Markelle Fultz

[Bensational]

My point was more “would Fultz start over FVV?” (Assuming that’s the comparison)

I also think Suggs has another offensive gear (coming very soon)…so I dont really want to factor moving him or benching him, due to his elite defense and his always impactful big play presence. I just think he’s got “it”, so I prefer to get some scoring and floor spacing in the backcourt from the other spot…I just keep coming back to Fultz, largely for that reason. So two limited, maybe mismatched starting guards. If I’m picking one to accommodate, it’s Suggs and his elite defense, “confident” 3pt stroke, aggressive play overall, and lack of mysterious health issues and age. Contract status can’t be ignored either.

I don’t think Fultz is BAD…but he’s not a good fit with Paolo and he’s not a good fit with Suggs. Anybody is a good fit with Franz- he has such a complete game, he can work with anyone BUT Franz’ biggest strength is his driving to the hoop…so more floor spreading would be a plus. A green light 3-level scorer at SG could work with Fultz…but that’s really compromising, isn’t it? Two shooters is better…Guards should be able to shoot. A lot.

I’m not sure what to think of Black yet…I can build an intriguing case, but the fit questions are the same. I could see a Black/Jett or Black/Cole pairing, but it always comes back to “are his pluses intriguing & impactful to overshadow his one big critical minus?” It takes a special guy to do that…young Ben Simmons was All-NBA …but also All-Defense and a 6’10 freight train to the rim who could pile up assists.

I think Houston would struggle to justify playing Fultz over FVV since they just paid FVV $40M a year to be there. Toronto chose not to pay FVV, and instead to pay Schroder a fraction of that. Toronto definitely looks more prepared to be competitive than Houston.

As for Fultz being a bad fit - that just hasn’t been demonstrated. On paper, by the theories you subscribe to, sure he’s a bad fit in that context. But the results don’t match that presumption.

When Paolo is ready to be the primary playmaker, then I think Fultz becomes a worse fit, and that’s when we will likely look to upgrade to more shooting from that position. But I think Paolo is a couple seasons away from that moment.

[ibraheim718]

To Knicks fan , and by your logic, Greg Oden , if he returns today, at age of 35, would still be sophmore? After all, his cumulative games played is one season and quater.
If you have been in nba for now, 7 years and your game count is thin, you aren't sophmore. You are 7th year player who is injury prone.
Players don't start playing sport when they turn pros, they spend over decade playing that sport before they turn pros. That's why somebody who 25 normally shows very little to no progress . Because he has been playing that exect sport for past 15 years at that point, if not more.
Matter of fact median retirment age in nba is 33 but average age of retirment in nba is ...drumroll.. between 27 and 28.

Greg Oden is the worst analogy. Oden is probably at home eating cheeseburgers on his couch right now. Fultz has actively been trying to play basketball. He has an injury he rehabilitates and starts playing and training for high level NBA games. Oden had a CAREER ending patella tendon injury and hasn't played in 9 years. The hyperbole is real with you though.

I'm not the biggest Markelle Fultz fan, far from it. But even I can't ignore that he had a good year last year.. for him. So he has the ability to have a better one this year.. easily. He never had the chance to learn a lot of the early lessons that young players usually learn i.e. how to win games, playing to their strengths to impact games, and how to improve upon their skins during the off-season with hard work whereas Fultz was working hard just to have the chance to play basketball.

And regardless of what the preseason "stats" that Fultz/Suggs backcourt showed potential.

I even took under 30 games played last year for Fultz on this forum and he surpassed that by double. He's already proven just by playing that one year that he's healed and showed some durability. He's PROVEN he can play a substantial amount of NBA games. He plays 70 games this year.. the Magic make the Play-in does he not prove you wrong?

[pepe1991]

To Knicks fan , and by your logic, Greg Oden , if he returns today, at age of 35, would still be sophmore? After all, his cumulative games played is one season and quater.
If you have been in nba for now, 7 years and your game count is thin, you aren't sophmore. You are 7th year player who is injury prone.
Players don't start playing sport when they turn pros, they spend over decade playing that sport before they turn pros. That's why somebody who 25 normally shows very little to no progress . Because he has been playing that exect sport for past 15 years at that point, if not more.
Matter of fact median retirment age in nba is 33 but average age of retirment in nba is ...drumroll.. between 27 and 28.

Greg Oden is the worst analogy. Oden is probably at home eating cheeseburgers on his couch right now. Fultz has actively been trying to play basketball. He has an injury he rehabilitates and starts playing and training for high level NBA games. Oden had a CAREER ending patella tendon injury and hasn't played in 9 years. The hyperbole is real with you though.

I'm not the biggest Markelle Fultz fan, far from it. But even I can't ignore that he had a good year last year.. for him. So he has the ability to have a better one this year.. easily. He never had the chance to learn a lot of the early lessons that young players usually learn i.e. how to win games, playing to their strengths to impact games, and how to improve upon their skins during the off-season with hard work whereas Fultz was working hard just to have the chance to play basketball.

And regardless of what the preseason "stats" that Fultz/Suggs backcourt showed potential.

I even took under 30 games played last year for Fultz on this forum and he surpassed that by double. He's already proven just by playing that one year that he's healed and showed some durability. He's PROVEN he can play a substantial amount of NBA games. He plays 70 games this year.. the Magic make the Play-in does he not prove you wrong?

I went with Oden because he is both: former 1# pick and retred due health problems with sub 150 games played. Hyperbole was on purpose.

Fultz was given green light to play basketball from first day he joined nba. Nobody held him back but his *injury*. One that he was doing 2 years of rehab, and still, allegedlly, couldn't shoot because. Begs the question, why he didn't return sooner, if maximum he was ever going to get is - this?
Here we are, 5 years later talking about *injury* that didn't needed surgery and all he was doing was physical therapy. And yet, he still refuses to shoot, much like he refused to shoot half of decade ago. So, nothing really changed, we just got used to a fact he playstyle is mini Ben SImmons in that sense.

He's PROVEN he can play a substantial amount of NBA games.

This is contradiction to your first reply to me where you said he only played amount of games equal to sophmore. But now he proved to you he can play substational amount of games? Despite fact he played 192 out of 470 games? You can't have both.

And regardless of what the preseason "stats" that Fultz/Suggs backcourt showed potential.

*Can play* and " should play* and *good fits* are all separated points, During preseason you can do anything, that's whole purpose of it.
Due nba defenses not being on high altert during regular season, you can also get away with bunch of BS and still win lot of games . 2019-20 Philadelphia started 2 centers 2 power forwards and swignman . They even had 13th ranked offense despite fact nothing made sense. Ofc they got exposed in playoffs but in regular season they were paced to win 48 games. (43-30, shorter season).

In same fashion yes, Fultz and Suggs could play together, but we are smart enough to know that in one moment, in soon future, once team makes playoffs, somebody on other side will figure that you can play 2-3 zone against Magic to oblivion and get away with it. Instad of sitting and waiting until somebody tells you on national tv that this doesn't make sense, we can make changes before we get to that point. If you pair guard who refuses to shoot with guard who can't really shoot well, and your best player also can't really shoot well, what a hell are you doing?

He plays 70 games this year.. the Magic make the Play-in does he not prove you wrong?

Why would that prove me wrong? You think replacing him with some replacment level, part time starter like Dennis Schroder wouldn't give team exect same results?
I don't think he is any better playmaker than some Monte Morris,

According to raptor data he is ballpark of PGs of Gabe Vincet, Tyus Jones, Schroder, Sexton (55th among 72 PGs).

Also he will play 70-ish games because only time he ever did play 70ish games before was- in contract year. And now he is UFA and has even more reasons to try extra hard.

[ibraheim718]

I went with Oden because he is both: former 1# pick and retred due health problems with sub 150 games played. Hyperbole was on purpose.

On purpose to make you look like a fool? I don't get it. It's a terrible comp.

Fultz was given green light to play basketball from first day he joined nba. Nobody held him back but his *injury*. One that he was doing 2 years of rehab, and still, allegedlly, couldn't shoot because. Begs the question, why he didn't return sooner, if maximum he was ever going to get is - this?
Here we are, 5 years later talking about *injury* that didn't needed surgery and all he was doing was physical therapy. And yet, he still refuses to shoot, much like he refused to shoot half of decade ago. So, nothing really changed, we just got used to a fact he playstyle is mini Ben SImmons in that sense.

Anything you have to say about his injury history is seriously just hearsay and cherry picking from news articles. You don't actually know a damn thing when it comes to his injury history or what was actually happening behind closed doors.

"He's PROVEN he can play a substantial amount of NBA games."

This is contradiction to your first reply to me where you said he only played amount of games equal to sophmore. But now he proved to you he can play substational amount of games? Despite fact he played 192 out of 470 games? You can't have both.

No it isn't. He proved last year he's completely healthy again and his body can sustain a full NBA season. But he still doesn't have the amount of game time experience as most 6 year vets have had. So to say "ha he's been in the league for 6 years and he is who is" is disingenuous.

"And regardless of what the preseason "stats" that Fultz/Suggs backcourt showed potential."

*Can play* and " should play* and *good fits* are all separated points, During preseason you can do anything, that's whole purpose of it.
Due nba defenses not being on high altert during regular season, you can also get away with bunch of BS and still win lot of games . 2019-20 Philadelphia started 2 centers 2 power forwards and swignman . They even had 13th ranked offense despite fact nothing made sense. Ofc they got exposed in playoffs but in regular season they were paced to win 48 games. (43-30, shorter season).

"Ill-fitting" player combinations have won in the NBA. What I'm saying is the back-court showed "potential". Look up the definition of the word potential to help you understand the context of my sentence.

In same fashion yes, Fultz and Suggs could play together, but we are smart enough to know that in one moment, in soon future, once team makes playoffs, somebody on other side will figure that you can play 2-3 zone against Magic to oblivion and get away with it. Instad of sitting and waiting until somebody tells you on national tv that this doesn't make sense, we can make changes before we get to that point. If you pair guard who refuses to shoot with guard who can't really shoot well, and your best player also can't really shoot well, what a hell are you doing?

Time and time again this kind of thinking has been proven wrong. You're just too myopic to remember or didn't watch. Opposing teams completely sagged off both Rajon Rondo and Giannis and those teams still won Chips because those players added other dimensions to the team that other players couldn't.

"He plays 70 games this year.. the Magic make the Play-in does he not prove you wrong?"

Why would that prove me wrong? You think replacing him with some replacment level, part time starter like Dennis Schroder wouldn't give team exect same results?

It would prove you wrong in that if the above happens Fultz would have shown improvement.

I don't think he is any better playmaker than some Monte Morris,

So is this is about play making now and his lack thereof?

According to raptor data he is ballpark of PGs of Gabe Vincet, Tyus Jones, Schroder, Sexton (55th among 72 PGs).

Also he will play 70-ish games because only time he ever did play 70ish games before was- in contract year. And now he is UFA and has even more reasons to try extra hard.

Honestly.. I don't worship stats like you do so save them for someone else. They can help tell a story but often times they don't tell the whole story.

[Audi]

So at this point Fultz's "fit" with the roster is really about Paolo, right? Why is there so much emphasis put on 'fit' with a player who has yet to play a game of his second season? Has Paolo hit his ceiling?

[VFX]

So at this point Fultz's "fit" with the roster is really about Paolo, right? Why is there so much emphasis put on 'fit' with a player who has yet to play a game of his second season? Has Paolo hit his ceiling?

That’s funny. So now Fultz’ limited skill set relies entirely on Paolo’s upside?

The spin is real.

Let me ask you this. What does Fultz do to highlight Paolos skillset while minimizing his weaknesses? Wouldn’t that be important for the starting point guard?

[Audi]

So at this point Fultz's "fit" with the roster is really about Paolo, right? Why is there so much emphasis put on 'fit' with a player who has yet to play a game of his second season? Has Paolo hit his ceiling?

That’s funny. So now Fultz’ limited skill set relies entirely on Paolo’s upside?

The spin is real.

Let me ask you this. What does Fultz do to highlight Paolos skillset while minimizing his weaknesses? Wouldn’t that be important for the starting point guard?

Why can't you answer the question? You are claiming Fultz doesn't fit. The only players he doesn't fit with in the SL are Suggs (not considered core, hopefully subject to change) and a rookie iteration of Paolo (considered core).

To answer your question - Paolo's skillset is not developed or defined (which should excite all of us). It's a skillset that he's developed over the course of a mere 72 games in the league. His weaknesses are also that of a rookie. This is the point I'm making.

Has there ever been a team that held it's starting PG accountable for a perceived lack of "highlighting skillset while minimizing weaknesses" of their rookie?

[VFX]

So at this point Fultz's "fit" with the roster is really about Paolo, right? Why is there so much emphasis put on 'fit' with a player who has yet to play a game of his second season? Has Paolo hit his ceiling?

That’s funny. So now Fultz’ limited skill set relies entirely on Paolo’s upside?

The spin is real.

Let me ask you this. What does Fultz do to highlight Paolos skillset while minimizing his weaknesses? Wouldn’t that be important for the starting point guard?

Why can't you answer the question? You are claiming Fultz doesn't fit. The only players he doesn't fit with in the SL are Suggs (not considered core, at least for now hopefully) and a rookie iteration of Paolo (considered core).

To answer your question - Paolo's skillset is not developed or defined (which should excite all of us). It's a skillset that he's developed over the course of a mere 72 games in the league. His weaknesses are also that of a rookie. This is the point I'm making.

So we should definitely resign him for $25-$30m+ because we don’t know what Paolo is yet. That’s your line of thinking.

I can venture to guess Paolo will be a heightened version of what he is currently with better defense and likely better ability to stretch the floor on an average growth trajectory.

What does that have to do with the criticisms on Fultz game?

You do realize this logic works with just about every guy on the roster aside from Ingles to varying degrees right? It’s never valid criticism for Fultz. Everything hinges on everything else right?

[Skybox]

So at this point Fultz's "fit" with the roster is really about Paolo, right? Why is there so much emphasis put on 'fit' with a player who has yet to play a game of his second season? Has Paolo hit his ceiling?

That’s funny. So now Fultz’ limited skill set relies entirely on Paolo’s upside?

The spin is real.

Let me ask you this. What does Fultz do to highlight Paolos skillset while minimizing his weaknesses? Wouldn’t that be important for the starting point guard?

Why can't you answer the question? You are claiming Fultz doesn't fit. The only players he doesn't fit with in the SL are Suggs (not considered core, at least for now hopefully) and a rookie iteration of Paolo (considered core).

To answer your question - Paolo's skillset is not developed or defined (which should excite all of us). It's a skillset that he's developed over the course of a mere 72 games in the league. His weaknesses are also that of a rookie. This is the point I'm making.

maybe we can turn PB into a spot up guy? Like Bamba...and give a wholly unexceptional driver who doesn't draw fouls free use of the paint?

however Paolo evolves...his behemoth physique handling, moving, and driving like a 6' guy should always be his core advantage. There's no conceivable iteration of Paolo that isn't limited by a guard who won't spread the floor and draw defenders away from Paolo. There's just no favorable place for that on any NBA team anymore.

[Audi]

That’s funny. So now Fultz’ limited skill set relies entirely on Paolo’s upside?

The spin is real.

Let me ask you this. What does Fultz do to highlight Paolos skillset while minimizing his weaknesses? Wouldn’t that be important for the starting point guard?

Why can't you answer the question? You are claiming Fultz doesn't fit. The only players he doesn't fit with in the SL are Suggs (not considered core, at least for now hopefully) and a rookie iteration of Paolo (considered core).

To answer your question - Paolo's skillset is not developed or defined (which should excite all of us). It's a skillset that he's developed over the course of a mere 72 games in the league. His weaknesses are also that of a rookie. This is the point I'm making.

maybe we can turn PB into a spot up guy? Like Bamba...and give a wholly unexceptional driver who doesn't draw fouls free use of the paint?

however Paolo evolves...his behemoth physique handling, moving, and driving like a 6' guy should always be his core advantage. There's no conceivable iteration of Paolo that isn't limited by a guard who won't spread the floor and draw defenders away from Paolo. There's just no favorable place for that on any NBA team anymore.

Perfect. We should be able to resign him on the cheap then and wait for a clear upgrade to emerge via roster or trade.

[Audi]

You do realize this logic works with just about every guy on the roster aside from Ingles to varying degrees right? It’s never valid criticism for Fultz. Everything hinges on everything else right?

With as much back and forth we've done, surely you know I've criticized his weaknesses plenty. The divide is on the degree of how detrimental we believe it is.

[VFX]

You do realize this logic works with just about every guy on the roster aside from Ingles to varying degrees right? It’s never valid criticism for Fultz. Everything hinges on everything else right?

With as much back and forth we've done, surely you know I've criticized his weaknesses plenty. The divide is on the degree of how detrimental we believe it is.

There are different timeframes of development on this roster.

Franz, Suggs, Paolo, and Cole (to a lesser degree) are all relatively on the same timeframe of development. (Years 2-3)

AB and Jett are on the same timeframe being rookies. Rookies have a steeper curve.

Then there is Fultz, Isaac, and Carter. (Years 5 & 6)

Timeframes matter in regards to building a roster. Not sure why the goalposts are moved with specific players in either direction when we are talking about cap space %, contracts, and skill sets.

[Audi]

You do realize this logic works with just about every guy on the roster aside from Ingles to varying degrees right? It’s never valid criticism for Fultz. Everything hinges on everything else right?

With as much back and forth we've done, surely you know I've criticized his weaknesses plenty. The divide is on the degree of how detrimental we believe it is.

There are different timeframes of development on this roster.

Franz, Suggs, Paolo, and Cole (to a lesser degree) are all relatively on the same timeframe of development. (Years 2-3)

AB and Jett are on the same timeframe being rookies. Rookies have a steeper curve.

Then there is Fultz, Isaac, and Carter. (Years 5 & 6)

Timeframes matter in regards to building a roster. Not sure why the goalposts are moved with specific players in either direction when we are talking about cap space %, contracts, and skill sets.

I've always understood your concern in regard to future cap (though I do trust the FO in this regard more than you seem to) and I agree timelines make a difference. That's why I've been opposed to these proposed trades involving older vets and always been open to clear upgrades to Fultz within similar core timelines. Skillsets are just not a pressing issue at this point for me considering the skillset that matters most right now (Paolo's...Franz has already shown his skillset is universal and growing) is the product of 72 games. I don't look at Paolo winning ROY and think "Man...Fultz is really holding him back". I don't understand the urgency.

[Residual-Heat]

Brogdon is still available. There are upgrades available. The problem is whether the FO want to make a move or not.

Paolo's jumpshot might take years to develop. In the meantime, it would be easier for Paolo to continue to develop the other aspects of his game with a PG that can space the floor.

[Bensational]

You do realize this logic works with just about every guy on the roster aside from Ingles to varying degrees right? It’s never valid criticism for Fultz. Everything hinges on everything else right?

With as much back and forth we've done, surely you know I've criticized his weaknesses plenty. The divide is on the degree of how detrimental we believe it is.

There are different timeframes of development on this roster.

Franz, Suggs, Paolo, and Cole (to a lesser degree) are all relatively on the same timeframe of development. (Years 2-3)

AB and Jett are on the same timeframe being rookies. Rookies have a steeper curve.

Then there is Fultz, Isaac, and Carter. (Years 5 & 6)

Timeframes matter in regards to building a roster. Not sure why the goalposts are moved with specific players in either direction when we are talking about cap space %, contracts, and skill sets.

You say “timeframe of development” and point to their years experience in the league, but that’s not the case. The “timeframe for development” is the timeframe towards playing competitive basketball.

Franz are Paolo are advanced for their age, Suggs and Cole just seem to be entering the rise to their prime, while AB and Jett are still adapting to the pace of the game. Fultz, WCJ, Isaac, Moe, Harris, Ingles are all in various stages of their competitive primes, but Paolo, Franz, Suggs and Cole are now closer to that timeframe of development than they are to AB and Jett’s current trajectories. The reality is that AB and Jett are further away in development than the rest of the team.

That’s not a problem, that just means we currently have staggered levels of player readiness. As Paolo and Franz come into their own as franchise focal points over coming seasons, AB and Jett will come into their own as competitive players and be able to be introduced to higher roles without impeding momentum.

We gave Suggs all the minutes he could handle in his rookie year and it did little to give us an understanding of what we had with him beyond what his limitations were. He still needed another season to start to correct those after that. If AB and Jett were Paolo/Franz like phenoms they would be in bigger roles right now.

[IllMagic04]

Fultz is our starting PG and hes our best chance to win next season. I do think that his long term fit with Paolo is very questionable. However are we to believe that Black is the future PG? Cause the same issue exist. If it doesn't work with Fultz then it sure aint going to work with Black. Theres also an fit issue with Suggs if we really are being honest with ourselves. To unlock Paolo's playmaking upside we need shooting in our back court period. So its just kinda weird we scapegoat Fultz and dont talk about our current bricklaying SG thats gonna be playing next to him.

Sent from my SM-G970U using RealGM mobile app

[VFX]

With as much back and forth we've done, surely you know I've criticized his weaknesses plenty. The divide is on the degree of how detrimental we believe it is.

There are different timeframes of development on this roster.

Franz, Suggs, Paolo, and Cole (to a lesser degree) are all relatively on the same timeframe of development. (Years 2-3)

AB and Jett are on the same timeframe being rookies. Rookies have a steeper curve.

Then there is Fultz, Isaac, and Carter. (Years 5 & 6)

Timeframes matter in regards to building a roster. Not sure why the goalposts are moved with specific players in either direction when we are talking about cap space %, contracts, and skill sets.

You say “timeframe of development” and point to their years experience in the league, but that’s not the case. The “timeframe for development” is the timeframe towards playing competitive basketball.

Franz are Paolo are advanced for their age, Suggs and Cole just seem to be entering the rise to their prime, while AB and Jett are still adapting to the pace of the game. Fultz, WCJ, Isaac, Moe, Harris, Ingles are all in various stages of their competitive primes, but Paolo, Franz, Suggs and Cole are now closer to that timeframe of development than they are to AB and Jett’s current trajectories. The reality is that AB and Jett are further away in development than the rest of the team.

That’s not a problem, that just means we currently have staggered levels of player readiness. As Paolo and Franz come into their own as franchise focal points over coming seasons, AB and Jett will come into their own as competitive players and be able to be introduced to higher roles without impeding momentum.

We gave Suggs all the minutes he could handle in his rookie year and it did little to give us an understanding of what we had with him beyond what his limitations were. He still needed another season to start to correct those after that. If AB and Jett were Paolo/Franz like phenoms they would be in bigger roles right now.

I’m talking more about contract dispersal relative to tenure…

Yes, all players develop at different rates.

[Skybox]

Fultz is our starting PG and hes our best chance to win next season. I do think that his long term fit with Paolo is very questionable. However are we to believe that Black is the future PG? Cause the same issue exist. If it doesn't work with Fultz then it sure aint going to work with Black. Theres also an fit issue with Suggs if we really are being honest with ourselves. To unlock Paolo's playmaking upside we need shooting in our back court period. So its just kinda weird we scapegoat Fultz and dont talk about our current bricklaying SG thats gonna be playing next to him.

Sent from my SM-G970U using RealGM mobile app

To win what?

[Bensational]

There are different timeframes of development on this roster.

Franz, Suggs, Paolo, and Cole (to a lesser degree) are all relatively on the same timeframe of development. (Years 2-3)

AB and Jett are on the same timeframe being rookies. Rookies have a steeper curve.

Then there is Fultz, Isaac, and Carter. (Years 5 & 6)

Timeframes matter in regards to building a roster. Not sure why the goalposts are moved with specific players in either direction when we are talking about cap space %, contracts, and skill sets.

You say “timeframe of development” and point to their years experience in the league, but that’s not the case. The “timeframe for development” is the timeframe towards playing competitive basketball.

Franz are Paolo are advanced for their age, Suggs and Cole just seem to be entering the rise to their prime, while AB and Jett are still adapting to the pace of the game. Fultz, WCJ, Isaac, Moe, Harris, Ingles are all in various stages of their competitive primes, but Paolo, Franz, Suggs and Cole are now closer to that timeframe of development than they are to AB and Jett’s current trajectories. The reality is that AB and Jett are further away in development than the rest of the team.

That’s not a problem, that just means we currently have staggered levels of player readiness. As Paolo and Franz come into their own as franchise focal points over coming seasons, AB and Jett will come into their own as competitive players and be able to be introduced to higher roles without impeding momentum.

We gave Suggs all the minutes he could handle in his rookie year and it did little to give us an understanding of what we had with him beyond what his limitations were. He still needed another season to start to correct those after that. If AB and Jett were Paolo/Franz like phenoms they would be in bigger roles right now.

I’m talking more about contract dispersal relative to tenure…

Yes, all players develop at different rates.

Lol sure. Your post is quoted right there and you open with “this team has many timeframes of development” but never mention “contract dispersal relative to tenure” once. If you want to talk about cap space, then talk about cap space.

Yes, there is a difference in rookie scale contracts vs market rate contracts. Even then, Fultz and Cole have more in common in their timeframes as impending FAs who’ll both have different cap impacts next season.

The next stages of contractual changes will be:

2024 - Fultz, Harris, and Cole FAs, Ingles team option

2025 - Franz + Suggs up for extension, Isaac FA

2026 - Paolo up for extension, WCJ FA

2027 - AB + Jett up for extension

The summer of 2026 is when decisions will have to be made about balancing Paolo + Franz max extensions vs the rest of the team. Either by then we’ve loaded the team up with depth we can retain with bird rights and go over the cap, or we’ll be looking to make consolidation trades.

That’s a long on-ramp to sort out a lot of everyone’s concerns.

[VFX]

You say “timeframe of development” and point to their years experience in the league, but that’s not the case. The “timeframe for development” is the timeframe towards playing competitive basketball.

Franz are Paolo are advanced for their age, Suggs and Cole just seem to be entering the rise to their prime, while AB and Jett are still adapting to the pace of the game. Fultz, WCJ, Isaac, Moe, Harris, Ingles are all in various stages of their competitive primes, but Paolo, Franz, Suggs and Cole are now closer to that timeframe of development than they are to AB and Jett’s current trajectories. The reality is that AB and Jett are further away in development than the rest of the team.

That’s not a problem, that just means we currently have staggered levels of player readiness. As Paolo and Franz come into their own as franchise focal points over coming seasons, AB and Jett will come into their own as competitive players and be able to be introduced to higher roles without impeding momentum.

We gave Suggs all the minutes he could handle in his rookie year and it did little to give us an understanding of what we had with him beyond what his limitations were. He still needed another season to start to correct those after that. If AB and Jett were Paolo/Franz like phenoms they would be in bigger roles right now.

I’m talking more about contract dispersal relative to tenure…

Yes, all players develop at different rates.

Lol sure. Your post is quoted right there and you open with “this team has many timeframes of development” but never mention “contract dispersal relative to tenure” once. If you want to talk about cap space, then talk about cap space.

when we are talking about cap space %, contracts, and skill sets

Literally in the same post you are referring to.

It all matters. You are being disingenuous to parse these issues out like they aren’t all connected.

Like I’ve said before, I wouldn’t care whatsoever about Fultz’ shortcomings if he was actually a 3rd year player making a rookie scale contract matched with his development window. He’s not and won’t be.

This is why this thread is 80 pages long with people making absurd qualifying statements about how his fit with Paolo hinges more on Paolos upside than a player 7 seasons into the league, or that Orlando really just needs an extremely high volume SG to alleviate his gravity, or that we need to just wait another 3-4 seasons while shelling out money because this FO can’t make decisions.

No thanks. I’d rather they just realize who works with who and not spend 10 expensive years building a real roster because Magic Twitter liked a dunk.