TripleThreat wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Id give up my 2018 #1 with only top 3 restrtiction to get Kaminsky
The 2018 NBA Draft is a LONG LONG LONG WAY OFF.
There's a decent chance NBA Draft lottery reform will happen by then, and the Knicks could be sacrificing, with different odds in place, an extremely high pick.
Let's take a ride in the UK Hot Tub Time Machine shall we?
Instead of going four years into the future, since we can't project into the future and read it quite like Mr Briggs can, let's go four years into the past, and take a look at a five year sample of what a Kaminsky might cost the Knicks. The last Knicks pick lost was something like the 12th overall. So let's look from 4 to 12, and see what a five year span will get us.
In the 2010 draft, you could be getting a star in Kaminsky, though the odds are against it, and only be giving up a Epke Udoh.
You could also be giving up DeMarcus Cousins, Gordon Hayward, Paul George and Greg Monroe.
In the 2009 draft, that player sacrificed might be a Jonny Flynn (Ugh) Or it could be a Stephen Curry, Tyreke Evans or DeMar DeRozan
In the 2008 draft, you might just save yourself from Joe Alexander. But you could also pass on a Russell Westbrook, a Kevin Love or a Brook Lopez
In the 2007 draft, a Kaminsky type would seem super sexy compared to an Acie Law, but what about Mike Conley, Joachim Noah, Thad Young and Spencer Hawes?
In the 2006 draft, in a ugly top of the draft, saving yourself from Patrick O Bryant would be swell indeed, but what about Rudy Gay and JJ Redick?
Trading future picks has gotten the Knicks where in the past and currently?
And how did that strategy work out?
You could, in theory, be getting the superior player in Kaminsky sooner than anyone who you could draft in 2018. It's entirely possible ( though you'll never see Briggs openly say anyone he wants might not pan out, he won't extend that same courtesy ) But IS IT LIKELY?
There are people out there who gamble for a living. Looking for the big score. Always looking for the home run swing.
Then there are the people who try to build their asset base slowly and sometimes painfully, over time, in a more stable manner.
Which group tends to succeed more?
Briggs isn't asking the Knicks to just gamble some chips on the table, he's asking them to DOUBLE DOWN on the type of strategy that has brought them to this current hell in the first place. There's a big difference between reckless and aggressive. What Briggs sees as an aggressive strategy IMHO is just a thinly veiled disguise for doubling down on being reckless.
If a team felt a player was ranked much higher value -wise than he potentially falls to and you are able to use a future pick to acquire such player--how is that a gamble? Youre using the 2018 pick to make an additional pick in 2015 for a player the franchise might need and value very high. High enough that it makes a lot of sense to expedite the process. What exactly is the gamble?
3/9/2015 8:03 PM