Markelle Fultz, Year Three: He's back! Big....?

[HomeRunBaker]

Whatever his issues are or aren't, I think he's at least looking at a floor of "poor man's Ben Simmons". The bad shooting and strange rookie year overshadow a ton of talent. He needs to improve to become a legitimate fit on the Sixers, who don't have much use for a poor man's Ben Simmons with the original already on board, but if I were a well-managed team in a rebuilding phase I'd absolutely go after him.

Simmons was 3rd I league in Assists, 5th in Steals, and 2nd overall in Defensive Win Shares as a 21- year old rookie.

Who know what his ceiling is right now but his floor isn't Simmons no matter how poor he is......his floor is flipping burgers at In-and-Out.

 

[The Needler]

I was referring to his on court personality type. I don’t know anything else about the kid except he didn’t shoot all that well in college, his team wasn’t good, Celtics had him in for a workout and immediately pivoted off of him to Tatum.

He’s not an Ainge type for a lot of reasons, the alpha/bulldog personality type being one of them, the other being he wasn’t a highly sought after high school recruit. Ainge values the HS ranking as much as one year in college.

Huh? He was a top 5 HS recruit, and offered pretty much everywhere in the country.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

He also shot pretty well in college, though not from the FT line.

 

[benhogan]

Scouts Honor is a bit of a kook, but he goes into his thoughts on Markelle Fultz "personality type" pre-Draft in 2017. So Markelle's lack of dog mentality was very well flagged.

Go to the 3:10 mark and listen all the way through to the end.

In-N-Out is the bomb, as long as Markelle gets my Double-double Animal style done right he's a winner in my book.

 

[ManicCompression]

I get very frustrated about people implying that his issues are due to mental weakness without any such evidence. And all these comments about his personality as if that caused it. That his character even caused this and more that Ainge could tell he was weak. And again imply this perceptible weakness was the cause of this issue.

I've suffered from depression and anxiety since my teens. I also work in an extremely competitive industry, though obviously not as competitive as the NBA.

My "mental health issues" do not make me weak, but they certainly place me at a disadvantage - it's my weakness. Does this make me not tough? No, I'm tough as nails, I'm battling everyday and succeeding in my fight. That being said, if I'm being honest with myself, my life would be a lot easier if I didn't have to jump over these extra hurdles.

Dealing with self-doubt, or anything close to anxiety or depression, at the highest levels of professional sport would be exhausting. If one player is carefree, dripping with confidence, impossible to deter (aka Marcus Smart), then he's going to have a much easier time than the player who's doubting himself. The first mental lesson they teach you in youth sports is to have a short memory. This is where the dumb, cocky jock stereotype comes from. Being blissfully ignorant of your place on the court/playing field is vital. You want Isaiah Thomas thinking that he's the best player in the NBA, not that he's only 5'9" and severely overmatched on defense.

We don't know what's going on with Markelle, and I'm not going to speculate. We have a few rumors that may or may not be true. But someone having the yips in their shooting form, whether it's caused by a mental issue or a physical issue, is most certainly a weakness. It's no different than any other weakness. Ben Simmons never learned to shoot - that's a weakness. IT is 5'9" - that's a weakness. It's not stigmatizing anything to call it that and recognize that if he wants to stick around in the league, he has to find a way to overcome it.

 

[The Needler]

I've suffered from depression and anxiety since my teens. I also work in an extremely competitive industry, though obviously not as competitive as the NBA.

My "mental health issues" do not make me weak, but they certainly place me at a disadvantage - it's my weakness. Does this make me not tough? No, I'm tough as nails, I'm battling everyday and succeeding in my fight. That being said, if I'm being honest with myself, my life would be a lot easier if I didn't have to jump over these extra hurdles.

Dealing with self-doubt, or anything close to anxiety or depression, at the highest levels of professional sport would be exhausting. If one player is carefree, dripping with confidence, impossible to deter (aka Marcus Smart), then he's going to have a much easier time than the player who's doubting himself. The first mental lesson they teach you in youth sports is to have a short memory. This is where the dumb, cocky jock stereotype comes from. Being blissfully ignorant of your place on the court/playing field is vital. You want Isaiah Thomas thinking that he's the best player in the NBA, not that he's only 5'9" and severely overmatched on defense.

We don't know what's going on with Markelle, and I'm not going to speculate. We have a few rumors that may or may not be true. But someone having the yips in their shooting form, whether it's caused by a mental issue or a physical issue, is most certainly a weakness. It's no different than any other weakness. Ben Simmons never learned to shoot - that's a weakness. IT is 5'9" - that's a weakness. It's not stigmatizing anything to call it that and recognize that if he wants to stick around in the league, he has to find a way to overcome it.

Thank you for this. Mental health issues are health issues. If we're going to discuss whether player x is a good trade or pick value because of perceived physical injury proneness, we ought to be able to respectfully discuss a player's mental or emotional health. Making mental health issues a taboo topic doesn't ameliorate stigmatization, it exacerbates it.

That's not to say someone can't express the opinion for example that there's no reason to believe player x has chronic mental health issues; just that raising the possibility shouldn't be condemned any more than raising the possibility that player y will have chronic knee problems.

 

[tbrown_01923]

I think the distinction is we shouldn't project mental health issues on folks. We can talk about physical issues because we can visually see the cast on their arm. We can talk about perceived on-court (and now via social media) off-court personality traits because we witness them (e.g. always passing up the last shot, or flat-earthing). There needs to be a line where we don't assume people have mental health issues based on distant observations or a lone (unsubstantiated) tweet(er).

Let's say this about Fultz: his rookie year was marred with some poor shooting, which even if caused by an injury, persisted long past his return to health. His career in college (highlighted by @HRB) was an odd showing a full swing of brilliant ball, team losing and odd benchings. And someone (Colangelo?) asserted that there were some emotional concerns - but weren't they unsubstantiated?

The shine has come of Fultz since June of 2017 - his stock has fallen. To where - this is the fun subjective and speculative bit. As an NBA exec I would refer back to my board in 2017 (efficient market hypothesis pricing in his college career and behavior to position on their board) and start to downgrade him based on the performance of his rookie year and loss of year of control.

 

[The Needler]

I think the distinction is we shouldn't project mental health issues on folks. We can talk about physical issues because we can visually see the cast on their arm. We can talk about perceived on-court (and now via social media) off-court personality traits because we witness them (e.g. always passing up the last shot, or flat-earthing). There needs to be a line where we don't assume people have mental health issues based on distant observations or a lone (unsubstantiated) tweet(er).

But why? Why does there have to be a line? Why is it okay to speculate about a pitcher's arm being injured (as we frequently do around here) based on a couple of mph drop on his fastball, but not to speculate about Fultz's health when his team says there's nothing wrong with him physically, yet he isn't at practice, and when own coach specifically says he needs to get right mentally? You are implicitly assigning a value judgment to mental health issues that is not present with other physical health issues. That's what stigmatization is.

As I wrote six months ago:

And by the way, the reluctance many have here about "jumping to conclusions" or that the issue being psychological is a "hot take'" is the very reason we're likely not getting the truth about what's going on - the stigmatization of mental health issues. We're totally okay with believing in an injury (scapular imbalance) most of us had never heard of, and armchair hypothesizing about any other physical injury we suspect are bothering players, but the suggestion that he's suffering from an issue we have seen many times before (Rick Ankiel, Steve Sax, etc.) is a hot take because there's a value judgment associated with it.

A 19-year old with more pressure on his shoulders than 99% of us will experience in our lives might be having trouble dealing with it psychologically. Doesn't mean he's a bad kid, or that he's weak. But it's the most likely explanation here.

 

[DJnVa]

He’s not an Ainge type for a lot of reasons, the alpha/bulldog personality type being one of them, the other being he wasn’t a highly sought after high school recruit. Ainge values the HS ranking as much as one year in college.

Uh, he was 5 star recruit, #5 in nation

https://n.rivals.com/content/prospects/2016/markelle-fultz-497

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Uh, he was 5 star recruit, #5 in nation

https://n.rivals.com/content/prospects/2016/markelle-fultz-497

I'm sure the or original poster was referring to the middle of his high school career when he wasn't on anyone's radar and still playing JV as a sophomore. His real rise came prior to his senior year in HS after he tore up the summer circuit.

One great story is the one about Lorenzo Romar's assistant who got to the DeMatha game so early that he go to see the 2nd half of the JV game. He texted Romar with (paraphrasing), "You're gonna think I'm crazy but I'm watching this skinny gangly kid who can't run in a straight line who has the tools be an NBA All-Star when he grows up!"

 

[LondonSox]

A lot of these "dog menality" stuff was said about Simmons this time a year ago too. He went for loyalty to the first people who were all in on him. Even after some players had one and dones which weren't expected.

I have no idea what happened with his knee.
We all have little idea what happened to and with his shoulder.

So much of this is an echo of he was good but couldn't make his team win, seemed disinterested, didn't try hard enough on defense as Simmons it's really uncanny.

The only real difference is that no one could pile on about mental weakness due to a foot injury vs a shoulder plus yips.

We shall see there's not a lot to go on. And I'll try to avoid projecting my issues onto this discussion.

 

[ManicCompression]

I don't think anyone is saying that you have to have a "dog/alpha dog mentality" to succeed. Clearly, all kinds of personalities, when combined with the right kind of talent, can win in the NBA. I mean, Rasheed Wallace was once a key component to a championship team. But a certain kind of personality - alpha dog, whatever you want to call it - often, not always, correlates with success.

Look at the top players of all time. Jordan, LeBron, Kobe, Bird, Magic, Russell, the list goes on - these guys approached the game (and competition in general) with a similar ferocity (sometimes, sadly, to the detriment of their personal lives). Yes, obviously there are exceptions amongst the all-time greats (for example, a guy like Bill Walton pre-injuries) but the overall trend of personality types is pretty obvious.

People looked at Simmons and his career on a non-tourney LSU team and his loafing on defense and of course they questioned his will to be great. They were wrong. It's awesome that he's proven thus far to be a killer on the court, but that kind of player often disappoints.

So, yes, players can surprise, but it feels like some posters here are making a fairly non-controversial statement that players who bust their ass, compete at all costs, block out the noise - be alpha dogs - overcome adversity more consistently than players who lack that mentality.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

For the longest time LeBron James was called passive and not considered an alpha.

 

[ManicCompression]

He seems pretty competitive and domineering to me. Take him out of that list then? Does that really change anything in my response about trends vs. exceptions?

 

[LondonSox]

He seems pretty competitive and domineering to me. Take him out of that list then? Does that really change anything in my response about trends vs. exceptions?

That's the whole point though.
These narratives we have are largely bullshit.
LeBron was weak until he wasn't and now people barely remember it was a long held view.

Is Durant weak for joining GSW?

You don't have to be swaggy P to be determined. Arguably quite the reverse.

So the idea we know Fultz isn't competitive and hard working is utterly nonsense.
He works his ass off, the main issue people have is he appears calm on court etc. Calm doesn't mean non competitive.

He got slapped down to JV squad and high school and bounced back to top 5 prospect under the same coach. That's hardly like he gave up and quit.

All current sixers talk about how hard he works and how passionate he is about succeeding and playing.

Narratives based on nothing treated as facts suck ballsm

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

To chime in.....

I don't know if "mentally weak" is the proper term but there was more going on with this kid at Washington with his mysterious knee injury. I documented the exact timeline at the time (don't recall specifically now).....Fultz played 36 min one night and finished game without apparent injury, Then he missed a couple games with a "sore knee." Ok that happens.....now he returns and removes himself from game, goes to locker room and everyone assumes he's done. Then he returns to bench w trainer, cleared to go, is inserted in game that is a blowout, and leaves again. That is how his college career ended. No limp, no wincing, medically cleared, and walked off himself twice.

I'm not pointing the finger but I watched these games and was baffled at the time at what was going on for the perceived #1 pick in the upcoming draft for be yanked around like that and keep pulling himself. It was weird and looking back it doesn't appear that it was nothing. I have no idea of "what" it was but it should be included into the storyline of this bizarre start to his career.

With regards to the bolded, this article says that he was limping pretty heavily after the ARI game.

But everything else you describe about Fultz's knee injury is basically right and it was weird he missed something like two months of basketball without any diagnosis (sound familiar?). I mean no one thought it was serious (including his coach); everyone thought he'd be playing again until he didn't.

And note - even though he was too injured to play in the Pac-12 tournament, he did hit an amazing trick shot from the stands in warmups according to this article: https://www.seattletimes.com/sports/uw-husky-basketball/banggggg-is-right-check-out-markelle-fultz-nail-this-shot-from-the-t-mobile-arena-stands-before-pac-12-tournament/

I'm sure DA probably had more than a few questions for Fultz about the knee when he was in Boston. I really wonder what Fultz could have said to satisfy DA given the reports in the papers.

 

[ManicCompression]

Who is discussing narratives? You're not talking to Skip Bayless, dude. Nowhere in my posts am I making judgments on a player/person's self-worth or calling anyone lazy or weak.

These guys are in the NBA, They're all insanely competitive and gifted. We're working on a scale. But there are obviously differences in player personalities and they clearly matter. It's true in every other profession - why would it be different in the NBA?

It's not a question of can or can't. It's a question of likely and not likely. If one player keeps his head up after failure and another player slumps his shoulders, that's a piece of data which is informative and has value. If these players possess similar physical abilities, would you honestly select the latter over the former?

Competitiveness and hard-work are great, but those traits alone don't help a person/player overcome failure. You can shoot ten thousand jump shots a day, but if you're fixated on the one you missed, you're unlikely to fare as well as the guy who doesn't give a shit about missing. And if you truly think that a player's mental ability/attitude doesn't matter, then why did Nick Anderson suddenly become a 40% free throw shooter?

 

[southshoresoxfan]

Is Durant weak for joining GSW?

Oh yes.

 

[snowmanny]

I thought you were mentally weak if you didn’t choose to play in the ACC?

 

[LondonSox]

Who is discussing narratives? You're not talking to Skip Bayless, dude. Nowhere in my posts am I making judgments on a player/person's self-worth or calling anyone lazy or weak.

These guys are in the NBA, They're all insanely competitive and gifted. We're working on a scale. But there are obviously differences in player personalities and they clearly matter. It's true in every other profession - why would it be different in the NBA?

It's not a question of can or can't. It's a question of likely and not likely. If one player keeps his head up after failure and another player slumps his shoulders, that's a piece of data which is informative and has value. If these players possess similar physical abilities, would you honestly select the latter over the former?

Competitiveness and hard-work are great, but those traits alone don't help a person/player overcome failure. You can shoot ten thousand jump shots a day, but if you're fixated on the one you missed, you're unlikely to fare as well as the guy who doesn't give a shit about missing. And if you truly think that a player's mental ability/attitude doesn't matter, then why did Nick Anderson suddenly become a 40% free throw shooter?

So we have two examples of Fultz keeping his head up and keeping working.
When he got put on the JV team.
This season there's zero indication he stopped working. Including coming back and getting a tripple double (the youngest in league history btw) without his shot.

Hence my what is the argument?

Edit and as for Anderson I don't know do you?
Again you are assuming a perceived trait is related, which is my whole point

 

[JohnnyTheBone]

Who is discussing narratives? You're not talking to Skip Bayless, dude. Nowhere in my posts am I making judgments on a player/person's self-worth or calling anyone lazy or weak.

These guys are in the NBA, They're all insanely competitive and gifted. We're working on a scale. But there are obviously differences in player personalities and they clearly matter. It's true in every other profession - why would it be different in the NBA?

It's not a question of can or can't. It's a question of likely and not likely. If one player keeps his head up after failure and another player slumps his shoulders, that's a piece of data which is informative and has value. If these players possess similar physical abilities, would you honestly select the latter over the former?

Competitiveness and hard-work are great, but those traits alone don't help a person/player overcome failure. You can shoot ten thousand jump shots a day, but if you're fixated on the one you missed, you're unlikely to fare as well as the guy who doesn't give a shit about missing. And if you truly think that a player's mental ability/attitude doesn't matter, then why did Nick Anderson suddenly become a 40% free throw shooter?

Good post, MC. You introduced concepts I hadn't previously pondered, and I'm better for it. Thank you.

 

[ManicCompression]

London - you’re arguing that player personality types are bs and that we don’t have access to data to make somewhat educated guesses about them. To me, that’s a bit silly.

Here’s the third result that comes up when you google “nick Anderson free throws”: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/orlando-magic/os-magic-nick-anderson-brian-schmitz-0610-20150609-column.html

It took Anderson years to put those four missed free throws behind him and come out on the other side whole.

"I made it," he said. "I'm not afraid. I'm not ashamed. I used to be — I admit to that. I fought with it for a long time. I struggled with it."

 

[Sam Ray Not]

You don't have to be Swaggy P to be determined.

 

[LondonSox]

I'm saying you have no idea what players personality types are, esp rookies who have played a handful of games.
Saying you can judge a personality from body language etc is quite a reach.

Personalities obviously impact players, I'm not disputing that.
I'm also saying, in this case, it's fair to question if people are implying his personality from the issues.

Ie if he's struggling like this he must be x personality type. Which is backwards
As was LeBron btw, he was mentally soft because he hadn't won yet, and his exit from clevland etc. Blah blah. Ie results > people's assumption of personality.

Ok maybe at extremes (Garnett maybe?) Personality can be seen, but the implication is that expressive/ extroverts are better. But introverts can be confident and competitive but be calm. Is Kawhi worse because he's very calm and rarely shows emotion?

 

[snowmanny]

So what are you saying about Fultz? You said you were concerned the Sixers “broke” him. Did you mean his confidence, his mechanics, his physical well-being or something else? Do you think he’s fine and progressing slowly, not very good, hurt, or something else? Are you saying it’s a psychological issue but folks shouldn’t speculate or make assumptions on the nature of the psychological issue (on a message board)?

Ainge of course is well known for evaluating athletes in part based on personality types and specifically didn’t pick Fultz to many people’s (yours) shock and never said publicly (as far as I know) what he didn’t see in Fultz (it was something) so folks will wonder if the psych component was a factor. I do.

 

[ManicCompression]

Again, this is not a black and white issue. No one can be certain about anything. We're making estimates and then using that to calculate risk (and how that effects a player's value).

I'm saying you have no idea what players personality types are, esp rookies who have played a handful of games.
Saying you can judge a personality from body language etc is quite a reach.

We can definitely watch games, videos from practices, read articles, read social media and infer things from the way organizations prioritize players in the draft or on the trade market. This doesn't give us the final word on a player but it has some value in the same way that a rookie flashing better handles in a game can indicate their future playmaking skills. It doesn't mean that player will for sure become a playmaker, it just flashes that something is there.

Personalities obviously impact players, I'm not disputing that.
I'm also saying, in this case, it's fair to question if people are implying his personality from the issues.

Ie if he's struggling like this he must be x personality type. Which is backwards

I've honestly wanted to avoid addressing Markelle specifically (and just address the macro questions of player personalities), but the dude's current shooting coach said he has the yips. The fact that he has the yips tells us something about him because plenty of players get injured and don't forget how to shoot.

This doesn't mean he's weak.
It doesn't mean he's not a hard worker.
It doesn't mean he's not competitive.
It doesn't mean he's less than.

It means that he has an extra hurdle that other players don't have to go through. That simple fact alone raises his risk profile in comparison to players who don't have the yips.

If he gets through it, great! It sounds like there are positive indicators. Maybe he'll come out the other side of this thing even better prepared to bulldoze the NBA. But don't act like we can't glean something from the fact that he has had difficulty with an issue that doesn't effect 99.9% of other NBA players.

As was LeBron btw, he was mentally soft because he hadn't won yet, and his exit from clevland etc. Blah blah. Ie results > people's assumption of personality.

I don't know why you keep bringing up LeBron but I think you can definitely look at moments from earlier in his career (case in point, The Decision) and infer certain things about his personality that would turn out to be true (like a narcissism that both drives him to be the best player of all time but also attracts/wants a circus around him). But that's a longer conversation.

Ok maybe at extremes (Garnett maybe?) Personality can be seen, but the implication is that expressive/ extroverts are better. But introverts can be confident and competitive but be calm. Is Kawhi worse because he's very calm and rarely shows emotion?

You keep placing value on traits, which is strange. This isn't a math problem. It's not like hard work + competitiveness + extroversion = great player. It's more like a slow cooker chili recipe. All of these traits are tossed into a pot, they mix together, mature over time and then you end up with a meal. Everyone has their own recipe, and they all taste differently. Not better or worse, they're just different. So, no, Kawhi is obviously not worse because he's very calm and rarely shows emotion. That's just how his competitiveness manifests itself on the court and it's all a part of this mix that produces a very effective, efficient player who apparently wants to live near Riverside, CA for some reason.

 

[Bosox1528]

I think mental health issues is a big red herring.

It's definitely possible Fultz has mental health issues with the way he acts on social media, but I'm not sure that's his main concern. His biggest problem is clearly the yips, which is a neurological problem, not a psychological one.

 

[snowmanny]

Um. That depends on how you define yips, neurological and psychological. Which part of the nervous system is disordered in the yips?

 

[bankshot1]

I'm neither a neurologist or psychologist, just a fan, and I've seen yips from Blass to Sax to Knoblaugh to Sasser to Lester, and some of these guys overcame the issue, some didn't.

What strikes me about Fultz and what leads me to susepct its psychological is that in his 17 NBA games (about 275 minutes of court time) in the '17-'18 season, he launched just one 3-point shot. In a game that stresses the "3" and presumably with the encouragement of teammates he would not or could not attempt a "3". He was 0-1, so its not like he was brutal, he wouldn't shoot. (he was 46/117 in 2s).

He may be killing it in practice, but something is blocking him from game time performance.

 

[Devizier]

Um. That depends on how you define yips, neurological and psychological. Which part of the nervous system is disordered in the yips?

This has been a subject of research, believe it or not.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=A+Multidisciplinary+Study+of+the+‘Yips’+Phenomenon+in+Golf

I'm not sure how reliable said research is; self-reporting always gives me the heebie jeebies.

 

[snowmanny]

Yes. But I’m not sure that’s applicable to Fultz.

 

[benhogan]

This has been a subject of research, believe it or not.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=A+Multidisciplinary+Study+of+the+‘Yips’+Phenomenon+in+Golf

I'm not sure how reliable said research is; self-reporting always gives me the heebie jeebies.

Upon further thought, I'd say Markelle is suffering more from the shanks than the yips.

Any chance we see Markelle in Summer League? If it was something physical last season, Markelle should be chomping at the bit to get back on the court. If its "other" I'd expect him to stay out of the limelight and go solo in a gym with Hanlan.

 

[Bosox1528]

I'm neither a neurologist or psychologist, just a fan, and I've seen yips from Blass to Sax to Knoblaugh to Sasser to Lester, and some of these guys overcame the issue, some didn't.

What strikes me about Fultz and what leads me to susepct its psychological is that in his 17 NBA games (about 275 minutes of court time) in the '17-'18 season, he launched just one 3-point shot. In a game that stresses the "3" and presumably with the encouragement of teammates he would not or could not attempt a "3". He was 0-1, so its not like he was brutal, he wouldn't shoot. (he was 46/117 in 2s).

He may be killing it in practice, but something is blocking him from game time performance.

Well, he's definitely not killing it in practice. We've seen videos. It was not pretty. He can't even make a 3 in practice.

That suggests to me that Fultz's shot is way further gone than the public perception is. Ben Simmons can drain 3s in practice. Fultz can't even get there. Taking only 1 three-pointer doesn't necessarily make it a mental issue, it could just mean he knows it won't go in

 

[Bosox1528]

Um. That depends on how you define yips, neurological and psychological. Which part of the nervous system is disordered in the yips?

Motor skills

 

[bankshot1]

Taking only 1 three-pointer doesn't necessarily make it a mental issue, it could just mean he knows it won't go in

Armed only with my Intro to Psych 101 which I mostly slept through, for an elite athlete to assume failure at his chosen profession and not even try for fear of failure would suggest to me an emotional block.

And I see our time is up

heh

 

[snowmanny]

Motor skills

I don't see the evidence that Fultz has a neurological problem with his fine motor skills. Has he seen a neurologist? I would also argue that the evidence that Rick Ankiel had a (edit: literally disabling) neurological disorder but put up an OPS+ of 120 while playing centerfield is pretty weak.

 

[Reverend]

This has been a subject of research, believe it or not.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=A+Multidisciplinary+Study+of+the+‘Yips’+Phenomenon+in+Golf

I'm not sure how reliable said research is; self-reporting always gives me the heebie jeebies.

The first line of that defines yips as neurological. No offense, but saying that supports the notion that it's neurological is the epitome of begging the question.

 

[slamminsammya]

In which we veer headlong into unsettled debates about the boundaries between psychology, cognitive science, neuroscience, and philosophy of mind. Get me Daniel Dennett, Drew Hanlen, and Phineas Gage stat!

I am actually confident he will turn it around, based on nothing but a feeling. The same feeling that will turn his shot around.

 

[JCizzle]

It looks like he won't be participating in summer league this year. The guy needs reps, but I guess his shot must still be coming along.

https://www.libertyballers.com/platform/amp/2018/6/30/17521626/markelle-fultz-not-expected-to-play-in-2018-summer-league

 

[DJnVa]

A less rosy view of the Sixers situation: https://www.theringer.com/nba/2018/7/6/17538272/philadelphia-76ers-free-agency-kawhi-leonard-ben-simmons

Considering the way this offseason has gone so far, it’s possible that the Sixers’ window to build something significant is smaller than we though

The Sixers fancy themselves a free-agent landing spot because they have two young superstars in place, a bunch of money to spend, and a marvelous new training facility. But compared with what the Warriors have, in terms of team and lifestyle in the Bay Area, or what LeBron and the Lakers are building in Los Angeles, the Sixers’ situation isn’t as attractive, which makes me wonder whether maybe the Philly-as-a-destination narrative was a bit overblown and whether the franchise will be playing catch-up for a while.

 

[BigSoxFan]

A less rosy view of the Sixers situation: https://www.theringer.com/nba/2018/7/6/17538272/philadelphia-76ers-free-agency-kawhi-leonard-ben-simmons

Not sure I fully agree with their analysis. This team, as it's currently constructed, will be a top 3-4 EC team for the next several years as long as Embiid stays healthy. While I agree that they could use another elite player to truly contend, there is still plenty of time to find that piece. If Fultz finds his jumper, there you go. Saric may never be a star but he just put up 15/7 shooting 39% from downtown as a 23 year-old. Right now, the Celtics are the only team who I'd take over Philly in the EC over the next few years. And if Kyrie bolts next summer, which is possible, that gap narrows considerably. The Sixers are well-positioned to pounce and they'll have the ability to sign one next summer. I'd be surprised if we're sitting here a year from now and they've been unable to land another impact guy via trade or FA.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

With respect to the yips, y'all might be interested in the story of Hayden Hurst - former Pirates draft choice who could throw 95+ but got the yips and was a first round draft pick of the Ravens. Pretty amazing story here: https://www.baltimoreravens.com/news/how-the-yips-ruined-hayden-hurst-s-arm-tortured-his-mind-and-revealed-his-passio. One snippet:

Hurst now says, without a doubt, that he was in a depression. His uncle and cousin both struggled with depression and both committed suicide.

Not only did he hide his feelings from his family, but Hurst was also isolated by his teammates. They were so spooked that they didn’t want to be near him while he pitched because they feared his yips could spread like a disease. Hurst was alone with his thoughts.

“It’s a battle inside your head every single second of the day,” Hurst said. “You second-guess what you’re doing, why you’re doing it, why this is happening to you.

“There was a failure of letting my family down. But I think as much as I didn’t want to disappoint my family, I didn’t want to disappoint myself. I never want to fail at anything; that’s just the competitor and man that I am.”

So he kept working … and working. Elarton has since coached other players who had the yips. None tried to conquer the affliction as long as Hurst did.

“It’s so mentally exhausting that it eventually becomes not worth the toll that it takes on you,” Elarton said.​

 

[Jimbodandy]

Not sure I fully agree with their analysis. This team, as it's currently constructed, will be a top 3-4 EC team for the next several years as long as Embiid stays healthy. While I agree that they could use another elite player to truly contend, there is still plenty of time to find that piece. If Fultz finds his jumper, there you go. Saric may never be a star but he just put up 15/7 shooting 39% from downtown as a 23 year-old. Right now, the Celtics are the only team who I'd take over Philly in the EC over the next few years. And if Kyrie bolts next summer, which is possible, that gap narrows considerably. The Sixers are well-positioned to pounce and they'll have the ability to sign one next summer. I'd be surprised if we're sitting here a year from now and they've been unable to land another impact guy via trade or FA.

If you wouldn't mind elaborating, I'd be interested in why you think this highly of Philly. I love Embiid and Simmons, and Saric is no slouch, but they look closer to me to Milwaukee than Boston. Even Milwaukee took the Celtics to seven games last year.

Is Fultz sorting out his jumper enough for you to see them as a legit EC representative, or is it because of their space and theoretical big free agent help?

 

[Bosox1528]

Not sure I fully agree with their analysis. This team, as it's currently constructed, will be a top 3-4 EC team for the next several years as long as Embiid stays healthy. While I agree that they could use another elite player to truly contend, there is still plenty of time to find that piece. If Fultz finds his jumper, there you go. Saric may never be a star but he just put up 15/7 shooting 39% from downtown as a 23 year-old. Right now, the Celtics are the only team who I'd take over Philly in the EC over the next few years. And if Kyrie bolts next summer, which is possible, that gap narrows considerably. The Sixers are well-positioned to pounce and they'll have the ability to sign one next summer. I'd be surprised if we're sitting here a year from now and they've been unable to land another impact guy via trade or FA.

The way things currently stand, I don't think they have enough. I don't think that Ben Simmons and Joel Embiid will ever be good enough to be the best 2 players on a championship team without other stars. If Simmons develops a jump shot, that could change, but I find that extremely unlikely, as people who flat out can't shoot like Simmons don't usually learn to shoot. Not having a jump shot is so limiting. Embiid is a great player but he's not an MVP level player, and he's 24, so I wouldn't expect too much growth.

I think if they don't get another star and if Simmons doesn't develop a jump shot (both of which I think are likely outcomes), the Sixers' ceiling is Raptors 2.0

 

[BigSoxFan]

If you wouldn't mind elaborating, I'd be interested in why you think this highly of Philly. I love Embiid and Simmons, and Saric is no slouch, but they look closer to me to Milwaukee than Boston. Even Milwaukee took the Celtics to seven games last year.

Is Fultz sorting out his jumper enough for you to see them as a legit EC representative, or is it because of their space and theoretical big free agent help?

Next year, you could very well be right but I think that's more of a point of how good we expect the Celtics to be next year (82-0, right?)

With LeBron gone, the Eastern Conference is incredibly weak right now. The Celtics should be a juggernaut but after them, you're left with a bunch of really flawed teams. I view Philly as the next best team in the short-term and will go down the list:

Toronto: Lowry turns 33 in March. He's likely played his best basketball. DeRozan turns 29 so he's probably in the middle of his prime but falls short as a true elite guy in my book. The rest of the roster has useful pieces but is pretty meh. I think they've peaked.

Knicks: Right now, they have an injured Porzingis and some raw guys in Ntilikina and Knox. Things could change drastically next summer if they can poach some FAs but for now, definitely Philly.

Nets: Ha.

Cavs: Get ready for a loooooooong rebuild. They won't be a threat unless they land another LeBron in the draft. Right now, they'll be in mid-to-late lotto hell for the foreseeable future.

Pacers: Nice squad and Oladipo really popped last year but they still only have 1 star. If Myles Turner emerges (I thought he took a step back last year), they may enter the picture but for now, I see this team as having a ceiling of what Philly accomplished last year.

Bucks: Even with the Freak last year, they managed to only win 44 games. This is still a team with 1 great player, one good player in Middleton, and then a whole lot of meh. Where is that 2nd star coming from to elevate them past Philly?

Pistons: This team just screams mediocrity for the next few years before Griffin breaks down physically. Not a threat to Philly.

Bulls: I like the direction they're headed in but I don't see any stars on this roster. Markannen is solid. Carter should be as well. But neither guy gets them close to Philly in the coming years.

Heat: Whole lot of mediocrity on this squad and not a lot of flexibility to do anything about it for a few years. And Philly just got done dismantling them in the playoffs. Not a threat.

Wizards: One of the few teams outside Boston that can match Philly's top 2 but the rest of the roster is a tire fire and they really can't ever get out of their own way. This team is more likely to blow it up than challenge Philly as the #2 to Boston.

Hornets: Another Ha.

Magic: Some nice young pieces but still lacking in star power. Very doubtful they'll approach Philly's current position let alone exceed it.

Hawks: Roster is a disaster. No FAs will sign here. And I think they F'd up on passing on JJJ or Doncic. Not a threat.

So, when you look at all these teams, who are you taking over Philly over the next few years? Maybe Toronto, Milwaukee, or Indiana but that's debatable. When I look at Philly, I see a team with 2 very good foundational players, 2 quality starters in Saric/Covington, some solid developmental prospects, some draft capital, plenty of cap space, a good coach, and Fultz (a real x-factor). I fully expect the Celtics to run the East for the next 3-5 years but I see Philly as their prime competitor. And if they can reel in a 3rd star, I think they'll be right there with us if Embiid stays healthy.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

Next year, you could very well be right but I think that's more of a point of how good we expect the Celtics to be next year (82-0, right?)

With LeBron gone, the Eastern Conference is incredibly weak right now. The Celtics should be a juggernaut but after them, you're left with a bunch of really flawed teams. I view Philly as the next best team in the short-term and will go down the list:

Toronto: Lowry turns 33 in March. He's likely played his best basketball. DeRozan turns 29 so he's probably in the middle of his prime but falls short as a true elite guy in my book. The rest of the roster has useful pieces but is pretty meh. I think they've peaked.

Knicks: Right now, they have an injured Porzingis and some raw guys in Ntilikina and Knox. Things could change drastically next summer if they can poach some FAs but for now, definitely Philly.

Nets: Ha.

Cavs: Get ready for a loooooooong rebuild. They won't be a threat unless they land another LeBron in the draft. Right now, they'll be in mid-to-late lotto hell for the foreseeable future.

Pacers: Nice squad and Oladipo really popped last year but they still only have 1 star. If Myles Turner emerges (I thought he took a step back last year), they may enter the picture but for now, I see this team as having a ceiling of what Philly accomplished last year.

Bucks: Even with the Freak last year, they managed to only win 44 games. This is still a team with 1 great player, one good player in Middleton, and then a whole lot of meh. Where is that 2nd star coming from to elevate them past Philly?

Pistons: This team just screams mediocrity for the next few years before Griffin breaks down physically. Not a threat to Philly.

Bulls: I like the direction they're headed in but I don't see any stars on this roster. Markannen is solid. Carter should be as well. But neither guy gets them close to Philly in the coming years.

Heat: Whole lot of mediocrity on this squad and not a lot of flexibility to do anything about it for a few years. And Philly just got done dismantling them in the playoffs. Not a threat.

Wizards: One of the few teams outside Boston that can match Philly's top 2 but the rest of the roster is a tire fire and they really can't ever get out of their own way. This team is more likely to blow it up than challenge Philly as the #2 to Boston.

Hornets: Another Ha.

Magic: Some nice young pieces but still lacking in star power. Very doubtful they'll approach Philly's current position let alone exceed it.

Hawks: Roster is a disaster. No FAs will sign here. And I think they F'd up on passing on JJJ or Doncic. Not a threat.

So, when you look at all these teams, who are you taking over Philly over the next few years? Maybe Toronto, Milwaukee, or Indiana but that's debatable. When I look at Philly, I see a team with 2 very good foundational players, 2 quality starters in Saric/Covington, some solid developmental prospects, some draft capital, plenty of cap space, a good coach, and Fultz (a real x-factor). I fully expect the Celtics to run the East for the next 3-5 years but I see Philly as their prime competitor. And if they can reel in a 3rd star, I think they'll be right there with us if Embiid stays healthy.

Nice post. So we have Cs, PHI, TOR, WASH, MIL, and MIA as playoff locks. Wonder who 7 & 8 are going to be? Would anyone be surprised if BRK makes the playoffs the upcoming season?

 

[BigSoxFan]

The way things currently stand, I don't think they have enough. I don't think that Ben Simmons and Joel Embiid will ever be good enough to be the best 2 players on a championship team without other stars. If Simmons develops a jump shot, that could change, but I find that extremely unlikely, as people who flat out can't shoot like Simmons don't usually learn to shoot. Not having a jump shot is so limiting. Embiid is a great player but he's not an MVP level player, and he's 24, so I wouldn't expect too much growth.

I think if they don't get another star and if Simmons doesn't develop a jump shot (both of which I think are likely outcomes), the Sixers' ceiling is Raptors 2.0

The Sixers won 52 games last year despite Embiid missing 19 regular season games, Simmons playing in his first NBA season, Fultz doing absolutely nothing, and Saric playing in his age 23 season. Despite all that, they made the 2nd round and gave the Celtics a tough series. I get that Kyrie/Hayward weren't playing but the Sixers clearly showed that they could compete with the best. This is a young team with draft capital and FA cap space. Right now, they don't have enough to beat the top 3-4 teams in the league but I also don't think they're that far off either. I do agree that this is a pivotal time for them. In order to win a title, they need that 3rd star player. This is why I think they will ultimately take a gamble on Kawhi.

 

[Jimbodandy]

Thanks BSF. Makes a lot of sense.

 

[benhogan]

Nice post. So we have Cs, PHI, TOR, WASH, MIL, and MIA as playoff locks. Wonder who 7 & 8 are going to be? Would anyone be surprised if BRK makes the playoffs the upcoming season?

I'd be surprised if BRK finished ahead of IND, CHAR, DET. Maybe it's just me but I don't care for D'Angelo Russell. Whenever I watched them Russell had carte blanche to launch off balance, fade-away 3s.

 

[heavyde050]

The Sixers won 52 games last year despite Embiid missing 19 regular season games, Simmons playing in his first NBA season, Fultz doing absolutely nothing, and Saric playing in his age 23 season. Despite all that, they made the 2nd round and gave the Celtics a tough series. I get that Kyrie/Hayward weren't playing but the Sixers clearly showed that they could compete with the best. This is a young team with draft capital and FA cap space. Right now, they don't have enough to beat the top 3-4 teams in the league but I also don't think they're that far off either. I do agree that this is a pivotal time for them. In order to win a title, they need that 3rd star player. This is why I think they will ultimately take a gamble on Kawhi.

The Sixers were good (and definitely ahead of schedule) last year. But that final record is really fueled by a 16 game win streak to close out the regular season.
I mean the team only lost 3 times after March 1.
That type of play isn’t sustainable.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/PHI/2018_games.html