Markelle Fultz Discussion

Unbreakable99 · Post #1901 » by **Unbreakable99** » Mon Oct 16, 2017 9:24 pm

I like what Embiid is doing with Fultz. Embiid is showing his leadership. I hope he does help Fultz reach his full potential.

Read on Twitter

HotelVitale · Post #1902 » by **HotelVitale** » Mon Oct 16, 2017 10:19 pm

Slartibartfast wrote:
HotelVitale wrote: Tl;dr version: he's a good prospect as far as size/skills but anything can happen with those guys, and he's not a usual #1 pick since his game and development rely so much on skills and IQ rather than athleticism and/or obvious innate ability (like a B Griffin or D Rose type guy).
Fultz does have great physical attributes, though. Great length and great size for a PG, good (not great) speed, good quickness, good leaping ability, good strength. It's a talent stack - you put them all together and Fultz is one of the most physically gifted PGs in the league. Wall and Westbrook are ahead of him, but he's also well ahead of CP3, Conley, Irving, IT, Lowry and Lillard from a physical standpoint. If you don't view him as a PG, then his physical profile diminishes considerably.

I don't disagree with the details but would frame the whole differently. In my read, there's nothing about Fultz's physical attributes that provide him a leg up in the league (aside from maybe length), so in that regard his athleticism/size isn't really helping elevate him at all to star status; the things you're talking about just mean that he's not being hurt by his size/athleticism--he's not undersized, not so slow or unexplosive that it's a liability, etc. But to be a good or great player (like I've been saying) he'll be reliant on developing top notch skills, IQ, etc. None of the physical things are good enough to allow him to work around that on their own (like they do with Wall or Westbrook or Rose or guys like DSJ to an extent).

The guys you mentioned--CP3, Conley, Lowry, Lillard--have all had some of the most phenomenal developments of any players in the league. They're masterful readers of plays and make quick and make difficult, quick-trigger shots and passes with ridiculous accuracy. Fultz has a chance to be like that but nothing assures us he will be now. Put it this way: if almost any player developed the skill/IQ game of CP3, they'd be a star; while if you gave Fultz' phsyical attributes to a guy with average skills/IQ for the league, needle doesn't move that much.

Ericb5 · Post #1903 » by **Ericb5** » Mon Oct 16, 2017 10:34 pm

Slartibartfast wrote:
HotelVitale wrote:
cksdayoff wrote: fultz may not be an elite level athlete, but his handles and athleticism are advanced enough for him to produce efficiently in the pros, imo there's always going to be an adjustment period, due to the speed and length of the nba, but that didn't stop guys like cj and bradley beal from producing. if fultz is a top level prospect, which he is, then he'll get better in every phase of his game, and it will be the league that will have to adjust. i'm gonna assume a 19 year old fultz is better than an 18 year old fultz, and a 20 year old fultz with a full year of nba level conditioning and training will be better than his 19 year old self and so on. it's only logical...
I don't disagree with any of this aside from the assumption in the bold part. The fact is we DO NOT KNOW who will improve in what areas--we're dealing in probabilities and not certainties with prospects, and there's no way to project who's going to make all the necessary adjustments (otherwise GMs would be a lot lot better at the draft than they are). 99% of players improve from college but that's different from making full adjustments to the NBA game; even guys that had unquestioned elite skills in college have to adjust them completely to the NBA (speeding up your shot, finishing over a bit more length around screens, absorbing contact, etc); it's all very small movements that require crazy accuracy, and look no further than Stauskas for an example of a guy who was a blistering shooter (he shot like 43% over two years in college) and just couldn't adjust for the pace of the NBA, which in turn led him to never develop the feel for the game he showed in his 2nd year at UM.

He's an extreme example but guys like CJ McCollum are extreme the other way--in addition to doing what they did well in college, they also extended their range, speeded up their games, developed new ways to read and operate quickly in space, etc. You obviously hope for that sort of development but can't expect or assume it from prospects. I think Fultz will be better than McCollum if he develops--he should get to the basket better and his passing should lead to more high % assists--but he definitely might not get close to that, or he might only develop his shooting to average levels (rather than CJ's near elite ones) while his creation becomes above average. There's a whole range of outcomes, and my point is just that a player like Fultz who doesn't have great physical attributes has a lot of burden placed on his skill/IQ development/adjustment, and that stuff is really really hard to master.

Tl;dr version: he's a good prospect as far as size/skills but anything can happen with those guys, and he's not a usual #1 pick since his game and development rely so much on skills and IQ rather than athleticism and/or obvious innate ability (like a B Griffin or D Rose type guy).

Fultz does have great physical attributes, though. Great length and great size for a PG, good (not great) speed, good quickness, good leaping ability, good strength.

It's a talent stack - you put them all together and Fultz is one of the most physically gifted PGs in the league. Wall and Westbrook are ahead of him, but he's also well ahead of CP3, Conley, Irving, IT, Lowry and Lillard from a physical standpoint.

If you don't view him as a PG, then his physical profile diminishes considerably.

It doesn’t matter how you view him though. He will defend point guards most of the time, but he isn’t a point guard on offense. Thankfully he is on one of the teams where he won’t have to be the point guard. We can use his natural shooting and scoring ability without burdening him with the need to facilitate.

Further, he is big enough and long enough that you could play him next to little guards like Bayless and McConnell, and he can guard the 2.

Hell, you could probably play him at the 3 in some lineups.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Kobblehead · Post #1904 » by **Kobblehead** » Mon Oct 16, 2017 11:28 pm

Man, I appreciate so much what Justin Anderson and Joel Embiid are doing for Fultz's psyche.

Mik317 · Post #1905 » by **Mik317** » Mon Oct 16, 2017 11:30 pm

I wish we could get him to workout w/ Kobe. Kobe lost a step or two after 30 and figured out how to use his size and footwork (two of Fultz strengths at his position) to get shots.

Post #1906 » by **Slartibartfast** » Mon Oct 16, 2017 11:33 pm

HotelVitale wrote:
Slartibartfast wrote:
HotelVitale wrote: Tl;dr version: he's a good prospect as far as size/skills but anything can happen with those guys, and he's not a usual #1 pick since his game and development rely so much on skills and IQ rather than athleticism and/or obvious innate ability (like a B Griffin or D Rose type guy).
Fultz does have great physical attributes, though. Great length and great size for a PG, good (not great) speed, good quickness, good leaping ability, good strength. It's a talent stack - you put them all together and Fultz is one of the most physically gifted PGs in the league. Wall and Westbrook are ahead of him, but he's also well ahead of CP3, Conley, Irving, IT, Lowry and Lillard from a physical standpoint. If you don't view him as a PG, then his physical profile diminishes considerably.
I don't disagree with the details but would frame the whole differently. In my read, there's nothing about Fultz's physical attributes that provide him a leg up in the league (aside from maybe length), so in that regard his athleticism/size isn't really helping elevate him at all to star status; the things you're talking about just mean that he's not being hurt by his size/athleticism--he's not undersized, not so slow or unexplosive that it's a liability, etc. But to be a good or great player (like I've been saying) he'll be reliant on developing top notch skills, IQ, etc. None of the physical things are good enough to allow him to work around that on their own (like they do with Wall or Westbrook or Rose or guys like DSJ to an extent).

The guys you mentioned--CP3, Conley, Lowry, Lillard--have all had some of the most phenomenal developments of any players in the league. They're masterful readers of plays and make quick and make difficult, quick-trigger shots and passes with ridiculous accuracy. Fultz has a chance to be like that but nothing assures us he will be now. Put it this way: if almost any player developed the skill/IQ game of CP3, they'd be a star; while if you gave Fultz' phsyical attributes to a guy with average skills/IQ for the league, needle doesn't move that much.

But Fultz isn't average in the skill/IQ area either - the guy was a PNR dynamo, 3-level scorer and playmaker at 18. He's really good on both fronts without being transcendent on either.

Obviously he could stall out on the skill development and his physical gifts aren't enough to ensure stardom in that case, but whose physical gifts are? Avery Bradley is a sneakily great athlete who has never developed into more than a roleplayer because his skill level flatlined at pull-up jumpshooting.

Post #1907 » by **BullyKing** » Mon Oct 16, 2017 11:37 pm

Kobblehead wrote:Man, I appreciate so much what Justin Anderson and Joel Embiid are doing for Fultz's psyche.

One of the reasons I have hope for both SImmons and Fultz's defense is that they have the physical capabilities to be plus defenders. Their issues in college were mostly focus/effort related. Joel is not going to allow people to slack on defense on his team (except Jah apparently).

Mik317 · Post #1908 » by **Mik317** » Mon Oct 16, 2017 11:39 pm

BullyKing wrote:
Kobblehead wrote:Man, I appreciate so much what Justin Anderson and Joel Embiid are doing for Fultz's psyche.

One of the reasons I have hope for both SImmons and Fultz's defense is that they have the physical capabilities to be plus defenders. Their issues in college were mostly focus/effort related. Joel is not going to allow people to slack on defense on his team (except Jah apparently).

people actually yell at Jah on court all the time. Not in a mean way (I guess) but to keep him on task. You hear "JAH JAAAAAH" all the time during games lol.

HotelVitale · Post #1909 » by **HotelVitale** » Tue Oct 17, 2017 12:35 am

Slartibartfast wrote: But Fultz isn't average in the skill/IQ area either - the guy was a PNR dynamo, 3-level scorer and playmaker at 18. He's really good on both fronts without being transcendent on either. Obviously he could stall out on the skill development and his physical gifts aren't enough to ensure stardom in that case, but whose physical gifts are? Avery Bradley is a sneakily great athlete who has never developed into more than a roleplayer because his skill level flatlined at pull-up jumpshooting.

Sure, and the argument for him as #1 was basically that he's got the physical stuff and the basic outlines of the skill stuff to have a reasonable chance to be a star. PGs rarely have that combo at a young age, and I thought Fultz becoming a 20/5/5 guy was a better bet than the other guys reaching their reasonable potential. (Maybe you missed context but I was one of the only ppl on our draft board before the lotto who had Fultz at #1. I've just been trying to explain why he's still not a typical #1, more risk and more dependence on his development--most #1s have some kind of irrepressible athletic packages or a longer track record of elite skill stuff.)

Post #1910 » by **Stanford** » Tue Oct 17, 2017 12:39 am

Kobblehead wrote:Man, I appreciate so much what Justin Anderson and Joel Embiid are doing for Fultz's psyche.

The results of a losing culture.

76ciology · Post #1911 » by **76ciology** » Tue Oct 17, 2017 2:20 am

HotelVitale wrote:
Slartibartfast wrote: But Fultz isn't average in the skill/IQ area either - the guy was a PNR dynamo, 3-level scorer and playmaker at 18. He's really good on both fronts without being transcendent on either. Obviously he could stall out on the skill development and his physical gifts aren't enough to ensure stardom in that case, but whose physical gifts are? Avery Bradley is a sneakily great athlete who has never developed into more than a roleplayer because his skill level flatlined at pull-up jumpshooting.

Sure, and the argument for him as #1 was basically that he's got the physical stuff and the basic outlines of the skill stuff to have a reasonable chance to be a star. PGs rarely have that combo at a young age, and I thought Fultz becoming a 20/5/5 guy was a better bet than the other guys reaching their reasonable potential. (Maybe you missed context but I was one of the only ppl on our draft board before the lotto who had Fultz at #1. I've just been trying to explain why he's still not a typical #1, more risk and more dependence on his development--most #1s have some kind of irrepressible athletic packages or a longer track record of elite skill stuff.)

I think what you’re saying is that he has the highest chance to be a star player and least chance to be a bust, and that is a good point. Lonzo is high risk or high reward, currently looking like high risk. Tatum, Isaac and JJ are likely to be high end role playing wings and not that high likely to be stars compared to Fultz.

LongLiveHinkie · Post #1912 » by **LongLiveHinkie** » Tue Oct 17, 2017 2:31 am

This guy diagnoses sports injuries by video, and was a former team doc for the Chargers. He hasn't seen the video where Fultz got hurt, but he knows his stuff and he said this:

Read on Twitter

Simmons25 · Post #1913 » by **Simmons25** » Tue Oct 17, 2017 2:33 am

Yeah don't need to be a doctor to know it's concerning whenever someone changes their shot completely so that the ball starts above their shoulder line. It means it's too painful to lift his arm.

He has rotator cuff injury written all over him.

76ciology · Post #1914 » by **76ciology** » Tue Oct 17, 2017 2:35 am

You think we let Fultz play if his injury is serious? We shut down players even if its just a bad hair day.

snoopdogg88 · Post #1915 » by **snoopdogg88** » Tue Oct 17, 2017 2:46 am

i think they're terrified of the bad PR if they admit they **** up again with an injury

Ericb5 · Post #1916 » by **Ericb5** » Tue Oct 17, 2017 2:57 am

LongLiveHinkie wrote:This guy diagnoses sports injuries by video, and was a former team doc for the Chargers. He hasn't seen the video where Fultz got hurt, but he knows his stuff and he said this:

Read on Twitter

I don’t understand the tweet. What comment is concerning?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

LloydFree · Post #1917 » by **LloydFree** » Tue Oct 17, 2017 3:01 am

76ciology wrote:You think we let Fultz play if his injury is serious? We shut down players even if its just a bad hair day.

You don't get it. The way you handle an injured player is to bring him off the bench, instead of letting him start. The pre-game introductions have been known to aggravate injuries...

HotelVitale · Post #1918 » by **HotelVitale** » Tue Oct 17, 2017 3:02 am

76ciology wrote: I think what you’re saying is that he has the highest chance to be a star player and least chance to be a bust, and that is a good point. Lonzo is high risk or high reward, currently looking like high risk. Tatum, Isaac and JJ are likely to be high end role playing wings and not that high likely to be stars compared to Fultz.

I guess that's basically right, but I gotta repeat one final time (then I'll shut up for the day and hopefully week) that I really don't feel Fultz as a star. Can't say exactly what it is but it's about how he's not quite quick, powerful or dynamic enough to allow me project that (even though I really want to). It's like he's missing a higher gear to go into--he plays really well in middle gear for such a young guy, but when he's on he's just doing a very good version of middle gear. It's hard for me to see what he can go to or how he can produce at star levels with the tools he's got.

So yeah I think he's a very good prospect but no I don't think he's a likely star while Tatum/JJ/etc are likely role players. I think he's the best of that bunch to bet on, but I'd definitely take the field if we're betting on who's going to be a star. Hope I'm wrong, wish it was different, but gotta say what the eyes see.

76ciology · Post #1919 » by **76ciology** » Tue Oct 17, 2017 3:06 am

LloydFree wrote:
76ciology wrote:You think we let Fultz play if his injury is serious? We shut down players even if its just a bad hair day.

You don't get it. The way you handle an injured player is to bring him off the bench, instead of letting him start. The pre-game introductions have been known to aggravate injuries...

He probably injured his shoulder by all the high fives during pregame intro. Makes so much sense

76ciology · Post #1920 » by **76ciology** » Tue Oct 17, 2017 3:07 am

HotelVitale wrote:
76ciology wrote: I think what you’re saying is that he has the highest chance to be a star player and least chance to be a bust, and that is a good point. Lonzo is high risk or high reward, currently looking like high risk. Tatum, Isaac and JJ are likely to be high end role playing wings and not that high likely to be stars compared to Fultz.

I guess that's basically right, but I gotta repeat one final time (then I'll shut up for the day and hopefully week) that I really don't feel Fultz as a star. Can't say exactly what it is but it's about how he's not quite quick, powerful or dynamic enough to allow me project that (even though I really want to). It's like he's missing a higher gear to go into--he plays really well in middle gear for such a young guy, but when he's on he's just doing a very good version of middle gear. It's hard for me to see what he can go to or how he can produce at star levels with the tools he's got.

So yeah I think he's a very good prospect but no I don't think he's a likely star while Tatum/JJ/etc are likely role players. I think he's the best of that bunch to bet on, but I'd definitely take the field if we're betting on who's going to be a star. Hope I'm wrong, wish it was different, but gotta say what the eyes see.

So the guy you think should be the #1 pick is the same guy you feel won't be a star?