Why Josh Jackson Should Go #1 to Celtics

Rmbone wrote:Jackson shoots 38% from 3 but he's an "offensive project".
Fultz shoots 41% from 3 and he's a polished scorer?

Jackson went to Kansas where he could compete for a championship, playing alongside the Naismith Player of the Year who averaged 21 points.

Fultz went to Washington, who were never going to win anything, so he could put up maximum shots and showcase himself the best.

Jackson and Fultz had the exact same true shooting %, .559%  for Jackson Vs .558 for Fultz. Jackson even out-shot Fultz from 3 in conference play, 43.5% Vs 38% for Fultz.

The fact is Fultz simply took more shots than Jackson, because he went to a school where he could do that.

Jackson's defense, athleticism, size, and motor is night and day better than Fultz's. And he's about the same level as a scorer, he just didn't pick a garbage college program to make himself look the best, he went to a place where he could compete as a member of a team.

The two relevant questions for me are - A) is the player NBA ready now and B) does the player in fill a need on the Celtics.

A)
From what I have seen and read, Jackson isnt nearly a finished product on the offensive end, kind of an important skill in today’s NBA. As you said, his three point shooting isn’t bad (35.3%) but his free throw shooting is atrocious at 56.3%. He has a ton of potential, but the Celtics need an NBA ready scorer - Jackson is not that guy.

B)
Is Jackson a better athlete than Jaylen Brown? I dont think so...and with Jaylen being the same age now as Jackson with a year in the league, I think the Celtics are set at SF.

They are both great players, but right now - Fultz is a more finished product.

agreed kleen, were set at SF with Crowder and Jaylen whos got serious upside, we know we need rebounding and even though our backcourt is good, its an elite guard dominated league now, in other words we still need an upgrade in the backcourt as Smart and AB are defensive pitbulls with offensive inconsistency and do you want to rely on little IT to score 35-40 every night to carry us? IT is gonna be 30 soon too, Fultz looks like a real 2 way player.....I'm trusting his defense cause of you NYCelt, so if Danny goes with Fultz its got to be the right choice by me.

mrkleen09 wrote:

Rmbone wrote:Jackson shoots 38% from 3 but he's an "offensive project".
Fultz shoots 41% from 3 and he's a polished scorer?

Jackson went to Kansas where he could compete for a championship, playing alongside the Naismith Player of the Year who averaged 21 points.

Fultz went to Washington, who were never going to win anything, so he could put up maximum shots and showcase himself the best.

Jackson and Fultz had the exact same true shooting %, .559%  for Jackson Vs .558 for Fultz. Jackson even out-shot Fultz from 3 in conference play, 43.5% Vs 38% for Fultz.

The fact is Fultz simply took more shots than Jackson, because he went to a school where he could do that.

Jackson's defense, athleticism, size, and motor is night and day better than Fultz's. And he's about the same level as a scorer, he just didn't pick a garbage college program to make himself look the best, he went to a place where he could compete as a member of a team.

The two relevant questions for me are - A) is the player NBA ready now and B) does the player in fill a need on the Celtics.

A)
From what I have seen and read, Jackson isnt nearly a finished product on the offensive end, kind of an important skill in today’s NBA.  As you said, his   three point shooting isn’t bad (35.3%) but his free throw shooting is atrocious at 56.3%.  He has a ton of potential, but the Celtics need an NBA ready scorer - Jackson is not that guy.

B)
Is Jackson a better athlete than Jaylen Brown?  I dont think so...and with Jaylen being the same age now as Jackson with a year in the league, I think the Celtics are set at SF.  

They are both great players, but right now - Fultz is a more finished product.

You just wrote that Jackson shot 35.3 from 3. Wrong. He shot 38% for the season, and 43.5% in conference play.

The people picking apart Jackson's game don't really know what they're talking about. Fultz only shot 10% better from FT line, but Jackson is a much better finisher around the rim, and just about as good from 3 point land.

Like I said, Jackson had the exact same True shooting % as Fultz, and much better true shooting in conference play. All he needs to do is relax more on his free throws, and stop shooting them off the EXACT same spot on the back of the rim. He wasn't scattering his FT misses all over the place like a real bad FT shooter, he was just getting anxious and not taking deep breaths before shooting, so he was shooting them a bit long, center of the rim but long.

Fultz is years away from developing the defensive motor and effectiveness to earn big minutes under Brad Stevens. Jackson's defense is NBA ready from day one, better than Jaylen's and similar to Marcus Smart's was as a rookie.

Like I said, these scouts don't really know what they're talking about. Last year they said Kris Dunn would instantly be the Celtics' best PG, and they said that Buddy Hield would have been a much better pick for the Celtics than Jaylen Brown. And they were sure that Jaylen Brown couldn't shoot outside. They simply don't know basketball nearly as well as they think they do.

Danny Ainge doesn't pay those guys any mind anyway, even if it means a night full of boos on draft night at the Garden.

cowens/oldschool wrote:agreed kleen, were set at SF with Crowder and Jaylen whos got serious upside, we know we need rebounding and even though our backcourt is good, its an elite guard dominated league now, in other words we still need an upgrade in the backcourt as Smart and AB are defensive pitbulls with offensive inconsistency and do you want to rely on little IT to score 35-40 every night to carry us? IT is gonna be 30 soon too, Fultz looks like a real 2 way player.....I'm trusting his defense cause of you NYCelt, so if Danny goes with Fultz its got to be the right choice by me.

Both Jaylen and Jackson are superstar shooting guards in the making. And much, much better defenders and rebounders than Fultz at that position. As far as PG, we already have Marcus Smart in addition to IT. If Smart just limits his FGAs, he's a top 15 pg in the future. He's already top 22 in win shares, and he doesn't even start yet.

And if there's one thing Danny knows how to do, it's draft or trade for good/great PGs.

Rmbone wrote:

cowens/oldschool wrote:agreed kleen, were set at SF with Crowder and Jaylen whos got serious upside, we know we need rebounding and even though our backcourt is good, its an elite guard dominated league now, in other words we still need an upgrade in the backcourt as Smart and AB are defensive pitbulls with offensive inconsistency and do you want to rely on little IT to score 35-40 every night to carry us? IT is gonna be 30 soon too, Fultz looks like a real 2 way player.....I'm trusting his defense cause of you NYCelt, so if Danny goes with Fultz its got to be the right choice by me.

Both Jaylen and Jackson are superstar shooting guards in the making. And much, much better defenders and rebounders than Fultz at that position. As far as PG, we already have Marcus Smart in addition to IT. If Smart just limits his FGAs, he's a top 15 pg in the future. He's already top 22 in win shares, and he doesn't even start yet.

And if there's one thing Danny knows how to do, it's draft or trade for good/great PGs.

actually your call last year on Jaylen was right on the money, I was open to Hield or Jaylen and leaving it up to Danny....right now am I glad we have Jaylen.

If it makes you feel better I also love Josh Jackson and wouldn't mind to see a poor mans Pippen- Jordan wing combo in the making with Brown- Jackson harassing both ends.

I guess again I leave it up to Danny.

So scouts who watch college players and evaluate them for a living, using all kinds of metrics and real world exprience dont know what they are talking about. But then we are to draft a guy #1 and then trust that as long as he "...takes deep breaths..." while shooting FT he will be fine?

At the end of it, I trust in DA to make the right call. I just think this team is past the point of stockpiling assets at redundant positions. As Cowens correctly stated, the NBA is a guard oriented league now - and finding a consistent scorer to play next to IT is at the top of the list.

I woudl be happy with any of the top 3 prospects, but Fultz is my guy.

mrkleen09 wrote:So scouts who watch college players and evaluate them for a living, using all kinds of metrics and real world exprience dont know what they are talking about.  But then we are to draft a guy #1 and then trust that as long as he "...takes deep breaths..." while shooting FT he will be fine?

At the end of it, I trust in DA to make the right call.  I just think this team is past the point of stockpiling assets at redundant positions.  As Cowens correctly stated, the NBA is a guard oriented league now - and finding a consistent scorer to play next to IT is at the top of the list.

I woudl be happy with any of the top 3 prospects, but Fultz is my guy.

breathe grasshopper, breathe

mrkleen09 wrote:So scouts who watch college players and evaluate them for a living, using all kinds of metrics and real world exprience dont know what they are talking about.  But then we are to draft a guy #1 and then trust that as long as he "...takes deep breaths..." while shooting FT he will be fine?

At the end of it, I trust in DA to make the right call.  I just think this team is past the point of stockpiling assets at redundant positions.  As Cowens correctly stated, the NBA is a guard oriented league now - and finding a consistent scorer to play next to IT is at the top of the list.

I woudl be happy with any of the top 3 prospects, but Fultz is my guy.

Did you just say redundant positions? As if Fultz wouldn't be redundant? The scouts you have so much faith in told you last year that Kris Dunn was the #3 prospect in that draft, and that Buddy Hield was a better prospect than Jaylen Brown. They also told you Thon Maker was a second round talent who couldn't shoot at all. Then Thon shot 38% from 3 and was the starting center for a surprise playoff team.

Keep putting your faith in the same guys who told you Kris Dunn, Lonzo Ball, D'Angelo Russell, Emmanuel Mudiay, and Dante Exum were franchise-changing point guards.

After all, they're experts, right? Right?

All the advanced metrics in the world won't tell you that the NBA game is different. Different 3 point line, different spacing, different talent level. Staring at college stats under a microscope isn't what makes these "experts" so smart, it's what makes them so terrible at predicting PG success.

Those stupid advanced metrics they point to so proudly are the main reason they thought Jaylen Brown wasn't even a top 6 prospect in that draft. And many analytics nerds didn't even have Jaylen Brown in their top 20, or even top 30 prospects, because "advanced metrics".

Who predicted that Jaylen Brown would be the #3 pick last year, and that it would be a great pick? Who told you Jaylen could shoot just fine, when all the other "experts" had you believing that Jaylen couldn't shoot?

See you on draft night. Bring your kleenex, just like last year.

I don't follow college sports, so I'm not in a position to discuss the specifics of the various players' games but it strikes me like this:

1.  Assuming no trades (a seriously flawed premise) we have a definite need for a shooter/scorer, especially one that can create for himself, and not so much for a SF.  Jackson might be as good from 3 as Fultz, or close enough as to not matter, but is he "a shooter/scorer"?  If not, then drafting Jackson would be drafting the best athlete available and not for need.  

2.  Also, assuming no trade, then all the rumors about the Celtics being "all in" on Gordon Hayward are either false (certainly a possibility) or they are true which means the Celtics management and ownership are looking to have Hayward, Crowder and Jaylen Brown.  Where's the room for Jackson?  Whether they get Hayward or not is irrelevant to the question of Fultz vs Jackson.  The draft is before the moratorium on free agents is lifted which means we will already have Fultz/Jackson/whomever by the time we know if Hayward is coming here.  The problem with doing that is you can end up like Philly with Okafor and Noel and Embiid.  Someone had to go and everybody knew it, which drove down trade value since the pressure was on Philly to deal and not on Dallas, their eventual partner, to buy.

3.  Can Jackson play any position other than 3?  Brad LOVES multi-position players.  If he cannot play 2 nor 4 that might be a factor in the decision regardless of points 1 & 2 above.

4.  Assuming the "no trade" premise is BS, and I believe it is, then all this gets turned on its head since trades will create holes in our depth chart as well as probably fill some.  Will Crowder be traded because we land Hayward?  That still begs the question where are the minutes for Jackson?  Brown will play minutes at 2 but that isn't his prime position, at least not yet.  He hasn't really learned NBA 3 yet, throwing another position at him before he gets that one down solid might not be helpful.

The bottom line to me is:  if we do go after Hayward then the viability of Crowder, Brown and Jackson all being on the roster next year makes no sense.  Therefore, the credibility of the Hayward-to-Boston rumors are critical path to figuring this out.  Once we get a handle on that then speculating about who is traded, and someone will be, becomes more focused.  Is Crowder traded?  Then the depth chart could be Hayward/Brown/Jackson.  Does that make sense?  If Brown is traded then it's Hayward/Crowder/Jackson.  Does that makes sense?  It all depends upon the trade value of Brown vs Crowder but also whether Danny is trading for next year or for 4 years from now.  How about if we draft Fultz?  Then, if we trade Crowder, we could keep Gerald Green or some other veteran-but-inexpensive SF for depth (Abdel Nader?), but then we have an issue in the back court with IT/Bradley/Rozier/Smart/Fultz and even some Brown at really BIG 2 and forget about Demetrius Jackson. Once again, we're talking about a shifting target and depending upon who is moved we might be drafting for need or best athlete or it could turn out to be both. I just made myself dizzy.

Therefore, thinking out loud, the "no trade" scenario itself makes no sense.  It's not just about creating roster space by letting Amir and/or Jonas go, it's about balance and this draft will not fix that because there are no high quality bigs that should go that high.



bob


.

No Fultz wouldnt be redundant, because IT and likely Bradley will be gone when he hits his prime in 2 or 3 years. Sorry.

As for the Kleenex comments, not sure WTF that means.

I will go read up on all the scouts who are wrong year after year - and maybe you can pick up a copy of How to Win Friends and Influence People - since you seem to be a little lacking in that department.

mrkleen09 wrote:

Rmbone wrote:Jackson shoots 38% from 3 but he's an "offensive project".
Fultz shoots 41% from 3 and he's a polished scorer?

Jackson went to Kansas where he could compete for a championship, playing alongside the Naismith Player of the Year who averaged 21 points.

Fultz went to Washington, who were never going to win anything, so he could put up maximum shots and showcase himself the best.

Jackson and Fultz had the exact same true shooting %, .559%  for Jackson Vs .558 for Fultz. Jackson even out-shot Fultz from 3 in conference play, 43.5% Vs 38% for Fultz.

The fact is Fultz simply took more shots than Jackson, because he went to a school where he could do that.

Jackson's defense, athleticism, size, and motor is night and day better than Fultz's. And he's about the same level as a scorer, he just didn't pick a garbage college program to make himself look the best, he went to a place where he could compete as a member of a team.

The two relevant questions for me are - A) is the player NBA ready now and B) does the player in fill a need on the Celtics.

A)
From what I have seen and read, Jackson isnt nearly a finished product on the offensive end, kind of an important skill in today’s NBA.  As you said, his   three point shooting isn’t bad (35.3%) but his free throw shooting is atrocious at 56.3%.  He has a ton of potential, but the Celtics need an NBA ready scorer - Jackson is not that guy.

B)
Is Jackson a better athlete than Jaylen Brown?  I dont think so...and with Jaylen being the same age now as Jackson with a year in the league, I think the Celtics are set at SF.  

They are both great players, but right now - Fultz is a more finished product.

With the first or any high draft pick, you don't draft for need/nba ready, you draft for talent.

Shamrock1000 wrote:
With the first or any high draft pick, you don't draft for need/nba ready, you draft for talent.

And when there is no clear winner as to who is the most talented, you draft for need.

Some of you guys may like like Fultz for any number of reasons, but again - this is nothing but my opinion.

Fultz is explosive, but he plays under control. He's got great size for a point guard, and a jumper that's already fairly reliable for someone his age. I have heard him compared to James Harden, I like the Brandon Roy comparisons - and a couple of people who I respect in assessing talent have written that he is the best guard prospect the NBA's seen since John Wall.

He will need to improve his defense and his effort on both ends needs to become more consistent, but at 6'4" with early 6'10 wingspan, he's got the tools to be excellent. Exactly what the Celtics need.

bobheckler wrote:I don't follow college sports, so I'm not in a position to discuss the specifics of the various players' games but it strikes me like this:

1.  Assuming no trades (a seriously flawed premise) we have a definite need for a shooter/scorer, especially one that can create for himself, and not so much for a SF.  Jackson might be as good from 3 as Fultz, or close enough as to not matter, but is he "a shooter/scorer"?  If not, then drafting Jackson would be drafting the best athlete available and not for need.  

2.  Also, assuming no trade, then all the rumors about the Celtics being "all in" on Gordon Hayward are either false (certainly a possibility) or they are true which means the Celtics management and ownership are looking to have Hayward, Crowder and Jaylen Brown.  Where's the room for Jackson?  Whether they get Hayward or not is irrelevant to the question of Fultz vs Jackson.  The draft is before the moratorium on free agents is lifted which means we will already have Fultz/Jackson/whomever by the time we know if Hayward is coming here.  The problem with doing that is you can end up like Philly with Okafor and Noel and Embiid.  Someone had to go and everybody knew it, which drove down trade value since the pressure was on Philly to deal and not on Dallas, their eventual partner, to buy.

3.  Can Jackson play any position other than 3?  Brad LOVES multi-position players.  If he cannot play 2 nor 4 that might be a factor in the decision regardless of points 1 & 2 above.

4.  Assuming the "no trade" premise is BS, and I believe it is, then all this gets turned on its head since trades will create holes in our depth chart as well as probably fill some.  Will Crowder be traded because we land Hayward?  That still begs the question where are the minutes for Jackson?  Brown will play minutes at 2 but that isn't his prime position, at least not yet.  He hasn't really learned NBA 3 yet, throwing another position at him before he gets that one down solid might not be helpful.

The bottom line to me is:  if we do go after Hayward then the viability of Crowder, Brown and Jackson all being on the roster next year makes no sense.  Therefore, the credibility of the Hayward-to-Boston rumors are critical path to figuring this out.  Once we get a handle on that then speculating about who is traded, and someone will be, becomes more focused.  Is Crowder traded?  Then the depth chart could be Hayward/Brown/Jackson.  Does that make sense?  If Brown is traded then it's Hayward/Crowder/Jackson.  Does that makes sense?  It all depends upon the trade value of Brown vs Crowder but also whether Danny is trading for next year or for 4 years from now.  How about if we draft Fultz?  Then, if we trade Crowder, we could keep Gerald Green or some other veteran-but-inexpensive SF for depth (Abdel Nader?), but then we have an issue in the back court with IT/Bradley/Rozier/Smart/Fultz and even some Brown at really BIG 2 and forget about Demetrius Jackson.  Once again, we're talking about a shifting target and depending upon who is moved we might be drafting for need or best athlete or it could turn out to be both.  I just made myself dizzy.

Therefore, thinking out loud, the "no trade" scenario itself makes no sense.  It's not just about creating roster space by letting Amir and/or Jonas go, it's about balance and this draft will not fix that because there are no high quality bigs that should go that high.



bob


.

Bob, I've said it several times in this thread alone, Jackson can play multiple positions, and he's probably a better shooting guard than Fultz. He's 6'8, more athletic, a better defender against point guards, shooting guards, small forwards, power forwards, and centers than Fultz, he's a better rebounder than Fultz, he can create his own shot just as well if not better than Fultz, and he scores at the rim much better than Fultz. The fact that he can also play SF and some PF is just gravy.

When people like a prospect, as they do Fultz, they'll tell you how versatile he is to be able to play multiple positions. When people don't like a prospect, they'll ignore positional versatility and claim he can only play one position. There's a lot of bad information floating around.

Who do you think is the more ideal shooting guard, the 6'4" guy or the 6'8 guy who is also more athletic, plays much harder on defense, and scores even more efficiently than the 6'4" guy?

mrkleen09 wrote:No Fultz wouldnt be redundant, because IT and likely Bradley will be gone when he hits his prime in 2 or 3 years.  Sorry.

As for the Kleenex comments, not sure WTF that means.  

I will go read up on all the scouts who are wrong year after year - and maybe you can pick up a copy of How to Win Friends and Influence People - since you seem to be a little lacking in that department.

Mrkleen, I'm sorry for the attitude earlier.

Here's a new video of Fultz shooting.
His body looks pretty sloppy, but maybe I'm reading too much into it.

Rmbone wrote:  Mrkleen, I'm sorry for the attitude earlier.

No sweat man.....all good.

This was posted earlier, but kid doesnt look sloppy to me.  

Rmbone wrote:Here's a new video of Fultz shooting.
His body looks pretty sloppy, but maybe I'm reading too much into it.

Rmbone,

8-13 from 3 in 50 seconds.  I can live with that.  



bob


.

Rmbone, forget the sloppy look of Fultz. What really struck me about that video was the robot throwing the ball back to him. If I had one as a kid I might have turned into something. I hope Elon Musk doesn't see this film. Next thing we'd encounter would be robot basketball, with little things on wheels passing the ball around, shooting, and somehow even dunking. Egads!

Yes Dboss, but a robot could probably shoot 100% with the right programming, and think of how much cap space it could save.

worcester wrote:Rmbone, forget the sloppy look of Fultz. What really struck me about that video was the robot throwing the ball back to him.  If I had one as a kid I might have turned into something. I hope Elon Musk doesn't see this film. Next thing we'd encounter would be robot basketball, with little things on wheels passing the ball around, shooting, and somehow even dunking. Egads!

I was thinking the same thing..... if I had that as a kid I would have shot a few million more jumpers. (Not that that would have got me anywhere)

The Marcus Smart incident was "in the heat of the moment".

Josh Jackson actually threatened to beat a woman.

Here:

An affidavit alleges Jackson threatened to “beat” a player on the Kansas women’s basketball team after following her to her vehicle. Damages were estimated between $1,100 and $3,100 when he reportedly kicked the car.
http://hoopshype.com/2017/05/22/top-nba-draft-prospect-josh-jackson-entered-anger-management-program/

The Jayhawks star was suspended for the first game of the Big 12 tournament in March. Kansas lost the game and Jackson was charged with misdemeanor criminal damage.

Part of the punishment for Jackson was discovered earlier today (via Kansas City Star):

A diversion agreement for former Kansas men’s basketball player Josh Jackson includes stipulations that he attend anger management classes, refrain from alcohol and recreational drugs during the diversion period of 12 months and a write an apology letter, according to Douglas County court records.

bobheckler wrote:

Rmbone wrote:Here's a new video of Fultz shooting.
His body looks pretty sloppy, but maybe I'm reading too much into it.

Rmbone,

8-13 from 3 in 50 seconds.  I can live with that.  



bob


.

https://streamable.com/4da7i

fierce wrote:The Marcus Smart incident was "in the heat of the moment".

Josh Jackson actually threatened to beat a woman.

Here:

An affidavit alleges Jackson threatened to “beat” a player on the Kansas women’s basketball team after following her to her vehicle. Damages were estimated between $1,100 and $3,100 when he reportedly kicked the car.
http://hoopshype.com/2017/05/22/top-nba-draft-prospect-josh-jackson-entered-anger-management-program/

The Jayhawks star was suspended for the first game of the Big 12 tournament in March. Kansas lost the game and Jackson was charged with misdemeanor criminal damage.

Part of the punishment for Jackson was discovered earlier today (via Kansas City Star):

A diversion agreement for former Kansas men’s basketball player Josh Jackson includes stipulations that he attend anger management classes, refrain from alcohol and recreational drugs during the diversion period of 12 months and a write an apology letter, according to Douglas County court records.

Yet one more vivid example of why the NBA should ban one-and-done.  Superstars in High School and pampered, privileged BMOCs in college.  Then they become instant multi-millionaires at 19 years old with endorsers and other seductions being offered to them.  The weakest muscle in their bodies is the 4" one between their ears and that one is the difference-maker between, say, MJ and Gerald Green.  Both ridiculous athletes and great scorers but one had a mature mind that put him on track to greatness and the other one didn't.

Marcus Smart at OK State responded to a fan who, according to him, used a racial slur.  Nobody should have to put up with that.  Jackson followed a woman to her car and committed an act.  He didn't just say something inappropriate.


bob

.

Rmbone wrote:

bobheckler wrote:

Rmbone wrote:Here's a new video of Fultz shooting.
His body looks pretty sloppy, but maybe I'm reading too much into it.

Rmbone,

8-13 from 3 in 50 seconds.  I can live with that.  



bob


.

https://streamable.com/4da7i

Rmbone,

WOW!

One thing I wish is that the coaches would change where they pass to.  I understand "the drill", using the same motion againand again, but I'd like to see a more realistic drill with bounce passes and passes higher and lower.  The feeder kept passing right to his numbers, a perfect pass every time.  Yeah, he shot great but they won't be perfect passes in games.  Not Jackson's fault, of course.


bob


.