2016-2017 College Basketball / '17 NBA Draft Thread IV

broseph13 · Post #1501 » by **broseph13** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 5:43 am

I honestly have no idea why people think Fultz is so great.

-Not a leader
-Plays with zero emotion or fire
-Looks like he could easily become a fat guy if he doesn't watch his diet
-Streaky shooter
-Average size for an NBA 2G (he's not a PG)
-Average NBA athleticism
-Scored most of his points in college after UW was already down by 20 points.
-Has really never played on winning teams

HankTheTank · Post #1502 » by **HankTheTank** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 5:51 am

LongLiveHinkie wrote:None of this stuff is going to happen. The draft is gonna be so boring and predictable.

The only thing predictable to me has been the knowledge that Ainge is a sharp dude who will likely not take Fultz #1. Never bought it, and will be surprised if it happens. Too good to be true.

I think back to the twitter battles I've had with fools -- including a draft guru who shall remain nameless-- who wanted us to pull the trigger on #3+Saric+'18 Laker pick for #1 to take Fultz. Laughable.

LongLiveHinkie · Post #1503 » by **LongLiveHinkie** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 6:21 am

broseph13 wrote:I honestly have no idea why people think Fultz is so great.

-Not a leader
-Plays with zero emotion or fire
-Looks like he could easily become a fat guy if he doesn't watch his diet
-Streaky shooter
-Average size for an NBA 2G (he's not a PG)
-Average NBA athleticism
-Scored most of his points in college after UW was already down by 20 points.
-Has really never played on winning teams

If we get Fultz he can succeed Mbah a Moute(TGFA) as the next Sixers acronym player. TFGFW(The Fat Guy From Washington).

LongLiveHinkie · Post #1504 » by **LongLiveHinkie** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 6:38 am

TFGFW after a month of shirley temples

GabeCerebro · Post #1505 » by **GabeCerebro** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 6:46 am

PLO wrote:
GabeCerebro wrote:
Kolkmania wrote:
No it does not say more on it's own. Scoring 34 out of 90 attempts is such a small sample size that the percentage isn't conclusive at all. I think that the combination of three point percentage, three point volume, free throw percentage, high school shooting, shooting form, footwork and consistency forms a more educated guess.

Josh Jackson has a terrible form, shooting in two motions, low release point, his footwork (especially off the catch) is atrocious and his volume, FT% and high school history is also really poor.

Fox, has historically bad 3PT% and 3PA and I'm not a fan of his form since he brings it too far back, but I like it better than Jackson's. That said, he's a far better FT shooter, shot nearly 34% out of ~500 attempts at high school from three (just one foot closer to the basket) and his footwork problems are heavily correlated to his lack of lower body strength.

Dennis Smith jr. and Jayson Tatum are overall far better bets on becoming an average three point shooter than Jackson and Fox imo, not even going to discuss their evaluations on the aforementioned points.

Note: I'm not saying that Jackson will become the worst shooter of the four prospects, just that I think the chance(!) him becoming the worst is the most significant.

You're looking way too deep into this... As does everybody. Josh makes his threes. As does Lonzo. The form of a player is as irrelevant and foolish as the crowd that says Iverson is overrated because of "efficiency" and "advanced stats". If a player gets it done, he gets it done. Period. I could care less about a good form on a player that is a worse shooter than a player with a "bad" one. That's ridiculous. Josh is fine already, as is, has room to improve, and he will.

So.....I'm assuming you're not a fan of the analytics then.

I am... In moderation. But that's irrelevant because Josh made his threes and anyone opposing his jumper is nitpicking.

76ciology · Post #1506 » by **76ciology** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:27 am

If there's a guy in the draft who's benefitted on this year's NBA Finals, it's Josh Jackson. Where GSW showed how important versatility is in today's basketball.

KD&LBJ really stood out in the finals.

Tzar · Post #1507 » by **Tzar** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:43 am

76ciology wrote:If there's a guy in the draft who's benefitted on this year's NBA Finals, it's Josh Jackson. Where GSW showed how important versatility is in today's basketball.

KD&LBJ really stood out in the finals.

Spot on. This Finals was really a revelation as to where the current NBA milieu is and where it's going. 6'7 6'8 guys. long. athletic. versatile. good motor. 2-way players.

The big, obvious question for Jackson is his shooting ability ( a huge question in today's NBA). The operative question then becomes: What's more teachable? new jump shot mechanics (Jackson) or defense (Fultz and Ball - both are, as it stands currently, horrendous defenders).

Negrodamus · Post #1508 » by **Negrodamus** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 9:28 am

GabeCerebro wrote:
PLO wrote:
GabeCerebro wrote:
You're looking way too deep into this... As does everybody. Josh makes his threes. As does Lonzo. The form of a player is as irrelevant and foolish as the crowd that says Iverson is overrated because of "efficiency" and "advanced stats". If a player gets it done, he gets it done. Period. I could care less about a good form on a player that is a worse shooter than a player with a "bad" one. That's ridiculous. Josh is fine already, as is, has room to improve, and he will.

So.....I'm assuming you're not a fan of the analytics then.

I am... In moderation. But that's irrelevant because Josh made his threes and anyone opposing his jumper is nitpicking.

That's an interesting take. I'm on the other end of the spectrum. If you don't see anything wrong with his form, you are sticking your head in the sand.

76ciology · Post #1509 » by **76ciology** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:16 am

Tzar wrote:
76ciology wrote:If there's a guy in the draft who's benefitted on this year's NBA Finals, it's Josh Jackson. Where GSW showed how important versatility is in today's basketball.

KD&LBJ really stood out in the finals.

Spot on. This Finals was really a revelation as to where the current NBA milieu is and where it's going. 6'7 6'8 guys. long. athletic. versatile. good motor. 2-way players.

The big, obvious question for Jackson is his shooting ability ( a huge question in today's NBA). The operative question then becomes: What's more teachable? new jump shot mechanics (Jackson) or defense (Fultz and Ball - both are, as it stands currently, horrendous defenders).

You got to have good motor to run and provide high impact AT THAT PACE.

Something I don't see in Fultz while Lonzo lacks that star scoring ability but I think he'd be fine in today's game similar to Mike Conley.

It's just I think between the three, Josh Jackson will have an easier time providing impact+volume with his skillset and tools.

If Josh Jackson's weakness is his shooting, so is his upside. Then if that's the case, he also has good upside because his in game shooting is not that bad. It's on it's way up!

Semi related, you also see a limited role for center. I think in today's game, in order to play ELITE offense and defense, you'll have to play a heavy 2 way forward game.

That a guy like Gobert or DMC maybe a better player than Iguodala. But if you consider everything (both ends,pace, space and etc.), Iggy provides a higher impact on GSW's line-up. You'd probably get slightly better D with Gobert but you'll see a drop-off on offense that won't compensate the improvement in offense.

Won't be surprised to see the trend of centers continue slipping in the draft like previous years.

76ciology · Post #1510 » by **76ciology** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:19 am

Would be fun if we draft Lonzo Ball this year then Bol Bol with the Kings pick in 2019.

That way we can get sponsored by BBB (big baller brand)

76ciology · Post #1511 » by **76ciology** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:24 am

76ciology wrote:Fultz is BPA. But among Fultz, Ball and Josh Jackson, I think Josh Jackson fits Ainge's "preferred prospect" the most.

- MAY 25, 2017

http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=26&p=55743530

"I've picked Danny's brain for years," one GM said. "Jackson is an Ainge player all the way. Tough, athletic, long, versatile, elite motor. If he's keeping the pick, Jackson just to me, far and away, is the most Celtics-type player for them to draft. From all my conversations with them, I'm convinced they'll take Jackson No. 1."

JUNE 15, 2017

76ciology · Post #1512 » by **76ciology** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:25 am

If both Celts and Lakers are really into analytics, both teams will pass on Fultz.

Sixers being Sixers, will draft Fultz. I don't know if BC has the guts to pass up on Fultz.

If Fultz is available with the third pick, I'll call up Pacers and Bulls and ask if they'd be willing to trade Jimmy Butler or Paul George for Fultz.

I'll get JB or PG. Then use other assets (Saric, Lakers&Kings pick) to get either JB or PG.

BS
JB
PG
Embiid

Ask Lebron if he wants to join the party in 2018

freshie2 · Post #1513 » by **freshie2** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:32 am

Tzar wrote:
76ciology wrote:If there's a guy in the draft who's benefitted on this year's NBA Finals, it's Josh Jackson. Where GSW showed how important versatility is in today's basketball.

KD&LBJ really stood out in the finals.

Spot on. This Finals was really a revelation as to where the current NBA milieu is and where it's going. 6'7 6'8 guys. long. athletic. versatile. good motor. 2-way players.

The big, obvious question for Jackson is his shooting ability ( a huge question in today's NBA). The operative question then becomes: What's more teachable? new jump shot mechanics (Jackson) or defense (Fultz and Ball - both are, as it stands currently, horrendous defenders).

If I'm basing my pick on the finals and position versatility plus the dubs high end shooting, then Isaac is probably the best option. He checks more boxes than Jackson or anyone else with the full skill set on both ends of the court.

SelfishPlayer · Post #1514 » by **SelfishPlayer** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:51 am

Read on Twitter

tsmith · Post #1515 » by **tsmith** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:58 am

76ciology wrote:Would be fun if we draft Lonzo Ball this year then Bol Bol with the Kings pick in 2019.

That way we can get sponsored by BBB (big baller brand)

BBBBB

Ball, Ben, Bol Bol, Biid

76ciology · Post #1516 » by **76ciology** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:01 pm

t_smith979 wrote:
76ciology wrote:Would be fun if we draft Lonzo Ball this year then Bol Bol with the Kings pick in 2019.

That way we can get sponsored by BBB (big baller brand)

BBBBB

Ball, Ben, Bol Bol, Biid

BBBBBBB

Brett Brown

Dedicated76Fan · Post #1517 » by **Dedicated76Fan** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:02 pm

Monk looks like an absolute stud in the workouts. I will :banghead:

if Colangelo does not select the next Curry.

Unbreakable99 · Post #1518 » by **Unbreakable99** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:07 pm

Sixerscan wrote:
Unbreakable99 wrote:
Sixerscan wrote:If the Celtics pass on Fultz, I feel like if you have Fultz #1 you have to give the Lakers their pick back to lock that down right? Can't be messing around at that point. (yeah yeah anti-fultz contingent you are acknowledged)

No. And I'm not anti-Fultz. I'm ant-taking Fultz over Ball and Jackson.

My question was if you have Fultz #1.

I rank Fultz 3rd.

76ciology · Post #1519 » by **76ciology** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:07 pm

SelfishPlayer wrote:

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Here's the thing. Everyone has their flaws. Ball handling and shooting are work in progress for JJ. Important things is he's got a good base rate/foundation to develop that's the reason why some GMs and the top two teams are interested with him.

Scouting is more of buying or selling strengths and weaknesses. And for me his ball handling and shooting is a buy. Easier to believe that will improve over Ball's shooting mechanics or Fultz Motor.

Unbreakable99 · Post #1520 » by **Unbreakable99** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:09 pm

HankTheTank wrote:
LongLiveHinkie wrote:None of this stuff is going to happen. The draft is gonna be so boring and predictable.

The only thing predictable to me has been the knowledge that Ainge is a sharp dude who will likely not take Fultz #1. Never bought it, and will be surprised if it happens. Too good to be true.

I think back to the twitter battles I've had with fools -- including a draft guru who shall remain nameless-- who wanted us to pull the trigger on #3+Saric+'18 Laker pick for #1 to take Fultz. Laughable.

Who was it? I need to know who.