He must work on his defense to become a STARTER, he likely will need at least 1 year experience before he can put in the work that would be needed and see if he can become a STARTER
It also depends on the team that drafts him with their system and players that utilize him correctly
And he is not a TOP 3 pick with this draft...

mreinman wrote:

fishmike wrote:I think he's everything we hoped Channing Frye would be. A skilled stretch 5 who could be a good starter on a good team. You dont have to make the allstar game every year to be a good draft pick. Frank will be a nice player. Limited with certain matchups but should do really well in a team concept.

but how high should he go?

I would not take him in the top 6 or 7 spots.

But after picks 5-6 its wide open. It becomes a skills vs. upside debate, age vs. athleticism, that sort of thing. Every year guys are missed. Every year guys slide. Every year guys bust.

I could easily see Frank going #6 to Sac. He could be a nice fit next to Cousins with their high/low game. Someone will have to defend Cousins in the post and someone with height will have to guard Frank on the wing when they stretch the floor.

If you were a Sac fan would that bother you? If you were Sac and OK4/Towns/Winslow/Russell/Mudiay are off the board who do you pick? I would think taking Frank there makes sense and isnt a stretch at all. Maybe you look at WCS there?

fishmike wrote:

mreinman wrote:

fishmike wrote:I think he's everything we hoped Channing Frye would be. A skilled stretch 5 who could be a good starter on a good team. You dont have to make the allstar game every year to be a good draft pick. Frank will be a nice player. Limited with certain matchups but should do really well in a team concept.

but how high should he go?

I would not take him in the top 6 or 7 spots.

I could see him going that high. There is this low ceiling stigma attached to Frank which seems unfair. Especially when you consider his ability to shoot and how much todays NBA is about floor spacing.
The right situation can mask his percieved issues.

But after picks 5-6 its wide open. It becomes a skills vs. upside debate, age vs. athleticism, that sort of thing. Every year guys are missed. Every year guys slide. Every year guys bust.

I could easily see Frank going #6 to Sac. He could be a nice fit next to Cousins with their high/low game. Someone will have to defend Cousins in the post and someone with height will have to guard Frank on the wing when they stretch the floor.

If you were a Sac fan would that bother you? If you were Sac and OK4/Towns/Winslow/Russell/Mudiay are off the board who do you pick? I would think taking Frank there makes sense and isnt a stretch at all. Maybe you look at WCS there?

if the knicks dont draft #1 or #2 (where they should get "cant miss prospects" like okafor or towns), then they should try to trade down, acquire other plays and draft "nice" prospects like kaminsky

and for the record, all these kids have work ethic; well maybe a good 90% of them. i think often we dont give these players credit for how hard and often they work. a friend of mine played in the NBA. to be honest he wasnt that good but dude was ALWAYS practicing - at least twice a day. we wanted to go to clubs and he was like naw i gotta practice at 6am tomorrow. i think making it has a lot to do with opportunity and taking advantage of that opportunity

BRIGGS wrote:I do know hes a great great shooter who has a LOT of skills. Is there even 1 player like Kaminsky in this draft?

Kaminsky is the type of player you say--hed fit the Knicks very well as a 7 foot mobile 4/5 and then you gauge need/fir vs BPA. As previously stated I think a multi asset deal here we can pick up 1-2-3 players who collectively could well surpass the potential of 1 might be the way to go.

IF we came in position 3 IF the Knicks were able to pick up an additional pick or two--remember just how much value it is up here--we pick up Kaminsky and another bg in this draft OR we pick up a 2016 pick and maybe a prospect.

For example and Ill go back here--lets say the Lakers fall to 6.

We get pick #3. Would the Knicks trade back for a 2016 #1(Philly has 4 of them and we ask for the 2nd best pick) and 2 2nd rounders in 2015 32 and 35 and their best 2nd rounder in 2016.

We give up Russell or Winslow but we get Kaminsky an additional #1 next year and 3 good 2's. Id easily do that.