Markelle Fultz Discussion

[Rastas]

Sooooooo back to Markelle.

I think the majority of us believe Embiid will be the alpha, Simmons will be the alpha lite, and Fultz will be content playing off the ball and as secondary ball handler. I also think the majority of us believe Embiid and Simmons have the higher ceilings. What are the chances that Fultz becomes a better player than Embiid or Simmons? If Fultz joins these 2 in terms of level of prospects (star potential), the ceiling of our team is just too crazy to even think about. This is no knock on Fultz, who I think has the ceiling of a regular AS player. I just view Embiid and Simmons as potential top 10 players some day.

Over/under % (chance to be better than)
Embiid- 9.5%
Simmons- 24.5%

Is that fair?

Fultz will NEVER BE better than Embiid. Emiid's floor is a HOF, his ceiling is generational. Very few players in the league today have Embiids ceiling/potential.

Not to mention his injury potential.
Prey he can play out at least half a dozen more seasons to reach his floor.

[Mrcrockpots]

That's why I made it less than 10% chance. No doubt Embiid has HOF potential. Also, how many elite guard prospects are there in the NBA? Wiggins, Booker, Ingram, Hield, Druss, Lonzo, Murray, Brogdon? I like Fultz's chances to be a consistent all star guard.

[Ericb5]

Hopefully we won't have to worry about this. I do think it would be troublesome if a team based around Fultz, Simmons, Covington, Reddick, Holmes, with Saric, McConnell, Stauskas, Amir Johnson coming off the bench couldn't make a serious run at making the playoffs. That's 2 number one picks surrounded by veterans and a pretty decent bench in an absolutely horrible East.

Fultz and/Simmons would probably have to bust hard for that to happen.

I don't think they have to bust hard at all to miss the playoffs. They're both Rookies. The Wizards with a veteran John Wall and rookie Bradley Beal we're one of the worst teams in the NBA. The Simmons and Fultz would be near that combo. The rest of the team... you have to have way more confidence in their ability than they deserve, to call that a playoff roster. Covington and Redick are legitimate NBA starters. The rest of them are the average NBA bench players that many other teams have. The thing that makes this team a playoff contender is Embiid. It was proven last year with his on/off numbers. You're giving too much credit to the rest of the roster.

Take Embiid off the team, we're no better than the 2012/13 Wizards, who went 29-53. Wall, Beal, Ariza vs Simmons, Fultz, Covington

Fultz
Redick
Covington
Simmons
Okafor

This team wins more than 29 games, last year we won 28 games. Anyway, add Embiid and your talking playoffs.

I think that that team healthy could win as many as 35 games, but with Embiid we will be in the 45-50 range.

I think Simmons is a franchise player in his own right, but I would be surprised if he dominated immediately like Embiid did. He might, but if he does it will be next to another dominant player which makes it easier for him.

What gives someone like Fultz the opportunity to be a positive rookie is that he will be playing with Embiid and Simmons as well.

Throughout history, rookies at the Fultz/Simmons level generally don't start their careers playing with dominant players. Every once in a while you get a Magic/Kareem, or Duncan/Robinson situation, but usually it is an Iverson and a bunch of nobodies in his first year situation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ericb5]

Sooooooo back to Markelle.

I think the majority of us believe Embiid will be the alpha, Simmons will be the alpha lite, and Fultz will be content playing off the ball and as secondary ball handler. I also think the majority of us believe Embiid and Simmons have the higher ceilings. What are the chances that Fultz becomes a better player than Embiid or Simmons? If Fultz joins these 2 in terms of level of prospects (star potential), the ceiling of our team is just too crazy to even think about. This is no knock on Fultz, who I think has the ceiling of a regular AS player. I just view Embiid and Simmons as potential top 10 players some day.

Over/under % (chance to be better than)
Embiid- 9.5%
Simmons- 24.5%

Is that fair?

I would say that the chances of Fultz being better than Simmons or Embiid is literally zero, unless he wins by default because they bust due to injuries.

I think that it is fair to think this and still be considered a Fultz fan too though. Fultz is a tremendous talent. I think he is going to be better than D'Angelo Russell, but worse than James Harden. That is a big range, and it includes being an allstar player.

He could turn into Lilard and be in that range, and that is his most likely ceiling in my mind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mrcrockpots]

Sooooooo back to Markelle.

I think the majority of us believe Embiid will be the alpha, Simmons will be the alpha lite, and Fultz will be content playing off the ball and as secondary ball handler. I also think the majority of us believe Embiid and Simmons have the higher ceilings. What are the chances that Fultz becomes a better player than Embiid or Simmons? If Fultz joins these 2 in terms of level of prospects (star potential), the ceiling of our team is just too crazy to even think about. This is no knock on Fultz, who I think has the ceiling of a regular AS player. I just view Embiid and Simmons as potential top 10 players some day.

Over/under % (chance to be better than)
Embiid- 9.5%
Simmons- 24.5%

Is that fair?

I would say that the chances of Fultz being better than Simmons or Embiid is literally zero, unless he wins by default because they bust due to injuries.

I think that it is fair to think this and still be considered a Fultz fan too though. Fultz is a tremendous talent. I think he is going to be better than D'Angelo Russell, but worse than James Harden. That is a big range, and it includes being an allstar player.

He could turn into Lilard and be in that range, and that is his most likely ceiling in my mind.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Don't injuries need to factor into the equation?

[europeanfan]

Sooooooo back to Markelle.

I think the majority of us believe Embiid will be the alpha, Simmons will be the alpha lite, and Fultz will be content playing off the ball and as secondary ball handler. I also think the majority of us believe Embiid and Simmons have the higher ceilings. What are the chances that Fultz becomes a better player than Embiid or Simmons? If Fultz joins these 2 in terms of level of prospects (star potential), the ceiling of our team is just too crazy to even think about. This is no knock on Fultz, who I think has the ceiling of a regular AS player. I just view Embiid and Simmons as potential top 10 players some day.

Over/under % (chance to be better than)
Embiid- 9.5%
Simmons- 24.5%

Is that fair?

Think his odds of being better than Simmons are much higher than that. Simmons is a great transition player but he has proven nothing in half court compared to Fultz. Fultz is an incredible PnR player already.

Hell if anything they'll soon understand it's more efficient if Markelle is the full time PG.

Looks at Ben Simmons' DX page :
"One NBA executive described him as a taller Rajon Rondo, a more athletic Evan Turner, or a skinnier Royce White. Simmons has displayed a penchant for stat-mongering like few players in recent memory, seeming to pad his numbers in blowouts. At times, it appears he only passes when guaranteed an assist and chases home-run plays at inopportune times in search of a highlight. Simmons seems to value those things over winning.

Simmons' porous defense is masked by his gaudy steal and block numbers. But when watching him closely, it's clear that no opposing player or coach fears attacking him. As Simmons rarely makes the effort to close out on shooters, put a body on opposing big men, or offer much beyond gambling wildly swiping for steals, his lack of intensity is amplified. He has wonderful anticipation skills as a rebounder and will wow you with his instincts in passing lanes. But overall, Simmons hasn't shown the length, toughness and inclination to emerge as an asset on the defensive end."

My odds :
5% Embiid
80% Simmons

And I feel pretty good about it. At the very least I don't get why Simmons gets to be mentioned on the same level as Embiid.

[Mrcrockpots]

Sooooooo back to Markelle.

I think the majority of us believe Embiid will be the alpha, Simmons will be the alpha lite, and Fultz will be content playing off the ball and as secondary ball handler. I also think the majority of us believe Embiid and Simmons have the higher ceilings. What are the chances that Fultz becomes a better player than Embiid or Simmons? If Fultz joins these 2 in terms of level of prospects (star potential), the ceiling of our team is just too crazy to even think about. This is no knock on Fultz, who I think has the ceiling of a regular AS player. I just view Embiid and Simmons as potential top 10 players some day.

Over/under % (chance to be better than)
Embiid- 9.5%
Simmons- 24.5%

Is that fair?

Think his odds of being better than Simmons are much higher than that. Simmons is a great transition player but he has proven nothing in half court compared to Fultz. Fultz is an incredible PnR player already.

Hell if anything they'll soon understand it's more efficient if Markelle is the full time PG.

Looks at Ben Simmons' DX page :
"One NBA executive described him as a taller Rajon Rondo, a more athletic Evan Turner, or a skinnier Royce White. Simmons has displayed a penchant for stat-mongering like few players in recent memory, seeming to pad his numbers in blowouts. At times, it appears he only passes when guaranteed an assist and chases home-run plays at inopportune times in search of a highlight. Simmons seems to value those things over winning.

Simmons' porous defense is masked by his gaudy steal and block numbers. But when watching him closely, it's clear that no opposing player or coach fears attacking him. As Simmons rarely makes the effort to close out on shooters, put a body on opposing big men, or offer much beyond gambling wildly swiping for steals, his lack of intensity is amplified. He has wonderful anticipation skills as a rebounder and will wow you with his instincts in passing lanes. But overall, Simmons hasn't shown the length, toughness and inclination to emerge as an asset on the defensive end."

My odds :
5% Embiid
80% Simmons

And I feel pretty good about it. At the very least I don't get why Simmons gets to be mentioned on the same level as Embiid.

I hear ya. Simmons must be the primary ball handler. Giving those reigns to Fultz would severely limit Simmons to the perimeter and without the ball, allowing defenses to sag off him. He'd be basically useless. Simmons is a much more dynamic creator and passer than Fultz. I really hope the fan base doesn't become divisive between Simmons and Fultz as they were with Okafor and Noel.

[Negrodamus]

I think Simmons and Fultz are a lot closer than people are willing to let on. Embiid, if healthy, is far away ahead of that pack.

[ivysixer2000]

I think Simmons and Fultz are a lot closer than people are willing to let on. Embiid, if healthy, is far away ahead of that pack.

Well it's easier to say Embiid is much better when we have seen him play in the NBA and he is 4 years older than Fultz. He is also 2 years older than Simmons.

Who knows how they will all develop, but comparing a 19 year old Fultz to Embiid is a bit unfair to Fultz....how good was Embiid at 19?? He was averaging 11/8 at Kansas, and not on the same stage as Fultz will be. Wish you guys would give Fultz a chance to actually develop his game before making all these vast statements about how good he will be in a decade.....cause honestly noone has a clue, its up to Fultz, not a message board.

[Negrodamus]

I think Simmons and Fultz are a lot closer than people are willing to let on. Embiid, if healthy, is far away ahead of that pack.

Well it's easier to say Embiid is much better when we have seen him play in the NBA and he is 4 years older than Fultz. He is also 2 years older than Simmons.

Who knows how they will all develop, but comparing a 19 year old Fultz to Embiid is a bit unfair to Fultz....how good was Embiid at 19?? He was averaging 11/8 at Kansas, and not on the same stage as Fultz will be. Wish you guys would give Fultz a chance to actually develop his game before making all these vast statements about how good he will be in a decade.....cause honestly noone has a clue, its up to Fultz, not a message board.

Because based on what we've seen, Embiid could be the best center in the league if healthy. I'll for sure give Simmons and Fultz a chance, but what Embiid brings to the table (size, length, shooting, defense, athleticism) is unmatched by anyone in the league except for maybe Cousins and Davis.

[ivysixer2000]

I think Simmons and Fultz are a lot closer than people are willing to let on. Embiid, if healthy, is far away ahead of that pack.

Well it's easier to say Embiid is much better when we have seen him play in the NBA and he is 4 years older than Fultz. He is also 2 years older than Simmons.

Who knows how they will all develop, but comparing a 19 year old Fultz to Embiid is a bit unfair to Fultz....how good was Embiid at 19?? He was averaging 11/8 at Kansas, and not on the same stage as Fultz will be. Wish you guys would give Fultz a chance to actually develop his game before making all these vast statements about how good he will be in a decade.....cause honestly noone has a clue, its up to Fultz, not a message board.

Because based on what we've seen, Embiid could be the best center in the league if healthy. I'll for sure give Simmons and Fultz a chance, but what Embiid brings to the table (size, length, shooting, defense, athleticism) is unmatched by anyone in the league except for maybe Cousins and Davis.

Oh I agree on Embiid's potential, I'm just not willing to put a limit on Fultz and Simmons in the process of giving Embiid credit. They are below him now, doesn't mean they can't be the best at their respective positions in the future. The age factor is a pretty big one thats getting ignored with the situation.

Seen 31 games in 3 years out of Embiid, not willing to just give him that big role til he proves it by at least staying on the court. I have much less of a problem thinking Simmons and Fultz can at least stay on the court. Most teams don't have this issue with this many talented young players, but I would warn to not be so quick to assign an 'alpha dog' for the next decade.....hope they don't think that way cause it could fracture the team.

[Mrcrockpots]

I think all 3 players are unique in their own right. Embiid is on the same level of Anthony Davis and KAT in terms of being a top big man in the game. Simmons can do everything (rebound, pass, run, finish) at such a high rate that it makes it difficult to compare him in terms of Embiid's ceiling. Fultz is a pure shooter with great size and length that really doesn't have a weakness other than untapped defensive potential.

This season needs to start already. In the words of Green Day, "wake me up when September ends."

[Negrodamus]

Well it's easier to say Embiid is much better when we have seen him play in the NBA and he is 4 years older than Fultz. He is also 2 years older than Simmons.

Who knows how they will all develop, but comparing a 19 year old Fultz to Embiid is a bit unfair to Fultz....how good was Embiid at 19?? He was averaging 11/8 at Kansas, and not on the same stage as Fultz will be. Wish you guys would give Fultz a chance to actually develop his game before making all these vast statements about how good he will be in a decade.....cause honestly noone has a clue, its up to Fultz, not a message board.

Because based on what we've seen, Embiid could be the best center in the league if healthy. I'll for sure give Simmons and Fultz a chance, but what Embiid brings to the table (size, length, shooting, defense, athleticism) is unmatched by anyone in the league except for maybe Cousins and Davis.

Oh I agree on Embiid's potential, I'm just not willing to put a limit on Fultz and Simmons in the process of giving Embiid credit. They are below him now, doesn't mean they can't be the best at their respective positions in the future. The age factor is a pretty big one thats getting ignored with the situation.

Seen 31 games in 3 years out of Embiid, not willing to just give him that big role til he proves it by at least staying on the court. I have much less of a problem thinking Simmons and Fultz can at least stay on the court. Most teams don't have this issue with this many talented young players, but I would warn to not be so quick to assign an 'alpha dog' for the next decade.....hope they don't think that way cause it could fracture the team.

I'm not putting a limit on their potential, but Fultz showed very little effort on the defensive end and I'm hoping that he can become at least passible on that end. Simmons, despite being a positive on the defensive end, was frequently giving poor effort on that end too (possible symptom of being on a garbage teams). On top of that, he did everything in his power to not shoot left handed layups, had no real jump shot. Those are still concerns.

Embiid's concern is his foot. You could argue that getting into foul trouble could still be an issue. That's pretty much it. And it's been that way since we picked him.

[LongLiveHinkie]

Honestly, I hope all 3 of our Big 3 become transcendent talents, but at the end of the day I just hope we're talking about 3 great players who fit perfectly together rather than debating who is best, because that means we'll be winning a lot of games.

Btw when debating next season's win totals, it's important to remember that whe winning 28 games, we basically squandered away 5-10 wins screwing around with the Okafor and Embiid starting lineup. It worked horribly and they kept trying to force it. Without that we probably win 33 games this past season, which is already matching this upcoming season's ESPN "win projection"

[Unbreakable99]

Sooooooo back to Markelle.

I think the majority of us believe Embiid will be the alpha, Simmons will be the alpha lite, and Fultz will be content playing off the ball and as secondary ball handler. I also think the majority of us believe Embiid and Simmons have the higher ceilings. What are the chances that Fultz becomes a better player than Embiid or Simmons? If Fultz joins these 2 in terms of level of prospects (star potential), the ceiling of our team is just too crazy to even think about. This is no knock on Fultz, who I think has the ceiling of a regular AS player. I just view Embiid and Simmons as potential top 10 players some day.

Over/under % (chance to be better than)
Embiid- 9.5%
Simmons- 24.5%

Is that fair?

If Fultz becomes better than both Embiid and Simmons that could be good or bad. It would be good because I expect Embiid and Simmons to be top 10 players in the league. They have HOF level skills. If Fultz is better than them we probably win multiple titles and may be the greatest team ever. The bad if Fultz is better than both is that could mean Embiid and Simmons didn't play to the level I thought they would and I don't even want to think about that. But to answer your question I think think it's a less than 10% chance Fultz is better than either.

[Mrcrockpots]

Sooooooo back to Markelle.

I think the majority of us believe Embiid will be the alpha, Simmons will be the alpha lite, and Fultz will be content playing off the ball and as secondary ball handler. I also think the majority of us believe Embiid and Simmons have the higher ceilings. What are the chances that Fultz becomes a better player than Embiid or Simmons? If Fultz joins these 2 in terms of level of prospects (star potential), the ceiling of our team is just too crazy to even think about. This is no knock on Fultz, who I think has the ceiling of a regular AS player. I just view Embiid and Simmons as potential top 10 players some day.

Over/under % (chance to be better than)
Embiid- 9.5%
Simmons- 24.5%

Is that fair?

If Fultz becomes better than both Embiid and Simmons that could be good or bad. It would be good because I expect Embiid and Simmons to be top 10 players in the league. They have HOF level skills. If Fultz is better than them we probably win multiple titles and may be the greatest team ever. The bad if Fultz is better than both is that could mean Embiid and Simmons didn't play to the level I thought they would and I don't even want to think about that. But to answer your question I think think it's a less than 10% chance Fultz is better than either.

You're probably right. I agree with you pretty much everywhere. However, there is still a chance that Ben never learns to get a reliable jump shot which takes away from his potential overall effectiveness.

[cksdayoff]

fultz can score on all three levels. has a body that is nba ready. has an advanced skillset that sets him apart from other nba guards already, at the age of 19, not to mention legit point guard skills. his defense is a concern, will need a lot of work but tell me an elite offensive prospect at the guard position who came into the league at a young age who didn't need work?

i believe he'll become an elite shooter. not enough emphasis on the fact that we finally have an all-world talent in the backcourt in fultz who's game is made for the nba

[Ericb5]

Sooooooo back to Markelle.

I think the majority of us believe Embiid will be the alpha, Simmons will be the alpha lite, and Fultz will be content playing off the ball and as secondary ball handler. I also think the majority of us believe Embiid and Simmons have the higher ceilings. What are the chances that Fultz becomes a better player than Embiid or Simmons? If Fultz joins these 2 in terms of level of prospects (star potential), the ceiling of our team is just too crazy to even think about. This is no knock on Fultz, who I think has the ceiling of a regular AS player. I just view Embiid and Simmons as potential top 10 players some day.

Over/under % (chance to be better than)
Embiid- 9.5%
Simmons- 24.5%

Is that fair?

I would say that the chances of Fultz being better than Simmons or Embiid is literally zero, unless he wins by default because they bust due to injuries.

I think that it is fair to think this and still be considered a Fultz fan too though. Fultz is a tremendous talent. I think he is going to be better than D'Angelo Russell, but worse than James Harden. That is a big range, and it includes being an allstar player.

He could turn into Lilard and be in that range, and that is his most likely ceiling in my mind.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Don't injuries need to factor into the equation?

Yes, and that is what I meant. If Embiid and Simmons can't be healthy, then Fultz could be better than them. If you assume health for all three of them then I think he has no chance.

What it comes down to for me is that I think that Embiid and Simmons are sure fire superstars, and Fultz doesn't even have that as an upside. So he is operating in a different space.

I think he can be one of the best third bananas in the league though, which would be the second banana on some playoff teams.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Unbreakable99]

Does anyone know why Fultz changed his shooting form? It's not like his form was bad and he couldn't shoot. He could shoot pretty well. Why the change? He now shoots more with the ball further out in front of him. I guess it's for the better.

[cksdayoff]

he shoots like cj mccollum now. it's because his release was a bit on the slow side. he could get away with it in college but he and his personal trainer thought it needed tweaking at the next level. he wanted to have a quicker release, shooting over quicker and longer defenders in the nba