Fultz4thewin

Good to know when your opinions are countered by well reasoned counter arguments you run away instead of having an open mind and learning something.

You're using a 6 game sample. The previous 5 games he was averaging 11 ppg. An outlier is bringing up his numbers.

But he hasn't improved as time has gone on. He's been around the same numbers all year. And when one guy averages 10.6ppg 4.1 assists and 1.7 steals a game and the other guy averages 11.7 ppg 5.2 assists and 1.3 steals that's pretty similar

I'm pointing out how single game samples aren't good at defining players

Murray is averaging 10.6ppg this season. Over the past 5 games he's averaging 11 Over the past 10 he's averaging 14. Over the past 15 he's averaging 12 Over the past 20 he's averaging 11. Seems like random ebbs and flows

Contradict? You're being intellectually dishonest. By your logic Ross is playing like an mvp lately

Are you honestly sitting here quoting a single game back at me and calling that "lately"? Should I bring up his zero point 0-7 shooting effort in 21 minutes the other day and act like that's an honest representation of his game?

Murray has a smaller role than fultz and Morant joined a team starting from scratch, not a team with an established identity

Quantum physics? We're saying you can't really fully appreciate players by only looking at box scores and watching stuff on YouTube here and there. It's like saying you can't really appreciate a television show by reading the Wikipedia and following up with a few key clips. Watching things as they happen in context is really really really important. So much of what guys do on the court isn't categorized into highlight videos. It's fine for seeing how Caris LeVert got his 51 points or how gordon got that game saving block against Brooklyn but not how guys rotate on defense or passes into missed shots or placing big moments in context.

Wait... You have all these opinions on guys who you haven't watched? You can't really understand things from just watching clips

I think he's more focused on distributing to our other guys than scoring right now. He's shooting 51% on twos and 41% from the mid range. Three point shooting isn't a deciding reason why a guy is or is not considered an offensive player. Jimmy Butler isn't not an offensive player because he's shooting the same percentage from three as fultz. Ben Simmons isn't not an offensive player because guys leave him open on the three point line. Derrick white isn't a limited offensive player because he's stuck in a role where he doesn't get field goal attempts.

I think you're incorrectly replacing "role player" with "3 and D" in your head. Like MCW is a role player. He provides defense and energy. Augustin is a role player, he provides shooting (except this year), Birch is a role player, he sets screens and defends. Role players operate in specific roles doing 1 or 2 things. A 3 and D player is a guy who can hit threes and defend but you actually have to do those two roles to be considered one

This is more of a problem you have than fultz has because he's not really limited at all other than role.

I agree, I just think it'd be a mistake to pick him at 16 given the level of development he needs.

I don't really think it's scouting. I think it's mostly random. Like it's wrong to think of Dillon Brooks as having a 100% chance of being Dillion Brooks. There's been dozens of guys with similar profiles and all of them have a 5% or 15% or whatever% of being starting caliber players and Dillon Brooks just happens to be the guy who hit. So we keep drafting guys based on similar profiles and sooner or later one will hit.