Is Fultz D'Angelo Russell 2.0?

[SHAQATTACK]

Skill wise , I can 't comment , but Russell is ruined by LA and all that crazy non sense that goes on in that city, organization tumoil ,  unstable vets around him,  poor coaches .   

Fultz can be bought around under good comditions to make a good person and player .  Same as Brown ,  tuff but a good citizen and hard worker.

I think Magic has helped some ....he has laid down some tuffer rules .

Fultz will be the better teamate and professional .

[MJohnnyboy]

Name me one guy in the last 10 years that was drafted in the top 5 of the draft simply for his defense in college?

Saying he didn't play much D is simply pointing out what 95% of these kids are doing, and that's not playing much D.

Michael Kidd-Gilchrist?

[gouki88]

Name me one guy in the last 10 years that was drafted in the top 5 of the draft simply for his defense in college?

Saying he didn't play much D is simply pointing out what 95% of these kids are doing, and that's not playing much D.

Michael Kidd-Gilchrist?

MKG is definitely the only one that really springs to mind - Noel would likely have been right there too without that injury. I think MKG was a jack of all trades, master of none kinda pick as well, with very little risk.

[liam]

Skill wise , I can 't comment , but Russell is ruined by LA and all that crazy non sense that goes on in that city, organization tumoil ,  unstable vets around him,  poor coaches .   

Fultz can be bought around under good comditions to make a good person and player .  Same as Brown ,  tuff but a good citizen and hard worker.

I think Magic has helped some ....he has laid down some tuffer rules .

Fultz will be the better teamate and professional .

The biggest differences between Fultz and Russell is between the ears and drive to be the best!

[Jvalin]

I think Fultz is the next James Harden.

That being said, I don't like Harden. He is obviously a very talented player (legitimate MVP candidate this year) but imo he is not a winner. He is an entertainer.

Not really sure how this makes sense. Every team James Harden has led has been a winning team except for the season where they fired Kevin McHale. Just because he doesn't win titles out West (as in Western Conference Champs as well as NBA Champs) competing against teams such as the Warriors and the Spurs hardly makes him not a winner - he simply has never really had a strong supporting cast.
The best players he's played alongside have been in decline Dwight Howard and maybe Trevor Ariza / Chandler Parsons.

If Harden and Curry swapped places, Harden would be a winner because he would almost certainly have a ring by now, or at least have won the West.

- plays no D whatsoever
- terrible shot selection
- at his best when playing at fast pace -> great player for the regular season, not so much for the playoffs

You could say all the same things about Isaiah, who Harden is a better player than.

The only real issues with Harden are between his ears, things like his questionable motor and desire to win.

It's hard to criticize him on anything basketball wise unless your talking defense.

Exactly.
That's why people say we can't win a championship with him as our best player. Only difference is that Isaiah is too short to play D whereas Harden simply doesn't care about playing D.

It's hard to criticize him on anything basketball wise unless your talking defense.

Last time I checked, defense was 50% of the game.

[OldSchoolDude]

They do have  similitarities, but also the differences exist. Its possible Fultz can become a slightly better Russell

Do you mean that is his ceiling? Because if so - that is a bust

1) I think Fultz will be better that's Russell
2) even though I'm a strong proponent of the don't max IT movement I recognize all that he's achieved, overachieved.

I believe if you swapped IT for Russell at the start of the season we would have finished no worse than we did and would have given Cleveland more of a fight. We may even have been able to beat the Caves.  A quality supporting cast may be more important than the star.  By that I mean you can swap similarly skilled stars and get the same result.   

Before you flame me remember ITis not far removed from being considered by everyone except IT as a back up at best.  He is at 28 just being seen as a franchise player and even still a lot of people myself included don't see him as a player to build around. Russell was picked #2 because he was considered a franchise player and he still is.  His rookie and sophomore production has been very good, despite the team environment he's been a part of.  IT is a dynamic offensive player who does a lot for us offensively but he's a serious defensive liability. Russell is also a dynamic offensive player who I believe in our system, with players like Smart, Bradley, and Crowder who set a defensive tone, would be a plus defender.

I don't think that fultz is like Russell but maybe his rookie year they may be very similar. When I look at fultz play he reminds me the most of Kobe not exactly but that's the player whose skill set I see the most at least offensively.  Because of the system he played in in and the lack of emphasis placed on defense, I really don't know who he will be like defensively.  He has the physical tools to be something special but I don't know what he will become.  I think he can score like Kobe he can pass like Wall and he may defend better than both of them when it's all said and done. 

Fultz, Brown, and the 2018 Brooklyn pick are the future of this team. Everyone else is just the supporting cast, which is not an insult, it's just in the land salary caps and luxury tax, we can only afford big money in about there players hands at best, during any given season.  So when our new big three come up for the big bucks, they'll be getting it.

[showtime]

  Ray Allen with handles!!

[Jvalin]

Name me one guy in the last 10 years that was drafted in the top 5 of the draft simply for his defense in college?

Doesn't mean a thing. I can name you many guys that were great defenders, but were not drafted simply for their defense because they were 2-way players.

Saying he didn't play much D is simply pointing out what 95% of these kids are doing, and that's not playing much D.

Seriously? 95% of college kids play no D?

Defense is a huge thing in college games. College teams play harder on D than most of the NBA teams do (at least in the regular season).

[No Nickname]

They do have  similitarities, but also the differences exist. Its possible Fultz can become a slightly better Russell

Do you mean that is his ceiling? Because if so - that is a bust

slightly better Russell is my floor for fultz lol. Its a high floor

Ceiling is a better version of John wall ( slightly worse defense, better offense)

Please don't say worse defense than John Wall.  He is an absolute prima donna on defense.  He only goes for steals, is constantly beaten back door (especially by Avery Bradley), yells at his teammates for not helping, yet won't step in to help his teammates when they get beat. 

I seriously hate guys that play defense like Wall.  Sure he'll get some steals which lead to awesome fast breaks (his forte) but he is a sieve on defense when he doesn't get the steal.

Rondo was very similar.  Wouldn't fight through screens and then would totally ignore his man who would go in for offensive boards while Rondo watched the ball instead of boxing out.

[Ilikesports17]

They do have  similitarities, but also the differences exist. Its possible Fultz can become a slightly better Russell

Do you mean that is his ceiling? Because if so - that is a bust

1) I think Fultz will be better that's Russell
2) even though I'm a strong proponent of the don't max IT movement I recognize all that he's achieved, overachieved.

I believe if you swapped IT for Russell at the start of the season we would have finished no worse than we did and would have given Cleveland more of a fight. We may even have been able to beat the Caves.  A quality supporting cast may be more important than the star.  By that I mean you can swap similarly skilled stars and get the same result.   

Before you flame me remember ITis not far removed from being considered by everyone except IT as a back up at best.  He is at 28 just being seen as a franchise player and even still a lot of people myself included don't see him as a player to build around. Russell was picked #2 because he was considered a franchise player and he still is.  His rookie and sophomore production has been very good, despite the team environment he's been a part of.  IT is a dynamic offensive player who does a lot for us offensively but he's a serious defensive liability. Russell is also a dynamic offensive player who I believe in our system, with players like Smart, Bradley, and Crowder who set a defensive tone, would be a plus defender.

I don't think that fultz is like Russell but maybe his rookie year they may be very similar. When I look at fultz play he reminds me the most of Kobe not exactly but that's the player whose skill set I see the most at least offensively.  Because of the system he played in in and the lack of emphasis placed on defense, I really don't know who he will be like defensively.  He has the physical tools to be something special but I don't know what he will become.  I think he can score like Kobe he can pass like Wall and he may defend better than both of them when it's all said and done. 

Fultz, Brown, and the 2018 Brooklyn pick are the future of this team. Everyone else is just the supporting cast, which is not an insult, it's just in the land salary caps and luxury tax, we can only afford big money in about there players hands at best, during any given season.  So when our new big three come up for the big bucks, they'll be getting it.

Excuse me?

I thought comparing AB to Scottie Pippen was gonna be the worst take of the day. My Goodness.

[gouki88]

They do have  similitarities, but also the differences exist. Its possible Fultz can become a slightly better Russell

Do you mean that is his ceiling? Because if so - that is a bust

1) I think Fultz will be better that's Russell
2) even though I'm a strong proponent of the don't max IT movement I recognize all that he's achieved, overachieved.

I believe if you swapped IT for Russell at the start of the season we would have finished no worse than we did and would have given Cleveland more of a fight. We may even have been able to beat the Caves.  A quality supporting cast may be more important than the star.  By that I mean you can swap similarly skilled stars and get the same result.   

Before you flame me remember ITis not far removed from being considered by everyone except IT as a back up at best.  He is at 28 just being seen as a franchise player and even still a lot of people myself included don't see him as a player to build around. Russell was picked #2 because he was considered a franchise player and he still is.  His rookie and sophomore production has been very good, despite the team environment he's been a part of.  IT is a dynamic offensive player who does a lot for us offensively but he's a serious defensive liability. Russell is also a dynamic offensive player who I believe in our system, with players like Smart, Bradley, and Crowder who set a defensive tone, would be a plus defender.

I don't think that fultz is like Russell but maybe his rookie year they may be very similar. When I look at fultz play he reminds me the most of Kobe not exactly but that's the player whose skill set I see the most at least offensively.  Because of the system he played in in and the lack of emphasis placed on defense, I really don't know who he will be like defensively.  He has the physical tools to be something special but I don't know what he will become.  I think he can score like Kobe he can pass like Wall and he may defend better than both of them when it's all said and done. 

Fultz, Brown, and the 2018 Brooklyn pick are the future of this team. Everyone else is just the supporting cast, which is not an insult, it's just in the land salary caps and luxury tax, we can only afford big money in about there players hands at best, during any given season.  So when our new big three come up for the big bucks, they'll be getting it.

Good God man. One of the best individual seasons in recent memory, and you disrespect him like this? Surely not.

[ManUp]

I think Fultz is the next James Harden.

That being said, I don't like Harden. He is obviously a very talented player (legitimate MVP candidate this year) but imo he is not a winner. He is an entertainer.

Not really sure how this makes sense. Every team James Harden has led has been a winning team except for the season where they fired Kevin McHale. Just because he doesn't win titles out West (as in Western Conference Champs as well as NBA Champs) competing against teams such as the Warriors and the Spurs hardly makes him not a winner - he simply has never really had a strong supporting cast.
The best players he's played alongside have been in decline Dwight Howard and maybe Trevor Ariza / Chandler Parsons.

If Harden and Curry swapped places, Harden would be a winner because he would almost certainly have a ring by now, or at least have won the West.

- plays no D whatsoever
- terrible shot selection
- at his best when playing at fast pace -> great player for the regular season, not so much for the playoffs

You could say all the same things about Isaiah, who Harden is a better player than.

The only real issues with Harden are between his ears, things like his questionable motor and desire to win.

It's hard to criticize him on anything basketball wise unless your talking defense.

Exactly.
That's why people say we can't win a championship with him as our best player. Only difference is that Isaiah is too short to play D whereas Harden simply doesn't care about playing D.

It's hard to criticize him on anything basketball wise unless your talking defense.

Last time I checked, defense was 50% of the game.

And yet despite defense being 50% of the game, Harden is still a top ten NBA player in contention for 2017 league MVP... So what's your point exactly?

[CelticsElite]

I think Fultz is the next James Harden.

That being said, I don't like Harden. He is obviously a very talented player (legitimate MVP candidate this year) but imo he is not a winner. He is an entertainer.

Not really sure how this makes sense. Every team James Harden has led has been a winning team except for the season where they fired Kevin McHale. Just because he doesn't win titles out West (as in Western Conference Champs as well as NBA Champs) competing against teams such as the Warriors and the Spurs hardly makes him not a winner - he simply has never really had a strong supporting cast.
The best players he's played alongside have been in decline Dwight Howard and maybe Trevor Ariza / Chandler Parsons.

If Harden and Curry swapped places, Harden would be a winner because he would almost certainly have a ring by now, or at least have won the West.

- plays no D whatsoever
- terrible shot selection
- at his best when playing at fast pace -> great player for the regular season, not so much for the playoffs

You could say all the same things about Isaiah, who Harden is a better player than.

The only real issues with Harden are between his ears, things like his questionable motor and desire to win.

It's hard to criticize him on anything basketball wise unless your talking defense.

Exactly.
That's why people say we can't win a championship with him as our best player. Only difference is that Isaiah is too short to play D whereas Harden simply doesn't care about playing D.

It's hard to criticize him on anything basketball wise unless your talking defense.

Last time I checked, defense was 50% of the game.

And yet despite defense being 50% of the game, Harden is still a top ten NBA player in contention for 2017 league MVP... So what's your point exactly?

a lot of people like to nitpick an elite players weaknesses

[Jvalin]

I think Fultz is the next James Harden.

That being said, I don't like Harden. He is obviously a very talented player (legitimate MVP candidate this year) but imo he is not a winner. He is an entertainer.

Not really sure how this makes sense. Every team James Harden has led has been a winning team except for the season where they fired Kevin McHale. Just because he doesn't win titles out West (as in Western Conference Champs as well as NBA Champs) competing against teams such as the Warriors and the Spurs hardly makes him not a winner - he simply has never really had a strong supporting cast.
The best players he's played alongside have been in decline Dwight Howard and maybe Trevor Ariza / Chandler Parsons.

If Harden and Curry swapped places, Harden would be a winner because he would almost certainly have a ring by now, or at least have won the West.

- plays no D whatsoever
- terrible shot selection
- at his best when playing at fast pace -> great player for the regular season, not so much for the playoffs

You could say all the same things about Isaiah, who Harden is a better player than.

The only real issues with Harden are between his ears, things like his questionable motor and desire to win.

It's hard to criticize him on anything basketball wise unless your talking defense.

Exactly.
That's why people say we can't win a championship with him as our best player. Only difference is that Isaiah is too short to play D whereas Harden simply doesn't care about playing D.

It's hard to criticize him on anything basketball wise unless your talking defense.

Last time I checked, defense was 50% of the game.

And yet despite defense being 50% of the game, Harden is still a top ten NBA player in contention for 2017 league MVP... So what's your point exactly?

I told you my point. He is obviously a super star but imo he is not a winner. He is an entertainer.

[Future Celtics Owner]

Fultz was put in a real tough position at Washington. I think even the worst detractors of Fultz have to put his defensive effort into context.