His contested threes are low because if it’s going to be contested he just glides past the defender to the rim like a swan.
Markelle Fultz, Year Three: He's back! Big....?
- Thread starter PedroKsBambino
- Start date
Right. BUT if you can hit contested -well thats on the player not on the coach. But (again) #TatumStud
LOL, you are too much. You cry like a newborn any time anyone levels even the slightest criticsm of 76er or suggests Ben Simmons might not be a first-ballot hall of famer (haven't you promised that "you're done" with this and the other thread about three times now?), and then you bring this nonsense. Tatum has shot the three much better than anyone expected, and at a higher volume. Most of those threes have not been "wide open," rather they are mostly of the spot up range that NBA.com counts among the 4-6 feet from defender grouping ("open"), but in reality feature an NBA wing jumping at him with a hand in his face.
If the only thing that matters are "contested" threes, or those in the 0-2 or 2-4 feet range, then there's not a single rookie in the league who's made more than one. The 0-2 foot rangers (very tight) are rare shots, and ill-advised in almost every circumstance. And the 2-4 footers are great if you're Steph Curry, who has I think five on the year.
This is a bizarre post. Simmons is a PG not a wing, so you’re taking the rest of that lot and saying, meh, good w Tatum I’ll take the shot putting PG?
SSS but there’s issues swirling around Fultz that are nowhere to be found w Tatum. And the price tag was VERY steep to draft him.
The NBA draft was in June. Redick was not on the team. Kormaz signed after the draft as well.
And if you wouldn't draft Tatum because you have Stauskas and Anderson, well....okay.
I wouldn't draft Tatum because I don't think he's as good as Fultz and isn't as good a fit
I don't see why that has changed because Tatum has shot well for two weeks and Fultz is hurt. Tatum has been better defensively than I expected. I still think, for now, he's going to be a very good player. Fultz has a chance to be a star and fits well with the team.
The people saying Fultz can't shoot are pathetic btw, he's injured.
I appreciate Anderson and Sauce are not reasons to make any decisions. Korkmaz was already verbally agreed by the draft. TLC needs time. Covington is a superb 3&D wing that fits perfectly. Simmons has been guarding 1-4 in the game.
The Sixers need a PG who can shoot a whole lot more than they need another wing. Especially as I expected him to be 3& not much D.
Tatum is better than I thought, Fultz is unchanged. You guys want to hot take yourself into whatever go for it.
I don't see why that has changed because Tatum has shot well for two weeks and Fultz is hurt. Tatum has been better defensively than I expected. I still think, for now, he's going to be a very good player. Fultz has a chance to be a star and fits well with the team.
The people saying Fultz can't shoot are pathetic btw, he's injured.
I appreciate Anderson and Sauce are not reasons to make any decisions. Korkmaz was already verbally agreed by the draft. TLC needs time. Covington is a superb 3&D wing that fits perfectly. Simmons has been guarding 1-4 in the game.
The Sixers need a PG who can shoot a whole lot more than they need another wing. Especially as I expected him to be 3& not much D.
Tatum is better than I thought, Fultz is unchanged. You guys want to hot take yourself into whatever go for it.
No Covington, TLC Kormaz Saric and Simmons are blocking Tatum the sixers NEED a PG and don't NEED a wing.
Setting aside my utter stupidity for a minute, there is a school of thought that says you cannot have enough wings in today's NBA. Simmons isn't really blocking Tatum given that the former is, in fact, a PG and there is a world in which both of them can easily coexist/thrive on the floor together.
That said, we are in SSS territory when evaluating the draft so its not worth it. You like Fultz and think the Sixers were smart in trading for and drafting him. I don't disagree with this view, however the red flags that surrounded Fultz leading up to and post the draft are still there.
We may look back at some of the takes around his injury as the hottest ever as Fultz tears up the league and leads Philadelphia to contention. However we are a long way from that time. Right now Fultz, as a potential star NBA player, is a bigger question mark versus some of his draft class peers. That is an undeniable fact, if only because of his unfortunate injury.
That said, we are in SSS territory when evaluating the draft so its not worth it. You like Fultz and think the Sixers were smart in trading for and drafting him. I don't disagree with this view, however the red flags that surrounded Fultz leading up to and post the draft are still there.
We may look back at some of the takes around his injury as the hottest ever as Fultz tears up the league and leads Philadelphia to contention. However we are a long way from that time. Right now Fultz, as a potential star NBA player, is a bigger question mark versus some of his draft class peers. That is an undeniable fact, if only because of his unfortunate injury.
I'm sorry I thought we as a board tried to be better. Carry on
Hit's hit 1/11 on contested threes and 68% on open. It's great he can hit an open shot, though I expect it to regress. My point is purely he's been hot on the easy shots. Catch and shoot open 3s.
Ok Needler, Remind me where I said this about Simmons?
He's shot well, better than expected. He's better than I expected. Yeah so? I have to declare him better than Fultz
Look at all the stats work you guys are putting in. By the way. Amazing. He has taken 1/3 of his 3 point shots as contested and missed 10 of them. He's showing range, stroke and honestly the best thing is his defense (vs expectations). The higher volume than expected has been due to injury. He's earned them, but not like there is a choice.
I don't see him as a superstar, a very solid player on a good team.
I'm sorry if that gets your panties all knotted up. You guys should be fucking happy with how it played out, why are you so angry?? lol
Ok have you watched much of the sixers. He plays point guard offensively mainly, but defends wings.
Fultz is hurt, shot putting is a ridiculous. Did you watch him at Washington like at all? Or in summer league. He can shoot just fine. He's excellent pulling up too, which is exactly what the sixers need. He can run a pnr very nicely and shoot if they sag. No one else running the pnr for the sixers brings that.
The sixers have a ton of young wings. None as good as Tatum, other than Covington, sure.
These issues swirling around Fultz are what? The competition stuff? Oh right like all the takes on Simmons last year? OR the injury, which isn't structural?
But please continue your circle jerk because I answered a question in a way you guys don't like.
I frickin complemented Tatum, I always liked him. I think his shooting numbers aren't quite as good, or sustainable, as they appear. Sorry. Were you thinking 50% from 3 is sustainable?
As for leaving the thread I was bored. And you were all talking shit as usual.
The hot takes in the NBA threads are such nonsense.
What are his these red flags (plural)?
Are they the same (losing, doesn't love the game) ones that had people saying the sixers should take ingram over simmons? Something else? Ainge didn't like him? Look if I was in the Celtics position maybe I do the same. The sixers really need a Guard to build with. I would still have taken Ball over Tatum for the Sixers too.
Maybe you don't make the trade if you know Ainge is taking Tatum 1 happily and you then get Ball or Fultz for free (which is probably true).
His injury is short term and non structural. IF he broke his shot when healthy, ok fine, but that take is in itself red hot.
My assessment of Fultz is unchanged. Why would it be? He showed BETTER defense than expected, BETTER passing than expected and could get into the paint freely even with no shot.
I just don't know why anyone would change their opinion on the info we have so far on him.
There have been persistent questions about Fultz drive and desire - I think you know this because it was covered in last year's draft thread IIRC. His injury has nothing to do with this, of course - but its preventing him starting the season strong and silencing his critics.
For the record, I don't have a view on Fultz competitiveness and Washington's record last season is somewhat irrelevant to me. That said, others, including scouts, cited those things as concerns - like they did for every other player drafted last year (and they will for every player drafted going forward too).
I get that you like him and expect that he will be a very good player - you may well be correct. However its entirely natural to have questions about any rookie and especially a lottery pick. Like it or not, Fultz and Tatum (and Ball and Jackson and Fox) will be compared and contrasted with one another for the rest of their careers. And if the guys selected further down are doing better than higher picks at any given time, you should expect people to point that out. Its what NBA (and sports) fans do.
Fultz gets an incomplete so far. It's crazy to draw any conclusions on him at this point. He hasn't really affirmed anything, positively or negatively.
Tatum has answered some questions, which is why some Celtics fans are spiking the football at the moment. Gets the offense, check. Can shoot, check. Rumors about maybe suboptimal athleticism, bullshit. He's not Russell Westbrook, but he gets to the rim and otherwise creates separation quite nicely. And his defense and rebounding is way better than I expected. Tatum's stock has risen, SSS be damned.
Personally, I still think that Fultz has the higher likelihood of becoming a top-5 NBA player. But with the ridiculous floor that Tatum has already shown, he would be my pick in the redraft today even without the sweetener pick.
Tatum has answered some questions, which is why some Celtics fans are spiking the football at the moment. Gets the offense, check. Can shoot, check. Rumors about maybe suboptimal athleticism, bullshit. He's not Russell Westbrook, but he gets to the rim and otherwise creates separation quite nicely. And his defense and rebounding is way better than I expected. Tatum's stock has risen, SSS be damned.
Personally, I still think that Fultz has the higher likelihood of becoming a top-5 NBA player. But with the ridiculous floor that Tatum has already shown, he would be my pick in the redraft today even without the sweetener pick.
Why is nobody mentioning the cost to acquire Fultz? They gave up what is likely to be a top 5 pick to get him. Even if they are equal players throughout their career that is an insane cost.
Thinking Fultz ceiling is higher than Tatums is crazy. That was crazy pre draft and it’s crazier now.
Thinking Fultz ceiling is higher than Tatums is crazy. That was crazy pre draft and it’s crazier now.
Tatum is going to be a special player. What he’s doing at 19 years-old with a boy’s body is quite impressive. His skill set plus an adult body is going to be something to see. And he doesn’t rely on his athleticism either so he’ll age well.
I wouldn’t touch Tatum for Fultz with a 10 foot pole. If Philly came calling and offered up the OTHER valuable pick they have (likely LA 2018), I still don’t do it.
Fultz should ultimately have a good career but there’s no way I’m taking his career over Tatum’s.
I wouldn’t touch Tatum for Fultz with a 10 foot pole. If Philly came calling and offered up the OTHER valuable pick they have (likely LA 2018), I still don’t do it.
Fultz should ultimately have a good career but there’s no way I’m taking his career over Tatum’s.
London, can you imagine the angst the SoSH C's fans would be having right now if Fultz was a Celtic? Hasn't shot an outside shot this season, can't lift his right arm above his shoulder, yet he was playing, and in his rehab phase is working on a left handed jumper. Seriously, what you're reading is coming from their surprise that you are not suicidal as they/we surely would be.
Gonna stay out of Fultz v. Tatum, but I do think that "SSS" gets thrown around a lot improperly (not you, jimbo).
If you're talking about the outcome of a fairly random process, like shooting, then SSS definitely matters. A really crappy player could randomly hit a lot of 3s in a row, and it happens all the time.
On the other hand, a lot of the defensive plays Tatum has made aren't random. You can put a sub-par athlete in those situations all you want, and he simply won't be able to block the shot of an NBA player once or twice, let alone 10 times in 11 games. Same goes for creating separation on drives etc.
I'd still be almost as bullish on Tatum if he were shooting 25% from 3, because he's done so many things that you just can't do if you're not a good athlete with good awareness on the offensive and defensive ends.
I'm going to stay away from the potential negatives as those have been beaten to death, but in what I've watched, he has absolutely affirmed positives. First, he's shown he can clearly get wherever he wants on the court. FInishing is probably impacted by his injury so I'd agree on the incomplete on that but his ability to get to the rim was pretty amazing considering defenses were playing way off him (and Simmons goes into this category too).
Defensively, I thought he was better than IT and Kyrie on the Cavs. He wasn't always in the right place but he was (generally) fighting over screens and he was long enough that he was pretty disruptive in the passing lanes.
So yes, I think Fultz has shown some positive qualities even in his limited court time.
Not to turn this in to the Tatum thread but the most impressive thing about him - to me - is that he doesn't seem to miss rotations. Horford has mentioned this on several occasions. It's pretty amazing for a 19 year old playing 30-ish minutes per game.
Agreed. Last year if you focused on Jaylen Brown for any significant period you would see multiple plays where he was in the wrong spot on defense, conspicuously so. That has rarely happened with Tatum this year. The guy has a great basketball sense.
(In which every thread turns into a Celtics fan Tatum circle jerk).
But people are worried about Fultz way too much. He's injured. Let's wait and see what happens.
(In which every thread turns into a Celtics fan Tatum circle jerk).
But people are worried about Fultz way too much. He's injured. Let's wait and see what happens.
That's fair. I was more referring to his impressive summer league, before he sat out, which is not very meaningful. But yes, his ability to walk around NBA defenders like they're turnstiles was apparent. And if he can do that, play adequate defense, and convert contested shots at an elite rate, then his ceiling is obviously very high. If this were the stock market, it would be a good time to buy Fultz stock.
I have no opinion on Fultz until I get a ruling from DRS. If the medical prognosis is good, then he's still roughly just as good a prospect as Tatum in my mind. The Tatum athleticism fears were overblown - he isn't fast-twitch, but he has an above-average combination of length and leaping ability; everything else as good or better than advertised. Very rare for a rookie to do what he's done on a winning team.
Stop playing the martyr. Your basketball takes are great. Your wounded pride when someone says something about the Sixers is annoying.
Of fucking course a Celtics board is going to discuss the player everyone had them taking at #1 that was then traded to a division rival that then has the agent and team saying different things about his injury. Thinking they wouldn't is asinine.
But carry on.
I agree this is the key point. I think it's fine to argue over whether Tatum or Fultz is better, but arguing that Tatum plus very likely another lottery pick (not sure I agree with southshore it's "likely" to be top 5 but there's a very real chance it will be) is equal to or lesser value than Fultz seems very dubious even with the SSS caveats everyone has discussed. The very fact we are even having this debate shows that Philly probably overvalued Fultz - they treated him as the clear, no-doubt-about-it number 1 pick most prognosticators and fans thought/assumed he was but now it seems more like he was just one of three players in the top tier, all of whom appear to be roughly equal even if Fultz ends up slightly better than Tatum when all is said and done.
So yeah Fultz may end up being better than Tatum, but better enough to be worth another lottery pick (which of course Philly could have traded for other pieces if they didn't want to use it)? It's early, but seems unlikely at this point.
(Edited to remove my second point which Needler already covered above.)
Thanks, I figured it was something along those lines; I was looking for similar stats for Brown a few days ago and couldn’t find anything publicly available and the ones on NBA.com don’t pass the smell test (e.g they have 3 of Tatum’s 3PAs on the season being contested total).
I was thinking about this last night
I think in answer to would I do the trade today I'd say no. While Fultz value is, to me barely changed, Tatum is up. So there are now three guys I'm happy to get at 3 so no need to give up an extra pick to land a guy. I still believe in Fultz fit and talent but it's a bad move to give up a valuable pick when the extra value is lower.
I say this as I think ball remains a good pick, perhaps better for a sixers or Celtics than a Lakers team. As he would play off ball and lead second units, which is his better role as I've always said.
I love fultz, but it's hard to argue he's worth Tatum and a high first. No trade knowing what we know and Tatum goes 1, and Philly gets ball or fultz at 3.
Edit
Also I have been reading some 2018 draft stuff and it repeats a point I made. There are almost no elite point guard prospects, but a lot of wings and shooting guard types. I do think this matters, the sixers wanted a lead guard to build with the core. Waiting two years comes with a cost.
I don't know too who the sixers are targeting with the max space they are saving for this off-season. They have worked hard to keep it, maybe they have their eye on a wing too?
I think in answer to would I do the trade today I'd say no. While Fultz value is, to me barely changed, Tatum is up. So there are now three guys I'm happy to get at 3 so no need to give up an extra pick to land a guy. I still believe in Fultz fit and talent but it's a bad move to give up a valuable pick when the extra value is lower.
I say this as I think ball remains a good pick, perhaps better for a sixers or Celtics than a Lakers team. As he would play off ball and lead second units, which is his better role as I've always said.
I love fultz, but it's hard to argue he's worth Tatum and a high first. No trade knowing what we know and Tatum goes 1, and Philly gets ball or fultz at 3.
Edit
Also I have been reading some 2018 draft stuff and it repeats a point I made. There are almost no elite point guard prospects, but a lot of wings and shooting guard types. I do think this matters, the sixers wanted a lead guard to build with the core. Waiting two years comes with a cost.
I don't know too who the sixers are targeting with the max space they are saving for this off-season. They have worked hard to keep it, maybe they have their eye on a wing too?
Last edited:
It's an interesting question whether the Sixers should have taken Ball. I think that if he didn't have issues around his shot, the answer would have been yes.
I don't see the sixers pressing need for a PG when they are set on playing Simmons there. At least not a pass first one. In that regard, Fultz is a good fit: a 1st or 2nd scoring option with the ability to bring the ball up court and play PG when Simmons is on the bench. It's not like the Sixers are lacking in front court players either with Embiid, Simmons*, Saric, Holmes, and Covington. I don't think Ball would work well on the Sixers because you are taking the ball out of either his or Simmons hand and nerfing their play.
I'll be curious what happens when Paul returns to the Rockets for this very reason. Granted Paul has considerable value outside of his court vision where Ball doesn't.
As in because he's shooting badly for 10 games or his form?
If you are suggesting ball is a better prospect than fultz because fultz got an injury I think you are crazy.
Fultz is an off the dribble shooter, a great PNR ball handler and flashes catch and shoot ability. He works great with Simmons, and he works great to lead the offense when he sits.
Ball was great at UCLA in an off ball role, he cuts exceptionally well and half his finishes at the rim were assisted (Vs 20% for fultz and Smith Jr). Ball got to the rim cutting, fultz gets to the rim driving. Ball is imo clearly better as a secondary handler. He's in the wrong role, and predictably so.
The overlap is in transition.
Ball was my favorite prospect in the draft, but I'm not sure it would make sense for the Sixers or Celtics to take him first because of the risk that even if he turned into a star, he'd just leave to go to the Lakers as soon as he could. Restricted free agency and Bird rights make it harder for guys to leave the team that drafted them, but not impossible. I don't know how high that risk was, but it seemed to be high enough that I'd have taken Fultz.
In retrospect if I was any of those top three GMs I would instead figure out a way to trade my pick for Kyrie.
Well maybe not if I were Magic Johnson because then Irving would just walk when I signed LeBron.
It seems to have worked out great for the Celtics but I would have taken Fultz largely because he seemed to have the Irving-esque inside/outside scoring.
But in 1980 I really really wanted the Celtics to take Darrell Griffith with the top pick and instead they traded to three and picked the not flashy tall but not that tall guy who actually was a much better free throw shooter than Griffith (and Carroll, not that anybody noticed that stat). Ca plus ca change and all that shit.
Well maybe not if I were Magic Johnson because then Irving would just walk when I signed LeBron.
It seems to have worked out great for the Celtics but I would have taken Fultz largely because he seemed to have the Irving-esque inside/outside scoring.
But in 1980 I really really wanted the Celtics to take Darrell Griffith with the top pick and instead they traded to three and picked the not flashy tall but not that tall guy who actually was a much better free throw shooter than Griffith (and Carroll, not that anybody noticed that stat). Ca plus ca change and all that shit.
Is there a single example yet of a team not holding onto a star in RFA? Can't think of any.
Not that I'm aware of, but we also don't have much (any?) history of players like Ball who had such open preferences about only wanting to go one team, refusing to work out for the team picking first, and then subsequently getting drafted by a different team. I don't think history of the current system is much use really.
Well, we do know that RFA aside, NBA players simply don't turn down $100M+ contracts to take one year offers for $8-10M, particularly when it's their first big deal. I get the other factors with Lonzo, but I don't think he or his family have anywhere near enough money to do that.
That said, I put down $5K post-draft on a bet that Lonzo's 2nd NBA contract would be less than $10M AAV, so I clearly think this is all likely to be academic, and I was thrilled the Lakers took him.
EDIT: we do have the one data point of Kobe Bryant, who was open about refusing to play for (I think) Charlotte, but said years later that he absolutely would have played for whomever drafted him. These declarations are usually pretty obvious bluffs that aren't hard to call.
Lonzo is very likely to be much less under his father's thumb in a few years, of course. After a few years of living as a free man, I suspect that open preference would be revealed to be much less his than his father's.
He'd have to be a serious bust. 10m AAV aint what it used to be and it will be even less in 2021.
Except Charlotte didn't call? To to the extent these declarations happen, they're going to prevent teams from drafting guys in the first place.
You'd need a clear #1 pick to really test this. Anyone else, and teams are probably just going to steer clear of the headache if there's anyone else cromulent they can take in the same spot.
Curious if the first month of play has changed your thinking on the rankings of the players from this class, or if the Fultz injury has made it too hard to judge the top three yet.
Thomas, of course, refused to work out for Dallas so he could get to Detroit. But that was long before the days of RFA
ED: And Aguirre was indeed CROMULENT
ed2: and the Pistons ended up with both of them and won so there's that too
Honestly I think they would have been better off trading for Irving. Honestly Irving is what you’re hoping Fultz becomes, and they could have had Kyrie for #3, Covington, and Saric. And then they would have had three more lottery picks to add to the core of Embiid, Irving, and Simmons. That squad would have dominated the NBA until it got too expensive to maintain.
Oh absolutely. I'd take Tatum first overall right now. Tatum's pro career is now almost as big as his college career. There's no way our priors should be that strong with these guys yet. Fultz hasn't fallen that much for me, but Tatum has skyrocketed.
I also don't think the Sixers could have gotten Kyrie without moving Covington and/or Saric. A big part of the allure for Cleveland was the "win now/win later" part of this.
When did he ask for the trade? Are you sure it wasn't before the draft? I thought he was pissed about a pre-draft Phoenix trade proposal.
Ed: I guess it doesn't matter because you're right, Cleveland wasn't shopping him until later.