joec32033 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

joec32033 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

IMO, not alot of this kids game is gonna translate into the NBA. He looks like Reddick shooting wise, and the rest of his game looks great in college but all I see is Steve Blake at the NBA level. His finishing at the rim is gonna take a huge hit. Those passes are mostly gonna get tipped. He is also gonna get Abused (capital A not a typo) on defense.

He actually moves very well with the ball. He’s strong too. If you look at film of FVV he looks like he would have no nba chance— now he’s a 20 mm $ player.
Nope this kid is real good. High end nba range. Good end to end speed complete understanding of angles( like Steve Nash) strong body tough great handle excellent passer smart savvy tough gamer That extended 3 point shot is a weapon.

I really don't know what all the Fred Van Vleet love. But that is another story. He screams slightly above average PG to me.

This kid may run end to end fast, but to me that is the NBA version of the 40 yard dash. He isn't quick, which IMO is more important. He can definitely shoot, and has some court awareness, but those passes in the NBA are getting tipped. He may be strong enough to finish in college, but I don't think he is even getting in the lane with those moves in the pros, and if he does he isn't really overpowering in college he is just strong enough to finish. In the NBA he isn't finishing.

I think you may be spot on on Nesmith, though.

I think we need a shooting Pg but I kind of want to bypass that at the top.
In my best case scenario

I’d get either Paul Reed or Saddiq Bey at 27 be patient or try to move up a few skits to get Pritchard

I’m pretty much
1-7 Wiseman Nesmith
26 Bey Reed Pritchard
36 patience to see who drops/ Pritchard

I'm not sure there's a game changer in this draft, and your taking over a team thats been very bad for a long long time.

There's probably a Gem some where in this draft, but perry picked knox and the pandemic killed college ball..

BRIGGS wrote:

joec32033 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

joec32033 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

IMO, not alot of this kids game is gonna translate into the NBA. He looks like Reddick shooting wise, and the rest of his game looks great in college but all I see is Steve Blake at the NBA level. His finishing at the rim is gonna take a huge hit. Those passes are mostly gonna get tipped. He is also gonna get Abused (capital A not a typo) on defense.

He actually moves very well with the ball. He’s strong too. If you look at film of FVV he looks like he would have no nba chance— now he’s a 20 mm $ player.
Nope this kid is real good. High end nba range. Good end to end speed complete understanding of angles( like Steve Nash) strong body tough great handle excellent passer smart savvy tough gamer That extended 3 point shot is a weapon.

I really don't know what all the Fred Van Vleet love. But that is another story. He screams slightly above average PG to me.

This kid may run end to end fast, but to me that is the NBA version of the 40 yard dash. He isn't quick, which IMO is more important. He can definitely shoot, and has some court awareness, but those passes in the NBA are getting tipped. He may be strong enough to finish in college, but I don't think he is even getting in the lane with those moves in the pros, and if he does he isn't really overpowering in college he is just strong enough to finish. In the NBA he isn't finishing.

I think you may be spot on on Nesmith, though.

I think we need a shooting Pg but I kind of want to bypass that at the top.
In my best case scenario

I’d get either Paul Reed or Saddiq Bey at 27 be patient or try to move up a few skits to get Pritchard

I’m pretty much
1-7 Wiseman Nesmith
26 Bey Reed Pritchard
36 patience to see who drops/ Pritchard

I have never been that much of a college guy, and most of my "scouting" is reports and maybe watching some clips, but the only 2 PG's that interest me are Haliburton and the kid from France. I like Nesmith, he kind of reminds me of Dotson. Wiseman is intriguing, but I am not a fan of a "twin towers" approach in this NBA. I'll be honest, I am not a huge fan of Mitch. Kind of reminds me of Camby. Wiseman and Ayton look similar to me, however I heard they are more old school pivots.

That Edwards kid is intriguing. Him and RJ kind of like a Houston/Spree swing situation.

I haven't even thought of the later picks yet, but I think this team just needs talent. Grab the highest talent players and see where it goes and adjust from there. The one thing I don't want is to take some swing guy and force him to play a position he isnt. I don't want to take a wing and force him to play point, or force a kid like RJ to play point. The Knicks have a history of doing that in it rarely works out to getting the most from said players.

xblvdels3 wrote:First things first

1. In a few weeks we will find out our drafting position.

2. What happens by trade or what player we pick is highly dependent on if we are picking 1-3 5-8 or 8-11.

3. After the lottery we will be able to zero in on a reasonable best pick. but then the conversation will immediately switch to who can we trade to move up.

Hallelujah! I feel we've been stuck in this pre-draft lottery limbo for the least exciting nba draft in years- FOR YEARS! Can't wait for it all to be over with! In 2 weeks time we'll be in our usual spot of finding out by how much we'll miss out on our preferred player!

BRIGGS wrote:Can’t understand the lack of feeling for Wiseman.

The guy is 7-1 250 athletic skilled seems to be rather bright and a hard worker. He has all the elements of an nba star. There is no other player I feel more confidant about
I know only 3 gabes but he avg 20-11-3 in 20 minutes with another nba of on his team. We can keep M Robinson and play 2 big or atleast have one or ther other in for 48 minutes. Tgis gives us a chance to play truly big OR 4-1 small. I don’t want to see this guy going to an Atlanta or a Cleveland He’s gonna be a close version of David Robinson— not a stiff 5 but a fast athletic guy who can shoot to 3 point range — someone was telling me the nba always changes and their right. But every once in awhile u better be a team that starts a new trend

The issue is very little big men are having a big impact on the game despite big numbers, and we need guard improvements in the worst way.

Knixkik wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Can’t understand the lack of feeling for Wiseman.

The guy is 7-1 250 athletic skilled seems to be rather bright and a hard worker. He has all the elements of an nba star. There is no other player I feel more confidant about
I know only 3 gabes but he avg 20-11-3 in 20 minutes with another nba of on his team. We can keep M Robinson and play 2 big or atleast have one or ther other in for 48 minutes. Tgis gives us a chance to play truly big OR 4-1 small. I don’t want to see this guy going to an Atlanta or a Cleveland He’s gonna be a close version of David Robinson— not a stiff 5 but a fast athletic guy who can shoot to 3 point range — someone was telling me the nba always changes and their right. But every once in awhile u better be a team that starts a new trend

The issue is very little big men are having a big impact on the game despite big numbers, and we need guard improvements in the worst way.

I think a force like Wiseman in the paint just makes it easier for perimeter players — he’s a physical force. No other player like him in the draft. Immediate nba impact player

BRIGGS wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Can’t understand the lack of feeling for Wiseman.

The guy is 7-1 250 athletic skilled seems to be rather bright and a hard worker. He has all the elements of an nba star. There is no other player I feel more confidant about
I know only 3 gabes but he avg 20-11-3 in 20 minutes with another nba of on his team. We can keep M Robinson and play 2 big or atleast have one or ther other in for 48 minutes. Tgis gives us a chance to play truly big OR 4-1 small. I don’t want to see this guy going to an Atlanta or a Cleveland He’s gonna be a close version of David Robinson— not a stiff 5 but a fast athletic guy who can shoot to 3 point range — someone was telling me the nba always changes and their right. But every once in awhile u better be a team that starts a new trend

The issue is very little big men are having a big impact on the game despite big numbers, and we need guard improvements in the worst way.

I think a force like Wiseman in the paint just makes it easier for perimeter players — he’s a physical force. No other player like him in the draft. Immediate nba impact player

How would Wiseman match up against a small ball pivot?

The short answer is he wouldn't. Has a strong physical tool set but that advantage is negated once you start moving up from college ball to the NBA.

Does he give you spacing?
Can he thread the needle when the defense collapses on him?
How is his free throw shooting?
Can he hold pace with a jumbo wing in transition?
Can he defend on the perimeter when needed?
How does he hold up against the pick and roll?

More traditional pivots also tend to, compared to jumbo wings who act as small ball pivots -

Turn the ball over more relatively
Are more likely to be injury prone
Be more deficient free throw shooters
Have a longer pathway to development
Clog up your floor spacing
Tend to need a longer rapport time with the refs to actually start getting some calls
Only exploit small ball pivot matchups via low efficiency possessions

The likelihood of finding a replacement level pivot in Tier 4 and Tier 5 of free agency is also exponentially greater than finding a useful wing.

What did Parcells always say? You build your roster to win your division first and foremost. It's pointless to think Superbowl and/or playoffs until you win your division first.

Small ball pivots tend to show their value in late game situations/playoff matchup situations. What happens in the playoffs? Each possession is more critical. Turnover differential becomes paramount. Rotations get smaller. Guys who would normally sit out games will play injured/hurt. Individual matchups have a more pronounced impact on game pace and game flow. Teams with more roster continuity tend to thrive more.

The immediate problem the Knicks would face with Wiseman is the floor spacing. They don't have the shooters to balance him out.

Traditional pivots find value in reducing attrition to the high energy small ball style of play. This is to meter out your roster usage against a typical regular season that runs far too long

If Wiseman's defense was more predictable/projectible against NBA level game speed and competition, his draft position would stabilize. But it's not, so it won't. The character concerns are present as well.

The giraffe is technically one of the fastest land animals on the planet. But if you asked it to flee for 10 miles or if you locked it in a cage with a lion, it's ****ed. A high ceiling for a physical tool set is NOT the same thing as being skilled. You have to adjust to the context under which a player will most likely be used. JaMarcus Russell had one of the greatest combine performances in modern NFL history. But it took a long ass time for someone to finally ask, "How often is this mother****er going to need to make an 80 yard throw on one knee?" If you put the physical comparison of Chad Pennington and JaMarcus Russell out there, it's not hard to see how Russell was vastly more impressive without context. However work ethic, reading a defense, leading a team, situational awareness, mentally operating at game speed, these are all things that formed the context under which Pennington had a better NFL career than Russell.

Wiseman is impressive in the same way a well fed healthy non injured giraffe looks like a rocket if it only had to run on a treadmill.

My take? The Knicks should pass on him unless they find a way to get the 12th-15th pick and he freefalls ( pretty much impossible to happen)

I wonder if a giraffe can give a blowjob to another giraffe? I'm thinking not, what a totally **** way to live.

BigDaddyG wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Can’t understand the lack of feeling for Wiseman.

The guy is 7-1 250 athletic skilled seems to be rather bright and a hard worker. He has all the elements of an nba star. There is no other player I feel more confidant about
I know only 3 gabes but he avg 20-11-3 in 20 minutes with another nba of on his team. We can keep M Robinson and play 2 big or atleast have one or ther other in for 48 minutes. Tgis gives us a chance to play truly big OR 4-1 small. I don’t want to see this guy going to an Atlanta or a Cleveland He’s gonna be a close version of David Robinson— not a stiff 5 but a fast athletic guy who can shoot to 3 point range — someone was telling me the nba always changes and their right. But every once in awhile u better be a team that starts a new trend

The issue is very little big men are having a big impact on the game despite big numbers, and we need guard improvements in the worst way.

Yep. DeAndre Ayton was far more skilled in college and some people are already calling him a bust. I don't feel that way about Ayton, but the stink of being picked of Luka will always follow him. Let's say Wiseman never develops his stretch game and settles at being an ultra athletic big who can score on the occasional post up. What value does that have in today's game? What need does it fill on the current roster? I have no problem picking Wiseman if he is the best player on the board when we're selecting. But is his potential impact really that much bigger than Edwards or Ball? Does he display Jokic or Embiid level skill? I haven't watched any of the Jokers old European clips, but I can honestly say Wiseman didn't measure up to Embiid's skill during his brief college stint.

agree with a lot of this. In principal i agree with the idea of zigging when others zag. that's how you can find value (i.e., buying then underappreciated assets/talent). Toronto mastered that. But going big/centers is one way to zig, not the only way, and for various reasons current league rules and enforcement make it exceedingly difficult to build an offense around a center.

If the Knicks wanted my advice, it would be a hard pass on this guy. Develop Mitch so he can stay on the floor. He Can guard the perimeter and interior. And if you ignore him on offense he can dunk on you.

As a comparison, Anthony Davis (who i love) could only take his teams so far before being paired with LBJ. OLd Chris Paul did more for OKC by generaling a team oriented offense and defense.

Low post centers are dinosaurs. And they will be until rules are loosened on defense. At the moment it advantageous statistically to launch a ton of threes and attack the rim for layups or Free throws, which for an attacking guard with decent FT% is still the most efficient way to score and also among the best to balance your team for defense if you miss

ESOMKnicks wrote:If your big man is unstoppable scorer down low and a willing passer, it does wonders for team spacing and 3-point shooting.

Shaq and Hakeem were dominant scoring centers that took their teams to championships because they were great passers out of the post. A lot of LeBron's effectiveness in recent years has been as a bully down low and an effective passer out of the post. Patrick Ewing was not a great passer, as great as he was as an individual player, hence no rings for him.

I am not saying it is Wiseman or bust, but if we do not place high in the lottery, and he slips to us at 6 or 7, he would be an asset worth taking and capitalizing on. He may not be the next Admiral, but as long as he is not the next Okafor or Olowokandi, I am willing to roll. Is Wiseman a good passer?

Yeah agree with this. I’m certainly not opposed to drafting Wiseman, I just have others above him based on fit / team chemistry / BPA. If he fell to 6 / 7 and we got him - excellent!!

In terms of a comparison maybe a young Jermaine Oneal maybe DeAndre Jordan?