Doctor MJ wrote:falcolombardi wrote:i dont follow kings, how good/how much potential do fox and haliburton have?
reading you guys it seems like haliburton has much higher ceiling than fox?
Fox is in his 5th year now, on a max deal, and has continually been a volume scorer on below league-average efficiency who isn't a great passer and generally has a negative On/Off. I don't think it was so much that Haliburton was perceived to have a higher ceiling than Fox was once perceived, but it seems likely that it was a mistake to treat Fox as a franchise player, and it isn't so clear cut how to use him in another way.
By contrast, Haliburton is a guy who works just fine around greater talent due to his intelligence and general lack of entitlement to his game, and also happens to still be on a rookie deal.
All of this made Halliburton the much more valuable trade asset, which was why Indiana wanted him instead of Fox.
ftr, while I'm not optimistic about Fox's future, I will say that I completely get seeing him as having more potential than Halliburton even now, it's just that if I'm trying to build my franchise for the long-term, I'd much rather have a commitment to Halliburton at his place in his career than to Fox in his.
what is it about fox that makes you think he has more potential than haliburton still ? athletism?