You can see the passing and playmaking ability if you really watch him. He doesn't have d rose tunnel vision. His playmaking will never be on display alongside Fox, but he can be converted like Harden was. You can build an offense completely around monk, Porzingis, and Hernangomez. You will have to have wings who are unselfish, versatile on defense, and can shoot. Lee and Thomas can provide some of that, but obviously longterm upgrades would be needed. I can definitely see phil going this route. Worst case, monk becomes just a scorer who can provide secondary playmaking, but best case is he can use his elite skills and athletic ability and turn into a triangle type pg.
Knixkik wrote:You can see the passing and playmaking ability if you really watch him. He doesn't have d rose tunnel vision. His playmaking will never be on display alongside Fox, but he can be converted like Harden was. You can build an offense completely around monk, Porzingis, and Hernangomez. You will have to have wings who are unselfish, versatile on defense, and can shoot. Lee and Thomas can provide some of that, but obviously longterm upgrades would be needed. I can definitely see phil going this route. Worst case, monk becomes just a scorer who can provide secondary playmaking, but best case is he can use his elite skills and athletic ability and turn into a triangle type pg.
In the triangle, the pg brings the ball up, hands it of, and runs to the corner. There's very little play making (see jennings) and scoring is a 3rd or 4th option..When you think pg's, you better think on the lines of FISHER and KERR
knicks1248 wrote:Knixkik wrote:You can see the passing and playmaking ability if you really watch him. He doesn't have d rose tunnel vision. His playmaking will never be on display alongside Fox, but he can be converted like Harden was. You can build an offense completely around monk, Porzingis, and Hernangomez. You will have to have wings who are unselfish, versatile on defense, and can shoot. Lee and Thomas can provide some of that, but obviously longterm upgrades would be needed. I can definitely see phil going this route. Worst case, monk becomes just a scorer who can provide secondary playmaking, but best case is he can use his elite skills and athletic ability and turn into a triangle type pg.
In the triangle, the pg brings the ball up, hands it of, and runs to the corner. There's very little play making (see jennings) and scoring is a 3rd or 4th option..When you think pg's, you better think on the lines of FISHER and KERR
Monk would play the 2 in the Triangle
The 2 in the Triangle gets same opportunities as a PG would
Still I wouldn't pick Monk unless he is BPA
knicks1248 wrote:Knixkik wrote:You can see the passing and playmaking ability if you really watch him. He doesn't have d rose tunnel vision. His playmaking will never be on display alongside Fox, but he can be converted like Harden was. You can build an offense completely around monk, Porzingis, and Hernangomez. You will have to have wings who are unselfish, versatile on defense, and can shoot. Lee and Thomas can provide some of that, but obviously longterm upgrades would be needed. I can definitely see phil going this route. Worst case, monk becomes just a scorer who can provide secondary playmaking, but best case is he can use his elite skills and athletic ability and turn into a triangle type pg.
In the triangle, the pg brings the ball up, hands it of, and runs to the corner. There's very little play making (see jennings) and scoring is a 3rd or 4th option..When you think pg's, you better think on the lines of FISHER and KERR
Right. He can easily be that player. Obviously in an offense where there's a lot of ball movement, cutting, and screening, he's a good fit. He's an elite shooter, so he's a weapon anywhere in the triangle.
knicks1248 wrote:Knixkik wrote:You can see the passing and playmaking ability if you really watch him. He doesn't have d rose tunnel vision. His playmaking will never be on display alongside Fox, but he can be converted like Harden was. You can build an offense completely around monk, Porzingis, and Hernangomez. You will have to have wings who are unselfish, versatile on defense, and can shoot. Lee and Thomas can provide some of that, but obviously longterm upgrades would be needed. I can definitely see phil going this route. Worst case, monk becomes just a scorer who can provide secondary playmaking, but best case is he can use his elite skills and athletic ability and turn into a triangle type pg.
In the triangle, the pg brings the ball up, hands it of, and runs to the corner. There's very little play making (see jennings) and scoring is a 3rd or 4th option..When you think pg's, you better think on the lines of FISHER and KERR
But when did you ever see Rose or Jennings hand off and run to the corner? 🤔🤥🤥🤥🤥
I know he's streaky but man can he heat up. You want guys that can flat out shoot and score. Like curry when he was in college, it's easy to focus on the weaknesses. Then 5 years later a guy like this is putting up 25 ppg in the league and you wonder how he didn't go top 3 in the draft.
Uptown wrote:
Hahaha. I was gonna say. The more I see of Monk, he reminds me of JR Smith. He can get hot but otherwise seems to disappear. Though it's hard to scout a guy like him at UK, like Booker was.
Monk started off the season on fire-- looked great. The last third of the season he looks like a second round pick. No way the knicks
crzymdups wrote:Uptown wrote:
Hahaha. I was gonna say. The more I see of Monk, he reminds me of JR Smith. He can get hot but otherwise seems to disappear. Though it's hard to scout a guy like him at UK, like Booker was.
You don't touch Monk anywhere in the top 7. Ontop of that, I really hope we are not targeting guys who we think can fit the triangle at the risk of missing out guys like Fox and or Ball who can be a bit ball dominant at times...Lets just take the best player at our spot!
Uptown wrote:crzymdups wrote:Uptown wrote:
Hahaha. I was gonna say. The more I see of Monk, he reminds me of JR Smith. He can get hot but otherwise seems to disappear. Though it's hard to scout a guy like him at UK, like Booker was.
You don't touch Monk anywhere in the top 7. Ontop of that, I really hope we are not targeting guys who we think can fit the triangle at the risk of missing out guys like Fox and or Ball who can be a bit ball dominant at times...Lets just take the best player at our spot!
Yeah BPA is always the smart move.
knicks1248 wrote:Knixkik wrote:You can see the passing and playmaking ability if you really watch him. He doesn't have d rose tunnel vision. His playmaking will never be on display alongside Fox, but he can be converted like Harden was. You can build an offense completely around monk, Porzingis, and Hernangomez. You will have to have wings who are unselfish, versatile on defense, and can shoot. Lee and Thomas can provide some of that, but obviously longterm upgrades would be needed. I can definitely see phil going this route. Worst case, monk becomes just a scorer who can provide secondary playmaking, but best case is he can use his elite skills and athletic ability and turn into a triangle type pg.
In the triangle, the pg brings the ball up, hands it of, and runs to the corner. There's very little play making (see jennings) and scoring is a 3rd or 4th option..When you think pg's, you better think on the lines of FISHER and KERR
Yeah Austin Rivers is the typical Triangle PG (which is why I believe those rumors they still want him).
Monk would be the SG. Funny coincidence Monk would also be the typical two guard in Hornecek's system as well. Frank Ntilikina would also be a combo guard that could fit both of those systems.....
StarksEwing1 wrote:Uptown wrote:crzymdups wrote:Uptown wrote:
Hahaha. I was gonna say. The more I see of Monk, he reminds me of JR Smith. He can get hot but otherwise seems to disappear. Though it's hard to scout a guy like him at UK, like Booker was.
You don't touch Monk anywhere in the top 7. Ontop of that, I really hope we are not targeting guys who we think can fit the triangle at the risk of missing out guys like Fox and or Ball who can be a bit ball dominant at times...Lets just take the best player at our spot!
Yeah BPA is always the smart move.
Agreed, as long as it's not a center or PF.......
Uptown wrote:crzymdups wrote:Uptown wrote:
Hahaha. I was gonna say. The more I see of Monk, he reminds me of JR Smith. He can get hot but otherwise seems to disappear. Though it's hard to scout a guy like him at UK, like Booker was.
You don't touch Monk anywhere in the top 7. Ontop of that, I really hope we are not targeting guys who we think can fit the triangle at the risk of missing out guys like Fox and or Ball who can be a bit ball dominant at times...Lets just take the best player at our spot!
Ball can play in a two guard front in the Triangle! We haven't really been doing that as much but he's not a typical PG that constantly looks for PnR penetration. He does give it up early looking to move the ball. I think he would fit perfectly in the Triangle.
I think Monk would be able to be effective in the Triangle as well. Monk doesn't seem to force things too much and I think the spacing in the NBA will benefit him.
BRIGGS wrote:Monk started off the season on fire-- looked great. The last third of the season he looks like a second round pick. No way the knicks
You judge guys strictly off their last game so I knew you would say this. Look at his season as a whole. He had a great freshman year. His scoring numbers are strong. And the system limits him, like it did Booker.
Knixkik wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Monk started off the season on fire-- looked great. The last third of the season he looks like a second round pick. No way the knicks
You judge guys strictly off their last game so I knew you would say this. Look at his season as a whole. He had a great freshman year. His scoring numbers are strong. And the system limits him, like it did Booker.
I think you do Knox. monk has been poor most of the last 15 games . I think hes been exposed as a smallish 2 guard who doesn't rebound or pass-- nor does he handle that well. Could he be a Lou Williams-- absolutely -- but he is no Knick pick 0/100 no chance
booker is 6-6 200+ monk looks 6-2 185
BRIGGS wrote:Knixkik wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Monk started off the season on fire-- looked great. The last third of the season he looks like a second round pick. No way the knicks
You judge guys strictly off their last game so I knew you would say this. Look at his season as a whole. He had a great freshman year. His scoring numbers are strong. And the system limits him, like it did Booker.
I think you do Knox. monk has been poor most of the last 15 games . I think hes been exposed as a smallish 2 guard who doesn't rebound or pass-- nor does he handle that well. Could he be a Lou Williams-- absolutely -- but he is no Knick pick 0/100 no chance
booker is 6-6 200+ monk looks 6-2 185
But Monk is listed 6'3 200lbs 🤥🤥🤥🤥🤥
EnySpree wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Knixkik wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Monk started off the season on fire-- looked great. The last third of the season he looks like a second round pick. No way the knicks
You judge guys strictly off their last game so I knew you would say this. Look at his season as a whole. He had a great freshman year. His scoring numbers are strong. And the system limits him, like it did Booker.
I think you do Knox. monk has been poor most of the last 15 games . I think hes been exposed as a smallish 2 guard who doesn't rebound or pass-- nor does he handle that well. Could he be a Lou Williams-- absolutely -- but he is no Knick pick 0/100 no chance
booker is 6-6 200+ monk looks 6-2 185
But Monk is listed 6'3 200lbs 🤥🤥🤥🤥🤥
I list my penis at 7.5 inches
BRIGGS wrote:Knixkik wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Monk started off the season on fire-- looked great. The last third of the season he looks like a second round pick. No way the knicks
You judge guys strictly off their last game so I knew you would say this. Look at his season as a whole. He had a great freshman year. His scoring numbers are strong. And the system limits him, like it did Booker.
I think you do Knox. monk has been poor most of the last 15 games . I think hes been exposed as a smallish 2 guard who doesn't rebound or pass-- nor does he handle that well. Could he be a Lou Williams-- absolutely -- but he is no Knick pick 0/100 no chance
booker is 6-6 200+ monk looks 6-2 185
You won't find me flip flopping opinions. I don't judge guys on small sample sizes. Monk is 6'3-6'4 with a 6'6 wing span. Booker is 6'6 with a 6'7 wing span. And monk is a much much better athlete.
Knixkik wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Knixkik wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Monk started off the season on fire-- looked great. The last third of the season he looks like a second round pick. No way the knicks
You judge guys strictly off their last game so I knew you would say this. Look at his season as a whole. He had a great freshman year. His scoring numbers are strong. And the system limits him, like it did Booker.
I think you do Knox. monk has been poor most of the last 15 games . I think hes been exposed as a smallish 2 guard who doesn't rebound or pass-- nor does he handle that well. Could he be a Lou Williams-- absolutely -- but he is no Knick pick 0/100 no chance
booker is 6-6 200+ monk looks 6-2 185
You won't find me flip flopping opinions. I don't judge guys on small sample sizes. Monk is 6'3-6'4 with a 6'6 wing span. Booker is 6'6 with a 6'7 wing span. And monk is a much much better athlete.
Monk is a fantastic athlete... so is JR Smith though (and I'm kind of a fan of JR), not saying Monk has the head case issues JR has, but I see a lot of similarities in their games. JR can get red hot, I believe he's second in the league behind Steph Curry in games with more than 5 3pt fg for their careers. If Monk goes toward the high end of his potential - he's more in the Beal, CJ McCollum, healthy Eric Gordon world. But I think if he doesn't hit the high end of his potential, he could more like a JR or Jamal type guy... which would not be terrible, both guys have won Sixth Man awards... (And I remember people saying both Jamal Crawford and JR could both run point when they first came into the league and it just never worked)
It's just really hard to judge whether Monk can run an offense based off what we've seen from him. I've watched Kentucky pretty closely the past two months since it became clear we'd be a lotto team and I liked Fox and Monk. Monk can get hot and fill it up... but I don't see much else there. He's not a smart defender, and he kinda sinks into the background in UK's offense.
I think Cal ran a bad offense for Monk this year. He should've had him running off more pin down screens to free him up, maybe let him try to create off the dribble. But he was just sort of hidden (which is weird to say since he led the team in scoring, but definitely the last month or so, he sank into the background on that team)
Knixkik wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Knixkik wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Monk started off the season on fire-- looked great. The last third of the season he looks like a second round pick. No way the knicks
You judge guys strictly off their last game so I knew you would say this. Look at his season as a whole. He had a great freshman year. His scoring numbers are strong. And the system limits him, like it did Booker.
I think you do Knox. monk has been poor most of the last 15 games . I think hes been exposed as a smallish 2 guard who doesn't rebound or pass-- nor does he handle that well. Could he be a Lou Williams-- absolutely -- but he is no Knick pick 0/100 no chance
booker is 6-6 200+ monk looks 6-2 185
You won't find me flip flopping opinions. I don't judge guys on small sample sizes. Monk is 6'3-6'4 with a 6'6 wing span. Booker is 6'6 with a 6'7 wing span. And monk is a much much better athlete.
Actually Draft express has Monk having a 6'3.5 wingspan..... he has raptor arms but his skill level compensates for it.
