WaltLongmire wrote:

TLover wrote:This guy is a true talent and has a great feel for the game. We have not seen Frankie yet but right now it looks like we should've taken D.Smith Jr.

Any player is susceptible to injury. This kid has a competitive spirit that champions need to have.
He would've brought some electricity to the garden.. too bad we have executives that trip over their own feet.

Why not wait so see what Ntilikina does. Smith is almost a full 2 years older, by the way. Different body types, but Smith is clearly more mature physically at this point.

I would have been fine with Smith, though I wanted Ntilikina.

I also prefer consistency and intelligent play over electricity, by the way, a player who makes others around him better. That was Rose's issue, by the way

Seem to recall some of the same doubt with Porzingis. Looks like Smith will be the next Justice Winslow or Mudiay...or maybe Stein, in terms of the guy we should have taken before the person we picked.

Patience is a virtue...at least that is what someone once said. Maybe Smith ends up being the choice we should have made, but I'd say it's a bit too early to make such a judgment right now, though I expect some of you to be doing it on a regular basis, especially if Smith has a good game.

But some of us are ok waiting 4-5 years and then look back and see where we are. Its also possible Monk might have been the better pick. Then its like "what are the odds one of the others besides frank was the better pick"? You know, you don't get pick BOTH Dennis Smith and Monk. Just one.
So the odds in this instance are "66% chance knicks made wrong pick".....>But like I said, you can only pick one.

There was a process that thought Frank has the higher upside. WE'll see.

MS wrote:We ****ed up. Why not just recognize that.

Smith is a star. It doesn't make sense to pick a kid that needs years to develop. This team goes as far as KP and Willy can take them and you need those guys on their rookie contracts when you sign free agents.

fishmike wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Hey look... lets what Randle drop 26 and get 6 steals. Another star!

Funny its impossible to predict someones potential but easy to defend a pick that was based more on speculation and probable fit to an antiquated syatem. Your comparing Randle? Was he considered #1 in his draft class, at any time in his life?

Exavtly what in DSjr. draft workouts, documented history since a kid, athletic ability give anyone the inclination that Frank was a better prospect? Specially if you were watching Franks games in the French league. The only respectable objection would have been a concern for his knee. Fair enough. I would accept that. But we both know it was more about the Triangle. But let's ignore that and just keep downplaying his play. Then..if he turns out to be a star, just claim it was all luck of the draw.

Say what you want Fish, regardless of the outcome, this was a short sighted pick. Another affect of Phil. But your right, we have to wait and see. Just like we had to wair to see whether or not the Triangle would last. It will be interesting, as we both claim to know a little bit about basketball. I hope you are right. I will be the first to admit it.

HofstraBBall wrote:

fishmike wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Hey look... lets what Randle drop 26 and get 6 steals. Another star!

Funny its impossible to predict someones potential but easy to defend a pick that was based more on speculation and probable fit to an antiquated syatem. Your comparing Randle? Was he considered #1 in his draft class, at any poimt in his life?

Exavtly what in DSjr. draft workouts, documented history since a kid, athletic ability give anyone the inclination that Frank was a better prospect? Specially if you were watching Franks games in the French league. The only respectable objection would have been a concern for his knee. Fair enough. I would accept that. But we both know it was more about the Triangle. But let's ignore that and just keep downplaying his play. Then..if he turns out to be a star, jusy claim it was all luck of the draw.

Say what you want Fish, regardless of the outcome, this was a short sighted pick. Another affect of Phil. But your right, we have to wait and see. Just like we had to wair to see whether or not the Triangle would last. It will be interesting, as we both claim to know a little bit about basketball. I hope you are right. I will be the first to admit it.

The Knicks scouted Frank all year. 7 other teams passed on Smith(8 if you include the Wolves) other then the Knicks. Given all the information you just stated. 7 other teams doing their due diligence passed on him. None of these other teams play the triangle. And they all(other then maybe Philly) didn't pass on him due to them believing he was less talented then the player that they drafted. Its not a lack of talent that made Smith drop to 9. Given his talent that i'm sure popped out at teams during workouts. He must have some serious baggage and skeletons in that closet. To claim it was just triangle and not possibly Smith's own doing and history doesn't answer for why all the other teams passed on him. Why Philly wasn't so blown away by him that instead of giving up all those picks to move up to #1 they didn't just draft him at 3 and keep those picks to make moves for other players. With that Lakers pick they could have moved that for a star on its own and still drafted Smith. Or the Kings willing to take Fox at #5 over him even though to me strictly eye test always looked like the better prospect. But workouts should have blown Kings away and solidified that. Maybe he did, but that baggage is to real.

newyorknewyork wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

fishmike wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Hey look... lets what Randle drop 26 and get 6 steals. Another star!

Funny its impossible to predict someones potential but easy to defend a pick that was based more on speculation and probable fit to an antiquated syatem. Your comparing Randle? Was he considered #1 in his draft class, at any poimt in his life?

Exavtly what in DSjr. draft workouts, documented history since a kid, athletic ability give anyone the inclination that Frank was a better prospect? Specially if you were watching Franks games in the French league. The only respectable objection would have been a concern for his knee. Fair enough. I would accept that. But we both know it was more about the Triangle. But let's ignore that and just keep downplaying his play. Then..if he turns out to be a star, jusy claim it was all luck of the draw.

Say what you want Fish, regardless of the outcome, this was a short sighted pick. Another affect of Phil. But your right, we have to wait and see. Just like we had to wair to see whether or not the Triangle would last. It will be interesting, as we both claim to know a little bit about basketball. I hope you are right. I will be the first to admit it.

The Knicks scouted Frank all year. 7 other teams passed on Smith(8 if you include the Wolves) other then the Knicks. Given all the information you just stated. 7 other teams doing their due diligence passed on him. None of these other teams play the triangle. And they all(other then maybe Philly) didn't pass on him due to them believing he was less talented then the player that they drafted. Its not a lack of talent that made Smith drop to 9. Given his talent that i'm sure popped out at teams during workouts. He must have some serious baggage and skeletons in that closet. To claim it was just triangle and not possibly Smith's own doing and history doesn't answer for why all the other teams passed on him. Why Philly wasn't so blown away by him that instead of giving up all those picks to move up to #1 they didn't just draft him at 3 and keep those picks to make moves for other players. With that Lakers pick they could have moved that for a star on its own and still drafted Smith. Or the Kings willing to take Fox at #5 over him even though to me strictly eye test always looked like the better prospect. But workouts should have blown Kings away and solidified that. Maybe he did, but that baggage is to real.

We were not talking aboitbither teams. Specially top 4 picks. We are talking about the 8th pick and best available. But fair enough.

I do think Dunn has talent but it maybe talent on the Marcus Smart level. This year will be huge for him.

fishmike wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

fishmike wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:Funny its impossible to predict someones potential but easy to defend a pick that was based more on speculation and probable fit to an antiquated syatem. Your comparing Randle? Was he considered #1 in his draft class, at any time in his life?

Exavtly what in DSjr. draft workouts, documented history since a kid, athletic ability give anyone the inclination that Frank was a better prospect? Specially if you were watching Franks games in the French league. The only respectable objection would have been a concern for his knee. Fair enough. I would accept that. But we both know it was more about the Triangle. But let's ignore that and just keep downplaying his play. Then..if he turns out to be a star, just claim it was all luck of the draw.

Say what you want Fish, regardless of the outcome, this was a short sighted pick. Another affect of Phil. But your right, we have to wait and see. Just like we had to wair to see whether or not the Triangle would last. It will be interesting, as we both claim to know a little bit about basketball. I hope you are right. I will be the first to admit it.

Do you not realize how dumb it sounds to call picking this guy "short sighted" before you have seen him play an NBA game?

On one hand you say we whiffed, then you say we have to wait and see. Which one?

Exavtly what in DSjr. draft workouts, documented history since a kid, athletic ability give anyone the inclination that Frank was a better prospect?

How about size? How about defense? How about experience? At 18 Ntilinkina has proven he can play winning basketball vs. pro grown men. Dennis Smith put up good number on a team that couldnt win NCAA games. Smith has one knee injury under his belt.

A LOT of people have also voiced concerns over what Smith brings between the ears. This is from his draftexpress:

From a personality standpoint, Smith is best surrounded by accomplished veterans and a coach that he respects. He was detached at N.C. State, and wasn't held accountable on the defensive end. His season in Raleigh served as merely a pit stop to the NBA, and the lack of camaraderie on that Wolfpack team was apparent. Although a team like the Knicks could sorely use his shot creation, his less than stellar defensive habits and ball-dominant style would likely continue to worsen for an organization that is lacking veteran leadership and stability on the coaching staff and front office. For Smith's sake, like Monk, he'd be much better off landing in a place like Dallas, which has strong ownership, an accomplished head coach in Carlisle, and veterans like Dirk Nowitzki and Wesley Matthews to learn from. If Smith lands in the wrong spot, his NBA career could look a lot like that lone season at N.C. State -- big statistical games in lopsided losses, but with a strong infrastructure in place, his talent could very well be maximized, turning into that top five caliber prospect we saw at the high school level. - Source: http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Dennis-Smith-76448/ ©DraftExpress

So yea... I wont give you an ounce of criticism for wanted to draft Smith first. Fine. I would have been fine with him as a prospect. Summer league doesnt not equate to any measure of success in the NBA. Just ask Dunn from Minnesota or Randle last year with the Knicks. Summer league is like OTAs for football. It just a chance for coaches to work with players.

"Short sighted" is appropriate, not dumb, when making a pick based on a system that would have been gone in 2 years. Now 2 weeks ago. But you keep ignoring that. And btw, an earlier post also suggested Dunn as a good comparison. May be, if you leave out that he had a major injury in his rookie season, therefore the drop in expectation. And are you suggesting Frank's play in the French league (whuxh i watched) is not an indication of his ability but the summer league would have been?

again... the bold. Your whole premise is based on an assumption. Knick only took Frank because he fits the system? He's 18. He was drafted because he's a 6'5 PG with a 7'0 wingspan who hits 3s and guards 3 positions and runs like a deer. I thought those were the reasons the Knicks picked him and I dont see taking someone who on the downside is going to be a good 3&D player with skills as short sighted. As far as upside? How about a taller Gary Payton? Rondo with a jumper? I dont know... he's pretty unique. Dennis Smith is not unique. He's shown to be a REALLY good offensive player. That is ALL he's shown! He's not a big player and if he cant guard at a high level (hasnt shown) or elevate the play of guys around him (hasnt shown) then he's already way short of any of your hopes for him

Just don't agree with that. Can't believe the triangle guru ignored who he thought would be the better fit, for his system, but instead picked the most athletic kid available. That would have have been Smith? As he was regarded as a physical phenom and rated best available. Just think it was a another Phil mistake and we missed a chance at getting a difference maker. But again, hope the kid is a good contributor for us.