“

@TheRealSnooop: @I_Am_Iman please, please tell me you don't want out of NY” Hell no! Y wud I? That doesn't even make sense

dk7th wrote:

3G4G wrote:

VCoug wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Knicks need was at 2-guard. PF wasn't on their mind with Amare coming off a 26ppg season

You never draft for need, always draft for talent.

Disagree....had we drafted for need in the 2008 and 2009 draft we would have potentially had(Eric Gordon/Lopez/Mayo or Lawson/Holiday/Curry) factoring trading up if necessary. We needed any combination of a Guard/Center/Point Guard in either of those drafts which in the end covers the talent aspect too.

This is eliminating guys like....

Hibbert/Batum/Jordan/Dragic/Ryan Anderson/George Hill/Omer Asik...arguably as good as talents as Gallo

and

Gerald Henderson/Taj Gibson/Buddinger/Danny Green/Jeff Teague/Marcus Thornton/B.J. Mullens...arguably as good as talents as Hill and Douglas

All filling more of our needs at the time. Keep in mind needs don't always mean positioned player, it can also mean what skillset does a player bring to a team lacking such(i.e. rebounding, interior defense, perimeter defense, shooting, leadership, etc etc)

Talents that weren't hyped as much coming into the draft, who were picked later and/or around our selections in those drafts or players who could have been draft with additional pick(s) and/or acquired pick(s) as in the case of Toney Douglas. Talent also may not cover UPSIDE...as it is vague it could assume Talent as in NBA ready BPA.

well doesn't the gm and coach have a say in who should be drafted and why? at the time it was d'antoni as the coach and nepotism notwithstanding they chose to go with gallinari as the beginning of a rebuild here. gallinari is a talented player and he filled a perceived need ostensibly as a floor spacer who can shoot the 3 ball. that he has not ended up being that sort of player does not preclude the notion that they drafted for need. i mean, sure, lopez is a no-brainer in this scenario-- except that you have to factor in that d'antoni was the coach-- and lopez did not fill a need based on an overarching plan. rebuilding, in my opinion, must be a top-down process especially with a coach who had success with his system.

the following draft was clearly a mistake. with d'antoni at the helm for the foreseeable future you have to draft a legitimate point guard. lawson should have been drafted even if he was low. in hindsight obviously holliday would have been great too.

Yes Gallo was part of "Nepotism's Finest" but D'AnToni needed a "POINT GUARD" or a "POINT FORWARD" and a "CENTER DEFENDING BIG" to run his system more than anything else..so maybe if he had such a boner for "FLOOR SPACING" (although overblown at the time as we had a couple spacers) as it would have filled a need then maybe the GM should have been innovative along with our scouts and traded down if we couldn't trade up to get Mayo. You trade down get an additional first rounder and maybe just maybe you end up with...

George Hill/Anderson
Chalmers/Jordan
Augustin/Ibaka
Bayless/Batum

Or any combination of the above continuing to mix them

Hell I don't know...but to say you draft Talent over Need is not a concrete rule I'd go by at all when approaching a draft. Bringing in a 19yr old foreign project was not the smartest decision to make regardless if D'AnToni was coaching, it's about as shortsighted as trying to go in WIN NOW MODE move making.

VCoug wrote:

3G4G wrote:

VCoug wrote:

3G4G wrote:

VCoug wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Knicks need was at 2-guard. PF wasn't on their mind with Amare coming off a 26ppg season

You never draft for need, always draft for talent.

Disagree....had we drafted for need in the 2008 and 2009 draft we would have potentially had(Eric Gordon/Lopez/Mayo or Lawson/Holiday/Curry) factoring trading up if necessary. We needed any combination of a Guard/Center/Point Guard in either of those drafts which in the end covers the talent aspect too.

This is eliminating guys like....

Hibbert/Batum/Jordan/Dragic/Ryan Anderson/George Hill/Omer Asik...arguably as good as talents as Gallo

and

Gerald Henderson/Taj Gibson/Buddinger/Danny Green/Jeff Teague/Marcus Thornton/B.J. Mullens...arguably as good as talents as Hill and Douglas

All filling more of our needs at the time. Keep in mind needs don't always mean positioned player, it can also mean what skillset does a player bring to a team lacking such(i.e. rebounding, interior defense, perimeter defense, shooting, leadership, etc etc)

Talents that weren't hyped as much coming into the draft, who were picked later and/or around our selections in those drafts or players who could have been draft with additional pick(s) and/or acquired pick(s) as in the case of Toney Douglas. Talent also may not cover UPSIDE...as it is vague it could assume Talent as in NBA ready BPA.

I don't know how you're coming to the conclusion that we drafted for talent in those drafts, particularly 2009. My recollection is that most people thought Jordan Hill was kind of a reach and a lot of posters here were saying we should've drafted Jennings, Derozan, Holiday, or Lawson. Also, we were still terrible both of those years so we could've drafted any position we wanted to and we could have said we were drafting for need.

The point is not what you thought Jordan Hill was...going by rule had we'd been focused on "NEED" Hill would not have been drafted the same can be said of Gallo and we could have walked out with "TALENT" if we drafted by "NEED" in both drafts

Our teams sucked both years though. We could have drafted any position we wanted to and claimed it was for need.

True but as we saw with the franchise over the yrs the players usually trumped the coach, that means in the event the coach leaves for whatever reason, you better have something left over to work with. I would try and construct a team irregardless of who's coaching it...because if I have good scout/talent evaluators I'll be able to fill every position with Talent based on Needs.

Just ask the Wolves and Sacramento Kings how it's working out drafting based on Talent

VCoug wrote:

3G4G wrote:

dk7th wrote:

3G4G wrote:

VCoug wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Knicks need was at 2-guard. PF wasn't on their mind with Amare coming off a 26ppg season

You never draft for need, always draft for talent.

Disagree....had we drafted for need in the 2008 and 2009 draft we would have potentially had(Eric Gordon/Lopez/Mayo or Lawson/Holiday/Curry) factoring trading up if necessary. We needed any combination of a Guard/Center/Point Guard in either of those drafts which in the end covers the talent aspect too.

This is eliminating guys like....

Hibbert/Batum/Jordan/Dragic/Ryan Anderson/George Hill/Omer Asik...arguably as good as talents as Gallo

and

Gerald Henderson/Taj Gibson/Buddinger/Danny Green/Jeff Teague/Marcus Thornton/B.J. Mullens...arguably as good as talents as Hill and Douglas

All filling more of our needs at the time. Keep in mind needs don't always mean positioned player, it can also mean what skillset does a player bring to a team lacking such(i.e. rebounding, interior defense, perimeter defense, shooting, leadership, etc etc)

Talents that weren't hyped as much coming into the draft, who were picked later and/or around our selections in those drafts or players who could have been draft with additional pick(s) and/or acquired pick(s) as in the case of Toney Douglas. Talent also may not cover UPSIDE...as it is vague it could assume Talent as in NBA ready BPA.

well doesn't the gm and coach have a say in who should be drafted and why? at the time it was d'antoni as the coach and nepotism notwithstanding they chose to go with gallinari as the beginning of a rebuild here. gallinari is a talented player and he filled a perceived need ostensibly as a floor spacer who can shoot the 3 ball. that he has not ended up being that sort of player does not preclude the notion that they drafted for need. i mean, sure, lopez is a no-brainer in this scenario-- except that you have to factor in that d'antoni was the coach-- and lopez did not fill a need based on an overarching plan. rebuilding, in my opinion, must be a top-down process especially with a coach who had success with his system.

the following draft was clearly a mistake. with d'antoni at the helm for the foreseeable future you have to draft a legitimate point guard. lawson should have been drafted even if he was low. in hindsight obviously holliday would have been great too.

Yes Gallo was part of "Nepotism's Finest" but D'AnToni needed a "POINT GUARD" or a "POINT FORWARD" and a "CENTER DEFENDING BIG" to run his system more than anything else..so maybe if he had such a boner for "FLOOR SPACING" (although overblown at the time as we had a couple spacers) as it would have filled a need then maybe the GM should have been innovative along with our scouts and traded down if we couldn't trade up to get Mayo. You trade down get an additional first rounder and maybe just maybe you end up with...

George Hill/Anderson
Chalmers/Jordan
Augustin/Ibaka
Bayless/Batum

Or any combination of the above continuing to mix them

Hell I don't know...but to say you draft Talent over Need is not a concrete rule I'd go by at all when approaching a draft. Bringing in a 19yr old foreign project was not the smartest decision to make regardless if D'AnToni was coaching, it's about as shortsighted as trying to go in WIN NOW MODE move making.

Those players you just listed are all role players at best except for Serge Ibaka, who was a 19 year old foreigh project, and maybe Batum.

Point is each combination is better than having just Gallo....and you still get players who can do what Gallo did for us if not more, for the most part. It's 2 for 1. You trade the 6th for 2 picks really easy stuff here I'm posting.

Same could have been done with Hill. I think we could have walked away with 3 picks that draft. You trade down from 8 and acquire 2 picks coupled with the purchased pick from the Lakers. That's a total of 5 picks over 2 drafts. Team built right there.

3G4G wrote:

dk7th wrote:

3G4G wrote:

VCoug wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Knicks need was at 2-guard. PF wasn't on their mind with Amare coming off a 26ppg season

You never draft for need, always draft for talent.

Disagree....had we drafted for need in the 2008 and 2009 draft we would have potentially had(Eric Gordon/Lopez/Mayo or Lawson/Holiday/Curry) factoring trading up if necessary. We needed any combination of a Guard/Center/Point Guard in either of those drafts which in the end covers the talent aspect too.

This is eliminating guys like....

Hibbert/Batum/Jordan/Dragic/Ryan Anderson/George Hill/Omer Asik...arguably as good as talents as Gallo

and

Gerald Henderson/Taj Gibson/Buddinger/Danny Green/Jeff Teague/Marcus Thornton/B.J. Mullens...arguably as good as talents as Hill and Douglas

All filling more of our needs at the time. Keep in mind needs don't always mean positioned player, it can also mean what skillset does a player bring to a team lacking such(i.e. rebounding, interior defense, perimeter defense, shooting, leadership, etc etc)

Talents that weren't hyped as much coming into the draft, who were picked later and/or around our selections in those drafts or players who could have been draft with additional pick(s) and/or acquired pick(s) as in the case of Toney Douglas. Talent also may not cover UPSIDE...as it is vague it could assume Talent as in NBA ready BPA.

well doesn't the gm and coach have a say in who should be drafted and why? at the time it was d'antoni as the coach and nepotism notwithstanding they chose to go with gallinari as the beginning of a rebuild here. gallinari is a talented player and he filled a perceived need ostensibly as a floor spacer who can shoot the 3 ball. that he has not ended up being that sort of player does not preclude the notion that they drafted for need. i mean, sure, lopez is a no-brainer in this scenario-- except that you have to factor in that d'antoni was the coach-- and lopez did not fill a need based on an overarching plan. rebuilding, in my opinion, must be a top-down process especially with a coach who had success with his system.

the following draft was clearly a mistake. with d'antoni at the helm for the foreseeable future you have to draft a legitimate point guard. lawson should have been drafted even if he was low. in hindsight obviously holliday would have been great too.

Yes Gallo was part of "Nepotism's Finest" but D'AnToni needed a "POINT GUARD" or a "POINT FORWARD" and a "CENTER DEFENDING BIG" to run his system more than anything else..so maybe if he had such a boner for "FLOOR SPACING" (although overblown at the time as we had a couple spacers) as it would have filled a need then maybe the GM should have been innovative along with our scouts and traded down if we couldn't trade up to get Mayo. You trade down get an additional first rounder and maybe just maybe you end up with...

George Hill/Anderson
Chalmers/Jordan
Augustin/Ibaka
Bayless/Batum

Or any combination of the above continuing to mix them

Hell I don't know...but to say you draft Talent over Need is not a concrete rule I'd go by at all when approaching a draft. Bringing in a 19yr old foreign project was not the smartest decision to make regardless if D'AnToni was coaching, it's about as shortsighted as trying to go in WIN NOW MODE move making.

gallo was regarded as a point forward on his club teams in italy. and at this point-- without the annoying comparisons to carmelo anthony-- gallo is rounding into an important player on his team. by "important" i mean a legitimate starter on a contending team, a two-way player who helps on both ends of thew court.

all the players you have listed here range from bench guys to solid starters. i am not sure any of the combinations you listed would have been realistic with a dantoni squad, but here is where your philosophy flies in the face of what i believe walsh and d'antoni were trying to do: build a team based on how well a player would project fitting into d'antoni's system. looking back at that draft i don't recognize a point guard or center defending big that fills the bill. i also think your expectations for an innovative scouting team are way too generous in terms of recognizing the combinations of lower seeds.

Happy Walters ‏@Happywalters
For the record, no one has requested an Iman trade from the Knicks. The report from Chris Sheridan is incorrect.