DRAFT TALK Thread: Looking Like Lonzo

Jackson is an athletic 2-3 wing who is a tough-as-hell competitor on D and is an underrated passer. I'm less concerned about his J than I would be about Fox's (0-3 this season on NBA-range 3's...yikes).

I'd still be pissed if the Lakers pass on Ball, but of the other options, Jackson is at the top of the list for me and it's not particularly close. He brings some of the other things this team sorely lacks: Defensive pressure, intensity, athleticism.

Also, our two best players/prospects are Russell & Ingram right now. Both of those guys are cerebral type of personalities on the court most of the time. That's also something I've heard about Ball. You toss a raging animal who's out there to cut your heart out in Jackson, and you're going to see him & Randle destroy dudes at times.

Again, I'm more for Ball, but I wouldn't be too upset with Jackson. The more I look at Fox though, the less I like him. He's a thin high character guy whose D is solid and has NO jumper. He's basically all speed at this point. Best case scenario on his J is he eventually figures it out like Mike Conley, but worst-case he's a faster Ricky Rubio with much worse court vision. PASS.

 

Great post. I'm with you 100%, especially with looking into Fox more. I really like Fox, but he's got some serious NBA level problems. I really think he figures it out over time, but he is more of a project than people think and Jackson is less of a project than people think. Jackson comes with his own, very serious, flags off the court though which solidifies Ball as the best pick in my opinion for the Lakers. A ton of upside, a solid floor, and a good fit. It's boring at this point in the off-season but it's the best pick right now.

 

Magic Johnson is on record as being interested in Josh Jackson. It came from his own mouth in more than one interview on ESPN 710. He likes Jackson for all the same reasons that JSJ just touched on.

 

He's actually shown good anticipation on D. That combined with his length make him an adequate defender AT WORST. Toss in his dependable J and it's almost guaranteed he'll be a solid pro with a long career, IMO.

The dude has shown some truly special traits, though. At #2 overall, I'm more than happy to take that gamble. That's what you do at the top of the NBA draft.

 

I did think about this.

Barnes, do you own the rights to this domain? If you do, pray that Lonzo becomes a stud.

 

It's going to be Ball guys. National writers are just playing the giant Laker fan base. They need page hits and they know that's the way to get them. A bunch of mock drafts or articles about Fultz/Ball at the top isn't interesting to Laker fans. It's wht the Lakers have "interest" in every player that is available. Same reason the Yankees are interested in every baseball player. This draft is almost as locked in as last year's draft. For a while writers tried to pull the, "Sixers might take Ingram" angle, but realized no one would really buy that. The insane amount of writers out there these days are why we get stuff like this. It's why we have so much "fake news" flying around. (I hate that term by the way.) Too many reporters/writers for the amount of eyes available.

 

That's what I see too. As ugly as his shot is, there's ample evidence that it goes in. In fact there was that post a week ago or so that showed his shot went in at somewhere just below Curry's rate when he takes it from way the hell outside. He's shown electric range. At first I was concerned his shot form would get blocked, but I don't have that concern as much anymore. He gets the shot off quickly enough and the only time it'll be a real problem is in the mid-range where traffic is tight. From deep it'll be fine which makes him, at the least, an adequate floor spacer.

I also agree his "struggles" on defense are sort of overblown. There's no real evidence that he's a bad defender. I posted the stats not too long ago that he's nearly the same level of defender in advanced and standard stats as the "big time defenders" in this draft with Fox and Jackson. The biggest recurring problem I saw with Ball was that he frequently died on screens. Just laid there. That's not going to fly. In one-on-one situations he's as decent as any prospect not named Josh Jackson in my opinion and Ball is an excellent help side defender too. He'll be alright on that end. Opportunistic.

I'm not married to Ball as the pick, but in my opinion he's the right one. If they go with Jackson or even Tatum, I'm okay but I don't think it's the right pick. Fox I'm starting to lean against. I'm not interested in being the team that gambles on Dennis Smith. Fultz I'd also take in a heartbeat given his talent.

 

Pretty much agree with all this. Fultz is sort of like Simmons last year. I like Ball just like I really like Ingram. But if Boston takes anyone other than Fultz, I take Fultz and skip through a field of flowers with glee.

 

There's some things about him that I genuinely don't like. I think it'll take a bit before his jumper translates to the NBA three point line. I honestly don't know what he looks like when he's focused and engaged to best of his ability. Most importantly though, how does he affect winning? We're seeing it now with Randle, Russell, and Clarkson: they don't move the win column right now as youngsters. Most kids don't, don't get me wrong, but it's about how much they're willing to change to get there. What strikes me with Fultz is 9 wins in college. Just 9 wins... His talent leaps off the page in a way most kids don't, so why didn't he win more? Even Ben Simmons won more games than that. I understand his team was awful, but isn't the mark of a great player that they can lift the team with their play? He's shown none of that. I know it's unfair to hold a 19 year old to that standard, but that's all the film we've got on him.

I still take him because his scoring talent is remarkable, but I really need to get into this kid's head and understand what it'll take to make him tick. What will we need to do to make sure he's going to help us win games?