RealGM

The Magic are not getting what they need from their guards, that much we all agree on.

But one guard stands to improve team performance by his presence as a starter. That player isn't Fultz, isn't Suggs, isn't Harris, isn't Houstan.

Cole Anthony is our best PG right now and it's not really even a big contest.

Looking at the Off and Def 4 factors - and how we rank versus other teams - our turnover % really stands out as a killer. Our opponent FGM% is another.

Cole is looking after the ball way better than the other options, on similar usage. Defensively, on-ball he is trash at getting around screens. In all other respects he's comparable enough to Fultz.

But where he's better than Markelle is in the midrange, 3pt attempts, 3pt percentage, FT attempts, FT percentage, DREB%, PNR PPP, Block% and - crucially - TOV%.

Where Markelle is better is generally not by a ton, where Cole is better statistically it's generally by a fair margin.

Cole has rarely gotten to play with the Harris/Franz/Banchero/Carter lineup in the past two months (majority of roster available), but when he has the +/- is higher than with Fultz.

He's better at the pick and roll, he spaces the floor better, he can get hot and really go on a tear. His assist numbers aren't on a par with Fultz', but I'd like to see them when hes playing more with our best guys. Crucially he looks after the ball better.

Sure, he's streaky and when he's bad he tends to be baaad, but every criticism people have had of him he has improved. Some things more than others, but he's trending upward on virtually all fronts.

Fultz? Good in transition, gets defenders on his back in the paint, can finish at the rim. Aaaaaaannd, that's about the height of it.

I don't want to make this a Fultz- bashing topic, because he has his merits, but I frankly think that upward trend and statistical production, plus reduction in very costly turnovers all point toward playing Cole more and Markelle less.

Some people will hate the thought as they hate CA, but the objective viewpoint supports him getting more time with the rosters good players and thereby making us more competitive.

I'm not completely opposed to it.

He's the personification of what we need...if he could just tighten up his decision-making and bad shots (he HAS shown a lot of growth, IMO) and pass and score...defense would be nice too, but maybe not the highest need right now. I'd kind of call it a 'tryout" to see what it looks like. Ultimately, I'd like to see Suggs there, but they could play together and sort of balance each other for now.

I just don't see another gear for Fultz - I'm sorry to say and I see no reason to prolong the experiment...especially given his limited guaranteed deal, he might have use in a trade package for the next team willing to give him a look.

I assumed Fultz would be better at getting others involved, but his assist numbers aren’t that great. And now that he won’t even try 3’s, what is he contributing? I’d be in favor of giving Cole a shot with a healthy starting lineup. His rebounding alone would give us a boost.

If Cole starts then Franz and Paolo will have to do the majority of the playmaking. That was our problem in the beginning of the season and that's why we were 5-20 until Markelle got fully acclimated to the players. Oh and Cole doesn't defend.

I've really liked the partnership Cole and Suggs have been building with that reserve unit, so would be keen to see both given a run with the starters, see what they can do. Even if it's just with rotations. But I don't see Mose changing anything major with his rotations at this point

Counterpoint: Start Suggs

While i agree Fultz is really bad fit for us or modern basketball, Cole Anthony is definetly not an anwser.
He is worse than Fultz defensively, both by awareness and physical stature. Thats one area where starting Markelle has some sense. There is no obvious weak spot in our defense. No small players to target.
When we start Anthony we get almost no benefit offensively, becouse he is below average shooter, he has tendencies to stop ball movement and he is similar level off playmaker to Fultz (better in p&r worse in motion sets)
Our team doesnt function well when Anthony plays with more number of starters.

Obvious resolution to the problem is Suggs. He doesnt compromise our defense. He even makes it a lot better. His spacing is better than Fultz becouse he is a willing shooter. He also doesnt chuck as much as Cole and his % is actually improving. His passing is better than both Fultz and Anthony. Only downside is his injury history. He is playing more in control from the bench.

jezzerinho wrote:Cole Anthony is our best PG right now and it's not really even a big contest.

Do you recall that Anthony was basically Terrible the whole month of December?

..

The gaps between Fultz, Suggs, Anthony are closer than I anticipated. You could argue to me that Anthony and Suggs should be the starting back court.

Cole is streaky because when he goes up against a good defender, he disappears.

Cole gives you nothing if he can't score.

Sent from my SM-G781U using RealGM mobile app

Def Swami wrote:The gaps between Fultz, Suggs, Anthony are closer than I anticipated. You could argue to me that Anthony and Suggs should be the starting back court.

It's very, very close. Fultz was starting to pull away a bit but the gap has narrowed again.

drsd wrote:

jezzerinho wrote:Cole Anthony is our best PG right now and it's not really even a big contest.

Do you recall that Anthony was basically Terrible the whole month of December?

..

I don't recall that. That's just Cole doing Cole. 5 good games...4 bad ones...Repeat

zaymon wrote:While i agree Fultz is really bad fit for us or modern basketball, Cole Anthony is definetly not an anwser.
He is worse than Fultz defensively, both by awareness and physical stature. Thats one area where starting Markelle has some sense. There is no obvious weak spot in our defense. No small players to target.
When we start Anthony we get almost no benefit offensively, becouse he is below average shooter, he has tendencies to stop ball movement and he is similar level off playmaker to Fultz (better in p&r worse in motion sets)
Our team doesnt function well when Anthony plays with more number of starters.

Obvious resolution to the problem is Suggs. He doesnt compromise our defense. He even makes it a lot better. His spacing is better than Fultz becouse he is a willing shooter. He also doesnt chuck as much as Cole and his % is actually improving. His passing is better than both Fultz and Anthony. Only downside is his injury history. He is playing more in control from the bench.

Yah, I'd rather see suggs go 0 for 5 from 3 at this point than MF continue to take 1 a game. Frankly, I'd like to see all three of them taking at least 4 a game. All of them need to realize what they have to do if they want be a guard in the NBA during the Roaring Twenties.

Fox used to be a good potential comp for Fultz...dude took over 4 3s a game last year at 29.7%.

All 3 possess key qualities that the others lack, which is frustrating. But let's not pretend like the coaching staff doesn't know this. I think we can rest assured that they've experimented with numerous different LU configurations and they have Fultz starting for a reason. Until we get that guy who can be all 3 wrapped up in one, I think the way the starting unit plays with Fultz at the helm is what Mose & Co prefers.

at this point,as long is not Suggs i can accept even cole anthony at PG,probably even bol bol

NO. Cole is doing well now because he can do what he does best with the 2nd unit. CHUCK. I dont want to see Cole chucking with Franz and Paolo on the court.

jonbob17 wrote:

drsd wrote:

jezzerinho wrote:Cole Anthony is our best PG right now and it's not really even a big contest.

Do you recall that Anthony was basically Terrible the whole month of December?

..

I don't recall that. That's just Cole doing Cole. 5 good games...4 bad ones...Repeat

True...and I was as critical as anyone. But last year it was 2 good games...8 bad, so he really is improving...Not kidding!

Honestly, I wonder how much more he could improve given the chance to play with a healthy roster. Last year, he was often the best guy on the floor ....which is not a good look. I'd really like to see some new blood in at the TD regardless...maybe a big one (FVV) or a bit of a cheaper crapshoot (Bones) or a newer, younger, bigger Harris-type (Moody).

Suggs give you more size to handle switches better.

Sent from my SM-G781U using RealGM mobile app

I actually think Cole has been a ton better this year, the chucking is more controlled than last year. He plays with effort and an edge which I like. His playmaking and setting up seems better to me at least. But my issue with Cole isn’t his talent level, I think he’s starter level talent, but his style of play is totally an offensive spark off the bench. The issue is also despite Markelles shooting issues he’s the best guy suited to start at the point. The Magic are a lot better when he’s out there, plus if you watch him enough, Markelles got some leader tendancies, can’t say the same for Cole yet.

Im still a Cole fan but no. Ive been waiting since we drafted him to get him in the off the bench scoring punch role. We finally got him where he should be. No need to mess with it.

Sent from my SM-G970U using RealGM mobile app