I agree for the most part except I would say that the stupid reach in fouls should be easy to correct but for whatever reason some players just can't seem to stop themselves. I hope that's not the case for Jackson because in every other way he looks like he's going to be a great player in the NBA.
If we pick anyone other than Ayton or Doncic, Jackson is the player who would make the most sense to me. I wouldn't totally agree with it, but I would at least respect the decision. He's the best defender in the draft and he's got a very intriguing mix of offensive skills. He's everything Bamba projects to be minus a few inches of reach and he's closer to reaching that potential than Bamba is. I can even see why someone would project him over Ayton and Doncic -- he's the one guy here that has not just good but elite two-way potential.
The only the thing that gives me pause is the question of why, if he's really the complete package and potentially the best player in the draft, he didn't produce at the level that Ayton, Bagley, and Trae Young did this year. Is he going to be one of those players that forever teases us with immense potential that they never quite seem to bring to the floor every night? That's why I don't have him #1. But he's very very impressive and one of my favorite players in this draft.
I'll try and answer your question if I can. First, Jackson played out of position a lot at Mich St.. On offense he played a majority of the time on the perimeter, which hurt his offensive rebounding, and didn't give him a lot of touches at the basket, or a lot of touches period. Why you ask, well because of Nick Ward, who had little to no game away from the basket. Personally, I would have brought Ward off the bench and started Jackson down low. But Ward was a sophmore, and Jackson a freshman, and he had to pay his dues. Stupid!
The other problem along with Ward, was Miles Bridges, who did play away from the basket a lot, but also scored at least half his points at the basket. So you can see how it would have gotten crowded at the basket if you also had Jackson down low. Ward is an OK player, but he's 6'9" whild Jackson is 6'11" with a huge wingspan. Logic tells you Jackson should have been the center. I would love to ask Izzo what the logic behind his decisions was. I'm sure I'm not the only one.
I have little doubt that had Jackson been the center, his rebounding numbers would have gone up, as well as his points per game. While Ward is an Adonis like physical specimen, he's not near the athlete that Jackson is. The defensive plus/minus with Jackson is almost ridiculous, and yet he only played 22 minutes a game. Yes, sometimes foul trouble played into that. But there were games where Jackson started, and got sent to the bench 2 or 3 minutes into the game, for no apparent reason other than a whim of Izzo.
Personally I think Jackson was the best player on that Mich. St. team. I like Bridges, but he's not the player that Jackson is, nor does he have that kind of potential. So I would like to ask Izzo why did Bridges play over 30 minutes a game, and Jackson only 22 minutes a game. Jackson only averaged 6.6 shot attempts a game, of which 41% were three's. Bridges averaged 13.4 attempts per game and he took a hundred more three's than Jackson.
I'll admit that it's hard to get a read on Jackson. Limited minutes and limited touches and shots. You'd see a glimpse here and there of what he was capable of. Like the time on the right side outside the 3pt line when out of the blue he he put the ball on the floor, dribbled between his legs, did a crossover followed by a spin move and exploded to the basket for a dunk. For a moment, I was stunned. I had no idea he had that in his bag of tricks. But if you wern't watching that game, you'd never know. To me, he's truly the mystery man...