GG Jackson Thread

[NO-KG-AI]

i don't agree with those comps at all esp for Knox/Sekou (Sekou was a big, Knox was far from prototypical and just flatout sucked), but you can do this for everyone, unless you're suggesting wing prototypes shouldn't be taken high in the draft, not sure what the point here is.

GG is not without faults and most definitely not bust-proof but he's the type of pick you make high in the draft and sleep well at night even if it doesn't work out.

Also, while I haven't seen enough to feel strongly or not on GG, hasn't he been very productive so far?

yes, pretty unprecedented productivity for someone his age in high level conference, even tho the efficiency hasn't been there yet

Would you say if there was a concern, it would be more that he falls in line with some of those tweener guys that dominated and then struggled at the next level for whatever reason like Derrick Williams, Michael Beasley, etc?

Not that everyone needs to be an ultra athlete, but I feel like tweener forwards(Big 3/average sized 4 types) had a history of doing well in college and struggling to find something to hang their hat on in the pros for years(Not having the quickness to guard and penetrate from the perimeter consistently, and lacking the size/length to bully inside or be a rim protector and rebounder), but the league is probably more tailored to those types than it ever has been before.

I feel like guys like Knox and Sekou failed because they just sucked at basketball, and I don't get that vibe from his numbers or highlights about GG. GG's body and ball skills probably means at worst that he can find a place as a solid contributor even if he weren't to break out and be a superstar.

[SeattleJazzFan]

efficiency is pretty terrible, tbh. but due to his age, he's hard to judge - how much rope do you give him due to his age? i don't know the answer, but even against bad competition he's struggling to be even below average efficiency, teetering on brutal.

[clyde21]

Also, while I haven't seen enough to feel strongly or not on GG, hasn't he been very productive so far?

yes, pretty unprecedented productivity for someone his age in high level conference, even tho the efficiency hasn't been there yet

Would you say if there was a concern, it would be more that he falls in line with some of those tweener guys that dominated and then struggled at the next level for whatever reason like Derrick Williams, Michael Beasley, etc?

Not that everyone needs to be an ultra athlete, but I feel like tweener forwards(Big 3/average sized 4 types) had a history of doing well in college and struggling to find something to hang their hat on in the pros for years(Not having the quickness to guard and penetrate from the perimeter consistently, and lacking the size/length to bully inside or be a rim protector and rebounder), but the league is probably more tailored to those types than it ever has been before.

I feel like guys like Knox and Sekou failed because they just sucked at basketball, and I don't get that vibe from his numbers or highlights about GG. GG's body and ball skills probably means at worst that he can find a place as a solid contributor even if he weren't to break out and be a superstar.

from a size standpoint he's as prototypical as you can get for a modern wing, athletically he's not quite young PG13 but he has enough athleticism enough in his physical pro and already a solid baseline of perimeter skills that positionally it's a non issue at this point.

again there are issues there (decision making, passing, get better at the FT line) and he's not a lock by any stretch but he fits a clear and premium archetype in today's NBA imo, and you just don't find guys that have his physical pro, at his age, and with his productivity in the draft often.

[clyde21]

efficiency is pretty terrible, tbh. but due to his age, he's hard to judge - how much rope do you give him due to his age? i don't know the answer, but even against bad competition he's struggling to be even below average efficiency, teetering on brutal.

meh, is it really? 43% from the field and 36% from 3. given the circumstances (age, in probably the most athletic conference in the nation) is it really that bad? also it's not like he's just taking high percentage shots, he's taking deep looks off the dribble and pull ups and turnaround Js etc.

im more concerned with his FT%, gotta get that up >70%

[SeattleJazzFan]

efficiency is pretty terrible, tbh. but due to his age, he's hard to judge - how much rope do you give him due to his age? i don't know the answer, but even against bad competition he's struggling to be even below average efficiency, teetering on brutal.

meh, is it really? 43% from the field and 36% from 3. given the circumstances (age, in probably the most athletic conference in the nation) is it really that bad? also it's not like he's just taking high percentage shots, he's taking deep looks off the dribble and pull ups and turnaround Js etc.

im more concerned with his FT%, gotta get that up >70%

50% TS is really bad. and the fact he isn't taking high percentage shots is part of the problem. at his size and skill level, he should be taking higher percentage shots. but as you said, given his age and competition level, maybe that's okay. i don't know. that's where i'm saying, i'm not sure how much rope you give him. maybe a lot of rope and maybe he's just fine.

[clyde21]

efficiency is pretty terrible, tbh. but due to his age, he's hard to judge - how much rope do you give him due to his age? i don't know the answer, but even against bad competition he's struggling to be even below average efficiency, teetering on brutal.

meh, is it really? 43% from the field and 36% from 3. given the circumstances (age, in probably the most athletic conference in the nation) is it really that bad? also it's not like he's just taking high percentage shots, he's taking deep looks off the dribble and pull ups and turnaround Js etc.

im more concerned with his FT%, gotta get that up >70%

50% TS is really bad. and the fact he isn't taking high percentage shots is part of the problem. at his size and skill level, he should be taking higher percentage shots. but as you said, given his age and competition level, maybe that's okay. i don't know. that's where i'm saying, i'm not sure how much rope you give him. maybe a lot of rope and maybe he's just fine.

i dont think he should be taking higher percentage shots at all, i think he should be trying all different types of shots, he's a young cat trying to figure out what he can and can't do...i'm sure you can put him in the dunker spot all year long and have him catch lobs and putbacks for a 60 TS% but who cares at that point?

[Catchall]

South Carolina is so bad. Seriously, GG feeds one of his guards for a wide-open, point-blank layup and the guy blows it.

[clyde21]

PURE FILTH

Read on Twitter

[clyde21]

cant wait to hear the mental gymnastics about not having this cat top 5 when it's all said and done

[clyde21]

height comp...Sharp is listed at 7-5

[Hal14]

height comp...Sharp is listed at 7-5

Interesting. That looks like maybe 4" difference at the most. So even if Sharp's listed height is being exaggerated and he's really 7'4", that would put GG around 7'0" or at the worst, 6'11".

Since GG is only 17, it shouldn't be surprising if he's still growing..

I'd say he's gotta be at least 6'10" at this point..

[andyhop]

meh, is it really? 43% from the field and 36% from 3. given the circumstances (age, in probably the most athletic conference in the nation) is it really that bad?

You keep mentioning how impressive he is doing because he is in a great conference like the SEC , he hasn't played a single SEC opponent yet

[clyde21]

meh, is it really? 43% from the field and 36% from 3. given the circumstances (age, in probably the most athletic conference in the nation) is it really that bad?

You keep mentioning how impressive he is doing because he is in a great conference like the SEC , he hasn't played a single SEC opponent yet

that's true, conference play hasn't started yet

[Catchall]

efficiency is pretty terrible, tbh. but due to his age, he's hard to judge - how much rope do you give him due to his age? i don't know the answer, but even against bad competition he's struggling to be even below average efficiency, teetering on brutal.

meh, is it really? 43% from the field and 36% from 3. given the circumstances (age, in probably the most athletic conference in the nation) is it really that bad? also it's not like he's just taking high percentage shots, he's taking deep looks off the dribble and pull ups and turnaround Js etc.

im more concerned with his FT%, gotta get that up >70%

50% TS is really bad. and the fact he isn't taking high percentage shots is part of the problem. at his size and skill level, he should be taking higher percentage shots. but as you said, given his age and competition level, maybe that's okay. i don't know. that's where i'm saying, i'm not sure how much rope you give him. maybe a lot of rope and maybe he's just fine.

The other issue here is that a very high percentage of GG's shots are unassisted. His teammates simply aren't getting him the ball in positions to be successful. Only a couple other guys are credible shooters, and none of them are particularly good playmakers. A lot of the time GG is on his own to create something out on the floor for himself.

[Catchall]

Ima just leave this here. GG got some easier looks tonight. There were fewer crazy forces. Eastern Michigan isn't exactly a powerhouse though.

Watch on YouTube

[MemphisX]

Read on Twitter

[TheBunk]

All those guys had prototypical physical tools and combo forward size with some shooting ability and semblance of an offensive skillset, but never made any impact before coming to the NBA and continued to suck once they got there.

I'm not saying you are wrong. I don't really know if those are good comparison because hes one of the guys I haven't watched yet, but thats just my immediate concern about him, which is very loose and vibes based at this point. Like, when I do watch him that will be the thing I am looking out for, to basically see if he seems like another one of these big athletic combo forwards with a bit of skill but no actual substance. I'm worried the team situation will muddy the waters and make him harder to evaluate.

I still have him top 8 right now just based on the tools that seem to be there, but hes one of three guys in my top 11 that I haven't watched full games of yet, so its not a very confident placement.

- Sekou was not a wing, he was a big with SOME perimeter skill traits that never actually developed

- Knox was a wing, but again not a prototype, small hands, crappy w/s, not a true 6-8 and was just bad

- Williams is/was a prototype, and even tho I didn't have him anywhere near #4 overall, you completely understand why Chicago made the pick, bust or not

- Minga a prototype im some ways (he does have small hands) but you justify that pick 10/10 even if it doesn't work out.

i'm still not sure what your point here - you admit to not watching the dude play and still make a bunch of half-assed comps in the process. and if your point is that prototypical wings shouldn't be drafted high I'm not sure what to tell you.

and yes, he's not playing on Duke or Kentucky. if that 'muddies the waters' for you by all means.

lol, the draft forum is so weird. Is it just the norm for everyone on here to get annoyed at anyone bringing up even the possibility of there being any concern about a player they like?

I'm not trying to make any point. All I said was what I was going to look out for when I watched him play based on my currently uninformed perception. You don't need to try to convince me those comparisons are wrong. I straight up said I don't know if those comparisons are appropriate, but those are just some recent guys that have some vague similarity to GG that havent panned out, so I'm going to look for things that differentiate him from those guys when I get around to evaluating him. Is that ok with you?

And if anything the thing I said about his team was meant in his favor. My concern there is that hes going to put up good stats and look good when I watch him play, but his team will be so bad that it makes him seem worse than he is to a lot of people.

edit: and like, I'm glad that you think my immediate uninformed concerns are unwarranted and I take that into serious consideration since I don't have much to go on myself besides the vague perception of someone who has only seem some highlights and read a little bit of scouting analysis on the guy.

...I'm so confused here. You've never seen him play. You're really not saying anything at all here.

[buzzkilloton]

Read on Twitter

I just watched his pod I was going to come over and post that he had him at 5 and said he would be 2024s pick 1 if he was in the draft. Barlowe talks to alot of NBA execs and scouts so expect to see GG making his move up alot of boards.

[clyde21]

GG's been a top5 pick not sure what there is to think about here tbh, has just as good of a case for #3 off the board as anyone else

[clyde21]

really top4 pick actually

as of right now it's Vic/Scoot

and then clearly Black/GG for 3/4 in a tier of their own above everyone else.

obv a lot can change but that's as it stands for me today.