Prescott wrote: I will say that Evan Turner is a better college player than Michael Redd. Turner rebounds better and passes the ball better. Neither player is/was a great perimeter shooter in college, but Turner is a better finisher because he has more athleticism. Turner is projected to be a lottery pick, while Redd was the 43rd overall pick.That should tell you something.

That doesn't mean shit....BJ Mullens was a first round draft pick and if you know about Ohio State basketball I would have taken Ken Johnson over Mullens.

Prescott wrote: I will say that Evan Turner is a better college player than Michael Redd. Turner rebounds better and passes the ball better. Neither player is/was a great perimeter shooter in college, but Turner is a better finisher because he has more athleticism. Turner is projected to be a lottery pick, while Redd was the 43rd overall pick.That should tell you something.

Prescott wrote:

That doesn't mean shit....BJ Mullens was a first round draft pick and if you know about Ohio State basketball I would have taken Ken Johnson over Mullens.

If you knew anything about the NBA you wouldn't make such a ridiculous comparison.

But here you say it's ridiculous to compare college players based on where they were selected in the NBA draft

Prescott wrote:

But here you say it's ridiculous to compare college players based on where they were selected in the NBA draft

.

He was comparing Mullins to Johnson.

The NBA drafts upperclassmen based on what they've seen over 3 or 4 years. Their ceiling is usually easier to see.Turner, Redd, and Johnson fall into this category.

The NBA drafts underclassmen early based primarily on potential.Their ceiling is more difficult to see.Mullins falls into this category.Therefore, comparing Johnson to Mullins isn't a valid comparison.

queencitybuckeye wrote: Add basketball to a long list of things that Ricordorki doesn't understand.

mallymal614 wrote:

queencitybuckeye wrote: Add basketball to a long list of things that Ricordorki doesn't understand.

Especially since he is from Chicago. He wasn't even here when Jimmy was playing, so how would he know?

Ironman92 wrote: Ken JOhnson over Mullens.....I guess we'll see down the road how smart that statement is.



Redd struggled without the great PG Scoonie....but he has had a stellar NBA career....maybe better than JJ's. (I haven't looked at the numbers though)

HeathAlum21 wrote: One of the biggest mistakes that people make is looking at a career as a whole. JJ was a GREAT college basketball player. It doesn't matter where he was drafted or how his NBA career panned out. A player can be an awesome college player and never play a game in the NBA, and they can still be one of the best of all time. The NBA career should never tarnish a player's reputation as a college basketball player, but I think sometimes as fans we forget to make the distinction. One of my favorite players to watch in college, although I hate Duke, was JJ Redick. He was a player. The fact that he is mediocre to below average in the NBA does absoultely nothing to tarnish what a great player he was in college and how dominant he was.

With the Mavericks, Jackson played sparingly in his rookie season (largely due to a contract dispute with the team - Jackson initially refused to play for the lowly Mavericks), and appeared in only 28 games. He started in all 82 games the following season, averaging 19.2 points, 4.8 rebounds, and 4.6 assists in 37.4 minutes per game. With the drafting of Jamal Mashburn and Jason Kidd in the following two seasons, Mavericks fans affectionately referred to the trio as the "Three J's". Jackson appeared to be on his way to NBA stardom in 1994-95 when an ankle injury short-circuited his third professional season after 51 games. He was averaging 25.7 points, the fifth-best mark in the league, and 5.1 rebounds when he went down. Jackson came back to average 19.6 points in 1995-96.

Jackson played and started in only 31 games with the Nets to finish the 1996-1997 season averaging 16.5 points and 5.9 rebounds per game with them.

Although Jackson saw an increased role as the Warriors’ starting shooting guard, averaging 18.9 points, 5.6 rebounds, and 40.6 minutes per game for the remainder of the 97-98, he disliked playing for a losing franchise. In the offseason, Jackson signed with the Portland Trail Blazers.

For the 1999-2000 season, Jackson played in 79 games for the Hawks averaging 16.7 points and 5 rebounds per 35 minutes. Jackson suited up for only 17 games for the Hawks in the 2000-2001 season.

centralbucksfan wrote:

HeathAlum21 wrote: One of the biggest mistakes that people make is looking at a career as a whole. JJ was a GREAT college basketball player. It doesn't matter where he was drafted or how his NBA career panned out. A player can be an awesome college player and never play a game in the NBA, and they can still be one of the best of all time. The NBA career should never tarnish a player's reputation as a college basketball player, but I think sometimes as fans we forget to make the distinction. One of my favorite players to watch in college, although I hate Duke, was JJ Redick. He was a player. The fact that he is mediocre to below average in the NBA does absoultely nothing to tarnish what a great player he was in college and how dominant he was.

Very good point. Although, when you play 10+years in the league, and do as well as Jackson did over that time span...I think your a little better then "mediocre to below average". Jackson had a SOLID NBA career. You don't last that long in the league without being good.
V