ImageImageImage

Markelle Fultz Discussion II

Moderators: HartfordWhalers, BullyKing, sixers hoops, Foshan, Sixerscan

gdog2004
Starter
Posts: 2,183
And1: 706
Joined: Jun 01, 2014
   

Re: Markelle Fultz Discussion II 

Post#1301 » by gdog2004 » Sat Nov 11, 2017 6:49 pm

Unbreakable99 wrote:
ivysixer2000 wrote:
Unbreakable99 wrote:
Tatum benefits from being on a good team but he’d be doing the same thing on our team. He doesn’t even take that many shots. If he took more shots he would average 20 points.


He is slightly better than I thought he would be defensively, but 13.7/5.7/1.8 as a starter playing 30 mins a night on a good team....yawwwnnn. He's a PF and Fultz could average 5 rebs from the guard spot.

Your still ignoring the fact that we need a potentially elite guard, and not a forward, and we can get a way better forward than Tatum next offseason but we can't get an elite guard in either the draft or free agency.


You’re just counting stats. He’s like the 4th option. He doesn’t take as many shots. If he took as many shots as Simmons he would averag about 20 points. He’s playing PF but he can play SF too. He can create his own shot and shoot 3s. He would be more impactful than a healthy Fultz in my opinion if Tatum were on our team. Don’t you agree after Simmons Tatum is the best rookie?


Unless your being an absolute homer its safe to admit Tatum is absolutely the best rookie after Simmons. And Simmons is really a pseudo Rookie as that year of learning on the bench and playing with the guys early this year gives him a leg up. Tatum is a very nice player so far. But Fultz has yet to take the court healthy. So lets see what happens. No one is taking that ROTY from Ben though. He's been unbelievable.
User avatar
Tony Franciosa
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,704
And1: 1,095
Joined: Mar 09, 2011
     

Re: Markelle Fultz Discussion II 

Post#1302 » by Tony Franciosa » Sat Nov 11, 2017 6:51 pm

mithrandir17 wrote:who's with me in saying this thread will reach 100 pages before fultz plays his next game?


I was just thinking about this... there's no timeline for him to return right? I mean, I know what organization I'm speaking about, but I wanted to make sure I didn't miss anything. They haven't shared a plan at all right?
BullyKing
Forum Mod - 76ers
Forum Mod - 76ers
Posts: 13,441
And1: 14,114
Joined: Jan 16, 2014

Re: Markelle Fultz Discussion II 

Post#1303 » by BullyKing » Sat Nov 11, 2017 7:06 pm

LloydFree wrote:
BullyKing wrote:
Unbreakable99 wrote:
I think it’s obvious why they wouldn’t want to admit it. He plays for a rival in the Celtics is the main reason. Then Fultz is “hurt” and not playing now which compounds that. Then BC trading a great asset to move up which could potentially be a player just as good or maybe worse than Tatum adds to that. That’s why Bodner put on twitter the other day of fans would still do that trade today and many people got mad. When you combine all that it’s easy to see why some don’t want to admit Tatum is playing very well.


It is so ridiculous watching you wrap yourself in Tatum as if he was the prospect you've been talking about nonstop. You are so confident that you are a scouting wizard that you have 100% confidence in your opinion of Fultz yet appear to have missed horribly on Lonzo. So does that make you question whether your opinion of Fultz might be wrong as well? Nope, you just pretend like it was Tatum you wanted this entire time.

I don't get your attack on him for pointing out something that is obvious and true. You don't attack the guys who are spitting out stupidly, pretending Tatum hasn't looked better than Fultz and isn't playing well. He has the right in the Fultz thread, to talk about the player we basically gave Boston for Fultz. Fultz looks like dookey, but rather than talk about that, you'd rather insult the guys that said it was a mistake to draft him.


Yes, he said it was a mistake to draft him. He's said that again and again and again and again and again. But he keeps acting like his evaluation (i.e. opinion) of Fultz is a fact, which he has said repeatedly, while ignoring that his equally strong opinion about Ball looks to be egregiously wrong.
NYSixersFan wrote:
the plan is to get as good as quickly as possible....I fully believe we could have been a borderline playoff team last year by adding young veterans....using or draft picks and cap space.....can I specifically tell you who? no.
BullyKing
Forum Mod - 76ers
Forum Mod - 76ers
Posts: 13,441
And1: 14,114
Joined: Jan 16, 2014

Re: Markelle Fultz Discussion II 

Post#1304 » by BullyKing » Sat Nov 11, 2017 7:11 pm

Mik317 wrote:Tatum has been really good for a 19 year old. Anyone who denies that is a hater.

THAT being said, it is hilarious to see the flip floppers using him as a tool to once again bash Fultz. I remmeber the exact line being "at least Ainge wasted the pick on Tatum". The anti Fultz brigade was super high on Ball, Jackson and even Smith before Tatum...Tatum was barely mentioned outside of Negrodamus. This whole "oh there was 6 guys all along" **** is revisionist history at best...and even if that was the case Tatum was not high on that list of 6. Some of yall have a hard time coming to grips that maybe just maybe you aren't the amazing flawless draft gurus you act like and maybe your take on Fultz was wrong too.
its sad at this point, when you got fools going " well Ball shooting under 30% isn't that bad doe".


Do better



100% this. And it's not even to say you were wrong about Fultz, just stop acting like your opinion is proven fact. I swear the Sixers could win the title this year and the first reaction for a couple of you would be "yeah but we would have swept the finals if not for that Fultz trade."
NYSixersFan wrote:
the plan is to get as good as quickly as possible....I fully believe we could have been a borderline playoff team last year by adding young veterans....using or draft picks and cap space.....can I specifically tell you who? no.
smittybanton
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,766
And1: 398
Joined: Jul 30, 2016

Re: Markelle Fultz Discussion II 

Post#1305 » by smittybanton » Sat Nov 11, 2017 7:38 pm

From hating the trade, to merely and mildly annoyed.

After watching the Sixers, Lakers, Kings and the 2017 draft class for ten games, I will bump my grade from a D to a C.

1) Fultz' skills are a better fit for this team than I initially acknowledged. Of course, we needed a scorer. As Kenneth Williams said before the draft, "Ben likes to pass that thing. Markelle likes to shoot it." But I give more credit now after watching Ben and Joel trying to close out games, and realizing neither is all that gifted as a one-on-one scorer--not yet, anyway.

Joel has a great shooting touch and is physically intimidating. But for all his dominance, I thought his post-up game would be just a notch more fluid than it is now. I'm a little taken aback at how easily Joel loses the ball after mild contact and confusion in the paint.

Ben is as I thought he'd be, a pure point guard. Which means he dribbles and penetrates for the purpose of setting other people up first, himself second. It's not helped by his free throw shooting. I do believe Ben would be even more aggressive going to the cup if he were more confident in his free throw shooting. It's coming, I'm sure.

But Markelle's skills are that of a natural closer. Yes, he needs to learn to play off the catch and shoot more like JJ. In the last four minutes of a game though, things change, and with a lead we need someone who punishes a weary defense relentlessly, scoring, getting to the line and setting up teammates. John Riggins, Legarrett Blount.

We shouldn't be forcing Embiid to go one-on-several. He's not there, yet. He'll get there. I loved that sweeping hook for the and-one. I even like the potential in Ben's mini-"Sky Hook".

But Ben and Joel are great pillars for our TEAM offense. As big as their stats will be, they won't get as much credit as they should for how much Covington and Redick are going to G off. Covington's higher than usual 3pt % is not a coincidence.

I'm watching the Heat v. Jazz last night, and to protect their four point lead in crunch time, the Heat cleared out and let Dion close the game. That's when the ball hogging one-on-one dude is special. You know you can run the clock down and still get at least a decent shot without a turnover.

Waiters is also the guy who turns around and plays stopper on the other team's "comeback hero". The Jazz' rookie Donovan Mitchell can pretty much get ny shot he wants. That makes him comparable to Markelle. But he doesn't hit the shots he gets. That's what's supposed to make Markelle ten draft slots better. And regardless, Mitchell was getting the same shots once Dion got up in his chest and the referees get slow on the whistle in the closing minutes.

Remember the win against the Pistons, when Markelle took the point of the defense and disrupted their offense before it even got started? Two deflections, one ending in a steal and fast break for the good guys. I have never had doubts about Ben Simmons guarding point guards, because during the course of regular games all he has to do is guard the line and the rim and let them take as many mid-range jumpers as they want. Sag, switch and swat. But during crunch time, I want Markelle to relish that assignment. Dion Waiters, Kemba Walker's, etc.

An extra plus is that if you pick and roll against Markelle, we've seen him use those arms to deny passes to the roll or dive man. He has the frame to be able to hold his own against bigger players. Something I can't say for my personal draft favorite, Dennis Smith Jr.

2) The price reflected the market. Speaking of Mitchell and DSJ, almost every pick in the lottery has done well. That reflects what a lot of people had been saying. These guys are good. But just as importantly, none, be it Tatum, Ball, Fultz or Jackson, project to a perenniel NBA All-Star, either. Ben Simmons as a generational prospect. Joel was a great pick, but he was also fortunate to grow two inches after being drafted. Nothing I've seen from Lauri Markkannen to Josh Jackson to DeAaron Fox suggests that any of them are going to ascend to Simmons and Embiid's level. In other words, I don't think any meaningful separation has occurred. Everyone drafted has simply lived up to the hype, except Markelle because of injury. '

And all of this comports with the fact that Colangelo only spent one draft pick, when Golden State paid THREE first round picks to move from PENNY HARDAWAY to Chris Webber. By only exchanging only one pick, Ainge and Colangelo connote the fact that the move is only about fit and not about talent. I don't do draft-for-fit, especially when you have other draft picks, tradable players and a ton of free agent money. i also don't think the Celtics would've taken Markelle Fultz #1 and that we still would've gotten at #3.

But the 'meager' price reflects the fact that it was entirely possible that Boston could've taken him, given that they did in fact move Avery Bradley out of the two-spot. It is also possible that Lavar Ball is not Svengali, and that Pelinka and Johnson have brain enough to consider Fultz as well as Lonzo Ball. As we see now, as we should've accepted before, Ball is going to be a very good NBA player, but the Jason Kidd comparisons were just as unfair to him as the John Wall comparisons were to Kris Dunn.

I am willing to admit I thought Ball's shooting would've translated better to the NBA, and if we would've taken Ball after Lakers go Fultz, we would not have the shooting we need to compliment Ben Simmons. I'm not saying it would be a disaster. But it is clear that Fultz' skillset matches with Simmons much better than Ball's to a degree I had not recognized prior to the draft.

3) A "meager" price is proven also by the fact that a) Sacramento would not trade the #5 and #10 for the #1 pick, because they also knew that getting DeAaron Fox at #5 was as good for their squad as getting Jayson Tatum or Josh Jackson to fill their gaping hole at small forward. Shoot, forget Josh Jackson, Justin Jackson (and Kyle Kuzma) are out here doing things.

If Vlade Divac correctly surmised that this draft was top heavy, then no of us should be far behind, if at all.

And being correct, landed them two seemingly good pieces vying for starting spots already, and Harry Giles as a high upside lottery ticket. Skal Labissiere and Willie Cauley Stein are showing potential. If you got a point guard and a center, things look not too bad for the future.

Give their young'ns a year under the belt, then add either Luka Doncic or Michael Porter, and the Kings are looking at being a half-decent team in 2018-2019.

4) Similarly, the Lakers had a great summer. Kyle Kuzma is as a positive surprise as Ball's shooting has been a disappointment. KCP was a great get for this year. Brook Lopez and Bogut. We're not giving up the Lakers pic this year.

Better yet, this draft has several forwards who should be available between #5-10. With Doncic, Bagley, DeAndre Ayton and Mohammed Bamba as frontrunners, it's quite likely we get to choose a guy like Miles Bridges to give us someone who plays well above the rim. Kevin Knox? It's not impossible that a talent like Michael Porter falls to #6 or #7, where the Sixers might be able to trade up to get him.

Or, the Lakers pick could get us Collin Sexton or Trevon Duval, if you don't want to pay TJ McConnell what he's asking (or sign him and trade him later).

...

Right now, I believe we've given up the #10 pick in the 2019 draft to move up from 3 to 1 for the player who, like BC claimed, fits this team's current needs the best. That's less than what Orlando gave us to move up from #12 to #10--which should not be the case.

Bryan Colangelo does Bryan Colangelo things. One of them is make trades, draft fairly well, and draft internationals. He's done that.

He also gets fours who can shoot and play above the rim. I can't wait until he mkes a move for one, so we can put this trade to rest and complain about tht one.

...

Anybody seen Jerami lately. That's a trade I'd still like to complain about.

...

All that said, how does your jump shot form hurt you so bad that you are out for weeks, with still no return date? I'm about to go full conspiracy theorist and claim that BC and Fultz camp agreed to redshirt him for the year if they promised to make him the #1 pick--he gets more dough and the Sixers let insurance pick up the tab. Now, that's one hell of an accusation--insurance fraud. Illegal and such. But I've honestly never seen or heard of a player being out for several weeks because of a shoulder boo boo.

Come clean, Markelle. WTF happened to your shoulder, dude?
LloydFree
RealGM
Posts: 15,840
And1: 11,657
Joined: Aug 20, 2012
Location: Somewhere near the Jersey Turnpike, between exit 4 and 15E

Re: Markelle Fultz Discussion II 

Post#1306 » by LloydFree » Sat Nov 11, 2017 8:24 pm

BullyKing wrote:
LloydFree wrote:
BullyKing wrote:
It is so ridiculous watching you wrap yourself in Tatum as if he was the prospect you've been talking about nonstop. You are so confident that you are a scouting wizard that you have 100% confidence in your opinion of Fultz yet appear to have missed horribly on Lonzo. So does that make you question whether your opinion of Fultz might be wrong as well? Nope, you just pretend like it was Tatum you wanted this entire time.

I don't get your attack on him for pointing out something that is obvious and true. You don't attack the guys who are spitting out stupidly, pretending Tatum hasn't looked better than Fultz and isn't playing well. He has the right in the Fultz thread, to talk about the player we basically gave Boston for Fultz. Fultz looks like dookey, but rather than talk about that, you'd rather insult the guys that said it was a mistake to draft him.


Yes, he said it was a mistake to draft him. He's said that again and again and again and again and again. But he keeps acting like his evaluation (i.e. opinion) of Fultz is a fact, which he has said repeatedly, while ignoring that his equally strong opinion about Ball looks to be egregiously wrong.


His/my opinion on what should have been done at the draft, still isn't equally wrong. Because they wouldn't have given a conference rival an extra pick for the opportunity to take a lesser player. While Ball is struggling with his shot, he's still a starting PG in the top 10 in assists in the NBA. So regardless of whether you feel Ball has somehow shown to be a bigger failure than Fultz in the early going, the point remains they gave the Celtics an extra opportunity to get a player like Ayton. Ayton is a significantly better prospect than both Fultz and Tatum. Tatum and Ball both could both be abject failures and the trade would still be a net loss for the 76ers... Regardless of whether you want to hear about it over and over again.
Fischella wrote:I think none of you guys that are pro-Embiid no how basketball works today.. is way easier to win it all with Omer Asik than Olajuwon.
Actually if you ask me which Center I want for my perfect championship caliber team, I will chose Asik hands down
eyeatoma
RealGM
Posts: 29,957
And1: 13,210
Joined: Feb 25, 2005
     

Re: RE: Re: Markelle Fultz Discussion II 

Post#1307 » by eyeatoma » Sat Nov 11, 2017 8:46 pm

Unbreakable99 wrote:
76ciology wrote:Fultz and Tatum are likely to be very good players. But Fultz is more likely to be an elite player.

Why? Elite size for position that Fultz should be able to defend PG&wings, while almost no holes to his game.

And that plus fit is why we have to pay a big price for him.


Disagree.
Thanks for clarifying. Wasn't sure how you felt.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Sixerscan
Senior Mod - 76ers
Senior Mod - 76ers
Posts: 33,946
And1: 16,328
Joined: Jan 25, 2005

Re: Markelle Fultz Discussion II 

Post#1308 » by Sixerscan » Sat Nov 11, 2017 8:58 pm

LloydFree wrote:
BullyKing wrote:
LloydFree wrote:I don't get your attack on him for pointing out something that is obvious and true. You don't attack the guys who are spitting out stupidly, pretending Tatum hasn't looked better than Fultz and isn't playing well. He has the right in the Fultz thread, to talk about the player we basically gave Boston for Fultz. Fultz looks like dookey, but rather than talk about that, you'd rather insult the guys that said it was a mistake to draft him.


Yes, he said it was a mistake to draft him. He's said that again and again and again and again and again. But he keeps acting like his evaluation (i.e. opinion) of Fultz is a fact, which he has said repeatedly, while ignoring that his equally strong opinion about Ball looks to be egregiously wrong.


His/my opinion on what should have been done at the draft, still isn't equally wrong. Because they wouldn't have given a conference rival an extra pick for the opportunity to take a lesser player. While Ball is struggling with his shot, he's still a starting PG in the top 10 in assists in the NBA. So regardless of whether you feel Ball has somehow shown to be a bigger failure than Fultz in the early going, the point remains they gave the Celtics an extra opportunity to get a player like Ayton. Ayton is a significantly better prospect than both Fultz and Tatum. Tatum and Ball both could both be abject failures and the trade would still be a net loss for the 76ers... Regardless of whether you want to hear about it over and over again.


"Our ridiculously confident predictions about ball and Jackson looking wrong doesn't matter because I am ridiculously confident about where the Lakers pick is going to end up as well as the skill level of a guy I watched played in a McDonald's all star game."

This isn't about you being right or wrong. It's about you making the you making every conversation you have come back to the question of whether you being right or wrong about something we won't know for years. It's not like if you go a day (a week? a month?) without complaining you won't be able to point to the hundreds of posts where you have already made your exact point.
spikeslovechild
RealGM
Posts: 12,843
And1: 6,198
Joined: Dec 16, 2013
Location: Right here waiting for you

Re: Markelle Fultz Discussion II 

Post#1309 » by spikeslovechild » Sat Nov 11, 2017 9:00 pm

Here is the problem with all this Tatum talk Ainge said after the trade the player we took at three would likely be the player we took at one. They were high on Tatum. Jackson already had an agreement with PHX and didn't want to play behind Brown and BOS hundred wings.

They controlled the process. The idea that if we just stuck at 3 we could have taken Tatum is stupidity. They knew we wanted Fultz. They knew the Lakers wanted Fultz. The one who didn't make the trade would have ended up with Ball or Jackson. Not Tatum.
Ericb5
RealGM
Posts: 10,303
And1: 3,377
Joined: Jan 08, 2014
       

Re: Markelle Fultz Discussion II 

Post#1310 » by Ericb5 » Sat Nov 11, 2017 9:00 pm

Mik317 wrote:Tatum has been really good for a 19 year old. Anyone who denies that is a hater.

THAT being said, it is hilarious to see the flip floppers using him as a tool to once again bash Fultz. I remmeber the exact line being "at least Ainge wasted the pick on Tatum". The anti Fultz brigade was super high on Ball, Jackson and even Smith before Tatum...Tatum was barely mentioned outside of Negrodamus. This whole "oh there was 6 guys all along" **** is revisionist history at best...and even if that was the case Tatum was not high on that list of 6. Some of yall have a hard time coming to grips that maybe just maybe you aren't the amazing flawless draft gurus you act like and maybe your take on Fultz was wrong too.
its sad at this point, when you got fools going " well Ball shooting under 30% isn't that bad doe".


Do better


Tatum was in the top 6 obviously. I don’t know where you are getting that. He was a viable pick at 3 for us even though there were very few people who wanted him over Jackson, Fultz or Ball.

His average mock position was 4 probably.

The top 6 in my mind was really more like two groups of 3 that could be in any order within the groups.

Fultz, Ball and Jackson in the top 3, and Smith, Tatum and Fox in the second 3. At the beginning of the draft process I wouldn’t have had Fox in the same group with Tatum and Smith, but by the end he had climbed into it.

So Tatum at 3, whether to Boston or us was completely viable from the beginning. Embiid even said that he thought we were going to go with Jackson or Tatum.

I think that those 6 all have allstar upside, and nobody has done anything to change that yet.

Tatum looks good because he was ready for the league, and because he is playing in a great situation. There is nothing raw about him.

The revisionist history is annoying though when people decide after the draft that they were for something that they weren’t for before the draft. The same thing happened with Porzingis.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
smittybanton
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,766
And1: 398
Joined: Jul 30, 2016

Re: Markelle Fultz Discussion II 

Post#1311 » by smittybanton » Sat Nov 11, 2017 9:05 pm

76ciology wrote:Fultz and Tatum are likely to be very good players. But Fultz is more likely to be an elite player.

Why? Elite size for position that Fultz should be able to defend PG&wings, while almost no holes to his game.

And that plus fit is why we have to pay a big price for him.


Well put.

And considering the history of trading up in the top five, and the positive moves the Kings and Lakers have made since, it wasn't that big price.

But as LLoydFree said, I hate that we hooked Boston up--with anything. I was loving that the Nets picks had gotten them Jaylen Brown and the #1 pick in a flat draft with no bigs. I just knew Vlade was going to give them #5 and #10 for them to get Jonathan Isaac and Zach Collins. He resisted. We didn't.

It's not just that it's Boston, it's not just that it's a division rival....it's Danny Ainge! Some of us have despised his whiny crying act since his bad haircuts at BYU, the 'puritanical' school playing a 'puritanical' style earning a role on the 'puritanical' Celtics with his puritan-work ethic, to then rise to GM and steer them from their latest chip to contending for another one without any serious pain of rebuilding... BLECCHCCCHHH

For those of you not in my generation, Danny Ainge was Grayson Allen. Imagine the Tripster going to Boston, lasting over ten years, winning rings and coming back later to be a 'successful' gm of the Celtics. Somebody get Sedale Threatt on line three...

Maybe that explains the visceral reaction some of us have/had. (Or maybe it doesn't. lol)
User avatar
Mik317
RealGM
Posts: 41,434
And1: 20,062
Joined: May 31, 2005
Location: In Spain...without the S
       

Re: Markelle Fultz Discussion II 

Post#1312 » by Mik317 » Sat Nov 11, 2017 9:10 pm

you know damn well if Fultz was shooting under 30% from the field, him being top 10 in any category would not be enough for you to not hate him.

I get not liking a prospect but at the very least be consistent with all prospects. This is why it looks like you have an agenda. You all could be very much correct w/ Fultz. This **** with his shoulder aside, he has not had a great start and could very much flame out and be a bust. I think only the most homerish of us would deny that....again I was a big Fox/Jackson guy, so yeah I get it going up for a guy who may not be better than what we could have gotten at 3 could suck big time...especially if we ended up helping out the Celtics of all teams in the process. I get the angst over that (think its bit premature but whatever). What I don't get is the goal post moving to justify the constant hatred of a player on your favorite team when at the end of the day the two guys most pumped up in regards to Fultz also have major hurdles to overcome and have not done so in this admittedly short set of games. The fact that people have moved on to Tatum as their "see told you so" guy is just sad at this point considering he might have been one of the few guys from that top bunch that barely anyone talked about predraft. There is a weird double standard going on to justify continuing to be super down on Fultz...instead of giving him the same benifit of the doubt one would give any other rookie. Ball's shot will totally start falling...but Fultz? No he's a finished product fo sho. How bout we all wait and see what happens and let go of our preconceived notions about what is going to happen and let it actually happen for once? There are plenty of things happening right now to talk about than constantly harping on and on about what could be. You guys are getting mad about **** that has not happened yet as if it is currently happening. For all we know Ayton could bomb in college, the Lakers pick ends up at 10 or some ****, and Fultz turns out pretty good. The fact that some are almost hoping for the worst case scenario is just sad
#NeverGonnaBeGood
User avatar
JojoSlimbiid
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,325
And1: 2,248
Joined: Dec 03, 2016
   

Re: Markelle Fultz Discussion II 

Post#1313 » by JojoSlimbiid » Sat Nov 11, 2017 9:17 pm

Thread should be burned
User avatar
cksdayoff
RealGM
Posts: 13,331
And1: 3,639
Joined: Jun 21, 2010

Re: Markelle Fultz Discussion II 

Post#1314 » by cksdayoff » Sat Nov 11, 2017 9:45 pm

it feels like the fultz haters have more posts in this thread than everyone else lol
#failforfultz
Unbreakable99
General Manager
Posts: 8,752
And1: 3,993
Joined: Jul 04, 2014

Re: Markelle Fultz Discussion II 

Post#1315 » by Unbreakable99 » Sat Nov 11, 2017 10:10 pm

LloydFree wrote:
BullyKing wrote:
LloydFree wrote:I don't get your attack on him for pointing out something that is obvious and true. You don't attack the guys who are spitting out stupidly, pretending Tatum hasn't looked better than Fultz and isn't playing well. He has the right in the Fultz thread, to talk about the player we basically gave Boston for Fultz. Fultz looks like dookey, but rather than talk about that, you'd rather insult the guys that said it was a mistake to draft him.


Yes, he said it was a mistake to draft him. He's said that again and again and again and again and again. But he keeps acting like his evaluation (i.e. opinion) of Fultz is a fact, which he has said repeatedly, while ignoring that his equally strong opinion about Ball looks to be egregiously wrong.


His/my opinion on what should have been done at the draft, still isn't equally wrong. Because they wouldn't have given a conference rival an extra pick for the opportunity to take a lesser player. While Ball is struggling with his shot, he's still a starting PG in the top 10 in assists in the NBA. So regardless of whether you feel Ball has somehow shown to be a bigger failure than Fultz in the early going, the point remains they gave the Celtics an extra opportunity to get a player like Ayton. Ayton is a significantly better prospect than both Fultz and Tatum. Tatum and Ball both could both be abject failures and the trade would still be a net loss for the 76ers... Regardless of whether you want to hear about it over and over again.


Exactly. Well said.
Ryuzaki
Freshman
Posts: 76
And1: 25
Joined: Oct 31, 2017

Re: Markelle Fultz Discussion II 

Post#1316 » by Ryuzaki » Sat Nov 11, 2017 10:16 pm

I love Markelle Fultz and he will be a great basketball player for this team!
Unbreakable99
General Manager
Posts: 8,752
And1: 3,993
Joined: Jul 04, 2014

Re: Markelle Fultz Discussion II 

Post#1317 » by Unbreakable99 » Sat Nov 11, 2017 10:24 pm

spikeslovechild wrote:Here is the problem with all this Tatum talk Ainge said after the trade the player we took at three would likely be the player we took at one. They were high on Tatum. Jackson already had an agreement with PHX and didn't want to play behind Brown and BOS hundred wings.

They controlled the process. The idea that if we just stuck at 3 we could have taken Tatum is stupidity. They knew we wanted Fultz. They knew the Lakers wanted Fultz. The one who didn't make the trade would have ended up with Ball or Jackson. Not Tatum.


You keep saying Ainge was going to trade the pick. Yes the Sixers and Lakers talked to Ainge. It doesn’t mean a trade had to be done. Yeah Woj said the Lakers wanted Fultz if they traded up but I think that’s what he was fed. If the Lakers and Sixers made Ainge pick we would have been better off. What really makes my skin crawl is we gave Ainge a great pick that has a greater than 50% chance of going to the Celtics and they may take Bamba or Bagley or Ayton. That alone made the trade atrocious for us. If Fultz and Tatum cancel each other out then those other prospects make it a clear win for Boston. I don’t see how people don’t see that. If Boston doesn’t trade the pick they just take Tatum number one and we still end up with Fultz because the Lakers would take Ball. I just hate incompetent GMing. BC really messed up. How will you all feel just handing a rim protector to Boston to complete their team? This is the worst trade ever. I say that because we gave our rival who we need to go through a final piece. I would have still hated the trade had we trade up with a team in the western conference but it wouldn’t be as bad. Still an awful trade but you wouldn’t be handing a conference rival a clear win in the trade.
LloydFree
RealGM
Posts: 15,840
And1: 11,657
Joined: Aug 20, 2012
Location: Somewhere near the Jersey Turnpike, between exit 4 and 15E

Re: Markelle Fultz Discussion II 

Post#1318 » by LloydFree » Sat Nov 11, 2017 10:31 pm

cksdayoff wrote:it feels like the fultz haters have more posts in this thread than everyone else lol


I'll make a deal with you. If you remove your #failforFultz SIG, I won't post in this thread again (unless my name is mentioned). Deal?
Fischella wrote:I think none of you guys that are pro-Embiid no how basketball works today.. is way easier to win it all with Omer Asik than Olajuwon.
Actually if you ask me which Center I want for my perfect championship caliber team, I will chose Asik hands down
Mrcrockpots
Junior
Posts: 460
And1: 172
Joined: Jun 30, 2017
       

Re: Markelle Fultz Discussion II 

Post#1319 » by Mrcrockpots » Sat Nov 11, 2017 10:32 pm

I am and have always been on Team Markelle. I often avoid this thread because of all the reasons posted above. Cannot wait for Fultz's shoulder to heal and we can actually talk about real basketball stuff.
Sixerscan
Senior Mod - 76ers
Senior Mod - 76ers
Posts: 33,946
And1: 16,328
Joined: Jan 25, 2005

Re: Markelle Fultz Discussion II 

Post#1320 » by Sixerscan » Sat Nov 11, 2017 10:32 pm

Unbreakable99 wrote:
spikeslovechild wrote:Here is the problem with all this Tatum talk Ainge said after the trade the player we took at three would likely be the player we took at one. They were high on Tatum. Jackson already had an agreement with PHX and didn't want to play behind Brown and BOS hundred wings.

They controlled the process. The idea that if we just stuck at 3 we could have taken Tatum is stupidity. They knew we wanted Fultz. They knew the Lakers wanted Fultz. The one who didn't make the trade would have ended up with Ball or Jackson. Not Tatum.


You keep saying Ainge was going to trade the pick. Yes the Sixers and Lakers talked to Ainge. It doesn’t mean a trade had to be done. Yeah Woj said the Lakers wanted Fultz if they traded up but I think that’s what he was fed. If the Lakers and Sixers made Ainge pick we would have been better off. What really makes my skin crawl is we gave Ainge a great pick that has a greater than 50% chance of going to the Celtics and they may take Bamba or Bagley or Ayton. That alone made the trade atrocious for us. If Fultz and Tatum cancel each other out then those other prospects make it a clear win for Boston. I don’t see how people don’t see that. If Boston doesn’t trade the pick they just take Tatum number one and we still end up with Fultz because the Lakers would take Ball. I just hate incompetent GMing. BC really messed up. How will you all feel just handing a rim protector to Boston to complete their team? This is the worst trade ever. I say that because we gave our rival who we need to go through a final piece. I would have still hated the trade had we trade up with a team in the western conference but it wouldn’t be as bad. Still an awful trade but you wouldn’t be handing a conference rival a clear win in the trade.


Greater than 50% wtf? Listen man it's bad enough that you spend all day whining about the trade don't also just make odds up.

Return to Philadelphia 76ers