I had red flagged him a bit as a pure scorer and too small to be a full time SG. Too much Jamal Crawford in his game but looking closer he's a much better athlete than I gave him credit for. MUCH better. He's truly explosive. His 42 inch vert is in the Vince Carter zone. 6'6 wingspan respectable as well especially considering his athleticism.
Not saying I now want Monk above this guy or that guy, but if we drop to 7-8 this could be the best player available and I think he's got as much upside as most of these guys.
I keep saying this about Monk and Fox: these guys are two elite freshman prospects--who shared a back court together. Imagine how either would look if they were featured and not splitting the load
SupremeCommander wrote:I keep saying this about Monk and Fox: these guys are two elite freshman prospects--who shared a back court together. Imagine how either would look if they were featured and not splitting the load
I think Fox is superior, but I made the mistake of overlooking much of what Towns could do because of who he was surrounded by. Barring a lottery win the Knicks will be 6-8 so I am focused on that group. Especially with Baker/Lee as the incumbents the Knicks could really use an above the rim player and a killer from 3. Monk certainly brings those aspects so there is some fit as well.
Love his shooting, but he has other limitations...D and being a distributor.
You are looking at a guy who is under 6'3" w/o his shoes, (actually listed at 6'3" WITH shoes and about a 6'3" wingspan by KU in 2016) has no wingspan, and was invisible at times as a ball handler.
On the right team he can be a nice fit, but right now I see him as a limited player who is the best streak shooter in the draft.
As I've said before...think Del Curry, Steph's dad. That is what Monk will be, though yes, he is a much better athlete.
fishmike wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:I keep saying this about Monk and Fox: these guys are two elite freshman prospects--who shared a back court together. Imagine how either would look if they were featured and not splitting the load
I think Fox is superior, but I made the mistake of overlooking much of what Towns could do because of who he was surrounded by. Barring a lottery win the Knicks will be 6-8 so I am focused on that group. Especially with Baker/Lee as the incumbents the Knicks could really use an above the rim player and a killer from 3. Monk certainly brings those aspects so there is some fit as well.
I would prefer Fox, for sure, but I do think Monk would be a fantastic lead guard in the triangle. He's an athlete, he can score, and he got a decent amount of assists considering Fox was the distributor. Most of Phil's points have been guys that are big and can score. Look at what a broken Ron Harper did in the offense... Monk ain't as big as Harper but he's not tiny either
WaltLongmire wrote:Love his shooting, but he has other limitations...D and being a distributor. You are looking at a guy who is under 6'3" w/o his shoes, has no wingspan, and was invisible at times as a ball handler.
On the right team he can be a nice fit, but right now I see him as a limited player who is a great shooter.
As I've said before...think Del Curry, Steph's dad. That is what Monk will be.
I see that... some similarities but I would say that Dell is his downside. Dell Curry was a good player, but didnt have anything close to Monk's hops.
fishmike wrote:WaltLongmire wrote:Love his shooting, but he has other limitations...D and being a distributor. You are looking at a guy who is under 6'3" w/o his shoes, has no wingspan, and was invisible at times as a ball handler.
On the right team he can be a nice fit, but right now I see him as a limited player who is a great shooter.
As I've said before...think Del Curry, Steph's dad. That is what Monk will be.
I see that... some similarities but I would say that Dell is his downside. Dell Curry was a good player, but didnt have anything close to Monk's hops.
I just added some of his height numbers...and yeah, Del did not have the vertical numbers Monk has, which is why he developed that quick release minimal height jumper of his.
SupremeCommander wrote:fishmike wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:I keep saying this about Monk and Fox: these guys are two elite freshman prospects--who shared a back court together. Imagine how either would look if they were featured and not splitting the load
I think Fox is superior, but I made the mistake of overlooking much of what Towns could do because of who he was surrounded by. Barring a lottery win the Knicks will be 6-8 so I am focused on that group. Especially with Baker/Lee as the incumbents the Knicks could really use an above the rim player and a killer from 3. Monk certainly brings those aspects so there is some fit as well.
I would prefer Fox, for sure, but I do think Monk would be a fantastic lead guard in the triangle. He's an athlete, he can score, and he got a decent amount of assists considering Fox was the distributor. Most of Phil's points have been guys that are big and can score. Look at what a broken Ron Harper did in the offense... Monk ain't as big as Harper but he's not tiny either
Harper is listed as 6'6" and we know he had long arms...Monk is 6'3" with short arms... Just saying.
Fox...Frank...Isaac, or maybe one of the guys who drops because someone moves up.
My feeling...best team for Monk is Philly. Simmons will be the point player for them. They really need a sniper, and nobody in this draft is better than Monk at that.
Monk to me seems like he would be very good in a system like the Triangle. He wouldn't have to worry about being a Pure PG! Just basic bring the ball up and call the play. He can move very well without the ball and Catch and Shoot or cuts to the basket like our guards are doing. With Monks athletic ability he can finish very well. He's not shy or scared to put it up from 3 like our guards have been.
He would have to get much stronger tho and show more resistance on D. I can imagine Monk lighting it up off screens from Willy.
Monk is a guy I go back and forth on for a few reasons.
- while certainly no pure PG I did watch about 15 or so of his UK games and he did show some unselfishness, vision and passing ability in flashes
- in the triangle we don't need a pure PG but simply 2 guards who can move, pass and shoot
- he is outstanding off the ball either cutting off the ball or using screens --- all of which fits in the triangle
- this is a kid with I think (+4) 30 plus games as a freshmen. The SEC player of the year and a kid who put up 47 on National Champion NC and 27 on South Carolina D
- he is spectacular in the open court (some Westbrook in him)
- his range and form are both outstanding
It wouldn't be the worse thing to put a dynamic wing scorer next to KP -- particularly a guard that could pressure the defense on the break (get us out in transition and finish) -- we really haven't had a legit wing threat like that in some time.
Also liked that he showed a great attitude at UK -- sharing the limelight with Fox/BAM and taking tough coaching from Cal.
This may be true but then you have to ask why didnt he use his athleticism to get rebounds? To me Monk best cases of success are in the McCollum and Beal range. Beal came out of UF(6'3.3 w/o shoes & 202 lbs) slightly bigger and taller than what Monk is listed at for UK(6'2.3 w/o shoes & 197 lbs). Beal's smooth stroke did not translate into a High 3pg% but he did rebound and play defense at a high level. Monk shot a higher % from 3 but does not check off any of the other boxes. However, even though Beal came in as a better all around player it hasn't really translated until this year. Before this year he was just a good sniper who shot way too many mid range 2s. Hopefully Monk shows a more well rounded game at the next level because the guy can shoot.
WaltLongmire wrote:Love his shooting, but he has other limitations...D and being a distributor. You are looking at a guy who is under 6'3" w/o his shoes, (actually listed at 6'3" WITH shoes and about a 6'3" wingspan by KU in 2016) has no wingspan, and was invisible at times as a ball handler.
On the right team he can be a nice fit, but right now I see him as a limited player who is the best streak shooter in the draft.
As I've said before...think Del Curry, Steph's dad. That is what Monk will be, though yes, he is a much better athlete.
Good points but if you look at how Cal used him at UK -- in all 1/2 court situations Monk was played off the ball because they had Fox/Briscoe with the ball (and neither of them were perimeter threats). Monk was basically asked to run off baseline screens and often asked/forced to take tough/contested shots against defenses set to stop him. If anything (like Towns) I think Monk's game could expand at the NBA level in a more free flowing offense where the ball is moving better and there are better players playing next to him. Also think the NBA game/shot clock play to his strengths.
WaltLongmire wrote:fishmike wrote:WaltLongmire wrote:Love his shooting, but he has other limitations...D and being a distributor. You are looking at a guy who is under 6'3" w/o his shoes, has no wingspan, and was invisible at times as a ball handler.
On the right team he can be a nice fit, but right now I see him as a limited player who is a great shooter.
As I've said before...think Del Curry, Steph's dad. That is what Monk will be.
I see that... some similarities but I would say that Dell is his downside. Dell Curry was a good player, but didnt have anything close to Monk's hops.
I just added some of his height numbers...and yeah, Del did not have the vertical numbers Monk has, which is why he developed that quick release minimal height jumper of his.
Dell Curry was a 1 dimensional perimeter assassin / shooter. Monk can score all over the place in 1/2 court, catch-shoot, 1, 2 or 3 dribble pull ups, floaters in the lane, layups with either hand at the rim and purely dunking on people.
Dell and Malik is NOT a great compare. I'd say more so guys like M-Ellis or L-Williams.
WaltLongmire wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:fishmike wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:I keep saying this about Monk and Fox: these guys are two elite freshman prospects--who shared a back court together. Imagine how either would look if they were featured and not splitting the load
I think Fox is superior, but I made the mistake of overlooking much of what Towns could do because of who he was surrounded by. Barring a lottery win the Knicks will be 6-8 so I am focused on that group. Especially with Baker/Lee as the incumbents the Knicks could really use an above the rim player and a killer from 3. Monk certainly brings those aspects so there is some fit as well.
I would prefer Fox, for sure, but I do think Monk would be a fantastic lead guard in the triangle. He's an athlete, he can score, and he got a decent amount of assists considering Fox was the distributor. Most of Phil's points have been guys that are big and can score. Look at what a broken Ron Harper did in the offense... Monk ain't as big as Harper but he's not tiny either
Harper is listed as 6'6" and we know he had long arms...Monk is 6'3" with short arms... Just saying.
I am not sure about what UK has him listed at in regards to wingspan most of his other measurements stayed nearly the same but his wingspan went from nearly 6'6 to 6'3. I guess will have to wait until the combine. If I was him I'd bring his best "shoes" and stretch my spine like I never stretched before. Lol.
yellowboy90 wrote:This may be true but then you have to ask why didnt he use his athleticism to get rebounds? To me Monk best cases of success are in the McCollum and Beal range. Beal came out of UF(6'3.3 w/o shoes & 202 lbs) slightly bigger and taller than what Monk is listed at for UK(6'2.3 w/o shoes & 197 lbs). Beal's smooth stroke did not translate into a High 3pg% but he did rebound and play defense at a high level. Monk shot a higher % from 3 but does not check off any of the other boxes. However, even though Beal came in as a better all around player it hasn't really translated until this year. Before this year he was just a good sniper who shot way too many mid range 2s. Hopefully Monk shows a more well rounded game at the next level because the guy can shoot.
I don't think rebounds were a focus and if we can get a CJ McCollum or B-Beal at #6 -- I'm down for that.
Yeah - I want to see his measurements from the combine -- neither Fox or Monk look short to me in terms of wingspan but maybe they are.
LivingLegend wrote:WaltLongmire wrote:Love his shooting, but he has other limitations...D and being a distributor. You are looking at a guy who is under 6'3" w/o his shoes, (actually listed at 6'3" WITH shoes and about a 6'3" wingspan by KU in 2016) has no wingspan, and was invisible at times as a ball handler.
On the right team he can be a nice fit, but right now I see him as a limited player who is the best streak shooter in the draft.
As I've said before...think Del Curry, Steph's dad. That is what Monk will be, though yes, he is a much better athlete.
Good points but if you look at how Cal used him at UK -- in all 1/2 court situations Monk was played off the ball because they had Fox/Briscoe with the ball (and neither of them were perimeter threats). Monk was basically asked to run off baseline screens and often asked/forced to take tough/contested shots against defenses set to stop him. If anything (like Towns) I think Monk's game could expand at the NBA level in a more free flowing offense where the ball is moving better and there are better players playing next to him. Also think the NBA game/shot clock play to his strengths.
There's a reason Monk is so highly thought of despite not showing a lot of different things at UK. Scouts are aware of what he's capable of but didn't get to show at UK due to the other talent and role he played. IMO Monk will be used as a PG in the NBA. I don't see him being like Beal at all.
yellowboy90 wrote:This may be true but then you have to ask why didnt he use his athleticism to get rebounds? To me Monk best cases of success are in the McCollum and Beal range. Beal came out of UF(6'3.3 w/o shoes & 202 lbs) slightly bigger and taller than what Monk is listed at for UK(6'2.3 w/o shoes & 197 lbs). Beal's smooth stroke did not translate into a High 3pg% but he did rebound and play defense at a high level. Monk shot a higher % from 3 but does not check off any of the other boxes. However, even though Beal came in as a better all around player it hasn't really translated until this year. Before this year he was just a good sniper who shot way too many mid range 2s. Hopefully Monk shows a more well rounded game at the next level because the guy can shoot.
If we draft Monk and he turns out like McCollum or Beal, I would be really psyched. An awesome player to have.
Basically, what LivingLegend has just said.
WaltLongmire wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:fishmike wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:I keep saying this about Monk and Fox: these guys are two elite freshman prospects--who shared a back court together. Imagine how either would look if they were featured and not splitting the load
I think Fox is superior, but I made the mistake of overlooking much of what Towns could do because of who he was surrounded by. Barring a lottery win the Knicks will be 6-8 so I am focused on that group. Especially with Baker/Lee as the incumbents the Knicks could really use an above the rim player and a killer from 3. Monk certainly brings those aspects so there is some fit as well.
I would prefer Fox, for sure, but I do think Monk would be a fantastic lead guard in the triangle. He's an athlete, he can score, and he got a decent amount of assists considering Fox was the distributor. Most of Phil's points have been guys that are big and can score. Look at what a broken Ron Harper did in the offense... Monk ain't as big as Harper but he's not tiny either
Harper is listed as 6'6" and we know he had long arms...Monk is 6'3" with short arms... Just saying.
Monk's wingspan is 6'6. Thats nothing to write home about but I wouldnt call him short armed. Steph Curry has a 6'3 wingspan by comparison. Tony Allen is 6'4 with a 6'9 wingspan.
A good NBA comparison is Avery Bradley. They are both 6'3.5. Bradly has a 6'7 wingspan vs. Monk's 6'6. Monk has an extra 5 inches (42 vs 37) on his vert than Avery does.
Certainly Monk is at a size advantage at the SG spot. He also lacks the length to overcome that. However the hops will will certainly help.
Walt I thought the Dell Curry or Jamal Crawford type was fair. Guys who can shoot but not too much else. Good players... but I didnt scout Monk well enough. When I saw how shifty he was I dug a bit deeper and quickly learned he is an elite athlete. 42 inch vert is otherworldly. Thats Vince Carter zone. He's very young and will add some strength as well. He's a sniper. Good killer instinct.
Again.. not saying this is my guy, but if he was at pick 7-9 I would be happy. I think he can be great.
LivingLegend wrote:Monk is a guy I go back and forth on for a few reasons.- while certainly no pure PG I did watch about 15 or so of his UK games and he did show some unselfishness, vision and passing ability in flashes
- in the triangle we don't need a pure PG but simply 2 guards who can move, pass and shoot
- he is outstanding off the ball either cutting off the ball or using screens --- all of which fits in the triangle
- this is a kid with I think (+4) 30 plus games as a freshmen. The SEC player of the year and a kid who put up 47 on National Champion NC and 27 on South Carolina D
- he is spectacular in the open court (some Westbrook in him)
- his range and form are both outstanding
It wouldn't be the worse thing to put a dynamic wing scorer next to KP -- particularly a guard that could pressure the defense on the break (get us out in transition and finish) -- we really haven't had a legit wing threat like that in some time.
Also liked that he showed a great attitude at UK -- sharing the limelight with Fox/BAM and taking tough coaching from Cal.
Here is something to think about as you are a Ron Baker guy... Baker measured 6'4 with a 6'10 wingspan. Do you consider the fact that those two are complimentary? Baker handles the ball and takes on the tougher guard in the backcourt. Monk guards opposing 1's usually, plays off the ball and both can spread the floor... Going to be tough to win NBA games with that backcourt but maybe Monk comes off the bench to play with Baker. You like that?
