The case for Jonathan Isaac

[Darth Magic]

Exactly. I think its laughable to suggest we somehow need to trade Fournier. He's an asset not a liability. We trade 6 and Fournier to move down into the teens. Are these people high?

Fournier is definitely more liability than asset if he continues to play as poorly as he did this past year.

If he bounces back to his form under Skiles, then it's a different story.

He was miscast as a leading scorer and was dealing with injuries pretty much all year. But he did have a down year and needs to play better. But I'm not worried about it. He's not a drag and I don't think that he's a liability. His contract is ok.

[Nyce_1]

@stevekylerNBA: Continue to hear Jonathan Isaac is their guy at 4, unless someone falls.

Read on Twitter

[SOUL]

Kyler throwing more stuff at the wall.

[Bensational]

@stevekylerNBA: Continue to hear Jonathan Isaac is their guy at 4, unless someone falls.

Read on Twitter

Which means he's our guy at 4, since Hammond already dropped that we're looking to pick at #4

[tiderulz]

Exactly. I think its laughable to suggest we somehow need to trade Fournier. He's an asset not a liability. We trade 6 and Fournier to move down into the teens. Are these people high?

Fournier is definitely more liability than asset if he continues to play as poorly as he did this past year.

If he bounces back to his form under Skiles, then it's a different story.

he was top-10 in scoring for SG's last year, after having to shoulder the load as the primary scorer when he shouldnt have been.

well, the trend continues of having a losing season, so lets tear into our own players

[Darth Magic]

@stevekylerNBA: Continue to hear Jonathan Isaac is their guy at 4, unless someone falls.

Read on Twitter

Which means he's our guy at 4, since Hammond already dropped that we're looking to pick at #4

I like the way you think

[Bensational]

Exactly. I think its laughable to suggest we somehow need to trade Fournier. He's an asset not a liability. We trade 6 and Fournier to move down into the teens. Are these people high?

Fournier is definitely more liability than asset if he continues to play as poorly as he did this past year.

If he bounces back to his form under Skiles, then it's a different story.

he was top-10 in scoring for SG's last year, after having to shoulder the load as the primary scorer when he shouldnt have been.

well, the trend continues of having a losing season, so lets tear into our own players

He's a good player, but does he fit where our team currently is? As you said, he's not a #1 scorer, and that's what we're looking for first and foremost. Same with Vuc. But, they end up taking on a larger workload because they are the most competent, which just results in them proving they can't carry the team whilst stifling opportunities for the young guys to step up.

Do we want to continue collecting #3 options before we get our #1? We tried that already with Tobias and Oladipo. I'd like to see us rebuild properly and reinvest those kinds of guys in favour developing youth or collecting future picks.

[Skin]

@stevekylerNBA: Continue to hear Jonathan Isaac is their guy at 4, unless someone falls.

Read on Twitter

PHX fans want Isaac at SF. ORL fans can learn something from them.

[VFX]

@stevekylerNBA: Continue to hear Jonathan Isaac is their guy at 4, unless someone falls.

Read on Twitter

PHX fans want Isaac at SF. ORL fans can learn something from them.

What they want and what they get might be two different things.

[Skin]

@stevekylerNBA: Continue to hear Jonathan Isaac is their guy at 4, unless someone falls.

Read on Twitter

PHX fans want Isaac at SF. ORL fans can learn something from them.

What they want and what they get might be two different things.

Go to their forum and say that.

[VFX]

PHX fans want Isaac at SF. ORL fans can learn something from them.

What they want and what they get might be two different things.

Go to their forum and say that.

Nah I'll let them discover the results come mid season.

[Skin]

What they want and what they get might be two different things.

Go to their forum and say that.

Nah I'll let them discover the results come mid season.

Or maybe you'll eat your words.

[OrlandoDream]

@stevekylerNBA: Continue to hear Jonathan Isaac is their guy at 4, unless someone falls.

Read on Twitter

It's Kyker who has as much validity as Magical. However; this I can see happening. Isaac and Booker just makes since. That means that Tatum would be all for the taking at 6 or even better. Do I dare dream Josh Jackson will fall to the 6? That would be amazing

[VFX]

Go to their forum and say that.

Nah I'll let them discover the results come mid season.

Or maybe you'll eat your words.

Maybe. Unlikely, but maybe.

And hey, if they draft Isaac and he pans out we can't say we missed out on him...

[fendilim]

The key for Isaac is whether he can be that guy who can takeover.

He reminds me so much of Iguodala who has all the physical tools in the world, has the skills to be great, but doesn't have the mentality to be so.

In the article that cedric just posted they made several interesting comments... like this one..

The truth is “role player” is a silly, outdated term. It implies that each NBA team has one, maybe two, stars who score all the points and get the attention, that everyone else on the team just does the dirty work. We talk about three-and-D guys like they’re something special, but nowadays, anyone that does not have a passable three or play decent defense is almost unplayable. In 2017, almost every good player is a 3-and-D guy. And on good teams, almost everyone has a role to fill.

In 2017, every NBA contender is trying to figure out how to get someone that can defend LeBron or Durant and be at useful on the other end of the court. Through seven years of LeBron Finals, every single Conference Finals team had a versatile athletic wing that could defend any position. By comparison, just 18 of the 28 teams had a top-level point guard, and only 12 or 13 had a great traditional center. You can win in the modern NBA without a top notch point guard or big man, but you can’t even get close without one of these wings anymore.

yes, but in today's game, you also have tohe able to shoot threes. Or he'll be another aaron gordon.

[tiderulz]

Fournier is definitely more liability than asset if he continues to play as poorly as he did this past year.

If he bounces back to his form under Skiles, then it's a different story.

he was top-10 in scoring for SG's last year, after having to shoulder the load as the primary scorer when he shouldnt have been.

well, the trend continues of having a losing season, so lets tear into our own players

He's a good player, but does he fit where our team currently is? As you said, he's not a #1 scorer, and that's what we're looking for first and foremost. Same with Vuc. But, they end up taking on a larger workload because they are the most competent, which just results in them proving they can't carry the team whilst stifling opportunities for the young guys to step up.

Do we want to continue collecting #3 options before we get our #1? We tried that already with Tobias and Oladipo. I'd like to see us rebuild properly and reinvest those kinds of guys in favour developing youth or collecting future picks.

isnt that what this draft is for, to hopefully find that #1?

[Nyce_1]

@stevekylerNBA: Continue to hear Jonathan Isaac is their guy at 4, unless someone falls.

Read on Twitter

It's Kyker who has as much validity as Magical. However; this I can see happening. Isaac and Booker just makes since. That means that Tatum would be all for the taking at 6 or even better. Do I dare dream Josh Jackson will fall to the 6? That would be amazing

Its possible. If Ainge really sees Pierce in Tatum (as reported), if Suns are super high on Isaac, and Kings stick to Fox, Jackson is right there for us.

Assuming LA takes Ball, we get leftover of the 3 SFs vs. DSJ. I think DS is a dark horse for Bos.

[MagicStarwipe]

I love the excuses for Fournier. It's always interesting the players that it's ok to make excuses for and look at things with context in mind and the players it isn't ok to do so for. Carry on.

[Knightro]

he was top-10 in scoring for SG's last year, after having to shoulder the load as the primary scorer when he shouldnt have been.

well, the trend continues of having a losing season, so lets tear into our own players

Fournier was really bad this past year. I don't hate the guy, but he was just not good in any respect.

His defense, which has never been good, was absolutely terrible and his overall offensive performance took a major step backwards.

Since he's never going to be a good defender, Fournier MUST be a strong offensive player to make up for it. If he can bounce back to his form under Skiles, then ok. If he doesn't, then he's gotta go.

It's hard to say he definitely will bounce back, considering 2015-16 looks like the outlier compared to the other four years of his career.

[SOUL]

[
Fournier was really bad this past year. I don't hate the guy, but he was just not good in any respect.

His defense, which has never been good, was absolutely terrible and his overall offensive performance took a major step backwards.

Since he's never going to be a good defender, Fournier MUST be a strong offensive player to make up for it. If he can bounce back to his form under Skiles, then ok. If he doesn't, then he's gotta go.

It's hard to say he definitely will bounce back, considering 2015-16 looks like the outlier compared to the other four years of his career.

Yeah, it's comical that he signs for 5/85 mil, gets booked as a leading offensive player on this team that should average 20 points per game (by a number of people before the season), and then gets the least amount of heat for most of the year. Sorry, "he can't carry this team offensively alone" should not be a default excuse if we're to dismiss the improved play of Elfrid or AG at the end of the year because "the season was lost". If we can dismiss good play so easily, why should there be an asterisk for poor play?

He should warrant a healthy amount of criticism for the failure of last year, but not all of it. He had the most opportunity and minutes on the team. Does that mean he should be traded or this whole thing is his fault? Not at all. Does that mean he can flourish in a different role? Absolutely. But he had a disappointing year last year. I wish more people would admit that.