I'm still not sure what to make us Fultz vs. Ball in terms of their impact on their respective programs. Washington is 9-18. That's really (REALLY) bad. When you have the best player on the court every single night in a 5-on-5 contest, you should at least be a .500 team, right? Meanwhile, Ball took over a mediocre UCLA squad (15-17 last season) and they're 25-3. I don't want to sound like Morgan or Kruk making antiquated analysis, but there has to be something there.
I watched Fultz against Arizona a couple of weeks ago, and he was fine. He checks the boxes, but he's not Westbrook. What makes Westbrook elite is his manic competitiveness. Westbrook wants to kick your ass every night; he plays harder than his competition. I didn't see that from Fultz. His effort was fine, but he wasn't an ass-kicker. I'd love to see him with a real supporting cast though because the tools are there.
I've seen Ball twice (Kentucky, Arizona) and I was super impressed with his feel for the game. I think he's a much more instinctive player than Fultz, but how does a guy as talented as Ball only attempt 3 free throws a game? That's nuts. Of course, his jumper is funky as hell. But he made contested, deep threes so I'm not overly concerned about it. My only question on Ball is if he can get into the paint.
As an aside, I wouldn't touch Dennis Smith. I watched him against Louisville and he didn't look like a draftable player. Just a complete non-factor. I got a 2nd look at him against Miami the other weekend and while he put up a productive stat line, I hated his game. Played with a bad pace, no sense of urgency in the final minutes with his team down in a close game, and not much defensive effort. He screams Monta Ellis to me.
I wouldn't have any qualms with Fultz, Ball or Jackson if they end up keeping their pick. But I see this as essentially a three player draft the way last year was viewed as a two player draft. So hopefully the ping pong balls bounce their way.