NUPE wrote:People are upset about the Shumpert pick now?!?! LoL!

Faried is a star all of a sudden?!?!?! LoL!

Shumpert's ceiling is Bruce Bowen now?!?!? LoL!

Knicks fans say the wildest things nowadays!

I don't think people are upset...

I don't think people are saying faried is a star either..

some just feel we needed faried more than shump, I guess..

I don't necessarily agree.. would love to have had both..

I am happy with shumpert.. watched him here at GA tech..

I like the kid a lot.. Just feel he may not flourish on this team and in this environment..

I was banking on a lin/shump backcourt for the future..... that went up in smoke..

mrKnickShot wrote:

tkf wrote:

mrKnickShot wrote:

KnicksFE wrote:

mrKnickShot wrote:

holfresh wrote:

mrKnickShot wrote:

holfresh wrote:

mrKnickShot wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

NUPE wrote:Jeremy Lin is not the next Chris Paul. Lin will be a good player at very best but NOT REMOTELY a franchise player NOR a star. This season Lin will be marginally better than Felton on the offensive end and vastly inferior to Felton on the defensive end. I see people predicting 20 and 10 for Lin this season which is wholly ludicrous. I really don't get the incessant whining and crying regarding Lin. It's actually largely absurd. If you care that much about Lin, to the point where you actually desire to see the Knicks lose or fail, then then please become a Rockets fan and move on with your life.

Really, Knicks fans have a long history of over-hyping their young players while simultaneously hating the best players on the Knicks team. This is nothing new.

Don't need to go too far into the distant past for examples of this either, do we?

Like overrating shumpert

It's not a function of over rating a player..Last here most was very with what we saw in Shump...The fact that we don't do an about face because another player we could have selected is doing well doesn't mean we are homers or over rating said individual...It's just means some of us just don't role that way...I was very happy with the pick and will remain so..I'm happy Faried is doing well but I want to see Shrump put Wade on lockdown in June...

Fair enough. I just did not see Shump prove that he can be an Offensive 2. He is still young and can still improve - I am just not sold that it can happen.

Defensively, he is a home run.

But u do admit he can defensively change a game which many in this league can't..So he is special....

He is very good defensively. Bowen was a great defender too but he was also able to knock down a 3. Will shump get there? Who knows.

I agree, I’m extremely happy with Shump, by far one of my favorite Knicks (along with Chandler), but I wonder sometimes why is that we never ended up with the Rondo, Ibaka, Marc Gasol, Ginobli, Josh Smith, Parker, late first rounders that became near or all-stars.
Even Farid seems to have the motor to get there one day as well, may be we wouldn’t have to surrender many assets or over pay if we just draft better.

We are notorious for our awful drafts - can't argue that.

Even Gallo and Shump. We could have done/drafter better. But, like you said, why can't we get the diamond?

you need as many balls in the bin as you can to get that diamond.. more balls more chances.. knicks are notorious for trading picks.. starphuch......as they call it I guess..... I would love to have the picks back from the curry trade, marbury trade and especially the carmelo trade.... hard to find a diamond when you are busy chasing donkeys...

There is nothing wrong with trading pick in the right situations. We have not done it right.

LA traded 1st rounders for Nash. Was that correct for a guy at his age? We shall see.

Did we trade too much for Melo? Probably - we shall see.

However, the way we draft, we should trade all our picks.

not every player drafted is going to be a star, maybe they are just good players that will give you good assets to move.. walsh didn't do bad.. gallo, hill, shumpert, fields... all of them got new deals(except shump, still on rookie contract) some have gotten better offers than expected.. they have value...

As far as nash, I can see why LA made that move.. they are a championship team with championship players making one last run... I can see that, makes sense... nash hasn't shown much slowdown and I think they are banking on two good years from nash, which again makes sense with the way that team is built....

dk7th wrote:
you don't get it-- this is both bryant and nash's last shot. this is a team that was assembled for win-now, with players that perfectly complement each other. bryant wants that last ring, perhaps two, and nash wants one as well. nash was not getting that here in ny with this group of guys. an argument can be made that they have a top 3 player at 4 out of 5 positions. they aren't waiting around to watch guys develop, like shumpert. medium risk, high reward. any of them could break down, that much is true.

outside of that the only caveat for LA is whether bryant is going to contribute to chemistry that will occur naturally among nash, howard, gasol, and artest. so far as phoenix not being dumb, their franchise point guard departed in good will and with their blessing.

this isn't grass being greener, this is their reloading according to a clear plan. that you can't see that or want to assert skepticism is fine but it does imply a bit of sour grapes.

I think that you completely missed my main point. If shumpert was so good - a top 5 draft pick as people refer to him, why did Phx choose to takes LA's 2 late picks?

Did the lakers make the right move? hard to know. Kobe is getting old fast and hates to share. Something smells like disaster there.

If we traded Shump for nash!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! oh SHyt!!!!!!!!!! And yes, he could have helped us compete for a title.

tkf wrote:

mrKnickShot wrote:

dk7th wrote:
you don't get it-- this is both bryant and nash's last shot. this is a team that was assembled for win-now, with players that perfectly complement each other. bryant wants that last ring, perhaps two, and nash wants one as well. nash was not getting that here in ny with this group of guys. an argument can be made that they have a top 3 player at 4 out of 5 positions. they aren't waiting around to watch guys develop, like shumpert. medium risk, high reward. any of them could break down, that much is true.

outside of that the only caveat for LA is whether bryant is going to contribute to chemistry that will occur naturally among nash, howard, gasol, and artest. so far as phoenix not being dumb, their franchise point guard departed in good will and with their blessing.

this isn't grass being greener, this is their reloading according to a clear plan. that you can't see that or want to assert skepticism is fine but it does imply a bit of sour grapes.

I think that you completely missed my main point. If shumpert was so good - a top 5 draft pick as people refer to him, why did Phx choose to takes LA's 2 late picks?

Did the lakers make the right move? hard to know. Kobe is getting old fast and hates to share. Something smells like disaster there.

If we traded Shump for nash!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! oh SHyt!!!!!!!!!! And yes, he could have helped us compete for a title.

I think kobe not wanting to share is a bit overblown.. a number of guys have flourished playing with him.. odom, gasol, ariza, Shanon Brown... even a declining kobe is a serious threat.. for what we are doing now with our team, He would be ideal... I would trade both carmelo and amare for him and nash straight up, I might even throw in a pick as well.... since we are going all in.. right?

Word has it you would trade Melo for a bag of peanuts...

dk7th wrote:

mrKnickShot wrote:

dk7th wrote:
you don't get it-- this is both bryant and nash's last shot. this is a team that was assembled for win-now, with players that perfectly complement each other. bryant wants that last ring, perhaps two, and nash wants one as well. nash was not getting that here in ny with this group of guys. an argument can be made that they have a top 3 player at 4 out of 5 positions. they aren't waiting around to watch guys develop, like shumpert. medium risk, high reward. any of them could break down, that much is true.

outside of that the only caveat for LA is whether bryant is going to contribute to chemistry that will occur naturally among nash, howard, gasol, and artest. so far as phoenix not being dumb, their franchise point guard departed in good will and with their blessing.

this isn't grass being greener, this is their reloading according to a clear plan. that you can't see that or want to assert skepticism is fine but it does imply a bit of sour grapes.

I think that you completely missed my main point. If shumpert was so good - a top 5 draft pick as people refer to him, why did Phx choose to takes LA's 2 late picks?

Did the lakers make the right move? hard to know. Kobe is getting old fast and hates to share. Something smells like disaster there.

If we traded Shump for nash!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! oh SHyt!!!!!!!!!! And yes, he could have helped us compete for a title.

i don't know who regard shumpert as a top 5 pick, but he certainly won me over with his terrific energy and effectiveness on defense. he needs a lot of grooming offensively before he is going to be a starter on a title team, and lets not forget, as an aside, that he is coming back from some major knee surgery. who knows how that will effect lateral quickness and explosiveness?

that said, phoenix did the best they could to grant one of its greatest players his wish to finish his career with a shot at a title. the deal may not have been as beneficial to them as trading for shumpert, but nash simply did not want to go to new york to this knick team. in fact he did the suns a favor by staying an extra couple of seasons. and they rewarded his loyalty by taking a slight hit in their dealings with the lakers.

that's my take. i know new yorkers are not used to these kinds of healthy symbiotic relationships among players, fans, and ownership-- but this is an example of everybody winning.

would he have helped us compete for a title? not nearly as realizable for him as with the lakers.

gasol
howard
bryant
artest

versus

anthony
stoudemire
chandler

what would you prefer if you were nash?

thought so.

I did, name 5 guys in that draft you would have picked before Shrump...

I also see a lot of mis-information re. Steve Nash and the Suns. The Knicks refused to give up Shumpert in the deal for Nash. That is why that deal did not go through. Nash was willing to come to NY.

Obviously

Irving 1rst then....

Derrick Williams(yes I believe he is better than Shumpert always did just maybe not worth #2)

Klay Thompson(spoken highly of amongst all teams we even were looking at him)

Kawhi Leonard(spoken highly of)

Kenneth Faried(wasn't real high on him(concerned about his size) but he was spoken highly of)

Marshon Brooks(Yep sure would take him even now ahead of Shump)

That's 6 players

Then you have 2 debateable players in Knight and Kanter who I know if were available to us at 17 would have been snatched off the board. Let's stop fooling ourselves here.

But let's keep this in perspective. After Landry Fields first year wasn't this said of him? How were fans of Landry after his second season?

Wasn't this said the same of Wilson Chandler? I heard back then if you redo the draft over how many players would have been taken ahead of him?

Why do we always do this? Why?

NUPE wrote:
Knicks fans always overrate their young players. It's annoying. That being said, you are greatly overrating young players in your post, 3G4G. It is not clear anyone you listed other than Klay and Kyrie are better than Shump. It is not clear that Shump is better than anyone you listed excluding Klay and/or Kyrie. I don't think Knicks were in a position to get Klay or Kyrie anyhow.

faried and williams are at this point better.. not sure how he is overrating them.... shump is a baller, but this list is pretty legit... I wouldn't even go as far as to say klay, but it is a legit argument, shumpert is on the verge of being an elite defender, but some of these guys have clear allstar traits in their skillset.....

NUPE wrote:It's way too early to make any real determination regarding the 2011 draft, excluding Kyrie. You need to give almost all the other players around three seasons or so. Even if Shump ends up as a top 5 pick from the draft that does not mean he will be a star or even good. The same goes for Faried. Let's stop jumping to conclusions and see how things pan out on the court.

I also see a lot of mis-information re. Steve Nash and the Suns. The Knicks refused to give up Shumpert in the deal for Nash. That is why that deal did not go through. Nash was willing to come to NY.

and you know this how?