...just saying.

Welpee wrote:Billups through age 24: 10.9 pts, 3.7 assists, 39 fg%, 86 ft%
Burke through age 24: 10.6 pts, 3.6 assists, 39 fg%, 81 ft%

...just saying.

Good example... you just never know. Burke is a confident dude. If he did blossom into something, why not here?

SupremeCommander wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

stopstandthere wrote:Could someone describe about Burke?

Started with a bang, highly hyped at first. Fizzled out.
Bad shooter, barely 6ft and doesn't do anything well if I remember correctly.

someone said 'John Starks' before as a comp. I don't like the comp for how he plays, but I do like it in terms of how he carries himself. His attitude would've been a great fit for the 90s Knicks

He is definitely a score-first guy, but isn't necessarily scared to share the ball either. He's a willing defender. I loved him coming out of college and thought he'd be much better than he is. Why? He's tiny for the position.

So back to Starks, if Burke can become the mind-over-matter guy, I think he could make a mark in the league

What Knicks fan doesn't love John Starks? But I would caution against form fitting what we want into thinking what we can get out of him. It only leads to disappointment down the road.

SupremeCommander wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

stopstandthere wrote:Could someone describe about Burke?

Started with a bang, highly hyped at first. Fizzled out.
Bad shooter, barely 6ft and doesn't do anything well if I remember correctly.

someone said 'John Starks' before as a comp. I don't like the comp for how he plays, but I do like it in terms of how he carries himself. His attitude would've been a great fit for the 90s Knicks

He is definitely a score-first guy, but isn't necessarily scared to share the ball either. He's a willing defender. I loved him coming out of college and thought he'd be much better than he is. Why? He's tiny for the position.

So back to Starks, if Burke can become the mind-over-matter guy, I think he could make a mark in the league

What Knicks fan doesn't love John Starks? But I would caution against form fitting what we want into thinking what we can get out of him. It only leads to disappointment down the road.

Definitely. To be clear, I think he has a better chance of being the next Shane Larkin than the next John Starks. The game is different and faster than then... We drafted Frank primarily because of measurements... So you have to factor in that Burke is small if measurements are now important around here

I think you fundamentally misunderstand how the Knicks Scouts work if you think they drafted Ntilikina primarily based on measurements. I suggest you read up on Clarence Gaines and how deeply he scouts players beyond the physical measurements. There was a LOT more that went into drafting him than his being tall and long for a PG.

Burke is a low risk, high reward type. He's got talent but hasn't been able to put it all together so far. He's smallish and somewhat frail compared to many of today's PG's but he's not off the charts small. His main issue isn't so much physical as it is mental. This may be a chance for him to carve out a role and Jeff has had success with Scoring PG's in the past. Burke is a good PnR PG and so if Jeff puts him in that kind of role it could work out better for him. He's got better ball handling than our other PG's and has a shifty style that could be a nice change up from our other guards.

fishmike wrote:

nixluva wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

stopstandthere wrote:Could someone describe about Burke?

Started with a bang, highly hyped at first. Fizzled out.
Bad shooter, barely 6ft and doesn't do anything well if I remember correctly.

someone said 'John Starks' before as a comp. I don't like the comp for how he plays, but I do like it in terms of how he carries himself. His attitude would've been a great fit for the 90s Knicks

He is definitely a score-first guy, but isn't necessarily scared to share the ball either. He's a willing defender. I loved him coming out of college and thought he'd be much better than he is. Why? He's tiny for the position.

So back to Starks, if Burke can become the mind-over-matter guy, I think he could make a mark in the league

What Knicks fan doesn't love John Starks? But I would caution against form fitting what we want into thinking what we can get out of him. It only leads to disappointment down the road.

Definitely. To be clear, I think he has a better chance of being the next Shane Larkin than the next John Starks. The game is different and faster than then... We drafted Frank primarily because of measurements... So you have to factor in that Burke is small if measurements are now important around here

I think you fundamentally misunderstand how the Knicks Scouts work if you think they drafted Ntilikina primarily based on measurements. I suggest you read up on Clarence Gaines and how deeply he scouts players beyond the physical measurements. There was a LOT more that went into drafting him than his being tall and long for a PG.

Burke is a low risk, high reward type. He's got talent but hasn't been able to put it all together so far. He's smallish and somewhat frail compared to many of today's PG's but he's not off the charts small. His main issue isn't so much physical as it is mental. This may be a chance for him to carve out a role and Jeff has had success with Scoring PG's in the past. Burke is a good PnR PG and so if Jeff puts him in that kind of role it could work out better for him. He's got better ball handling than our other PG's and has a shifty style that could be a nice change up from our other guards.

I think his point is Frank's measurements are what separates him from others in that class. He is easily the longest of that PG class, and not much else separates him from Monk, Smith, Mitchell, etc... so saying we drafted him based on his size I think is a pretty accurate statement. Much better than that "triangle player" stupid tag.

Nitty just being tall and long would be useless if he couldn't play. It's how he USES his physical gifts that's more important. His passing and court vision. His demeanor and BBIQ. His unselfish approach to the game. The well rounded nature of his skills. His passion for defense. So no I disagree that his measurements were the primary reason we drafted him. Of course it's a factor but minus all the other factors he would not be a top prospect.

SupremeCommander wrote:

fishmike wrote:

nixluva wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

stopstandthere wrote:Could someone describe about Burke?

Started with a bang, highly hyped at first. Fizzled out.
Bad shooter, barely 6ft and doesn't do anything well if I remember correctly.

someone said 'John Starks' before as a comp. I don't like the comp for how he plays, but I do like it in terms of how he carries himself. His attitude would've been a great fit for the 90s Knicks

He is definitely a score-first guy, but isn't necessarily scared to share the ball either. He's a willing defender. I loved him coming out of college and thought he'd be much better than he is. Why? He's tiny for the position.

So back to Starks, if Burke can become the mind-over-matter guy, I think he could make a mark in the league

What Knicks fan doesn't love John Starks? But I would caution against form fitting what we want into thinking what we can get out of him. It only leads to disappointment down the road.

Definitely. To be clear, I think he has a better chance of being the next Shane Larkin than the next John Starks. The game is different and faster than then... We drafted Frank primarily because of measurements... So you have to factor in that Burke is small if measurements are now important around here

I think you fundamentally misunderstand how the Knicks Scouts work if you think they drafted Ntilikina primarily based on measurements. I suggest you read up on Clarence Gaines and how deeply he scouts players beyond the physical measurements. There was a LOT more that went into drafting him than his being tall and long for a PG.

Burke is a low risk, high reward type. He's got talent but hasn't been able to put it all together so far. He's smallish and somewhat frail compared to many of today's PG's but he's not off the charts small. His main issue isn't so much physical as it is mental. This may be a chance for him to carve out a role and Jeff has had success with Scoring PG's in the past. Burke is a good PnR PG and so if Jeff puts him in that kind of role it could work out better for him. He's got better ball handling than our other PG's and has a shifty style that could be a nice change up from our other guards.

I think his point is Frank's measurements are what separates him from others in that class. He is easily the longest of that PG class, and not much else separates him from Monk, Smith, Mitchell, etc... so saying we drafted him based on his size I think is a pretty accurate statement. Much better than that "triangle player" stupid tag.

I thought that was obvious? But here we go again, nix knows oh so much more than me and starts putting words into my mouth... telling me what I know and don't know and can or can't understand... but sheesh, I am such a jerkface for not blindly loving the Knicks! such a nasty person for not being infatuated with a 19 y/o!

You can take what I wrote as you like but all I did was challenge your statement that "We drafted Frank primarily because of measurements..."

Gaines doesn't choose players based Primarily on physical measurements. If you read anything on him he's a Scout who is very deep into every aspect of a player including psychological aspects. Unlike Phil he's not focused on the Triangle. In fact he believes in 3 point shooting and even challenged Phil on the mathematical logic of taking 3's vs Midrange shots.

Mills also scouted Nitty and listed what he liked.

“I went over, I talked to our scouts a lot about Frank before the draft. I went over and watched Frank play prior to the draft, met with Frank’s coaches and learned a lot about who he is as a player and who he is as a person,’’ Mills said. “So I’m very comfortable with that draft pick. I would have selected Frank at that point in the draft myself. He’s a guy that fits in everything that we’re talking about right now. He’s a smart basketball player. He focuses defensively and his approach to the game, his work ethic, fit exactly in the direction that we want to take this team.’’

SupremeCommander wrote:

nixluva wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

fishmike wrote:

nixluva wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

stopstandthere wrote:Could someone describe about Burke?

Started with a bang, highly hyped at first. Fizzled out.
Bad shooter, barely 6ft and doesn't do anything well if I remember correctly.

someone said 'John Starks' before as a comp. I don't like the comp for how he plays, but I do like it in terms of how he carries himself. His attitude would've been a great fit for the 90s Knicks

He is definitely a score-first guy, but isn't necessarily scared to share the ball either. He's a willing defender. I loved him coming out of college and thought he'd be much better than he is. Why? He's tiny for the position.

So back to Starks, if Burke can become the mind-over-matter guy, I think he could make a mark in the league

What Knicks fan doesn't love John Starks? But I would caution against form fitting what we want into thinking what we can get out of him. It only leads to disappointment down the road.

Definitely. To be clear, I think he has a better chance of being the next Shane Larkin than the next John Starks. The game is different and faster than then... We drafted Frank primarily because of measurements... So you have to factor in that Burke is small if measurements are now important around here

I think you fundamentally misunderstand how the Knicks Scouts work if you think they drafted Ntilikina primarily based on measurements. I suggest you read up on Clarence Gaines and how deeply he scouts players beyond the physical measurements. There was a LOT more that went into drafting him than his being tall and long for a PG.

Burke is a low risk, high reward type. He's got talent but hasn't been able to put it all together so far. He's smallish and somewhat frail compared to many of today's PG's but he's not off the charts small. His main issue isn't so much physical as it is mental. This may be a chance for him to carve out a role and Jeff has had success with Scoring PG's in the past. Burke is a good PnR PG and so if Jeff puts him in that kind of role it could work out better for him. He's got better ball handling than our other PG's and has a shifty style that could be a nice change up from our other guards.

I think his point is Frank's measurements are what separates him from others in that class. He is easily the longest of that PG class, and not much else separates him from Monk, Smith, Mitchell, etc... so saying we drafted him based on his size I think is a pretty accurate statement. Much better than that "triangle player" stupid tag.

I thought that was obvious? But here we go again, nix knows oh so much more than me and starts putting words into my mouth... telling me what I know and don't know and can or can't understand... but sheesh, I am such a jerkface for not blindly loving the Knicks! such a nasty person for not being infatuated with a 19 y/o!

You can take what I wrote as you like but all I did was challenge your statement that "We drafted Frank primarily because of measurements..."

Gaines doesn't choose players based Primarily on physical measurements. If you read anything on him he's a Scout who is very deep into every aspect of a player including psychological aspects. Unlike Phil he's not focused on the Triangle. In fact he believes in 3 point shooting and even challenged Phil on the mathematical logic of taking 3's vs Midrange shots.

Mills also scouted Nitty and listed what he liked.

“I went over, I talked to our scouts a lot about Frank before the draft. I went over and watched Frank play prior to the draft, met with Frank’s coaches and learned a lot about who he is as a player and who he is as a person,’’ Mills said. “So I’m very comfortable with that draft pick. I would have selected Frank at that point in the draft myself. He’s a guy that fits in everything that we’re talking about right now. He’s a smart basketball player. He focuses defensively and his approach to the game, his work ethic, fit exactly in the direction that we want to take this team.’’

http://nypost.com/2017/07/17/new-knicks-regime-wants-credit-or-blame-for-frank-ntilikina/amp/

dude, I get that you love Frank but come on -- why are you trying to ramrod a debate. Save it for a Frank thread.