Fox's shot looks decent to very good right now. And it looked lights out over the final month of the NCAA season. If you're not seeing the shooting improvement, you're not really looking.
I wouldn't be upset if we took Fox. Not sure what I'd do with my Ball Laker jersey though. :Randallconfused:
Improved enough to over take Fultz too though? Fultz minus the d got him on everything else no? Both are equal in my eyes with the handles, fultz has fox with sz but fox probably has speed on fultz
the more i think about it, the more i'm open to moving 2 for 5 and 10 (sac). one of fultz/ball/fox/jackson/tatum is there at 5 (feel like i've read very positive buzz on all five from early workouts and such), and the 10 could be used as part of a trade (ideally, for george, imo, and paired with deng and the 28).
I've spent no time looking at Fultz, as he was the consensus #1 - and we don't have that pick. So, I don't know.
2 best case scenario to me 1. For whatever odd reason Bos takes anyone but fultz 1st, we can either trade down with phi or pho and still end up with ball n xtra asset 2. Fox garners crazy hype n teams like sac or pho gets scared we take fox forcing them to deal with a potential disgruntled Lonzo, thus we get to trade down n still also get ball
Watching those videos above, I gotta say, I'm even more impressed with Fox. I still think Ball is the better fit for us, but Fox is gonna be outstanding in the league. Okay, he's not as fast as Wall. Who is? he's still blazing fast.
Watching those videos it seemed coach Nick or whatever the guy's name is was pointing out all the weaknesses in Fox's footwork and techniques on defense. Looked not like the juggler's knot most have acknowledged him to be on D? Ball not perfect either but I heard it seemed less in the tone of his narration that he had as much work to do to as Fox to correct flaws?
I don't even expect college kids coming in to be anything close to average on defense. Fox has speed, so that'll serve him well. I think he'll be similar to Iverson who couldn't stop anyone, but had tons of steals. Ball has quick hands and can block some shots. But like Real said, they both have a long way to go.
Been watching what I can find on these guys. I like Ball's NBA three point shot, pin point passing and pace. Effort on defense shows he can be a good defender. Very good at UCLA but his game is even better suited for the pros. He has basketball sense and awareness that not many have. Going to be a little on edge till he is officially a Laker.
And Fultz is in the same boat. Videos I've watched of his weaknesses show him being a step behind quite a lot, being in poor position, catching up late/ closing out to his man too slow. He's very much like Russell/Randle in that regard, the defensive awareness is not sharp.
None of the players mentioned in your post is a star. They were never projected to be a star. So it really has no relevance to my post. I agree that solid players are valuable, but in the case of Big Baby, Perkins and Lamar, the team already had a star(s) to build around. We're not there yet. We still haven't identified a franchise player, so I think it's premature to start collecting "pieces." We need to swing for the fences and hope one or two of the kids pan out. You see Ball having a 40% chance of being a star, so I could see how that would affect your reasoning, but I still wouldn't move the pick. As for the probability of our kids becoming stars, I currently put Russell/Randle at around 30-40%, and Ingram at 75-80%. So we could definitely use another 40%.
This has been my thought process all along. I'm willing to be patient a few more years and gradually add pieces to our young core. I don't want us to end up being the New York Knicks West. I think by 2020 we'll be one of the better teams in the league.