DeAaron Fox - meeting expectations?
- Thread starter VF21
- Start date
When I read about the low expectations that some of you have with Fox, it makes me chuckle. I get it; you don't want to set yourself up and be disappointed. Or worse, be seen as the guy who thought [insert player name here] was going to be great.
This board is full of all kinds and that's what makes it interesting. Not harmonius, but interesting. Sometimes informative. We have posters that get all hyped overnight and fizzle out when their latest hero doesn't meet their expectations. We have posters who always expect us to be bad and they make you wonder why they are even fans. And all kinds of in-between. Well, bless all of you, one and all. And keep posting!
However you feel about Fox as we near the end of his first season, he has the keys to the car. We go as he goes. Until they take away his keys.
This board is full of all kinds and that's what makes it interesting. Not harmonius, but interesting. Sometimes informative. We have posters that get all hyped overnight and fizzle out when their latest hero doesn't meet their expectations. We have posters who always expect us to be bad and they make you wonder why they are even fans. And all kinds of in-between. Well, bless all of you, one and all. And keep posting!
However you feel about Fox as we near the end of his first season, he has the keys to the car. We go as he goes. Until they take away his keys.
To add to what you just posted, it wasn't that long ago that some of the posters on this forum were willing to give up half the team in a trade to acquire Justise Winslow, which was ridiculous of course. I doubt any of them feel the same way now. Of course the jury is still out on Winslow, and he has managed to be part of the rotation. But he's far from being a star, and may never become one. It seems there's always the flavor of the day, along with the whipping boy of the day. Frankly, I'm not interested in either argument, because both are agenda driven with cherry picked facts for the most part.
I would have to say in this case your recollection is wrong. Tyreke is one of my favourite players, and I was definitely on the pro-Evans side back in the day. I would have to say Evans showed far more signs of being a future all star than Fox has shown, even after accounting for the difference in freedom that the two guys have/had, even putting stats aside. Fox simply has not impacted the game on a consistent basis, particularly as a PG. That's not all on him, as for the most part we've been playing through ZBo and not utilizing him well.
We'll have to disagree on this, but this area is actually where I find him the most lacking. I don't see him effective in using his speed aside from going in a straight line, and I definitely wouldn't describe him as someone who has shown great vision as a playmaker at this point. Agree with you on the intangibles.
So the debate on Fox continues.
Personally, I wanted us to pick him at 5. I was hoping we were either going to get Fox or Tatum and I would have been stoked with either. I think I said somewhere leading up to the draft that if he can put it together, Dennis Smith Jr. has genuine all-star potential and could be the best player from this draft. When he got drafted by Dallas, I said that is the best spot for his realistically.
I wanted Fox for this team because as a player he has all these attributes
- Talent
- You can't teach speed
- Leadership
- Swagger
- Defensive potential
- Offensive potential
Now I expected him to struggle early because of his shot and his slight frame. However, when I look at draft prospects, I try and predict what they can be in 3-4 years time and I am just as excited about Fox now as I was leading up to the draft. All people need to look at is what Fox was like at the start of the season to what he is now. I think he has noticeably improved for anyone paying attention.
His shot, while inconsistent, is better than I expected it to be. He is getting better at creating for others. He is unstoppable in the open court and is learning how to get to the paint in the half court when the defense focuses on him. He shows flashes of great defense and is ice cold when the game is on the line.
I am comfortable in the thought that we do have our PG of the future going forward. He is FAR from a finished product, in fact he has only just started. I think one thing we can be comfortable in going forward is the Fox/Bogdanovic back court. They complement each other really well and I think Fox has so much scope for improvement. As soon as next season, I think we can expect to see more improvement in terms of consistency from that back court.
Now SF, PF and C are all together different issues for me personally.
Personally, I wanted us to pick him at 5. I was hoping we were either going to get Fox or Tatum and I would have been stoked with either. I think I said somewhere leading up to the draft that if he can put it together, Dennis Smith Jr. has genuine all-star potential and could be the best player from this draft. When he got drafted by Dallas, I said that is the best spot for his realistically.
I wanted Fox for this team because as a player he has all these attributes
- Talent
- You can't teach speed
- Leadership
- Swagger
- Defensive potential
- Offensive potential
Now I expected him to struggle early because of his shot and his slight frame. However, when I look at draft prospects, I try and predict what they can be in 3-4 years time and I am just as excited about Fox now as I was leading up to the draft. All people need to look at is what Fox was like at the start of the season to what he is now. I think he has noticeably improved for anyone paying attention.
His shot, while inconsistent, is better than I expected it to be. He is getting better at creating for others. He is unstoppable in the open court and is learning how to get to the paint in the half court when the defense focuses on him. He shows flashes of great defense and is ice cold when the game is on the line.
I am comfortable in the thought that we do have our PG of the future going forward. He is FAR from a finished product, in fact he has only just started. I think one thing we can be comfortable in going forward is the Fox/Bogdanovic back court. They complement each other really well and I think Fox has so much scope for improvement. As soon as next season, I think we can expect to see more improvement in terms of consistency from that back court.
Now SF, PF and C are all together different issues for me personally.
You are right on that but you also have to account for the fact the kings run the worst system possible for him. Its laughable. Two bigs clogging the paint all the time. Postups. No space. In fact, if you wanted to run a system to hide his strenghts you couldnt design one more detrimental to Fox. This is Joergers plan. He thinks that this will help him improve. He said something like We could run middle pick and roll all the time but we wouldnt be better two years from now. Whether that will be true, we will see.
If you think about in which system Fox would shine, it would be a 5-out system with the center stretching the floor as well. We have seen glimpses what Fox can do when there is no one clogging the paint:
If you think about in which system Fox would shine, it would be a 5-out system with the center stretching the floor as well. We have seen glimpses what Fox can do when there is no one clogging the paint:
You are right that as of late he is improving. I certainly am glad he is improving. But my original point was that I don't think you can look at Fox's entire season of work and conclude that he's gonna be a future all star. You have to assume that he will make some pretty significant strides. Compare this to someone like Mitchell, who has already established (signs) that he will be a force to reckon with.
He does have a really sweet euro step that I have to rewind and watch in slow motion every time because it looks like he's taking 4 steps but I've been kinda talking about the point you're making all year as well. When we play the Jazz, Mitchell is constantly breaking down defenders and wreaking havoc in the paint. Even if he misses them, he still gets to an area where he gets a good up close shot. We don't see that a whole lot with Fox unless he can get a good running start. I don't know if it's the system, his moves, his handles or if he takes a bit to get his speed wound up whereas Mitchell can just accelerate from a dead stop. Either way, they play completely the opposite in the half court.
What makes the Rockets offense work so well when Harden has the ball is that the moment he gets to the top of the 3 point line you have Chris Paul, Eric Gordon, Trevor Ariza, Ryan Anderson, etc hovering around different areas of the 3 point line and Clint Capela sags out of the paint. This gives Harden plenty of room to drive and operate as well as a variety of options to kick the ball out to. If Capela and Anderson just camped down in the key all game then that entire offense falls apart and Harden's effectiveness gets slashed. This type of system would be a game changer for De'Aaron Fox. The offense we are running right now will never allow Fox to be at his most effective.
I may be wrong, but I believe that Fox's signature move to the basket is always a "travel".
Here is a short video of which the seond sequence is Fox (the first is Randolph).
It is shown in regular time and then repeated in slow motion.
In my book, that is a travel every day and twice on Sundays.
(The sequence begins with 1:45 left in the third quarter and the score 87-76 Kings)
Remember, you will see it twice, in regular time and THEN in slow motion (and you can use your cursor to slow it down even more and watch it frame by frame):
https://fansided.com/videos/sendton...ly&utm_source=FanSided+Daily&utm_medium=email
I've coached (youth) but never refereed. As I understand the rule, you can move your feet as much as you want while maintaining your dribble, but once you pick up the ball for the last time (cease dribbling) whatever foot Or it could be both/either) foot is on the floor becomes your pivot foot and you can take one step and most of a second step but when that b[pivot foot hiots the floor again, the ball has to be out of your hands or it is a travel. Fox not only fails at this, but he takes most of a thiord step before releasing the shot.
And he does this every time (until they start calling him for it).
Without that move, what has he got?
Not a dependable outside shot (he's no Sweet Lou Williams).
Not enough strength to overpower anyone (he's no Super John Williamson).
And he is most certainly not the second coming of Allen Iverson.
Trade him while you can get value - Frank Mason will do for now.
I'll take a 2019 #1 from a team that you think will be in the lottery then (and their current but aging point guard capable of being an end-of-career backup - how old is Mike Conley?)
Here is a short video of which the seond sequence is Fox (the first is Randolph).
It is shown in regular time and then repeated in slow motion.
In my book, that is a travel every day and twice on Sundays.
(The sequence begins with 1:45 left in the third quarter and the score 87-76 Kings)
Remember, you will see it twice, in regular time and THEN in slow motion (and you can use your cursor to slow it down even more and watch it frame by frame):
https://fansided.com/videos/sendton...ly&utm_source=FanSided+Daily&utm_medium=email
I've coached (youth) but never refereed. As I understand the rule, you can move your feet as much as you want while maintaining your dribble, but once you pick up the ball for the last time (cease dribbling) whatever foot Or it could be both/either) foot is on the floor becomes your pivot foot and you can take one step and most of a second step but when that b[pivot foot hiots the floor again, the ball has to be out of your hands or it is a travel. Fox not only fails at this, but he takes most of a thiord step before releasing the shot.
And he does this every time (until they start calling him for it).
Without that move, what has he got?
Not a dependable outside shot (he's no Sweet Lou Williams).
Not enough strength to overpower anyone (he's no Super John Williamson).
And he is most certainly not the second coming of Allen Iverson.
Trade him while you can get value - Frank Mason will do for now.
I'll take a 2019 #1 from a team that you think will be in the lottery then (and their current but aging point guard capable of being an end-of-career backup - how old is Mike Conley?)
L
Let me clarify:
I'm NOT saying, "Oh my god - we have GOT to trade De'Arron Fox."
or
"TRADE FOX... TRADE FOX".
I was actually at the post game season ticket holder's meeting with him after the recent Lakers game and he is as likeable, honest and direct (in his answers to our questions) as any player I've ever been around.
A true credit to his franchise.
However.
It's clear that he views himself as a go-to guy, "The Man", "Mr. Big Shot", ect, ect.
And I only see him as a nice piece to the puzzle.
If ANOTHER team sees him as more, then I think we would be wise to trade him.
This is situational.
If we had not drafted Frank Mason, one could simply not entertain trading Fox.
But I see this more like when Cleveland took Mark Price in 1986 and then Kevin Johnson in 1987.
It was clear that both had value, but Johnson, the taller, first round pick, had more value.
Price (barely six feet, a second rounder) was still enough - and more importantly, Johnson could bring more in return.
Johnson brought them Larry Nance and they went to the playoffs in seven of the next eight years.
Phoenix also benefited,(11 straight playoff seasons), the proverbial "trade that helps both teams".
The Kings are 2-3 pieces away.
With no draft pick in 2019 - which impacts in that NBA rules don't allow trading the 2018 or 2020 first round pick, not even to package and move up or down. Vlade has tied our hands.
Few point guards are the number one guy on their team. Iverson, maybe Kyrie. But Chris Paul, an excellent Robin,. took New Orleans nowhere. Paul came into the league as the #4 pick in the first round at age 20. Do you think De'Arron Fox will have a better career than Chris Paul? I don't.
But, because the Kings need SO much AND have a competent starter in Mason, better to trade the guy with more value, especially since I don't think he is as good as he has looked (again, see recent referee's reports).
By rights, when you miss on three lottery picks in one decade (that is, you get nothing for Fredette, Robinson or McLemore), your hand is forced and you have to make trades that the Warriors don't have to make. Hmmm, I seem to remember a lot of boobirds when Monte Ellis was traded for what the Dubs needed.
So, circumstances dictate that Fox be traded for (what I believe is currently inflated) value. And if he turns out to be as good as Kevin Johnson, then both teams win.
Let me clarify:
I'm NOT saying, "Oh my god - we have GOT to trade De'Arron Fox."
or
"TRADE FOX... TRADE FOX".
I was actually at the post game season ticket holder's meeting with him after the recent Lakers game and he is as likeable, honest and direct (in his answers to our questions) as any player I've ever been around.
A true credit to his franchise.
However.
It's clear that he views himself as a go-to guy, "The Man", "Mr. Big Shot", ect, ect.
And I only see him as a nice piece to the puzzle.
If ANOTHER team sees him as more, then I think we would be wise to trade him.
This is situational.
If we had not drafted Frank Mason, one could simply not entertain trading Fox.
But I see this more like when Cleveland took Mark Price in 1986 and then Kevin Johnson in 1987.
It was clear that both had value, but Johnson, the taller, first round pick, had more value.
Price (barely six feet, a second rounder) was still enough - and more importantly, Johnson could bring more in return.
Johnson brought them Larry Nance and they went to the playoffs in seven of the next eight years.
Phoenix also benefited,(11 straight playoff seasons), the proverbial "trade that helps both teams".
The Kings are 2-3 pieces away.
With no draft pick in 2019 - which impacts in that NBA rules don't allow trading the 2018 or 2020 first round pick, not even to package and move up or down. Vlade has tied our hands.
Few point guards are the number one guy on their team. Iverson, maybe Kyrie. But Chris Paul, an excellent Robin,. took New Orleans nowhere. Paul came into the league as the #4 pick in the first round at age 20. Do you think De'Arron Fox will have a better career than Chris Paul? I don't.
But, because the Kings need SO much AND have a competent starter in Mason, better to trade the guy with more value, especially since I don't think he is as good as he has looked (again, see recent referee's reports).
By rights, when you miss on three lottery picks in one decade (that is, you get nothing for Fredette, Robinson or McLemore), your hand is forced and you have to make trades that the Warriors don't have to make. Hmmm, I seem to remember a lot of boobirds when Monte Ellis was traded for what the Dubs needed.
So, circumstances dictate that Fox be traded for (what I believe is currently inflated) value. And if he turns out to be as good as Kevin Johnson, then both teams win.
I like DeAaron Fox and I firmly believe in him. You're jumping into a board towards the end of the season and restating arguments that have gone on virtually all year. I honestly don't have the energy to refute your points or reiterate mine at this time.
Circumstances be damned. Fox ain't going nowhere.
Now for an honest but blunt question: Are you a Kings fan or are you a Warriors fan?
Circumstances be damned. Fox ain't going nowhere.
Now for an honest but blunt question: Are you a Kings fan or are you a Warriors fan?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am a fan of great basketball. I was a Warriors fan and season ticket holder when they were exciting (Run TMC years). I now live closer to Sac and have season tix to the Kings. I have renewed for next year. Most of the home games have been sufficiently exciting for the cost. But I was against the Cousins trade and I do not think the rebuild will ultimately be successful (even Nape the Shill seems to be banking on Harry Giles, who may or may not be able to actually get on then court). That trade seems to have been an economic decision, maybe by Vivek or maybe from the other 80% of ownership. Fact is, before the all-star break, Kings had second lowest payroll in the NBA.
If I had season tix to the Warriors now, I would constantly be asking myself "why?" and would sell them for a profit if I could.
Because the reality of the NBA is that home teams have an advantage. So a decent team that wins around 45 games a year, generally wins about 30 of those at home. They will lose to teams that win 50-60 games a year, but those home games will be close and exciting, even f they lose. Even home games against bad teams have a shot at being close and exciting, if your team is good enough only to barely make the playoffs.
If I had Warriors tix now, I would be watching games that were 25 point blowouts by halftime (at home). Bo-ring. Their road games would be more exciting, but I would not be there for those. This excludes times like now when the Warriors are decimated by injuries.
I don't pay for road games, so I do not judge the Kings by whether they get blown out in Washington or not.
Now that I have answered your question, let me just ask why you feel like you can disagree with my position on Fox without stating any reason. Being "too tired" is a weak excuse.
You seem to be saying to me that "You are new here and this has already been discussed".
But there are always new developments and most of Fox's value has been determined by big shots in very recent games - and some of those should never have happened had the refs made the correct calls.
Take the shots by Fox that sent two recent wins into overtime.
The Nets game came down to one play - Kings down by two with 6.1 seconds to go. For some CRAZY reason, Joerger designs a play where Fox will inbound from the side, free throw line extended in the frontcourt. I cannot recall him EVER being the inbounder in the frontcourt prior to this (Joegger seemed to have settled on Jackson or Temple for that role).
The ref simply did not blow his whistle as Fox held the ball longer than five seconds. Had he made the correct call, the balls turns over to the Nets, up 2 with 6.1 seconds to go. The Kings have to foul and if the shooter makes two free throws the game is clinched.
In the recent Miami win, Fox (who is only an average defender - Mason is far superior and also a better rebounder) fouled Drazic with 10.5 seconds left, Heat up 1. If the correct call is made, Drazic probably makes two free throws. Instead, it became a 24 second violation.
(It does not stop there. On the ensuing inbounds pass, Bogi - another player who I have never seen inbound in the frontcourt prior to this play - fails to inbound within 5 seconds but it again is not called. This did not really matter because Randolph missed the shot).
My point is that the Kings would likely have had to shoot a three to tie.
So, if the correct calls are made, Fox doesn't even get either of those game tying shots.
This does not change the fact that he made two big shots in traffic. But it also does not change the fact that neither should have been attempted and the Kings likely lose both games.
As Yogi said, "You could look it up":
http://official.nba.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2018/03/L2M-MIA-SAC-03-14-2018.pdf
http://official.nba.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2018/02/L2M-BKN-SAC-03-01-2018.pdf
You are apparently a moderator and you give me the impression that perhaps you don't want me here or want me to "know my place". If that is correct, please say so and I will immediately depart.
When you get your vim and vigor back, perhaps you can address Fox's signature hip hop to the basket and whether or not it is blatant travelling - eventually, refs will wise up and make that call and then Fox will have to rely on an average to below average outside shot. I would also like to hear your opinion on whether or not you think the career of De'Arron Fox will be better, worse or the same as that of Chris Paul.
I am a fan of great basketball. I was a Warriors fan and season ticket holder when they were exciting (Run TMC years). I now live closer to Sac and have season tix to the Kings. I have renewed for next year. Most of the home games have been sufficiently exciting for the cost. But I was against the Cousins trade and I do not think the rebuild will ultimately be successful (even Nape the Shill seems to be banking on Harry Giles, who may or may not be able to actually get on then court). That trade seems to have been an economic decision, maybe by Vivek or maybe from the other 80% of ownership. Fact is, before the all-star break, Kings had second lowest payroll in the NBA.
If I had season tix to the Warriors now, I would constantly be asking myself "why?" and would sell them for a profit if I could.
Because the reality of the NBA is that home teams have an advantage. So a decent team that wins around 45 games a year, generally wins about 30 of those at home. They will lose to teams that win 50-60 games a year, but those home games will be close and exciting, even f they lose. Even home games against bad teams have a shot at being close and exciting, if your team is good enough only to barely make the playoffs.
If I had Warriors tix now, I would be watching games that were 25 point blowouts by halftime (at home). Bo-ring. Their road games would be more exciting, but I would not be there for those. This excludes times like now when the Warriors are decimated by injuries.
I don't pay for road games, so I do not judge the Kings by whether they get blown out in Washington or not.
Now that I have answered your question, let me just ask why you feel like you can disagree with my position on Fox without stating any reason. Being "too tired" is a weak excuse.
You seem to be saying to me that "You are new here and this has already been discussed".
But there are always new developments and most of Fox's value has been determined by big shots in very recent games - and some of those should never have happened had the refs made the correct calls.
Take the shots by Fox that sent two recent wins into overtime.
The Nets game came down to one play - Kings down by two with 6.1 seconds to go. For some CRAZY reason, Joerger designs a play where Fox will inbound from the side, free throw line extended in the frontcourt. I cannot recall him EVER being the inbounder in the frontcourt prior to this (Joegger seemed to have settled on Jackson or Temple for that role).
The ref simply did not blow his whistle as Fox held the ball longer than five seconds. Had he made the correct call, the balls turns over to the Nets, up 2 with 6.1 seconds to go. The Kings have to foul and if the shooter makes two free throws the game is clinched.
In the recent Miami win, Fox (who is only an average defender - Mason is far superior and also a better rebounder) fouled Drazic with 10.5 seconds left, Heat up 1. If the correct call is made, Drazic probably makes two free throws. Instead, it became a 24 second violation.
(It does not stop there. On the ensuing inbounds pass, Bogi - another player who I have never seen inbound in the frontcourt prior to this play - fails to inbound within 5 seconds but it again is not called. This did not really matter because Randolph missed the shot).
My point is that the Kings would likely have had to shoot a three to tie.
So, if the correct calls are made, Fox doesn't even get either of those game tying shots.
This does not change the fact that he made two big shots in traffic. But it also does not change the fact that neither should have been attempted and the Kings likely lose both games.
As Yogi said, "You could look it up":
http://official.nba.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2018/03/L2M-MIA-SAC-03-14-2018.pdf
http://official.nba.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2018/02/L2M-BKN-SAC-03-01-2018.pdf
You are apparently a moderator and you give me the impression that perhaps you don't want me here or want me to "know my place". If that is correct, please say so and I will immediately depart.
When you get your vim and vigor back, perhaps you can address Fox's signature hip hop to the basket and whether or not it is blatant travelling - eventually, refs will wise up and make that call and then Fox will have to rely on an average to below average outside shot. I would also like to hear your opinion on whether or not you think the career of De'Arron Fox will be better, worse or the same as that of Chris Paul.
Thank you for your response.
I'll address parts of your response:
You have just joined a pretty dynamic board. There are threads on pretty much any topic you can imagine (within our guidelines) and people are welcome and encouraged to participate in as many of them as they choose (or not). Your enthusiasm and apparent knowledge/experience is a welcome addition to our little group. It was, to be honest, a little overwhelming right out of the gate (just my personal opinion and not that of me THE MODERATOR.)
There are others here much better versed in arguing in as much detail as you seem to enjoy. I'm not one of those people. That's why I said I was too tired. Flippant? Perhaps, but that leads me to another point.
You signed up the night before the Warriors game. Your comments were full of Warrior references and it appeared quite possible you might be a Warrior fan troll. Back when the Kings were good, we got opposing team trolls on a frequent basis. Hence, my less than in depth response.
Yes, I am a moderator and have been for almost 17 years. You are more than welcome here and based on what I've seen thus far I think you'll end up in some really good debates/discussions with some of our other members. I apologize for initially suspecting you of being a troll.
I do not participate in most of the very detailed, in-depth discussions of the types of things you are questioning, but there are a number of folks around here who will do so with relish. It's one of the best things about KF - there's someone who will debate/discuss your interests at whatever level you wish to do so.
My opinion of DeFox in comparison to Chris Paul? I have no idea, but I suspect there's a lot more to Fox than we've seen quite yet.
Hope this clears things up. Have a good day.
GO KINGS!!
I'll address parts of your response:
You have just joined a pretty dynamic board. There are threads on pretty much any topic you can imagine (within our guidelines) and people are welcome and encouraged to participate in as many of them as they choose (or not). Your enthusiasm and apparent knowledge/experience is a welcome addition to our little group. It was, to be honest, a little overwhelming right out of the gate (just my personal opinion and not that of me THE MODERATOR.)
There are others here much better versed in arguing in as much detail as you seem to enjoy. I'm not one of those people. That's why I said I was too tired. Flippant? Perhaps, but that leads me to another point.
You signed up the night before the Warriors game. Your comments were full of Warrior references and it appeared quite possible you might be a Warrior fan troll. Back when the Kings were good, we got opposing team trolls on a frequent basis. Hence, my less than in depth response.
Yes, I am a moderator and have been for almost 17 years. You are more than welcome here and based on what I've seen thus far I think you'll end up in some really good debates/discussions with some of our other members. I apologize for initially suspecting you of being a troll.
I do not participate in most of the very detailed, in-depth discussions of the types of things you are questioning, but there are a number of folks around here who will do so with relish. It's one of the best things about KF - there's someone who will debate/discuss your interests at whatever level you wish to do so.
My opinion of DeFox in comparison to Chris Paul? I have no idea, but I suspect there's a lot more to Fox than we've seen quite yet.
Hope this clears things up. Have a good day.
GO KINGS!!
Players routinely travel, carry the ball, foul in the NBA and are not called for it. As you mentioned yourself the fact that some incorrect calls led to the situation in which a player could shine or fail does not change the fact that he did shine in those situations. Yes, Bogi held the ball for 5.28 seconds and they did not call a 5 second violation, but that does not change the fact that Fox was able to create a shot and make it in the clutch.
Btw, here is Bogi inbounding in front court for Skal's 3 to win it last second vs Knicks a week ago:
Btw, here is Bogi inbounding in front court for Skal's 3 to win it last second vs Knicks a week ago:
It’s too early to say with Fox.
But right now, I don’t see consistency with him. I see a guy that disappears for a Qtr or 2 or 3 and then makes a few highlight plays. Which,
Does not compensate for his overall mediocre/bad game. You can tell a player like Lonzo will be a star. He impacts the game on so many levels. Even, with a strange looking shot.
Rebounds, sees the floor like Vintage Rondo or Paul. Defends constantly at a high level.
I want to see more substance than flash from Fox.
But right now, I don’t see consistency with him. I see a guy that disappears for a Qtr or 2 or 3 and then makes a few highlight plays. Which,
Does not compensate for his overall mediocre/bad game. You can tell a player like Lonzo will be a star. He impacts the game on so many levels. Even, with a strange looking shot.
Rebounds, sees the floor like Vintage Rondo or Paul. Defends constantly at a high level.
I want to see more substance than flash from Fox.