Chandler wrote:

wargames wrote:

Chandler wrote:

wargames wrote:https://theringer.com/french-nba-prospect-frank-ntilikina-passes-the-eye-test-2a9897ed8322

Just wanted to post this article about Frank Ntilkina. I think he would be a great guard next to KP (and potentially Melo) because he isn't ball dominant. In a lot of ways this year with Rose showed that if we want KP to develop we got to put him next to guards who will look to pass him the ball. Also for the sake of KP and Willy we need perimeter defense to keep guards from running into them. A sign of a bad defense is big men with a lot of block shots..... it means everyone is getting to the rim. Also if KP is the trailer taking the shot in transition his size could help since the guards would need to be able to go up for a rebound......

Anyhow my whole argument comes down to, Ntilkina may not be the BPA at #6 but he would likely be the best fit next to KP and Willy (and Melo if he is here next year)

Thanks! I'm so confused w this draft. I have a sneaky suspicion we're choosing a forward and regardless Phil likes length so if we go guard this guy seems to fit that bill

I think Chad Ford has us taking Tatum at #6 in his last mock draft. We haven't been attached to him in the Media but Phil is pretty good so far creating false rumors. Picking a forward means we would be chasing a PG in FA. Not to mention it would be a very loud "GTFO" to Melo....... with that said Instill prefer they get a guard.

Not sure if Phil has ever invested a #6-type pick in a pg, and I can understand why given his priorities. He has liked long versatile forwards who pass, and of course superstar SGs. I can easily imaging him going forward and then getting a pg by other means, including that some teams will have too many pgs post-draft. Celts come to mind, but one can also wonder about Minny and a bunch of other teams. Might not be FA

Very true, I just felt that in a lot of ways Hornecek was brought in to "modernize" the tringle and he was going to accomplish that by using a two Big PG (aka ballhandlers) to push the tempo to try and maximize transition points. Its one of the reasons I believed that the even if we drafted a bigger PG, we would also probably still trade for Austin Rivers. That would lead to lineups like

Rivers
Rookie PG
Lee
KP
Willy

But you do have a point and rumors were Phil like Josh Jackson if we moved up.

Rivers
Lee
Tatum
KP
Willy

is still very much an improvement over what we have now. They would just have to make sure Tatum is a willing passer

wargames wrote:

Chandler wrote:

wargames wrote:

Chandler wrote:

wargames wrote:https://theringer.com/french-nba-prospect-frank-ntilikina-passes-the-eye-test-2a9897ed8322

Just wanted to post this article about Frank Ntilkina. I think he would be a great guard next to KP (and potentially Melo) because he isn't ball dominant. In a lot of ways this year with Rose showed that if we want KP to develop we got to put him next to guards who will look to pass him the ball. Also for the sake of KP and Willy we need perimeter defense to keep guards from running into them. A sign of a bad defense is big men with a lot of block shots..... it means everyone is getting to the rim. Also if KP is the trailer taking the shot in transition his size could help since the guards would need to be able to go up for a rebound......

Anyhow my whole argument comes down to, Ntilkina may not be the BPA at #6 but he would likely be the best fit next to KP and Willy (and Melo if he is here next year)

Thanks! I'm so confused w this draft. I have a sneaky suspicion we're choosing a forward and regardless Phil likes length so if we go guard this guy seems to fit that bill

I think Chad Ford has us taking Tatum at #6 in his last mock draft. We haven't been attached to him in the Media but Phil is pretty good so far creating false rumors. Picking a forward means we would be chasing a PG in FA. Not to mention it would be a very loud "GTFO" to Melo....... with that said Instill prefer they get a guard.

Not sure if Phil has ever invested a #6-type pick in a pg, and I can understand why given his priorities. He has liked long versatile forwards who pass, and of course superstar SGs. I can easily imaging him going forward and then getting a pg by other means, including that some teams will have too many pgs post-draft. Celts come to mind, but one can also wonder about Minny and a bunch of other teams. Might not be FA

Very true, I just felt that in a lot of ways Hornecek was brought in to "modernize" the tringle and he was going to accomplish that by using a two Big PG (aka ballhandlers) to push the tempo to try and maximize transition points. Its one of the reasons I believed that the even if we drafted a bigger PG, we would also probably still trade for Austin Rivers. That would lead to lineups like

Rivers
Rookie PG
Lee
KP
Willy

But you do have a point and rumors were Phil like Josh Jackson if we moved up.

Rivers
Lee
Tatum
KP
Willy

is still very much an improvement over what we have now. They would just have to make sure Tatum is a willing passer

Completely agree. I see Rivers/Baker combo being a solid triangle fit at PG, for better or for worse, and Phil investing in a wing. Tatum or Jackson make perfect sense. I also see Monk as a strong possibility as well. He's smaller, but is fine at SG next to a big PG like Rivers or Baker. Long-term, i still think we will eventually need to upgrade at PG if we are going to compete for a title, but for now, getting an elite wing and going with a system PG is ok. Can't fix it all at once. We can be resourceful searching for PG upgrades along the way as well.

smackeddog wrote:Well at least the kings won- lowest odds we finish with is 7th.

Cool plus the Wolves apparently want a big to put next to KAT...... this could be a lot worse. Hopefully we don't move down after the lottery happens.

wargames wrote:

smackeddog wrote:Well at least the kings won- lowest odds we finish with is 7th.

Cool plus the Wolves apparently want a big to put next to KAT...... this could be a lot worse. Hopefully we don't move down after the lottery happens.

I see them having more holes than some think...and I'm on record saying either LaVine or Wiggins has to go.

If we pick before the T-Wolves...I'm obviously not that concerned with what they do...but I'm not sure how many bigs are on the board who can play with Towns if you are looking for someone who can play D.

wargames wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:

wargames wrote:

smackeddog wrote:Well at least the kings won- lowest odds we finish with is 7th.

Cool plus the Wolves apparently want a big to put next to KAT...... this could be a lot worse. Hopefully we don't move down after the lottery happens.

Had not heard this...Would they be looking for a defensive big or someone who can score...would have to assume the former.

I see them having more holes than some think...and I'm on record saying either LaVine or Wiggins has to go.

If we pick before the T-Wolves...I'm obviously not that concerned with what they do...but I'm not sure how many bigs are on the board who can play with Towns if you are looking for someone who can play D.

I think it'll be Markkenan or Zach Collins. Arguably between Rubio reemergence and the fact that Thibs drafted Dunn to be there future PG last year. I don't see them picking PG again unless they move up To the top 3.

I could see the Wolves taking Isaac to play between Towns and Wiggins. I could see them doing a lot of things. Hopefully they're doing it after we pick.

Fultz
Ball
Jackson
Monk
Tatum

If the best player on the board is Fox at #6, even though there is a good chance his skill set doesn't match what the knicks are doing..... do they draft him as BPA?

I also just noticed that Frank is all the way at mock pick #11..... if this holds up and Gaines/Phil want him I think then the plan they should be to see if the kings will give up pick #9 and #10 to move up to #6? Which actually is a fair trade depending on who wants what. Knicks want to build depth that can be developed and probably tank again next year (two of Frank, OG, Ferguson, Isaac, or Justin Jackson). Kings want to get a player that could be their organizations face with Hield to compensate for losing Cousins (Fox).

It would be really risky..... but its a deep draft, and we need more quality depth than anything to be able to compete with teams like Philly in the future. Also we're likely going to tank at least one more year so why not get some guys who can get time developing.

Markelle Fultz
Lonzo Ball
Josh Jackson
Jayson Tatum
Jonathan Isaac
Malik Monk
Dennis Smith
Frank Ntilikina
De'Aaron Fox
Lauri Markkanen
Miles Bridges
Zach Collins

I would be more than fine with ending up with Fox!

90sKnicks wrote:I'm going to assume we get pick #8. I'd be okay if we got Monk, Issac, Fox, or Ntilkina. Don't really want Tatum or Smith or Markkanen. Hopefully those 3 rise in the draft. Don't want Ball either but he will go top 3 so no worries.

Why would you assume the Knicks will fall back to the 8 spot? The odds are greater that we stay where we are.

Tatum is very talented and we'd be fortunate to end up with tho I doubt it unless we move up. Then again the only way we move up is either 1,2 or 3 in which case we would not be drafting Tatum! I think Tatum isn't likely to be an option.

wargames wrote:

nixluva wrote:

90sKnicks wrote:I'm going to assume we get pick #8. I'd be okay if we got Monk, Issac, Fox, or Ntilkina. Don't really want Tatum or Smith or Markkanen. Hopefully those 3 rise in the draft. Don't want Ball either but he will go top 3 so no worries.

Why would you assume the Knicks will fall back to the 8 spot? The odds are greater that we stay where we are.

Tatum is very talented and we'd be fortunate to end up with tho I doubt it unless we move up. Then again the only way we move up is either 1,2 or 3 in which case we would not be drafting Tatum! I think Tatum isn't likely to be an option.

At 6 we would of likely seen on of Fox or Ball. Along with DSJ and Ntilkina. at 7 Monk/Fox could very easily could of been drafted

Crazy how just a couple of meaningless wins dropped the Knicks back out of the sweet spot. I think having so many home games to close the season kind of hurt the Tank. The players were playing to the crowd and feeding off that energy.

Just have to wait and see how the Lottery shakes out.

Chandler wrote:Brooklyn/celts -- some chance for Jackson (but after Jaylen Brown [and some stash picks] would seem strange unless Jackson is to be used as a pf?); if they go fultz or ball what will they do with all the pgs they currently have
phoenix -- they drafted front court last year (twice) -- seems like a guard to me
lakers -- pg(and punt D'Angelo to 2 spot)? front court (isn't Ingram supposed to be their SF), do they give up on randle?
philly -- need guards though they're so dysfunctional
Orlando -- they probably feel at least content with Even F and Gordon judging by their contracts. Looks like a guard to me, and the near end of the Elfrid era. If evan is (or becomes) a sg, then perhaps a sf
knicks -- SF or sg
minny -- if KAT is a forward I can't see them picking high for front court. Back court seems more apparent

Tier 1 of this years NBA draft will likely be a two player tier. Fultz and Ball. Whomever picks first will take Fultz odds on. If they don't, and take Ball, the 2nd team will default to whomever is NOT picked by the first team. That's generally how Tier 1 of the NBA draft breaks down. It's always been this way and will always be this way. Occasionally you get a glitch like Anthony Bennett or Joe Smith but those are usually in unique circumstances.

Teams at the top of the lottery generally go best player available and figure the rest out later. Team who are in the contention segment of all NBA teams will start to go for specific need. "Positional Value" only operates as a tiebreaker. (I.E. if the Lakers like a wing and a PF about the same, they will take the wing)

Philly was criticized for taking big man after big man with high picks, but those were the best values on the board. That is, and will always be, the right decision, even in hindsight, even if the players don't end up working out. Your pick still have to reflect the general market consensus to approximate actual value ( i.e. the Raiders took Derek Carr with their 2nd round pick, after taking Amari Cooper in the first round, Carr has proven he carries the value of a top shelf 1st round pick QB prospect, but the Raiders are still beholden to consider that taking Carr would have negated their ability to take Cooper in the 1st round. Carr still could have been a justified pick in this scenario, but it would not represent "best value" overall for the Raiders in general)

This is why Phil Jackson SHOULD receive so much criticism for running the Knicks, at the stage the Knicks are in, and given there are literally no market inefficiencies in the NBA marketplace, the path to decision making in personnel almost literally writes itself. Something Daryl Morey said years ago stuck with me, that responsible decision making in the NBA is often about refusing to give into the temptation to be contrarian, simply for the sake of ego/wanting to prove people you are smarter than they are by trying to do it all in a way that opposes actual market conditions and forces at work.

Good teams are good teams precisely for the reason that they don't get in their own way. Bad teams who want to be good teams have to learn to STOP getting in their own way.