Simmons would effectively be the PG in terms of ballhandling, so they wanted a scoring guard to help their backcourt. They didn't have Redick at that point but a backcourt slasher who can pressure the interior D would help free up their shooters as well.

Tatum's logical NBA position is the same as Simmons' although their skillsets are different, so that probably mattered too.

Finally they clearly thought Fultz was good enough that there was a good chance we'd take him #1 if they didn't trade up to snag him. Oops!

Re: Why Did Philly Take Fultz over Tatum?
« Reply #6 on: November 14, 2017, 12:51:37 PM »

Offline Fafnir

  • Paul Pierce
  • ***************************
  • Posts: 27996
  • Tommy Points: 1116
I think Philly is still all about taking the best talent and figuring out later, especially with Embiid's injury history and Okafor being a bust for them.

Re: Why Did Philly Take Fultz over Tatum?
« Reply #7 on: November 14, 2017, 12:56:19 PM »

Offline Fafnir

  • Paul Pierce
  • ***************************
  • Posts: 27996
  • Tommy Points: 1116
Finally they clearly thought Fultz was good enough that there was a good chance we'd take him #1 if they didn't trade up to snag him. Oops!
Lakers reportedly would have taken Fultz over Ball, so I think they thought the only way to get him was to trade up.

If they viewed Tatum as a 4 it makes more sense, especially if they didn't want Ball (two ball handlers who can't shoot is a no go)

Re: Why Did Philly Take Fultz over Tatum?
« Reply #8 on: November 14, 2017, 12:56:34 PM »

Offline Green-18

  • Marcus Smart
  • Posts: 246
  • Tommy Points: 25
I think Philly is still all about taking the best talent and figuring out later, especially with Embiid's injury history and Okafor being a bust for them.

Exactly.  Most teams don't have a true organizational philosophy in regards to player development.  The plan is to acquire talent until you finally strike gold.     

Re: Why Did Philly Take Fultz over Tatum?
« Reply #9 on: November 14, 2017, 12:56:43 PM »

Offline green_bballers13

  • NCE
  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1473
  • Tommy Points: 225
I think Philly is still all about taking the best talent and figuring out later, especially with Embiid's injury history and Okafor being a bust for them.

I find it interesting that Philly and the consensus view chose to ignore winning in the calculus. They also chose to ignore potential shooting issues, as well as potential defensive issues and health issues. Fultz missed a decent amount of time near the end of his one year in college.

Maybe Tatum appeared to be "less athletic", but he was polished and ready to contribute. I think he would have been a perfect fit next to high end potential players in Simmons and Embiid.

I know its super early, but I think there's a chance that Fultz is just another high end pick (like Noel and Okafor) that is not part of Philly's long term plan.

Re: Why Did Philly Take Fultz over Tatum?
« Reply #10 on: November 14, 2017, 12:58:58 PM »

Offline Fafnir

  • Paul Pierce
  • ***************************
  • Posts: 27996
  • Tommy Points: 1116
Fultz's shooting was not an issue in college! The fact that it's become an issue is the reason everyone is freaking out, he was a good shooter in college.

Re: Why Did Philly Take Fultz over Tatum?
« Reply #11 on: November 14, 2017, 12:59:25 PM »

Offline Green-18

  • Marcus Smart
  • Posts: 246
  • Tommy Points: 25
Fultz was highly skilled in college with a ton of raw talent.  The kid clearly has the ability to be an elite scorer in the NBA.  The win/loss argument isn't great when you are comparing Washington to Duke.  If you remove intangibles from the equation then Fultz is a prospect with the upside to be an elite NBA player.  I don't believe that the 76ers organization places the same value on character/work ethic as the Celtics do.  To be honest I'm not sure how many organizations trust the ability of their coaches to maximize the talent of high draft picks.  This leads to the perceived ceiling of players like Tatum to be much lower.  Fultz appeared to be the closest to a transcendent talent at face value. 

By no means am I saying that this is the right approach but I think it explains why Philly moved up in the draft.

Coupled with a ton of losses and no interest in playing strong D

KD was a raw talent but also was a winner. Showed intensity

Hence why I mentioned removing intangibles from the equation.  I am in complete agreement regarding his lack of intensity and effort.  Philly approached the draft with an emphasis on talent and nothing else.
« Last Edit: November 14, 2017, 01:07:21 PM by Green-18 »

Re: Why Did Philly Take Fultz over Tatum?
« Reply #12 on: November 14, 2017, 01:04:14 PM »

Offline Green-18

  • Marcus Smart
  • Posts: 246
  • Tommy Points: 25
I think Philly is still all about taking the best talent and figuring out later, especially with Embiid's injury history and Okafor being a bust for them.

I find it interesting that Philly and the consensus view chose to ignore winning in the calculus. They also chose to ignore potential shooting issues, as well as potential defensive issues and health issues. Fultz missed a decent amount of time near the end of his one year in college.

Maybe Tatum appeared to be "less athletic", but he was polished and ready to contribute. I think he would have been a perfect fit next to high end potential players in Simmons and Embiid.

I know its super early, but I think there's a chance that Fultz is just another high end pick (like Noel and Okafor) that is not part of Philly's long term plan.

I think the answer to your first point is that the Sixers don't have any faith in their ability to develop talent.  This results in an approach that consists of drafting the best raw talent regardless of intangibles.  I'm not comparing players but John Wall is a good example of a PG that would have been a great player no matter where he was drafted.  Teams like Philly are hoping that they can hit on the same type of player.   

Teams are afraid of prospects like Tatum because they aren't sure how to maximize his talent. 
 

Re: Why Did Philly Take Fultz over Tatum?
« Reply #13 on: November 14, 2017, 01:08:54 PM »

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17711
  • Tommy Points: 2368
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
Finally they clearly thought Fultz was good enough that there was a good chance we'd take him #1 if they didn't trade up to snag him. Oops!
Lakers reportedly would have taken Fultz over Ball, so I think they thought the only way to get him was to trade up.

If they viewed Tatum as a 4 it makes more sense, especially if they didn't want Ball (two ball handlers who can't shoot is a no go)

That's interesting, I hadn't heard that. Makes the deal make more sense for them because Ball and Simmons would be a really bad fit.

Re: Why Did Philly Take Fultz over Tatum?
« Reply #14 on: November 14, 2017, 01:09:00 PM »

Offline mmmmm

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3016
  • Tommy Points: 453
I think Philly is still all about taking the best talent and figuring out later, especially with Embiid's injury history and Okafor being a bust for them.

I find it interesting that Philly and the consensus view chose to ignore winning in the calculus. They also chose to ignore potential shooting issues, as well as potential defensive issues and health issues. Fultz missed a decent amount of time near the end of his one year in college.

Simmons also did not win much in college and neither, for that matter, did Jaylen Brown.

I think good GMs don't put too much stock in how well the player's NCAA team performs because they aren't drafting the player's team.  They are drafting the player.

NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.
#OneCitizenOneVote - True Election Reform:  Eliminate the anti-democratic Electoral College farce now.