Not saying I now want Monk above this guy or that guy, but if we drop to 7-8 this could be the best player available and I think he's got as much upside as most of these guys.

You are looking at a guy who is under 6'3" w/o his shoes, (actually listed at 6'3" WITH shoes and about a 6'3" wingspan by KU in 2016) has no wingspan, and was invisible at times as a ball handler.

On the right team he can be a nice fit, but right now I see him as a limited player who is the best streak shooter in the draft.

As I've said before...think Del Curry, Steph's dad. That is what Monk will be, though yes, he is a much better athlete.

WaltLongmire wrote:Love his shooting, but he has other limitations...D and being a distributor.

You are looking at a guy who is under 6'3" w/o his shoes, has no wingspan, and was invisible at times as a ball handler.

On the right team he can be a nice fit, but right now I see him as a limited player who is a great shooter.

As I've said before...think Del Curry, Steph's dad. That is what Monk will be.

SupremeCommander wrote:

fishmike wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:I keep saying this about Monk and Fox: these guys are two elite freshman prospects--who shared a back court together. Imagine how either would look if they were featured and not splitting the load

I think Fox is superior, but I made the mistake of overlooking much of what Towns could do because of who he was surrounded by. Barring a lottery win the Knicks will be 6-8 so I am focused on that group. Especially with Baker/Lee as the incumbents the Knicks could really use an above the rim player and a killer from 3. Monk certainly brings those aspects so there is some fit as well.

I would prefer Fox, for sure, but I do think Monk would be a fantastic lead guard in the triangle. He's an athlete, he can score, and he got a decent amount of assists considering Fox was the distributor. Most of Phil's points have been guys that are big and can score. Look at what a broken Ron Harper did in the offense... Monk ain't as big as Harper but he's not tiny either

He would have to get much stronger tho and show more resistance on D. I can imagine Monk lighting it up off screens from Willy.

WaltLongmire wrote:

fishmike wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:Love his shooting, but he has other limitations...D and being a distributor.

You are looking at a guy who is under 6'3" w/o his shoes, has no wingspan, and was invisible at times as a ball handler.

On the right team he can be a nice fit, but right now I see him as a limited player who is a great shooter.

As I've said before...think Del Curry, Steph's dad. That is what Monk will be.

I see that... some similarities but I would say that Dell is his downside. Dell Curry was a good player, but didnt have anything close to Monk's hops.

I just added some of his height numbers...and yeah, Del did not have the vertical numbers Monk has, which is why he developed that quick release minimal height jumper of his.

Dell Curry was a 1 dimensional perimeter assassin / shooter. Monk can score all over the place in 1/2 court, catch-shoot, 1, 2 or 3 dribble pull ups, floaters in the lane, layups with either hand at the rim and purely dunking on people.

Dell and Malik is NOT a great compare. I'd say more so guys like M-Ellis or L-Williams.

yellowboy90 wrote:This may be true but then you have to ask why didnt he use his athleticism to get rebounds? To me Monk best cases of success are in the McCollum and Beal range. Beal came out of UF(6'3.3 w/o shoes & 202 lbs) slightly bigger and taller than what Monk is listed at for UK(6'2.3 w/o shoes & 197 lbs). Beal's smooth stroke did not translate into a High 3pg% but he did rebound and play defense at a high level. Monk shot a higher % from 3 but does not check off any of the other boxes. However, even though Beal came in as a better all around player it hasn't really translated until this year. Before this year he was just a good sniper who shot way too many mid range 2s. Hopefully Monk shows a more well rounded game at the next level because the guy can shoot.

I don't think rebounds were a focus and if we can get a CJ McCollum or B-Beal at #6 -- I'm down for that.

LivingLegend wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:Love his shooting, but he has other limitations...D and being a distributor.

You are looking at a guy who is under 6'3" w/o his shoes, (actually listed at 6'3" WITH shoes and about a 6'3" wingspan by KU in 2016) has no wingspan, and was invisible at times as a ball handler.

On the right team he can be a nice fit, but right now I see him as a limited player who is the best streak shooter in the draft.

As I've said before...think Del Curry, Steph's dad. That is what Monk will be, though yes, he is a much better athlete.

Good points but if you look at how Cal used him at UK -- in all 1/2 court situations Monk was played off the ball because they had Fox/Briscoe with the ball (and neither of them were perimeter threats). Monk was basically asked to run off baseline screens and often asked/forced to take tough/contested shots against defenses set to stop him. If anything (like Towns) I think Monk's game could expand at the NBA level in a more free flowing offense where the ball is moving better and there are better players playing next to him. Also think the NBA game/shot clock play to his strengths.

There's a reason Monk is so highly thought of despite not showing a lot of different things at UK. Scouts are aware of what he's capable of but didn't get to show at UK due to the other talent and role he played. IMO Monk will be used as a PG in the NBA. I don't see him being like Beal at all.

WaltLongmire wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

fishmike wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:I keep saying this about Monk and Fox: these guys are two elite freshman prospects--who shared a back court together. Imagine how either would look if they were featured and not splitting the load

I think Fox is superior, but I made the mistake of overlooking much of what Towns could do because of who he was surrounded by. Barring a lottery win the Knicks will be 6-8 so I am focused on that group. Especially with Baker/Lee as the incumbents the Knicks could really use an above the rim player and a killer from 3. Monk certainly brings those aspects so there is some fit as well.

I would prefer Fox, for sure, but I do think Monk would be a fantastic lead guard in the triangle. He's an athlete, he can score, and he got a decent amount of assists considering Fox was the distributor. Most of Phil's points have been guys that are big and can score. Look at what a broken Ron Harper did in the offense... Monk ain't as big as Harper but he's not tiny either

Harper is listed as 6'6" and we know he had long arms...Monk is 6'3" with short arms... Just saying.

A good NBA comparison is Avery Bradley. They are both 6'3.5. Bradly has a 6'7 wingspan vs. Monk's 6'6. Monk has an extra 5 inches (42 vs 37) on his vert than Avery does.

Certainly Monk is at a size advantage at the SG spot. He also lacks the length to overcome that. However the hops will will certainly help.

Walt I thought the Dell Curry or Jamal Crawford type was fair. Guys who can shoot but not too much else. Good players... but I didnt scout Monk well enough. When I saw how shifty he was I dug a bit deeper and quickly learned he is an elite athlete. 42 inch vert is otherworldly. Thats Vince Carter zone. He's very young and will add some strength as well. He's a sniper. Good killer instinct.

Again.. not saying this is my guy, but if he was at pick 7-9 I would be happy. I think he can be great.