[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

REALITY CHECK: bigs and pg's take longer to adapt to the NBA than wing players
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 1 of 2  1  2 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
PresIke
Posts: 27671
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/26/2001
Member: #33
USA
7/18/2009  10:24 PM
I haven't watched all of the SL games yet, but i think it is important to keep in mind that the adjustment from NCAA hoops to the NBA for bigs and pg's is usually going to be longer than other positions, just by default.

walsh makes a good point in his interview in the pistons game that for hill he has to adjust to playing against players his size. i can even defend thabeet in the same way, by arguing that it is a pretty big adjustment for bigs to get used to playing against every team with bigs, unlike college, where many teams only play 6'7" or 6'8" centers (or smaller), and the game is more focused on guards who can shoot.

for pg's one key is being a "leader," so to come in to a new team as a rookie and be that guy is just not easy, as is learning the strengths and weaknesses of all of your team mates, which a good/top pg knows, and really running a team.

the good thing about douglas is you can see that he really has a lot of potential as a leader. imho this is huge. how he adjusts to being a scoring combo guard in college, to transitioning to his clear attempt to be more of a "true" pg as we see in (at least) the first 2 sl games, could explain his shooting woes.

in other words, in college douglas may have not had to think about primarily being a passer as much as he seems to in the sl games, versus being able to focus on being a scorer/shooter on florida state, even if might have been pretty good at it (and defense). this experience is an adjustment for him.

so while we can envy daye's performance, who shows a lot of ability, we can also see that he is basically just being who he was already, while hill and douglas (who are also showing some nice ability, to me) are having to do more adjustment to their games to perform. also the lack of physical defense in summer league is going to allow daye to thrive. in the regular nba, while i like him, we will have to see. i think he will do well over his career, but i don't expect him to be consistently this good in his first year.

[Edited by - PresIke on 07-18-2009 10:25 PM]
Forum Po Po and #33 for a reason...
AUTOADVERT
Ira
Posts: 24692
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 8/14/2001
Member: #91
7/18/2009  10:48 PM
I think it's going to take Hill a long time to adjust - maybe 2-3 years. I think he's one of those guys who takes a long time to pick up things and integrate them into his game. He does have all the tools to be a good player, but he'll need time. By the end of November, half of ultimateknicks will be calling him a bust.

In contrast, Douglas appears to be a quick learner. He'll help as a rookie.
BigC
Posts: 22672
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 12/14/2004
Member: #829
7/18/2009  10:51 PM
bigs and pg's take longer to adapt to the NBA than wing players

I don't know about that. Most bigs that I can think of that are stars in the past or even now had an immediate impact if they got playing time from day one. It all depends on the player. Not really the position.

[Edited by - BigC on 07-18-2009 10:55 PM]
BigC's Knick blogs and Knicks highlights after every Knicks game http://fromthebaseline.com/
Cosmic
Posts: 26570
Alba Posts: 27
Joined: 3/17/2006
Member: #1115
USA
7/19/2009  7:42 AM
I think this is true to some degree as big men seem a big rawer than the guards but overall I think it's a way to convince one self that the big you've got on your team has to be better than what you see and you invoke the cliche to convince yourself as much. Look at Sene. He sucked from day one and still sucks. Look at Ewing. He was awesome from day one for 15 years.

I think it has very little merit - but what I will say is it seems the college guards are quite more refined and ready to contribute than the PF's and C's that come out of college. I guess that's because it is such a guard oriented game - and slashing, cutting, faster paced game. Whereas the best way a big man can develop as a youth is in half court sets where he is featured.

Since College ball doesn't seem to do that much that's why the big man are rawer....and have to be taught half court sets instead of already being good at them.

Does that make sense?

Bottom line is: A good player is a good player. A bad one is probably going to be a bad one. Regardless of their size/position. Can't just slap "big men take more time to develop" on every big man and muse each and every one is going to significantly improve.

I seriously doubt we can write the book on Jordan Hill right away but the reality is - he is playing basketball, we are watching, and most of us are questioning why he hasn't produced as advertised. Nothing earth shattering but he is indeed more awkward and slower than I thought he would be. Definitely rawer. So I guess we have the scouting reports to blame for that one more than Hill himself.
http://popcornmachine.net/ A must-use tool for NBA stat junkies!
franco12
Posts: 34069
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 2/19/2004
Member: #599
USA
7/19/2009  8:00 AM
I'd agree with Cosmic. With Hill, every time someone says he is going to take time to develop, I keep thinking of Chris Wilcox - a big player with all the physical skills who came in with similar expectations.
BigC
Posts: 22672
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 12/14/2004
Member: #829
7/19/2009  9:17 AM
Posted by Cosmic:

I think this is true to some degree as big men seem a big rawer than the guards but overall I think it's a way to convince one self that the big you've got on your team has to be better than what you see and you invoke the cliche to convince yourself as much. Look at Sene. He sucked from day one and still sucks. Look at Ewing. He was awesome from day one for 15 years.

I think it has very little merit - but what I will say is it seems the college guards are quite more refined and ready to contribute than the PF's and C's that come out of college. I guess that's because it is such a guard oriented game - and slashing, cutting, faster paced game. Whereas the best way a big man can develop as a youth is in half court sets where he is featured.

Since College ball doesn't seem to do that much that's why the big man are rawer....and have to be taught half court sets instead of already being good at them.

Does that make sense?

Bottom line is: A good player is a good player. A bad one is probably going to be a bad one. Regardless of their size/position. Can't just slap "big men take more time to develop" on every big man and muse each and every one is going to significantly improve.

I seriously doubt we can write the book on Jordan Hill right away but the reality is - he is playing basketball, we are watching, and most of us are questioning why he hasn't produced as advertised. Nothing earth shattering but he is indeed more awkward and slower than I thought he would be. Definitely rawer. So I guess we have the scouting reports to blame for that one more than Hill himself.
That's the thing for me and many others. I was not surprised because I saw Hill play many times in college. This is why I really don't pay attention to scouting reports. It's better to see for yourself what a player can do. We can go on and on from a Chris Paul to even Marbury. If you have big talent you will be ready. Amare was ready from day one. The problem is not only the scouting reports but the Knicks put pressure on Hill by saying he reminds them of Amare. So when people watch these games they want to see Amare. Scottie Pippen said J. O'neal was the best player on the Blazers and that was J O'Neal's rookie year fresh out of High School. Walsh many say that it takes longer for a big to get adjusted but I bet you he was thinking Hill would be a good replacement for Lee when he drafted him this year.

BigC's Knick blogs and Knicks highlights after every Knicks game http://fromthebaseline.com/
Bippity10
Posts: 13999
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2004
Member: #574
7/19/2009  11:11 AM
Back in the day when players stayed in college for four years you noticed that most players took the biggest jump between sophomore and junior years. Most players were twice as skilled as seniors as they were freshman. They grew because of maturity, practice, confidence and experience. Countless stories of guys averaging 3 points per game as freshman and 20 as seniors. Countless stories of guys getting no time as freshman but going on to star at the NBA level.

Now all of sudden the NBA is drafting guys at 19 and 20. With the success of Amare, Lebron and Wade(etc) we have forgotten that this is not the normal path. Just because these guys are NBA players doesn't mean this learning curve goes away magically. If you look at the profile of most NBA starters it begins scoring 7 points a game and slowly progresses over the years to starter numbers.

I think in NY we just need a reason to call someone a bust. I agree that guys like Wade and Lebron and KG and Howard came out of the womb being able to dominate at the NBA level. But if you thought Danilo or Hill were as talented as these guys then you are an idiot.

Give these guys time. They should have shown enough in the summer league to reassure you that they will be able to contribute at this level. The rest of the development is a waiting game and depends on how hard the player actually works.
I just hope that people will like me
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
7/19/2009  11:43 AM
Posted by Ira:

I think it's going to take Hill a long time to adjust - maybe 2-3 years. I think he's one of those guys who takes a long time to pick up things and integrate them into his game. He does have all the tools to be a good player, but he'll need time. By the end of November, half of ultimateknicks will be calling him a bust.

In contrast, Douglas appears to be a quick learner. He'll help as a rookie.

the improvement he showed in his game from his freshman year to his sophomore year would suggest otherwise... IMO he's a quick learner & will pick up things relatively quickly... playing in MDA's system should help him get off his numbers as well... u clearly saw D Lee's #'s spike this year & i expect no less out of Jordan Hill after he's had a year to acclimate himself to the NBA style game.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
Cosmic
Posts: 26570
Alba Posts: 27
Joined: 3/17/2006
Member: #1115
USA
7/19/2009  11:57 AM
Posted by Bippity10:



I think in NY we just need a reason to call someone a bust. I agree that guys like Wade and Lebron and KG and Howard came out of the womb being able to dominate at the NBA level. But if you thought Danilo or Hill were as talented as these guys then you are an idiot.

Danilo was exactly what I expected when he showed his flashes. He wasn't any worse than advertised.

Hill on the other hand is quite slower, more passive, rawer, less skilled, and less interested, and in less shape - than I was led to believe.

What I'm not going to do is tell myself it's all fine and he will eventually be a star in the league because "big men take more time to develop."

You gotta show something from the start and to be honest? He has shown to be far less energetic than Balkman was - and moderately more offensively polished than Balkman was - and as awkward or worse than Balkman was.

This is our #8 can't miss draft pick that we can't critique because "big men take more time to develop" and "its only summer league"?

Nah, I think not. After what I've seen Hill needs to show quite a bit more to impress me. The scouting report impressed me. Hahn's take on Hill in practice had me impressed. Then he steps out on the court? And it's like "Who is this hack? Where's this Hill guy that I was told will tear things up and have me drooling over him?"

So, that's where we're at. Hill looked a bit better last night but still nowhere NEAR what I was led to believe him to be. To say "yeah I'm out of shape (that's why Im nothing special right now)" is a terrible statement about someone's work ethic.

He's got a lot of growth to do before I'm penciling him in as a starter on any NBA team and to be honest - even a rotation player on our present roster.

Gallo on the other hand, in between his injury woes, showed quite enough to live up to and beyond his scouting reports and hype. So to lump them in together and try to make a point isn't the right thing to do.
http://popcornmachine.net/ A must-use tool for NBA stat junkies!
Cosmic
Posts: 26570
Alba Posts: 27
Joined: 3/17/2006
Member: #1115
USA
7/19/2009  11:59 AM
Posted by BigC:

That's the thing for me and many others. I was not surprised because I saw Hill play many times in college. This is why I really don't pay attention to scouting reports. It's better to see for yourself what a player can do. We can go on and on from a Chris Paul to even Marbury. If you have big talent you will be ready. Amare was ready from day one. The problem is not only the scouting reports but the Knicks put pressure on Hill by saying he reminds them of Amare. So when people watch these games they want to see Amare. Scottie Pippen said J. O'neal was the best player on the Blazers and that was J O'Neal's rookie year fresh out of High School. Walsh many say that it takes longer for a big to get adjusted but I bet you he was thinking Hill would be a good replacement for Lee when he drafted him this year.

And that's fine, except, not for a #8 pick. When your #29 pick is outshining your #8 pick from the get go you've got to have questions about the #8 pick right?

Not that we haven't seen it happen before (Lee versus Frye).

Just that, with high praise, and a high draft pick, I would have expected to see a LOT more out there, wouldn't you? And when you don't as a fan what do you do... say "awww it's fine...don't hate" or do you say "what's going on? I was told he was better than this. This is our can't miss pick? really?"

....we will see, but, as of right now - not looking all that impressive to me.
http://popcornmachine.net/ A must-use tool for NBA stat junkies!
BigC
Posts: 22672
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 12/14/2004
Member: #829
7/19/2009  12:04 PM
Posted by TMS:
Posted by Ira:

I think it's going to take Hill a long time to adjust - maybe 2-3 years. I think he's one of those guys who takes a long time to pick up things and integrate them into his game. He does have all the tools to be a good player, but he'll need time. By the end of November, half of ultimateknicks will be calling him a bust.

In contrast, Douglas appears to be a quick learner. He'll help as a rookie.

the improvement he showed in his game from his freshman year to his sophomore year would suggest otherwise... IMO he's a quick learner & will pick up things relatively quickly... playing in MDA's system should help him get off his numbers as well... u clearly saw D Lee's #'s spike this year & i expect no less out of Jordan Hill after he's had a year to acclimate himself to the NBA style game.
I think David Lee getting big numbers is do to him getting major minutes not the system. Hill will improve because he will be playing with better players on the court compared to a summer league lineup. If the Knicks resign Lee I think Hill can learn many things from him because Lee might be one of the best players as far as moving without the ball. Hill will also have real players to workout with to show him their routines and techniques to be successful.


[Edited by - BigC on 07-19-2009 1:01 PM]
BigC's Knick blogs and Knicks highlights after every Knicks game http://fromthebaseline.com/
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
7/19/2009  12:10 PM
Posted by BigC:
Posted by TMS:
Posted by Ira:

I think it's going to take Hill a long time to adjust - maybe 2-3 years. I think he's one of those guys who takes a long time to pick up things and integrate them into his game. He does have all the tools to be a good player, but he'll need time. By the end of November, half of ultimateknicks will be calling him a bust.

In contrast, Douglas appears to be a quick learner. He'll help as a rookie.

the improvement he showed in his game from his freshman year to his sophomore year would suggest otherwise... IMO he's a quick learner & will pick up things relatively quickly... playing in MDA's system should help him get off his numbers as well... u clearly saw D Lee's #'s spike this year & i expect no less out of Jordan Hill after he's had a year to acclimate himself to the NBA style game.
I think David Lee getting big numbers is do to him getting major minutes not the system. Hill will improve because he will be playing with better players on the court compared to a summer league lineup. If the Knicks resign Lee I think Hill can learn many things from him because Lee might be one of the best players as far as moving without the ball. Hill also have real players to workout with to show him their routines and techniques to be successful.

i think it was a combo of both factors... he showed an improvement in his midrange shot last year & played very well w/Duhon in the pick & roll... that speaks to both an improvement in his own game as well as playing more minutes in an offensively conducive system such as the one MDA has implemented... i think Jordan Hill will see similar success on the offensive side & will be more of a presence on the defensive side when it's all said & done, & that will probably happen a lot quicker than it did for Lee because Hill already has a developed midrange J at his disposal... as soon as he learns where to move to & gets acclimated w/the system & his teammates like u just brought up, i think Hill will be a very nice player for us.

[Edited by - TMS on 07-19-2009 09:11 AM]
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
BigC
Posts: 22672
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 12/14/2004
Member: #829
7/19/2009  12:18 PM
Posted by Cosmic:
Posted by BigC:

That's the thing for me and many others. I was not surprised because I saw Hill play many times in college. This is why I really don't pay attention to scouting reports. It's better to see for yourself what a player can do. We can go on and on from a Chris Paul to even Marbury. If you have big talent you will be ready. Amare was ready from day one. The problem is not only the scouting reports but the Knicks put pressure on Hill by saying he reminds them of Amare. So when people watch these games they want to see Amare. Scottie Pippen said J. O'neal was the best player on the Blazers and that was J O'Neal's rookie year fresh out of High School. Walsh many say that it takes longer for a big to get adjusted but I bet you he was thinking Hill would be a good replacement for Lee when he drafted him this year.

And that's fine, except, not for a #8 pick. When your #29 pick is outshining your #8 pick from the get go you've got to have questions about the #8 pick right?

Not that we haven't seen it happen before (Lee versus Frye).

Just that, with high praise, and a high draft pick, I would have expected to see a LOT more out there, wouldn't you? And when you don't as a fan what do you do... say "awww it's fine...don't hate" or do you say "what's going on? I was told he was better than this. This is our can't miss pick? really?"

....we will see, but, as of right now - not looking all that impressive to me.
That was my point. Look at my posts when we first drafted him before the summer league. I did not think the Knicks should have drafted him. I felt the same way with Frye. We should have drafted Granger. It's not that Hill is a bad player I just feel the Knicks should have drafted a player in backcourt. Why draft a forward when the Knicks claim that Danilo is suppose to be the power forward of the future? Demar Derozan should have been the pick. Whether it's 2010 or 2011 the Knicks have to build a backcourt. Now if the Knicks resign Lee this pick will make even less sense. Especially if the Knicks don't trade Lee if he is resigned.

The point I was making in the other post is I watched him so I did not think he was going to be this dominate force like Amare.



[



[Edited by - BigC on 07-19-2009 1:03 PM]
BigC's Knick blogs and Knicks highlights after every Knicks game http://fromthebaseline.com/
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
7/19/2009  12:23 PM
Posted by BigC:
Posted by Cosmic:
Posted by BigC:

That's the thing for me and many others. I was not surprised because I saw Hill play many times in college. This is why I really don't pay attention to scouting reports. It's better to see for yourself what a player can do. We can go on and on from a Chris Paul to even Marbury. If you have big talent you will be ready. Amare was ready from day one. The problem is not only the scouting reports but the Knicks put pressure on Hill by saying he reminds them of Amare. So when people watch these games they want to see Amare. Scottie Pippen said J. O'neal was the best player on the Blazers and that was J O'Neal's rookie year fresh out of High School. Walsh many say that it takes longer for a big to get adjusted but I bet you he was thinking Hill would be a good replacement for Lee when he drafted him this year.

And that's fine, except, not for a #8 pick. When your #29 pick is outshining your #8 pick from the get go you've got to have questions about the #8 pick right?

Not that we haven't seen it happen before (Lee versus Frye).

Just that, with high praise, and a high draft pick, I would have expected to see a LOT more out there, wouldn't you? And when you don't as a fan what do you do... say "awww it's fine...don't hate" or do you say "what's going on? I was told he was better than this. This is our can't miss pick? really?"

....we will see, but, as of right now - not looking all that impressive to me.
That was my point. Look at my posts when we first drafted him before the summer league. I did not think the Knicks should have drafted him. I felt the same way with Frye. We should have drafted Granger. It's not that Hill is a bad player I just feel the Knicks should have drafted a player in backcourt. Why draft a forward when the Knicks claim that Danilo is suppose to be the power forward of the future? Demar Derozan should have been the pick. Whether it's 2010 or 2011 the Knicks have to build a backcourt. Now if the Knicks resign Lee this pick will make even less sense. Especially if don't the Knicks trade Lee if he is resigned.

The point I was making in the other post is I watched him so I did not think he was going to be this dominate force like Amare.



[

[Edited by - BigC on 07-19-2009 12:21 PM]

BigC, i feel u on the Derozan argument... there wasn't a bigger proponent of drafting him on this board than me... but while i agree w/u that i don't see the same kinda dominance in Hill that Amare has, i do think he's gonna be a very good player for us in time.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
Ira
Posts: 24692
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 8/14/2001
Member: #91
7/19/2009  12:44 PM
I agree that DeRozan would have been a better choice, but I think Hill will come around a be a pretty good player.
BigC
Posts: 22672
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 12/14/2004
Member: #829
7/19/2009  1:05 PM
Posted by TMS:
Posted by BigC:
Posted by Cosmic:
Posted by BigC:

That's the thing for me and many others. I was not surprised because I saw Hill play many times in college. This is why I really don't pay attention to scouting reports. It's better to see for yourself what a player can do. We can go on and on from a Chris Paul to even Marbury. If you have big talent you will be ready. Amare was ready from day one. The problem is not only the scouting reports but the Knicks put pressure on Hill by saying he reminds them of Amare. So when people watch these games they want to see Amare. Scottie Pippen said J. O'neal was the best player on the Blazers and that was J O'Neal's rookie year fresh out of High School. Walsh many say that it takes longer for a big to get adjusted but I bet you he was thinking Hill would be a good replacement for Lee when he drafted him this year.

And that's fine, except, not for a #8 pick. When your #29 pick is outshining your #8 pick from the get go you've got to have questions about the #8 pick right?

Not that we haven't seen it happen before (Lee versus Frye).

Just that, with high praise, and a high draft pick, I would have expected to see a LOT more out there, wouldn't you? And when you don't as a fan what do you do... say "awww it's fine...don't hate" or do you say "what's going on? I was told he was better than this. This is our can't miss pick? really?"

....we will see, but, as of right now - not looking all that impressive to me.
That was my point. Look at my posts when we first drafted him before the summer league. I did not think the Knicks should have drafted him. I felt the same way with Frye. We should have drafted Granger. It's not that Hill is a bad player I just feel the Knicks should have drafted a player in backcourt. Why draft a forward when the Knicks claim that Danilo is suppose to be the power forward of the future? Demar Derozan should have been the pick. Whether it's 2010 or 2011 the Knicks have to build a backcourt. Now if the Knicks resign Lee this pick will make even less sense. Especially if don't the Knicks trade Lee if he is resigned.

The point I was making in the other post is I watched him so I did not think he was going to be this dominate force like Amare.



[

[Edited by - BigC on 07-19-2009 12:21 PM]

BigC, i feel u on the Derozan argument... there wasn't a bigger proponent of drafting him on this board than me... but while i agree w/u that i don't see the same kinda dominance in Hill that Amare has, i do think he's gonna be a very good player for us in time.
The Knicks played conservative too many times. Frye was the conservative pick and Hill is too. If you look at the solid players around the league that the Knicks want, the majority of them are playing with the team that drafted them. When will the Knicks start drafting real home grown talent instead of just role players?

The Knicks could have had Derozan,Granger, Rondo, and Randolph. That could have been four positions to lock down.

pg Rondo
sg Derozan
sf Granger
pf Randolph

Even if you are not a fan of the players I listed they still can be good trading pieces.

If Danilo stays healthy it will not be as bad. However, Hill over Derozan I don't like. I could be wrong but this might be the draft that we see several players drafted after Hill that were better than him. Again if Hill plays good I will support him. What is the point of drafting if we keep on going after role players? I really think Hill was drafted to cover if Lee did not get resigned rather than getting the best player available.

BigC's Knick blogs and Knicks highlights after every Knicks game http://fromthebaseline.com/
djsunyc
Posts: 44929
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
7/19/2009  1:10 PM
knicks 2009 season will only be about one thing and that's gallinari.
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
7/19/2009  1:12 PM
i think there is a lot of merit to what you're saying, Hill was probably drafted to cover losing Lee... i agree w/u on that front... & i also wish we woulda went after a higher ceiling prospect in Derozan, i was saying we shoulda drafted him from before last season & on up to the moment he dropped to us at #8... but i liked what i saw outta Hill in the games i watched last year... given he may have played in a weaker bigman's conference but all in all he demonstrated some nice skills & seems like a player that addresses multiple needs on this team, especially if like u mentioned, we end up trading Lee or losing him in free agency.

Anthony Randolph looks like a nice prospect but until we've given Gallo a fair shake i don't think we can call that a mistake yet either... i don't wanna rehash the other guys u listed, those were the mistakes of the past regime... time to move forward & focus on what can be done in the future to build a championship squad.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
djsunyc
Posts: 44929
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
7/19/2009  1:13 PM
btw, the development of hill is now directly on d'antoni's coaching staff.

gallo was a guy that could step in right away and play. nate + chandler + lee were here before d'antoni got to town. so was amare + marion. so this is d'antoni's chance to show that he can be a development coach.
BigC
Posts: 22672
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 12/14/2004
Member: #829
7/19/2009  1:13 PM
Posted by djsunyc:

knicks 2009 season will only be about one thing and that's gallinari.
Tell Al Harrington, Duhon, Larry Hughes that. This is their contract year.
BigC's Knick blogs and Knicks highlights after every Knicks game http://fromthebaseline.com/
Page 1 of 2  1  2 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
REALITY CHECK: bigs and pg's take longer to adapt to the NBA than wing players
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy