knicks1248 wrote:Ndour 4 yrs
bakers 4yr
Early 4 yrs
grant 4 yrs
galloway 4 yrs
willy playing professional for 4 yrs
Kp playing professional 4 yrs
kuz 7yrs
thansis 4 yrs professional100% consistent pattern
Guys who are 2nd round level talents and/or undrafted free agents, will, on the average, be older players. If they had the production and pedigree to be "One And Done" type players, they would be. However based on their limited draft/NBA potential as underclassmen, they stay either overseas or in college longer to develop their skills.
Key to note - Older players are EXPECTED to dominate players who are younger or at lower levels of development. A 22 year old should, in theory, dominate a /18/19 year old, he's had more experience and is more physically developed, but we all understand this is not always the case. This is why the NBA 2nd round is littered with guys with good senior college seasons or international guys used as stashes.
Knicks have had limited draft assets the past three years, of course they will have more players on the roster from the 2nd round and/or UDFA to fill out the roster, these players as stated, will naturally and likely be older than most of their 1st round "One And Done" 19 year old counterparts.
Is Phil Jackson seeking out players he actually "wants", or making the most, within his skill set as team runner, of what he can "get"
Your post illustrates the base problem of a lot of argument and back and forth jabbing on this forum, a lot of guys here fundamentally do not understand the NBA marketplace nor the basic CBA nor the methodology on why franchises make most of the personnel decisions that they do. There really isn't a greater example of this disconnect than Sam Hinkie and the 76ers. He gave some really candid interviews when he was GM of the 76ers about what he was doing and WHY he was doing it. He was a top lieutenant under Daryl Morey in Houston and he REALLY upset a lot of people, he challenged convention because he openly exposed the flaws inherent in the NBA marketplace environment, so typical of any situation like this, the rest of the league kept leaning on him until he got clipped. A lot of people see his decision making as flawed because it had a ton of inherent risk, but he never promised a winner, what he did discuss was the difference between a slim opportunity versus what the NBA design has for most teams - being stuck in the middle and having no opportunity.
To me, the litmus test of anyone understanding the basic NBA marketplace, the Sam Hinkie/76ers situation is a good test case. It's not whether someone agrees or disagrees with his methodology of who he picked and why, but whether they can draw the distinctions on why he made the choices he did given the changes in the game, the changes in the CBA at the time, the scarcity of elite NBA level talent around the world and what operates as team building/rebuilding convention.
4/4/2017 9:58 PM
