Knicks · Let's start optimistically and see who we would take with pick #1. (page 1)

I go with Fultz. I think he's got an advantage at his position every night. Athletic, big, long and skilled. He's a do it all PG and I think we need a player like that who can run a team but also take over and hit the big shot if needed.

nixluva wrote:I go with Fultz. I think he's got an advantage at his position every night. Athletic, big, long and skilled. He's a do it all PG and I think we need a player like that who can run a team but also take over and hit the big shot if needed.

Me too- I love Josh Jackson, but I'd take Fultz over him. At the moment I'd probably take JJ second, ahead of Ball, but I would do a bit more research first.

I think Ball and Fultz have serious potential to play below expectations. D'Angelo Russell looked better than either of them in college, but has struggled so far in the league.

So Jackson would me my preferred pick at #1. Or a trade down to a couple of first round picks: a top 6 one and a current or future lottery pick.

I see Fultz as a shooting guard. He didn't impress me at all with his ball handling or court vision. I see Eric Gordon. That's not a diss... before he got hurt he was a 20pt a Game scorer. He's a 15 a game guy now.

I voted Josh Jackson. Hard to vote against him at #1. With that said, the Knicks could end up with the 3rd-5th pick... we are in fantastic position

I'm all in on Lonzo. Haven't seen a player who makes players better like this in many years. He's also an nba range 3 point shooter rebounds defends at 6-6 from the pg slot I'm well aware of the other good players but this may be a transcending player who controls the flow of the game

BRIGGS wrote:I'm all in on Lonzo. Haven't seen a player who makes players better like this in many years. He's also an nba range 3 point shooter rebounds defends at 6-6 from the pg slot I'm well aware of the other good players but this may be a transcending player who controls the flow of the game

Cant argue with any of that. He and Jackson are my 1 and 1A

BRIGGS wrote:I'm all in on Lonzo. Haven't seen a player who makes players better like this in many years. He's also an nba range 3 point shooter rebounds defends at 6-6 from the pg slot I'm well aware of the other good players but this may be a transcending player who controls the flow of the game

+1

It's a toss up for me Ball, Fultz or Jackson. Fultz only draw back could be his height if he is a legit 6'5 or more I would take him first. I guess my reasoning behind this is that triangle always thrived when it had an elit SG.

Its close...Ball's IQ is off the charts for an 18 yr old...Makes his teammates better, Smooth and always under control, changes gears and runs the offense similar to Kidd. He does have range but what concerns me about him is the defensive side of the ball. UCLA was not a good defensive team and he played out at the top. He didn't offer a whole lot of resistance when guarding Fultz and Fox who scored on him quite a bit....

Fultz is the prototypical Lead Guard in todays NBA. He's not a pure pg like Ball, but other than Paul, what elite PGS in the league are pure? Lillard, Westbrook, Harden and Thomas are all shoot first lead guards who are willing passers and that's the style of ball Fultz plays. He doesn't have the vision like Ball but he's a better defender, and athlete. Its a close call....But theres something special about Ball!!!

Uptown wrote:Its close...Ball's IQ is off the charts for an 18 yr old...Makes his teammates better, Smooth and always under control, changes gears and runs the offense similar to Kidd. He does have range but what concerns me about him is the defensive side of the ball. UCLA was not a good defensive team and he played out at the top. He didn't offer a whole lot of resistance when guarding Fultz and Fox who scored on him quite a bit....

Fultz is the prototypical Lead Guard in todays NBA. He's not a pure pg like Ball, but other than Paul, what elite PGS in the league are pure? Lillard, Westbrook, Harden and Thomas are all shoot first lead guards who are willing passers and that's the style of ball Fultz plays. He doesn't have the vision like Ball but he's a better defender, and athlete. Its a close call....But theres something special about Ball!!!

My reason for putting Fultz ahead of Ball is that we don't just need a great Passing PG, we also need a real WEAPON on the Perimeter. Fultz can take over a game in a way that Ball isn't really going to do. You get a special mix of PG Skills but also Primary Scoring threat with Fultz. I think you really will need that on this team going forward. If and when Melo is gone you can't just have a team full of guys that can't take over a game for key stretches.

I think one skill most people over look is IQ. To be honest, I don't know too much about any of these guys. I did watch Ball in his last game, and his defense didn't jump out at me. But his IQ did, and his ability to get others involved and score was great. He also makes the game look very easy out there. So if I was a GM, and given I only seen Ball play one game (which isn't fare to the others, I understand)....I would take Ball.....

As we get closer to the draft, I will do some research on the other guys. But Ball and Jackson seem to fill a direct need.....Something we've been lacking for years.

IQ and Defense.

If Fultz is the new NBA westbrook or rose type of guard, well that's an easy decision for me. We already saw how Rose fits into our triangle system. And I'm not the type to draft based on system, but a scoring point guard doesn't fill the top two needs for me.....

IQ and Defense.

blkexec wrote:I think one skill most people over look is IQ. To be honest, I don't know too much about any of these guys. I did watch Ball in his last game, and his defense didn't jump out at me. But his IQ did, and his ability to get others involved and score was great. He also makes the game look very easy out there. So if I was a GM, and given I only seen Ball play one game (which isn't fare to the others, I understand)....I would take Ball.....

As we get closer to the draft, I will do some research on the other guys. But Ball and Jackson seem to fill a direct need.....Something we've been lacking for years.

IQ and Defense.

If Fultz is the new NBA westbrook or rose type of guard, well that's an easy decision for me. We already saw how Rose fits into our triangle system. And I'm not the type to draft based on system, but a scoring point guard doesn't fill the top two needs for me.....

IQ and Defense.

I wouldn't compare anyone to Rose. Rose so disappointed me. He showed ZERO desire to buy into the system and I just don't think Fultz is that kind of player. True he is more of a SG than a pure PG but in the Triangle you actually WANT Combo guards. You want simple and smart PG decisions and not Ball Dominant, make every decision for the team style PG's. Fultz would be in the MJ/Kobe role and not the role Baker is playing. Baker is doing Fisher right now. In the Triangle Fultz would be in the Attack Guard Role and playing on the Pinch Post side of the floor with all the space. You still need passing skills in that role so a big Combo guard is ideal.

in a way I'm kinda rooting for the number three pick... I think Fultz is the best player (voted for him), Ball is the most intriguing, and I'm becoming increasingly interested in Josh Jackson. I think we win with any of the players, but I'm starting to think Jackson is the best prospect but I wouldn't have the stones to draft him first overall

I pick Josh Jackson, I think we can get a very good PG in the second round if things fall right in the draft or free agency. I think Josh Jackson wil be special in the NBA.

mikesknicks wrote:I pick Josh Jackson, I think we can get a very good PG in the second round if things fall right in the draft or free agency. I think Josh Jackson wil be special in the NBA.

he certainly looks like he belongs in the NBA

blkexec wrote:I think one skill most people over look is IQ. To be honest, I don't know too much about any of these guys. I did watch Ball in his last game, and his defense didn't jump out at me. But his IQ did, and his ability to get others involved and score was great. He also makes the game look very easy out there. So if I was a GM, and given I only seen Ball play one game (which isn't fare to the others, I understand)....I would take Ball.....

As we get closer to the draft, I will do some research on the other guys. But Ball and Jackson seem to fill a direct need.....Something we've been lacking for years.

IQ and Defense.

If Fultz is the new NBA westbrook or rose type of guard, well that's an easy decision for me. We already saw how Rose fits into our triangle system. And I'm not the type to draft based on system, but a scoring point guard doesn't fill the top two needs for me.....

IQ and Defense.

I'll bring up the same thing with ball that I brought up with Russell last year. Feel and IQ are nice and I'm sure ball will be a good player. But nearly all of the superstar players in this league have that extra burst that separate s them from the rest. The Ball/Kidd comparison is OK, but Kidd was also super fast and strong for his position. He could impose his will physical against an opponent. Do you get that sense watching ball. That position is he'll. Think of guys like Steve Smith, Allan Houston, Doug Christie, etc. who couldn't hand the position athletically when they were placed their early in their careers. These guys were solid to great athletes in their own rights, but they had to moves to SG full-time. I'm not saying Ball won't be good. But the transformational tag some guys give him is overblown.

BigDaddyG wrote:

blkexec wrote:I think one skill most people over look is IQ. To be honest, I don't know too much about any of these guys. I did watch Ball in his last game, and his defense didn't jump out at me. But his IQ did, and his ability to get others involved and score was great. He also makes the game look very easy out there. So if I was a GM, and given I only seen Ball play one game (which isn't fare to the others, I understand)....I would take Ball.....

As we get closer to the draft, I will do some research on the other guys. But Ball and Jackson seem to fill a direct need.....Something we've been lacking for years.

IQ and Defense.

If Fultz is the new NBA westbrook or rose type of guard, well that's an easy decision for me. We already saw how Rose fits into our triangle system. And I'm not the type to draft based on system, but a scoring point guard doesn't fill the top two needs for me.....

IQ and Defense.

I'll bring up the same thing with ball that I brought up with Russell last year. Feel and IQ are nice and I'm sure ball will be a good player. But nearly all of the superstar players in this league have that extra burst that separate s them from the rest. The Ball/Kidd comparison is OK, but Kidd was also super fast and strong for his position. He could impose his will physical against an opponent. Do you get that sense watching ball. That position is he'll. Think of guys like Steve Smith, Allan Houston, Doug Christie, etc. who couldn't hand the position athletically when they were placed their early in their careers. These guys were solid to great athletes in their own rights, but they had to moves to SG full-time. I'm not saying Ball won't be good. But the transformational tag some guys give him is overblown.

that tag is based on his ability to improve the play of those around him. Is there another player in the draft that appears to have the positive impact on his teammates and leadership that Ball does?

People saying that Fultz is not a PG have not watched him play and are just going off of youtube clips.

Ball should be #1. I've only seen him play once (UCLA Vs. Washington) and the kid is ready, imo. I think he and Justin Jackson will have the biggest impact in their first year in the league but Fultz is no joke either and is everything that WE need for the PG position. I don't think he will be there past the 4th pick but, if he is, thats who the Knicks should target.

Josh Jackson, in my opinion, will flame out in the NBA. avoid at all costs.

fishmike wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

blkexec wrote:I think one skill most people over look is IQ. To be honest, I don't know too much about any of these guys. I did watch Ball in his last game, and his defense didn't jump out at me. But his IQ did, and his ability to get others involved and score was great. He also makes the game look very easy out there. So if I was a GM, and given I only seen Ball play one game (which isn't fare to the others, I understand)....I would take Ball.....

As we get closer to the draft, I will do some research on the other guys. But Ball and Jackson seem to fill a direct need.....Something we've been lacking for years.

IQ and Defense.

If Fultz is the new NBA westbrook or rose type of guard, well that's an easy decision for me. We already saw how Rose fits into our triangle system. And I'm not the type to draft based on system, but a scoring point guard doesn't fill the top two needs for me.....

IQ and Defense.

I'll bring up the same thing with ball that I brought up with Russell last year. Feel and IQ are nice and I'm sure ball will be a good player. But nearly all of the superstar players in this league have that extra burst that separate s them from the rest. The Ball/Kidd comparison is OK, but Kidd was also super fast and strong for his position. He could impose his will physical against an opponent. Do you get that sense watching ball. That position is he'll. Think of guys like Steve Smith, Allan Houston, Doug Christie, etc. who couldn't hand the position athletically when they were placed their early in their careers. These guys were solid to great athletes in their own rights, but they had to moves to SG full-time. I'm not saying Ball won't be good. But the transformational tag some guys give him is overblown.

that tag is based on his ability to improve the play of those around him. Is there another player in the draft that appears to have the positive impact on his teammates and leadership that Ball does?

Didn't we say the same thing about Kyle Anderson a few years ago?

BigDaddyG wrote:

fishmike wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

blkexec wrote:I think one skill most people over look is IQ. To be honest, I don't know too much about any of these guys. I did watch Ball in his last game, and his defense didn't jump out at me. But his IQ did, and his ability to get others involved and score was great. He also makes the game look very easy out there. So if I was a GM, and given I only seen Ball play one game (which isn't fare to the others, I understand)....I would take Ball.....

As we get closer to the draft, I will do some research on the other guys. But Ball and Jackson seem to fill a direct need.....Something we've been lacking for years.

IQ and Defense.

If Fultz is the new NBA westbrook or rose type of guard, well that's an easy decision for me. We already saw how Rose fits into our triangle system. And I'm not the type to draft based on system, but a scoring point guard doesn't fill the top two needs for me.....

IQ and Defense.

I'll bring up the same thing with ball that I brought up with Russell last year. Feel and IQ are nice and I'm sure ball will be a good player. But nearly all of the superstar players in this league have that extra burst that separate s them from the rest. The Ball/Kidd comparison is OK, but Kidd was also super fast and strong for his position. He could impose his will physical against an opponent. Do you get that sense watching ball. That position is he'll. Think of guys like Steve Smith, Allan Houston, Doug Christie, etc. who couldn't hand the position athletically when they were placed their early in their careers. These guys were solid to great athletes in their own rights, but they had to moves to SG full-time. I'm not saying Ball won't be good. But the transformational tag some guys give him is overblown.

that tag is based on his ability to improve the play of those around him. Is there another player in the draft that appears to have the positive impact on his teammates and leadership that Ball does?

Didn't we say the same thing about Kyle Anderson a few years ago?

I dont even think its a question mark. Some team will find out fast if they bypass him. Lonzo Ball is a clear #1 pick. I think there are a bunch of potentials NBA all stars up there--but only 1 that I see that controls pace the way the NBA plays its game from 30 feet out and in. The guy had a 68%eFG. His defense is going to be more than fine. Look at his tapes--smart good hands long athletic--he has some fundamental flaws there--but all correctable. This draft isnt about the triangle--this is a 15 year decision. With Ball were in good hands.

BigDaddyG wrote:

fishmike wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

blkexec wrote:I think one skill most people over look is IQ. To be honest, I don't know too much about any of these guys. I did watch Ball in his last game, and his defense didn't jump out at me. But his IQ did, and his ability to get others involved and score was great. He also makes the game look very easy out there. So if I was a GM, and given I only seen Ball play one game (which isn't fare to the others, I understand)....I would take Ball.....

As we get closer to the draft, I will do some research on the other guys. But Ball and Jackson seem to fill a direct need.....Something we've been lacking for years.

IQ and Defense.

If Fultz is the new NBA westbrook or rose type of guard, well that's an easy decision for me. We already saw how Rose fits into our triangle system. And I'm not the type to draft based on system, but a scoring point guard doesn't fill the top two needs for me.....

IQ and Defense.

I'll bring up the same thing with ball that I brought up with Russell last year. Feel and IQ are nice and I'm sure ball will be a good player. But nearly all of the superstar players in this league have that extra burst that separate s them from the rest. The Ball/Kidd comparison is OK, but Kidd was also super fast and strong for his position. He could impose his will physical against an opponent. Do you get that sense watching ball. That position is he'll. Think of guys like Steve Smith, Allan Houston, Doug Christie, etc. who couldn't hand the position athletically when they were placed their early in their careers. These guys were solid to great athletes in their own rights, but they had to moves to SG full-time. I'm not saying Ball won't be good. But the transformational tag some guys give him is overblown.

that tag is based on his ability to improve the play of those around him. Is there another player in the draft that appears to have the positive impact on his teammates and leadership that Ball does?

Didn't we say the same thing about Kyle Anderson a few years ago?

That does not ring a bell at all. In fact I had to look up who Kyle Anderson was