Zebo13 wrote:All I want is the #1 overall pick and trade it to SAC for both their first rounders then draft Frank and Isaac.

I would never do that. Markelle is a freaking baller who would be a huge short and longterm boost to this team.

crzymdups wrote:

TPercy wrote:

Zebo13 wrote:All I want is the #1 overall pick and trade it to SAC for both their first rounders then draft Frank and Isaac.

I would never do that. Markelle is a freaking baller who would be a huge short and longterm boost to this team.

I would be torn between Ball and Fultz... but, yeah, if we be some divine providence get the #1 pick, you don't turn around and trade it.

That was where I stood a week or so ago until you all convinced me we need a complete overhaul everywhere. Two top ten picks in this draft with really no clear cut #1 pick? It'd be a hard choice.

fishmike wrote:

Zebo13 wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

TPercy wrote:

Zebo13 wrote:All I want is the #1 overall pick and trade it to SAC for both their first rounders then draft Frank and Isaac.

I would never do that. Markelle is a freaking baller who would be a huge short and longterm boost to this team.

I would be torn between Ball and Fultz... but, yeah, if we be some divine providence get the #1 pick, you don't turn around and trade it.

That was where I stood a week or so ago until you all convinced me we need a complete overhaul everywhere. Two top ten picks in this draft with really no clear cut #1 pick? It'd be a hard choice.

There is a drop off after Fultz/Ball/Jackson imo. The next 3-4 guys are really good but on paper those 3 are in a higher class and I wouldnt trade down no way no how.

From what I've see Fox and Tatum can be SPECIAL too. Just cuz Fultz/Ball/Jackson are easy to read cuz they're a bit more ready right now doesn't mean that Fox and Tatum don't have the same massive upside as well. Both have some serious physical talent and skill that will translate well in the NBA and as they grow stronger I expect some serious upside.

It's a really good draft even tho it's not a Lebron or KD at the top. I see a little less separation between the top 3 and some of the other top players. It's gonna be interesting to see how it shakes out over the years.

NardDogNation wrote:

TPercy wrote:

Zebo13 wrote:All I want is the #1 overall pick and trade it to SAC for both their first rounders then draft Frank and Isaac.

I would never do that. Markelle is a freaking baller who would be a huge short and longterm boost to this team.

So if you could walk away with Jayson Tatum and Frank Ntilkina with those SAC picks...you'd pass?

I think someone else said this well on this thread. This scenario depends on those two picks being high. I don't think you can make this a contingent trade because then we would have to draft whoever they want with the first pick and if the contingency kicks in, we would be stuck with that player. So basically lots of IFs to this ever happening

TPercy wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

TPercy wrote:

Zebo13 wrote:All I want is the #1 overall pick and trade it to SAC for both their first rounders then draft Frank and Isaac.

I would never do that. Markelle is a freaking baller who would be a huge short and longterm boost to this team.

So if you could walk away with Jayson Tatum and Frank Ntilkina with those SAC picks...you'd pass?

For Markelle...I'd pass.

Yep- its easier to land a 5-8 first rounder in the future than it is to land the 1st again (unless you're the cavs!). It would be crazy to trade it away if we got it.

crzymdups wrote:Thursday morning good vibes - I got this on my first click on tankathon. Time to go pray to my bball gods.

lovely. booooootiful.

NardDogNation wrote:

TPercy wrote:

Zebo13 wrote:All I want is the #1 overall pick and trade it to SAC for both their first rounders then draft Frank and Isaac.

I would never do that. Markelle is a freaking baller who would be a huge short and longterm boost to this team.

So if you could walk away with Jayson Tatum and Frank Ntilkina with those SAC picks...you'd pass?

50/50 they would have to really like those two guys to trade the #1 for Fultz

BRIGGS wrote:Right now
#1 Ball
#2 Jackson
#3 Fultz
#4 Tatum
#5 Smith
#6 Fox

I dont want to go below this. I know whod I pick at 7 and he is no G--hes a safe pick. But if we want a guard or F we need top 6 MINIMALLY.

I'd put Fox ahead of Smith, but otherwise, I agree. I might actually take Monk over Smith, too... but I'm hopeful we get a top 5 pick.

That could be good for the Knicks if Monk moves up, it knocks down Fox and Smith a notch to 6 and 7. (Again, still obviously hoping we get a top 3 pick, but right now we'd be 6 or 7)

http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-mock-draft/2017/

BRIGGS wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Right now
#1 Ball
#2 Jackson
#3 Fultz
#4 Tatum
#5 Smith
#6 Fox

I dont want to go below this. I know whod I pick at 7 and he is no G--hes a safe pick. But if we want a guard or F we need top 6 MINIMALLY.

I would go Monk over Smith. I like how Kentucky guards translate to the NBA and i think he will have more opprtunity to let loose when he can handle the ball more. Also, i can't think of any elite offensive players (as freshman) who failed in the nba. Maybe Beasley, but we know the reasons why. Otherwise, elite scoring players typically become elite offensively in the nba. There is so much more space in the NBA to operate.

1. Fultz
2. Ball
3. Jackson
4. Tatum
5. Monk
6. Fox
7. Ntilikina
8. Smith

Id take Smith over Monk--I thought Monk at one point was pick #1 but that has coold off. Id take Smith over Monk because he makes plays with the dribble--has a stronger NBA body much better passer defender
re bounder--Remember Smith was on a bad team--and while he can be wild---I think hes taylor made for the NBA.

I highlighted a key part though. You tend to swift your thoughts on players quickly based on a couple of games. You see what Monk can do. Just because he has cooled off doesn't mean he can't do it anymore. Just like Fox, i told you how good he can be, and you were so focused on his 3pt % saying there is no way we should draft him. Now he makes a couple of shots and his stock has risen in your mind. But the reality is, nothing has changed with Fox. He has been the same player all year. The only difference now is his 3pt attempts are going in at a slightly higher rate. It was easy to see his shooting would improve. If you once saw Monk as a possible #1 player, don't change your mind just because he has cooled off. Obviously the shooting/scoring ability hasn't changed. Players should not be judged on a few games, but on an entire body of work.