Knicks · the problem with using pick 8 on a guy like Malik Monk (page 4)
reub wrote:newyorknewyork wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:Welpee wrote:newyorknewyork wrote:What also makes things challenging is the fact he played at Kentucky. Kentucky has so many top flight players they all have to sacrifice their game to make it work on the court. Carolina players under Dean Smith were notorious being better pro than they showed in college because their system didn't showcase individual talent.Welpee wrote:fishmike wrote:Walker will never be an all-star...in spite of the fact he made the all-star team this year?Welpee wrote:although Kemba is a monster in the clutch I would hope we could do a bit better. Walker will never be an all star. He's such a chucker your hope is he's around more talented guys that helps his shot selection and he's more a finisher which he's great at. Kemba is above average.. but when you look at the upside of some of these guys (including Monk) I hope we can do bettermeloshouldgo wrote:That's a ridiculous bet. The overwhelming majority of players in this draft will be no better than rotation/role players based on draft history including the guys in the top 10. There are folks begging for Jonathan Isaac to drop to us. I can give you a laundry list of similar tall, lanky players who were busts. I could say the same about him: The projected value of drafting Isaac in the hope of him being the next Durant are infinitesimally small.fishmike wrote:Welpee wrote:Let me rephrase the point.... how many guys are great athletes that can shoot? Now how many guys are like Steph Curry? Its just really dangerous when your investing in a type of player that does not have a ton of success in the league, Curry aside.meloshouldgo wrote:I don't understand why you keep insisting that Steph had this off the charts work ethic and commitment to team ball that can't be duplicated by anyone else. Monk didn't become a lottery pick rolling out of bed eating doughnuts every morning. With all of the talent on Kentucky's roster is anybody going to be allowed to not play team ball?Knixkik wrote:fishmike wrote:Frank Mason shot 47% from 3 last year and has a 41 inch vert.We just dont need to use pick 8 for this kind of player. Take Frank Mason Jr. with Portland's #26 and take some salary from them. Use pick 8 for building block on both sides of the ball
Mason is a 23 year old 5th year senior. Monk is a 19 year old freshman. You can't really compare them. Monk has major upside.
What is "major upside" - how major and how far up?
I posted on another thread that the key ingredient to being Steph Curry after having started with somewhat pedestrian skills other than shooting is hard work and a commitment to play team ball. Unless Malik Monk had demonstrated he is super saturated on both of those, his chances of being Steph Curry are less than remote.Agreed. Looking at the one example that worked from the same starting point and ignoring the the 100s or 1000s that didn't is betting on really bad odds with the only asset you have. Sure it would be great if it worked out, but the data says it won't. The projected value of drafting Monk in the hope of him being the next Steph are infinitesimally small. If you are betting he will be a borderline rotation player you definitely have much better odds, but convincing yourselves that the second set of odds makes the first gamble worth it is where this type of reasoning breaks down.
It's not about players fitting a template, it's about evaluating each guy on their own merits. Saying Monks draft profile is similar to Curry's doesn't mean anybody is predicting that he's going to be Curry 2.0. If Monk became a Kemba Walker-like player I'd be elated.
I totally disagree with you on this one. You minimize being "a monster in the clutch" like it's no big deal. If we could trade our 8th pick for Kemba Walker I would do it in a heartbeat. If you guys are looking for perfect players in this draft, good luck with that.
I feel CJ McCollum is the best comparison. Walker is more of lightning quick speed demon scoring guard. Just to fast for his opponent.But at the end of the day all these guys we are comparing him to other then Beal(Who was more rock solid in build and more physical) were 3-4 yr college players with elite ball handling ability while Monk is only a freshman. So its hard to guage. They all rebounded a lot better the Monk did though. Monk has the skills to be a very crafty scorer like CJ and has a similar build. CJ's ball handling ability though makes a huge difference. Monk again is only a freshman though which mean we can only hope his is able to develop it to CJ's level. And CJ after 4yrs of college still didn't come on until his 3rd year in the NBA.
This! Said same thing about KAT. Kentucky is a selfless program. It shares the ball and can hide the full individual ability of some players.
Monk, Tatum and Smith are the only guys I'm hoping somehow fall through the cracks. Although, think it will come down to who Phil thinks is a classic Phil/Triangle guy. To me, the notion that Frank should be picked solely due to his height and wingspan at 8 is a mistake. Think teams who overthink things or try to be the ones who pick the needle in the haystack is what creates bust picks. Think about it, how many athletic players can be had later in Round 1 or even Round 2. Would say many. If that's the goal, trade down and pick Justin Jackson, John Collins or D. Mitchell. The 8th pick should not be for teams to try to hit the Lotto. It's to pick a guy that can contribute from day 1. Unless you don't really need good rookies but rather gamble on the next Curry. Tough odds though. Think Frank and Fox are going to be the 2 biggest busts in the top 10. Fox because of his jump shot and Frank because all his weaknesses are being excused by his "Possible Potential" Don't want to see another guy who is quick, hustles but can't hit an open 3. (Grant)
However, whoever they pick, I will root for.
Most people felt Towns was the #1 pick as he brought to much variety of skills to the table. You knew he was going to come in and be a big time rebounder/shot blocker. But also had potential passing, shooting out to 3 point land, and developing post game. He had potential skills in too many categories.
There is Brandon Knight, Eric Blesoe, Bradley Beal, CJ Mccollum, Dion Waiters, Deangelo Russell, Jamal Murray, Marcus Smart, Zach Lavine, Gary Harris, Oladipo, Lillard, Irving, Jackson, Curry, Holiday, Westbrook, Gordon, Hill, Rose, Mayo. And I only named the hits and didn't even get into 2nd rd picks like Williams, Ellis, Dragic, Isiah Thomas. Scoring combo guards like Monk is probably the easiest type of player to find in the NBA.
While I agree with you on Fox not living up to his billing. Frank N brings a multitude of potential skills with him. And I like what he represents. Him being able to guard 3 positions and offer lock down ability, him being able to knock down 3s off the dribble or spot up, him having playmaking skills from the G/F position from the PNR. The versatility and lineups you could get away with him on the floor. High character consummate team player. That is what we should be trying to build piece by piece.
I like Isaac more than Frank N for the same reasons but players with his potential skills at his position are so hard to find so he would get favored and I am hoping he falls but most GMs are on that same mindset nowadays. And if it came down to it I probably would draft Smith over Frank N also if the character checks out and he isn't a cancer risk.
But what Frank brings to the table. That's the vision the Knicks should be going into these drafts with and free agents and trades collecting as many of these type of players as possible. Give me Frank N and try to find a way to get a 2nd first rounder for Mitchell &/or Bolden who offers unique skills from the Forward position. Guys that can guard multiple positions, shoot, put the ball on the floor, offer unselfishness with the passing. The fact that they aren't viewed as go to scorers is why teams that have started winning have been able to land them and start winning.
See what Miluakee built with Brogden, Freak, Middleton, Parker, Maker. If Maker reaches half of his potential they could be close to Warriors level.
Sometimes I think that we're better off trading #8 to Portland for their 3 #1s. We could draft 3 of Mitchell, OG, Giles, Kennard, Bolden, Hart, Bell, Allen or Swanigan.
Agree 100%
My bet is those 3 picks have a much stronger cumulative effect
reub wrote:That theory always looks good pre-draft because everybody is talked up like they have star potential. Go through the history of the draft and I bet you'll find you're better off picking high versus stockpiling a bunch of lower picks.newyorknewyork wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:Welpee wrote:newyorknewyork wrote:What also makes things challenging is the fact he played at Kentucky. Kentucky has so many top flight players they all have to sacrifice their game to make it work on the court. Carolina players under Dean Smith were notorious being better pro than they showed in college because their system didn't showcase individual talent.Welpee wrote:fishmike wrote:Walker will never be an all-star...in spite of the fact he made the all-star team this year?Welpee wrote:although Kemba is a monster in the clutch I would hope we could do a bit better. Walker will never be an all star. He's such a chucker your hope is he's around more talented guys that helps his shot selection and he's more a finisher which he's great at. Kemba is above average.. but when you look at the upside of some of these guys (including Monk) I hope we can do bettermeloshouldgo wrote:That's a ridiculous bet. The overwhelming majority of players in this draft will be no better than rotation/role players based on draft history including the guys in the top 10. There are folks begging for Jonathan Isaac to drop to us. I can give you a laundry list of similar tall, lanky players who were busts. I could say the same about him: The projected value of drafting Isaac in the hope of him being the next Durant are infinitesimally small.fishmike wrote:Welpee wrote:Let me rephrase the point.... how many guys are great athletes that can shoot? Now how many guys are like Steph Curry? Its just really dangerous when your investing in a type of player that does not have a ton of success in the league, Curry aside.meloshouldgo wrote:I don't understand why you keep insisting that Steph had this off the charts work ethic and commitment to team ball that can't be duplicated by anyone else. Monk didn't become a lottery pick rolling out of bed eating doughnuts every morning. With all of the talent on Kentucky's roster is anybody going to be allowed to not play team ball?Knixkik wrote:fishmike wrote:Frank Mason shot 47% from 3 last year and has a 41 inch vert.We just dont need to use pick 8 for this kind of player. Take Frank Mason Jr. with Portland's #26 and take some salary from them. Use pick 8 for building block on both sides of the ball
Mason is a 23 year old 5th year senior. Monk is a 19 year old freshman. You can't really compare them. Monk has major upside.
What is "major upside" - how major and how far up?
I posted on another thread that the key ingredient to being Steph Curry after having started with somewhat pedestrian skills other than shooting is hard work and a commitment to play team ball. Unless Malik Monk had demonstrated he is super saturated on both of those, his chances of being Steph Curry are less than remote.Agreed. Looking at the one example that worked from the same starting point and ignoring the the 100s or 1000s that didn't is betting on really bad odds with the only asset you have. Sure it would be great if it worked out, but the data says it won't. The projected value of drafting Monk in the hope of him being the next Steph are infinitesimally small. If you are betting he will be a borderline rotation player you definitely have much better odds, but convincing yourselves that the second set of odds makes the first gamble worth it is where this type of reasoning breaks down.
It's not about players fitting a template, it's about evaluating each guy on their own merits. Saying Monks draft profile is similar to Curry's doesn't mean anybody is predicting that he's going to be Curry 2.0. If Monk became a Kemba Walker-like player I'd be elated.
I totally disagree with you on this one. You minimize being "a monster in the clutch" like it's no big deal. If we could trade our 8th pick for Kemba Walker I would do it in a heartbeat. If you guys are looking for perfect players in this draft, good luck with that.
I feel CJ McCollum is the best comparison. Walker is more of lightning quick speed demon scoring guard. Just to fast for his opponent.But at the end of the day all these guys we are comparing him to other then Beal(Who was more rock solid in build and more physical) were 3-4 yr college players with elite ball handling ability while Monk is only a freshman. So its hard to guage. They all rebounded a lot better the Monk did though. Monk has the skills to be a very crafty scorer like CJ and has a similar build. CJ's ball handling ability though makes a huge difference. Monk again is only a freshman though which mean we can only hope his is able to develop it to CJ's level. And CJ after 4yrs of college still didn't come on until his 3rd year in the NBA.
This! Said same thing about KAT. Kentucky is a selfless program. It shares the ball and can hide the full individual ability of some players.
Monk, Tatum and Smith are the only guys I'm hoping somehow fall through the cracks. Although, think it will come down to who Phil thinks is a classic Phil/Triangle guy. To me, the notion that Frank should be picked solely due to his height and wingspan at 8 is a mistake. Think teams who overthink things or try to be the ones who pick the needle in the haystack is what creates bust picks. Think about it, how many athletic players can be had later in Round 1 or even Round 2. Would say many. If that's the goal, trade down and pick Justin Jackson, John Collins or D. Mitchell. The 8th pick should not be for teams to try to hit the Lotto. It's to pick a guy that can contribute from day 1. Unless you don't really need good rookies but rather gamble on the next Curry. Tough odds though. Think Frank and Fox are going to be the 2 biggest busts in the top 10. Fox because of his jump shot and Frank because all his weaknesses are being excused by his "Possible Potential" Don't want to see another guy who is quick, hustles but can't hit an open 3. (Grant)
However, whoever they pick, I will root for.
Most people felt Towns was the #1 pick as he brought to much variety of skills to the table. You knew he was going to come in and be a big time rebounder/shot blocker. But also had potential passing, shooting out to 3 point land, and developing post game. He had potential skills in too many categories.
There is Brandon Knight, Eric Blesoe, Bradley Beal, CJ Mccollum, Dion Waiters, Deangelo Russell, Jamal Murray, Marcus Smart, Zach Lavine, Gary Harris, Oladipo, Lillard, Irving, Jackson, Curry, Holiday, Westbrook, Gordon, Hill, Rose, Mayo. And I only named the hits and didn't even get into 2nd rd picks like Williams, Ellis, Dragic, Isiah Thomas. Scoring combo guards like Monk is probably the easiest type of player to find in the NBA.
While I agree with you on Fox not living up to his billing. Frank N brings a multitude of potential skills with him. And I like what he represents. Him being able to guard 3 positions and offer lock down ability, him being able to knock down 3s off the dribble or spot up, him having playmaking skills from the G/F position from the PNR. The versatility and lineups you could get away with him on the floor. High character consummate team player. That is what we should be trying to build piece by piece.
I like Isaac more than Frank N for the same reasons but players with his potential skills at his position are so hard to find so he would get favored and I am hoping he falls but most GMs are on that same mindset nowadays. And if it came down to it I probably would draft Smith over Frank N also if the character checks out and he isn't a cancer risk.
But what Frank brings to the table. That's the vision the Knicks should be going into these drafts with and free agents and trades collecting as many of these type of players as possible. Give me Frank N and try to find a way to get a 2nd first rounder for Mitchell &/or Bolden who offers unique skills from the Forward position. Guys that can guard multiple positions, shoot, put the ball on the floor, offer unselfishness with the passing. The fact that they aren't viewed as go to scorers is why teams that have started winning have been able to land them and start winning.
See what Miluakee built with Brogden, Freak, Middleton, Parker, Maker. If Maker reaches half of his potential they could be close to Warriors level.
Sometimes I think that we're better off trading #8 to Portland for their 3 #1s. We could draft 3 of Mitchell, OG, Giles, Kennard, Bolden, Hart, Bell, Allen or Swanigan.
Welpee wrote:reub wrote:That theory always looks good pre-draft because everybody is talked up like they have star potential. Go through the history of the draft and I bet you'll find you're better off picking high versus stockpiling a bunch of lower picks.newyorknewyork wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:Welpee wrote:newyorknewyork wrote:What also makes things challenging is the fact he played at Kentucky. Kentucky has so many top flight players they all have to sacrifice their game to make it work on the court. Carolina players under Dean Smith were notorious being better pro than they showed in college because their system didn't showcase individual talent.Welpee wrote:fishmike wrote:Walker will never be an all-star...in spite of the fact he made the all-star team this year?Welpee wrote:although Kemba is a monster in the clutch I would hope we could do a bit better. Walker will never be an all star. He's such a chucker your hope is he's around more talented guys that helps his shot selection and he's more a finisher which he's great at. Kemba is above average.. but when you look at the upside of some of these guys (including Monk) I hope we can do bettermeloshouldgo wrote:That's a ridiculous bet. The overwhelming majority of players in this draft will be no better than rotation/role players based on draft history including the guys in the top 10. There are folks begging for Jonathan Isaac to drop to us. I can give you a laundry list of similar tall, lanky players who were busts. I could say the same about him: The projected value of drafting Isaac in the hope of him being the next Durant are infinitesimally small.fishmike wrote:Welpee wrote:Let me rephrase the point.... how many guys are great athletes that can shoot? Now how many guys are like Steph Curry? Its just really dangerous when your investing in a type of player that does not have a ton of success in the league, Curry aside.meloshouldgo wrote:I don't understand why you keep insisting that Steph had this off the charts work ethic and commitment to team ball that can't be duplicated by anyone else. Monk didn't become a lottery pick rolling out of bed eating doughnuts every morning. With all of the talent on Kentucky's roster is anybody going to be allowed to not play team ball?Knixkik wrote:fishmike wrote:Frank Mason shot 47% from 3 last year and has a 41 inch vert.We just dont need to use pick 8 for this kind of player. Take Frank Mason Jr. with Portland's #26 and take some salary from them. Use pick 8 for building block on both sides of the ball
Mason is a 23 year old 5th year senior. Monk is a 19 year old freshman. You can't really compare them. Monk has major upside.
What is "major upside" - how major and how far up?
I posted on another thread that the key ingredient to being Steph Curry after having started with somewhat pedestrian skills other than shooting is hard work and a commitment to play team ball. Unless Malik Monk had demonstrated he is super saturated on both of those, his chances of being Steph Curry are less than remote.Agreed. Looking at the one example that worked from the same starting point and ignoring the the 100s or 1000s that didn't is betting on really bad odds with the only asset you have. Sure it would be great if it worked out, but the data says it won't. The projected value of drafting Monk in the hope of him being the next Steph are infinitesimally small. If you are betting he will be a borderline rotation player you definitely have much better odds, but convincing yourselves that the second set of odds makes the first gamble worth it is where this type of reasoning breaks down.
It's not about players fitting a template, it's about evaluating each guy on their own merits. Saying Monks draft profile is similar to Curry's doesn't mean anybody is predicting that he's going to be Curry 2.0. If Monk became a Kemba Walker-like player I'd be elated.
I totally disagree with you on this one. You minimize being "a monster in the clutch" like it's no big deal. If we could trade our 8th pick for Kemba Walker I would do it in a heartbeat. If you guys are looking for perfect players in this draft, good luck with that.
I feel CJ McCollum is the best comparison. Walker is more of lightning quick speed demon scoring guard. Just to fast for his opponent.But at the end of the day all these guys we are comparing him to other then Beal(Who was more rock solid in build and more physical) were 3-4 yr college players with elite ball handling ability while Monk is only a freshman. So its hard to guage. They all rebounded a lot better the Monk did though. Monk has the skills to be a very crafty scorer like CJ and has a similar build. CJ's ball handling ability though makes a huge difference. Monk again is only a freshman though which mean we can only hope his is able to develop it to CJ's level. And CJ after 4yrs of college still didn't come on until his 3rd year in the NBA.
This! Said same thing about KAT. Kentucky is a selfless program. It shares the ball and can hide the full individual ability of some players.
Monk, Tatum and Smith are the only guys I'm hoping somehow fall through the cracks. Although, think it will come down to who Phil thinks is a classic Phil/Triangle guy. To me, the notion that Frank should be picked solely due to his height and wingspan at 8 is a mistake. Think teams who overthink things or try to be the ones who pick the needle in the haystack is what creates bust picks. Think about it, how many athletic players can be had later in Round 1 or even Round 2. Would say many. If that's the goal, trade down and pick Justin Jackson, John Collins or D. Mitchell. The 8th pick should not be for teams to try to hit the Lotto. It's to pick a guy that can contribute from day 1. Unless you don't really need good rookies but rather gamble on the next Curry. Tough odds though. Think Frank and Fox are going to be the 2 biggest busts in the top 10. Fox because of his jump shot and Frank because all his weaknesses are being excused by his "Possible Potential" Don't want to see another guy who is quick, hustles but can't hit an open 3. (Grant)
However, whoever they pick, I will root for.
Most people felt Towns was the #1 pick as he brought to much variety of skills to the table. You knew he was going to come in and be a big time rebounder/shot blocker. But also had potential passing, shooting out to 3 point land, and developing post game. He had potential skills in too many categories.
There is Brandon Knight, Eric Blesoe, Bradley Beal, CJ Mccollum, Dion Waiters, Deangelo Russell, Jamal Murray, Marcus Smart, Zach Lavine, Gary Harris, Oladipo, Lillard, Irving, Jackson, Curry, Holiday, Westbrook, Gordon, Hill, Rose, Mayo. And I only named the hits and didn't even get into 2nd rd picks like Williams, Ellis, Dragic, Isiah Thomas. Scoring combo guards like Monk is probably the easiest type of player to find in the NBA.
While I agree with you on Fox not living up to his billing. Frank N brings a multitude of potential skills with him. And I like what he represents. Him being able to guard 3 positions and offer lock down ability, him being able to knock down 3s off the dribble or spot up, him having playmaking skills from the G/F position from the PNR. The versatility and lineups you could get away with him on the floor. High character consummate team player. That is what we should be trying to build piece by piece.
I like Isaac more than Frank N for the same reasons but players with his potential skills at his position are so hard to find so he would get favored and I am hoping he falls but most GMs are on that same mindset nowadays. And if it came down to it I probably would draft Smith over Frank N also if the character checks out and he isn't a cancer risk.
But what Frank brings to the table. That's the vision the Knicks should be going into these drafts with and free agents and trades collecting as many of these type of players as possible. Give me Frank N and try to find a way to get a 2nd first rounder for Mitchell &/or Bolden who offers unique skills from the Forward position. Guys that can guard multiple positions, shoot, put the ball on the floor, offer unselfishness with the passing. The fact that they aren't viewed as go to scorers is why teams that have started winning have been able to land them and start winning.
See what Miluakee built with Brogden, Freak, Middleton, Parker, Maker. If Maker reaches half of his potential they could be close to Warriors level.
Sometimes I think that we're better off trading #8 to Portland for their 3 #1s. We could draft 3 of Mitchell, OG, Giles, Kennard, Bolden, Hart, Bell, Allen or Swanigan.
It wasn't about trading down for lower picks. Its about acquiring players who can defend multiple positions, shoot the 3, put the ball on the floor, willing passers to keep the ball moving and create easy shot for each other. That should be the foundation of the players that we look to acquire. Over being a go to scorer unless he also brings those things.
meloshouldgo wrote:Knixkik wrote:fishmike wrote:Frank Mason shot 47% from 3 last year and has a 41 inch vert.We just dont need to use pick 8 for this kind of player. Take Frank Mason Jr. with Portland's #26 and take some salary from them. Use pick 8 for building block on both sides of the ball
Mason is a 23 year old 5th year senior. Monk is a 19 year old freshman. You can't really compare them. Monk has major upside.
What is "major upside" - how major and how far up?
I posted on another thread that the key ingredient to being Steph Curry after having started with somewhat pedestrian skills other than shooting is hard work and a commitment to play team ball. Unless Malik Monk had demonstrated he is super saturated on both of those, his chances of being Steph Curry are less than remote.
Frank Mason has more of basic-skills game plus tournament experience over a lot of the PG in the 2017 draft-class the reason why i want Phil to select Frank Nitty and Frank Mason out of this draft class .. Plus Mason ball handling n passing-skills are more of a winner to a team than Monk's scoring
Steph had 25% of Iverson Rookie talent his 3rd season in the NBA ..
Steph n Klay owe all of their NBA success to the hard training they receive from head-coach Mark Jackson.
All the high balling talk bout Steph were not going on 7 or 5 years ago .. Mark Jackson put Steph and the GS Warriors on the map.
Kemet wrote:meloshouldgo wrote:Knixkik wrote:fishmike wrote:Frank Mason shot 47% from 3 last year and has a 41 inch vert.We just dont need to use pick 8 for this kind of player. Take Frank Mason Jr. with Portland's #26 and take some salary from them. Use pick 8 for building block on both sides of the ball
Mason is a 23 year old 5th year senior. Monk is a 19 year old freshman. You can't really compare them. Monk has major upside.
What is "major upside" - how major and how far up?
I posted on another thread that the key ingredient to being Steph Curry after having started with somewhat pedestrian skills other than shooting is hard work and a commitment to play team ball. Unless Malik Monk had demonstrated he is super saturated on both of those, his chances of being Steph Curry are less than remote.Frank Mason has more of basic-skills game plus tournament experience over a lot of the PG in the 2017 draft-class the reason why i want Phil to select Frank Nitty and Frank Mason out of this draft class .. Plus Mason ball handling n passing-skills are more of a winner to a team than Monk's scoring
I really wouldn't go that far to say Mason's PG skills would mean more winning versus Monk's overall scoring ability. Monk is 19!!! He's being compared to a guy that is 23. There's bound to be much further development for 19 yr old Monk over the next 3-4 years. There's a reason why Monk is rated as high as he is.