BOOKER & FULTZ

[ColdPickleNachos]

He definitely liked Zizic. And I think Zubac too.

 

[slinslin]

He definitely liked Zizic. And I think Zubac too.

And Jokic and Capela and Schroeder and and and..

I don't like unproductive players that is all. Dragan Bender simply did not look good in euro-league. He showed the exact same problems against euro league competition as he did in his rookie season.

Why would I bother to respond to the ridiculous standard internet argument where someone who loses an argument resorts telling someone to "watch games". Something which can't be proven one way or another. It's pathetic. I have been watching Suns games sind 1995, I paid 600 Euros a year in the early 2000s to get VHS recordings of the games shipped. I don't owe any of you an explanation to that.

And I think my record on draft prospects is pretty damn good.

 

[pokerface]

They tell you to watch games because you can't get everything from a stat line... which you obviously arnt.

 

[GatorAZ]

http://www.brightsideofthesun.com/2...e-markelle-fultz-could-be-nbas-next-superstar

 

[sunsfan88]

Also Ulis would be a backup, meaning he'd probably leave when his deal is up.

Suns will have Ulis RFA rights and would just match any offers he gets. So he's likely to remain in Phoenix for another 8 years or so unless the Suns choose to trade him.

 

[Errntknght]

Suns will have Ulis RFA rights and would just match any offers he gets. So he's likely to remain in Phoenix for another 8 years or so unless the Suns choose to trade him.

If he gets treated shabbily here and wants to leave, he'll manage. It's possible he'll be like IT and have his heart set on being 'the man' but I don't see him wanting to be the prime offensive threat, the way Isaiah does. No doubt he's seeing the punishment the Celts opponents are inflicting on IT at every opportunity - whoever he's guarding is setting picks left and right. In fact, the Celts are now having him switch off when his man goes to set a screen - they're 'hiding' him! (I'm sure you all remember how Nash was targeted, especially in the playoffs.)

I think as long as the team is cohesive and Ulis has an important role he'll be happy here but I also think it would help if we had a better offensive scheme...

 

[Sunburn]

http://www.brightsideofthesun.com/2...e-markelle-fultz-could-be-nbas-next-superstar

I like Fultz, but how many NBA All-Star teams did LaDrell Whitehead and Ed Gray make?

 

[Sunburn]

Ball is way better in transition. I know I'm in the minority but gimme Ball all day over Fultz. Even with his crazy father. All I see when I watch Fultz is a player with a good jump shot that loves his spin move. He doesn't really have an effect on the game. Ball makes everyone else better. He'd make Booker even better. How scary is that?

 

[slinslin]

Ball is way better in transition. I know I'm in the minority but gimme Ball all day over Fultz. Even with his crazy father. All I see when I watch Fultz is a player with a good jump shot that loves his spin move. He doesn't really have an effect on the game. Ball makes everyone else better. He'd make Booker even better. How scary is that?

lol, yeah Fultz has no effect on the game. Ridiculous.

Fultz is just as good as Lonzo in transition and much better in the pick and roll. Fultz has a higher assist rate than Lonzo.

And you are kidding yourself if you think Lonzo is magically making Booker better but Fultz is not.
Booker likes the ball in his hands, Fultz will draw more attention to himself and therefore making it easier for Booker too.

Lillard and McCollum both lean way more score first than Fultz and Booker and they do just fine together.

How much better is Rubio making his teammates?

 

[slinslin]

If he gets treated shabbily here and wants to leave, he'll manage. It's possible he'll be like IT and have his heart set on being 'the man' but I don't see him wanting to be the prime offensive threat, the way Isaiah does. No doubt he's seeing the punishment the Celts opponents are inflicting on IT at every opportunity - whoever he's guarding is setting picks left and right. In fact, the Celts are now having him switch off when his man goes to set a screen - they're 'hiding' him! (I'm sure you all remember how Nash was targeted, especially in the playoffs.)

I think as long as the team is cohesive and Ulis has an important role he'll be happy here but I also think it would help if we had a better offensive scheme...

When was IT like that?

He signed with a team that had Bledsoe and Dragic and did so for a bargain amount.

 

[Russ Smith]

lol, yeah Fultz has no effect on the game. Ridiculous.

Fultz is just as good as Lonzo in transition and much better in the pick and roll. Fultz has a higher assist rate than Lonzo.

And you are kidding yourself if you think Lonzo is magically making Booker better but Fultz is not.
Booker likes the ball in his hands, Fultz will draw more attention to himself and therefore making it easier for Booker too.

Lillard and McCollum both lean way more score first than Fultz and Booker and they do just fine together.

How much better is Rubio making his teammates?

It's a dumb question because the assumption is Ball is Rubio and he's clearly a MUCH better shooter than Rubio. It's like saying Fultz is Zach Lavine they were both late bloomers in HS, both came into college being hyped as PG's and both went pro after 1 year.

To the question of Rubio and making players better, in 2015 in November the Twolves beat Sacramento in a game that was significant because they had lost their prior 12 games, without Rubio playing. That was the first time in 13 games where they didn't have Rubio and won.

This is from June 2016 so I don't know the data since then but this is a tweet from Britt Robson who writes for the Minnesota Post.

Let's idiot-proof this "doesn't help team win" meme.
Rubio 5 year career w/Wolves, W-L record
114-164 when he plays
28-88 when he doesn't

So that's a .410 win % with Rubio and a .241 win % without Rubio. call me a stat geek but I think Rubio is making his teammates better?

The guy on the Wolves who you should be criticizing is Zach Lavine, who looks great in highlights and dunk contests but has shown that at least so far he puts up empty stats and doesn't help his team win. I looked, last year the Wolves were 15-20 without him and that's only because they were playing all their young guys down the stretch, at one point they were 12-7 without Zach last year and 16-31 with him.

So if we're going to do the nonsensical comparisons as if they're facts shtick again, you compare Lonzo to Rubio and I'll compare Fultz to Lavine.

 

[slinslin]

It's a dumb question because the assumption is Ball is Rubio and he's clearly a MUCH better shooter than Rubio. It's like saying Fultz is Zach Lavine they were both late bloomers in HS, both came into college being hyped as PG's and both went pro after 1 year.

To the question of Rubio and making players better, in 2015 in November the Twolves beat Sacramento in a game that was significant because they had lost their prior 12 games, without Rubio playing. That was the first time in 13 games where they didn't have Rubio and won.

This is from June 2016 so I don't know the data since then but this is a tweet from Britt Robson who writes for the Minnesota Post.

Let's idiot-proof this "doesn't help team win" meme.
Rubio 5 year career w/Wolves, W-L record
114-164 when he plays
28-88 when he doesn't

So that's a .410 win % with Rubio and a .241 win % without Rubio. call me a stat geek but I think Rubio is making his teammates better?

The guy on the Wolves who you should be criticizing is Zach Lavine, who looks great in highlights and dunk contests but has shown that at least so far he puts up empty stats and doesn't help his team win. I looked, last year the Wolves were 15-20 without him and that's only because they were playing all their young guys down the stretch, at one point they were 12-7 without Zach last year and 16-31 with him.

So if we're going to do the nonsensical comparisons as if they're facts shtick again, you compare Lonzo to Rubio and I'll compare Fultz to Lavine.

Eric Bledsoe would have a similiar if not more dramatic W-L difference between playing for the Suns and not playing.

Yet everyone agrees he is not making players better.

Breaking news: Teams are worse when their starting PG is injured.

Lonzo would make the Suns better in transition than what they are right now. But Fultz would be capable of that as well.

In the halfcourt Lonzo will put a lot more pressure on Booker to create because Lonzo is not very good in the half court settings or pick and roll.
To a point you could argue that that would make them a good pairing since Booker is one of the best players in the league in isolation and can run the pick and roll also.

But then again, I'd rather go with two pretty complete offensive players in Fultz and Booker than with a specialist and Booker.

 

[Russ Smith]

Eric Bledsoe would have a similiar if not more dramatic W-L difference between playing for the Suns and not playing.

Yet everyone agrees he is not making players better.

Breaking news: Teams are worse when their starting PG is injured.

Breaking news if a team is better with a player than without that player, that player is making his teammates better. It's the very definition of it.

If you take Rubio off Minnnesota they're not as good. Now if you replaced him with Steph Curry they'd probably be better, but he IS in fact making that team better than if he's not there.

 

[slinslin]

No, when people say "making your team better" they mean it as making them better than what they really are.
They mean that when you replace a player that makes everyone else better that the efficiency of those around him drop.

The Timberwolves were one of the biggest underachievers of this season and have been under Rubio for years when they had Love too.

 

[Hoop Head]

No, when people say "making your team better" they mean it as making them better than what they really are.
They mean that when you replace a player that makes everyone else better that the efficiency of those around him drop.

In this last NCAA season, it's fairly obvious that Ball made his team better than Fultz did considering what each accomplished in addition to looking at what each did during the 2015-16 season. The Bruins were 15-17 before Ball and 31-5 with him. The Huskies were 19-15 the year before Fultz and 9-22 with him, they didn't even make it to the NIT like they did last year. In Pac 12 play the Bruins went 6-12 to 15-3 while the Huskies went 9-9 to 2-16. Washington were slightly better in 2015-16 than the Bruins and much worse in 2016-17.

If you take Fultz off of the Huskies do they make the tournament? I doubt it but they won half as many games with him than without. It's really hard to argue that a player makes his teammates better when the team he is on regressed so much.

Now if you take Ball off of the Bruins, do they make it to the Sweet 16? I'd say no. If he didn't get hurt could they have gotten farther? That's questionable, but he deserves credit for the season they had and the overall improvement. When Nash joined the Suns he won the MVP for helping us more than double our win total and leading us to the conference finals, it appears Ball did that for UCLA. No one will argue Nash didn't make the Suns better.

 

[Russ Smith]

No, when people say "making your team better" they mean it as making them better than what they really are.
They mean that when you replace a player that makes everyone else better that the efficiency of those around him drop.

The Timberwolves were one of the biggest underachievers of this season and have been under Rubio for years when they had Love too.

So the Wolves fall off a cliff without Rubio but their efficiency is not dropping?

Check.

 

[Russ Smith]

In this last NCAA season, it's fairly obvious that Ball made his team better than Fultz did considering what each accomplished in addition to looking at what each did during the 2015-16 season. The Bruins were 15-17 before Ball and 31-5 with him. The Huskies were 19-15 the year before Fultz and 9-22 with him, they didn't even make it to the NIT like they did last year. In Pac 12 play the Bruins went 6-12 to 15-3 while the Huskies went 9-9 to 2-16. Washington were slightly better in 2015-16 than the Bruins and much worse in 2016-17.

If you take Fultz off of the Huskies do they make the tournament? I doubt it but they won half as many games with him than without. It's really hard to argue that a player makes his teammates better when the team he is on regressed so much.

Now if you take Ball off of the Bruins, do they make it to the Sweet 16? I'd say no. If he didn't get hurt could they have gotten farther? That's questionable, but he deserves credit for the season they had and the overall improvement. When Nash joined the Suns he won the MVP for helping us more than double our win total and leading us to the conference finals, it appears Ball did that for UCLA. No one will argue Nash didn't make the Suns better.

To be fair UW lost a bunch of guys. They were 9-22 this year, 0-6 without Fultz so 9-16 with him. Of course 7 of those 9 wins were against mid majors. they were 2-17 in the conference, 0-6 without him, 2-11 with him. not a dramatic difference.

I should add I expect UCLA will fall off quite a bit without Lonzo but then they've lost 5 and might lose as many as 7 players so that's to be expected. With Lonzo it was obvious across the board UCLA was significantly worse when he wasn't in the game. UW's offense was clearly better with him than without him but the overall team was bad either way.

 

[slinslin]

In this last NCAA season, it's fairly obvious that Ball made his team better than Fultz did considering what each accomplished in addition to looking at what each did during the 2015-16 season. The Bruins were 15-17 before Ball and 31-5 with him. The Huskies were 19-15 the year before Fultz and 9-22 with him, they didn't even make it to the NIT like they did last year. In Pac 12 play the Bruins went 6-12 to 15-3 while the Huskies went 9-9 to 2-16. Washington were slightly better in 2015-16 than the Bruins and much worse in 2016-17.

If you take Fultz off of the Huskies do they make the tournament? I doubt it but they won half as many games with him than without. It's really hard to argue that a player makes his teammates better when the team he is on regressed so much.

Now if you take Ball off of the Bruins, do they make it to the Sweet 16? I'd say no. If he didn't get hurt could they have gotten farther? That's questionable, but he deserves credit for the season they had and the overall improvement. When Nash joined the Suns he won the MVP for helping us more than double our win total and leading us to the conference finals, it appears Ball did that for UCLA. No one will argue Nash didn't make the Suns better

here we go again with uninformed rubbish that has been debunked over and over and over again.

UCLA had one down year without a PG. They were good the year before and the year before and barely lost anyone transitioning to this year.

The Huskies last year had Marquese Chriss, Dejounte Murray and a very good senior player. That trio made up the vast majority of the Huskies production. This year the Huskies did not even have a junior player in the rotation.

It is ridiculous to have to repeat FACTS over and over again :

Washington rotation
David Crisp - unranked 2015, ESPN unranked, 3 star, 75 rating
Noah Dickerson - Rivals #81 2015, ESPN #52, 4 star
Mathisse Thybulle - Rivals #130 2015, ESPN unranked, 4 star
Malik Dime - unranked 2015, unranked on ESPN, unrated
Dominick Green - unranked 2015, unranked on ESPN, 72 rating
Carlos Johnson - unranked 2016, unranked on ESPN, 2 Star, 66 rating
Sam Timmins - unranked 2016, unranked on ESPN, unrated


UCLA rotation
Ike Anigbogu - Rivals #25 2016, ESPN #60, 4 Star 84 Grade
TJ Leaf - Rivals #16 2016, ESPN 13th, 5 Star, 94 Grade
Bryce Alford - unranked 2013, ESPN 3 Star, 75 Grade
Isaac Hamilton -Rivals #14, 2013 ESPN Ranked #32, 4 Star, 89 Grade
Aaron Holiday - Rivals #60 , 2015 ESPN Ranked #88, 82 Grade
Thomas Welsh - Rivals #41 , 2014 ESPN Ranked #36, 4 Star, 88 Grade

And second of all the main reason Washington was bad is because they were one of the worst defensive teams in all of college basketball. Something that can hardly be blamed on Markelle Fultz individually. They had an undersized roster without experience.

 

[Chaplin]

here we go again with uninformed rubbish that has been debunked over and over and over again.

UCLA had one down year without a PG. They were good the year before and the year before and barely lost anyone transitioning to this year.

The Huskies last year had Marquese Chriss, Dejounte Murray and a very good senior player. That trio made up the vast majority of the Huskies production. This year the Huskies did not even have a junior player in the rotation.

It is ridiculous to have to repeat FACTS over and over again :

Washington rotation
David Crisp - unranked 2015, ESPN unranked, 3 star, 75 rating
Noah Dickerson - Rivals #81 2015, ESPN #52, 4 star
Mathisse Thybulle - Rivals #130 2015, ESPN unranked, 4 star
Malik Dime - unranked 2015, unranked on ESPN, unrated
Dominick Green - unranked 2015, unranked on ESPN, 72 rating
Carlos Johnson - unranked 2016, unranked on ESPN, 2 Star, 66 rating
Sam Timmins - unranked 2016, unranked on ESPN, unrated


UCLA rotation
Ike Anigbogu - Rivals #25 2016, ESPN #60, 4 Star 84 Grade
TJ Leaf - Rivals #16 2016, ESPN 13th, 5 Star, 94 Grade
Bryce Alford - unranked 2013, ESPN 3 Star, 75 Grade
Isaac Hamilton -Rivals #14, 2013 ESPN Ranked #32, 4 Star, 89 Grade
Aaron Holiday - Rivals #60 , 2015 ESPN Ranked #88, 82 Grade
Thomas Welsh - Rivals #41 , 2014 ESPN Ranked #36, 4 Star, 88 Grade

And second of all the main reason Washington was bad is because they were one of the worst defensive teams in all of college basketball. Something that can hardly be blamed on Markelle Fultz individually. They had an undersized roster without experience.

Here we go again. There is NO need for that first sentence.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

Here, let this article settle this

https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/does-the-nba-care-that-markelle-fultzs-college-team-didnt-win

To get a better sense of where Fultz stands and sort the signal from the noise, I asked seven NBA front-office talent evaluators the following: Do you care that Markelle Fultz's team lost a lot of games this year? Would it give you pause in any way in regard to drafting him? Why or why not?

While none of the evaluators were negative, responses were mixed. Three said they didn't have any concerns. Zilch. The other four said they fell somewhere between concern and pause when weighing Washington's lack of success.

"It gives me a slight pause and is in the back of my mind," an NBA executive without a lottery pick said about Fultz. "But I wouldn't be too worried about it, because if he would've switched places with Ball [at UCLA] or [Kentucky's De'Aaron] Fox, he would have won a lot more."

That's inarguable. According to KenPom, Washington was the fifth-least experienced team in the nation this season. The cupboard was pretty bare, and the team also struggled with consistent effort and defensive discipline, ranking fifth among major teams in half-court defense. Expecting the 18-year-old Fultz to paper over all of those flaws is exceedingly optimistic.

Washington didn't struggle because Fultz failed to produce. His numbers don't lie. His effective field-goal percentage on shots off the catch was 56.7 percent; off the bounce, his eFG was 50.9 percent, third among all high-major players. Fultz creates shots for others, too, ranking No. 20 in the nation in assist rate despite his teammates shooting just 28.6 percent from beyond the arc in Pac-12 play and finishing with a collective 49.4 eFG for the season, good for No. 225 in the nation.

It's just being stubborn to continue to state Fultz didn't make his teammates better. His assist rate was very good and his team scored like 30 more points a game when he played then when he didn't.

Clearly some NBA execs don't know what to think about Fultz's winning percentage but it is no more a red flag than Ball's wonkey jump shot.

 

[Sunburn]

Here, let this article settle this

https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/does-the-nba-care-that-markelle-fultzs-college-team-didnt-win











It's just being stubborn to continue to state Fultz didn't make his teammates better. His assist rate was very good and his team scored like 30 more points a game when he played then when he didn't.

Clearly some NBA execs don't know what to think about Fultz's winning percentage but it is no more a red flag than Ball's wonkey jump shot.

Thank you for posting this. Good stuff. I retract my previous statement about Fultz.

 

[Mainstreet]

Here, let this article settle this

https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/does-the-nba-care-that-markelle-fultzs-college-team-didnt-win

It's just being stubborn to continue to state Fultz didn't make his teammates better. His assist rate was very good and his team scored like 30 more points a game when he played then when he didn't.

Clearly some NBA execs don't know what to think about Fultz's winning percentage but it is no more a red flag than Ball's wonkey jump shot.

Great article.

Now is his knee okay.

 

[Bodha]

Id be fine with Fultz

Be happy with Jackson


Ill fedex Mcdonough a box of soupy butt fudge if he takes Ball

 

[Sunburn]

Id be fine with Fultz

Be happy with Jackson


Ill fedex Mcdonough a box of soupy butt fudge if he takes Ball

Butt fudge is one thing, but soupy butt fudge is just wrong.

 

[Russ Smith]

It's just being stubborn to continue to state Fultz didn't make his teammates better. His assist rate was very good and his team scored like 30 more points a game when he played then when he didn't.

Clearly some NBA execs don't know what to think about Fultz's winning percentage but it is no more a red flag than Ball's wonkey jump shot.










[/QUOTE]


And if that were true it would in fact be stubborn to say he didn't make his teammates better, but it's not true. UW averaged 76 PPG this year and 66 without Fultz. In conference games with Fultz they averaged... 71 PPG. that's an average of 5 more PPG not 30. Counting OOC games in that doesn't make sense since they were well over 80PPG in OOC since they played a weak schedule.

He missed 6 games, all conference, they were 66 PPG without him, 71 with him. Note, I excluded one game because it went OT, they scored 67 in regulation in that one, with him.

They were a better offensive team with him than without him.