StarksEwing1 wrote:I really like kaminsky BUT im not sold on him quite yet to have a impact on the NBA. Not saying he wont but i dont think he will have a impact players like Towns and Russell will have.

Hellz no he won't have the impact that those guys will have. Teams are not sold on him at all. Say he's to slow for the 4 and not big enough for the 5.

Swishfm3 wrote:Kaminsky is nice...I see him more as a poor mans K.Durant.

Actually..I think he can do everything Durant can minus the reliable jumper. I can definitely see him playing the 3 in the NBA

VDesai wrote:I think he's plays the Duncan role. He's not as good as Duncan but he can play the role Duncan has played for the back half of his career on the Spurs pretty effectively. His bball IQ is fantastic, he's a great teammate and does everything the coaches ask. He's not the superstar version of Duncan from the first half of his career - he's more of a great teammate, key cog version of Duncan from the 2nd half.

Agree......Older Duncan is kaminsky.

Keith vanhorn is Decker.

So my question is simple.....if you had a chance at drafting ok4 as your only pick....or

Older Duncan and a young Keith Vanhorn

I think its obvious.

It usually takes a good 3 yrs at the college level to really see your true nba potential.

dk7th wrote:head and ball fakes already make him a legit player. he is going to draw fouls. his footwork is very very good. his court vision is great and his passing ability is very very good. he is a decent rebounder too. whoever picks him is going to have a really good rotation player. i see an oversized swingman-- not a tweener-- along the lines of paul pierce. man to man defense is an open question but he is quick-footed and will cover ground. that said, you have to wonder what his floor impact will be at the next level. i'd love to see him as a knick.

if he develops a post-up game and a little dirk-ish stepback he will be an incredibly versatile nba player.

Kaminsky is a role player in the NBA. He will not be an all star. He will be as good as the team around him. If he were on the Spurs he would be an upgrade (but play the same role) as Splitter. He would start some at the 4,5 sometimes off the bench, and fill the stat sheet out nicely. 15/8 1 block, a steal, 3 assists in 28-32 minutes a night. He's a good stretch 4/5. He will make any team that gets him better. He's simply an excellent basketball player.

Physically they are nothing alike, but in terms of impact think Arvydas Sabonis. Not a star or an all star even but a very good player who does everything and makes guys better because of it. Cliff Robinson comes to mind also. A guy who could play more than one frontcourt position, good at everything, great at nothing... good player, tons of winning seasons.

Frank isnt a guy you build a rotation around, but rather a guy you add to make your team deeper, bigger, better, etc

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:head and ball fakes already make him a legit player. he is going to draw fouls. his footwork is very very good. his court vision is great and his passing ability is very very good. he is a decent rebounder too. whoever picks him is going to have a really good rotation player. i see an oversized swingman-- not a tweener-- along the lines of paul pierce. man to man defense is an open question but he is quick-footed and will cover ground. that said, you have to wonder what his floor impact will be at the next level. i'd love to see him as a knick.

if he develops a post-up game and a little dirk-ish stepback he will be an incredibly versatile nba player.

So Melo is too slow to play the 3, but you "see" Kaminsky as an oversized 3. That sir is dropping some serious knowledge. Wow.

Kaminsky is a role player in the NBA. He will not be an all star. He will be as good as the team around him. If he were on the Spurs he would be an upgrade (but play the same role) as Splitter. He would start some at the 4,5 sometimes off the bench, and fill the stat sheet out nicely. 15/8 1 block, a steal, 3 assists in 28-32 minutes a night. He's a good stretch 4/5. He will make any team that gets him better. He's simply an excellent basketball player.

Physically they are nothing alike, but in terms of impact think Arvydas Sabonis. Not a star or an all star even but a very good player who does everything and makes guys better because of it. Cliff Robinson comes to mind also. A guy who could play more than one frontcourt position, good at everything, great at nothing... good player, tons of winning seasons.

Frank isnt a guy you build a rotation around, but rather a guy you add to make your team deeper, bigger, better, etce

you lost me at "melo." who cares about melo? why not just stick to the topic? i did not say he'd be an allstar. and i don't see the splitter comparison whatsoever. have you seen kaminsky handle the ball. have you seen him shoot.

lastly the two bolded statements seem contradictory. the first sounds like a solid role player, not a difference maker. the second sounds like a key rotation player, like one of a big 3 or something. players who make others around them better are in fact all-stars, whether they make the allstar game or not.

The bold makes perfect sense. If Frank replaces Splitter the Spurs are better. Frank makes the Spurs better. He will create more space, he's got a more versatile game, Parker/Duncan/Leanard all benefit from that. The point is his skill set is enough to improve a contender and be a rotation player.

Put him on this Knick team and they get better but not by much. Frank's not good enough to carry a team and he will get exposed, his #s are probably higher but his impact isnt anything impressive. You follow?

BTW your bold statement is one of the strangest things Ive read from you (and thats saying alot). I have no idea what that means.

So you think Frank is better suited to defend 3's in the NBA than Melo?

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:head and ball fakes already make him a legit player. he is going to draw fouls. his footwork is very very good. his court vision is great and his passing ability is very very good. he is a decent rebounder too. whoever picks him is going to have a really good rotation player. i see an oversized swingman-- not a tweener-- along the lines of paul pierce. man to man defense is an open question but he is quick-footed and will cover ground. that said, you have to wonder what his floor impact will be at the next level. i'd love to see him as a knick.

if he develops a post-up game and a little dirk-ish stepback he will be an incredibly versatile nba player.

So Melo is too slow to play the 3, but you "see" Kaminsky as an oversized 3. That sir is dropping some serious knowledge. Wow.

Kaminsky is a role player in the NBA. He will not be an all star. He will be as good as the team around him. If he were on the Spurs he would be an upgrade (but play the same role) as Splitter. He would start some at the 4,5 sometimes off the bench, and fill the stat sheet out nicely. 15/8 1 block, a steal, 3 assists in 28-32 minutes a night. He's a good stretch 4/5. He will make any team that gets him better. He's simply an excellent basketball player.

Physically they are nothing alike, but in terms of impact think Arvydas Sabonis. Not a star or an all star even but a very good player who does everything and makes guys better because of it. Cliff Robinson comes to mind also. A guy who could play more than one frontcourt position, good at everything, great at nothing... good player, tons of winning seasons.

Frank isnt a guy you build a rotation around, but rather a guy you add to make your team deeper, bigger, better, etce

you lost me at "melo." who cares about melo? why not just stick to the topic? i did not say he'd be an allstar. and i don't see the splitter comparison whatsoever. have you seen kaminsky handle the ball. have you seen him shoot.

lastly the two bolded statements seem contradictory. the first sounds like a solid role player, not a difference maker. the second sounds like a key rotation player, like one of a big 3 or something. players who make others around them better are in fact all-stars, whether they make the allstar game or not.

Why bring up Melo? Because you have said he's not mobile enough to guard 3s. But your OK with Frank there. So is it such a stretch of logic to ask you if you think Frank is quicker and more apt to defend the wing than Melo?

The bold makes perfect sense. If Frank replaces Splitter the Spurs are better. Frank makes the Spurs better. He will create more space, he's got a more versatile game, Parker/Duncan/Leanard all benefit from that. The point is his skill set is enough to improve a contender and be a rotation player.

Put him on this Knick team and they get better but not by much. Frank's not good enough to carry a team and he will get exposed, his #s are probably higher but his impact isnt anything impressive. You follow?

BTW your bold statement is one of the strangest things Ive read from you (and thats saying alot). I have no idea what that means.

So you think Frank is better suited to defend 3's in the NBA than Melo?

frank has greater length than melo. melo is 6"7.5" in sneakers with a 7 foot wingspan, and i am told frank is closer to 7 feet in shoes which is 3.5" taller. and that means at least a 7-foot wingspan because he is lanky. so far as i can see he has better instincts too-- not hard to do since melo's instincts and court vision are just awful. so yes, if frank has to guard the perimeter he would acquit himself better than melo-- which was your quibble. and i didn't even mention heart, which melo does not have on defense.

nothing strange about the make others better = allstar level. it's a fact that the allstar voting process is a joke. there are other, better ways to gauge a player.

frank's floor impact is an open question, i'll grant you that. then again i like players like pierce, ginobili, gallinari, milsap, gibson-- player's who don't wow with highlight reel fool's gold stuff but whose floor impact is palpable.

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:head and ball fakes already make him a legit player. he is going to draw fouls. his footwork is very very good. his court vision is great and his passing ability is very very good. he is a decent rebounder too. whoever picks him is going to have a really good rotation player. i see an oversized swingman-- not a tweener-- along the lines of paul pierce. man to man defense is an open question but he is quick-footed and will cover ground. that said, you have to wonder what his floor impact will be at the next level. i'd love to see him as a knick.

if he develops a post-up game and a little dirk-ish stepback he will be an incredibly versatile nba player.

So Melo is too slow to play the 3, but you "see" Kaminsky as an oversized 3. That sir is dropping some serious knowledge. Wow.

Kaminsky is a role player in the NBA. He will not be an all star. He will be as good as the team around him. If he were on the Spurs he would be an upgrade (but play the same role) as Splitter. He would start some at the 4,5 sometimes off the bench, and fill the stat sheet out nicely. 15/8 1 block, a steal, 3 assists in 28-32 minutes a night. He's a good stretch 4/5. He will make any team that gets him better. He's simply an excellent basketball player.

Physically they are nothing alike, but in terms of impact think Arvydas Sabonis. Not a star or an all star even but a very good player who does everything and makes guys better because of it. Cliff Robinson comes to mind also. A guy who could play more than one frontcourt position, good at everything, great at nothing... good player, tons of winning seasons.

Frank isnt a guy you build a rotation around, but rather a guy you add to make your team deeper, bigger, better, etce

you lost me at "melo." who cares about melo? why not just stick to the topic? i did not say he'd be an allstar. and i don't see the splitter comparison whatsoever. have you seen kaminsky handle the ball. have you seen him shoot.

lastly the two bolded statements seem contradictory. the first sounds like a solid role player, not a difference maker. the second sounds like a key rotation player, like one of a big 3 or something. players who make others around them better are in fact all-stars, whether they make the allstar game or not.

Why bring up Melo? Because you have said he's not mobile enough to guard 3s. But your OK with Frank there. So is it such a stretch of logic to ask you if you think Frank is quicker and more apt to defend the wing than Melo?

The bold makes perfect sense. If Frank replaces Splitter the Spurs are better. Frank makes the Spurs better. He will create more space, he's got a more versatile game, Parker/Duncan/Leanard all benefit from that. The point is his skill set is enough to improve a contender and be a rotation player.

Put him on this Knick team and they get better but not by much. Frank's not good enough to carry a team and he will get exposed, his #s are probably higher but his impact isnt anything impressive. You follow?

BTW your bold statement is one of the strangest things Ive read from you (and thats saying alot). I have no idea what that means.

So you think Frank is better suited to defend 3's in the NBA than Melo?

frank has greater length than melo. melo is 6"7.5" in sneakers with a 7 foot wingspan, and i am told frank is closer to 7 feet in shoes which is 3.5" taller. and that means at least a 7-foot wingspan because he is lanky. so far as i can see he has better instincts too-- not hard to do since melo's instincts and court vision are just awful. so yes, if frank has to guard the perimeter he would acquit himself better than melo-- which was your quibble. and i didn't even mention heart, which melo does not have on defense.

nothing strange about the make others better = allstar level. it's a fact that the allstar voting process is a joke. there are other, better ways to gauge a player.

frank's floor impact is an open question, i'll grant you that. then again i like players like pierce, ginobili, gallinari, milsap, gibson-- player's who don't wow with highlight reel fool's gold stuff but whose floor impact is palpable.

So there you go.... DK says Frank is a better SF than Melo. Awesome.

Just curious.. please induldge me. Was Danillo an allstar this year? I mean not like a voted allstar, like a DK allstar?

i said frank will be better at defending the small forward position than melo and nothing more. your too eager to find fault with me. so far as overall impact on both defense as well as offense... that remains to be seen. i doubt frank will end up being an overpaid, over-rated empty-calorie all-star like your hero melo.

gallinari was not playing at an allstar level this season. that happens when you've been out of the game for a season-and-a-half and with a bad coach like brian shaw. gallinari-- when healthy-- is a tier below allstar level. but he can't stay healthy, which is a real shame since he plays the game the right way.

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:head and ball fakes already make him a legit player. he is going to draw fouls. his footwork is very very good. his court vision is great and his passing ability is very very good. he is a decent rebounder too. whoever picks him is going to have a really good rotation player. i see an oversized swingman-- not a tweener-- along the lines of paul pierce. man to man defense is an open question but he is quick-footed and will cover ground. that said, you have to wonder what his floor impact will be at the next level. i'd love to see him as a knick.

if he develops a post-up game and a little dirk-ish stepback he will be an incredibly versatile nba player.

So Melo is too slow to play the 3, but you "see" Kaminsky as an oversized 3. That sir is dropping some serious knowledge. Wow.

Kaminsky is a role player in the NBA. He will not be an all star. He will be as good as the team around him. If he were on the Spurs he would be an upgrade (but play the same role) as Splitter. He would start some at the 4,5 sometimes off the bench, and fill the stat sheet out nicely. 15/8 1 block, a steal, 3 assists in 28-32 minutes a night. He's a good stretch 4/5. He will make any team that gets him better. He's simply an excellent basketball player.

Physically they are nothing alike, but in terms of impact think Arvydas Sabonis. Not a star or an all star even but a very good player who does everything and makes guys better because of it. Cliff Robinson comes to mind also. A guy who could play more than one frontcourt position, good at everything, great at nothing... good player, tons of winning seasons.

Frank isnt a guy you build a rotation around, but rather a guy you add to make your team deeper, bigger, better, etce

you lost me at "melo." who cares about melo? why not just stick to the topic? i did not say he'd be an allstar. and i don't see the splitter comparison whatsoever. have you seen kaminsky handle the ball. have you seen him shoot.

lastly the two bolded statements seem contradictory. the first sounds like a solid role player, not a difference maker. the second sounds like a key rotation player, like one of a big 3 or something. players who make others around them better are in fact all-stars, whether they make the allstar game or not.

Why bring up Melo? Because you have said he's not mobile enough to guard 3s. But your OK with Frank there. So is it such a stretch of logic to ask you if you think Frank is quicker and more apt to defend the wing than Melo?

The bold makes perfect sense. If Frank replaces Splitter the Spurs are better. Frank makes the Spurs better. He will create more space, he's got a more versatile game, Parker/Duncan/Leanard all benefit from that. The point is his skill set is enough to improve a contender and be a rotation player.

Put him on this Knick team and they get better but not by much. Frank's not good enough to carry a team and he will get exposed, his #s are probably higher but his impact isnt anything impressive. You follow?

BTW your bold statement is one of the strangest things Ive read from you (and thats saying alot). I have no idea what that means.

So you think Frank is better suited to defend 3's in the NBA than Melo?

frank has greater length than melo. melo is 6"7.5" in sneakers with a 7 foot wingspan, and i am told frank is closer to 7 feet in shoes which is 3.5" taller. and that means at least a 7-foot wingspan because he is lanky. so far as i can see he has better instincts too-- not hard to do since melo's instincts and court vision are just awful. so yes, if frank has to guard the perimeter he would acquit himself better than melo-- which was your quibble. and i didn't even mention heart, which melo does not have on defense.

nothing strange about the make others better = allstar level. it's a fact that the allstar voting process is a joke. there are other, better ways to gauge a player.

frank's floor impact is an open question, i'll grant you that. then again i like players like pierce, ginobili, gallinari, milsap, gibson-- player's who don't wow with highlight reel fool's gold stuff but whose floor impact is palpable.

So there you go.... DK says Frank is a better SF than Melo. Awesome.

Just curious.. please induldge me. Was Danillo an allstar this year? I mean not like a voted allstar, like a DK allstar?

i said frank will be better at defending the small forward position than melo and nothing more. your too eager to find fault with me. so far as overall impact on both defense as well as offense... that remains to be seen. i doubt frank will end up being an overpaid, over-rated empty-calorie all-star like your hero melo.

gallinari was not playing at an allstar level this season. that happens when you've been out of the game for a season-and-a-half and with a bad coach like brian shaw. gallinari-- when healthy-- is a tier below allstar level. but he can't stay healthy, which is a real shame since he plays the game the right way.