So, he's either hurt, has the yips, or a combination of the two. And possibly dealing with an incompetent organization who would rather trot him out there in October games rather than letting him heal or rest. And if the agent is to be believed, why would the organization let him "grind it out". Especially in October?
Just a weird situation.
I believe that they realized he's not NBA ready, tried to give him a few reps off the bench in ISO sets to sell some jerseys and tickets and he failed in that as well so plan C is fake injury while they train him.
That's a helluva conspiracy theory.
I'm an engineer so I look at all the facts and make the most likely conclusion. How else can you describe this bizarre situation ? We know he's not injured "can't lift his arm" or he wouldn't be playing. We know he's not NBA ready based on what we've seen. We know the sixers are "The Producers of broadway" NBA team. It's actually a highly plausible theory.
Do you also regularly bring up your status as an engineer in situations that have nothing to do with your expertise? Being an engineer has nothing to do with your opinion on the inner workings of a professional sports organization, and bringing it up for no reason (in an apparent attempt to make your opinion look more qualified) just casts a negative light on engineering/engineers as a whole
No, I don't go to bars and tell the bartender that he isn't making the drink correctly citing my engineering education. But when it comes to analysis and logical reasoning, I have a feeling that I am more qualified to solve a problem than the average person. Instead of arguing with my background, why don't you instead take the more respectable approach and explain to all of us what you see in Fultz that has impressed you so far other than "he's just a kid." No, he's the #1 draft pick and supposedly a generational talent. Both Ball and Tatum are thriving and he looks like he's headed to the d league.
I'll wait.
Note that I didn't say anything about how Fultz has impressed me (nor is the "he's just a kid" quote you included something I said...). I'm not really sure where you even got that from, except from a general feeling that "He disagrees with me on this, therefore he must disagree on everything!". You can wait for me to make an argument about something totally unrelated to what I said, but you'll be waiting for a while.
I have no problem with your opinion on Fultz (well, I do, but that's not relevant). What I have a problem with is bringing up your background as an engineer as if it's at all relevant to your opinion on basketball. (Also, note that that is not "arguing with your background". Being an engineer does not give you advanced insight into basketball organizations or whether or not the 76ers are faking an injury. Sorry.)
Let's be clear: I have no problem with you sharing whatever opinions you have. What I do have a problem with is you acting like being an engineer gives you special insight into basketball or makes you smarter than everyone here. You don't see Roy bringing up the fact that he's a lawyer in every discussion in an attempt to seem more qualified to talk about Smart's new shooting form, because it isn't relevant. You don't see jpotter bringing his doctorate into discussions about salary cap rules, because it isn't relevant. And you don't see the other engineers here (because, no, you are not the only one) bringing their profession into arguments about whether or not Fultz is actually injured vs. faking it to avoid looking bad because it isn't relevant. I don't think I can say this enough: bringing up your profession when it has nothing to do with the situation/doesn't give you special insight (like in this case) just makes everyone else with that profession look bad.