CrackersPhinn wrote:Biggest difference between Fultz and Russell is ability to get to the rim by himself and also draw contact. Fultz was a far more dynamic own-shot creator in college than Russell. Partly that is superior skill. Partly that is superior athleticism.
I think you're 100% spot on. Being able to get to the rim (1) and (2), finish. I don't think those skills can be understated. 3pt shooting can be up and down for most players. Even Steph Curry, who arguably, I don't think it's arguably, but it is arguable for many, is the greatest 3 pt shooter ever can string together a streak of 6-7 bad games where his 3PT% is under 30%. Not too many guys will differ by 25-40% off their FG% around the rim for more than a game or two.
In assessing Fultz vs Russell -- stats wise, physical profile wise they're as close a pair of players I've seen in the past 15 years other than the Harrison twins from Kentucky. Thinking out loud -- Is this then where 'scouting' can only tell the difference between two seemingly similar substances?
Back to the ability to get to the rim. It's kinda something I think I missed with Kris Dunn. I never doubted he could get to the rim. [He does, even now]. He's more athletic than 70% of guards who will guard him. But he can't seem to finish [hopefully, that's a "yet" - for the sake of this Wolves fan]. Russell, I loved his pocket passing. He really impressed me with some passes he made, both the vision, and the execution -- although, the latter definitely was questionable at times. He was quick, not fast. Fultz is a whole other level of quick to explosive AND (the 2nd part), he can finish...with either hand, scoops, hooks, finger rolls, floater, etc. Next to Jayson Tatum of Duke, he seems to have as many individual 'moves' developed as you will see in awhile. Mile Bridges, in my view, would be third. Left hand, right hand, post spin left, post spin right, side step, etc.
I watched at least 8+ games of both Fultz and Smith, Jr as they presented the possibility or potential of two the most dynamic explosive scoring point guards since...Kyrie maybe(?). So I perhaps had very high expectations. I'd watch a few DraftExpress videos, a few highlights and plan out my Thursday nigh, Saturday afternoon, or Saturday night to watch them. And in probably half of those games for Fultz and 3/4 for Smith, Jr. They'd just disappeared by simple schemes or "the ball isn't in my hands I'm going to watch this game cause I got a good point of view" type of feel.
My main concerns around Fultz I'd like clarity on, are ironically, applied also to DSJ. I never sensed a 'sense of urgency' about Futlz when a game was within reach. Two things I get from that. 1) my gosh, they were 'this good' without even trying?! and 2) hmmm, don't seem to love competition -- the NBA is a whole different league. Their once outlier athleticism [or all physical attributes] is going to be 'average'...one of many. In fact, on many nights it might even be less than their opponent (e.g. Westbrook, Wall, Kemba Walker, Harden, Lillard, Bledsoe).
But in those games I watched intently, hoping to see this ultra-dominant talent take over...whether down by 3, up by 5 there seemed no sense of ownership or urgency or fight. And Fultz's defense, in many games, it seemed like he wasn't really interested. Most 19 year kids aren't, but also most aren't that obvious about it! Note: he did seem to relish transition defense, that is the fast-break blocks and steals. Jumping, straight line speed (Free safety interceptions) vs lateral get your butt down plays.
Maybe he doesn't like Mozart when it comes to musical taste.... (lame joke attempt at pace/style). On offense, neither seemed to have a game plan or desire or forward thinking on how to beat a team vs a 1-on-1 instance here and there and even more preference for a fast-break. Could this be a preference thing that evolves from playing AAU ball and then playing in the Pac-12? Note: The Pac-12, this year, more than usual, there was a lot of fast-breaks (most teams had 25-33% of possessions in transition per hoop-math.com). FYI Ohio State when Russell was there was 33.9% fastbreak during 2014-15. So noting environment. I'm not sure what the NBA is. Note:
http://stats.nba.com/teams/scoring/#!?s ... _FB&dir=-1 shows % of points due to fast-break, but not possessions. I could probably reserve engineer it, asking for a free pass here or easy reference
But the point in contention would be the nature of the game changing quite bit. Duke, by contrast has 20% transition. I am a big believer of pushing transition at every chance (anything that has greater chance of mismatches or 'forced' decision making for the other team), but pulling back if no obvious advantage [something you coach].
I have less worry about Fultz due to that 'downhill' ability and profile [getting into the lane] than Smith Jr.
But these two share that 'unaware' feeling, which is in contrast to Lonzo Ball, who seemed rather aware -- even in half-court sets. Although, he seems to have trouble getting by (on offense) or staying in front of any guard with decent explosion (e.g. Melton USC, Simmons ARZ). Narrow profile with high hips makes it hard to have balance for lateral explosion. De'Aaron Fox obviously shows what a great athlete can do to Ball. P.S. I hope this isn't seen as 'negatives' for negatives' sake. In my un-expert opinion, there's a strong correlation as to why players don't do well in the NBA is not because of their lack of strengths, but rather it is having weaknesses that are easily exposed. It also seems that Offensive weaknesses are more easily tolerated. DeAndre Jordan can't shoot an 8 footer, make a free throw, pass, etc, etc. But he's those "Bob Knight" qualities. Knight said [paraphrasing], "...tell me who my best rebounder is and who my best defender is and I'll pick the other 3 starters out from the rest." There's many bigs who fit this. If you want a wing, Tony Allen, Thebo Sofa sofa (or however his name is spelled), MKG, Rondo, Pat Beverley, etc.
In trying to make this analytical -- statistically analytical. Would a good project idea be to show which 'weaknesses' are typical 'zero sum game' scenarios for players? And can this be done?
I was toying with this. e.g. Robert Williams for Texas A&M. He's 6'8. Long wingspan. 7'3". We saw Jordan Mickey and many others have this same profile of height, shot blocking ability, and wingspan. Not uncommon to find actually. I did some research of players who were 'rim protectors' in the NBA. That is blocked at least 2 per 36 mins. Of players under 6'9, only Bo Outlaw had more than 2 seasons that met that criteria. If Williams is 6'9, you can add Ben Wallace to the mix. But that's 1 data point, doesn't help. Once you get to 6'10 or taller and were a similar shot blocker in college (e.g. blk per 40) the 'rim protection' seemed to hold in the NBA. Though often, these players also showed very good rebounding ability. So maybe the rebounding ability [likely I believe] got them on the court more than the rim protection, but enabled enough minutes to get those blocks[?].
Another area. "individual defense' in bigs, which I focused on 3 stats -- DReb, Blk, Stl per 40mins. Mostly with further analyzing Lauri Markkanen. His per 40 numbers for those cats respectively, 6.3 dreb, 0.5 spg, 0.7 bpg. It's hard to quantify how bad that is. His most hopeful comp is Ryan Anderson -- don't have dreb stats available, I looked at Cal Bears official site too....nothing. So total rebounding is still a big difference 12.1 to 9.3. Almost 33% less. Soooo....how high would you draft a highly likely outcome of Steve Novak? Or a "taller" Doug McDermott?
Crow has pointed out on a few occasions how few NBA top 10 picks even become average NBA players. Then Fultz is supposed to go before him. Markkanen is Dirk. I just don't see it. If Steve Nash, John Stockton, Jason Kidd, or Dirk Nowitzki were in this draft I've had no problem taking any of them over these guys without blinking an eye. Yet supposedly on equal footing.