Can Jason Thompson play the 5 in the NBA?

S

Smills91

Starter
Let's assume that it's 5 years from now, Spencer Hawes is no longer on the team, neither is Brad Miller nor Mikki Moore. We haven't drafted a C yet or signed anyone. Can Jason Thompson be a Center of the future?

I know he hasn't played a minute in the NBA yet, but with his combination of size, athleticism and height do you think it's out of the realm of possibilities that JT could be seeing significant minutes at the 5.

I ask this in the sense that we get a sure-fire STUD in next year's draft, but that player ideally plays the FOUR. Can Jason Thompson slide to the 5 at the next level sufficiently well enough for us?
 
Yes he can play the five. At least this is what all of the experts believe, that is in reality his more natural position. He should gain about 15 pounds if you want him to be on a Tyson Chandler type level though.
 
Doubtful, but who knows. Maybe in a small ball setting, but you would probably be very soft. He has been lauded for his mobility, ball handling etc., so he may be a very mobile PF. With any luck he is one of those PFs who can swing over to play a few center minutes when your starting center is out. But a full time center, in particular with real centers beginning to pop up all over the league again, seems like a stretch. Why have a PF try to battle with Yao, Kaman, Oden, Bynum, Chandler etc. on a nightly basis?

Besides, Hawes as shown the potential to be at least a rotation player if he settles his game.
 
ryanandty said:
Yes he can play the five. At least this is what all of the experts believe, that is in reality his more natural position. He should gain about 15 pounds if you want him to be on a Tyson Chandler type level though.
Click to expand...


No idea why that would be his more natural position -- has the mobility to play 4 and maybe even some 3. Former guard. This sounds like a CWebb styled PF, not an anchor the middle power guy.
 
Only saying because he looks bigger than they say he is (just watched some video on the guy), and C is the position he played at the end of his college career right? I think he could do it and I can't wait to see him play.
 
I'm only saying this because I think Blake Griffin is the real deal and I think there is a strong possibility we could land a top 3 pick in the lottery next year to nab him potentially.

Griffin/Thompson/Hawes rotation looks real nice. I'll be honest though, Hawes' knees worry me.
 
ryanandty said:
Only saying because he looks bigger than they say he is (just watched some video on the guy), and C is the position he played at the end of his college career right? I think he could do it and I can't wait to see him play.
Click to expand...

I recall seeing somewhere (maybe on Rider website last season) that JT progressed along lines something like this as he grew lots taller:

High School Basketball
Frosh - PG
Soph - PG
Jr - SG/Wingman
Sr - Forward/Center

College Basketball
Frosh - SF
Soph - PF/C
Jr - C
Sr - C
 
If his listed measurements of 6'11 & 250 are accurate (though I suspect they may be a little generous) he's about the size of your average NBA center. In fact, he's listed at 15 pounds heavier than Chandler, rather than the reverse. He looks like he can carry a lot more muscle on that frame, and actually looks younger and less developed than his age, which probably has something to do with being such a late bloomer. He gained about 3 inches and 35 pounds as recently as from his sophomore to senior season, not to mention how much he shot up prior to that. I don't know what reason there is to say he'd be soft, just because he's skilled. I think he needs to learn to use his newfound size and use the professional training he's now getting to develop his body, particular lower body and core. Who says he's even finished growing? He claims to have gone up a shoe size just recently.

JT said yesterday that the Kings are having him learn each play from the 3, 4 and 5. I'd say that if he can play a range of three positions, the middle one is where he'll have his greatest advantage. At the 4, he should have an advantage of either size or quickness, if not both, on most nights. At the 3 he has size but will have some difficult matchups quickness-wise, and the 5 he would be extremely mobile but just average size-wise. For the foreseeable future, let's just be happy if we have PF with a great combination of skill, size and quickness that can also dabble at a couple of other positions. Down the road, I don't think it's out of the question that he could develop to where center makes more sense.
 
He should be playing the five against other teams second unit. It would be a bad decision to have him face off against players that will hurt his defensive statistics. Remember, it is not about winning more than it is about building valuable pieces. David Lee averages 10 and 10 and shoots a more than solid clip for a 6-9 PF. He is now one of the more valuable pieces in NYK. We want JT to see minutes mostly against people whom he will dominate, and start his stats in the right direction, which will help his confidence, and his value. Rookies are a rollercoaster of emotion, and it would help to have a stat or two he is proud of.
 
Smills91 said:
I'm only saying this because I think Blake Griffin is the real deal and I think there is a strong possibility we could land a top 3 pick in the lottery next year to nab him potentially.

Griffin/Thompson/Hawes rotation looks real nice. I'll be honest though, Hawes' knees worry me.
Click to expand...

I had a feeling you were thinking about Griffin when I read your first post. Yes, if he's available, we should take him--although there are a number of potential points out there, too. But what can you say, it's only October.
 
BMiller52 said:
I wouldn't be surprised if he played a little C this year when on the court with Mikki/Shelden.
Click to expand...


It will be a major disappointment if he can't play a little C. One of the huge advantages of drafting a nice big PF is that he should be able to swing to C for spells when your real C is out. Makes the desired 3-man frontcourt rotation much easier. One pure C, one PF who can swing to C. And one guy who can play either is ideal.

That is different though than actually trying to start him in there against the big boys and ask him to bang with them all night. As I've mentioned repeatedly, big centers are back again. This is the second time this has happened (maybe third) since I started watching the game. In the 80's there was talk for a long time about there being no centers, and then all of a sudden the greatest generation of them started pouring into the league. Hakeem and Robinson and Ewing and Shaq, and guys like Smits, Vlade, Deke, Mourning etc. etc. Now its started trending that way again. For about 5 years the centers \were dying out, and the exact same prattle I heard when I was young about there being no more centers, the game changing etc. goes on (and just like in the 80s its the big centers/PFs who kept right on winning titles). But now there are starting to pile up again. Yao is 7'6". Bynum is 7'1". Chandler 7'2". Kaman 7'1". etc. The position is filling back up with big talented guys and Thompson would have to be quite the phenom to be anything but a soft option at C going forward. You can almost always look pretty playing a PF at C, but you never win anything.

Now I would still be in favor of drafting another PF next year if we got a top pick and he really was that good -- great big players still trump anything else, and if nothing else it would have major trade value. Or maybe Thompson is not really a starter in the NBA, so he become that talented 3rd big. Or whatever.
 
Last edited:
I think he can play spot C, but IMO he will never be a true starting center, or at least never should be from the footage I've seen of him. I think he can play spot SF as well, but I'd like to see him stick to PF
 
Bricklayer said:
Now I would still be in favor of drafting another PF next year if we got a top pick and he really was that good -- great big players still trump anything else, and if nothing else it would have major trade value. Or maybe Thompson is not really a starter in the NBA, so he become that talented 3rd big. Or whatever.
Click to expand...

Exactly. You don't want to become Seattle (with Swift, Collison, Sene, Petro, etc) but if Griffin is there you take him and let things settle out from there.
 
I don't think there's any clear cut rule about having a traditional center or not. You're going to want somebody with size in the middle or you're giving up too many rebounds and open layups/dunks to be competitive in the NBA. But aside from that, I think you determine a strategy that maximizes the talent on your team rather than trying to determine what everyone else is doing and match up with that. If you're going to be a fast break team that outruns everybody down the court, then your ideal center is going to be fast and mobile like Chandler or Stoudamire. If you're going to play a slow-paced deliberate game than you want someone with size and power down there like Duncan or Shaq. It's too easy to pick on the Suns now in retrospect considering they haven't won anything. A lot of bad luck/injuries/bad officiating cost them when they were at their best and now they don't have the right personnel. Having an explosive PF at C actually became an advantage for them because he just went over and around everyone else's defense. The Phoenix Mercury won the WNBA championship last year with a fast break team and a center that trailed on the break and hit threes. They were playing against a tough defensive team with a traditional center (Detroit). Ultimately winning is going to come down to how good your game-plan is and how well you execute it.

So to answer the original question, I think Thompson has enough size to play C in the NBA, but he's too weak to adequately defend most NBA centers right now so either he's going to have to get a lot stronger to be able to hold position inside or you're going to have to be able to outscore people without playing defense. His jumpshot can be a real asset on offense though. If you get a team of 5 deadeye shooters out there, you can really space the floor out. But if that's the idea, Hawes looks like a better option at this point. And you have to have really really good shooters to win consistently that way. I'd say he's best utilized at PF at this point and wait to see what happens with the rest of the roster.
 
hrdboild said:
I don't think there's any clear cut rule about having a traditional center or not. You're going to want somebody with size in the middle or you're giving up too many rebounds and open layups/dunks to be competitive in the NBA. But aside from that, I think you determine a strategy that maximizes the talent on your team rather than trying to determine what everyone else is doing and match up with that. If you're going to be a fast break team that outruns everybody down the court, then your ideal center is going to be fast and mobile like Chandler or Stoudamire. If you're going to play a slow-paced deliberate game than you want someone with size and power down there like Duncan or Shaq. It's too easy to pick on the Suns now in retrospect considering they haven't won anything. A lot of bad luck/injuries/bad officiating cost them when they were at their best and now they don't have the right personnel. Having an explosive PF at C actually became an advantage for them because he just went over and around everyone else's defense. The Phoenix Mercury won the WNBA championship last year with a fast break team and a center that trailed on the break and hit threes. They were playing against a tough defensive team with a traditional center (Detroit). Ultimately winning is going to come down to how good your game-plan is and how well you execute it.

So to answer the original question, I think Thompson has enough size to play C in the NBA, but he's too weak to adequately defend most NBA centers right now so either he's going to have to get a lot stronger to be able to hold position inside or you're going to have to be able to outscore people without playing defense. His jumpshot can be a real asset on offense though. If you get a team of 5 deadeye shooters out there, you can really space the floor out. But if that's the idea, Hawes looks like a better option at this point. And you have to have really really good shooters to win consistently that way. I'd say he's best utilized at PF at this point and wait to see what happens with the rest of the roster.
Click to expand...

I agree with some of your post (The Phx part anyway) but this is exactly what we shouldn'tbe doing. Except for a few bad examples, defense wins championships. I'm sick of teams relying on if their players shots are on or not in order to win. The idea should be to give your team a chance to win EVERY night, even if your best offensive players are having off games.

So I say play Thompson spot minutes at C, but let's get a real C to rebound and block shots
 
SacKings7 said:
I agree with some of your post (The Phx part anyway) but this is exactly what we shouldn'tbe doing. Except for a few bad examples, defense wins championships. I'm sick of teams relying on if their players shots are on or not in order to win. The idea should be to give your team a chance to win EVERY night, even if your best offensive players are having off games.

So I say play Thompson spot minutes at C, but let's get a real C to rebound and block shots
Click to expand...

This is a pattern with GP, for three years we drafted a "tweener guard" (K-mart, Sisco and QD). So next year we can expect to draft another "tweener big" like we did with Hawes and JT. I am all for drafting on stability (a real Center who can rebound and block shots) rather than flexibility (a "point center").
 
I don't mind him playing 5 at times, but the whole reason we drafted Hawes was to get a center who could shoot/pass. I am actually REAL excited to see Hawes/Thompson in a couple years instead of Moore/Miller.

If there was a 2 on 2 game you think Hawes/Thompson would take Miller/Moore? I think so..
 
rings4Kings said:
This is a pattern with GP, for three years we drafted a "tweener guard" (K-mart, Sisco and QD). So next year we can expect to draft another "tweener big" like we did with Hawes and JT. I am all for drafting on stability (a real Center who can rebound and block shots) rather than flexibility (a "point center").
Click to expand...

Of all the players you mention, only Douby fits what is typically meant by a "tweener." It implies that you can't quite meet the expectations of either position. Being able to play more than one position effectively is never bad. Martin is a tweener between what and what, exactly?

JT may not be our future center, but he did average 12 boards and 3 blocks, you know. Albeit most of his games were against weak competition, but whenever he did have the opportunity to play tougher competition, he still put up the same production.
 
SacKings7 said:
I agree with some of your post (The Phx part anyway) but this is exactly what we shouldn'tbe doing. Except for a few bad examples, defense wins championships. I'm sick of teams relying on if their players shots are on or not in order to win. The idea should be to give your team a chance to win EVERY night, even if your best offensive players are having off games.

So I say play Thompson spot minutes at C, but let's get a real C to rebound and block shots
Click to expand...

We had Williams doing that, but he wasn't giving us much else. You have to be able to do more than rebound, and block shots to make it in the league nowadays. I say we stick with Hawes, and get a roleplayer to back him, and the PF spot up. Someone like a Pollard type player who can play some D, block a shot or two, and rebound.. Oh and also run the floor like Pollard could.

Remember when Pollard was injured? The Kings would always go up by like 20 and by the time the bench players were ready to come back out in favor of the starters our lead was pretty much gone, and we would have to rely on our starters playing in a slower more defensive oriented game as the time winded down which was not to their liking..

So I actually don't mind teams trying to run with our youngans only get get stuffed on the defensive end once our bench players are in... We are actually primed to do this if Moore, Garcia, and Jackson as possible bench players this year.
 
SacKings7 said:
I agree with some of your post (The Phx part anyway) but this is exactly what we shouldn'tbe doing. Except for a few bad examples, defense wins championships. I'm sick of teams relying on if their players shots are on or not in order to win. The idea should be to give your team a chance to win EVERY night, even if your best offensive players are having off games.

So I say play Thompson spot minutes at C, but let's get a real C to rebound and block shots
Click to expand...

Quite honestly, I'm a believer in the defense wins championships philosophy myself. (Which is why this team frustrates me so much) I don't think it's always true, but I think it's true often enough to make it a good guideline for building a team. That's why I said the jumpshooting strategy is really only viable if you have really really good shooters at every position, and even then it's still a roll of the dice. (figuring that really good shooters make about 50% of their shots on average -- look at Peja's track record in the playoffs for example) But on a general level, there's more than one way to win a basketball game and several of them don't involve having a traditional center. That's not an easy way to go, but it's not totally without it's merits. The key is always to use all 5 players together in a way that maximizes their individual strengths and minimizes their individual weaknesses.
 
Let me state that I am NOT saying Thomspon will be as good as KG, but I think if he is forced to play center it will be like KG playing center, it can happen but not really where you would want him.
 
can he play center? yes.... should he play center? yes, in limited minutes; when the starting center is in foul trouble...
 
How should I know if, 5 years from now, he'll be able to play C in the NBA? He hasn't played a single NBA minute yet.

But, if we're switching from Princeton to something more triangle, then Hawes might be trade fodder anyway, because we wouldn't really need a point-center anymore. We'll have chances to draft more conventional, defensive-minded centers over the next few years, I'd rather see us do that. I don't want to take our best hope for a decent young PF since last millenium, and throw that out the window.
 
fnordius said:
But, if we're switching from Princeton to something more triangle, then Hawes might be trade fodder anyway, because we wouldn't really need a point-center anymore. We'll have chances to draft more conventional, defensive-minded centers over the next few years, I'd rather see us do that. I don't want to take our best hope for a decent young PF since last millenium, and throw that out the window.
Click to expand...

Well...I'm certainly no expert on the triangle, but it seems pretty flexible with the type of center that can be plugged in (Wennington, Perdue, Shaq, etc.) I would seriously doubt the team would decide to move in a different personnel direction with their recent draft picks just because they are now going to run the triangle.

Also, I don't think the Princeton offense has been seriously run at any point for two years, so I think in general we need to move on.
 
Smills91 said:
Let's assume that it's 5 years from now, Spencer Hawes is no longer on the team, neither is Brad Miller nor Mikki Moore. We haven't drafted a C yet or signed anyone. Can Jason Thompson be a Center of the future?

I know he hasn't played a minute in the NBA yet, but with his combination of size, athleticism and height do you think it's out of the realm of possibilities that JT could be seeing significant minutes at the 5.

I ask this in the sense that we get a sure-fire STUD in next year's draft, but that player ideally plays the FOUR. Can Jason Thompson slide to the 5 at the next level sufficiently well enough for us?
Click to expand...

Well, it's a little premature to have the discussion. We really don't KNOW whether he can be a good NBA player yet. That said, the question revolves around the matchup. If he's playing a very strong low post center - No. If he's playing more of an outside guy, then yes. Also, I don't understand starting from the premise that Hawes isn't going to be our future center. It's much more reasonable to start from a premise that Thompson will not be our future center.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Spike
  • Poll Poll
Power Rankings, Week of 12/5
Replies
0
Views
187
Spike
Spike
Spike
  • Poll Poll
NBA Power Rankings Week of 11/14, Sponsored by Juniper Networks*
Replies
4
Views
511
Mr. S£im Citrus
Mr. S£im Citrus
Spike
  • Poll Poll
NBA Power Rankings, Week of 11/28
Replies
0
Views
204
Spike
Spike
Spike
  • Poll Poll
NBA Power Rankings Week of 11/21
Replies
2
Views
415
Capt. Factorial
Capt. Factorial
S
[Rumor] Kings Land Defensive Specialist in NBA Trade Idea with Nuggets
Replies
3
Views
340
QWERTYLICIOUS
QWERTYLICIOUS
Back
Top