nixluva wrote:

newyorker4ever wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

nixluva wrote:

foosballnick wrote:

FistOfOakley wrote:it just seemed like the knicks have certain types of players that they like and i'm pretty sure these guys are gaines' signature...

thanasis, labeyrie, guillermo and porzingis are in one mold... and early, galloway and grant are in another...

i wasn't a big fan of any of those picks but we'll see if any pan out or not... i am not too optimistic... it's quite possible that none of them do anything in this league...

Couple thoughts.......

1) Not sure what type of signature guys you are expecting to come out of the 2nd Round and D-League.
2) Isn't it a bit early to be down on Thanisis, Labeyrie, Porzingis and Grant without even seeing them play in the NBA?
3) Galloway seems like a solid role player out of the D-League - not sure how you can be down on him especially given his really cheap contract
4) I am not enamored with Early either (so far) - however he does not seem in the same mold galloway and grant as you indicated. Gallow and Grant are measured as good on the ball defenders and fairly heady offensive players - Early does not seem like this type of player (at least so far).

Early is a better player than he showed last year. We have to remember that Early had several setbacks which slowed down his development. If you recall his performances in college he was really energetic and capable. He was a team leader and willed his teams to wins in the NCAA. He started to come on at the end of the season. He still has a lot of upside IMO.

I love kool aid also, but 18 points in a blow out loss against the clips c team isn't convincing. Not saying Early can't put together a good season, but last year did not show me much.

Yeah i'm with you. He definitely looked like he was letting his nerves get to him while he was on the court. He kinda turned into Timmy and just kept putting up 3 point shots every time he touched the ball but when he did drive to the basket he didn't look that bad. It would be nice for the kid to show some good improvements in his 2nd year.

I get so tired of the lack of perspective when it comes to assessing our prospects. How many young late picks really flashed and especially after having F'ing surgery??? Some fans have no sense of perspective or reason when evaluating. Add on top all of the issues with the team, being a rookie and trying get a comfort level with the Triangle and it's not hard to imagine it would take something out of his aggressiveness. Early did start to look better but it was still HIS ROOKIE SEASON. Jesus. If he was a top 10 pick, with no surgery and a good team I could understand not cutting him any slack.

Nix, I try to be objective and Luv the Knix, but to even say 'after surgery' while describing a 2nd Round draft pick should give you pause. How many 2nd round picks get to come back from surgery? If he were not on the Knicks, you might be more objective on him. I'm not saying he can't take that next step and am praying he does. That said, he is a 2nd round pick and it's put up or shut up time. His roster spot is about to become more valuable than his contract and he has to earn his way forward. You are handing out gimmes cause he wears blue and orange and the rest of us were mildly unimpressed with his performance -- surgery or not. And if he needs surgery again, he is likely to be cut. Fisher even said, you look at a guy with his injury record and have to start thinking... What is this guy doing wrong? Glass ankles and poor rehab therapy. Either way, excuses have no room on this roster. If he performs again the way he did last year, his days will be numbered. It's more hopeful than realistic to expect otherwise. He did not do well in year 1.

foosballnick wrote:
Sorry, but this post is just a cop out and it shows that you've likely done squat in terms of analysis and research. If you choose not to provide any insight or data to back up your points - then most here will believe you just a poser who has no credibility.

Also in response to your NCAA comparison to the , you really don't seem to understand statistical analysis in any way. There are over 4500 Division 1 College basketball players mostly between the ages of 18 - 22. An overwhelming majority of those players are not NBA talent. Thus even good teams are playing mostly against watered down kids and padding their stats. The Spanish ACB league has perhaps 200 players - all of whom are professional with an average age of perhaps 27 years old. Further, the ACB league has a much higher concentration of former NBA players than the NCAA. So you are trying to compare kids to grown men, Amateurs to Professionals and playing frequently against marginal talent vs frequently against former NBA talent. Even the best NCAA power 5 conference teams would likely lose against an organized professional team of grown men from the ACB league.

I'll end the conversation with you here as my guess is that you will continue to add nothing of value in terms of valid insights to the conversation nor this board,

i provide plenty of evidence if what i'm saying is totally out there.. and if you think it's a cop out that's fine... i'm not here to educate you or anyone on this... i'm just here talking about basketball... what you choose to believe is entirely up to you and if you're curious enough about it you should seek out the info you need...

translations vary wildly and it depends on the age of the player.. if you're freshman-soph the competition between ncaa and the acb is pretty similar... but if you're a senior everyone in the ncaa is much younger than you so the difference between the acb and ncaa would appear wide... for the purposes of what we were talking about porzingis was 19/20 so you can make a similar comparison between other freshmen and soph...

if you don't understand that then you're going to keep mentioning acb teams vs ncaa teams and really that's not the discussion at all...

seriously... if you can't handle criticism for your favorite player then don't get involved in the discussion... if you want to contribute then go ahead... i'm not here to purposefully irritate you... i just have conviction with my opinions because i've already done the legwork to form those opinions... i try not to let my biases get in the way... in the case of porzingis.. i'm not the only one on the planet that had huge questions about him.. and certainly not the only one even on this forum that has questioned the knicks picks...

i don't get why it's bothering you so much... life is short.. this is the internet... you're not going to find too many ppl who share your world view...

That said he'll still have adjustments to make and loads of new things to learn. The advantage he takes into his rookie season is his size and shooting ability. Towns never really used his shooting in games to a high degree like KP has but he has the talent. KP has already figured out how to apply it in games tho. Kaminsky is one of the few who are on KP's level in terms of being able to move Ray Allen style and get open.

BRIGGS wrote:

FistOfOakley wrote:

foosballnick wrote:
Sorry, but this post is just a cop out and it shows that you've likely done squat in terms of analysis and research. If you choose not to provide any insight or data to back up your points - then most here will believe you just a poser who has no credibility.

Also in response to your NCAA comparison to the , you really don't seem to understand statistical analysis in any way. There are over 4500 Division 1 College basketball players mostly between the ages of 18 - 22. An overwhelming majority of those players are not NBA talent. Thus even good teams are playing mostly against watered down kids and padding their stats. The Spanish ACB league has perhaps 200 players - all of whom are professional with an average age of perhaps 27 years old. Further, the ACB league has a much higher concentration of former NBA players than the NCAA. So you are trying to compare kids to grown men, Amateurs to Professionals and playing frequently against marginal talent vs frequently against former NBA talent. Even the best NCAA power 5 conference teams would likely lose against an organized professional team of grown men from the ACB league.

I'll end the conversation with you here as my guess is that you will continue to add nothing of value in terms of valid insights to the conversation nor this board,

i provide plenty of evidence if what i'm saying is totally out there.. and if you think it's a cop out that's fine... i'm not here to educate you or anyone on this... i'm just here talking about basketball... what you choose to believe is entirely up to you and if you're curious enough about it you should seek out the info you need...

translations vary wildly and it depends on the age of the player.. if you're freshman-soph the competition between ncaa and the. acb is pretty similar... but if you're a senior everyone in the ncaa is much younger than you so the difference between the acb and ncaa would appear wide... for the purposes of what we were talking about porzingis was 19/20 so you can make a similar comparison between other freshmen and soph...

if you don't understand that then you're going to keep mentioning acb teams vs ncaa teams and really that's not the discussion at all...

This is all jibber. If I wanted to make a simple comparison showings comp that may lower the standard of potential for KP is point to Isiah Austin as healthy at Baylor. Many similar characteristics to Porzingis both in body and game. Austin was a higher based prospect who's play in college dropped his clout. It shows me a 7-1 player who under acheived his physical talent level due to strength and his offensive diversity actually being detrimental to his game. Austin would likely be considered a better defensive prospect than Porzingis.

It tells me the fan that KP and the Knicks better go all out right away SIMPlFYING Jo's offensive game to mid range post and the appropriate moves to go along in that area. Also going full throttle on Los body by FAR the absolute most important step. The knicks need to hire the absolute best trainers to work with KP to fast track his body. If the knicks or KP allow him to settle as a jump shooting big and dismiss going all out on his body like starting 3 days ago then they could stare troible on the face. If they get things simplified and put power on kp he could be really great

There are quite a few differences between KP and Isaiah. One, KP is a much better shooter at this point. Isaiah showed potential as an outside shooter, but he never gained consistency on his shot. Also, Porzingis came in heavier than Austin in their respective workouts. This is despite the the fact that KP is a year younger than Isaiah was at the same point last year. KrisP also had a better shooting percentage from two point range. That's not too surprising if you look at their highlights. KrisP is far more aggressive attacking and finishing at the rim than Isaiah was during his time in Baylor.

FistOfOakley wrote:i honestly don't know what you're trying to get at... you think i'm picking on porzingis and really all i'm stating are my opinions... i've never framed my opinions as infallible.. i've been wrong before and i'll be wrong again..

seriously... if you can't handle criticism for your favorite player then don't get involved in the discussion... if you want to contribute then go ahead... i'm not here to purposefully irritate you... i just have conviction with my opinions because i've already done the legwork to form those opinions... i try not to let my biases get in the way... in the case of porzingis.. i'm not the only one on the planet that had huge questions about him.. and certainly not the only one even on this forum that has questioned the knicks picks...

i don't get why it's bothering you so much... life is short.. this is the internet... you're not going to find too many ppl who share your world view...

Hard for Porzingis to be a favorite player of mine when he has not played a second for the Knicks. Would have taken Towns or Russell over him...probably OK4, but less sure of OK$ now than I was a month ago. At where we were drafting, KP was my choice, but I would have been OK with Winslow and even Kaminsky, to be honest.

I did a "Case for..." post on Porzingis more to bring him to the attention of folks than anything else. Had not thought of him in a Knicks uniform before the balls were drawn, since I assumed we would be picking 1 or 2. I think I may have commented about his weight at one time, too. The more I looked, the more I liked him, though, and although I know others appreciated him, I figured I would get the ball rolling.

Criticism is fine, but you're constantly searching for dubious evidentiary arguments to support conclusions which seem to come from a strongly held feeling, even if you don't really have objective support.

Some of your assumption go against the common wisdom and conflict with the opinions of folks who know a lot more than either of us. Broad generalizations about the the NCAA/Euro leagues...their players, and even their coaches- seem like a stretch.

i would say gaines is pretty much in charge of the whole draft process... and i absolutely do not trust him...

it just seemed like the knicks have certain types of players that they like and i'm pretty sure these guys are gaines' signature...
thanasis, labeyrie, guillermo and porzingis are in one mold... and early, galloway and grant are in another...

i wasn't a big fan of any of those picks but we'll see if any pan out or not... i am not too optimistic... it's quite possible that none of them do anything in this league...

1)It's the not the type of signature guys i'm talking about... it's the type of guys that have a good chance at success..
2)i'm not dooming those guys by any stretch.. esp porzingis and grant... but to me there were far better risks to take...
3)galloway seems ok.. i like him the most and i actually think he would've been fine starting...
4)early was an older prospect also and it's sort of tough to explain but their all similar in between the ears.... and they all had athleticism questions coming into the league...

point being.. the knicks MO so far in the phil jackson era is to take 'low risks' in experienced college guys who are smart but are not athletic... or take huge risks with foreign prospects that don't quite know the game yet regardless of their age... and we went the latter route on the most important pick we'll have in awhile...
i just don't see the reasoning behind any of it and time will tell who was right...

look.. i mean porzingis has skills.. and he's a hard guy to project since there hasn't been a ton of guys moving over from the acb to the pros... the best comps we have are from 10yrs ago... any projections are more guesswork than anything...
and im not so sure the acb was tougher than the ncaa.... they have two different playstyles and the acb might have better players but the ncaa does have better big men and it's much tougher environment for paint scoring and rebounding due to the 3p line being shorter and the paint being smaller...

omg with the age thing... look this is not me making this up... he was eligible for the draft last year... he would be a soph in college... you have to judge him based on the same scale as how the NBA and college delineates birthdays... he's older than both christian wood and jordan mickey... he's as close to towns in age as he is with andrew wiggins... this is hardly an argument... it is black and white...
and the quality of comp in acb.. the ncaa routinely brings in the best prospects in the nba.. alot more than the acb so i'd have to question the ppl who think that... most ppl say it is the second best professional league in the world... and they are right... it is probably not that close.. and it's decent comp... but comparing it to the ncaa is not a 1 to 1 comparison given the rules and you could easily argue the ncaa has better comp within the major conferences...
i might not sound objective but i am using objective measures... and i'd like to think that it has sound reasoning.. but some would disagree and that's fine... that's why we discuss things...

People point out that a guy has played over 2 years against good competition- you come up with personal assertions without any basis in reality. Basketball experts are tossed aside, as are the assessments of guys who've played in both leagues.

People talk about the fact that the Knicks might have been looking at this kid longer than any of us thought, and that Gaines and others were sent over to scout him, and you go after Gaines, discounting any due diligence done by the team. Jackson, Krause, and MJ appreciate Gaines as a talent evaluator, but that is meaningless.

You bring up the age thing which I expect any expert on this kind of thing would tell you is a red herring. People's bodies mature and develop at different rates- this is not something I'm inventing, it is a fact- but you actually brought up differences of a few months as being significant, if I remember correctly.

You talk about athleticism, but Early, Thanasis, Grant, Porzingis, and labeyrie are all good athletes who can play above the rim. Other we've picked up are guys who can work within a system. Of these 5, I would only consider Grant and Porzingis to be cerebral players, so you can't say we don't overlook athletic players.

You have an opinion on something...fine, but when you start creating arguments from faulty assumptions there comes a point where an intelligent conversation is no longer possible.