But he's 6-7.5 and thin in the legs and thin up top. He IS Renaldo Balkman with nicer biceps.
He's not ready to impact right now, he can never play center. ever. He was easily boxed out and scored over by Jajuan Johnson who is a finesse big with a rep for being soft. He would not beat out Sheldon Williams at center.

I'm not against drafting a project. I wouldn't be mad if we grabbed Keith Benson or Jajuan Johnson. their 7 ft and 6-11 respectively. I wouldnt mind grabbing Reggie Jackson or Iman Shumpert who are both big guards (we'll find out exactly how big tommorow). All of these guys are projects and are not ready to hit the floor in game one of the season.

BUT, those guys are projects in positions of need. Faried is a tweener forward, the only positions of strength on our squad.

He is a luxury we can't afford and we don't have a spot for him. If he were a super high ceiling guy id do it.

how did darius morris look?

is jajuan johnson a possible sleeper C candidate? is he like a bigger, stronger shawne williams?

Balkman might have some mental issues that prevent him from maximizing his impact.

Faried looks hungry with an unlimited motor with a penchant for rebounding, and rebounding, regardless the position, is probably the biggest need we have.

He may be thin and undersized, but so were Ben Wallace and Dennis Rodman- yet they have rings and personal awards.

I trust Walsh- but I hope he doesn't pass on Faried if he's there and Walsh believes he has impact talent, just to please D'Antoni to pick up the next Anthony Roberson.

franco12 wrote:I do get the comparison to Balkman. I'm was surprised when MDA played him- was it one game-but less so that he never went back.

Balkman might have some mental issues that prevent him from maximizing his impact.

Faried looks hungry with an unlimited motor with a penchant for rebounding, and rebounding, regardless the position, is probably the biggest need we have.

He may be thin and undersized, but so were Ben Wallace and Dennis Rodman- yet they have rings and personal awards.

I trust Walsh- but I hope he doesn't pass on Faried if he's there and Walsh believes he has impact talent, just to please D'Antoni to pick up the next Anthony Roberson.

there is no doubt that rebounding is a weakness of the Knicks but I am wondering if that is more of a symptom of lack of a pure rebounder or lack of a proper starting C. Having a front line that consists of Amare, Chandler, Gallo is a make-shift front line combo (that was the majority of the starts, even Turiaf is PF height or backup C at best).

And as much as rebounding is a weakness of the Knicks, so is interior defense and intimidation - things that Faried does not solve.

And as much as Rodman and Ben Wallace were undersized, they were not thin. And both had big men next to them that complimented their games, namely Sheed and Luc Longley (Rodmon primarily played PF, not C). Faried does not compliment Amare in any which way.

franco12 wrote:

martin wrote:

franco12 wrote:I do get the comparison to Balkman. I'm was surprised when MDA played him- was it one game-but less so that he never went back.

Balkman might have some mental issues that prevent him from maximizing his impact.

Faried looks hungry with an unlimited motor with a penchant for rebounding, and rebounding, regardless the position, is probably the biggest need we have.

He may be thin and undersized, but so were Ben Wallace and Dennis Rodman- yet they have rings and personal awards.

I trust Walsh- but I hope he doesn't pass on Faried if he's there and Walsh believes he has impact talent, just to please D'Antoni to pick up the next Anthony Roberson.

there is no doubt that rebounding is a weakness of the Knicks but I am wondering if that is more of a symptom of lack of a pure rebounder or lack of a proper starting C. Having a front line that consists of Amare, Chandler, Gallo is a make-shift front line combo (that was the majority of the starts, even Turiaf is PF height or backup C at best).

And as much as rebounding is a weakness of the Knicks, so is interior defense and intimidation - things that Faried does not solve.

And as much as Rodman and Ben Wallace were undersized, they were not thin. And both had big men next to them that complimented their games, namely Sheed and Luc Longley (Rodmon primarily played PF, not C). Faried does not compliment Amare in any which way.

I think really the debate is on whether Faried can turn into something special in the NBA. I don't think he's going to be available at 17, and unless you are Isiah, you don't trade up to get this kind of player - just too many question marks.

Now- as to being thin- I could see him adding muscle as he matures and works out and does whatever pro athletes do.

As for interior defense and intimidation - I hate the highlight videos that people always post to show how good a player is, but:

This guy might just be a better, taller Balkman - and when Balkman got time when Isiah was here, he was able to have an impact on the game.

If he's a legit talent, I wouldn't mind a front line of Faried, Amar'e and Carmelo. We'd still be small, but I'd feel better about our rebounding differential being less negative, if not positive, and help defense.

Edit - no idea why, but couldn't get the youtube thing working right.

again, guys like Rodman and Wallace were successful cause they had complimentary 7 footers or near 7 footers next to them that were good at the interior. Amare is not and prob will never be, so you have to have a guy that can make up for his weaknesses. Not sure Faried does that.

Killa4luv wrote:I like him. He's got a tough story, and I know people close to him.
He's a hardworking guy and gives 110% every play. Those are great qualities.

But he's 6-8 and thin in the legs and thin up top. He IS Renaldo Balkman with nicer biceps.
He's not ready to impact right now, he can never play center. ever. He was easily boxed out and scored over by Jajuan Johnson who is a finesse big with a rep for being soft. He would not beat out Sheldon Williams at center.

I'm not against drafting a project. I wouldn't be mad if we grabbed Keith Benson or Jajuan Johnson. their 7 ft and 6-11 respectively. I wouldnt mind grabbing Reggie Jackson or Iman Shumpert who are both big guards (we'll find out exactly how big tommorow). All of these guys are projects and are not ready to hit the floor in game one of the season.

BUT, those guys are projects in positions of need. Faried is a tweener forward, the only positions of strength on our squad.

He is a luxury we can't afford and we don't have a spot for him. If he were a super high ceiling guy id do it.

I agree

Killa4luv wrote:

martin wrote:
again, guys like Rodman and Wallace were successful cause they had complimentary 7 footers or near 7 footers next to them that were good at the interior. Amare is not and prob will never be, so you have to have a guy that can make up for his weaknesses. Not sure Faried does that.

I'm sure, he doesn't do that. Next to Brook Lopez, or Al Jefferson, or An actual big guy, it could make some sense. Next to Amare who is already a below average rebounder and under sized, it makes zero sense. There are many better options who also have developing offensive games. Faried has NO offensive game at all.

There are alot of big guys who rebound block and can give you something on offense.

Really? How come we don't have any and when we finally got one, we shipped him out as part of a mass exodus of assets for Carmelo.

Neither Ben Wallace nor Dennis Rodman needed 7 footers next to them to make them effective. I'm not saying that Faried will be or could be that good.

But, I think its a fallacy to argue that we can't pick him simply because we don't have any 7 footers to put next to him. What if Jerome Jordan is ready to come here or there is another big in our future? If you think Faried can be a special talent, you pick him and work it out later.

Doesn't matter- he won't be there at 17 and there is a very good chance that whomever we pick is getting traded at some point anyway.

CrushAlot wrote:

franco12 wrote:

Killa4luv wrote:

martin wrote:
again, guys like Rodman and Wallace were successful cause they had complimentary 7 footers or near 7 footers next to them that were good at the interior. Amare is not and prob will never be, so you have to have a guy that can make up for his weaknesses. Not sure Faried does that.

I'm sure, he doesn't do that. Next to Brook Lopez, or Al Jefferson, or An actual big guy, it could make some sense. Next to Amare who is already a below average rebounder and under sized, it makes zero sense. There are many better options who also have developing offensive games. Faried has NO offensive game at all.

There are alot of big guys who rebound block and can give you something on offense.

Really? How come we don't have any and when we finally got one, we shipped him out as part of a mass exodus of assets for Carmelo.

Neither Ben Wallace nor Dennis Rodman needed 7 footers next to them to make them effective. I'm not saying that Faried will be or could be that good.

But, I think its a fallacy to argue that we can't pick him simply because we don't have any 7 footers to put next to him. What if Jerome Jordan is ready to come here or there is another big in our future? If you think Faried can be a special talent, you pick him and work it out later.

Doesn't matter- he won't be there at 17 and there is a very good chance that whomever we pick is getting traded at some point anyway.

I agree. It gets hard to get excited about young players, especially bigs with the current regime. They either don't play and get traded or if they do play get traded after some haggling.

We've gone over this stuff a million times. Neither Donnie nor Mike are against having quality bigs on this team. We haven't gotten rid of guys for no good reason. There's always been a reason and the last time was due to Dolan's interference in the big trade. I'm not losing sleep over Hill, Darko or AR. Donnie and Mike are gonna do the best they can to fill our needs one way or another and I think they want to try and find players that are much more productive than anyone we've had before. Do we need to keep looking back to the crap we've had before? Players that didn't give 100%?

nixluva wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

franco12 wrote:

Killa4luv wrote:

martin wrote:
again, guys like Rodman and Wallace were successful cause they had complimentary 7 footers or near 7 footers next to them that were good at the interior. Amare is not and prob will never be, so you have to have a guy that can make up for his weaknesses. Not sure Faried does that.

I'm sure, he doesn't do that. Next to Brook Lopez, or Al Jefferson, or An actual big guy, it could make some sense. Next to Amare who is already a below average rebounder and under sized, it makes zero sense. There are many better options who also have developing offensive games. Faried has NO offensive game at all.

There are alot of big guys who rebound block and can give you something on offense.

Really? How come we don't have any and when we finally got one, we shipped him out as part of a mass exodus of assets for Carmelo.

Neither Ben Wallace nor Dennis Rodman needed 7 footers next to them to make them effective. I'm not saying that Faried will be or could be that good.

But, I think its a fallacy to argue that we can't pick him simply because we don't have any 7 footers to put next to him. What if Jerome Jordan is ready to come here or there is another big in our future? If you think Faried can be a special talent, you pick him and work it out later.

Doesn't matter- he won't be there at 17 and there is a very good chance that whomever we pick is getting traded at some point anyway.

I agree. It gets hard to get excited about young players, especially bigs with the current regime. They either don't play and get traded or if they do play get traded after some haggling.

We've gone over this stuff a million times. Neither Donnie nor Mike are against having quality bigs on this team. We haven't gotten rid of guys for no good reason. There's always been a reason and the last time was due to Dolan's interference in the big trade. I'm not losing sleep over Hill, Darko or AR. Donnie and Mike are gonna do the best they can to fill our needs one way or another and I think they want to try and find players that are much more productive than anyone we've had before. Do we need to keep looking back to the crap we've had before? Players that didn't give 100%?

what was the "good reason" with anthony randolph?

CrushAlot wrote:

NYKBocker wrote:Faried's measurements
Faried: 6’6 without shoes…6’7.5 with/7’0 wingspan 225

Dude is short for a PF even with shoes.

He has a great wing span, huge hands, and a 9'0 standing reach. He also holds the NCAA record for rebounds. Frischilla said that if he was taller he would be a consensus number one pick. He isn't a D'Antoni system player but playoff teams that win dominate the boards. He would be a nice addition.

My main concern is if he is there at 17, then does Walsh think he is best talent available, but opts not to get him because of the coach. That could end up biting us like passing on Artest simply because he was from the area. Granted, Artest was & is a nut job - but he has far more trade value, even today, than Frederic Weiss!