Continuing the Buddy Hield discussion.. his game has actually improved a good amount since college. Handles look tighter and his turn around fadeaway (learned from the mamba?) he has shown in the last month is pretty. I encourage anyone to watch some recent footage if you haven't already.
Continuing the Buddy Hield discussion.. his game has actually improved a good amount since college. Handles look tighter and his turn around fadeaway (learned from the mamba?) he has shown in the last month is pretty. I encourage anyone to watch some recent footage if you haven't already.
Why are we talking about Buddy Hield in this thread???
He's already 23 and the Kings owner has irrational fantasies about him. I think he will be a nice player, possibly long-time starter. All star? Doubt it. _________________ From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Continuing the Buddy Hield discussion.. his game has actually improved a good amount since college. Handles look tighter and his turn around fadeaway (learned from the mamba?) he has shown in the last month is pretty. I encourage anyone to watch some recent footage if you haven't already.
I definetly wouldn't consider the two turn around fadeaways in that clip pretty especially compared to Kobe. He didn't get square to the hoop, no elevation, and low arc. He just happened to make them.
Anyone else feel like, even if we get the #1, we're taking Ball? Feels like it's Magic's pick to make, and the home-grown UCLA kid that reminds him of himself (and if they make the title game, forget it) will be too much to pass up. I think this is our draft board:
1st: Ball
2nd: Ball
3rd: Whoever the Pacers want.
Sadly yeah. I hope if we get #1 Magic will see how good Fultz is during his workout but I feel like the narrative behind Ball is going to win out.
No need to be sad guys. The narrative won't win out, him being BPA will.
I've never heard a "good" argument as to how Ball is a better player than Fultz. Everything I do hear is about him being a "winner" which I place as much value as I do to other arbitrary garbage such as "swagger", "clutch gene" and whatever else the talking heads at ESPN spout out.
I don't necessarily think Ball is better than Fultz, but for the argument, here's a couple of statistical arguments:
to summarize, fultz is an elite PnR scorer, while Ball is a more efficient shooter in every other situation. on the other end, fultz measures out as a terrible defender while ball is quite good.
so there's essentially two elite prospects, and you have on one hand, an elite PnR ballhandler with defensive deficiencies, and on the other hand, an elite passer, above average shooter with NBA+ range, and above average defender. So it boils down to what you're looking for and how "elite" you think the player's "elite" traits are. I personally think of it as a choice between james harden and jason kidd (not saying either will meet the level of play that harden or kidd did, but that the relative strengths and weaknesses are similar). I can see someone preferring kidd, and I can see someone preferring harden. I personally lean harden but I'm not going to argue if you like kidd.
Except Fultz doesn't project to be a poor defender. In fact I expect Fultz to be a very good defender. As for his efficiency he's the lone option for his team. The amount of defensive pressure he demands is far more than what Lozno demands. One of those reasons is that Lonzo is surrounded by far superior talent. Fultz has very little holes in his game (free throw shooting and defensive consistency) while Ball has numerous holes in his game. I think it's that simple.
It's a "checkmark" versus "outlier skill" argument that makes for engaging debate, but one that's going to result in a statemate (until 2022 atvleast) unless we undermine the premises that Fultz has very few holes in his game or that Ball's passing/BBIQ isn't elite or won't translate.
interesting how different this mock is from the DX mock considering it should be by the same people
1. fultz
2. ball
3. jackson
4. tatum
5. monk
6. fox
7. smith
8. markkanen
9. isaac
10. ntilikina
I like that for Sac....picking up Fox and Isaac to add to Hield, Cauley-Stein, Skal, Papagiannis and Richardson....thats not a bad young core to start the rebuild with in my opinion.
I don't love Dennis Smith, but for a team like Sac looking to create a new team identity post-Boogie, I don't think I'd pass on his upside as a primary scorer for Fox. It would suck for Smith, though.
interesting how different this mock is from the DX mock considering it should be by the same people
1. fultz
2. ball
3. jackson
4. tatum
5. monk
6. fox
7. smith
8. markkanen
9. isaac
10. ntilikina
I like that for Sac....picking up Fox and Isaac to add to Hield, Cauley-Stein, Skal, Papagiannis and Richardson....thats not a bad young core to start the rebuild with in my opinion.
I don't love Dennis Smith, but for a team like Sac looking to create a new team identity post-Boogie, I don't think I'd pass on his upside as a primary scorer for Fox. It would suck for Smith, though.
Barring any major jump into the top 3, if I were Sacramento the 2 guys I'd want are Isaac and Monk.
I really feel like people are sleeping on Monk a bit. Kid is going to be a monster scorer one day. I'd take him as high as 3 but if Sacramento could nab those 2... they've got some fire power going forward
I'm liking the idea of a
Ball
Waiters or Seth Curry
George
Randle
Big boy Moz
Until you realize Ball is just like any other rookie we've had... meaning it will take time. While PG13 is an inefficient scorer, and a passive Kobe. 22 pts and he's had his own team for awhile, so nothing will change on the scoring front. 22 is lightweight for a "superstar" who might not make the all-star in the West either.
My comment is based on assuming that you've dealt Ingram and D'Lo for George? Terrible idea, hope this isn't what Magic and Pelinka are thinking.
You really feel like George is inefficient?
.448
.383
.914
5 free throws a game
57.4% TS% isn't bad at all, although in 2017 it's not great. Solidly above average. And it's not like his volume is that high.
Add in 3.3 assists per 36 to 3.0 turnovers and.... eh?
I feel like there's a big disparity in terms of how PG is perceived and how he actually plays, because he's so damn streaky and his hot streaks stick with you.
The reason I think he's a a superstar is because he's a great defender. I don't mind a streaky player all that much if they bring it defensively every night and when he is playing well, he's arguably the best 2 way wing in the game.
I love PG for his defense. But the first question was about his scoring, and George is really not close to a top flight scorer.
interesting how different this mock is from the DX mock considering it should be by the same people
1. fultz
2. ball
3. jackson
4. tatum
5. monk
6. fox
7. smith
8. markkanen
9. isaac
10. ntilikina
I like that for Sac....picking up Fox and Isaac to add to Hield, Cauley-Stein, Skal, Papagiannis and Richardson....thats not a bad young core to start the rebuild with in my opinion.
I don't love Dennis Smith, but for a team like Sac looking to create a new team identity post-Boogie, I don't think I'd pass on his upside as a primary scorer for Fox. It would suck for Smith, though.
Barring any major jump into the top 3, if I were Sacramento the 2 guys I'd want are Isaac and Monk.
I really feel like people are sleeping on Monk a bit. Kid is going to be a monster scorer one day. I'd take him as high as 3 but if Sacramento could nab those 2... they've got some fire power going forward
WCS/Skal/Isaac/Hield/Monk
everyone knows i love me some monk. only issue for him is what his role on defense will be. that said, i think his offensive potency more than makes up for any defensive liabilities, and as we all have seen with curry, harden, westbrook, and lillard to an extent...elite offense is a way more important aspect of the game compared to defense. _________________ substance over style
I've thrown his name in this thread a few times, but when I watch clips of Pasecniks I'm not sure why he's not higher on mock drafts. I would consider him starting in the late teens, and if he's still there at #28 I think he could be a steal.
7'1" PF/C that can stretch the floor, play in the post and is a high level athlete for his position. He's got those nice Euro fundamentals with the ball and can switch P/R on defense if needed. With some NBA strength and conditioning I think he could be a great option to run at with PF or C depending on lineups. _________________ “This goes far beyond paychecks”
I'm liking the idea of a
Ball
Waiters or Seth Curry
George
Randle
Big boy Moz
Until you realize Ball is just like any other rookie we've had... meaning it will take time. While PG13 is an inefficient scorer, and a passive Kobe. 22 pts and he's had his own team for awhile, so nothing will change on the scoring front. 22 is lightweight for a "superstar" who might not make the all-star in the West either.
My comment is based on assuming that you've dealt Ingram and D'Lo for George? Terrible idea, hope this isn't what Magic and Pelinka are thinking.
You really feel like George is inefficient?
.448
.383
.914
5 free throws a game
57.4% TS% isn't bad at all, although in 2017 it's not great. Solidly above average. And it's not like his volume is that high.
Add in 3.3 assists per 36 to 3.0 turnovers and.... eh?
I feel like there's a big disparity in terms of how PG is perceived and how he actually plays, because he's so damn streaky and his hot streaks stick with you.
The reason I think he's a a superstar is because he's a great defender. I don't mind a streaky player all that much if they bring it defensively every night and when he is playing well, he's arguably the best 2 way wing in the game.
I love PG for his defense. But the first question was about his scoring, and George is really not close to a top flight scorer.
And that's why many of us wouldn't trade two of our top three assets (including the pick hopefully) for him. If he was a top flight scorer, sure, but he clearly isn't. If Magic and Pelinka trade two of the core assets for him, that will set us back years (basically making us the Western Conference equivalent of Indy now) because the trade would be built upon the false belief that PG can carry a team by himself.
I've thrown his name in this thread a few times, but when I watch clips of Pasecniks I'm not sure why he's not higher on mock drafts. I would consider him starting in the late teens, and if he's still there at #28 I think he could be a steal.
7'1" PF/C that can stretch the floor, play in the post and is a high level athlete for his position. He's got those nice Euro fundamentals with the ball and can switch P/R on defense if needed. With some NBA strength and conditioning I think he could be a great option to run at with PF or C depending on lineups.
he's not higher because he's a stash pick, won't come over for another 2 years. _________________ substance over style
I'm liking the idea of a
Ball
Waiters or Seth Curry
George
Randle
Big boy Moz
Until you realize Ball is just like any other rookie we've had... meaning it will take time. While PG13 is an inefficient scorer, and a passive Kobe. 22 pts and he's had his own team for awhile, so nothing will change on the scoring front. 22 is lightweight for a "superstar" who might not make the all-star in the West either.
My comment is based on assuming that you've dealt Ingram and D'Lo for George? Terrible idea, hope this isn't what Magic and Pelinka are thinking.
You really feel like George is inefficient?
.448
.383
.914
5 free throws a game
57.4% TS% isn't bad at all, although in 2017 it's not great. Solidly above average. And it's not like his volume is that high.
Add in 3.3 assists per 36 to 3.0 turnovers and.... eh?
I feel like there's a big disparity in terms of how PG is perceived and how he actually plays, because he's so damn streaky and his hot streaks stick with you.
The reason I think he's a a superstar is because he's a great defender. I don't mind a streaky player all that much if they bring it defensively every night and when he is playing well, he's arguably the best 2 way wing in the game.
I love PG for his defense. But the first question was about his scoring, and George is really not close to a top flight scorer.
And that's why many of us wouldn't trade two of our top three assets (including the pick hopefully) for him. If he was a top flight scorer, sure, but he clearly isn't. If Magic and Pelinka trade two of the core assets for him, that will set us back years (basically making us the Western Conference equivalent of Indy now) because the trade would be built upon the false belief that PG can carry a team by himself.
He's not a top flight scorer. But scoring isn't our problem. It's a player who can play D and score 22+ ppg a night. I think in may 3 years Ingram may get there, but not sure if the FO will wait on him that long if that's the price for PG13. _________________ From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
interesting how different this mock is from the DX mock considering it should be by the same people
1. fultz
2. ball
3. jackson
4. tatum
5. monk
6. fox
7. smith
8. markkanen
9. isaac
10. ntilikina
I like that for Sac....picking up Fox and Isaac to add to Hield, Cauley-Stein, Skal, Papagiannis and Richardson....thats not a bad young core to start the rebuild with in my opinion.
I don't love Dennis Smith, but for a team like Sac looking to create a new team identity post-Boogie, I don't think I'd pass on his upside as a primary scorer for Fox. It would suck for Smith, though.
Barring any major jump into the top 3, if I were Sacramento the 2 guys I'd want are Isaac and Monk.
I really feel like people are sleeping on Monk a bit. Kid is going to be a monster scorer one day. I'd take him as high as 3 but if Sacramento could nab those 2... they've got some fire power going forward
WCS/Skal/Isaac/Hield/Monk
I'm assuming Monk doesn't slip past the Sixers. That's a perfect landing spot for him.
some TMI about this game.....I think it was on a Saturday....I was in 9th Grade and at a girl from schools house party....I was a big Hurley and Duke fan...so me and my buddy was in a guest bedroom watching the game and a few girls were hanging out in there. My friend jumped up to scream at tv and was chewing gum....the gum went flying out of his mouth and hit this girl setting on the bed who was wearing a crop top and jeans....the gum went down the front of her pants and as she went to get it out, it fell down lower.....this was 1993, the gum became extremely entangled, so scissors had to be utilized to remove the chewing gum. I am not saying that event was the beginning of a completely new trend female personal grooming, but the timeline makes you go hmm.
Ball looks like a very capable defender to me. I am concerned about his shooting form, which looks broken (and would be much more criticized if he wasn't shooting the 3 at a 40% clip). I have NEVER seen him pull up for a jumper after going right. Granted, every player has their favorite spots on the floor, but Ball seems unable to shoot effectively while going to the right because of his form.
I would be more concerned about Ball's release point if he wasn't a pass-first PG with elite passing skills. If he were a primary source of offense, then his ability to get his shot off with efficiency would be more of a problem. As he seems to shoot mostly as a complement to the rest of the offense - to open up the floor - I don't think it will be a problem.
Johnson and Kidd also had uninspiring shooting strokes, but since the shots went in and they were looking to pass anyway, they managed to be very effective.
Ball looks like a very capable defender to me. I am concerned about his shooting form, which looks broken (and would be much more criticized if he wasn't shooting the 3 at a 40% clip). I have NEVER seen him pull up for a jumper after going right. Granted, every player has their favorite spots on the floor, but Ball seems unable to shoot effectively while going to the right because of his form.
I would be more concerned about Ball's release point if he wasn't a pass-first PG with elite passing skills. If he were a primary source of offense, then his ability to get his shot off with efficiency would be more of a problem. As he seems to shoot mostly as a complement to the rest of the offense - to open up the floor - I don't think it will be a problem.
Johnson and Kidd also had uninspiring shooting strokes, but since the shots went in and they were looking to pass anyway, they managed to be very effective.
Lonzo won't be left alone to shoot like Magic and Kidd. He can shoot.. He has a quick release and hits his shots. I don't like that crazy shot of his.. I think he scores higher in the pros vs college..
Anyone else feel like, even if we get the #1, we're taking Ball? Feels like it's Magic's pick to make, and the home-grown UCLA kid that reminds him of himself (and if they make the title game, forget it) will be too much to pass up. I think this is our draft board:
1st: Ball
2nd: Ball
3rd: Whoever the Pacers want.
Sadly yeah. I hope if we get #1 Magic will see how good Fultz is during his workout but I feel like the narrative behind Ball is going to win out.
No need to be sad guys. The narrative won't win out, him being BPA will.
I've never heard a "good" argument as to how Ball is a better player than Fultz. Everything I do hear is about him being a "winner" which I place as much value as I do to other arbitrary garbage such as "swagger", "clutch gene" and whatever else the talking heads at ESPN spout out.
I don't necessarily think Ball is better than Fultz, but for the argument, here's a couple of statistical arguments:
to summarize, fultz is an elite PnR scorer, while Ball is a more efficient shooter in every other situation. on the other end, fultz measures out as a terrible defender while ball is quite good.
so there's essentially two elite prospects, and you have on one hand, an elite PnR ballhandler with defensive deficiencies, and on the other hand, an elite passer, above average shooter with NBA+ range, and above average defender. So it boils down to what you're looking for and how "elite" you think the player's "elite" traits are. I personally think of it as a choice between james harden and jason kidd (not saying either will meet the level of play that harden or kidd did, but that the relative strengths and weaknesses are similar). I can see someone preferring kidd, and I can see someone preferring harden. I personally lean harden but I'm not going to argue if you like kidd.
Except Fultz doesn't project to be a poor defender. In fact I expect Fultz to be a very good defender. As for his efficiency he's the lone option for his team. The amount of defensive pressure he demands is far more than what Lozno demands. One of those reasons is that Lonzo is surrounded by far superior talent. Fultz has very little holes in his game (free throw shooting and defensive consistency) while Ball has numerous holes in his game. I think it's that simple.
You do realize that when you say you haven't heard a good argument about ball being better than fultz, then turn around and say fultz has "less holes in his game" without backing that up with stats you are doing the EXACT thing you are railing against?
I mean, It's obtuse. Is it intentional? _________________ Creatures crawl in search of blood, To terrorize y'alls neighborhood.
I've thrown his name in this thread a few times, but when I watch clips of Pasecniks I'm not sure why he's not higher on mock drafts. I would consider him starting in the late teens, and if he's still there at #28 I think he could be a steal.
7'1" PF/C that can stretch the floor, play in the post and is a high level athlete for his position. He's got those nice Euro fundamentals with the ball and can switch P/R on defense if needed. With some NBA strength and conditioning I think he could be a great option to run at with PF or C depending on lineups.
he's not higher because he's a stash pick, won't come over for another 2 years.
Why not? I think he's got one more year on his contract. Not sure why he wouldn't be able to afford a buyout if he wanted to come this summer, assuming he gets a first round contract. He's also 21 years old so it's not like he's super young and needs the development. I'm not seeing any reason he would stay another 2 years. _________________ “This goes far beyond paychecks”
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 3:40 pm Post subject:
tox wrote:
defense wrote:
Runway8 wrote:
noahp45 wrote:
I'm liking the idea of a
Ball
Waiters or Seth Curry
George
Randle
Big boy Moz
Until you realize Ball is just like any other rookie we've had... meaning it will take time. While PG13 is an inefficient scorer, and a passive Kobe. 22 pts and he's had his own team for awhile, so nothing will change on the scoring front. 22 is lightweight for a "superstar" who might not make the all-star in the West either.
My comment is based on assuming that you've dealt Ingram and D'Lo for George? Terrible idea, hope this isn't what Magic and Pelinka are thinking.
You really feel like George is inefficient?
.448
.383
.914
5 free throws a game
57.4% TS% isn't bad at all, although in 2017 it's not great. Solidly above average. And it's not like his volume is that high.
Add in 3.3 assists per 36 to 3.0 turnovers and.... eh?
I feel like there's a big disparity in terms of how PG is perceived and how he actually plays, because he's so damn streaky and his hot streaks stick with you.
I don't understand how the Pacers work offensively, but I think he's doing great work considering just how much Iso volume shot creation he has to deal with. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 3:41 pm Post subject:
KeepItRealOrElse wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkuCO7UzWqo How often is Fultz this lazy of a defender? Every freshman has these moments, but.... Fultz looks horrible on those plays, and I'm leaning toward it looking like it's a real tendency --- he's a very casual player overall..more so than DLo.
Honestly, always thought he just played defense in spurts because he knew he had to carry the offense. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
