reanimator wrote:SBM wrote:Kennard makes more sense for the Bucks.
How? I just don't see a large shooting gap going forward and Frank clearly has more upside.
Are you seriously saying Frank and Luke are close as shooters?
Moderators: Marcus, Duke4life831
reanimator wrote:SBM wrote:Kennard makes more sense for the Bucks.
How? I just don't see a large shooting gap going forward and Frank clearly has more upside.
SBM wrote:reanimator wrote:SBM wrote:Kennard makes more sense for the Bucks.
How? I just don't see a large shooting gap going forward and Frank clearly has more upside.
Are you seriously saying Frank and Luke are close as shooters?
reanimator wrote:SBM wrote:reanimator wrote:
How? I just don't see a large shooting gap going forward and Frank clearly has more upside.
Are you seriously saying Frank and Luke are close as shooters?
Kennard as a freshman : 32 3pt% on 4.8 attempts, 56 TS%, 86 FT%
Jackson: 39 3pt% on 3.6 attempts, 60 TS%, 76 FT%
Not some absurd gap even if Kennard is a bit more versatile as a shooter but how much of that will translate with slow feet and not being featured in a ball-dominant role?
whitehops wrote:reanimator wrote:SBM wrote:
Are you seriously saying Frank and Luke are close as shooters?
Kennard as a freshman : 32 3pt% on 4.8 attempts, 56 TS%, 86 FT%
Jackson: 39 3pt% on 3.6 attempts, 60 TS%, 76 FT%
Not some absurd gap even if Kennard is a bit more versatile as a shooter but how much of that will translate with slow feet and not being featured in a ball-dominant role?
can jackson shoot off the dribble? off of screens? pullups? stepbacks? jackson excels at hitting open, spot-up threes but the ability to get off your shot is an important one and there's absolutely no comparison there between kennard and jackson.
whitehops wrote:reanimator wrote:SBM wrote:
Are you seriously saying Frank and Luke are close as shooters?
Kennard as a freshman : 32 3pt% on 4.8 attempts, 56 TS%, 86 FT%
Jackson: 39 3pt% on 3.6 attempts, 60 TS%, 76 FT%
Not some absurd gap even if Kennard is a bit more versatile as a shooter but how much of that will translate with slow feet and not being featured in a ball-dominant role?
can jackson shoot off the dribble? off of screens? pullups? stepbacks? jackson excels at hitting open, spot-up threes but the ability to get off your shot is an important one and there's absolutely no comparison there between kennard and jackson.
Fischella wrote:Jeanne? having Maker? for what?
Duke4life831 wrote:There is no doubt Luke is the superior pure shooter. Luke is probably the best pure shooter in this class. I will say one thing about Luke that I do question about his shooting. He doesn't shoot off screens well. He moves very poorly off the ball and if his feet aren't completely set his jumper isn't nearly effective. I'm not saying Frank is better at it since I don't recall Frank taking one jumper while running off on off ball screen.
I did begin to cool on Luke towards the end of the year because I started to notice he always needed to be set to get a good shot off and he isn't going to get that many of those type of looks in the NBA.
whitehops wrote:
i don't think frank jackson is a bad prospect and he would go well on a team like the bucks. i just think if people are expecting him to eventually be a "leading, scoring guard" as i've seen some predict then i think they are going to be disappointed.
whitehops wrote:Duke4life831 wrote:There is no doubt Luke is the superior pure shooter. Luke is probably the best pure shooter in this class. I will say one thing about Luke that I do question about his shooting. He doesn't shoot off screens well. He moves very poorly off the ball and if his feet aren't completely set his jumper isn't nearly effective. I'm not saying Frank is better at it since I don't recall Frank taking one jumper while running off on off ball screen.
I did begin to cool on Luke towards the end of the year because I started to notice he always needed to be set to get a good shot off and he isn't going to get that many of those type of looks in the NBA.
i'm not sold on kennard for the same reason i'm not completely sold on justin jackson, i question how well they are going to be able to maneuver off the ball. jackson didn't create a ton of separation coming off screens in college and it's going to be harder to get that separation against NBA athletes. kennard doesn't have jackson's size so he'll have to be even more creative to get shots off. luckily he's better at handling the ball than justin jackson and seems more natural improvising.
i don't think frank jackson is a bad prospect and he would go well on a team like the bucks. i just think if people are expecting him to eventually be a "leading, scoring guard" as i've seen some predict then i think they are going to be disappointed.
EvanZ wrote:whitehops wrote:
i don't think frank jackson is a bad prospect and he would go well on a team like the bucks. i just think if people are expecting him to eventually be a "leading, scoring guard" as i've seen some predict then i think they are going to be disappointed.
How would you compare FJ to Dion Waiters?
Prez wrote:Why is this guy mocked so low (39 on DX currently). He has great physical tools and his skill-set as a score first guy with good range but also good defensive upside would fit in really well with Milwaukee. Even his lack of true point guard playmaking isn't a big deal with guys like Giannis, Middleton, Brogdon on the roster. I just don't see why this guy isn't higher on some boards.
MotownMadness wrote:Prez wrote:Why is this guy mocked so low (39 on DX currently). He has great physical tools and his skill-set as a score first guy with good range but also good defensive upside would fit in really well with Milwaukee. Even his lack of true point guard playmaking isn't a big deal with guys like Giannis, Middleton, Brogdon on the roster. I just don't see why this guy isn't higher on some boards.
I'm not even paying attention to mocks this year. Hell you could make a case for anyone from 12-30 in the 1st round just about. If you like a guy take him.
Prez wrote:Why is this guy mocked so low (39 on DX currently). He has great physical tools and his skill-set as a score first guy with good range but also good defensive upside would fit in really well with Milwaukee. Even his lack of true point guard playmaking isn't a big deal with guys like Giannis, Middleton, Brogdon on the roster. I just don't see why this guy isn't higher on some boards.
Prez wrote:Why is this guy mocked so low (39 on DX currently). He has great physical tools and his skill-set as a score first guy with good range but also good defensive upside would fit in really well with Milwaukee. Even his lack of true point guard playmaking isn't a big deal with guys like Giannis, Middleton, Brogdon on the roster. I just don't see why this guy isn't higher on some boards.
RationalGaze wrote:Prez wrote:Why is this guy mocked so low (39 on DX currently). He has great physical tools and his skill-set as a score first guy with good range but also good defensive upside would fit in really well with Milwaukee. Even his lack of true point guard playmaking isn't a big deal with guys like Giannis, Middleton, Brogdon on the roster. I just don't see why this guy isn't higher on some boards.
Because he's not a play maker at all. You have to be able to do more than shoot at the position. Making some plays with great shooting makes you more valuable. You all are drafting Center with your 17th pick and not a backup point.
Catchall wrote:Diallo has been working out with teams in the teens and early 20s (including your Bulls). Frank Jackson should go by the late first.
There are so many arguably comparable bigs in this draft, it's flattening out the back half of the first round. All the positions are pretty subjective.
GimmeDat wrote:Catchall wrote:Diallo has been working out with teams in the teens and early 20s (including your Bulls). Frank Jackson should go by the late first.
There are so many arguably comparable bigs in this draft, it's flattening out the back half of the first round. All the positions are pretty subjective.
It's really hard to project Diallo - I think teams will need to see flashes of ability that we're not privy to at this point for him to go anywhere near the lottery, otherwise I see him in the sort of 18-25 range.
We've seen Jackson in the college setting though and I think he's clearly displayed enough to be a 1st rounder of some capacity, anywhere from 15-30.
If there was a guy I'd bank on to be the 'Booker' of this draft (under-utilized college player that stands out in the league) it's Frank. I think he has a George Hill-esque ceiling.