Knicks · Thoughts on Trier (page 4)
meloshouldgo wrote:
But other than PEDs what do we know of why he went undrafted? Nothing but conjecture, right? Didn't they accept the second test was still carryover residual effect from the first? Anyone who practices making 400 shots each time, deserves some respect. And he hasn't shown to be low IQ, everyone makes mistakes. I think at some point him and Frank starting together in interchangeable roles will be really fun to watch. I picked them in my initial starting line up on that thread. Two very different styles mixed in at random can be enough to keep defenses guessing.
Is this why he was undrafted? The two PED tests? In reading draft reports about him, he had some maturity issues, and some defensive liabilities. He certainly seems to have fixed those.
But I always worry about phenoms that come out of nowhere. Like someone mentioned, Lin comes to mind. Starks, Avery Johnson, David Wesley, Darrell Armstrong all played in the CBA for awhile, and for someone to go from undrafted to almost a starter, it's just crazy.
toodarkmark wrote:meloshouldgo wrote:
But other than PEDs what do we know of why he went undrafted? Nothing but conjecture, right? Didn't they accept the second test was still carryover residual effect from the first? Anyone who practices making 400 shots each time, deserves some respect. And he hasn't shown to be low IQ, everyone makes mistakes. I think at some point him and Frank starting together in interchangeable roles will be really fun to watch. I picked them in my initial starting line up on that thread. Two very different styles mixed in at random can be enough to keep defenses guessing.Is this why he was undrafted? The two PED tests? In reading draft reports about him, he had some maturity issues, and some defensive liabilities. He certainly seems to have fixed those.
But I always worry about phenoms that come out of nowhere. Like someone mentioned, Lin comes to mind. Starks, Avery Johnson, David Wesley, Darrell Armstrong all played in the CBA for awhile, and for someone to go from undrafted to almost a starter, it's just crazy.
I always say it's not where you draft it's who you draft, kudos for the front office for doing their homework, and thinking outside the box.
knicks1248 wrote:toodarkmark wrote:meloshouldgo wrote:
But other than PEDs what do we know of why he went undrafted? Nothing but conjecture, right? Didn't they accept the second test was still carryover residual effect from the first? Anyone who practices making 400 shots each time, deserves some respect. And he hasn't shown to be low IQ, everyone makes mistakes. I think at some point him and Frank starting together in interchangeable roles will be really fun to watch. I picked them in my initial starting line up on that thread. Two very different styles mixed in at random can be enough to keep defenses guessing.Is this why he was undrafted? The two PED tests? In reading draft reports about him, he had some maturity issues, and some defensive liabilities. He certainly seems to have fixed those.
But I always worry about phenoms that come out of nowhere. Like someone mentioned, Lin comes to mind. Starks, Avery Johnson, David Wesley, Darrell Armstrong all played in the CBA for awhile, and for someone to go from undrafted to almost a starter, it's just crazy.
I always say it's not where you draft it's who you draft...
Well, you should stop saying that.
The math clearly shows over multiple eras and front office administrations that the higher you draft, the more likely you'll wind up with an impact player.
Period.
And the odds accelerate even more the closer you get to #1.
This is indisputable. It is not at all to anyone's credit to try to dispute it.
NBA history teaches us conclusively it is, in fact, where you draft.
There is always exceptions, but only fools mistake that for the rule.
knicks1248 wrote:toodarkmark wrote:meloshouldgo wrote:
But other than PEDs what do we know of why he went undrafted? Nothing but conjecture, right? Didn't they accept the second test was still carryover residual effect from the first? Anyone who practices making 400 shots each time, deserves some respect. And he hasn't shown to be low IQ, everyone makes mistakes. I think at some point him and Frank starting together in interchangeable roles will be really fun to watch. I picked them in my initial starting line up on that thread. Two very different styles mixed in at random can be enough to keep defenses guessing.Is this why he was undrafted? The two PED tests? In reading draft reports about him, he had some maturity issues, and some defensive liabilities. He certainly seems to have fixed those.
But I always worry about phenoms that come out of nowhere. Like someone mentioned, Lin comes to mind. Starks, Avery Johnson, David Wesley, Darrell Armstrong all played in the CBA for awhile, and for someone to go from undrafted to almost a starter, it's just crazy.
I always say it's not where you draft it's who you draft, kudos for the front office for doing their homework, and thinking outside the box.
Like you always say and its not a good look either. For you its "Its not where you draft, but who you drafted in hindsight".
Trier, Vonleh, and Mudiay are all about the same age. When you suck as we have you have opportunities for playing time. Trier also picked us as he would be given an opportunity. Bad team scan afford to do that. Its often better to not get drafted as you can go where there is an opportunity.
How does Trier "fit outside the box"? He was undrafted.
Nalod wrote:knicks1248 wrote:toodarkmark wrote:meloshouldgo wrote:
But other than PEDs what do we know of why he went undrafted? Nothing but conjecture, right? Didn't they accept the second test was still carryover residual effect from the first? Anyone who practices making 400 shots each time, deserves some respect. And he hasn't shown to be low IQ, everyone makes mistakes. I think at some point him and Frank starting together in interchangeable roles will be really fun to watch. I picked them in my initial starting line up on that thread. Two very different styles mixed in at random can be enough to keep defenses guessing.Is this why he was undrafted? The two PED tests? In reading draft reports about him, he had some maturity issues, and some defensive liabilities. He certainly seems to have fixed those.
But I always worry about phenoms that come out of nowhere. Like someone mentioned, Lin comes to mind. Starks, Avery Johnson, David Wesley, Darrell Armstrong all played in the CBA for awhile, and for someone to go from undrafted to almost a starter, it's just crazy.
I always say it's not where you draft it's who you draft, kudos for the front office for doing their homework, and thinking outside the box.
Like you always say and its not a good look either. For you its "Its not where you draft, but who you drafted in hindsight".
Trier, Vonleh, and Mudiay are all about the same age. When you suck as we have you have opportunities for playing time. Trier also picked us as he would be given an opportunity. Bad team scan afford to do that. Its often better to not get drafted as you can go where there is an opportunity.
How does Trier "fit outside the box"? He was undrafted.
You answered your own question,
he wasn't in the box of 60
knicks1248 wrote:Nalod wrote:knicks1248 wrote:toodarkmark wrote:meloshouldgo wrote:
But other than PEDs what do we know of why he went undrafted? Nothing but conjecture, right? Didn't they accept the second test was still carryover residual effect from the first? Anyone who practices making 400 shots each time, deserves some respect. And he hasn't shown to be low IQ, everyone makes mistakes. I think at some point him and Frank starting together in interchangeable roles will be really fun to watch. I picked them in my initial starting line up on that thread. Two very different styles mixed in at random can be enough to keep defenses guessing.Is this why he was undrafted? The two PED tests? In reading draft reports about him, he had some maturity issues, and some defensive liabilities. He certainly seems to have fixed those.
But I always worry about phenoms that come out of nowhere. Like someone mentioned, Lin comes to mind. Starks, Avery Johnson, David Wesley, Darrell Armstrong all played in the CBA for awhile, and for someone to go from undrafted to almost a starter, it's just crazy.
I always say it's not where you draft it's who you draft, kudos for the front office for doing their homework, and thinking outside the box.
Like you always say and its not a good look either. For you its "Its not where you draft, but who you drafted in hindsight".
Trier, Vonleh, and Mudiay are all about the same age. When you suck as we have you have opportunities for playing time. Trier also picked us as he would be given an opportunity. Bad team scan afford to do that. Its often better to not get drafted as you can go where there is an opportunity.
How does Trier "fit outside the box"? He was undrafted.You answered your own question,
he wasn't in the box of 60
This is confirmation bias at work.
Most teams like the Knicks have their own G league teams.
ALL have summer league teams.
Knicks and every other team gets credit for this regardless of whether a guy like a Trier occasionally turns into something.
You want to give credit to the Knicks for doing something they and every team always does ("think outside the box") because in your mind it supports your crazy theory draft order doesn't matter.
knicks1248 wrote:Nalod wrote:knicks1248 wrote:toodarkmark wrote:meloshouldgo wrote:
But other than PEDs what do we know of why he went undrafted? Nothing but conjecture, right? Didn't they accept the second test was still carryover residual effect from the first? Anyone who practices making 400 shots each time, deserves some respect. And he hasn't shown to be low IQ, everyone makes mistakes. I think at some point him and Frank starting together in interchangeable roles will be really fun to watch. I picked them in my initial starting line up on that thread. Two very different styles mixed in at random can be enough to keep defenses guessing.Is this why he was undrafted? The two PED tests? In reading draft reports about him, he had some maturity issues, and some defensive liabilities. He certainly seems to have fixed those.
But I always worry about phenoms that come out of nowhere. Like someone mentioned, Lin comes to mind. Starks, Avery Johnson, David Wesley, Darrell Armstrong all played in the CBA for awhile, and for someone to go from undrafted to almost a starter, it's just crazy.
I always say it's not where you draft it's who you draft, kudos for the front office for doing their homework, and thinking outside the box.
Like you always say and its not a good look either. For you its "Its not where you draft, but who you drafted in hindsight".
Trier, Vonleh, and Mudiay are all about the same age. When you suck as we have you have opportunities for playing time. Trier also picked us as he would be given an opportunity. Bad team scan afford to do that. Its often better to not get drafted as you can go where there is an opportunity.
How does Trier "fit outside the box"? He was undrafted.You answered your own question,
he wasn't in the box of 60
"Knicks did their homework thinking outside the box". Your crediting the Knicks for 60 teams passing on him.
Thats just you making up shyt again.
knicks1248 wrote:toodarkmark wrote:meloshouldgo wrote:
But other than PEDs what do we know of why he went undrafted? Nothing but conjecture, right? Didn't they accept the second test was still carryover residual effect from the first? Anyone who practices making 400 shots each time, deserves some respect. And he hasn't shown to be low IQ, everyone makes mistakes. I think at some point him and Frank starting together in interchangeable roles will be really fun to watch. I picked them in my initial starting line up on that thread. Two very different styles mixed in at random can be enough to keep defenses guessing.Is this why he was undrafted? The two PED tests? In reading draft reports about him, he had some maturity issues, and some defensive liabilities. He certainly seems to have fixed those.
But I always worry about phenoms that come out of nowhere. Like someone mentioned, Lin comes to mind. Starks, Avery Johnson, David Wesley, Darrell Armstrong all played in the CBA for awhile, and for someone to go from undrafted to almost a starter, it's just crazy.
I always say it's not where you draft it's who you draft, kudos for the front office for doing their homework, and thinking outside the box.
I think he was their guy at 36. I don't think they thought there was anyway Mitch would be there. Trier has been a known commodity since 6th grade. The Trier/Ayton combo was hyped up a lot last year.
toodarkmark wrote:meloshouldgo wrote:
But other than PEDs what do we know of why he went undrafted? Nothing but conjecture, right? Didn't they accept the second test was still carryover residual effect from the first? Anyone who practices making 400 shots each time, deserves some respect. And he hasn't shown to be low IQ, everyone makes mistakes. I think at some point him and Frank starting together in interchangeable roles will be really fun to watch. I picked them in my initial starting line up on that thread. Two very different styles mixed in at random can be enough to keep defenses guessing.Is this why he was undrafted? The two PED tests? In reading draft reports about him, he had some maturity issues, and some defensive liabilities. He certainly seems to have fixed those.
But I always worry about phenoms that come out of nowhere. Like someone mentioned, Lin comes to mind. Starks, Avery Johnson, David Wesley, Darrell Armstrong all played in the CBA for awhile, and for someone to go from undrafted to almost a starter, it's just crazy.
That's all I know - haven't seen a lot else. I knew nothing about him when we got him, have been very happy with his play. Most of these kids have maturity issues, including KP. Trier seems to be winning me over because even given the green light to chuck mercilessly he seems to want to take good shots and pass when he can't. This shows he doesn't yet put himself ahead of the team. If that changes, I'll change my position on him as well. But so far so good!
meloshouldgo wrote:toodarkmark wrote:meloshouldgo wrote:
But other than PEDs what do we know of why he went undrafted? Nothing but conjecture, right? Didn't they accept the second test was still carryover residual effect from the first? Anyone who practices making 400 shots each time, deserves some respect. And he hasn't shown to be low IQ, everyone makes mistakes. I think at some point him and Frank starting together in interchangeable roles will be really fun to watch. I picked them in my initial starting line up on that thread. Two very different styles mixed in at random can be enough to keep defenses guessing.Is this why he was undrafted? The two PED tests? In reading draft reports about him, he had some maturity issues, and some defensive liabilities. He certainly seems to have fixed those.
But I always worry about phenoms that come out of nowhere. Like someone mentioned, Lin comes to mind. Starks, Avery Johnson, David Wesley, Darrell Armstrong all played in the CBA for awhile, and for someone to go from undrafted to almost a starter, it's just crazy.
That's all I know - haven't seen a lot else. I knew nothing about him when we got him, have been very happy with his play. Most of these kids have maturity issues, including KP. Trier seems to be winning me over because even given the green light to chuck mercilessly he seems to want to take good shots and pass when he can't. This shows he doesn't yet put himself ahead of the team. If that changes, I'll change my position on him as well. But so far so good!
This is why it's hard for rookies to flourish in this toxic environment. Most threads are really focused on his potential negatives....based on bad decisions he made as a 19 yr old. You would think he was in a murda case. He took PEDs. If anybody here had a chance to make it to theNBA, yall would take anything that gives u an advantage,
I'm happy the bad run of draft picks is over. Let's show Trier why knick fans are good for his career...Its time for a culture change from negative to positive. Trier has some balls to go undrafted to finishing NBA games like hes a vet. Soooooo many positives in this kid....This PED issue is becoming smaller by the minute. Time to read his new chapter in life....Called the road to rookie of the year. Sit back....grab some popcorn and enjoy.
blkexec wrote:meloshouldgo wrote:toodarkmark wrote:meloshouldgo wrote:
But other than PEDs what do we know of why he went undrafted? Nothing but conjecture, right? Didn't they accept the second test was still carryover residual effect from the first? Anyone who practices making 400 shots each time, deserves some respect. And he hasn't shown to be low IQ, everyone makes mistakes. I think at some point him and Frank starting together in interchangeable roles will be really fun to watch. I picked them in my initial starting line up on that thread. Two very different styles mixed in at random can be enough to keep defenses guessing.Is this why he was undrafted? The two PED tests? In reading draft reports about him, he had some maturity issues, and some defensive liabilities. He certainly seems to have fixed those.
But I always worry about phenoms that come out of nowhere. Like someone mentioned, Lin comes to mind. Starks, Avery Johnson, David Wesley, Darrell Armstrong all played in the CBA for awhile, and for someone to go from undrafted to almost a starter, it's just crazy.
That's all I know - haven't seen a lot else. I knew nothing about him when we got him, have been very happy with his play. Most of these kids have maturity issues, including KP. Trier seems to be winning me over because even given the green light to chuck mercilessly he seems to want to take good shots and pass when he can't. This shows he doesn't yet put himself ahead of the team. If that changes, I'll change my position on him as well. But so far so good!
This is why it's hard for rookies to flourish in this toxic environment. Most threads are really focused on his potential negatives....based on bad decisions he made as a 19 yr old. You would think he was in a murda case. He took PEDs. If anybody here had a chance to make it to theNBA, yall would take anything that gives u an advantage,
I'm happy the bad run of draft picks is over. Let's show Trier why knick fans are good for his career...Its time for a culture change from negative to positive. Trier has some balls to go undrafted to finishing NBA games like hes a vet. Soooooo many positives in this kid....This PED issue is becoming smaller by the minute. Time to read his new chapter in life....Called the road to rookie of the year. Sit back....grab some popcorn and enjoy.
Knicks need one more top heavy draft selection and we good to go. Make this happen!
toodarkmark wrote:Is this why he was undrafted? The two PED tests?
It's a good question. It's a good jump off for discussion.
2nd round picks in the NBA aren't not vested to any guaranteed money under the current system. 1st round picks get at minimum, two years of guaranteed money based on draft slot. This is why contenders in the tax and repeater zone are not so worried about trading off a very late first round pick. The talent/upside difference of a guy picked 28th versus 34th is incremental. The money/cap considerations though are vastly different.
To retain a players rights, for a 2nd rounder, a team can do a couple of things. Offer the guy a very team friendly contract. The longer the contract, the more guaranteed money you have to put into it. Security for control, the standard trade off. If the player rejects that contract offer, the team can then only offer the player a minimum tender. This is where a player bets on himself. He believes he can do well then either get cut and find a team or make the team and hopefully increase his marketability for next season where he has options to shop around.
If teams felt Trier was a top of the 2nd round talent, he would have gotten drafted. Guaranteed money tends to be better here. Late 2nd round though, odds are the player would simply taken the tender. Teams would rather bet on a fringe guy who can offer them a team friendly deal versus not. Or teams would rather take a guy they can get to agree to play overseas for a while first. ( i.e. not burn the roster space while letting him develop a bit elsewhere on someone elses dime while having the contract situation "toll")
Trier is an interesting player. The argument for him is his style of play is more suited to the modern NBA space and pace game versus the NCAA and particularly Zona. He's not a great athlete. He's got some tweener in him. He does have a natural feel around the rim, but he doesn't pass and showed as a shit defender ( shows much better now than he did in college) The PEDS didn't help. His tournament play didn't help. In pro sports, a PEDS test is also referred to as an "IQ TEST" meaning if you fail one, you've only proven that you are stupid as fuck. Everyone uses, everyone knows when their tests are coming, so failing one is a total fuck up. He didn't just come off as a chucker, but an idiot chucker. There's a lot of reasons why he fell out of the first round and even risked falling out of the top of the 2nd.
Teams likely probed him and he just told them, I won't sign a team friendly deal with you. Teams consider if they'd rather take a guy they can stash or get into a better contract and move on.
This is much of what I discuss here, how lots of the NBA issues around winning really just comes down to effective resource management.
Knickoftime wrote:knicks1248 wrote:toodarkmark wrote:meloshouldgo wrote:
But other than PEDs what do we know of why he went undrafted? Nothing but conjecture, right? Didn't they accept the second test was still carryover residual effect from the first? Anyone who practices making 400 shots each time, deserves some respect. And he hasn't shown to be low IQ, everyone makes mistakes. I think at some point him and Frank starting together in interchangeable roles will be really fun to watch. I picked them in my initial starting line up on that thread. Two very different styles mixed in at random can be enough to keep defenses guessing.Is this why he was undrafted? The two PED tests? In reading draft reports about him, he had some maturity issues, and some defensive liabilities. He certainly seems to have fixed those.
But I always worry about phenoms that come out of nowhere. Like someone mentioned, Lin comes to mind. Starks, Avery Johnson, David Wesley, Darrell Armstrong all played in the CBA for awhile, and for someone to go from undrafted to almost a starter, it's just crazy.
I always say it's not where you draft it's who you draft...
Well, you should stop saying that.
The math clearly shows over multiple eras and front office administrations that the higher you draft, the more likely you'll wind up with an impact player.
Period.
And the odds accelerate even more the closer you get to #1.
This is indisputable. It is not at all to anyone's credit to try to dispute it.
NBA history teaches us conclusively it is, in fact, where you draft.
There is always exceptions, but only fools mistake that for the rule.
is there a citation for this conclusive evidence? I ask because there is a lot of anecdotal evidence to suggest it's who does the drafting. Some people just suck at it
TripleThreat wrote:toodarkmark wrote:Is this why he was undrafted? The two PED tests?It's a good question. It's a good jump off for discussion.
2nd round picks in the NBA aren't not vested to any guaranteed money under the current system. 1st round picks get at minimum, two years of guaranteed money based on draft slot. This is why contenders in the tax and repeater zone are not so worried about trading off a very late first round pick. The talent/upside difference of a guy picked 28th versus 34th is incremental. The money/cap considerations though are vastly different.
To retain a players rights, for a 2nd rounder, a team can do a couple of things. Offer the guy a very team friendly contract. The longer the contract, the more guaranteed money you have to put into it. Security for control, the standard trade off. If the player rejects that contract offer, the team can then only offer the player a minimum tender. This is where a player bets on himself. He believes he can do well then either get cut and find a team or make the team and hopefully increase his marketability for next season where he has options to shop around.
If teams felt Trier was a top of the 2nd round talent, he would have gotten drafted. Guaranteed money tends to be better here. Late 2nd round though, odds are the player would simply taken the tender. Teams would rather bet on a fringe guy who can offer them a team friendly deal versus not. Or teams would rather take a guy they can get to agree to play overseas for a while first. ( i.e. not burn the roster space while letting him develop a bit elsewhere on someone elses dime while having the contract situation "toll")
Trier is an interesting player. The argument for him is his style of play is more suited to the modern NBA space and pace game versus the NCAA and particularly Zona. He's not a great athlete. He's got some tweener in him. He does have a natural feel around the rim, but he doesn't pass and showed as a shit defender ( shows much better now than he did in college) The PEDS didn't help. His tournament play didn't help. In pro sports, a PEDS test is also referred to as an "IQ TEST" meaning if you fail one, you've only proven that you are stupid as fuck. Everyone uses, everyone knows when their tests are coming, so failing one is a total fuck up. He didn't just come off as a chucker, but an idiot chucker. There's a lot of reasons why he fell out of the first round and even risked falling out of the top of the 2nd.
Teams likely probed him and he just told them, I won't sign a team friendly deal with you. Teams consider if they'd rather take a guy they can stash or get into a better contract and move on.
This is much of what I discuss here, how lots of the NBA issues around winning really just comes down to effective resource management.
I do remember that tournament game and Arizona's guards took a lot of the blame. Heck, it wasn't just that game. All season long, I'd hear people question Zonas backcourt play. I only took glimpses of Ayton last season, so I couldn't say whether or not those criticisms we're fair. Anyway, I just hope Trier continues to improve. I had no expectations for him in the first place, so everything he's done is gravy as far as I am concerned.
TripleThreat wrote:toodarkmark wrote:Is this why he was undrafted? The two PED tests?It's a good question. It's a good jump off for discussion.
2nd round picks in the NBA aren't not vested to any guaranteed money under the current system. 1st round picks get at minimum, two years of guaranteed money based on draft slot. This is why contenders in the tax and repeater zone are not so worried about trading off a very late first round pick. The talent/upside difference of a guy picked 28th versus 34th is incremental. The money/cap considerations though are vastly different.
To retain a players rights, for a 2nd rounder, a team can do a couple of things. Offer the guy a very team friendly contract. The longer the contract, the more guaranteed money you have to put into it. Security for control, the standard trade off. If the player rejects that contract offer, the team can then only offer the player a minimum tender. This is where a player bets on himself. He believes he can do well then either get cut and find a team or make the team and hopefully increase his marketability for next season where he has options to shop around.
If teams felt Trier was a top of the 2nd round talent, he would have gotten drafted. Guaranteed money tends to be better here. Late 2nd round though, odds are the player would simply taken the tender. Teams would rather bet on a fringe guy who can offer them a team friendly deal versus not. Or teams would rather take a guy they can get to agree to play overseas for a while first. ( i.e. not burn the roster space while letting him develop a bit elsewhere on someone elses dime while having the contract situation "toll")
Trier is an interesting player. The argument for him is his style of play is more suited to the modern NBA space and pace game versus the NCAA and particularly Zona. He's not a great athlete. He's got some tweener in him. He does have a natural feel around the rim, but he doesn't pass and showed as a shit defender ( shows much better now than he did in college) The PEDS didn't help. His tournament play didn't help. In pro sports, a PEDS test is also referred to as an "IQ TEST" meaning if you fail one, you've only proven that you are stupid as fuck. Everyone uses, everyone knows when their tests are coming, so failing one is a total fuck up. He didn't just come off as a chucker, but an idiot chucker. There's a lot of reasons why he fell out of the first round and even risked falling out of the top of the 2nd.
Teams likely probed him and he just told them, I won't sign a team friendly deal with you. Teams consider if they'd rather take a guy they can stash or get into a better contract and move on.
This is much of what I discuss here, how lots of the NBA issues around winning really just comes down to effective resource management.
Great post.
Chandler wrote:Knickoftime wrote:knicks1248 wrote:toodarkmark wrote:meloshouldgo wrote:
But other than PEDs what do we know of why he went undrafted? Nothing but conjecture, right? Didn't they accept the second test was still carryover residual effect from the first? Anyone who practices making 400 shots each time, deserves some respect. And he hasn't shown to be low IQ, everyone makes mistakes. I think at some point him and Frank starting together in interchangeable roles will be really fun to watch. I picked them in my initial starting line up on that thread. Two very different styles mixed in at random can be enough to keep defenses guessing.Is this why he was undrafted? The two PED tests? In reading draft reports about him, he had some maturity issues, and some defensive liabilities. He certainly seems to have fixed those.
But I always worry about phenoms that come out of nowhere. Like someone mentioned, Lin comes to mind. Starks, Avery Johnson, David Wesley, Darrell Armstrong all played in the CBA for awhile, and for someone to go from undrafted to almost a starter, it's just crazy.
I always say it's not where you draft it's who you draft...
Well, you should stop saying that.
The math clearly shows over multiple eras and front office administrations that the higher you draft, the more likely you'll wind up with an impact player.
Period.
And the odds accelerate even more the closer you get to #1.
This is indisputable. It is not at all to anyone's credit to try to dispute it.
NBA history teaches us conclusively it is, in fact, where you draft.
There is always exceptions, but only fools mistake that for the rule.
is there a citation for this conclusive evidence? I ask because there is a lot of anecdotal evidence to suggest it's who does the drafting. Some people just suck at it
Our vaunted franchise's draft record comes to mind during the era between Ewing and KP. And KP still has a possible bust window open slightly.
jrodmc wrote:Chandler wrote:Knickoftime wrote:knicks1248 wrote:toodarkmark wrote:meloshouldgo wrote:
But other than PEDs what do we know of why he went undrafted? Nothing but conjecture, right? Didn't they accept the second test was still carryover residual effect from the first? Anyone who practices making 400 shots each time, deserves some respect. And he hasn't shown to be low IQ, everyone makes mistakes. I think at some point him and Frank starting together in interchangeable roles will be really fun to watch. I picked them in my initial starting line up on that thread. Two very different styles mixed in at random can be enough to keep defenses guessing.Is this why he was undrafted? The two PED tests? In reading draft reports about him, he had some maturity issues, and some defensive liabilities. He certainly seems to have fixed those.
But I always worry about phenoms that come out of nowhere. Like someone mentioned, Lin comes to mind. Starks, Avery Johnson, David Wesley, Darrell Armstrong all played in the CBA for awhile, and for someone to go from undrafted to almost a starter, it's just crazy.
I always say it's not where you draft it's who you draft...
Well, you should stop saying that.
The math clearly shows over multiple eras and front office administrations that the higher you draft, the more likely you'll wind up with an impact player.
Period.
And the odds accelerate even more the closer you get to #1.
This is indisputable. It is not at all to anyone's credit to try to dispute it.
NBA history teaches us conclusively it is, in fact, where you draft.
There is always exceptions, but only fools mistake that for the rule.
is there a citation for this conclusive evidence? I ask because there is a lot of anecdotal evidence to suggest it's who does the drafting. Some people just suck at it
Our vaunted franchise's draft record comes to mind during the era between Ewing and KP. And KP still has a possible bust window open slightly.
Ewing was #1 and KP was #4
All in-between was crap-shots because of out starpunching-mediocrity, chasing some Merbs/Melos/Francisis/Barganis under the lead of defunct guitar-man. Who cares what the crappy organizations are doing? Unless one wants a good lough.
arkrud wrote:jrodmc wrote:Chandler wrote:Knickoftime wrote:knicks1248 wrote:toodarkmark wrote:meloshouldgo wrote:
But other than PEDs what do we know of why he went undrafted? Nothing but conjecture, right? Didn't they accept the second test was still carryover residual effect from the first? Anyone who practices making 400 shots each time, deserves some respect. And he hasn't shown to be low IQ, everyone makes mistakes. I think at some point him and Frank starting together in interchangeable roles will be really fun to watch. I picked them in my initial starting line up on that thread. Two very different styles mixed in at random can be enough to keep defenses guessing.Is this why he was undrafted? The two PED tests? In reading draft reports about him, he had some maturity issues, and some defensive liabilities. He certainly seems to have fixed those.
But I always worry about phenoms that come out of nowhere. Like someone mentioned, Lin comes to mind. Starks, Avery Johnson, David Wesley, Darrell Armstrong all played in the CBA for awhile, and for someone to go from undrafted to almost a starter, it's just crazy.
I always say it's not where you draft it's who you draft...
Well, you should stop saying that.
The math clearly shows over multiple eras and front office administrations that the higher you draft, the more likely you'll wind up with an impact player.
Period.
And the odds accelerate even more the closer you get to #1.
This is indisputable. It is not at all to anyone's credit to try to dispute it.
NBA history teaches us conclusively it is, in fact, where you draft.
There is always exceptions, but only fools mistake that for the rule.
is there a citation for this conclusive evidence? I ask because there is a lot of anecdotal evidence to suggest it's who does the drafting. Some people just suck at it
Our vaunted franchise's draft record comes to mind during the era between Ewing and KP. And KP still has a possible bust window open slightly.
Ewing was #1 and KP was #4
All in-between was crap-shots because of out starpunching-mediocrity, chasing some Merbs/Melos/Francisis/Barganis under the lead of defunct guitar-man. Who cares what the crappy organizations are doing? Unless one wants a good lough.
Starphuch Jimmy ran the knicks like. Business not to win. Kudo’s to this ugly phase as it demonstrates the first real commitment to a rebuild. KP down was a setback for sure. The way we used to do this would have been to get a one year rental like this version of Melo to at least put up points. Instead we doubled down with youth and a coach who himself is still developing his craft.
It’s ugly and there are a ton of questions still but this franchise future is intact. But Nobody can say what it will become.
5. Trier, the undrafted rookie, registered 11 points, but also had four turnovers with zero assists. Besides the failed drug tests, one reason Trier went undrafted was concerns about fitting in as far as passing the ball.It was a bad job by the public-address announcer who repeatedly mispronounced his last name despite Trier having played high-school ball in the Oklahoma City area for three years. The correct pronunciation is “Tree-er.” One of his former high-school teammates took in the game at Chesapeake Arena and laughed at Trier’s gunner style.
“He was even cocky as an eighth-grader — didn’t pass the ball,’’ he reminisced. “I knew what kind of player he’d be when he announced to the team his favorite player was Carmelo Anthony.’’
Thunder coach Billy Donovan said the club worked out Trier but indicated he wasn’t a consideration at 45 when the Thunder did well in taking native New Yorker Hamidou Diallo, who scored a career-high 11 points vs. the Knicks
Are we sipping our own KOOL AID..
We have at least 7 players in the rotation avg less than 2 assist..that's flat out retarded
He is an asset that cost us practically nothing. Hard to go around complaining if you ask me, as he's ideal for us given how few real offensive weapons we have, is young, developing and will certainly garner attention if we needed to flip him in a trade given his talents.