Posted by JohnWallace44:

Solace, if you're going to make a point that we should have drafted a player from Europe that was not coming over for a year or two, then make that point. There's some validity to that because we wouldn't have this log jam.

I'm simply posing a question, JW44. Not being a professional scout, I'm not going to lay claim that we would've been better picking any Euro player at #23. Morris Almond was my pick at #23 or Sean Williams, if he had fallen, which he didn't. I think there were certainly some good players available at #23, but my intention in this latest series of posts isn't to question the draft selection.

Posted by JohnWallace44:

The minutes are limited, but we have tons of depth at every position, so you pick the BEST fit.

I think Craw, Jeff and even Marbury could be suprised at how limited their minutes could be by Chandler, Mardy, and Balkman if they are not playing sharp basketball all the time.

Nichols is the developmental player because he doesn't have the handle he needs for his NBA position yet.

I don't think James, Jeffries, Rose, Morris, Nichols, or Dickau will see the floor long enough to get their sneakers broken in this year.

That's fine and that's a possibility. All I was doing was posing a question to see what you guys thought. Now you answered my question. I have some scepticism that highly paid players will lose too many minutes, but it's not out of the question. I think the fact that Jared played so much over Balkman last year when he wasn't cutting it, threw me, but hopefully Isiah will learn from his mistakes and if Chandler, Nichols, Morris, etc... earn the minutes, they will play.

[Edited by - Solace on Jul 29 2007 4:36 PM]

Posted by Solace:

Posted by nixluva:

Come on now Solace. You don't not draft a guy cuz you've got an OK player at the position now. If Isiah feels Chandler's upside exceeds what he has now, then you take him, teach him and groom him to replace the guys ahead of him. But having the other guys there is a form of insurance if that draft pick doesn't pan out. There will be opportunities over the next couple of years for Chandler to get some burn and for us to see what he's got. It's always been that way with Isiah.

Not everyone is gonna stay. Change is inevitable at some point. SF is the one position where we can afford to have some redundancy. We don't have that position locked down yet with someone that is rock solid. There's always some kind of trade that can be made if you want to clear space, you can also send the current player to the bench if he's not getting it done and there's also the drastic option to work out a buyout if there's no deal and you really feel a player needs to be replaced. We've got time before anything close to that needs to be considered. Chandler is 20 and still very green.

Posted by Pharzeone:

Didn't Thomas indicate that the player he was selecting would not really be in the rotation this upcoming season? Which is fine by me because I think he is a hybrid SF which is what the NBA seems to be going these days. A player with all around skills. I personally have no faith that Q Rich will last 82 games and for that matter many other Knicks. Apparently, he does not favor Jefferies anymore with all the trade rumors surfacing with his name. Do you think if he would have drafted Almond that he was going to take Crawford's minutes, Marbury's or Q-Rich. Any rookie should face the same problem. They will have to earn minutes in practice or when the opportunity arrives.

I'll respond to both of you as one combined response. I never claimed we shouldn't draft Chandler because we have no room for him to play. I merely asked, how will we go about making a role for him on this roster? Not just this year, not just next, not just the year after. We have a lot of guys locked up to multi-year deals, and we have younger players who are currently higher on the depth charts than Chandler. So, where does Chandler fit in? That's all.

I agree about earning minutes, and certainly if Chandler comes out and plays like Balkman/Lee, the minutes will be there. I just think there's a lot of "depth" before Chandler, so it's hard to see him finding a role. If he is to be an important piece, who do you see going to make room for him? If you like Chandler, then who do we rid ourselves of to make room for him, in the coming years? Crawford? Balkman? Quentin? Jared? Nate? Nichols? Etc...? If it's Jared and Quentin, maybe you can give Chandler a few minutes. But if Balkman, Craw and Nate wind up being the key cogs, minutes will still be low for both Chandler and Nichols. It's a concern, that's all.

I respond to you like this, there maybe depth in bodies but not necessarily in skills. How many players right now on this current roster who can play the swingman position that can shoot, rebound and play defense. While I am a huge fan of both Lee and Balkman, I know they have serious holes in their games that Chandler doesn't have. Will both continue to pass up open jumpers because they do not have confidence to shoot it on the perimeter (Balkman did this during SL as well until it looks like he was told to shoot when open). You can throw JJ2 into that mix as well. As I stated before Q Rich is not a body that should be counted on for the season anymore until he proves otherwise. The same issue was presented for Balkman last year as for as minutes go. My biggest issue right now is if Lee can defend the four spot and possible center position when Eddy/Curry gets into foul trouble since Frye is not on this team anymore.

Good question on the future of the team. I do see him being a type of player that probably should start if he can live up to his potential. It could be that his ability to score may leapfrog over some favorites. Another factor to consider is Lee's upcoming contract extension. How much does he want and what does management think he is worth. Putting that aside, Jefferies would be my first candidate to moving which Thomas appears to trying to move. Unless I see different to I have to put Q Rich on there if continues to play the role of Grant Hill. It should be an interesting year for both Lee and Balkman because right now they are the two who have the most similarities on this team in what they bring to the table.

Papabear says

After what I saw last year Marbs being hurt so was Crawford, Lee, Q, J Jerreries, J James, and even N8 for a while plus suspension. We were short handed at the end. I think that Jarret Jefferies started to come along right towards the end of the season. When he broke his wrist he also lost part of his game. We have about 6 player on this team who may still be hurt. Q claims he is ready and so did Allan Houston. I think that Zeke sees the same thing. Marbs can't go 40 min a game anymore because he will have nothing left during play off time. Will Crawford favor his ankle and will it effect his shot. As far as Jerom James he aught to be ashamed of himself. He came in here and robbed the Knicks with out a gun. He is a big man and he must play. Kick is butt out on that floor and make his lazy butt play. I'd work his butt at practice everyday without rest. I know Zeke ain't worried about the begining of the season he is worried about the end of the season. Last season we had nothing left, we were all banged up. Will Q last??? Come on guys you know deep down inside Q won't last. The only way is that he should come off the bench or let him start but only let him play 15 min a game. I think that Q may be done and thats why Zeke is going after Artest. No doubt Artest will be in New York 2008 and thats why the kings are having a hard time moving him and if he plays another season Artest can opt out and the kings will get nothin for him. They have no choice and Zeke knows this.

Papabear

Posted by Bippity10:

what crystal ball is everyone using to determine who is the better value when none of these guys have played an NBA minute yet?

If you could determine based on that, then the NBA draft would be very different. The determination is based on where other teams have placed their value at the time of the draft.