GustavBahler wrote:newyorknewyork wrote:GustavBahler wrote:nyk4ever wrote:GustavBahler wrote:martin wrote:Aw yeah
Depends on what a bad answer is. No coach is going to say "trade Frank." If a finalist says SG is where Frank is best suited, do they consider that a wrong answer? IDK. Guess we'll find out soon enough.
the right answer: "position is meaningless, i want frank on the court because he makes us a better team when he is. lets let his play and growth dictate what 'position' he ends up at."
Not if we draft a stud PG
Even if Frank developed into a stud PG himself. Having another stud PG wouldn't hurt. Having Frank be a stud PG(if he developed into that) but play at SG with a 6'5 7ft wing span frame would probably benefit the Knicks as that would mean 2 play makers at the guard position without giving up size. With one of them having lock down skills as well. Would also provide backup mins at the position. Knicks shouldn't be trying to put players in boxes imo. They should be looking for a 9 man rotation of players that can defend multiple positions, shoot, put the ball on the floor & pass. If they want to contend for a chip that's the level they have to build towards.
How did that work out for Mark Jackson and Rod Strickland? Id rather draft a stud PG and move Frank to SG.
My point was we dont really know why they're asking, because we dont know how they see Frank. His role on the team, given that he has looked better off the ball.
Mark and Rod played in the post up era where they passed the ball to Ewing majority of the game. Today where you have a way more open game, way more 3s and way more guard orientated rules. Not really a good comparison due to difference in era. Plus they were both crappy 3 point shooters so they both needed the ball in their hands to be effective. And neither if them could guard 3 positions.
Position doesn't matter at the end of the day. Frank is a player that can play on or off ball, guard multiple positions. And has shown flashes of everything from post ups to pull ups to floaters etc etc. If a stud SG came along forcing Frank to play OG but probably still be a 2ndary usage guy behind the more offensively gifted SG. Would he not still be off ball while still guarding the tougher defensive assignment between the 2?
When Rubio and Mitchell or Dragic and Bledsoe or Lillard & CJ or Paul and Harden share(d) the backcourt. They all split ball handling split ball handling duties and just played their games. There was no okay I'm PG and your SG so you only do this and I only do that.
Regardless of position create efficient shots for yourself and others and play defense. Make the right basketball decisions on or off ball. The rest works itself out.
newyorknewyork wrote:GustavBahler wrote:newyorknewyork wrote:GustavBahler wrote:nyk4ever wrote:GustavBahler wrote:martin wrote:Aw yeah
Depends on what a bad answer is. No coach is going to say "trade Frank." If a finalist says SG is where Frank is best suited, do they consider that a wrong answer? IDK. Guess we'll find out soon enough.
the right answer: "position is meaningless, i want frank on the court because he makes us a better team when he is. lets let his play and growth dictate what 'position' he ends up at."
Not if we draft a stud PG
Even if Frank developed into a stud PG himself. Having another stud PG wouldn't hurt. Having Frank be a stud PG(if he developed into that) but play at SG with a 6'5 7ft wing span frame would probably benefit the Knicks as that would mean 2 play makers at the guard position without giving up size. With one of them having lock down skills as well. Would also provide backup mins at the position. Knicks shouldn't be trying to put players in boxes imo. They should be looking for a 9 man rotation of players that can defend multiple positions, shoot, put the ball on the floor & pass. If they want to contend for a chip that's the level they have to build towards.
How did that work out for Mark Jackson and Rod Strickland? Id rather draft a stud PG and move Frank to SG.
My point was we dont really know why they're asking, because we dont know how they see Frank. His role on the team, given that he has looked better off the ball.
Mark and Rod played in the post up era where they passed the ball to Ewing majority of the game. Today where you have a way more open game, way more 3s and way more guard orientated rules. Not really a good comparison due to difference in era. Plus they were both crappy 3 point shooters so they both needed the ball in their hands to be effective. And neither if them could guard 3 positions.
Position doesn't matter at the end of the day. Frank is a player that can play on or off ball, guard multiple positions. And has shown flashes of everything from post ups to pull ups to floaters etc etc. If a stud SG came along forcing Frank to play OG but probably still be a 2ndary usage guy behind the more offensively gifted SG. Would he not still be off ball while still guarding the tougher defensive assignment between the 2?
When Rubio and Mitchell or Dragic and Bledsoe or Lillard & CJ or Paul and Harden share(d) the backcourt. They all split ball handling split ball handling duties and just played their games. There was no okay I'm PG and your SG so you only do this and I only do that.
Regardless of position create efficient shots for yourself and others and play defense. Make the right basketball decisions on or off ball. The rest works itself out.
Another thing to note is that neither Rod nor Mark could shoot. That made playing them together consistently hard to do.
