College basketball and 2017 draft - One more poll after last game

[AtheJ415]

I have trouble seeing any scenario where Fultz doesn't go #1. As good as he is in the half court I think he has star potential at two positions if need be. Honestly I think he's Penny 2.0

My only knock on him is having questionable judgement in head coaches. Nobody thought Chriss & Murray were one and done at the time Fultz commuted there (Dec 2015). Look what Chriss is starting to do now at the NBA level.

Hopefully Romar gets fired and Michael Porter opens his recruitment back up and decides to play with Ayton.

Don't get me wrong, I think the odds are good that Fultz will go number one. I just don't believe the argument over him and Ball is manufactured. I'm quite sure the Lakers would kill to take Ball no matter where they drafted. I think the Suns might even take him first too. And I think a lot of scouts would view him as a higher up-side player when compared to Fultz. But Fultz comes with fewer question marks as a pro, it's almost impossible to think he'll be any less than an all star level player. But Ball will have a chance to alleviate some of those concerns and move above Markelle depending on how he plays come March. So I disagree with the notion that the argument has already been closed. The debate has barely begun.

I don't know. Fultz is the better athlete and it's really hard to judge him relative to Ball because the talent disparity of the guys around them is mammoth. Ball is more of the pass first type, and while he has more size, he doesn't have the explosiveness or quickness Fultz does, and his release is wonky. Ball does shoot higher percentages though, and I actually have no problem with his release given how accurate he is with it and how quick it is. I could go either way personally because I think Ball's 6'6" frame may fit better in a positionless league, but I am not certain about him defensively at the next level. Gun to my head I'm going Fultz. He makes some of the most jaw dropping plays. His inefficiency bothers me relative to Ball, but I think there's a world of difference playing for Alford and with 3 probable NBA players around him relative to Fultz, who plays with a bunch of guys who shouldn't be in major conferences and a coach who probably shouldn't be in a major conference either.

I mean, I watched Fultz absolutely dominate a game against Yale (yes, haha, Yale), where he had something like 32, 8, and 7 on really good efficiency, and his team still got obliterated by double digits.

[bwgood77]

I have trouble seeing any scenario where Fultz doesn't go #1. As good as he is in the half court I think he has star potential at two positions if need be. Honestly I think he's Penny 2.0

My only knock on him is having questionable judgement in head coaches. Nobody thought Chriss & Murray were one and done at the time Fultz commuted there (Dec 2015). Look what Chriss is starting to do now at the NBA level.

Hopefully Romar gets fired and Michael Porter opens his recruitment back up and decides to play with Ayton.

Don't get me wrong, I think the odds are good that Fultz will go number one. I just don't believe the argument over him and Ball is manufactured. I'm quite sure the Lakers would kill to take Ball no matter where they drafted. I think the Suns might even take him first too. And I think a lot of scouts would view him as a higher up-side player when compared to Fultz. But Fultz comes with fewer question marks as a pro, it's almost impossible to think he'll be any less than an all star level player. But Ball will have a chance to alleviate some of those concerns and move above Markelle depending on how he plays come March. So I disagree with the notion that the argument has already been closed. The debate has barely begun.

I don't know. Fultz is the better athlete and it's really hard to judge him relative to Ball because the talent disparity of the guys around them is mammoth. Ball is more of the pass first type, and while he has more size, he doesn't have the explosiveness or quickness Fultz does, and his release is wonky. Ball does shoot higher percentages though, and I actually have no problem with his release given how accurate he is with it and how quick it is. I could go either way personally because I think Ball's 6'6" frame may fit better in a positionless league, but I am not certain about him defensively at the next level. Gun to my head I'm going Fultz. He makes some of the most jaw dropping plays. His inefficiency bothers me relative to Ball, but I think there's a world of difference playing for Alford and with 3 probable NBA players around him relative to Fultz, who plays with a bunch of guys who shouldn't be in major conferences and a coach who probably shouldn't be in a major conference either.

I mean, I watched Fultz absolutely dominate a game against Yale (yes, haha, Yale), where he had something like 32, 8, and 7 on really good efficiency, and his team still got obliterated by double digits.

Lets say we finish 4th worst record and drop to 5th because someone jumps us like in the Len draft. If Fultz, Ball, Jackson and Isaac are gone, who do you take? Ntilinka? Smith Jr.? Taytum? Markannen? I would probably list them in that order, though I think we need to see more.

[Zelaznyrules]

I have trouble seeing any scenario where Fultz doesn't go #1. As good as he is in the half court I think he has star potential at two positions if need be. Honestly I think he's Penny 2.0

My only knock on him is having questionable judgement in head coaches. Nobody thought Chriss & Murray were one and done at the time Fultz commuted there (Dec 2015). Look what Chriss is starting to do now at the NBA level.

Hopefully Romar gets fired and Michael Porter opens his recruitment back up and decides to play with Ayton.

Don't get me wrong, I think the odds are good that Fultz will go number one. I just don't believe the argument over him and Ball is manufactured. I'm quite sure the Lakers would kill to take Ball no matter where they drafted. I think the Suns might even take him first too. And I think a lot of scouts would view him as a higher up-side player when compared to Fultz. But Fultz comes with fewer question marks as a pro, it's almost impossible to think he'll be any less than an all star level player. But Ball will have a chance to alleviate some of those concerns and move above Markelle depending on how he plays come March. So I disagree with the notion that the argument has already been closed. The debate has barely begun.

I don't know. Fultz is the better athlete and it's really hard to judge him relative to Ball because the talent disparity of the guys around them is mammoth. Ball is more of the pass first type, and while he has more size, he doesn't have the explosiveness or quickness Fultz does, and his release is wonky. Ball does shoot higher percentages though, and I actually have no problem with his release given how accurate he is with it and how quick it is. I could go either way personally because I think Ball's 6'6" frame may fit better in a positionless league, but I am not certain about him defensively at the next level. Gun to my head I'm going Fultz. He makes some of the most jaw dropping plays. His inefficiency bothers me relative to Ball, but I think there's a world of difference playing for Alford and with 3 probable NBA players around him relative to Fultz, who plays with a bunch of guys who shouldn't be in major conferences and a coach who probably shouldn't be in a major conference either.

I mean, I watched Fultz absolutely dominate a game against Yale (yes, haha, Yale), where he had something like 32, 8, and 7 on really good efficiency, and his team still got obliterated by double digits.

I don't really have a quarrel with anyone who thinks Fultz is the better pro, I just disagree with the idea that it's a done deal and that any argument about it is artificially created. And I watched UCLA move Ball on to Bridges who was killing them and he just shut him down. He made it tough on Fultz too so IMO he's a guy that can already guard 3 positions, he's just playing for a team that focuses almost solely on the offensive end.

[Zelaznyrules]

Don't get me wrong, I think the odds are good that Fultz will go number one. I just don't believe the argument over him and Ball is manufactured. I'm quite sure the Lakers would kill to take Ball no matter where they drafted. I think the Suns might even take him first too. And I think a lot of scouts would view him as a higher up-side player when compared to Fultz. But Fultz comes with fewer question marks as a pro, it's almost impossible to think he'll be any less than an all star level player. But Ball will have a chance to alleviate some of those concerns and move above Markelle depending on how he plays come March. So I disagree with the notion that the argument has already been closed. The debate has barely begun.

I don't know. Fultz is the better athlete and it's really hard to judge him relative to Ball because the talent disparity of the guys around them is mammoth. Ball is more of the pass first type, and while he has more size, he doesn't have the explosiveness or quickness Fultz does, and his release is wonky. Ball does shoot higher percentages though, and I actually have no problem with his release given how accurate he is with it and how quick it is. I could go either way personally because I think Ball's 6'6" frame may fit better in a positionless league, but I am not certain about him defensively at the next level. Gun to my head I'm going Fultz. He makes some of the most jaw dropping plays. His inefficiency bothers me relative to Ball, but I think there's a world of difference playing for Alford and with 3 probable NBA players around him relative to Fultz, who plays with a bunch of guys who shouldn't be in major conferences and a coach who probably shouldn't be in a major conference either.

I mean, I watched Fultz absolutely dominate a game against Yale (yes, haha, Yale), where he had something like 32, 8, and 7 on really good efficiency, and his team still got obliterated by double digits.

Lets say we finish 4th worst record and drop to 5th because someone jumps us like in the Len draft. If Fultz, Ball, Jackson and Isaac are gone, who do you take? Ntilinka? Smith Jr.? Taytum? Markannen? I would probably list them in that order, though I think we need to see more.

That's easy for me, I go Markkanen and not look back.

[MrMiyagi]

Lets say we finish 4th worst record and drop to 5th because someone jumps us like in the Len draft. If Fultz, Ball, Jackson and Isaac are gone, who do you take? Ntilinka? Smith Jr.? Taytum? Markannen? I would probably list them in that order, though I think we need to see more.

I'd take Tatum personally. I'm convinced more and more on keeping Bledsoe. I think Ball and Fultz can play 1 along Booker and 2 along Bledsoe. Haven't seen enough of Smith to know if he can too. I think we really need a 2-way wing, which is why I think I'd take Jackson #1 if we got it (though Ball tempts me so much because I think he'd elevate Chriss and Bender) and I think Tatum is the second best two-way wing behind Jackson and he's on the board in this scenario.

[DaleyBlind]

Don't get me wrong, I think the odds are good that Fultz will go number one. I just don't believe the argument over him and Ball is manufactured. I'm quite sure the Lakers would kill to take Ball no matter where they drafted. I think the Suns might even take him first too. And I think a lot of scouts would view him as a higher up-side player when compared to Fultz. But Fultz comes with fewer question marks as a pro, it's almost impossible to think he'll be any less than an all star level player. But Ball will have a chance to alleviate some of those concerns and move above Markelle depending on how he plays come March. So I disagree with the notion that the argument has already been closed. The debate has barely begun.

I don't know. Fultz is the better athlete and it's really hard to judge him relative to Ball because the talent disparity of the guys around them is mammoth. Ball is more of the pass first type, and while he has more size, he doesn't have the explosiveness or quickness Fultz does, and his release is wonky. Ball does shoot higher percentages though, and I actually have no problem with his release given how accurate he is with it and how quick it is. I could go either way personally because I think Ball's 6'6" frame may fit better in a positionless league, but I am not certain about him defensively at the next level. Gun to my head I'm going Fultz. He makes some of the most jaw dropping plays. His inefficiency bothers me relative to Ball, but I think there's a world of difference playing for Alford and with 3 probable NBA players around him relative to Fultz, who plays with a bunch of guys who shouldn't be in major conferences and a coach who probably shouldn't be in a major conference either.

I mean, I watched Fultz absolutely dominate a game against Yale (yes, haha, Yale), where he had something like 32, 8, and 7 on really good efficiency, and his team still got obliterated by double digits.

Lets say we finish 4th worst record and drop to 5th because someone jumps us like in the Len draft. If Fultz, Ball, Jackson and Isaac are gone, who do you take? Ntilinka? Smith Jr.? Taytum? Markannen? I would probably list them in that order, though I think we need to see more.

Smith Jr

[MrMiyagi]

Smith Jr

Care to elaborate?

[darealjuice]

Lets say we finish 4th worst record and drop to 5th because someone jumps us like in the Len draft. If Fultz, Ball, Jackson and Isaac are gone, who do you take? Ntilinka? Smith Jr.? Taytum? Markannen? I would probably list them in that order, though I think we need to see more.

Smith Jr. would be my guy. He is the best player in that situation by a good margin in my opinion, although I'm not a huge fan of his demeanor on the court at times and obviously it'd be contingent on the medical staff giving him the green light with his ACL tear last year. If not, then it's tough.

Right now, I'd say that I'm starting to come around more on Tatum over the others. He has a lot of potential, has the frame to be able to play multiple positions in the NBA, and projects to be a very good scorer in the league at the very least. I like Ntilikina too, but with his production in Europe I'd think he's more of a project than the others and I haven't seen enough of him personally to say he's above Smith or Tatum. Markannen is probably who I'd have next, he's an interesting prospect but I think he'll be limited to a stretch 5 in the NBA with how the power forward position is trending towards being a bigger small forward instead of an inside player.

[DaleyBlind]

Smith Jr

Care to elaborate?

We need to draft a franchise player. He looks most likely out of the four to be an Star in the league, i think he can be a more explosive Lillard if he can show he can shoot 3's at a higher volume and keep his efficiency around 39%.
Ntilikina i admittley have not seen.
Markannen will be a high level role player, dont think he will be a star. We also have Bender who projects to be the same player (stretch 4)
Tatum, Wont be a star in the NBA.

[MrMiyagi]

Smith Jr

Care to elaborate?

We need to draft a franchise player. He looks most likely out of the four to be an Star in the league, i think he can be a more explosive Lillard if he can show he can shoot 3's at a higher volume and keep his efficiency around 39%.
Ntilikina i admittley have not seen.
Markannen will be a high level role player, dont think he will be a star. We also have Bender who projects to be the same player (stretch 4)
Tatum, Wont be a star in the NBA.

What makes you think that Smith has star power and Tatum doesn't? I haven't seen Smith, but looking at the numbers they each seem to have demonstrated skill on both sides of the ball, Tatum is listed as having good size/length for his position while Smith seems to be average. I'll concede athleticism to favor Smith based on reports.

I assume you believe Smith is better than Bledsoe (not that he'll put up better numbers as a rookie, but will eventually be better), so what do you plan to do with Bledsoe?

[DaleyBlind]

Care to elaborate?

We need to draft a franchise player. He looks most likely out of the four to be an Star in the league, i think he can be a more explosive Lillard if he can show he can shoot 3's at a higher volume and keep his efficiency around 39%.
Ntilikina i admittley have not seen.
Markannen will be a high level role player, dont think he will be a star. We also have Bender who projects to be the same player (stretch 4)
Tatum, Wont be a star in the NBA.

What makes you think that Smith has star power and Tatum doesn't? I haven't seen Smith, but looking at the numbers they each seem to have demonstrated skill on both sides of the ball, Tatum is listed as having good size/length for his position while Smith seems to be average. I'll concede athleticism to favor Smith based on reports.

I assume you believe Smith is better than Bledsoe (not that he'll put up better numbers as a rookie, but will eventually be better), so what do you plan to do with Bledsoe?

Depends what you consider a star. i see him becoming a less athletic not as good Rudy Gay, still a good player but not a star.
Yes, i think Smith will end up better than Bledsoe - as for what to do with with Eric....i dont know

[MrMiyagi]

Depends what you consider a star. i see him becoming a less athletic not as good Rudy Gay, still a good player but not a star.
Yes, i think Smith will end up better than Bledsoe - as for what to do with with Eric....i dont know

Fair enough. I mean, there's not problem with keeping Bled and having him be CP3 to Smith's Bledsoe. Provides security in case of injury and we do need a 3rd guard.

I feel like Tatum is a better defender than Gay, but I can see the comparison. I think that Gay's biggest problem has been he's had too high a usage % and has never really played with any good guards. I mean, he had Conley in Memphis before he got good and Isaiah Thomas for one and a half seasons in Sacramento.

[DirtyDez]

Don't get me wrong, I think the odds are good that Fultz will go number one. I just don't believe the argument over him and Ball is manufactured. I'm quite sure the Lakers would kill to take Ball no matter where they drafted. I think the Suns might even take him first too. And I think a lot of scouts would view him as a higher up-side player when compared to Fultz. But Fultz comes with fewer question marks as a pro, it's almost impossible to think he'll be any less than an all star level player. But Ball will have a chance to alleviate some of those concerns and move above Markelle depending on how he plays come March. So I disagree with the notion that the argument has already been closed. The debate has barely begun.

I don't know. Fultz is the better athlete and it's really hard to judge him relative to Ball because the talent disparity of the guys around them is mammoth. Ball is more of the pass first type, and while he has more size, he doesn't have the explosiveness or quickness Fultz does, and his release is wonky. Ball does shoot higher percentages though, and I actually have no problem with his release given how accurate he is with it and how quick it is. I could go either way personally because I think Ball's 6'6" frame may fit better in a positionless league, but I am not certain about him defensively at the next level. Gun to my head I'm going Fultz. He makes some of the most jaw dropping plays. His inefficiency bothers me relative to Ball, but I think there's a world of difference playing for Alford and with 3 probable NBA players around him relative to Fultz, who plays with a bunch of guys who shouldn't be in major conferences and a coach who probably shouldn't be in a major conference either.

I mean, I watched Fultz absolutely dominate a game against Yale (yes, haha, Yale), where he had something like 32, 8, and 7 on really good efficiency, and his team still got obliterated by double digits.

Lets say we finish 4th worst record and drop to 5th because someone jumps us like in the Len draft. If Fultz, Ball, Jackson and Isaac are gone, who do you take? Ntilinka? Smith Jr.? Taytum? Markannen? I would probably list them in that order, though I think we need to see more.

[AtheJ415]

Don't get me wrong, I think the odds are good that Fultz will go number one. I just don't believe the argument over him and Ball is manufactured. I'm quite sure the Lakers would kill to take Ball no matter where they drafted. I think the Suns might even take him first too. And I think a lot of scouts would view him as a higher up-side player when compared to Fultz. But Fultz comes with fewer question marks as a pro, it's almost impossible to think he'll be any less than an all star level player. But Ball will have a chance to alleviate some of those concerns and move above Markelle depending on how he plays come March. So I disagree with the notion that the argument has already been closed. The debate has barely begun.

I don't know. Fultz is the better athlete and it's really hard to judge him relative to Ball because the talent disparity of the guys around them is mammoth. Ball is more of the pass first type, and while he has more size, he doesn't have the explosiveness or quickness Fultz does, and his release is wonky. Ball does shoot higher percentages though, and I actually have no problem with his release given how accurate he is with it and how quick it is. I could go either way personally because I think Ball's 6'6" frame may fit better in a positionless league, but I am not certain about him defensively at the next level. Gun to my head I'm going Fultz. He makes some of the most jaw dropping plays. His inefficiency bothers me relative to Ball, but I think there's a world of difference playing for Alford and with 3 probable NBA players around him relative to Fultz, who plays with a bunch of guys who shouldn't be in major conferences and a coach who probably shouldn't be in a major conference either.

I mean, I watched Fultz absolutely dominate a game against Yale (yes, haha, Yale), where he had something like 32, 8, and 7 on really good efficiency, and his team still got obliterated by double digits.

Lets say we finish 4th worst record and drop to 5th because someone jumps us like in the Len draft. If Fultz, Ball, Jackson and Isaac are gone, who do you take? Ntilinka? Smith Jr.? Taytum? Markannen? I would probably list them in that order, though I think we need to see more.

I'd probably go Ntilinka, Smith Jr., Markannen. I am not as sold on Smith as most, but I think this really depends on if Markannen can play some 5. He's a muscular kid. If the Suns believe he can hold up at the 5 banging against other NBA 5s, particularly with the lineups getting smaller, then I would consider putting Markannen ahead of both. He's a dynamic scorer, and while not the rim protector we may want out of the 5, a big rotation of Len/Markannen, Chriss/Bender is long, has a lot of shooting, and can stretch the entire floor which opens lanes for Warren and Booker and eliminates most double team possibilities once Warren and Booker become dynamic go-to scorers.

Ultimately, I would probably hope to trade down at that point and take whoever falls out.

I like Ntilinka more than the others due to upside. His length is especially great.

I don't think it matters though unless we can trade back in like with Chriss, because I think even if we end up at the 5th spot, somebody will take Smith instead of one of the SFs.

I will say I do think there is a gap in the draft. Fultz and Ball are the top 2 for me. Jackson 3rd due to upside. I think there's a dropoff after that to the others. I think there's another drop off after the 8-10 top prospects as well.

[AtheJ415]

Lets say we finish 4th worst record and drop to 5th because someone jumps us like in the Len draft. If Fultz, Ball, Jackson and Isaac are gone, who do you take? Ntilinka? Smith Jr.? Taytum? Markannen? I would probably list them in that order, though I think we need to see more.

I'd take Tatum personally. I'm convinced more and more on keeping Bledsoe. I think Ball and Fultz can play 1 along Booker and 2 along Bledsoe. Haven't seen enough of Smith to know if he can too. I think we really need a 2-way wing, which is why I think I'd take Jackson #1 if we got it (though Ball tempts me so much because I think he'd elevate Chriss and Bender) and I think Tatum is the second best two-way wing behind Jackson and he's on the board in this scenario.

I think Bender and Warren are potential 2 way wings. Warren isn't a bad defender. He's average, but that's entirely fine at his age/experience level. A lot of guys who can score like he can don't give a crap defensively and are awful at this stage. Bender is a great defender for his age/development, and I think his offensive game has a good chance to come together. At worst he's a heady 3 and D player who can somewhat attack closeouts.

I get the appeal of Jackson and I like his upside due to his absurd athleticism, and it's useful that he can already defend at a high level, but I wouldn't take him over the 2 PGs out of need. I don't think we're a player away right now, and I think we could sign a 2 way wing in FA eventually. If we did take him, I wonder if we'd consider going really small with Warren and him on the court at the same time. Hopefully one could hold up against 4s.

[AtheJ415]

We need to draft a franchise player. He looks most likely out of the four to be an Star in the league, i think he can be a more explosive Lillard if he can show he can shoot 3's at a higher volume and keep his efficiency around 39%.
Ntilikina i admittley have not seen.
Markannen will be a high level role player, dont think he will be a star. We also have Bender who projects to be the same player (stretch 4)
Tatum, Wont be a star in the NBA.

What makes you think that Smith has star power and Tatum doesn't? I haven't seen Smith, but looking at the numbers they each seem to have demonstrated skill on both sides of the ball, Tatum is listed as having good size/length for his position while Smith seems to be average. I'll concede athleticism to favor Smith based on reports.

I assume you believe Smith is better than Bledsoe (not that he'll put up better numbers as a rookie, but will eventually be better), so what do you plan to do with Bledsoe?

Depends what you consider a star. i see him becoming a less athletic not as good Rudy Gay, still a good player but not a star.
Yes, i think Smith will end up better than Bledsoe - as for what to do with with Eric....i dont know

Smith reminds me of Kyle Lowry. He is insanely hard to judge though because his team is so terribly run. They have real talent on that team with at 2 NBA players, and they lose half their games by 20+.

[ATTL]

Watch on YouTube

@2 minutes "THIS COULD BE AMAZING...nope"

Most drafts he'd be clear #1 point guard. Last year he'd take Dunn's place. I could see him going ahead of Russell in '14.
If you want to move on from bledsoe due to injury concerns I don't see how you can pick him.

[DaleyBlind]

So whats everyone's top 5.

Fultz
Jackson
Smith Jr
Ball
Isaac

Really hoping we draft Jackson. (dont think we will get a shot at Fultz)

[MrMiyagi]

I'm going with: Ball, Jackson, Fultz, Tatum and Markannen. I think Ball will have Nash-like effects on our young guys, especially Chriss and Bender. I think Jackson makes a very formidable front court with Bender/Chriss. I think Fultz might be the best talent (I think Jackson/Ball are better fits and aren't too far off in the talent department, and he's definitely better than the rest of the draft). I think Tatum is the second best two way wing and similar to my reasoning for Jackson. I think Markannen is the best shooter in the draft and he's 7ft tall.

[Zelaznyrules]

Right now, for me - it's Ball, Fultz, Markkanen, Isaac/Robert Williams/Josh Jackson but it's subject to considerable change as conference tournaments and March Madness unfolds. Due to more advanced scouting and a consistently higher quality of opponent, the match-ups you get at that stage of the year typically reveal far more about each player than the games from November through middle February.