Knicks · The Premature, But Still Official, Landry Fields Appreciation Thread (page 5)

I don't really understand (outside of the fact that Fields is a rookie) of why D'Antoni doesn't run plays designed to take advantage of Fields (frequent) height advantage.

Fishmike - It's hard to know what Fields will amount to but to say he is a product of playing with good players? Well, in college he played on a crappy team, was the leader, go to guy, teams focused on him and he still led the conference in scoring. In NY, he is often the smartest (or one of the smartest) guys on the court (apparently), so I don't see the "he is playing with good players" argument. The only facet of his game that is lacking is really his outside shot. He is a great finisher on the break, yes great. He plays defense very well and it getting better each week it seems. He is an opportunistic scorer but that seems more because there are others ahead of him. In the past Mike has favored veterans so we really don't know how good Fields is cause he is still not allowed any freedom.

I also think he has a higher ceiling, I mean the cat is 22 and very athletic. He has got a solid 5-7 years of getting better ahead of him. Where that takes him??? I think we shouldn't take hustle and work ethic to be the same as "a hustle player". The guys clearly has a VERY HIGH BBIQ - and he hustles and has a great work ethic. This is a part of the reason why players like Balkman haven't improved that much- low IQ and questionable work ethic. A high IQ player can go very far in this league. All star is a possibility but clearly it's too early to tell.

It's strange to me when I read that posters think Landry is more of a SF than a SG. I have no idea what that means but perhaps it's to suggest that Fields doesnt have the automatic long range we assume a SG has? Is it his build?

I see a player comfortable at the role he is playing and it's currently at the SG spot, and I also think he is a SG in this league.

earthmansurfer wrote:I don't really understand (outside of the fact that Fields is a rookie) of why D'Antoni doesn't run plays designed to take advantage of Fields (frequent) height advantage.

Fishmike - It's hard to know what Fields will amount to but to say he is a product of playing with good players? Well, in college he played on a crappy team, was the leader, go to guy, teams focused on him and he still led the conference in scoring. In NY, he is often the smartest (or one of the smartest) guys on the court (apparently), so I don't see the "he is playing with good players" argument. The only facet of his game that is lacking is really his outside shot. He is a great finisher on the break, yes great. He plays defense very well and it getting better each week it seems. He is an opportunistic scorer but that seems more because there are others ahead of him. In the past Mike has favored veterans so we really don't know how good Fields is cause he is still not allowed any freedom.

I also think he has a higher ceiling, I mean the cat is 22 and very athletic. He has got a solid 5-7 years of getting better ahead of him. Where that takes him??? I think we shouldn't take hustle and work ethic to be the same as "a hustle player". The guys clearly has a VERY HIGH BBIQ - and he hustles and has a great work ethic. This is a part of the reason why players like Balkman haven't improved that much- low IQ and questionable work ethic. A high IQ player can go very far in this league. All star is a possibility but clearly it's too early to tell.

he played PF in college. Probably the main reason he was overlooked in the draft (being 6'7 and the team sucked).

I think his immediate success is a product of the talent around him, yes. Certainly his role his.

I give him HUGE credit, because 1) he WORKED himself into the starting line up and despite some up and down play from the team has stayed there, and certainly looks to continue there.

If I have to take him apart I would say he may be athletic but there is nothing impressive about his first step. His jumper is ok, doesnt really have a go-to scoring move. He's very good feeding off other players. Reminds me of Doug Christie or Ariza in LA. Looks bad and out of control when he has to create himself, but looks like a world beating hitting open Js and following scorers to the basket for rebounds and put back dunks. He also plays good smart physical defense and he's tough.

I'm not down on the guy at all. He's a gem and Walsh and staff deserve huge praise for getting a quality rotation guy in round 2. Just trying to be realistic about his limitations.

I hope we keep him but I could see him being a piece to get a more important piece (OJ Mayo)

fishmike wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:I don't really understand (outside of the fact that Fields is a rookie) of why D'Antoni doesn't run plays designed to take advantage of Fields (frequent) height advantage.

Fishmike - It's hard to know what Fields will amount to but to say he is a product of playing with good players? Well, in college he played on a crappy team, was the leader, go to guy, teams focused on him and he still led the conference in scoring. In NY, he is often the smartest (or one of the smartest) guys on the court (apparently), so I don't see the "he is playing with good players" argument. The only facet of his game that is lacking is really his outside shot. He is a great finisher on the break, yes great. He plays defense very well and it getting better each week it seems. He is an opportunistic scorer but that seems more because there are others ahead of him. In the past Mike has favored veterans so we really don't know how good Fields is cause he is still not allowed any freedom.

I also think he has a higher ceiling, I mean the cat is 22 and very athletic. He has got a solid 5-7 years of getting better ahead of him. Where that takes him??? I think we shouldn't take hustle and work ethic to be the same as "a hustle player". The guys clearly has a VERY HIGH BBIQ - and he hustles and has a great work ethic. This is a part of the reason why players like Balkman haven't improved that much- low IQ and questionable work ethic. A high IQ player can go very far in this league. All star is a possibility but clearly it's too early to tell.

he played PF in college. Probably the main reason he was overlooked in the draft (being 6'7 and the team sucked).

I think his immediate success is a product of the talent around him, yes. Certainly his role his.

I give him HUGE credit, because 1) he WORKED himself into the starting line up and despite some up and down play from the team has stayed there, and certainly looks to continue there.

If I have to take him apart I would say he may be athletic but there is nothing impressive about his first step. His jumper is ok, doesnt really have a go-to scoring move. He's very good feeding off other players. Reminds me of Doug Christie or Ariza in LA. Looks bad and out of control when he has to create himself, but looks like a world beating hitting open Js and following scorers to the basket for rebounds and put back dunks. He also plays good smart physical defense and he's tough.

I'm not down on the guy at all. He's a gem and Walsh and staff deserve huge praise for getting a quality rotation guy in round 2. Just trying to be realistic about his limitations.

I hope we keep him but I could see him being a piece to get a more important piece (OJ Mayo)

He strikes me as having maybe Allan Houston or Keith Van Horn like athleticism (When they were young). He's not that explosive, but has good leaping ability and fast and quick enough to be deceptive and also catch people off guard. When he learns about the ins and outs, I can definitely see him being a better scorer than the Doug Christies and Shane Battiers and Trevor Arizas of the world because he has ENOUGH athleticim and the basketball smarts and skills to go with the work ethic.

how about John Salmons then? Christie had some pretty good scoring years.

He's shown no ability to create his own shot so its tough to envision him as any kind of scorer. Nothing wrong with 10/7 every night while playing great D and being a good passer.

The Rookie

fishmike - if you think Landry Fields is stuck on 10 and 7 you, sir, are sadly mistaken.

Can't create his won shot? You obviously erased the highlight reel from his 21 point, 17 rebound, 2 steal night against Denver.

fishmike wrote:how about John Salmons then? Christie had some pretty good scoring years.

He's shown no ability to create his own shot so its tough to envision him as any kind of scorer. Nothing wrong with 10/7 every night while playing great D and being a good passer.

For a rookie shooting guard that is exceptional. How many SG play no D? How many more are pretty crappy passers? Those 2 things cannot be taken for granted as only elite SG's do both of those things well.
As far as scoring goes,his slashing game is already solid AND he draws fouls as a rookie ! His shooting he can work on , just like many of the greatest players ever have done after coming to the league. His rebounding could be the one part of his game that could separate him even from the best SGs in the league, if all else falls into place.

To me, as of right now, Fields is untouchable. I see our starting SG of many years in him.

The pull of Mr. Earl.

I don't get how a player who gets 10 & 7 without plays even being run for him can't vastly improve with all he brings to the table.
I can easily see him being a 15 & 7 kind of guy later this season. He is a very good rebounder and I wouldn't put it past him to be a double double SG at some point. Remember, some of the leagues best rebounders (e.g. Love and Lee)are also really really smart players and Love isn't even a great athlete. (Not meaning to compare positions of course.)

And I bet Fields holds his position when Azubakiki comes back. (Just wanted to really try to type his name, skip that last comment).

To me, the key to this guys career is developing a good jump shot. If he can do that, he'll be a 15-20 ppg player along with all of the extras.

TheGame wrote:

misterearl wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

martin wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

misterearl wrote:

crzymdups wrote:I was thinking the other day that Fields reminds me of Marquis Daniels when Daniels was a rookie on those great Mavs teams

Dude, get with the program. Marquis Daniels does not have a fraction of Fields personality, education or class.

Daniels is noted for having several tattoos inscribed on different parts of his body. The tattoos range from a detailed map of Florida that covers his entire back, a caricature of a man blowing his head off with a shotgun on his lower right arm, and Chinese characters on his other arm which were intended to represent his initials, but translate to English as "healthy woman roof". Also, he has an entire bible verse on his chest.

Marquis Daniels?

Hardly.

Think Clyde Drexler

Okay, glad we're not going overboard.

Slight differences between Drexler and Fields. One was one of the best college players of his generation and played in two final fours and one played power forward for an underachieving sub .500 team.

but is that just luck of your teammates or something else?

I think part of it has to do with the fact that Clyde Drexler was a hall of fame, gravity-defying superstar who helped to redefine the shooting guard position in the NBA.

Nothing against Landry Fields, but it's an insult to compare him to Clyde Drexler at this point in Landry's career.

An insult you say?

Let's rewind the video tape (just in case you missed it he first time)

Tale of The Tape

Height/ Weight
Drexler 6'7, 210... Fields 6'7, 210 pounds, i-dentical

Final Year In College
Glide at U of H - Southwest Conference Player of the Year (1983) 16 points, 3.2 assists and 10 rebounds on 35 per cent shooting, 35.

Fields at Stanford - All-Pac-10 First Team selection as a senior with 22 points, 9 rebounds and .49 per cent shooting... Led Pac-10 in scoring and rebounding... his 704 points in senior year marked third-highest single-season total in school history.

College Totals
Drexler - 14.4 points, 3.3 assists and 9.9 rebounds in three seasons at Houston
Fields - 11 points, 2 assists and 5 rebounds in four seasons at Stanford

Vertical Jump
Drexler - 44 inches, ridiculous
Fields - 39 inches, highly impressive

NBA Rookie Season
Drexler (82 games) 17 minutes avg 7.7 points, 3 rebounds .45 from the field .25 from three point range
Fields (14 games) 28 minutes avg 10.4 points, 6.4 rebounds, team leading .55 from the field .31 from three

Playing style

"Drexler was famed for his speed and finesse on the court, and his easy-going and quiet demeanor off the court. At Houston, Drexler became known for his exceptional abilities as a finisher, but generally was not considered a great shooter."

Fields is already a better shooter than Drexler. Not to be confused with his easy-going and quiet demeanor off the court.

Earl, I agree with alot of what you say, but Clyde Drexler, man??? Come on. Clyde Drexler was the "one man fast break," meaning he would get the rebound, beat everyone down the court, and dunk all by himself and he would do this consistently throughout the game. Clyde Drexler is probably one of the top-10 SGs of all-time. Fields is not Clyde Drexler and is not going to be Clyde Drexler, as his athleticism, while better than advertised, is not on a Clyde Drexler level. But I do agree that Fields can be a very good player and possible turn into a borderline All-star if he keeps improving.

For real. Give Fields Shannon Browns hops and TD's speed and you almost got Drexler

Let's see... Drexler had a 44-inch vertical... yeah, Fields just needs to focus and he'll be right up there skying with Clyde the Glide. Quick, Earl, how many other NBA players EVER, all-time, have had a 44-inch vertical? Vince Carter, VINCE CARTER, had a 43 inch vertical leap.

Earl, I love how you ramp up fandom to such an absurd level that somehow if we don't think a second round pick 14 games into his career is going to turn into a hall of fame shooting guard we're rooting against the Knicks.

I'm happy to follow along on the ride with Landry. I don't think he's going to be Clyde Drexler, in fact I know he won't, but I'm happy to see what he can do with his skill set and determination and I am rooting for him to succeed.

Anncr: "the Knicks rookie with ANOTHER play!"

crzymdups - you were saying?

oops, wrong thread!

excellent game tonight.

this dude is the dude.

Fields is no slouch with a 40" vert! He's just a smart smooth player and he doesn't waste energy. I LOVE this kid. He just plays the right way and is always Johnny on the Spot! Between Fields and Turiaf those guys are such great glue players that it puts us over the top amongst the other non elite teams in the East. Fields never does too much and stays under control.

7 critical points by the rookie last night in the 4th quarter, when most of the team had cooled off.
Rookie helps save the day. 14 & 7, 2 steals, 1 block, 1TO - wow

Drexler had a quicker first step, which made him a top scorer. I love the Fields pick, but I don't see the comparison to Drexler. Fields' greatest asset is his basketball smarts. He has a way of being in the right place at the right time.

Fields is still #3 on the rookie rankings @ nba.com - right behind the two #1 picks - Griffin and Wall.

nixluva wrote:Fields is no slouch with a 40" vert! He's just a smart smooth player and he doesn't waste energy. I LOVE this kid. He just plays the right way and is always Johnny on the Spot! Between Fields and Turiaf those guys are such great glue players that it puts us over the top amongst the other non elite teams in the East. Fields never does too much and stays under control.

Except for a few BRIEF moments during the regular season Fields has been just about as perfect as you can expect a rookie to be.

You get the sense that he can do more than he has shown so far, but that for now he is content to do the little things and pick his spots.

I'm sure that some of you have read it, but his DraftExpress diary comments pretty much tell you that this guy really gets it. http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Land...
What he is doing for the Knicks exactly what he determined was the best way to make an impact in front of scouts and with whatever team he was going to play for.

Hopefully, as he becomes more confident, we can see a little more of what he can do, but for now, he's been one of the more delightful surprises Knicks fans have been given in many years.

Forget Clyde the Glide and other comparisons, lets just root for this kid to be the best Landry Fields he can be. He is a unique player with an all round skill set that will only get better.

Ira wrote:Drexler had a quicker first step, which made him a top scorer. I love the Fields pick, but I don't see the comparison to Drexler. Fields' greatest asset is his basketball smarts. He has a way of being in the right place at the right time.

Fields is still #3 on the rookie rankings @ nba.com - right behind the two #1 picks - Griffin and Wall.

It is amazing that Fields is outproducing all rookies other than the #1 picks from the past two years and we got this guy in the second round. The Knicks scouting department has really redeemed itself from the Jennings fiasco.