BOOKER & FULTZ

[Bodha]

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

Well he gets what he aks for. The onus (and anus) is on him to make the right decision.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

Sorry there is a lot of information out there. I read something a week ago about the points with and without and it was clearly wrong. You are correct they scored 10 higher a game with him.

That still doesn't change his assist rate, which was very good.

It doesn't change that he was #16 in assists in college basketball while passing to hot garbage as teammates. He averaged just 1.8 assists less than Ball.

Its just overstated to characterize him as someone who is basically a shoot first PG when he finished 16th in assists on a team where his teammates finished #225 in the nation in effective field goal percentage. On a good team who knows.

Now I am not saying he is a better passer than Ball.

What has really turned me back on to Ball (despite his crazy shot) is his 3-1 assist to turnover ratio. It just shows how elite his passing skills are.

Ball will never be the scorer that Fultz can be but will still be good. Fultz will never be the passer that Ball is but will still be good.

I will be ecstatic with either of these guys.

 

[slinslin]

You know what the really crazy statistic is ?

Ball turns the ball over on like 30% of his pick and roll plays when he passes. That is very bad.

Btw Kendall Marshall had a 3.5-1 assist to turnover ratio and averaged 9.8 apg..

Balls turnover rate is higher than Fultz. It is not surprising that his assist to turnover rate is good, he does not beat defenders of the dribble much.

It would be more interesting to see a comparison of assist to passing turnover. Assist to turnover is not very meaningful when you compare players where 1 player besides passing also creates off the dribble for himself a lot and the other does not.

 

[Russ Smith]

Sorry there is a lot of information out there. I read something a week ago about the points with and without and it was clearly wrong. You are correct they scored 10 higher a game with him.

That still doesn't change his assist rate, which was very good.

It doesn't change that he was #16 in assists in college basketball while passing to hot garbage as teammates. He averaged just 1.8 assists less than Ball.

Its just overstated to characterize him as someone who is basically a shoot first PG when he finished 16th in assists on a team where his teammates finished #225 in the nation in effective field goal percentage. On a good team who knows.

Now I am not saying he is a better passer than Ball.

What has really turned me back on to Ball (despite his crazy shot) is his 3-1 assist to turnover ratio. It just shows how elite his passing skills are.

Ball will never be the scorer that Fultz can be but will still be good. Fultz will never be the passer that Ball is but will still be good.

I will be ecstatic with either of these guys.

Agreed. I think Fultz is more of a 2 than a 1 but I think he can play 1 and the NBA is going that way with lots of scoring 1's so he fits in that way.

One of the things that "bothered" me with him this year was that he seemed to be too passive early in games, passing the ball too much when the team needed him to take over and score. Don MacLean loves him, favorite player in the draft, said he's the best offensive player in the college game since Carmelo Anthony. But when he worked the UW/UCLA game in Washington he wouldn't shut up about how passive Fultz was. He was VERY disappointed he said he's going to end up with a good stat line but the game was over before he started asserted himself.

I don't think he's a ball hog at all I think he doesn't have the "feel" for passing that Lonzo does but I don't think many do.

as that article said there's just not much precedent on Fultz, only 6 kids who had losing records none with fewer wins than UW had, none of them projected that high in the draft. Simmons won 19 games, the next year they won 10. My guess is UW could be even worse this year with the coaching change and mass roster losses.

I think he's a good player it's not clear to me how good because we have to see him on a better team to see how he fits in. I don't think he'll be a bust but it wouldn't surprise me if in 5 years people are saying maybe we should have paid more attention to that won/loss record in college.

 

[Russ Smith]

You know what the really crazy statistic is ?

Ball turns the ball over on like 30% of his pick and roll plays when he passes. That is very bad.

Btw Kendall Marshall had a 3.5-1 assist to turnover ratio and averaged 9.8 apg..

Balls turnover rate is higher than Fultz. It is not surprising that his assist to turnover rate is good, he does not beat defenders of the dribble much.

It would be more interesting to see a comparison of assist to passing turnover. Assist to turnover is not very meaningful when you compare players where 1 player besides passing also creates off the dribble for himself a lot and the other does not.

Link please?

 

[Chris_Sanders]

Passive is absolutely what concerns me as well. If the Suns end up with him, I can see him deferring to Booker quite a bit. Maybe that is a good thing.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

I didn't think Slin was correct so I tried to find his stats. On foxsports.com it lists the following under assists:

Fultz Turnover % is 13.5% and his assist percentage is 35.5%

Ball's Turnover % is 18.7% and his assist percentage is 31.1%

I don't understand these stats though so I need to do some more research. Ball has a lower turnovers per game and turnovers per 40

 

[SirStefan32]

Passive is absolutely what concerns me as well. If the Suns end up with him, I can see him deferring to Booker quite a bit. Maybe that is a good thing.

I am not quite sold on Ball yet, but I do agree with you on this point. Booker is, and always will be a ball-dominant guard. Having a PG who defers to him is NOT a bad thing, as long as that PG can actually run the offense, defend, and make open three-point shots. I am NOT equating Booker and Kobe, but the principle is the same- Fisher was not a great player, but he could run the offense when Kobe was tired or double-teamed, he could defend, and he could make open threes. That's what Booker needs. I am sure both Ball and Fultz will be better players than Fisher, so I am not equating them to Fisher either. I am just pointing out I would rather have a PG who defers to Booker than a PG who competes for touches and shots.

 

[GatorAZ]

Booker isn't ball dominant. He can definitely ISO when needed but can also run off screens and catch/shoot. He needs to watch film on Reggie Miller and Ray Allen and learn to move better without the ball.

Garnett and Perkins were great at setting screens for Allen so Len/Williams need to study them too.

 

[slinslin]

I didn't think Slin was correct so I tried to find his stats. On foxsports.com it lists the following under assists:

Fultz Turnover % is 13.5% and his assist percentage is 35.5%

Ball's Turnover % is 18.7% and his assist percentage is 31.1%

I don't understand these stats though so I need to do some more research. Ball has a lower turnovers per game and turnovers per 40

Balls turnover rate is higher because even when his raw total turnovers are lower he has much lower usage than Fultz.

 

[slinslin]

http://havindex.com/index.php/2017/04/11/lonzo-ball-is-overrated/

I would not drat Ball over Fox.

Just say no to a PG that is at best mediocre in the pick and roll, has not shown he can break down defenders off the dribble and cant really shoot off the dribble.

~72% of Balls 3s were assisted, vastly more than any other PG. ~50% of his few attempts at the rim were assisted highlighting that he just does not get to the rim or get penetration at all.

He is a great player in transition but in the halfcourt he is just not a good prospect.

Read the article on azcentral. Don MacLean former UCLA player and PAC12 analyst thinks Fultz is the best guard prospect he has seen in terms of how Fultz will translate to the NBA while he also draws the comparison between Ball and Kendall Marshall as floor leaders who look great in college but lack fundamental NBA skills.

 

[slinslin]

Link please?

I would have to find the article again, it was in some draft anaylsis article that broke down the PGs. If anyone has access to synergy stats you should be able to find it. Balls turnover rate in the pick and roll was ridiculous.

 

[leclerc]

Give me some Fultz.

 

[Russ Smith]

Balls turnover rate is higher because even when his raw total turnovers are lower he has much lower usage than Fultz.

that's absurd. What you're saying is if Lonzo had a higher usage rate he'd have more turnovers. He'd also have more assists and he'd score more. if he "used" more possessions all those numbers would go up not just his turnovers.

The counter is Fultz would have less assists if his usage rate wasn't so high. If he had the same usage rate as Lonzo his raw assist numbers would fall.

Again you're using stats that completely omit one of the things Lonzo Ball does best, give the ball up, advance it forward, to move the ball and make the team tougher to guard.

 

[slinslin]

that's absurd. What you're saying is if Lonzo had a higher usage rate he'd have more turnovers. He'd also have more assists and he'd score more. if he "used" more possessions all those numbers would go up not just his turnovers.

The counter is Fultz would have less assists if his usage rate wasn't so high. If he had the same usage rate as Lonzo his raw assist numbers would fall.

Again you're using stats that completely omit one of the things Lonzo Ball does best, give the ball up, advance it forward, to move the ball and make the team tougher to guard.

Lonzo's usage rate is lower because basically he is a much shittier scorer than the other PGs, who are passing the ball and scoring at a higher clip themselves.

If Ball was attacking the defense and driving to the rim 5-6 times a game instead of 2s and usually on backdoor cuts, his turnovers would go up. They are not because he so far has not shown much ability off the dribble at all to score or create. Most of his assists are coming in transition and the other huge part come from other players moving off the ball and Lonzo simply finding them with the right pass, which he does extremely well.

But you can't tell me Ball does not have major holes in his game in
1. pick and roll, screen and roll
2. shooting of the dribble, getting to the basket
3. breaking down players off the dribble

 

[Russ Smith]

http://havindex.com/index.php/2017/04/11/lonzo-ball-is-overrated/

I would not drat Ball over Fox.

Just say no to a PG that is at best mediocre in the pick and roll, has not shown he can break down defenders off the dribble and cant really shoot off the dribble.

~72% of Balls 3s were assisted, vastly more than any other PG. ~50% of his few attempts at the rim were assisted highlighting that he just does not get to the rim or get penetration at all.

He is a great player in transition but in the halfcourt he is just not a good prospect.

Read the article on azcentral. Don MacLean former UCLA player and PAC12 analyst thinks Fultz is the best guard prospect he has seen in terms of how Fultz will translate to the NBA while he also draws the comparison between Ball and Kendall Marshall as floor leaders who look great in college but lack fundamental NBA skills.

You really should just put in your signature "I have never seen Lonzo Ball play in a real game."

He gets by his man all the time, he just chooses to drive and kick instead of shooting. it's something UCLA fans discussed at length all year. As the season went on teams started playing him to pass. Cincy's coach even talked about it after UCLA beat them in the tournament, Lonzo had 9 assists in the 2nd half and when asked what happened Mick Cronin said some of the guys forgot the "rules on defending Lonzo Ball" and started helping on his drives which led to him creating wide open shots for teammates and UCLA pulled away and won easily. Cincy was among the best defensive teams in the country but he ate them up in the 2nd half by beating his man drawing help and then kicking.

Ball started that by hitting 2 quick 3's, the defender started to extend on him and then he started blowing by him and hitting teammates for 9 second half assists in a game that was largely played in the halfcourt.

It is true MacLean prefers Fultz to Ball, i've mentioned that several times. he's also the guy that during the UCLA blowout of UW at Washington said he was really disturbed by how passive Fultz was, the lack of competitive fight in him, and how he chose to not attack until after UCLA pulled away. He said in that game he considers Fultz to be the most skilled offensive player in college since Carmelo Anthony, but that his lack of impact in that game was startling.

 

[slinslin]

You really should just put in your signature "I have never seen Lonzo Ball play in a real game."

He gets by his man all the time, he just chooses to drive and kick instead of shooting. it's something UCLA fans discussed at length all year. As the season went on teams started playing him to pass. Cincy's coach even talked about it after UCLA beat them in the tournament, Lonzo had 9 assists in the 2nd half and when asked what happened Mick Cronin said some of the guys forgot the "rules on defending Lonzo Ball" and started helping on his drives which led to him creating wide open shots for teammates and UCLA pulled away and won easily. Cincy was among the best defensive teams in the country but he ate them up in the 2nd half by beating his man drawing help and then kicking.

Ball started that by hitting 2 quick 3's, the defender started to extend on him and then he started blowing by him and hitting teammates for 9 second half assists in a game that was largely played in the halfcourt.

It is true MacLean prefers Fultz to Ball, i've mentioned that several times. he's also the guy that during the UCLA blowout of UW at Washington said he was really disturbed by how passive Fultz was, the lack of competitive fight in him, and how he chose to not attack until after UCLA pulled away. He said in that game he considers Fultz to be the most skilled offensive player in college since Carmelo Anthony, but that his lack of impact in that game was startling.

Straight from Draftexpress

His biggest limiting factor at this stage is that he just doesn't show much ability to consistently get into the paint off the dribble, even at the college level. His first step isn't great, as his athleticism really begins to shine when he has the chance to build up steam in transition, and he doesn't have the strength needed to overcome that. - Source: http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Lonzo-Ball-7229/ ©DraftExpress

I bet they have never scouted Lonzo either.

 

[Russ Smith]

Lonzo's usage rate is lower because basically he is a much shittier scorer than the other PGs, who are passing the ball and scoring at a higher clip themselves.

If Ball was attacking the defense and driving to the rim 5-6 times a game instead of 2s and usually on backdoor cuts, his turnovers would go up. They are not because he so far has not shown much ability off the dribble at all to score or create. Most of his assists are coming in transition and the other huge part come from other players moving off the ball and Lonzo simply finding them with the right pass, which he does extremely well.

But you can't tell me Ball does not have major holes in his game in
1. pick and roll, screen and roll
2. shooting of the dribble, getting to the basket
3. breaking down players off the dribble

The reason he's not doing all that driving to the rim is he already moved the ball to a teammate who was open.

I don't know how he'll play at the next level but at UCLA when he drove he was almost always looking to pass, when he did look to score he had no trouble finishing but that's college, there are no Rudy Gobert's in college.

he shot 73% on twos last year, only 3 guys in the country had better numbers than that and they were all post players. Yeah he's not going to get as many lob dunks in the NBA as he did in college but he's also smart enough and good enough to realize NBA teams are going to make him prove he can finish and not let him kick the ball out for 3's the way he did at UCLA. He showed in college he CAN do that.

He has to improve his handle it gets a bit too high at times and he has this habit of cradling the ball as he goes through traffic that probably will have to change to a lower dribble in the NBA, but he's perfectly capable of creating off the dribble he just does it with the pass.

on the pick and roll part again nobody knows, they didn't do it much at UCLA and people don't like to count pick and pops, like he did with Welsh and Leaf all year, because it doesn't fit their pre determined outcome that he can't do pick and roll. that article you're referring to doesn't at all say he can't do the pick and roll it just said he passed on 75% of his pick and rolls. What we don't know is did he do that because he can't do what you want him to, or because it was the right play? Given his TS%, his assist numbers, how good the offense was and how many games the team won I'm having a hard time saying he should have run the pick and roll more and shot more.

He may be asked to do that at the next level, we don't know how well he can do it or not because it wasn't a big part of UCLA's offense.

 

[Russ Smith]

Straight from Draftexpress


I bet they have never scouted Lonzo either.

So now you're calling yourself a scout?

BTW they also said this, which completely contradicts what you've been posting here for months and completely agrees with what I and others have been saying all along, the way he plays lots of the good things he does don't show up in the box score. So if you don't actually watch him play, you have no idea.

"For a player who was such a focal point offensively and who generated so many scoring opportunities for his teammates, the ball didn't stick with Ball, allowing other players to serve as playmakers and encouraging constant movement from his teammates. - "

You also keep saying his 3 won't translate to the next level because he only shoots such deep shots as he can't get off contested shots. But Draft Express says this:

"connecting on 44.6% of his catch and shoot shots, per Synergy, despite the fact that a majority of them came from three-point range and the fact that over 68% of them were contested. - "

So you say he takes deep shots because he can't get off contested ones and the "facts" of Draft Express say he shoots close to 45% on catch and shoot shots and that nearly 70% of those shots were contested, which again completely contradicts what you've been posting for months.

Yes he doesn't score a ton off the dribble, he didn't have to the team was winning most of their games. That was because he did such a good job moving the ball, as DE said above, that they didn't need him to just put his head down and drive. If you actually saw him play you'd have noticed how much more effective the offense ran with him than with Aaron Holiday ,who's the definition of put your head down and drive.

Even their stuff about assisted non transition shots at the rim is just circular logic. they even admit how good he is at back cutting to get layups and dunks but instead of considering that a positive they call it a negative by saying the reason 48% of his non transition shots at the rim were assisted is he "struggles creating his own shot off the dribble.' It's not that he's just good at moving without the ball, it's that he can't beat anybody off the dribble. The reality is he doesn't do that because he doesn't have the ball in his hands, he's already moved it to a teammate who has a better look than he does.

 

[SirStefan32]

Again, let me say that I like both of these guys, and have nothing against either of them. I am not sure which one I would draft.
That said, I feel like a lot of criticism of Ball revolves around him not doing stuff that he didn't need to do. What I've seen of him leads me to believe he simply takes what the defense gives him.

 

[slinslin]

So now you're calling yourself a scout?
I am calling them scouts, which they are, is that hard to understand?

BTW they also said this, which completely contradicts what you've been posting here for months and completely agrees with what I and others have been saying all along, the way he plays lots of the good things he does don't show up in the box score. So if you don't actually watch him play, you have no idea.

"For a player who was such a focal point offensively and who generated so many scoring opportunities for his teammates, the ball didn't stick with Ball, allowing other players to serve as playmakers and encouraging constant movement from his teammates. - "

You also keep saying his 3 won't translate to the next level because he only shoots such deep shots as he can't get off contested shots. But Draft Express says this:

"connecting on 44.6% of his catch and shoot shots, per Synergy, despite the fact that a majority of them came from three-point range and the fact that over 68% of them were contested. - "

So you say he takes deep shots because he can't get off contested ones and the "facts" of Draft Express say he shoots close

Wrong, I said his mechanics are a reason why he takes deep step back 3s. What is "contested" in this context is very vague by the way. Besides this they are talking exclusively about catch and shoot situations here and nothing else. 70% plus of his 3s were assisted.

Even their stuff about assisted non transition shots at the rim is just circular logic. they even admit how good he is at back cutting to get layups and dunks but instead of considering that a positive they call it a negative by saying the reason 48% of his non transition shots at the rim were assisted is he "struggles creating his own shot off the dribble.' It's not that he's just good at moving without the ball, it's that he can't beat anybody off the dribble. The reality is he doesn't do that because he doesn't have the ball in his hands, he's already moved it to a teammate who has a better look than he does.

No it is not because he only gets to the rim like twice per game compared to Fultz who gets their 5-6 times. It would be a different story if he made up for it but he doe not.

The reality is that Ball also often rather just holds the ball and waits for teammates to work to get open instead of trying to get dribble penetration or beat his man.

On his game winner against Oregon or whoever it was he basically spent 5 seconds or so just standing and holding the ball to end up making a tough forced deep step back 3. Ignoring the fact that he made it, that is a terrible shot to take and he basically settled for this.

.

 

[slinslin]

on the pick and roll part again nobody knows, they didn't do it much at UCLA and people don't like to count pick and pops, like he did with Welsh and Leaf all year, because it doesn't fit their pre determined outcome that he can't do pick and roll. that article you're referring to doesn't at all say he can't do the pick and roll it just said he passed on 75% of his pick and rolls. What we don't know is did he do that because he can't do what you want him to, or because it was the right play? Given his TS%, his assist numbers, how good the offense was and how many games the team won I'm having a hard time saying he should have run the pick and roll more and shot more.
.

They are counting that very much so and the stats of Fultz and Ball in the pick and roll broken down in passing plays and scoring plays were posted here multiple times.
While Fultz ranked in the upper percentiles in the pick and role both as a scorer and passer despite his teammates - Ball ranked average among all D1 players as a scorer in pick and roll situations and was about the same in passing situations as Fultz.

 

[Russ Smith]

It is when you put the word eitehr at the end which implies you too have scouted him, when I'm not sure you've even seen him play a game from your posts.

 

[Russ Smith]

They are counting that very much so and the stats of Fultz and Ball in the pick and roll broken down in passing plays and scoring plays were posted here multiple times.
While Fultz ranked in the upper percentiles in the pick and role both as a scorer and passer despite his teammates - Ball ranked average among all D1 players as a scorer in pick and roll situations and was about the same in passing situations as Fultz.

When you post a link to the 30% turnover rate on pick and rolls I'll address this.

That's 3 times now in the last few months you've thrown out some outrageous claim about Ball statistically, I've asked for a link and you've replied I can't find the link now will post it later.

I saw every game Lonzo played at UCLA, most of them multiple times thanks to a DVR. Turning the ball over in pick and roll situations was not something he had an issue with. The play in the UK loss the lazy crosscourt pass that got ripped for a dunk, that was one of his issues he was still getting used to how much more athletic guys in college were. Most players deal with that when they get to college and then again the NBA.

Fultz in college had 10 in 2 games against TCU, consecutive losses to TCU, 6 in a loss to WSU, 5 in a 41 point loss to UCLA. he had 35 turnovers in his last 10 games, only 1 game in the last 10 where he didnt' have at least 3 To's, if anybody had TO issues in college it was Fultz. Ball played nearly 300 more minutes than Fultz last year and had NINE more turnovers, and that was all done playing at a faster pace and playing in competitive games all year, games that mattered.

Fultz is a very good player, my opinion is he's not a PG and if the team that picks him makes him a PG they will ultimately decide that's not his best position and move him off the ball. the advantage he has is he can play 2 positions, and because of how he had a decade of high level training from a guy who trains pros for a living, he's more ready to transition to the NBA. All the stuff NBA teams have to teach rookies he's already been taught for years by Keith Williams. the upside is he's more ready to play right away, the downside is there's less room for improvement because he's already been exposed to that level of coaching and training. Which IMO had a lot to do with why he didn't get better at UW, people were saying it was Romar's lack of coaching, that may be some of it but some of it was also that he's like the QB who had a private QB coach growing up, they're ahead in HS and coming into college but they don't develop as much in college and beyond because they are so developed already.

 

[slinslin]

Making matters worse is that he does not show the same aptitude for working around screens as other point guards in this draft class. According to DraftExpress, the pick and roll accounted for only 10.2 percent of Ball’s offense last season, and he turned it over on pick-and-roll possessions 32.7 percent of the time.

http://www.brightsideofthesun.com/2...file-can-lonzo-ball-translate-game-to-the-nba

Since you questioned the legitimacy of my statement wanted a link, here is a new article that references the same thing.

As for the stats on his split of passing/scoring in pick and roll situations. That has been posted on this board before multiple times.

As if I bookmark every draft article I read just so I can find it again because you question the legitimacy.

Fultz’s play in pick-and-roll is outstanding — 30.4 percent of his offensive possessions have involved him trying to score as the ball-handler and he’s averaging 1.01 points per possession (PPP) (93rd percentile) in those situations, according to Synergy Sports. That outpaces the other top point guards in this class — Ball (0.81), Dennis Smith Jr. (0.78) and De’Aaron Fox (0.84) — by a significant margin.

http://fansided.com/2017/03/06/markelle-fultz-next-generation/

Maybe I can find the link again someone made a nice table comparing Fultz and Balls pick and role effectiveness.

Fultz in college had 10 in 2 games against TCU, consecutive losses to TCU, 6 in a loss to WSU, 5 in a 41 point loss to UCLA. he had 35 turnovers in his last 10 games, only 1 game in the last 10 where he didnt' have at least 3 To's, if anybody had TO issues in college it was Fultz. Ball played nearly 300 more minutes than Fultz last year and had NINE more turnovers, and that was all done playing at a faster pace and playing in competitive games all year, games that mattered.

Fultz is a very good player, my opinion is he's not a PG and if the team that picks him makes him a PG they will ultimately decide that's not his best position and move him off the ball. the advantage he has is he can play 2 positions, and because of how he had a decade of high level training from a guy who trains pros for a living, he's more ready to transition to the NBA. All the stuff NBA teams have to teach rookies he's already been taught for years by Keith Williams. the upside is he's more ready to play right away, the downside is there's less room for improvement because he's already been exposed to that level of coaching and training. Which IMO had a lot to do with why he didn't get better at UW, people were saying it was Romar's lack of coaching, that may be some of it but some of it was also that he's like the QB who had a private QB coach growing up, they're ahead in HS and coming into college but they don't develop as much in college and beyond because they are so developed already.

Sorry but you don't seem to understand that raw total turnovers are meaningless without context. There is a reason Fultz turnover% is lower. It is natural for him to have more total turnovers than Ball because he is a much bigger part of the offense, has a lot more usage, creates a lot more points, handles the ball more.

Nobody would say Stephen Curry has a turnover problem becuase he averages more turnovers than Klay Thompson (just assuming, didn't bother looking it up).

As to your Keith Williams point - sure just like Kevin Durant did not get better because he trained with Keith Williams.

And Fultz only put up the best numbers for a freshman guard in at least 25+ years. How dare he did not average 35/7/9 by the end of a 25 game college season.