Truly amazing player with superstar charisma. Kings won the lottery with this guy. (All pun intended)
We can’t just say he went through a slump that a whole college season. It’s fine he improved and hopefully he can stay somewhere near it
I really think people here are being victimized by putting too much faith into pitifully small-sample sizes... I tried to warn people about this all summer... these are kids we're talking about.... Those stats don't mean crap compared to the eye test....To be fair, he shot .246 from (a shorter) distance in college and .307 as a rookie, so it's not like the pundits weren't on to something. All props to Fox for the work he has put in to become a SIGNIFICANTLY better player this year all around and shooting not the least, but that was in fact a hole in his game.
Ok, well, considering that he didn't have much of an issue shooting the ball before then, what would you refer to it as? I'm asking seriously, not trying to be snarky.
Unless a guy was an elite shooter before college you can’t say 30+ games in college over HS is a slump. You take that seriously considering it’s higher competition only time to go against tia is if the guy was an elite shooter before with perfect form. Example being Bradley Beal, he wasn’t lights out at UF shot 34% on 5 attempts from 3 76% from the line on 4.7 attempts. However he was elite in HS and his form was damn near perfect. Fox obviously was close to elite in HS so it wasn’t a strength than you add 25% shooting on 2 attempts quite frankly that’s pathetic no way around it. His saving grace was that his jumper didn’t look broken it looked smooth and he shot a respectable 74% on 6 attempts from the line.
If Fox shoots anything close to mike Conley from 3 we’re looking at a top 20 15 player
He’s already shooting better than him this year.
What was your point again?I really think people here are being victimized by putting too much faith into pitifully small-sample sizes... I tried to warn people about this all summer... these are kids we're talking about.... Those stats don't mean crap compared to the eye test....
The pundits weren't onto something, clearly, they were fooled.. clearly they didn't look deep enough into the crap they were writing/speaking about, Pundits don't actually get paid for accuracy, they get paid to run their mouth.. I'd argue a keen eye could see it quite clearly....
Trey Lyles shot like what 13% from 3 his season at Kentucky? He then goes to workout for the Jazz and nails an absurd amount of corner 3's and they drafted him because of that workout..... Those stats are for the fans, they in no way shape or form are some be-all-end-all for actual NBA talent evaluators, fans see these players as assets that are underperforming or out performing or performing as expected, thats not how it is in reality though, these kids are PROJECTS it's a big balancing act
When you looked at Fox's shot there was never any legitimate reason to believe his shot was broken.. Only people who put way too much stock in %'s thought that. I'm sorry but the dust has settled on this... People hate to hear that their fears were unfounded, there was never any reason to believe Fox couldn't shoot though.. I've read all the articles on him for years now, I never saw a compelling argument that he couldn't shoot, and certainly he always passed the eye test In my opinion.
All the people on my ignore list here are there for talking wild nonsense about Fox. A younger me would go thru and bump these idiots comments and hold their feet to the fire. Couldn't shoot, wasn't a floor general, all the bogus claims that've been made over the years were here on this forum being perpetuated by a select few...
I think this kid has been a great player for years and the Kings were tanking and running a broken offense last year, its not OH WOW he all of a sudden got so much better. I think that take is HILARIOUS and clearly one that someone who's trying to save face, over concerns that were never ever warranted..
I get that people here have seen tons of lotto picks flame out but that expected doom being projected upon fox here was also unwarranted.... I don't get how people get like that tbh, If I lose 100 coinflips in a row I still think I've got a 50/50 shot on the next.
He hit 11 3's in a HS game
It's just crazy to me, I used to read the De'Aaron Fox scouting report back when Scout.com had him listed as a 4-star shooting guard, that was MANY YEARS AGO, and it just seems like to me the criticisms I read here often during the offseason are what that old crapty ridiculous scouting report FROM YEARS AGO is being repeated.
You'd have to be a complete moron of a college coach, to have the fastest quickest player in the Nation, who's a 6'4" PG, and worried about his 3pt%... It's not a hole in his game... even with his increased %'s you will see the same defense being played vs him on the 3pt line because they must respect his 1st step.. There's no other option on how to defend him.
That college % wasn't consistent throughout the year either, he was ice cold to start and warmed up as it went. So I say, why mash the 2 together? Why is his shooting percentage in college 24% a better indicator than his cold streak or his hot streak? because its some ****ing tremendous sample size? gimmie a break. To me clearly the hot streak to close the season was the true indicator ---- and I'd bet De'Aaron, Coach Cal, the Kings exects/scouts would agree with that.. I'd love to hear a counter argument to that now that the dust has settled.
This kid is the franchise savior put some respekt on his name!!!He's been a beast for years... it's not the result of one offseason, that is like marginalizing the years of progress this kid has made. Which seems to happen here quite often (UNWARRANTED)
Unless a guy was an elite shooter before college you can’t say 30+ games in college over HS is a slump. You take that seriously considering it’s higher competition only time to go against tia is if the guy was an elite shooter before with perfect form. Example being Bradley Beal, he wasn’t lights out at UF shot 34% on 5 attempts from 3 76% from the line on 4.7 attempts. However he was elite in HS and his form was damn near perfect. Fox obviously was close to elite in HS so it wasn’t a strength than you add 25% shooting on 2 attempts quite frankly that’s pathetic no way around it. His saving grace was that his jumper didn’t look broken it looked smooth and he shot a respectable 74% on 6 attempts from the line.
If Fox shoots anything close to mike Conley from 3 we’re looking at a top 20 15 player
so then I ask, is Mike Conley a top 20 player this season?
To be fair, he shot .246 from (a shorter) distance in college and .307 as a rookie, so it's not like the pundits weren't on to something. All props to Fox for the work he has put in to become a SIGNIFICANTLY better player this year all around and shooting not the least, but that was in fact a hole in his game.
I really think people here are being victimized by putting too much faith into pitifully small-sample sizes... I tried to warn people about this all summer... these are kids we're talking about.... Those stats don't mean crap compared to the eye test....
The pundits weren't onto something, clearly, they were fooled.. clearly they didn't look deep enough into the crap they were writing/speaking about, Pundits don't actually get paid for accuracy, they get paid to run their mouth.. I'd argue a keen eye could see it quite clearly....
Trey Lyles shot like what 13% from 3 his season at Kentucky? He then goes to workout for the Jazz and nails an absurd amount of corner 3's and they drafted him because of that workout..... Those stats are for the fans, they in no way shape or form are some be-all-end-all for actual NBA talent evaluators, fans see these players as assets that are underperforming or out performing or performing as expected, thats not how it is in reality though, these kids are PROJECTS it's a big balancing act
When you looked at Fox's shot there was never any legitimate reason to believe his shot was broken.. Only people who put way too much stock in %'s thought that. I'm sorry but the dust has settled on this... People hate to hear that their fears were unfounded, there was never any reason to believe Fox couldn't shoot though.. I've read all the articles on him for years now, I never saw a compelling argument that he couldn't shoot, and certainly he always passed the eye test In my opinion.
All the people on my ignore list here are there for talking wild nonsense about Fox. A younger me would go thru and bump these idiots comments and hold their feet to the fire. Couldn't shoot, wasn't a floor general, all the bogus claims that've been made over the years were here on this forum being perpetuated by a select few...
I think this kid has been a great player for years and the Kings were tanking and running a broken offense last year, its not OH WOW he all of a sudden got so much better. I think that take is HILARIOUS and clearly one that someone who's trying to save face, over concerns that were never ever warranted..
I get that people here have seen tons of lotto picks flame out but that expected doom being projected upon fox here was also unwarranted.... I don't get how people get like that tbh, If I lose 100 coinflips in a row I still think I've got a 50/50 shot on the next.
He hit 11 3's in a HS game
It's just crazy to me, I used to read the De'Aaron Fox scouting report back when Scout.com had him listed as a 4-star shooting guard, that was MANY YEARS AGO, and it just seems like to me the criticisms I read here often during the offseason are what that old crapty ridiculous scouting report FROM YEARS AGO is being repeated.
You'd have to be a complete moron of a college coach, to have the fastest quickest player in the Nation, who's a 6'4" PG, and worried about his 3pt%... It's not a hole in his game... even with his increased %'s you will see the same defense being played vs him on the 3pt line because they must respect his 1st step.. There's no other option on how to defend him.
That college % wasn't consistent throughout the year either, he was ice cold to start and warmed up as it went. So I say, why mash the 2 together? Why is his shooting percentage in college 24% a better indicator than his cold streak or his hot streak? because its some ****ing tremendous sample size? gimmie a break. To me clearly the hot streak to close the season was the true indicator ---- and I'd bet De'Aaron, Coach Cal, the Kings exects/scouts would agree with that.. I'd love to hear a counter argument to that now that the dust has settled.
This kid is the franchise savior put some respekt on his name!!!He's been a beast for years... it's not the result of one offseason, that is like marginalizing the years of progress this kid has made. Which seems to happen here quite often (UNWARRANTED)
He's shooting better than guys we drafted whose alleged strength was shooting: Jimmer, Stauskas and Ben. Unlike these busts, Fox creates space through his elite speed and juke moves. I like how he can dribble the ball in his right hand to keep defenders guessing. Defenders have to back off him and he gets clean looks. If they don't back off, bye bye. His mechanics were always solid. The conventional narrative was a lie. Pre-draft you needed to be worried about corkscrew mechanics as possessed by Lonzo Bust and his inability to get defenders to back off him. You needed to be worried about the aloofness of Markelle Fultz. There were no such concerns with Fox. Fox was confident and well-spoken prospect with maturity beyond his years. You got the sense he was not going to cower under the bright lights. This was so apparent. This is why I taken exception to those saying his progress has been astounding from the likes of Zach Lowe and others. He is on the developmental curve surprising only to those who don't know better.He cant shoot said the pundits. Welp.
You may be forgetting Donovan. I am not ready to say he is better than Donovan yet. Right now, I would say they are about equal. Mitchell is a great defense player with ability to absolutely takeover a game. He is unbelievable too. As far as who I would want on my team going forward, I would say Fox. I like having a more conventional PG than an undersized SG (combo guard) who can play PG. De'Aaron is also a year younger.Hecould end up beingis definitely without a doubt the best player out of that draft. He's unbelievable. The full package.
He's not scrawny. Also why is everything postponed to "two seasons or so". As I said above, it is the realm of possibility De'Aaron will be named to the All-Star game this year. The future is now!Fox is legit. Like, franchise player legit.
I watched the Cavs feed of the game, all they did was gush about Fox. He's not a household name yet, but he's really starting to get noticed by the NBA.
When his shot is on he's totally unstoppable. I'm sure Fox will have more off games this year, he's still just a scrawny 20 year old, but nights like this are flashes of what he's going to do on the regular, against everybody, in two seasons or so.
I wouldn’t say so but Fox would be a lot better Han him if he’s an average from 3. I honk fox is quicker, better athlete, bigger, and has more defensive potential
Cause he couldn’t but his jumper wasn’t broke, the opposite of the guy drafted at 2. His numbers lied and his jumper was clearly broke
He's not scrawny. Also why is everything postponed to "two seasons or so". As I said above, it is the realm of possibility De'Aaron will be named to the All-Star game this year. The future is now!
What was your point again?
Oh yeah, that Fox has always been great (per the eye test) and all those who think he only became great this year are stupid? And statistics are for idiots without the proper eye-testing abilities?
Methinks your posts are sometimes a reflection of a broken machine.
To be fair, he shot .246 from (a shorter) distance in college and .307 as a rookie, so it's not like the pundits weren't on to something. All props to Fox for the work he has put in to become a SIGNIFICANTLY better player this year all around and shooting not the least, but that was in fact a hole in his game.
I was thinking about that as I was looking at FiveThirtyEight's projections for that draft. Fox is labelled as a project, while the #1 (out of service) and #2 (highly overrated) picks were projected as all-stars. I understand AI and machine learning well enough that I thought about writing to Nate Silver to suggest some changes, but I think the problem is mostly the data. Someone who played like Fox did in the past has no real business playing like he did the other night. He is developing in a very anomalous way, and an algorithm is not going to be able to predict that any more than it can Fultz' previously undiagnosed health problems. Some people just aren't going to follow the model.
I was thinking about that as I was looking at FiveThirtyEight's projections for that draft. Fox is labelled as a project, while the #1 (out of service) and #2 (highly overrated) picks were projected as all-stars. I understand AI and machine learning well enough that I thought about writing to Nate Silver to suggest some changes, but I think the problem is mostly the data. Someone who played like Fox did in the past has no real business playing like he did the other night. He is developing in a very anomalous way, and an algorithm is not going to be able to predict that any more than it can Fultz' previously undiagnosed health problems. Some people just aren't going to follow the model.
Too many big name guards in the West. He'll be an allstar down the line, but not many people outside of Kings fandom know about him yet. Don't forget it's a popularity contest!