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.
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.
SocraticBallin22 wrote:If you had your pick, would you rather have a ball or a fox?
I actually don't like Fultz, Fox, Ball or Josh Jackson very much.
If the Knicks get the 1st overall, and keep it, I believe the best decision is to take Fultz
If the Knicks get the 2nd overall, and they keep it, I believe they should select either Fultz or Ball, whomever falls to them.
If the Knicks trade either the first or second overall, I believe the "right pick" is Jayson Tatum. Assuming they can fall back into the draft with a team trading it's high Tier 2 lottery pick and other future assets.
I question whether Ball's shot is going to translate to the NBA, I doubt it. Fultz ha a better chance of consistently creating his own shot at the next level. Ball has the superior court vision.
What I like about Tatum is his fundamental footwork. His footwork is excellent. I realize that can't be a be all, end all for a player evaluation, but his core fundamentals are there. There's a good foundation to build on.
Unfortunately, there is so much pressure for a team to go with the "safe pick" in the draft. I understand why they do it and understand why the Knicks would do it, even if they actually like some other players a bit better.
TripleThreat wrote:SocraticBallin22 wrote:If you had your pick, would you rather have a ball or a fox?
I actually don't like Fultz, Fox, Ball or Josh Jackson very much.
If the Knicks get the 1st overall, and keep it, I believe the best decision is to take Fultz
If the Knicks get the 2nd overall, and they keep it, I believe they should select either Fultz or Ball, whomever falls to them.
If the Knicks trade either the first or second overall, I believe the "right pick" is Jayson Tatum. Assuming they can fall back into the draft with a team trading it's high Tier 2 lottery pick and other future assets.
I question whether Ball's shot is going to translate to the NBA, I doubt it. Fultz ha a better chance of consistently creating his own shot at the next level. Ball has the superior court vision.
What I like about Tatum is his fundamental footwork. His footwork is excellent. I realize that can't be a be all, end all for a player evaluation, but his core fundamentals are there. There's a good foundation to build on.
Unfortunately, there is so much pressure for a team to go with the "safe pick" in the draft. I understand why they do it and understand why the Knicks would do it, even if they actually like some other players a bit better.
I like Josh J better than Tatum - though I go back and forth on those two. I mean we absolutely need to get JJ6 or is it 7?
I see the way Fox took the loss in the tournament, the way Ball was playing like he was looking ahead to the pros. As well as his trash talk about being better than another draft pick. I see a diva in the making.
Might turn out to be a great player, but NY doesn't need another PG diva, especially a rebuilding team. Not to mention that shot of his looks like it will probably get swatted regularly.
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.
Lonzo Ball every day of the week. Perfect player to a lead a team that will emphasize scoring in 3s rather than 2s.
Ball is still physically immature, IMO. Might never be an explosive player, but he will get stronger. I was surprised to see how underdeveloped he was when I watched him. Aso surprised that his father has not worked on his strength training...perhaps that was an issue of disagreement
He has to be able to get to the rim at will to compensate for the kind of jumper he has. I have not watched him enough to know if he can do this.
His court vision was the first thing I noticed with him...nothing can take that from him, but I think he needs more than this to succeed. Can he defend at the NBA level...vs NBA penetrating PGs?
Fox clearly got the better of him in the recent game, and seemed to take the challenge- something Ball did not really do. Both players are unfinished.
I'm not expecting to have a chance to get Ball, but who knows.
Have to let our scouts do their job and put the two through the paces when we work them out. I'll be interested to see if each of them work on their respective weaknesses by the time they start team workouts.
How does Fox have strong defensive size at 171 lbs? That works in college but not in the NBA.
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.
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.
yellowboy90 wrote:How does Fox have strong defensive size at 171 lbs? That works in college but not in the NBA.
Yes he's thin now, but I'm talking about his body frame. He'll put on weight and muscle as he fills out and develops. He is a much better athlete than Ball.
WaltLongmire wrote:Ball is still physically immature, IMO. Might never be an explosive player, but he will get stronger. I was surprised to see how underdeveloped he was when I watched him. Aso surprised that his father has not worked on his strength training...perhaps that was an issue of disagreementHe has to be able to get to the rim at will to compensate for the kind of jumper he has. I have not watched him enough to know if he can do this.
His court vision was the first thing I noticed with him...nothing can take that from him, but I think he needs more than this to succeed. Can he defend at the NBA level...vs NBA penetrating PGs?
Fox clearly got the better of him in the recent game, and seemed to take the challenge- something Ball did not really do. Both players are unfinished.
I'm not expecting to have a chance to get Ball, but who knows.
Have to let our scouts do their job and put the two through the paces when we work them out. I'll be interested to see if each of them work on their respective weaknesses by the time they start team workouts.
Great points. That's what I worry about too. I haven't seen a burst or any explosiveness from him, and you need that to be an elite pg in the NBA. He looks just average athletically. And you're right: to get his quirky shot off, he needs to be able to penetrate and finish.
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.
I think in todays NBA, its more important to play good TEAM defense. And you need good Bball IQ and yes athleticism to do so. Both things I believe he has. Dont think there are too many players that can absolutely stop a talented scoring PG one on one. WIth a few exceptions.
The Knicks will get a good player-- I'd like to think the goal is to get 3-4 good players.
I think Dennis Smith will be a better pro than Fox on both sides of the ball.
meloshouldgo wrote:TripleThreat wrote:SocraticBallin22 wrote:If you had your pick, would you rather have a ball or a fox?
I actually don't like Fultz, Fox, Ball or Josh Jackson very much.
If the Knicks get the 1st overall, and keep it, I believe the best decision is to take Fultz
If the Knicks get the 2nd overall, and they keep it, I believe they should select either Fultz or Ball, whomever falls to them.
If the Knicks trade either the first or second overall, I believe the "right pick" is Jayson Tatum. Assuming they can fall back into the draft with a team trading it's high Tier 2 lottery pick and other future assets.
I question whether Ball's shot is going to translate to the NBA, I doubt it. Fultz ha a better chance of consistently creating his own shot at the next level. Ball has the superior court vision.
What I like about Tatum is his fundamental footwork. His footwork is excellent. I realize that can't be a be all, end all for a player evaluation, but his core fundamentals are there. There's a good foundation to build on.
Unfortunately, there is so much pressure for a team to go with the "safe pick" in the draft. I understand why they do it and understand why the Knicks would do it, even if they actually like some other players a bit better.
I like Josh J better than Tatum - though I go back and forth on those two. I mean we absolutely need to get JJ6 or is it 7?
I agree....Josh looks more dynamic and can finish at the rim...Tatum looks like a better shooter...if Tatum showed(which I did not see in clips) more handle ala Grant Hill...I would be inclined to take him.
meloshouldgo wrote:TripleThreat wrote:SocraticBallin22 wrote:If you had your pick, would you rather have a ball or a fox?
I actually don't like Fultz, Fox, Ball or Josh Jackson very much.
If the Knicks get the 1st overall, and keep it, I believe the best decision is to take Fultz
If the Knicks get the 2nd overall, and they keep it, I believe they should select either Fultz or Ball, whomever falls to them.
If the Knicks trade either the first or second overall, I believe the "right pick" is Jayson Tatum. Assuming they can fall back into the draft with a team trading it's high Tier 2 lottery pick and other future assets.
I question whether Ball's shot is going to translate to the NBA, I doubt it. Fultz ha a better chance of consistently creating his own shot at the next level. Ball has the superior court vision.
What I like about Tatum is his fundamental footwork. His footwork is excellent. I realize that can't be a be all, end all for a player evaluation, but his core fundamentals are there. There's a good foundation to build on.
Unfortunately, there is so much pressure for a team to go with the "safe pick" in the draft. I understand why they do it and understand why the Knicks would do it, even if they actually like some other players a bit better.
I like Josh J better than Tatum - though I go back and forth on those two. I mean we absolutely need to get JJ6 or is it 7?
haha totally forgot about that Gold Standard. Thanks 
yellowboy90 wrote:How does Fox have strong defensive size at 171 lbs? That works in college but not in the NBA.
Yeah 18/19 year old kids never grow.
Look at his face...he is still a babe.
He will gain some weight, but he already has some amazing quickness and footwork to build on.
When I look at his shoulders I see a body you can add some more weight to, and if you add that to what he can already do, you have an excellent defender with good size.
HofstraBBall 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.
I think in todays NBA, its more important to play good TEAM defense. And you need good Bball IQ and yes athleticism to do so. Both things I believe he has. Dont think there are too many players that can absolutely stop a talented scoring PG one on one. WIth a few exceptions.
Agree with the last part...rules favor penetrators, but there are degrees of defensive ability, and Fox is clearly the better defender.
Not sure about Ball's athleticism yet...
I moved Ball back to pick #1. Other than 1 game(where he was hurting from a fall) Ball has been the player who really from almost every prospective is an elite prospect. This is a guy who shot 55% from the field over 41% from 3 on volume shots and had an efg above 66% which is unheard of.
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.
