I can definetely see Jackson's ceiling as Andre Iggy, if his jumper is decent. His ceiling would make us a legit formidable squad, what he brings to the table
Monk, hard for me not to see him as a shorter Lavine. Although, maybe he can be prime Monta with a 3pt shot - that's a legit 2nd option on a contender, imo. A lot of games that would be a legit 1st option.
I'm missing it completely on Monk. In the very, VERY little I've seen of him, he looks like a shooter. Is this just another case of Kentucky having too much talent and his full skill set had to be toned down, a la Booker? Or is his stack being elevated as a result of Booker's success?
I think he was given the green light at Kentucky to play how he really is. He's an off-screen shooter and a 1-2dribble simple pull-up guy. He has some decent shake in those short dribble pull-up's, and looks potentially dynamic/fassssstttt in transition when he successfully handles it there. He's a freak athlete, although he's small.
For a 19 year old, that's enough of a package to not cap a low ceiling on, IMO.
Although I think his realistic-floor is low, as do the guys in that podcast.
If he had Lavine's measurables, he'd be a greatttt prospect - he'd be Lavine all over again. Right now he's just a smaller Lavine to me, which I don't love.
IF I thought Monk was going to be at least an average defender, or even a plus defender it might be a discussion worth having. But I don't see it. Outside of his shooting, I don't see him becoming anything more than a really good role player. I'd rather grab someone who has more impact on the game.
I pretty much agree. The below average measurables really sour him for me
I can definetely see Jackson's ceiling as Andre Iggy, if his jumper is decent. His ceiling would make us a legit formidable squad, what he brings to the table
Monk, hard for me not to see him as a shorter Lavine. Although, maybe he can be prime Monta with a 3pt shot - that's a legit 2nd option on a contender, imo. A lot of games that would be a legit 1st option.
I'm missing it completely on Monk. In the very, VERY little I've seen of him, he looks like a shooter. Is this just another case of Kentucky having too much talent and his full skill set had to be toned down, a la Booker? Or is his stack being elevated as a result of Booker's success?
I think he was given the green light at Kentucky to play how he really is. He's an off-screen shooter and a 1-2dribble simple pull-up guy. He has some decent shake in those short dribble pull-up's, and looks potentially dynamic/fassssstttt in transition when he successfully handles it there. He's a freak athlete, although he's small.
For a 19 year old, that's enough of a package to not cap a low ceiling on, IMO.
Although I think his realostic-floor is low, as do the guys in that podcast.
If he had Lavine's measurables, he'd be a greatttt prospect - he'd be Lavine all over again. Right now he's just a smaller Lavine to me, which I don't love.
If it's a case of a Kentucky guy limiting his individual game to fit into a team role that Cal has carved out for him, then I would hope this is something that we can uncover through private workouts.
But for me personally, as dynamic as Monk has proven to be at one particular skill, Jackson is so much more appealing as a jack of all trades with stronger potential to become really good in all of these areas (compared to Monk's potential of becoming more than a shooter). I'm not sure if people use the Iggy comparison as a reason NOT to take him, but I see it as a positive. Iggy is a beast even now, at the age of 33, and he does so many things to help a team win that don't even show up on the box score.
And with the way the NBA is going, shooting is freakin' important, but what's more important is having as many guys on the floor as possible that can do as many things as possible (handle the ball, be a playmaker for others, shoot, slash to the basket, defend on the perimeter, block shots at the rim, etc). Jackson fit that trend to a tee, and if you add him to the core we already have, I'd be just as excited as if we picked Fultz or Ball.
was there a discussion on dennis smith already? too high if we keep the pick? is the only thing holding him back is his consistency and effort?
I look at Smith Jr and I see Tim Hardaway. He's not Chris Paul. That's my issue. Chris Paul at Wake Forest made 6'1" SG Justin Gray and 6'8" C Eric Williams look like NBA prospects. After he left early, they fell off the radar. I can't really say that for Smith Jr, but I can make that argument for Lonzo Ball. Smith Jr is still a special talent. I'd take him over Tatum.
I'm leaning towards Jackson as well, if Fultz and Lonzo are off the board and we pick 3rd ( Jackson/Lonzo is a toss up who'll go 2nd)
But, think of this - if Ingram and Jackson are both low 30% 3pt shooters next season
How in gods name do you play this lineup together and let them build chemistry - DLo, Jackson, BI, Randle, Zubac. Most likely that's a deficit of shooting to the point that we finish bottom 5 in the league, if you wana play that lineup a lot
Jacksons 3pt% while contested is so shockingly abysmal... It was in GT's scouting vid I can't remember the number off top
I do think he's worth it as a long term prospect though - if he eventually becomes a halfway respectable shooter, then he's a boarderline Allstar guaranteed.
In 3 years this lineup would have just enough shooting to be realllly good on the court
DLO - high 30s from 3
Jack - 34%
Ingram - 35/36%
Randle - 33% (pretty much respectable for a big)
That's enough shooting for the guys' other traits overpower the shooting dynamic vs the opponent
BUT UNTIL THEYRE THAT RESPECTABLE from 3, good god it's going to be a failing proposition of a lineup. 2-4 years of it
Yes that's why I think even with a slightly below average jumpshot(when he improves to that point) he's a boarderline Allstar. Aside from shooting he's easily one of the very best wing prospects in the past 4 years, super talented. We could really use a 2 way player
Average jumpshot and he's a sure-fire Allstar
Last edited by KeepItRealOrElse on Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:07 pm; edited 1 time in total
Jackson can be a good fit if we pick 3rd, but I like Monk better as a player. What concerns me is that Dlo, Zubac and Monk in the same lineup can make us a extremely slow paced team. Jackson seems to have better upside as defender, but I find him an underreaming offensive prospect to take #3.
At this point I find myself sold on Fultz as 1st pick, after him there are a lot of talent, but also a lot of questions about each player.
I'm leaning towards Jackson as well, if Fultz and Lonzo are off the board and we pick 3rd ( Jackson/Lonzo is a toss up who'll go 2nd)
But, think of this - if Ingram and Jackson are both low 30% 3pt shooters next season
How in gods name do you play this lineup together and let them build chemistry - DLo, Jackson, BI, Randle, Zubac. Most likely that's a deficit of shooting to the point that we finish bottom 5 in the league, if you wana play that lineup a lot
Jacksons 3pt% while contested is so shockingly abysmal... It was in GT's scouting vid I can't remember the number off top
I do think he's worth it as a long term prospect though - if he eventually becomes a halfway respectable shooter, then he's a boarderline Allstar guaranteed.
In 3 years this lineup would have just enough shooting to be realllly good on the court
DLO - high 30s from 3
Jack - 34%
Ingram - 35/36%
Randle - 33% (pretty much respectable for a big)
That's enough shooting for the guys' other traits overpower the shooting dynamic vs the opponent
BUT UNTIL THEYRE THAT RESPECTABLE from 3, good god it's going to be a failing proposition of a lineup. 2-4 years of it
So you still think BI's shot, as currently constructed, is broken? No hope of him going from 29% to the 34-36% range next season?
If we take Jackson, we badly need to get a guard that can shoot at #28.
And I'm really hoping Randle and/or Nance can take what they did towards the end of the season and make another small leap with their 3-point shooting next season on higher volume. Of course, we expect DLo to be the strongest of the bunch, and he has the highest chance of adding a few percentage points to his 3-PT makes %. JC might be who he is at this point...
Jackson can be a good fit if we pick 3rd, but I like Monk better as a player. What concerns me is that Dlo, Zubac and Monk in the same lineup can make us a extremely slow paced team. Jackson seems to have better upside as defender, but I find him an underreaming offensive prospect to take #3.
At this point I find myself sold on Fultz as 1st pick, after him there are a lot of talent, but also a lot of questions about each player.
Your last sentence is very true - and why I think it's the perfect pick to trade. That dynamic makes teams really interested, and trading it mitigates the downside of that dynamic. High reward, unregrettable risk, to trade it
Monk would increase our pace though, how can you think otherwise? He's jacking up 3s in transition, and super fast running his lane/handling in transition. Loves to utilize his speed, and puts up any jumper
I'm leaning towards Jackson as well, if Fultz and Lonzo are off the board and we pick 3rd ( Jackson/Lonzo is a toss up who'll go 2nd)
But, think of this - if Ingram and Jackson are both low 30% 3pt shooters next season
How in gods name do you play this lineup together and let them build chemistry - DLo, Jackson, BI, Randle, Zubac. Most likely that's a deficit of shooting to the point that we finish bottom 5 in the league, if you wana play that lineup a lot
Jacksons 3pt% while contested is so shockingly abysmal... It was in GT's scouting vid I can't remember the number off top
I do think he's worth it as a long term prospect though - if he eventually becomes a halfway respectable shooter, then he's a boarderline Allstar guaranteed.
In 3 years this lineup would have just enough shooting to be realllly good on the court
DLO - high 30s from 3
Jack - 34%
Ingram - 35/36%
Randle - 33% (pretty much respectable for a big)
That's enough shooting for the guys' other traits overpower the shooting dynamic vs the opponent
BUT UNTIL THEYRE THAT RESPECTABLE from 3, good god it's going to be a failing proposition of a lineup. 2-4 years of it
So you still think BI's shot, as currently constructed, is broken? No hope of him going from 29% to the 34-36% range next season?
If we take Jackson, we badly need to get a guard that can shoot at #28.
And I'm really hoping Randle and/or Nance can take what they did towards the end of the season and make another small leap with their 3-point shooting next season on higher volume. Of course, we expect DLo to be the strongest of the bunch, and he has the highest chance of adding a few percentage points to his 3-PT makes %. JC might be who he is at this point...
if you get Jackson, you better hope Randle has become a good shooter with 3 point range or we find really good stretch 4 who can start..
I'm leaning towards Jackson as well, if Fultz and Lonzo are off the board and we pick 3rd ( Jackson/Lonzo is a toss up who'll go 2nd)
But, think of this - if Ingram and Jackson are both low 30% 3pt shooters next season
How in gods name do you play this lineup together and let them build chemistry - DLo, Jackson, BI, Randle, Zubac. Most likely that's a deficit of shooting to the point that we finish bottom 5 in the league, if you wana play that lineup a lot
Jacksons 3pt% while contested is so shockingly abysmal... It was in GT's scouting vid I can't remember the number off top
I do think he's worth it as a long term prospect though - if he eventually becomes a halfway respectable shooter, then he's a boarderline Allstar guaranteed.
In 3 years this lineup would have just enough shooting to be realllly good on the court
DLO - high 30s from 3
Jack - 34%
Ingram - 35/36%
Randle - 33% (pretty much respectable for a big)
That's enough shooting for the guys' other traits overpower the shooting dynamic vs the opponent
BUT UNTIL THEYRE THAT RESPECTABLE from 3, good god it's going to be a failing proposition of a lineup. 2-4 years of it
So you still think BI's shot, as currently constructed, is broken? No hope of him going from 29% to the 34-36% range next season?
If we take Jackson, we badly need to get a guard that can shoot at #28.
And I'm really hoping Randle and/or Nance can take what they did towards the end of the season and make another small leap with their 3-point shooting next season on higher volume. Of course, we expect DLo to be the strongest of the bunch, and he has the highest chance of adding a few percentage points to his 3-PT makes %. JC might be who he is at this point...
First 35 games he was 25% from 3, then Jan-Feb he was 33%, then 28% in the last months.. strong no from me, with the FT% to boot..
I think it's going to take a couple years -- you don't usually see big 3pt% increases in year 2, especially from trash rookie 3pt shooters.
I think Randle could very well hit 33% next year though, that would help our offense. And Russell could hit 37%.
But yea, I'd love a guard who can shoot at #28. I actually wish Grayson Allen came out and we picked him there - I think he has better 2way potential than Kennard because he has better length(guessing he has better than Kennard's point guard reach)
But maybe Kennard can make up for that lack of length like JJ Reddick has. I guess I'd pick him and be optimistic. I'm not confident Allen will be a better pro, I just think it's a toss up - I know the consensus is that Kennard is better.
was there a discussion on dennis smith already? too high if we keep the pick? is the only thing holding him back is his consistency and effort?
I look at Smith Jr and I see Tim Hardaway. He's not Chris Paul. That's my issue. Chris Paul at Wake Forest made 6'1" SG Justin Gray and 6'8" C Eric Williams look like NBA prospects. After he left early, they fell off the radar. I can't really say that for Smith Jr, but I can make that argument for Lonzo Ball. Smith Jr is still a special talent. I'd take him over Tatum.
If Fultz and Ball are taken and we have the third pick, Dennis is a great pick for us. He reminds me a little of IT (strong and ability to drive and finish) and Steve Francis (crafty dribbler with ups), with the fire of Westbrook.
Jackson can be a good fit if we pick 3rd, but I like Monk better as a player. What concerns me is that Dlo, Zubac and Monk in the same lineup can make us a extremely slow paced team. Jackson seems to have better upside as defender, but I find him an underreaming offensive prospect to take #3.
At this point I find myself sold on Fultz as 1st pick, after him there are a lot of talent, but also a lot of questions about each player.
Your last sentence is very true - and why I think it's the perfect pick to trade. That dynamic makes teams really interested, and trading it mitigates the downside of that dynamic. High reward, unregrettable risk, to trade it
Monk would increase our pace though, how can you think otherwise? He's jacking up 3s in transition, and super fast running his lane/handling in transition. Loves to utilize his speed, and puts up any jumper
I know there are a lot of talented players in this class, but I'd move a second pick this season before I move Dlo. By the way I typed Monkey, but I was thinking about Tatum. Monk has his limitations, but that was not the contest I was thinking about.
Yes that's why I think even with a slightly below average jumpshot(when he improves to that point) he's a boarderline Allstar. Aside from shooting he's easily one of the very best wing prospects in the past 4 years, super talented. We could really use a 2 way player
Average jumpshot and he's a sure-fire Allstar
Yeah, he has a really high floor. They don't go about it the same way, but I think Jackson's floor is a a bigger & more athletic Marcus Smart. Really high motor + high IQ.
I know a Marcus Smart comparison sounds like an insult, but there's a reason he plays 30mpg for a #1 seed. And again, we're talking about floor, which we probably don't do often enough.
Yes that's why I think even with a slightly below average jumpshot(when he improves to that point) he's a boarderline Allstar. Aside from shooting he's easily one of the very best wing prospects in the past 4 years, super talented. We could really use a 2 way player
Average jumpshot and he's a sure-fire Allstar
Yeah, he has a really high floor. They don't go about it the same way, but I think Jackson's floor is a a bigger & more athletic Marcus Smart. Really high motor + high IQ.
I know a Marcus Smart comparison sounds like an insult, but there's a reason he plays 30mpg for a #1 seed. And again, we're talking about floor, which we probably don't do often enough.
I definitely can see that.
Although I think he's likely to be a slightly better shooter even as a floor - and not specifically from 3pt range - he just has good rhythm to his shot, so I wouldn't doubt him at least hitting midrange Js pretty decently.
I'd bet on him completely reconstructing his shot though.. tbh
Yes that's why I think even with a slightly below average jumpshot(when he improves to that point) he's a boarderline Allstar. Aside from shooting he's easily one of the very best wing prospects in the past 4 years, super talented. We could really use a 2 way player
Average jumpshot and he's a sure-fire Allstar
Yeah, he has a really high floor. They don't go about it the same way, but I think Jackson's floor is a a bigger & more athletic Marcus Smart. Really high motor + high IQ.
I know a Marcus Smart comparison sounds like an insult, but there's a reason he plays 30mpg for a #1 seed. And again, we're talking about floor, which we probably don't do often enough.
Are you gonna do a video on Dennis Smith Jr and why the Lakers should avoid at all costs? _________________ How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk
Are you gonna do a video on Dennis Smith Jr and why the Lakers should avoid at all costs?
Probably not. The Monk video hasn't done well and I can't monetize the college vids. If I'm not gonna make a little bit of scratch then I at least want people to be interested in the topic and possibly get new subscribers.
Last edited by GoldenThroat on Fri Apr 21, 2017 8:38 pm; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 8:38 pm Post subject:
LakERIC wrote:
JUST-MING wrote:
romeo wrote:
was there a discussion on dennis smith already? too high if we keep the pick? is the only thing holding him back is his consistency and effort?
I look at Smith Jr and I see Tim Hardaway. He's not Chris Paul. That's my issue. Chris Paul at Wake Forest made 6'1" SG Justin Gray and 6'8" C Eric Williams look like NBA prospects. After he left early, they fell off the radar. I can't really say that for Smith Jr, but I can make that argument for Lonzo Ball. Smith Jr is still a special talent. I'd take him over Tatum.
If Fultz and Ball are taken and we have the third pick, Dennis is a great pick for us. He reminds me a little of IT (strong and ability to drive and finish) and Steve Francis (crafty dribbler with ups), with the fire of Westbrook.
I definitely disagree about fire. While his line looks legit individually, it didn't translate into wins, and unlike Fultz, he had some solid talent around him. Dude is a ball stopper. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
Cole ZwickerVerified account @colezwicker 24h24 hours ago
More
Lonzo also has the 2nd highest PPP in half-court catch and shoot situations (min 100 attempts) for lead guards in the last decade (Dame #1)
3 replies 5 retweets 7 likes
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 8:48 pm Post subject:
KeepItRealOrElse wrote:
Cole ZwickerVerified account @colezwicker 24h24 hours ago
More
Lonzo also has the 2nd highest PPP in half-court catch and shoot situations (min 100 attempts) for lead guards in the last decade (Dame #1)
3 replies 5 retweets 7 likes
Such a SG archetype. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
