Author Topic: Jonathan Gibson  (Read 7269 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Jonathan Gibson
« Reply #15 on: July 11, 2012, 08:51:09 AM »

Offline wasi

  • Hugo Gonzalez
  • Posts: 63
  • Tommy Points: 5
He has looked a lot better than Moore who simply doesn't have the handle to be a point guard.

For a "chucker" Gibson played some good d on Marshon Brooks and made a huge steal and caused a turnover with his pressure at the end of the game to put it away.  If Rondo gets hurt we are going to need a guy who can handle the point for half a game or so and Moore simply can't.

Moore is 3 inches taller (probably more like 4) than Gibson.  Gibson is the class SG in a PG body.  These guys do not have much success in the NBA outside of the Eddie House role. 

My guess is he goes back to Turkey, probably makes more money there than in the D-league.

The thing though is they want Moore to be a PG and he struggles against the press. Gibson has a better dribble and much better speed allowing him to get the ball up court. He doesn't have to be a play maker, he just has to get the team into their offense.

If he thinks he can get a call up he'll play in the D-League over Turkey. If he plays in the D-League then you can assume he's hearing positive things from teams.

Also, if he's a chucker then what's Moore? They both averaged pretty similar numbers in college. Their FG% was about the same in college. Gibson was a tad lower by .3% but that's due to a rookie season where he averaged only 7 minutes per game and had an awful percentage.

He had a bad showing in game 1 but if he was given more minutes he would be clearly ahead of Moore. Guess we'll see what he does today but regardless I like him.

Re: Jonathan Gibson
« Reply #16 on: July 11, 2012, 09:14:59 AM »

Offline chambers

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7484
  • Tommy Points: 944
  • Boston Celtics= Championships, nothing less.
He has looked a lot better than Moore who simply doesn't have the handle to be a point guard.

For a "chucker" Gibson played some good d on Marshon Brooks and made a huge steal and caused a turnover with his pressure at the end of the game to put it away.  If Rondo gets hurt we are going to need a guy who can handle the point for half a game or so and Moore simply can't.

Moore is 3 inches taller (probably more like 4) than Gibson.  Gibson is the class SG in a PG body.  These guys do not have much success in the NBA outside of the Eddie House role. 

My guess is he goes back to Turkey, probably makes more money there than in the D-league.

The thing though is they want Moore to be a PG and he struggles against the press. Gibson has a better dribble and much better speed allowing him to get the ball up court. He doesn't have to be a play maker, he just has to get the team into their offense.

If he thinks he can get a call up he'll play in the D-League over Turkey. If he plays in the D-League then you can assume he's hearing positive things from teams.

Also, if he's a chucker then what's Moore? They both averaged pretty similar numbers in college. Their FG% was about the same in college. Gibson was a tad lower by .3% but that's due to a rookie season where he averaged only 7 minutes per game and had an awful percentage.

He had a bad showing in game 1 but if he was given more minutes he would be clearly ahead of Moore. Guess we'll see what he does today but regardless I like him.
They want him to be a combo guard..
Have you ever seen him play outside the summer league?
At this point Moore is much more NBA ready.
Gibson really struggles getting his shot off against size in the NBA, but he's physical and quick. I guess in the NBA we wouldn't need him to shoot, just get the ball up cleanly and defend other PG's.
"We are lucky we have a very patient GM that isn't willing to settle for being good and coming close. He wants to win a championship and we have the potential to get there still with our roster and assets."

quoting 'Greg B' on RealGM after 2017 trade deadline.
Read that last line again. One more time.

Re: Jonathan Gibson
« Reply #17 on: July 11, 2012, 09:27:55 AM »

Offline wasi

  • Hugo Gonzalez
  • Posts: 63
  • Tommy Points: 5
He has looked a lot better than Moore who simply doesn't have the handle to be a point guard.

For a "chucker" Gibson played some good d on Marshon Brooks and made a huge steal and caused a turnover with his pressure at the end of the game to put it away.  If Rondo gets hurt we are going to need a guy who can handle the point for half a game or so and Moore simply can't.

Moore is 3 inches taller (probably more like 4) than Gibson.  Gibson is the class SG in a PG body.  These guys do not have much success in the NBA outside of the Eddie House role. 

My guess is he goes back to Turkey, probably makes more money there than in the D-league.

The thing though is they want Moore to be a PG and he struggles against the press. Gibson has a better dribble and much better speed allowing him to get the ball up court. He doesn't have to be a play maker, he just has to get the team into their offense.

If he thinks he can get a call up he'll play in the D-League over Turkey. If he plays in the D-League then you can assume he's hearing positive things from teams.

Also, if he's a chucker then what's Moore? They both averaged pretty similar numbers in college. Their FG% was about the same in college. Gibson was a tad lower by .3% but that's due to a rookie season where he averaged only 7 minutes per game and had an awful percentage.

He had a bad showing in game 1 but if he was given more minutes he would be clearly ahead of Moore. Guess we'll see what he does today but regardless I like him.
They want him to be a combo guard..
Have you ever seen him play outside the summer league?
At this point Moore is much more NBA ready.
Gibson really struggles getting his shot off against size in the NBA, but he's physical and quick. I guess in the NBA we wouldn't need him to shoot, just get the ball up cleanly and defend other PG's.

Yes I watched every game last season (not that I really got to see him play). He's too slow to play at the SG spot and not athletic enough. If he had Avery's athleticism then his height wouldn't be a major issue but it is. His height advantage as a PG is why PG is his only option. He would obviously play minutes at SG but he's just not effective there. That's why they want him to play the point.

I've heard that Gibson struggles getting his shot off against size in the NBA except he's never played in the NBA....

He'll get open shots like everyone else in the NBA. His defensive intensity is great and he has the speed to create things.

Re: Jonathan Gibson
« Reply #18 on: July 11, 2012, 10:37:27 AM »

Offline BostonNative

  • Payton Pritchard
  • Posts: 286
  • Tommy Points: 14
OMG!! guys stop looking at the 1 quater he actually hit shots and look at his overall game. He is not NBA material he is a guy who plays 1 on 1 B-ball with.

He has waaaay too much faith in his shot and only that 1 quarter did he start to connect. He doesn't take the open shot but instead takes EVERY shot. I would like it better if he moved without the ball and got open shots.

I also Him and that smith guy make me sick to my stomach! They stand behind the 3pt line and continue to jack up 3's allday and barely connect.

Moore make me sick because he  jacks up shots to, but he gives me a differnt sort of fustration. He don't just jack them up he forces them. He crashed the lame and forces up garbage. Why not pass it to a big fella while your down there? Horrible IQ in my book. I'm sick of these guards.

Xmas is the only one who STARTED to get it right. I can tell xmas is a chucker to. Why don;t these guys step in and take the 2?

GO JOSEPH!! and Sully is a better PG than those clowns lol

Re: Jonathan Gibson
« Reply #19 on: July 11, 2012, 11:29:47 AM »

Offline TheBig5

  • Anfernee Simons
  • Posts: 386
  • Tommy Points: 25
He really isn't anything special. The first game he made a ton of mistakes, but game 2 he made shots so now he is suddenly a good prospect. I am sure a team will take a chance at him but the guy isn't that good.