RealGM

I didn't see a Jackson thread yet and if we don't have one we may be ignoring the most obvious guy. I like Jackson and I think he will have a decent and long pro ball career. He shoots pretty well, is tall and plays smart Basketball. Can play some D too. My reservation is that he is most likely not going to be great. His handles are not amazing and he doesn't drive that well. He is what is he is. But, with our need at that position and the local connections he may be the choice already.

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Justin-Jackson-7083/

I have no opinion on Justin Jackson and the Hornets, but the guy does have a nice, sweet shooting stroke, from deep, from mid-range, and in close. So I think you are selling him short there. Handles can be improved upon--look at DeMar DeRozan.

HEIGHT: 6'8.5"
WEIGHT: 201 lbs
AGE: 22.2
POSITION: SG / SF
COLLEGE: North Carolina




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I mean i think he can be a rotation player for someone eventually and maybe even a good one but that doesnt help us.

That helps a team who has stars in place. Bad pick from a risk/reward standpoint

"Get Out the Way, Let the Real F. Ballas thru" - Juvenile

Justin Jackson would be the guy that would get the most visceral reaction (good and bad) from this board of any potential pick, ESPECIALLY if we pass on one of the consensus top 10 prospects to select him. I think he'll be a good pro, a solid starter who is smart and skilled enough to be a valuable contributor to a winner.

He's been a high-IQ player from the jump at UNC. He reminded me of Matt Barnes in a way, he finds the creases in the action and makes smart plays with nifty little shots and passes as he needed. He has progressed quite a bit since those early days, and if his shooting holds up he can easily surpass what Barnes accomplished in the NBA (which wasn't bad). He's a smart/skilled wing who fits neatly into lineups as a supporting piece. At the pro level he won't be a potential leading man but as a "connector" piece he can be very valuable. He can shoot well, he can pass well, he doesn't make mistakes, he plays defense. I expect him to be a super role player 5th/6th piece on good teams.

All that said, I agree with GlenRiceARoni, Jackson is a pick that makes sense on a team that's ready to compete, and we are not that team. We should be looking for someone with more potential.

JJ Updates today on DX

http://www.draftexpress.com/article/justin-jackson-nba-draft-scouting-report-and-video-analysis-5948/

Again, if we had LeBron, cp3, curry type guys drawing defensive attention i think hed be pretty decent bench rotation piece in the corner or on the weakside.

But put him out there with kemba, mkg, marvin and he just has very little upside.

"Get Out the Way, Let the Real F. Ballas thru" - Juvenile

GlenRiceARoni wrote:But put him out there with Kemba, MKG, Marvin and he just has very little upside.

So far as offense goes, I would much rather see Justin Jackson with Kemba and Marvin than Mr. Kidd-Gilchrist. The rock would move a whole lot better.

He has a lot to learn on the defensive end, but at least he is quick, and quick to learn.

still not that interested in him at 11.

think he is too thin (just gained 4 pounds at UNC) and he isn't a great shooter/defender.

Not saying that we should take him, but we all know that Kemba is going to attract a lot of attention on offense. If Justin can come in and consistently knock down open threes he would be an asset.

MountBiyombo wrote:Not saying that we should take him, but we all know that Kemba is going to attract a lot of attention on offense. If Justin can come in and consistently knock down open threes he would be an asset.

There are better shooters than Jackson available, if we want a knockdown shooter then we should get kennard

JDR720 wrote:

MountBiyombo wrote:Not saying that we should take him, but we all know that Kemba is going to attract a lot of attention on offense. If Justin can come in and consistently knock down open threes he would be an asset.

There are better shooters than Jackson available, if we want a knockdown shooter then we should get kennard

Maybe at the college level, but will he be able to get his shot off against NBA defenders? Both guys are slow, but at least Jackson is slightly better than average size for his position. Kennard is slightly below average size.

I definitely need to do more research on this draft, but early thoughts... this guy feels like the type of player we'd select at 11. Sure, he's not a Big Ten PF, but he has that somewhat safe, somewhat NBA ready, fits our team, not a ton of upside, probably should be selected 5 picks later thing going for him.

I'm not advocating we take him at 11, but JJ is better than most posters here give him credit for. He's shown improvement on the offensive end that I believe can translate. His defense is by no mean elite, but he'll put the effort in and work to get better. If we had a pick around 15-18 I would definitely consider him.

Did anybody else see the rumor the Knicks are interested in him? If he gets drafted at 8, that means another prospect could slide.

The article Fats posted from the Ringer https://theringer.com/2017-nba-draft-casual-fan-guide-justin-jackson-frank-mason-667bd53c32 has an interesting take on Jackson:

Once Jackson added that smooth stroke to his game, everything clicked. It’s like he realized that his destiny as a basketball player is to curl off screens and rise above defenders to knock down jumpers and then use his length on the other end of the floor to bottle up smaller guards, not to fight for rebounds or try to body guys in the post with his frail frame. If Jackson continues to make strides over the offseason and tries to model his game after Klay Thompson instead of working to become a prototypical small forward, there’s no telling how good he could be.

If Jackson shoots 4-9 from 3 in the NCAA Championship game instead of 0-9 people might be climbing on instead of off his train. That 0-9 worries you, because defenses in the NBA are going to be intense and fast - like in a Championship game - will JJ's newfound stroke hold up or prove illusory? Regardless, eyeing Jackson in today's 3-happy NBA as a 6'8 SG instead of a weakling SF makes him more compelling.

Snidely FC wrote:The article Fats posted from the Ringer https://theringer.com/2017-nba-draft-casual-fan-guide-justin-jackson-frank-mason-667bd53c32 has an interesting take on Jackson:

Once Jackson added that smooth stroke to his game, everything clicked. It’s like he realized that his destiny as a basketball player is to curl off screens and rise above defenders to knock down jumpers and then use his length on the other end of the floor to bottle up smaller guards, not to fight for rebounds or try to body guys in the post with his frail frame. If Jackson continues to make strides over the offseason and tries to model his game after Klay Thompson instead of working to become a prototypical small forward, there’s no telling how good he could be.

If Jackson shoots 4-9 from 3 in the NCAA Championship game instead of 0-9 people might be climbing on instead of off his train. That 0-9 worries you, because defenses in the NBA are going to be intense and fast - like in a Championship game - will JJ's newfound stroke hold up or prove illusory? Regardless, eyeing Jackson in today's 3-happy NBA as a 6'8 SG instead of a weakling SF makes him more compelling.

I am willing to chalk that 0-9 in the Championship game up to playing on a elevated floor in a football stadium. its not as if either team shot very well.

Snidely FC wrote:The article Fats posted from the Ringer https://theringer.com/2017-nba-draft-casual-fan-guide-justin-jackson-frank-mason-667bd53c32 has an interesting take on Jackson:

Once Jackson added that smooth stroke to his game, everything clicked. It’s like he realized that his destiny as a basketball player is to curl off screens and rise above defenders to knock down jumpers and then use his length on the other end of the floor to bottle up smaller guards, not to fight for rebounds or try to body guys in the post with his frail frame. If Jackson continues to make strides over the offseason and tries to model his game after Klay Thompson instead of working to become a prototypical small forward, there’s no telling how good he could be.

If Jackson shoots 4-9 from 3 in the NCAA Championship game instead of 0-9 people might be climbing on instead of off his train. That 0-9 worries you, because defenses in the NBA are going to be intense and fast - like in a Championship game - will JJ's newfound stroke hold up or prove illusory? Regardless, eyeing Jackson in today's 3-happy NBA as a 6'8 SG instead of a weakling SF makes him more compelling.

The Hornets already have one of those.

I like Jackson as a player. I believe he has translatable skills to be very effective in limited minutes. Charlotte needs a wing with 3&D potential and Jackson fits the bill. If you're evaluating the player because he's not still in his teens and has a lack of "upside," then you haven't watched him the past couple of years work and develop his game.

Snidely FC wrote:The article Fats posted from the Ringer https://theringer.com/2017-nba-draft-casual-fan-guide-justin-jackson-frank-mason-667bd53c32 has an interesting take on Jackson:

Once Jackson added that smooth stroke to his game, everything clicked. It’s like he realized that his destiny as a basketball player is to curl off screens and rise above defenders to knock down jumpers and then use his length on the other end of the floor to bottle up smaller guards, not to fight for rebounds or try to body guys in the post with his frail frame. If Jackson continues to make strides over the offseason and tries to model his game after Klay Thompson instead of working to become a prototypical small forward, there’s no telling how good he could be.

If Jackson shoots 4-9 from 3 in the NCAA Championship game instead of 0-9 people might be climbing on instead of off his train. That 0-9 worries you, because defenses in the NBA are going to be intense and fast - like in a Championship game - will JJ's newfound stroke hold up or prove illusory? Regardless, eyeing Jackson in today's 3-happy NBA as a 6'8 SG instead of a weakling SF makes him more compelling.

If JJ develops in the Klay mold that would be really nice. At that point, then 11 would be a good slot to draft him. The problem is, we can't make that assessment for a couple of years.

Some of the guys picked in the 11+ range are going to be players and some will simply not make it. I'm not a huge JJ fan, but I have a feeling he's going to make it.

0-9 is a thing though. I get what Snidely was saying.