Knicks · Ball v. Fox (page 2)
At 6-6 he can see over anyone regardless of athleticism. Hes a good athlete--not great but has tremendous length. He plays the way the NBA is. He takes his 3's from NBA range and will shoot at any angle from deep. I dont like his form--but they go in at a high rate. So youre getting a player who has incredible vision that has to be guarded out to 30 feet with vision and court awareness to make everyone better. Hes a great rebounder and very good defender--he also has a good/great assist to TO ratio.
This team needs a leader--it needs brains. This draft pick isnt about the triangle its about the organization for the next 15 years. Ive come to the conclusion that for us if we get pick #1--despite some very attractive alternatives--this should be our guy. We need him. He will help KP and Willy G--he will help guys get good shots and help our pace for many many years.
yellowboy90 wrote:WaltLongmire wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:Ball has an advanced feel for the game and court vision that you dont see very often. We have no shot of getting either. Who ever gets Ball will have a franchise player. Think he will go on to do special things in NBA. His only negative against NC was that he was too unselfish. And that he has a jackass for a dad.Athletic enough to defend against NBA PGs? Have not watched him enough to know this...but did not see a good looking defender in that game vs KU.
If I am the GM I do not look to build a team with Ball as a PG but I'd first look at him as a SG.
This is pretty funny. Ball is an amazing passer
BigRedDog wrote:yellowboy90 wrote:WaltLongmire wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:Ball has an advanced feel for the game and court vision that you dont see very often. We have no shot of getting either. Who ever gets Ball will have a franchise player. Think he will go on to do special things in NBA. His only negative against NC was that he was too unselfish. And that he has a jackass for a dad.Athletic enough to defend against NBA PGs? Have not watched him enough to know this...but did not see a good looking defender in that game vs KU.
If I am the GM I do not look to build a team with Ball as a PG but I'd first look at him as a SG.
This is pretty funny. Ball is an amazing passer
He is but that doesn't make him a point guard necessarily in the high pnr landscape the NBA is in. I think he will get most of his assist to start out pushing the ball up the court or coming off curl screens that creates passing opps to back to the screener or to the corner when the help defense collapse down to stop Ball and the screener. I think he needs to go to a team in a system like GSW but he will most likely go to a team that puts him in High PnRs and tell him to create against stronger quicker guards that will harass him much like the 171 lbs Fox did. He will need to really work on his handle much like Curry and Harden did but both of those guys stayed in school longer and had another year to develop without NBA expectations. Harden landed in an even better situation when he was drafted by OKC so he had even more year to develop his craft without franchise saving expectations. Both Curry and Harden are know quasi-pgs but really their just two of the best passing sgs in the league. When I say I would build around him like he is an SG that doesn't mean he would not have the ball in his hands but I would also pair with another ball handler that can guard PGs to lessen his load as he starts his career. You have to start off in stages when you try to build around players and to start his career that is how I would look at it until his play says other wise.
yellowboy90 wrote:I think Dennis Smith will be a better pro than Fox on both sides of the ball.
I like Dennis Smith too and would be happy if we drafted him. But I don't think his defensive or playmaking instincts are on the same level as fox. His scoring ability one on one is better, but he's going to need to learn how to channel that in a team concept. But he's the safest bet of the three from a physical standpoint. I think Fox will get there, I just worry about his J. As for Ball, his passing instincts are there, but is he a guy who'll create for you at the end of the shotclock? And I don't mean long, unsustainable J's off the dribble. Will he be able to muscle guys down into the paint and shoot over them with that release? How do you hide him on defense? UCLA also had Kyle Anderson, who was a good passer, but his physical limitations have kept him from getting more minutes. Ball is a better athlete than Kyle, but the same questions will apply on defense. Think about all the taller pointguards that got drafted. Most of them ended up playing the 2 or 3 in the NBA because they couldn't handle quicker, smaller players.
BigDaddyG wrote:SocraticBallin22 wrote:
Con: Ball is an average athlete with below average strength who has shown good defensive ability but unknown if it will translate to NBA level.Ball might be average for NBA standards, but he is below avg. by positional standards right now. I remember a guy named Walt Williams who played for the University of Maryland. Great handle, good vision, but he had to switch positions. He Just couldn't guard the position. I'm still inclined to say Ball over Fox, but the margin gets smaller the more time I have to think about it. Will Ball be able to keep up athletically? Would we need another combo guard to cover for him? He'll definitely need time to fill out. Then I think of guys like Steve Nash and Mark Jackson who learned to be effective despite their physical limitations and that makes me feel better about his limitations. The shot doesn't bother me as long as it goes in, just like with Kevin Martin. Fox's J is also a huge concern. There are some guys who were able to develop, but there are plenty of guys who couldn't.
LArry Bird was below average too. Make JAckson too.
I like what I see out of Ball. The shot needs work, (Houston's job) and the father needs to stop hogging the spotlight from his own kids.
Not versed on Fox so I can't comment on him.
GoNyGoNyGo wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:SocraticBallin22 wrote:
Con: Ball is an average athlete with below average strength who has shown good defensive ability but unknown if it will translate to NBA level.Ball might be average for NBA standards, but he is below avg. by positional standards right now. I remember a guy named Walt Williams who played for the University of Maryland. Great handle, good vision, but he had to switch positions. He Just couldn't guard the position. I'm still inclined to say Ball over Fox, but the margin gets smaller the more time I have to think about it. Will Ball be able to keep up athletically? Would we need another combo guard to cover for him? He'll definitely need time to fill out. Then I think of guys like Steve Nash and Mark Jackson who learned to be effective despite their physical limitations and that makes me feel better about his limitations. The shot doesn't bother me as long as it goes in, just like with Kevin Martin. Fox's J is also a huge concern. There are some guys who were able to develop, but there are plenty of guys who couldn't.
LArry Bird was below average too. Make JAckson too.
I like what I see out of Ball. The shot needs work, (Houston's job) and the father needs to stop hogging the spotlight from his own kids.
Not versed on Fox so I can't comment on him.
The shot is funny but if you look closely the follow through is perfect
BRIGGS wrote:GoNyGoNyGo wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:SocraticBallin22 wrote:
Con: Ball is an average athlete with below average strength who has shown good defensive ability but unknown if it will translate to NBA level.Ball might be average for NBA standards, but he is below avg. by positional standards right now. I remember a guy named Walt Williams who played for the University of Maryland. Great handle, good vision, but he had to switch positions. He Just couldn't guard the position. I'm still inclined to say Ball over Fox, but the margin gets smaller the more time I have to think about it. Will Ball be able to keep up athletically? Would we need another combo guard to cover for him? He'll definitely need time to fill out. Then I think of guys like Steve Nash and Mark Jackson who learned to be effective despite their physical limitations and that makes me feel better about his limitations. The shot doesn't bother me as long as it goes in, just like with Kevin Martin. Fox's J is also a huge concern. There are some guys who were able to develop, but there are plenty of guys who couldn't.
LArry Bird was below average too. Make JAckson too.
I like what I see out of Ball. The shot needs work, (Houston's job) and the father needs to stop hogging the spotlight from his own kids.
Not versed on Fox so I can't comment on him.
The shot is funny but if you look closely the follow through is perfect
Agreed. Any issue with his release are overblown. His shot will be just fine in the league, unorthodoxed and all.
GoNyGoNyGo wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:SocraticBallin22 wrote:
Con: Ball is an average athlete with below average strength who has shown good defensive ability but unknown if it will translate to NBA level.Ball might be average for NBA standards, but he is below avg. by positional standards right now. I remember a guy named Walt Williams who played for the University of Maryland. Great handle, good vision, but he had to switch positions. He Just couldn't guard the position. I'm still inclined to say Ball over Fox, but the margin gets smaller the more time I have to think about it. Will Ball be able to keep up athletically? Would we need another combo guard to cover for him? He'll definitely need time to fill out. Then I think of guys like Steve Nash and Mark Jackson who learned to be effective despite their physical limitations and that makes me feel better about his limitations. The shot doesn't bother me as long as it goes in, just like with Kevin Martin. Fox's J is also a huge concern. There are some guys who were able to develop, but there are plenty of guys who couldn't.
LArry Bird was below average too. Make JAckson too.
I like what I see out of Ball. The shot needs work, (Houston's job) and the father needs to stop hogging the spotlight from his own kids.
Not versed on Fox so I can't comment on him.
And Mark Jackson sucked at defense. Larry Legend is one of the all-time greats, so I won't even mention him. Back to Jackson, one of the reasons his career wasn't greater is because he was a liability on D. I remember he would have to be taken out in late game situations for defensive reasons. He got better as time went on, but it took a while.
yellowboy90 wrote:I think Dennis Smith will be a better pro than Fox on both sides of the ball.
I agree with you based on his strength advantage and his shooting. I think he's a better distributor too from what I've seen. NBA teams need that shooting from their PGs these days and not Rondo types.
reub wrote:yellowboy90 wrote:I think Dennis Smith will be a better pro than Fox on both sides of the ball.I agree with you based on his strength advantage and his shooting. I think he's a better distributor too from what I've seen. NBA teams need that shooting from their PGs these days and not Rondo types.
I think he has Dam Lillard talent but he needs better coaching to stay away from some of the negatives Lillard as picked up over time. He needs a coach that will get him to play defense consistently and not be such a gunner. I think lillard would have developed better if Portland could've kept more of their core together. Now it still would be great if Smith reached Lillards level but coaching, health, roster, mental make-up, and a whole lot of favor could get him to a level even higher than Lillard.
SocraticBallin22 wrote:If you had your pick, would you rather have a ball or a fox?Here are the pros and cons:
Pro: Fox has great size and athleticism for the point guard position with a lightning quick first step and quickness.
Pro: Ball has the court vision and awareness of a Jason Kidd/Magic Johnson--the type of vision that maybe comes along once a generation able to make his teammates better.
Pro: Fox is an NBA athlete with strong defensive size and instincts (maybe our biggest weakness)
Con: Ball is an average athlete with below average strength who has shown good defensive ability but unknown if it will translate to NBA level.
Con: Ball is a good shooter but has a funky delivery (more of a set shot) with questions surrounding if he'll be able to get it off in the NBA against top notch athleticism and size.
Con: Ball has an imposing father whom the NY media will eat up and become a distraction for him on and off the court. He will also have unfair pressure from expectations placed upon him from year #1 because of his father's claims of greatness (and a bulls eye on his back from other players).
Pro: Fox has shown that he can finish around the basket with a combination of runners and strong finishes (something necessary from point guards in the NBA)
Con: Fox is an average shooter right now but his shot is not broken. He can definitely improve in this area and become an average shooter making defenses honest.
As you can see, while all the hype is on Ball right now, Fox may be the better player who fits our team and our scheme right now. He's an NBA ready prospect with his size, speed and athleticism who can defend and penetrate from day 1. While Ball may have a bigger prospect ceiling, his one advantage is his amazing court vision and feel for game with good size. However, he's too slight right now lacking strength, with a questionable release point and off the court drama involving his dad. Can he ever be as good as his dad is proclaiming? And what kind of an emotional impact will it have on the kid? If we're sure he will have a Jason Kidd/Magic type impact on the game, I would say take him. But do we really know this?
I would go for the Fox as the safer pick as of now.
EXCELLENT QUESTION AND BREAKDOWN OF PROS AND CONS!
ive been preaching Fox for a while now. i GET the hype of ball and i think its legit. there are just too many question marks to me (can dude hit a pull up jumper, can he finish at the rim, defense?). maybe he can - it wouldnt surprise me if he can.
but id rather have the sure bet in fox - we NEED defense at the PG and thats what he provides 1st. 2nd i love his speed and passing. yes his shooting is a concern (id even argue that its below average) but that can be worked on. and hes quick and dynamic enough where he wont be a liability
( i wonder what the poll is - ill create one)
yellowboy90 wrote:BigRedDog wrote:yellowboy90 wrote:WaltLongmire wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:Ball has an advanced feel for the game and court vision that you dont see very often. We have no shot of getting either. Who ever gets Ball will have a franchise player. Think he will go on to do special things in NBA. His only negative against NC was that he was too unselfish. And that he has a jackass for a dad.Athletic enough to defend against NBA PGs? Have not watched him enough to know this...but did not see a good looking defender in that game vs KU.
If I am the GM I do not look to build a team with Ball as a PG but I'd first look at him as a SG.
This is pretty funny. Ball is an amazing passer
He is but that doesn't make him a point guard necessarily in the high pnr landscape the NBA is in. I think he will get most of his assist to start out pushing the ball up the court or coming off curl screens that creates passing opps to back to the screener or to the corner when the help defense collapse down to stop Ball and the screener. I think he needs to go to a team in a system like GSW but he will most likely go to a team that puts him in High PnRs and tell him to create against stronger quicker guards that will harass him much like the 171 lbs Fox did. He will need to really work on his handle much like Curry and Harden did but both of those guys stayed in school longer and had another year to develop without NBA expectations. Harden landed in an even better situation when he was drafted by OKC so he had even more year to develop his craft without franchise saving expectations. Both Curry and Harden are know quasi-pgs but really their just two of the best passing sgs in the league. When I say I would build around him like he is an SG that doesn't mean he would not have the ball in his hands but I would also pair with another ball handler that can guard PGs to lessen his load as he starts his career. You have to start off in stages when you try to build around players and to start his career that is how I would look at it until his play says other wise.
Does Victor Oladipo tickle your fancy? Is he a great fit with Ball?
NardDogNation wrote:yellowboy90 wrote:BigRedDog wrote:yellowboy90 wrote:WaltLongmire wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:Ball has an advanced feel for the game and court vision that you dont see very often. We have no shot of getting either. Who ever gets Ball will have a franchise player. Think he will go on to do special things in NBA. His only negative against NC was that he was too unselfish. And that he has a jackass for a dad.Athletic enough to defend against NBA PGs? Have not watched him enough to know this...but did not see a good looking defender in that game vs KU.
If I am the GM I do not look to build a team with Ball as a PG but I'd first look at him as a SG.
This is pretty funny. Ball is an amazing passer
He is but that doesn't make him a point guard necessarily in the high pnr landscape the NBA is in. I think he will get most of his assist to start out pushing the ball up the court or coming off curl screens that creates passing opps to back to the screener or to the corner when the help defense collapse down to stop Ball and the screener. I think he needs to go to a team in a system like GSW but he will most likely go to a team that puts him in High PnRs and tell him to create against stronger quicker guards that will harass him much like the 171 lbs Fox did. He will need to really work on his handle much like Curry and Harden did but both of those guys stayed in school longer and had another year to develop without NBA expectations. Harden landed in an even better situation when he was drafted by OKC so he had even more year to develop his craft without franchise saving expectations. Both Curry and Harden are know quasi-pgs but really their just two of the best passing sgs in the league. When I say I would build around him like he is an SG that doesn't mean he would not have the ball in his hands but I would also pair with another ball handler that can guard PGs to lessen his load as he starts his career. You have to start off in stages when you try to build around players and to start his career that is how I would look at it until his play says other wise.
Does Victor Oladipo tickle your fancy? Is he a great fit with Ball?
I thought he would progress better but he would be okay but not ideal. Eric Bledsoe or Dragic type would be better