fans are rooting for Baker to be successful. Nothing wrong with that. We like to root for undrafted guys who make good.
Our past is what it is and we can't undue it. Phil is doing things differently than others before. He is trying to develop players than other regimes.
Baker with the right hair cut would be taken more seriously. The awe shucks midwest thing in NY does not play like it does in Indy. Some of you don't like the "White man can't jump" guy either.
This kid is making it in the NBA. He is better than Delevedova.
He made the team, stuck the whole season, got playing time, did what was asked of him and finished the season strong. Props to him.
If a fan wants to root for him, thats cool. If Mr Negative knicks1248 wants to sit back and troll some comments because he thinks he got the inside goods, go ahead.
Ron Baker has defied the odds. He has a window to continue to grow. Perhaps if he posted some work out videos with cool techno music and lift weights some might even get more excited.
Only thing that matters is what is on the court and how we going to draft.
Nalod will always root for the underdog.
Sucks we won that last game but N'Dour hit a game winning shot in the NBA!!! Kid has been scratching and clawing his way to get an opportunity and after few games he started looking good.
He did what most of us dream about in our backyards: Hit a game winning shot in the NBA!!!!
THis is Gaines kid, and phil respects him by getting the guy back and playing him. Was Ron Burgundy also a Gaines guy?
Sad when all we can do is bemoan about falling one draft spot cuz we won a game. One instance of Steph curry going before us and bemoaning that Walsh messed up cuz EVERYONE KNEW HE'D BE SPECIAL!!!!
You think 6 teams don't want to redue that draft again?
And look in the mirror and tell yourself Curry, don't get traded in the melo deal? Curry needed how many years to develop? He wasn't a star for 4 years?
Back to the hear and now. Deal with reality, not transpose the past to the future.
knicks1248 wrote:martin wrote:Cartman718 wrote:He is a project at best. I doubt he's in the NBA 5 years from now.
Why?
who have the knicks ever develop, their draft picks suffer yrs of losing then traded, or never resign. mosgov, gallo, chandler, lee, nate, douglas, THJ, Langston, lin, ariza, fields,shump.
But if we were winning 48 to 52 games, and those guys had minor roles where you can bring them along slowly, we would be much better at developing players.
think about how Charlie ward sat on the bench for 2 season behind guys like Harper and doc rivers, not to mention a winning culture, thats how he stood around for 7 to 8 yrs, not throw him into the frey and say play through your mistakes..once the scouting report is out, the league will feast on your weaknesses (see lin)
Kp should have had at least a yr or 2 coming of the bench behind a solid c/pf, instead of leading the league in fouls. It's just a certain way I see other teams develop players that this franchise ignores, and it's not just phil, it's every GM we've had since the Ewing ERA
While the point is somewhat valid. The examples are poor. KP was a top 4 pick and was 2nd for ROY. Ward was the 26th pick in the draft. Phil spent the available money on other needs like center and SG and some bench pieces. Rather then invest in the same PF position just to keep KP on the bench.
Isaiah Thomas trying to form that 48-52 win team threw away to many assets yet continued to net the results of a 30+ win team killing himself on both sides of the equation. Knicks only became that consistent 50 win team when they drafted Patrick Ewing. Knicks arent in a position where they are going to generate 48-50 wins.
Nalod wrote:fans are rooting for Baker to be successful. Nothing wrong with that. We like to root for undrafted guys who make good.
Our past is what it is and we can't undue it. Phil is doing things differently than others before. He is trying to develop players than other regimes.
Baker with the right hair cut would be taken more seriously. The awe shucks midwest thing in NY does not play like it does in Indy. Some of you don't like the "White man can't jump" guy either.
This kid is making it in the NBA. He is better than Delevedova.
He made the team, stuck the whole season, got playing time, did what was asked of him and finished the season strong. Props to him.
If a fan wants to root for him, thats cool. If Mr Negative knicks1248 wants to sit back and troll some comments because he thinks he got the inside goods, go ahead.
Ron Baker has defied the odds. He has a window to continue to grow. Perhaps if he posted some work out videos with cool techno music and lift weights some might even get more excited.
Only thing that matters is what is on the court and how we going to draft. Nalod will always root for the underdog.
Sucks we won that last game but N'Dour hit a game winning shot in the NBA!!! Kid has been scratching and clawing his way to get an opportunity and after few games he started looking good.
He did what most of us dream about in our backyards: Hit a game winning shot in the NBA!!!!
THis is Gaines kid, and phil respects him by getting the guy back and playing him. Was Ron Burgundy also a Gaines guy?
Sad when all we can do is bemoan about falling one draft spot cuz we won a game. One instance of Steph curry going before us and bemoaning that Walsh messed up cuz EVERYONE KNEW HE'D BE SPECIAL!!!!
You think 6 teams don't want to redue that draft again?
And look in the mirror and tell yourself Curry, don't get traded in the melo deal? Curry needed how many years to develop? He wasn't a star for 4 years?
Back to the hear and now. Deal with reality, not transpose the past to the future.
nolad, what exactly did i say that was negative about baker (that he's not a starter) that's negative..cmon dude get off fantasy island. It's stupid to think I wouldn't be pulling for Baker, but even more stupid to think he's capable of being a starter next season if he's even on the knicks roster.
knicks1248 wrote:StarksEwing1 wrote:knicks1248 wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:rpknicks wrote:4.1 pts, 2.1 rebounds, 1.7 assists4.1 pts, 1.1 rebounds, .8 assists
These are the rookie stats for two undrafted free agents, both from small midwestern towns who also shared a knack for defense, hustle and toughness in their limited opportunities.
The first stat line belongs to Ron baker and the second belongs to John Starks, who incidentally made a pretty big jump in his second year ( with his new team , the new york knicks) and just kept going.
Not to set the bar unreasonably high for Ron, but he's shown more than enough to warrant optimism.
The knicks front office has made some bad calls but they got this guy to camp ( called him right after the draft) and I think they know what they've got in Burgundy, see progress, and they will not let him walk this summer.
3.9 pts, 0.9 rbs, 2.2 Asts. That line belongs to Frank Williams' first full NBA season. He only played 9 more NBA games after that! We could do this forever. Most of the 4 PPG players who couldn't shoot the ball probably didn't last long in the NBA.
I can't believe he is even is discussion as a starter
I keep saying the bar for some knick fans have drop so low, that they think we have a better chance of success with baker than melo.
by January their praying for loses because were 9 games below 500, just to get a higher draft pick, and that's the culture we now have.
at least baker busts his ass out there more than the "veteran" players you crave
I don't crave anything but a winning balance roster, I'm not into young, old, fast or slow. I just see what works, and most you guy do too, and baker is not the answer by any stretch of the imagination.
Love the guys heart and defense, but when have you ever seen a lazy undrafted player, those types have to work 10x harder than any player on the court because of their limited skills.
Nobody said baker was the answer or even the starter no you are jumping the gun quite a bit lol
Ron Baker can be a starter for the team if his 3 ball improves and the team runs the Triangle.
It would also be only under the circumstance the team drafted a high scoring talent like Monk in the draft.
If Baker shares the backcourt with someone that cam get you 20 points a night, I think it blends in nicely.
newyorknewyork wrote:knicks1248 wrote:martin wrote:Cartman718 wrote:He is a project at best. I doubt he's in the NBA 5 years from now.
Why?
who have the knicks ever develop, their draft picks suffer yrs of losing then traded, or never resign. mosgov, gallo, chandler, lee, nate, douglas, THJ, Langston, lin, ariza, fields,shump.
But if we were winning 48 to 52 games, and those guys had minor roles where you can bring them along slowly, we would be much better at developing players.
think about how Charlie ward sat on the bench for 2 season behind guys like Harper and doc rivers, not to mention a winning culture, thats how he stood around for 7 to 8 yrs, not throw him into the frey and say play through your mistakes..once the scouting report is out, the league will feast on your weaknesses (see lin)
Kp should have had at least a yr or 2 coming of the bench behind a solid c/pf, instead of leading the league in fouls. It's just a certain way I see other teams develop players that this franchise ignores, and it's not just phil, it's every GM we've had since the Ewing ERA
While the point is somewhat valid. The examples are poor. KP was a top 4 pick and was 2nd for ROY. Ward was the 26th pick in the draft. Phil spent the available money on other needs like center and SG and some bench pieces. Rather then invest in the same PF position just to keep KP on the bench.
Isaiah Thomas trying to form that 48-52 win team threw away to many assets yet continued to net the results of a 30+ win team killing himself on both sides of the equation. Knicks only became that consistent 50 win team when they drafted Patrick Ewing. Knicks arent in a position where they are going to generate 48-50 wins.
You know why young talented guys like Isaiah Thomas and Cousins get traded, because your not winning with them, isn't that what Phil said regarding melo.
When ever your consistently losing, your going to make trades no matter the talent level. that's why to me winning is a priority. so when phil says if melo want to win, he need to be somewhere else, people are going to look at him like..wait a min, we all want to win???
It should have been if melo wants to win a title, not if he wants to win, the dude just wants to be playing in may and hopefully june
knicks1248 wrote:newyorknewyork wrote:knicks1248 wrote:martin wrote:Cartman718 wrote:He is a project at best. I doubt he's in the NBA 5 years from now.
Why?
who have the knicks ever develop, their draft picks suffer yrs of losing then traded, or never resign. mosgov, gallo, chandler, lee, nate, douglas, THJ, Langston, lin, ariza, fields,shump.
But if we were winning 48 to 52 games, and those guys had minor roles where you can bring them along slowly, we would be much better at developing players.
think about how Charlie ward sat on the bench for 2 season behind guys like Harper and doc rivers, not to mention a winning culture, thats how he stood around for 7 to 8 yrs, not throw him into the frey and say play through your mistakes..once the scouting report is out, the league will feast on your weaknesses (see lin)
Kp should have had at least a yr or 2 coming of the bench behind a solid c/pf, instead of leading the league in fouls. It's just a certain way I see other teams develop players that this franchise ignores, and it's not just phil, it's every GM we've had since the Ewing ERA
While the point is somewhat valid. The examples are poor. KP was a top 4 pick and was 2nd for ROY. Ward was the 26th pick in the draft. Phil spent the available money on other needs like center and SG and some bench pieces. Rather then invest in the same PF position just to keep KP on the bench.
Isaiah Thomas trying to form that 48-52 win team threw away to many assets yet continued to net the results of a 30+ win team killing himself on both sides of the equation. Knicks only became that consistent 50 win team when they drafted Patrick Ewing. Knicks arent in a position where they are going to generate 48-50 wins.
You know why young talented guys like Isaiah Thomas and Cousins get traded, because your not winning with them, isn't that what Phil said regarding melo.
When ever your consistently losing, your going to make trades no matter the talent level. that's why to me winning is a priority. so when phil says if melo want to win, he need to be somewhere else, people are going to look at him like..wait a min, we all want to win???
It should have been if melo wants to win a title, not if he wants to win, the dude just wants to be playing in may and hopefully june
That is some high level shyt right there.
Man, all this time I thought was needed other things, but that "Winning" Thing, man, if we can just get that, all the rest will take care of each other.
nyknickzingis wrote:Ron Baker can be a starter for the team if his 3 ball improves and the team runs the Triangle.
It would also be only under the circumstance the team drafted a high scoring talent like Monk in the draft.
If Baker shares the backcourt with someone that cam get you 20 points a night, I think it blends in nicely.
Yes, Ron is a stiff right now. His numbers and his uneven play on the court shows that. Most rookies are. The thing that gives you hope is his hustle and defense. He needs to improve offensively or he'll be out of the league. But he's shown he's a hard worker and I could definitely see him being a rotation player, possibly a stater in the right situation, in time. We're going to suck in the next few years, so he'll get the opportunity to prove his worth. I think most people realize this.
knicks1248 wrote:newyorknewyork wrote:knicks1248 wrote:martin wrote:Cartman718 wrote:He is a project at best. I doubt he's in the NBA 5 years from now.
Why?
who have the knicks ever develop, their draft picks suffer yrs of losing then traded, or never resign. mosgov, gallo, chandler, lee, nate, douglas, THJ, Langston, lin, ariza, fields,shump.
But if we were winning 48 to 52 games, and those guys had minor roles where you can bring them along slowly, we would be much better at developing players.
think about how Charlie ward sat on the bench for 2 season behind guys like Harper and doc rivers, not to mention a winning culture, thats how he stood around for 7 to 8 yrs, not throw him into the frey and say play through your mistakes..once the scouting report is out, the league will feast on your weaknesses (see lin)
Kp should have had at least a yr or 2 coming of the bench behind a solid c/pf, instead of leading the league in fouls. It's just a certain way I see other teams develop players that this franchise ignores, and it's not just phil, it's every GM we've had since the Ewing ERA
While the point is somewhat valid. The examples are poor. KP was a top 4 pick and was 2nd for ROY. Ward was the 26th pick in the draft. Phil spent the available money on other needs like center and SG and some bench pieces. Rather then invest in the same PF position just to keep KP on the bench.
Isaiah Thomas trying to form that 48-52 win team threw away to many assets yet continued to net the results of a 30+ win team killing himself on both sides of the equation. Knicks only became that consistent 50 win team when they drafted Patrick Ewing. Knicks arent in a position where they are going to generate 48-50 wins.
You know why young talented guys like Isaiah Thomas and Cousins get traded, because your not winning with them, isn't that what Phil said regarding melo.
When ever your consistently losing, your going to make trades no matter the talent level. that's why to me winning is a priority. so when phil says if melo want to win, he need to be somewhere else, people are going to look at him like..wait a min, we all want to win???
It should have been if melo wants to win a title, not if he wants to win, the dude just wants to be playing in may and hopefully june
The question though is how do you get to that level of sustained success. We aren't in position to flat out sign top flight FAs because they have better options. We can trade our lotto picks and future draft picks for proven players. But that isn't a winning practice unless you have wisely stocked the deck on future assets to fall back on allowing you to pick and choose when to draft and when to trade. There is only one route the Knicks can safely take to establish a 50 win team. And that is to hit a multiple draft picks and build a core cappable of doing so. Then from there maybe we can target some vets here and there to move the team forward. Then from there our draft picks can work there way in behind established players on a 50 win team.
I was watching a different Knicks team if Baker gets a pass .. Bakers half-court performance were a tier-3 performance, and Baker uptempo performance were tier-3 performance .. Bakers chemistry with teammates and backcourt help were tier 3 performance. Baker gets a pass on defense because none of his teammates acted on defense.
I like Baker for only one reason he kept his turn-over ratio low
This conversation would be entirely different if Baker had gotten a consistent 20+MPG from day 1.
An undrafted player learning a new position in a system many deem too difficult for today's players and actually grasping it better than established veterans is pretty impressive...and some around here are not giving him the credit he deserves.
His jumper consistency has to improve...we all know this, and I expect he knows it too. Look for him to return with a more consistent shot, and simply being more confident in his role on the team and knowing he will get a certain amount of minutes no matter what is going to help his shooting, IMO. With that said, his ultimate fate is linked to how well he shoots.
Baker can be a 15-25MPG glue player in this league, maybe even more than this if his shot becomes locked in. At the very least, he is a 15MPG high energy guy who gives you energy on D and moves the ball around on offense.
I just don't understand anyone who doesn't think we found a diamond in the rough with this guy...that old expression "don't look a gift horse in the mouth" comes to mind thinking of some around here.
