Markelle Fultz Discussion II

[HotelVitale]

2) we're keeping the Lakers pick. They're not going to be that bad (barring injuries) and BC did put top 1 protections on all the picks. 3) chances are we wilt lose the Sac pick but that wont be till next year and if Sac gets a good player this year they will probably be back end of the lottery next year.

good points. Id like to add that there was no generational talent in this draft. We don't need Fultz to be a #1 option. We need him to be a 3rd banana. That's it. Embiid, SImmons are the cornerstones. t

This all seems mad defensive, OleSchool--you know it's okay to be real about your team's moves, right? You can still love a team without kissing the GM's feet and shutting down your own ability to read situations. It's looking like we're likely to keep the LAL pick but there's still injuries, trades, the lotto, etc that give us a good chance (maybe 30-35%?) of gifting a Doncic/Ayton/Bagley/Porter to the Celtics; and the SAC pick has very very little chance of being late lotto now--I'd put it at less than 10% that they attract a franchise-altering FA or draft an instant difference-making player this season. That pick is still a likely top 5 one, and I'd be very comfortable betting big money it's top 7.

Also, I've been saying for months that the problem with the Fultz trade is precisely that there were lots of solid picks at the top but no mega-talents in this draft and people like you have been telling me to go die. It's okay to just admit that our GM didn't make a good gamble on Fultz, your head won't explode or anything and Fultz isn't going to go home and cry in his room because you don't believe he's definitely the next Harden. We can still hope that Fultz comes back and plays his role beautifully--while whatever pick we give up ends up being as weak as possible--without having to apologize for Bryan frickin Colangelo with every word we say on here.

[OleSchool]

This all seems mad defensive, OleSchool--you know it's okay to be real about your team's moves, right? You can still love a team without kissing the GM's feet and shutting down your own ability to read situations.

I dont think im being defensive, and im FAR from kissing BC's feet

It's looking like we're likely to keep the LAL pick but there's still injuries, trades, the lotto, etc that give us a good chance (maybe 30-35%?) of gifting a Doncic/Ayton/Bagley/Porter to the Celtics; and the SAC pick has very very little chance of being late lotto now--I'd put it at less than 10% that they attract a franchise-altering FA or draft an instant difference-making player this season. That pick is still a likely top 5 one, and I'd be very comfortable betting big money it's top 7.

where where do you get 30 to 35% chance of giving the LAL pick to the C's? The LAL's should finish somewhere between 8 -12.

Outside of this year Sac has typically been back end of the lottery for years. If they get a franchise player this draft to go along with Fox and Heild (who im not a fan of) they still should be tail end of the lottery next year.

Also, I've been saying for months that the problem with the Fultz trade is precisely that there were no mega-talents in this draft and people like you have been telling me to go die. It's okay to just admit that our GM didn't make a good gamble on Fultz, your head won't explode or anything and Fultz isn't going to go home and cry in his room because you don't believe he's definitely the next Harden. We can still hope that Fultz comes back and plays his role beautifully--while whatever pick we give up ends up being as weak as possible--without having to apologize for Bryan frickin Colangelo with every word we say on here.

please dont turn me into a BC apologist, cause im not. How do you know it wasnt a good gamble? His shoulder is hurt, so even when he did play he was getting to where he wanted to go and playing defense, which he didnt do at UW.

Listen, I saw all of Fultz flaws at at UW (and I agree with Lloyds and others assessment of him). So I can see that hes not going to be the next Harden. but he has enough talent and skill to be our 3rd option. If you cant see that then I dont know what to tell you.

and the only time any posters are jumping down others throats is when they are tying to push their own agenda, posters shall remain nameless

[Ericb5]

To be fair, the Kings were in the back end of the lottery when they had Cousins, who is a flawed, but real, superstar.

They don’t currently have anyone like that. I agree with you though that the Lakers pick is likely to stay with us this year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LloydFree]

Fultz was the best rated guard in the draft.

Best prospect. Still is.

Interesting

[gdog2004]

I loved the trade for Fultz and think hes the perfect fit once he comes back. But with the Sixers medical staff, I fear that wont be till at the earliest next year. Guys go into some black hole and dont come out when they get hurt here.

[Unbreakable99]

I loved the trade for Fultz and think hes the perfect fit once he comes back. But with the Sixers medical staff, I fear that wont be till at the earliest next year. Guys go into some black hole and dont come out when they get hurt here.

We have a new head medical guy.

[Mik317]

I loved the trade for Fultz and think hes the perfect fit once he comes back. But with the Sixers medical staff, I fear that wont be till at the earliest next year. Guys go into some black hole and dont come out when they get hurt here.

We have a new head medical guy.

didn't this **** happen on the old guard's watch tho?

[the_process]

I loved the trade for Fultz and think hes the perfect fit once he comes back. But with the Sixers medical staff, I fear that wont be till at the earliest next year. Guys go into some black hole and dont come out when they get hurt here.

We have a new head medical guy.

When new execs take over, they usually observe for awhile before making changes. He could be observing all season.

[the_process]

Hating BC and loving Fultz are not mutually exclusive groups.

[gdog2004]

Hating BC and loving Fultz are not mutually exclusive groups.

I hated the hiring of BC but think hes done a good job overall.
Fultz was a consensus number one pick by fans and GM's alike. If he turns out to be a bust, than everyone will be unanimously wrong. Including me. I really hope not, need to see what he looks like healthy.
Guys like Simmons and Embiid are anomaly's, guys usually aren't THAT good THAT fast.
Rookies usually struggle.

[MambaJuice]

I'm choosing to view anything we get from Fultz this season as icing on the cake. We have our franchise cornerstones in Embiid and Simmons, anyone else besides an established star is going to be a 3rd option. Fultz projects (key word, projects) to be a good fit for that 3rd option, if he can learn to play off ball and regain his 3. A two way guard with length, who can play D and hit 3s and get the rack is a perfect compliment. Even knowing what we know now, I'd still draft Fultz 1st overall again. Potential fit is too great.

[LongLiveHinkie]

I find it funny this Fultz skepticism is still going on. As far as I'm concerned we still haven't even seen "him" yet as Fultz isn't Fultz without the ability to shoot a jumper.

Btw, if you want to play revisionist history, the 3 most popular guys on this board aside from Fultz have been shaky at best to start, being Smith, Jackson, Ball. I think all 3 will end up being good NBA players, but it's still funny that the guys farther down this board's list of popularity were Tatum and Fox, both of whom have been the most impressive so far, and both were almost unanimously decided would be a poor fit with the Sixers.

Sure there were a few guys who liked both, but if the Sixers stood pat at 3 and took Tatum or Fox, this board would have absolutely melted down.

(and for the record, if the Sixers had stayed at 3, I heard from someone I trust they would have taken Tatum, not Jackson).

[Unbreakable99]

I find it funny this Fultz skepticism is still going on. As far as I'm concerned we still haven't even seen "him" yet as Fultz isn't Fultz without the ability to shoot a jumper.

Btw, if you want to play revisionist history, the 3 most popular guys on this board aside from Fultz have been shaky at best to start, being Smith, Jackson, Ball. I think all 3 will end up being good NBA players, but it's still funny that the guys farther down this board's list of popularity were Tatum and Fox, both of whom have been the most impressive so far, and both were almost unanimously decided would be a poor fit with the Sixers.

Sure there were a few guys who liked both, but if the Sixers stood pat at 3 and took Tatum or Fox, this board would have absolutely melted down.

(and for the record, if the Sixers had stayed at 3, I heard from someone I trust they would have taken Tatum, not Jackson).

Well that makes it even worse if you’re right. If Ainge would have passed on Tatum at number one and took another player then we have Tatum. BC gave up a great asset to get a worse player.

[Sixerscan]

2) we're keeping the Lakers pick. They're not going to be that bad (barring injuries) and BC did put top 1 protections on all the picks. 3) chances are we wilt lose the Sac pick but that wont be till next year and if Sac gets a good player this year they will probably be back end of the lottery next year.

good points. Id like to add that there was no generational talent in this draft. We don't need Fultz to be a #1 option. We need him to be a 3rd banana. That's it. Embiid, SImmons are the cornerstones. t

This all seems mad defensive, OleSchool--you know it's okay to be real about your team's moves, right? You can still love a team without kissing the GM's feet and shutting down your own ability to read situations. It's looking like we're likely to keep the LAL pick but there's still injuries, trades, the lotto, etc that give us a good chance (maybe 30-35%?) of gifting a Doncic/Ayton/Bagley/Porter to the Celtics; and the SAC pick has very very little chance of being late lotto now--I'd put it at less than 10% that they attract a franchise-altering FA or draft an instant difference-making player this season. That pick is still a likely top 5 one, and I'd be very comfortable betting big money it's top 7.

Also, I've been saying for months that the problem with the Fultz trade is precisely that there were lots of solid picks at the top but no mega-talents in this draft and people like you have been telling me to go die. It's okay to just admit that our GM didn't make a good gamble on Fultz, your head won't explode or anything and Fultz isn't going to go home and cry in his room because you don't believe he's definitely the next Harden. We can still hope that Fultz comes back and plays his role beautifully--while whatever pick we give up ends up being as weak as possible--without having to apologize for Bryan frickin Colangelo with every word we say on here.

Where are you getting this 30-35% number? Why are you acting like we have to give them both picks? Be "real."

I said the day the trade happened that it would years to decide who was right, and regardless it's not a big deal because we already have Simmons or Embiid. I'm not sure why I should have to change that stance because certain people are obsessed with the 2017 draft and have chosen to decidate 20% of their waking hours wetting their pants about it.

[HotelVitale]

Where are you getting this 30-35% number? Why are you acting like we have to give them both picks? Be "real."
I said the day the trade happened that it would years to decide who was right, and regardless it's not a big deal because we already have Simmons or Embiid. I'm not sure why I should have to change that stance because certain people are obsessed with the 2017 draft and have chosen to decidate 20% of their waking hours wetting their pants about it.

It's an estimate, bruh. Projected the Lakers as the 7th worst team overall (which seems fair and maybe a little generous), and gave a roughly 20-25% chance they slip down to 4th or 5th based on both who's below them and the usual fluctuations (injury, losing a bunch of close games, etc), which also seems pretty fair. Then added another 10% chance of winning the lotto for picks #2-3 from that #7 slot. I know it's not a perfect estimate--it took like 90 seconds to do and those things are always shaky--but it seems a lot better as a baseline than 'it could be ANYTHING!'

Also have no idea where you're pulling an implication that we'd lose both picks, it's not in my post and in any case I'm assuming we all understand the protections if we're talking about the trade here. Point is that between the two picks, we're very likely to be giving up at least a top 7 pick, with a solid chance that it's either top 5 this year (a year that has a nice top 5) or top 3 or 4 next year (don't know anything about that draft though). I don't see any pt in denying that in a forum that's dedicated to talking about basketball and has a specific niche for evaluating and talking over FO's/teams' decisions. Sure, we're not going to know the ultimate value of the trade for years (that's true of almost every trade in the NBA, no matter how small), but it's also not a good or useful or interesting take to say we can't or shouldn't ever talk about any trade until we know or certain every aspect of its aftermath. (Also fwiw I'd be happy to stop talking about this trade and the nature of Fultz's injury etc and just wait on Fultz--but it's kinda tough when people keep saying weird or delusional things and declaring that the trade was great and everyone needs to shut up and respect BC's intentions.)

[Sixerscan]

Where are you getting this 30-35% number? Why are you acting like we have to give them both picks? Be "real."
I said the day the trade happened that it would years to decide who was right, and regardless it's not a big deal because we already have Simmons or Embiid. I'm not sure why I should have to change that stance because certain people are obsessed with the 2017 draft and have chosen to decidate 20% of their waking hours wetting their pants about it.

It's an estimate, bruh. Projected the Lakers as the 7th worst team overall (which seems fair and maybe a little generous), and gave a roughly 20-25% chance they slip down to 4th or 5th based on both who's below them and the usual fluctuations (injury, losing a bunch of close games, etc), which also seems pretty fair. Then added another 10% chance of winning the lotto for picks #2-3 from that #7 slot. I know it's not a perfect estimate--it took like 90 seconds to do and those things are always shaky--but it seems a lot better as a baseline than 'it could be ANYTHING!'

Also have no idea where you're pulling an implication that we'd lose both picks, it's not in my post and in any case I'm assuming we all understand the protections if we're talking about the trade here. Point is that between the two picks, we're very likely to be giving up at least a top 7 pick, with a solid chance that it's either top 5 this year (a year that has a nice top 5) or top 3 or 4 next year (don't know anything about that draft though). I don't see any pt in denying that in a forum that's dedicated to talking about basketball and has a specific niche for evaluating and talking over FO's/teams' decisions. Sure, we're not going to know the ultimate value of the trade for years (that's true of almost every trade in the NBA, no matter how small), but it's also not a good or useful or interesting take to say we can't or shouldn't ever talk about any trade until we know or certain every aspect of its aftermath. (Also fwiw I'd be happy to stop talking about this trade and the nature of Fultz's injury etc and just wait on Fultz--but it's kinda tough when people keep saying weird or delusional things and declaring that the trade was great and everyone needs to shut up and respect BC's intentions.)

That's still only like a 23% chance?

75% of being 7th worst record (11% of being 2 or 3)
25% of being 4th or 5th (59% chance of being 2-5. With more than half of that being getting the 5th pick. If we're just worried about top 4 it's like a 15% chance)

75% of 11% is 8.25%
25% of 59% is 14.6%

Add them together and it's just under 23%.

Of course you can include the 6th pick which ups the odds somewhat, not to 30-35 though. There's also the chance that they finish higher than 7th.

Also acting like the Kings pick is destined to be top 3 or 4 is silly. Even if they finish with the worst record with the new odds their expected post lotto spot is still only 5.

My point is think people overvalue those picks.

You are free to change your mind however you want. Not sure why others have to.

[LloydFree]

The next James Harden... or at least Dwayne Wade... Cough, cough

[Sixerscan]

The next James Harden... or at least Dwayne Wade... Cough, cough

Did I say he would be at least Dwayne wade?

I think I said he was a better scoring prospect than Beal was.

I am not obsessed with maintaining my reputation as a scouting expert though so the stakes are much lower for me. I do however have the pac12 network on my cable package so maybe I have no excuse.

[gdog2004]

Tatum is looking like a nice player but that doesn't mean Fultz wont still be better.
I think Tatum was universally disliked by all sixer boards. Goes to tell you most people
don't know jack **** when it comes to evaluating players.

[LloydFree]

The next James Harden... or at least Dwayne Wade... Cough, cough

Did I say he would be at least Dwayne wade?

I think I said he was a better scoring prospect than Beal was.

I am not obsessed with maintaining my reputation as a scouting expert though so the stakes are much lower for me. I do however have the pac12 network on my cable package so maybe I have no excuse.

Excuse me. I didn't mention your name or quote your post. You got your opinion of the player and I have mine, so you can try to troll me with silly jabs all you want. That doesn't mean anything to me.