Jason Thompson!
- Thread starter OptimusRhyme
- Start date
for any one who reads Bill simmons he talked about JT in his column today. Pretty sweet.
Jason Thompson: I mocked him on draft day and he shoved it in my face like a cream pie. Top-notch energy guy, good defender, lots to like. You know, if Michael Beasley wasn't such a colossal disappointment and semi-fraud, the 2008 draft could have ranked among the best ever (and certainly superior to the more ballyhooed '07 class). Maybe it's not loaded with Hall of Famers like the '84 or '98 drafts, but the list of rooks ranging from "definitely a future starter" to "future multiple All-Star" is abnormally high. Put it this way: That draft was so good that poor Alexis Ajinca stands out like Dan Aykroyd in the "We Are The World" video right now. He should switch jersey numbers to No. 32 so we can call him "32AA's." When I think of the worst possible bra size, I want to think of Alexis Ajinca.
Jason Thompson: I mocked him on draft day and he shoved it in my face like a cream pie. Top-notch energy guy, good defender, lots to like. You know, if Michael Beasley wasn't such a colossal disappointment and semi-fraud, the 2008 draft could have ranked among the best ever (and certainly superior to the more ballyhooed '07 class). Maybe it's not loaded with Hall of Famers like the '84 or '98 drafts, but the list of rooks ranging from "definitely a future starter" to "future multiple All-Star" is abnormally high. Put it this way: That draft was so good that poor Alexis Ajinca stands out like Dan Aykroyd in the "We Are The World" video right now. He should switch jersey numbers to No. 32 so we can call him "32AA's." When I think of the worst possible bra size, I want to think of Alexis Ajinca.
The bad thing about being an energy guy is that your ceiling is an energy guy. Nothing wrong with it, to be sure, but energy guys are never your star. To be effective, energy guys must work to impose their energy on the game, whereas stars simply dictate the pace and tempo of a game. Think of the best energy guys in the game; Wallace, Varajao, Bjax, Leon Powe. Now the best power forwards in recent history; Malone, Webber, Duncan, Garnett, Dirk, Barkley. Only Garnett could be called a bona fide energy guy.
I like JT, I appreciate his hustle, but I am just saying that hustle/energy players are usually 6th men, and not a star on your team.
I like JT, I appreciate his hustle, but I am just saying that hustle/energy players are usually 6th men, and not a star on your team.
You make a good point, rhythmless. The only thing I would add is that it is too early in JT's career to be pigeonholed as an energy guy. Yes, he is playing like that, but as a rookie, that may be his way to contribute. I think he has a lot of upside. Given more time and training, I believe he may just break out of that pigeonhole (in 2-3 of years). Then, I think, he'll have to be reclassified.
Well nbrans, you post a lot of opinions about the college players. I'd like to see were you think JT would fit if he were in this years NBA draft.
From my viewpoint, JT isn't a great leaper. He doesn't go up an get control of the ball when he rebounds. Some of his scoring and rebounding comes from tip backs on missed shots. He seldom gets control then goes back strong with a dunk. I worry about bigs that get by on hustle and effort, because their performance is dictated on conditioning and weight control.
For a guy that is supposed to have SF skills, he doesn't seem to put the ball on the floor and drive strong to the rim. He's mid range jumper looks good as does his FT shooting. So, although his face up skills look ok, he doen't look good in the low post with his back to the basket. This isn't say he can't get better, it's just what I'm seeing now from a 22yr old 4 yr college player.
I'd guess I wouldn't put him in this yrs top 10.
From my viewpoint, JT isn't a great leaper. He doesn't go up an get control of the ball when he rebounds. Some of his scoring and rebounding comes from tip backs on missed shots. He seldom gets control then goes back strong with a dunk. I worry about bigs that get by on hustle and effort, because their performance is dictated on conditioning and weight control.
For a guy that is supposed to have SF skills, he doesn't seem to put the ball on the floor and drive strong to the rim. He's mid range jumper looks good as does his FT shooting. So, although his face up skills look ok, he doen't look good in the low post with his back to the basket. This isn't say he can't get better, it's just what I'm seeing now from a 22yr old 4 yr college player.
I'd guess I wouldn't put him in this yrs top 10.
If your saying you wouldn't put him in the top ten of this years draft, then I don't know what to say without be rude. He never played SF. He did play guard and then suddenly shot up to 6'11". At Rider he played center and mostly with his back to the basket. He's just going through an adjustment period. Suddenly he's up against guys taller, quicker and stronger than anyone he faced in college. I also think the ref's are affecting his rebounding a little. He appears to be trying to stay out of foul trouble and has lost some of his aggressiveness. He should be better next year, when hopefully the ref's will cut him a little slack.
I was talking about his pro career. He played SF for Reggie. But, thanks for taking it easy on me, I don't do well with rude. But, if I'm off by saying he's not a top 10, then where would you, think he'd fall?
Is he better than Griffin, Hill, Monroe, Clark & Thabeet? Would you take him over Harding, Aminu, Teague or Jennings?
Is he better than Griffin, Hill, Monroe, Clark & Thabeet? Would you take him over Harding, Aminu, Teague or Jennings?
Oh shoot yes... This years draft is weak. He would be top 5 probably in this years draft. The only players I can say would be definitely over Thompson would be Griffin, and Rubio if he came out.. Other than that it would be a crapshoot. I don't think any other players would deserve to be over Thompson. Jennings/no - Teague/hell no - Aminu/crazytalk - Thabeet, Clark, Hill/lol..
I would take him before I would take Hill, Clark, Aminu, Teague or Jennings. Monroe would be a push.
Aminu right now is not even in the same class. Jennings I don't know enough about to even consider him above Thompson. I like Teague, but I'll stick with the rule. Always take the big man in a tie. Monroe brings some things to the table that Thompson doesn't. But then Thompson does the same thing. Right now I value the things that Thompson brings more.
I love Harden, and obviously think higher of him than some others on the fourm. So I would have a hard time with that decision, but I'd probably take Harden. If Griffin is a legit 6'10" then I would take him over Thompson. But if he measures out to 6'8", then I pass. I didn't think that Beasley was worthy of the second pick in the draft last year, and so far he's been a disapointment. I still think he's a SF.
As far as Thompson playing SF for Reggie, I think he can play there in the right situation. But the dude is a PF who can play some center. He's pretty quick for a big guy, but not SF quick.
Aminu right now is not even in the same class. Jennings I don't know enough about to even consider him above Thompson. I like Teague, but I'll stick with the rule. Always take the big man in a tie. Monroe brings some things to the table that Thompson doesn't. But then Thompson does the same thing. Right now I value the things that Thompson brings more.
I love Harden, and obviously think higher of him than some others on the fourm. So I would have a hard time with that decision, but I'd probably take Harden. If Griffin is a legit 6'10" then I would take him over Thompson. But if he measures out to 6'8", then I pass. I didn't think that Beasley was worthy of the second pick in the draft last year, and so far he's been a disapointment. I still think he's a SF.
As far as Thompson playing SF for Reggie, I think he can play there in the right situation. But the dude is a PF who can play some center. He's pretty quick for a big guy, but not SF quick.
Last edited:
I think JT has the potential to be a carlos boozer/david west type player. He could be the best pf in the leage right now age 23 or under. Players with his size, skill set, hustle, and abilty to get get out on the break don't come around every year. I think JT could be better than Griffin will, and could end up being the top pf in the 08 and 09 drafts combined.
When I do the eyeball test on Griffin, there's no way he's close to 6'10". In fact, with his short arms, I think he's a "short" 6'8". To me, he's a Beasley without the dribble drive or the fluidity.
I'd take Teague over Thompson because Teague can flat out take over a game with some unconscious shooting, whereas Thompson isn't that sort of player.
I'd take Teague over Thompson because Teague can flat out take over a game with some unconscious shooting, whereas Thompson isn't that sort of player.
Sorry for the very late response. 
I was talking more about the similarity of over-all impact in games in terms of contribution Thompson will have in a team, than the actual individual talent.
It is true there wouldn't be an exact copy of talent of Dennis Rodman now, or even in the future. The same way as Martin and Peja have similar impact in games ( which is more on scoring ), and Peja is Peja and Martin is Martin, Rodman will always be Rodman and Thompson will always be Thompson, however much similarity in game they will have.
I think if Thompson fails to upgrade or develop his offensive skills, the least he can be is a monster in rebounds because he is quick, scrappy, and gives a lot of energy in his game the same way Rodman was. As of now, Thompson has shown he could be just that. Also, Thompson does not show he would be a very good shot blocker, the same way Rodman never was a shot blocker himself. So, their impact in games would be similar.
BTW, I don't believe that Rodman got those rebounds because he's got this supernatural talent you say instinct for trajectory and angles of ball to rim contact. It just doesn't make sense, unless he is spiderman, or had bionic eyes and can clearly see crystal clear the point of contact of the ball to the rim. Actually, most oftentimes no player can see that point of contact because that view will be covered by the ball, or is just too small to be seen by the unaided eye. But I agree with you that Rodman is so quick that whenever he saw where the ball was going, he got there even before the ball actually got there. I believe Thompson wil be able to develop at least that kind of ability because the kid is showing he is quick and determined to be one of the best in the NBA.
.
I was talking more about the similarity of over-all impact in games in terms of contribution Thompson will have in a team, than the actual individual talent.
It is true there wouldn't be an exact copy of talent of Dennis Rodman now, or even in the future. The same way as Martin and Peja have similar impact in games ( which is more on scoring ), and Peja is Peja and Martin is Martin, Rodman will always be Rodman and Thompson will always be Thompson, however much similarity in game they will have.
I think if Thompson fails to upgrade or develop his offensive skills, the least he can be is a monster in rebounds because he is quick, scrappy, and gives a lot of energy in his game the same way Rodman was. As of now, Thompson has shown he could be just that. Also, Thompson does not show he would be a very good shot blocker, the same way Rodman never was a shot blocker himself. So, their impact in games would be similar.
BTW, I don't believe that Rodman got those rebounds because he's got this supernatural talent you say instinct for trajectory and angles of ball to rim contact. It just doesn't make sense, unless he is spiderman, or had bionic eyes and can clearly see crystal clear the point of contact of the ball to the rim. Actually, most oftentimes no player can see that point of contact because that view will be covered by the ball, or is just too small to be seen by the unaided eye. But I agree with you that Rodman is so quick that whenever he saw where the ball was going, he got there even before the ball actually got there. I believe Thompson wil be able to develop at least that kind of ability because the kid is showing he is quick and determined to be one of the best in the NBA.
.
Last edited:
Rodman?
As much as I like JT, I really don't expect him to have years where he's averaging 18+ rebounds a game. That's like... (KG + Yao Ming), or Dwight Howard x 1.4. Not gonna happen. But I'm sure I'll be happy with the player he develops into. With his tools and work ethic, it's hard to see how he could go wrong.
As much as I like JT, I really don't expect him to have years where he's averaging 18+ rebounds a game. That's like... (KG + Yao Ming), or Dwight Howard x 1.4. Not gonna happen. But I'm sure I'll be happy with the player he develops into. With his tools and work ethic, it's hard to see how he could go wrong.
Interesting read on JT...
source: http://www.sacbee.com/sports/story/1606580.html?mi_rss=Sports
source: http://www.sacbee.com/sports/story/1606580.html?mi_rss=Sports
I just love how Greg Oden doesn't even play in the Rookie/Sophomore game after the league shafted the Kings and gave that final spot to him instead of Jason Thompson. Christ almighty that makes me mad.
Jason Thompson better not be traded for Stoudamire thoe... I swear to God that trade would set us back years. Not only would he probably leave us in 2010 he would pretty much ruin our chances at a top 5 pick this year and next. Screw that.
Jason Thompson better not be traded for Stoudamire thoe... I swear to God that trade would set us back years. Not only would he probably leave us in 2010 he would pretty much ruin our chances at a top 5 pick this year and next. Screw that.
Sorry for the very late response.
I was talking more about the similarity of over-all impact in games in terms of contribution Thompson will have in a team, than the actual individual talent.
It is true there wouldn't be an exact copy of talent of Dennis Rodman now, or even in the future. The same way as Martin and Peja have similar impact in games ( which is more on scoring ), and Peja is Peja and Martin is Martin, Rodman will always be Rodman and Thompson will always be Thompson, however much similarity in game they will have.
I think if Thompson fails to upgrade or develop his offensive skills, the least he can be is a monster in rebounds because he is quick, scrappy, and gives a lot of energy in his game the same way Rodman was. As of now, Thompson has shown he could be just that. Also, Thompson does not show he would be a very good shot blocker, the same way Rodman never was a shot blocker himself. So, their impact in games would be similar.
BTW, I don't believe that Rodman got those rebounds because he's got this supernatural talent you say instinct for trajectory and angles of ball to rim contact. It just doesn't make sense, unless he is spiderman, or had bionic eyes and can clearly see crystal clear the point of contact of the ball to the rim. Actually, most oftentimes no player can see that point of contact because that view will be covered by the ball, or is just too small to be seen by the unaided eye. But I agree with you that Rodman is so quick that whenever he saw where the ball was going, he got there even before the ball actually got there. I believe Thompson wil be able to develop at least that kind of ability because the kid is showing he is quick and determined to be one of the best in the NBA.
.
I was talking more about the similarity of over-all impact in games in terms of contribution Thompson will have in a team, than the actual individual talent.
It is true there wouldn't be an exact copy of talent of Dennis Rodman now, or even in the future. The same way as Martin and Peja have similar impact in games ( which is more on scoring ), and Peja is Peja and Martin is Martin, Rodman will always be Rodman and Thompson will always be Thompson, however much similarity in game they will have.
I think if Thompson fails to upgrade or develop his offensive skills, the least he can be is a monster in rebounds because he is quick, scrappy, and gives a lot of energy in his game the same way Rodman was. As of now, Thompson has shown he could be just that. Also, Thompson does not show he would be a very good shot blocker, the same way Rodman never was a shot blocker himself. So, their impact in games would be similar.
BTW, I don't believe that Rodman got those rebounds because he's got this supernatural talent you say instinct for trajectory and angles of ball to rim contact. It just doesn't make sense, unless he is spiderman, or had bionic eyes and can clearly see crystal clear the point of contact of the ball to the rim. Actually, most oftentimes no player can see that point of contact because that view will be covered by the ball, or is just too small to be seen by the unaided eye. But I agree with you that Rodman is so quick that whenever he saw where the ball was going, he got there even before the ball actually got there. I believe Thompson wil be able to develop at least that kind of ability because the kid is showing he is quick and determined to be one of the best in the NBA.
.
JT doesn't have a great vertical, although I never could find his predraft workout stats. So I can't know for sure how high he can leap or what his standing vertical is. But, by watching him rebound and dunk, you can see that he doesn't get very much above the rim. Because of his body type, he'll have to really work on his conditioning and controling his weight.
Offensively, he's already shown a good shooting stroke and midrange jumper, and he finishes well around the basket. But, for a guy that dunks with two hand most every time, I think he gets blocked too often. Certainly, he needs to get stronger both in the legs and upper body, and he's shown the aptitude to get better, so I think he will.
By next year, I'd like to see him perfect his drive to the basket. He gets called for traveling too much, and he doesn't get around his man as well as a guy with supposedly SF skills should.
