Author | Poll |
Author | Thread |
AUTOADVERT |
Panos
Posts: 29203 Alba Posts: 3 Joined: 1/6/2004 Member: #520 |
4/21/2017 9:17 AM
Knicks will just have to win the lottery.
|
BRIGGS
Posts: 53275 Alba Posts: 7 Joined: 7/30/2002 Member: #303 |
4/21/2017 10:52 AM
Knicks arent taking Monk
RIP Crushalot😞
|
Vmart
Posts: 31800 Alba Posts: 1 Joined: 5/23/2002 Member: #247 USA |
4/21/2017 11:11 AM
nixluva wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Knicks arent taking Monk Athleticism is good to have but now a days everyone one has to be able to do multiple things and Monk comes off one dimensional. He lacks the ability to make others better. His assist game is almost nonexistent and his rebounding is putrid. I'm not saying he won't be a great scorer but the signs are there that he may not make others better. |
EnySpree
Posts: 44917 Alba Posts: 138 Joined: 4/18/2003 Member: #397 |
4/21/2017 11:19 AM
BRIGGS wrote:Knicks arent taking Monk So I guess you voted for Smith? Lol Subscribe to my Podcast https://youtube.com/c/DiehardknicksPodcast
https://twitter.com/DiehardknicksPC?t=z5pqPMhdiAZNwzcCGMkiFw&s=09
|
WaltLongmire
Posts: 27623 Alba Posts: 0 Joined: 6/28/2014 Member: #5843 |
4/21/2017 11:23 AM
Not the biggest fan of either, but Smith can handle the ball.
I see Smith as another Rose and can see him getting injured because of his high flying style. Even though I don't want either of them, given the choices we should have, both have some major talent.
I also think, that like Rose, Smith is more of a scorer, and he will not use up his effort on the defensive end.
EnySpree: Can we agree to agree not to mention Phil Jackson and triangle for the rest of our lives?
|
Knixkik
Posts: 34857 Alba Posts: 0 Joined: 7/24/2001 Member: #11 USA |
4/21/2017 11:30 AM LAST EDITED: 4/21/2017 11:30 AM
Monk has an elite NBA skill that will translate right away with his shooting. His athletic ability makes up for his size. He has high upside, and not a ton of downside for a #7 pick. Best case he's a superstar, worst case he's an instant offense 6th man. And most likely he falls somewhere in between, which is really good starting guard.
|
BigDaddyG
Posts: 37419 Alba Posts: 9 Joined: 1/22/2010 Member: #3049 |
4/21/2017 12:19 PM
WaltLongmire wrote:Not the biggest fan of either, but Smith can handle the ball. I see aspects of Rose in Smith as well. The injury potential scare. Be Smith's jumper is more advanced and he shows more defensive potential. But can Smith's iso game fit in the triangle. I pick Smith in a vacuum. But Monk might make more sense when everything is taken into consideration. I think I would punt on both and take Frank T. Always... always remember: Less is less. More is more. More is better and twice as much is good too. Not enough is bad, and too much is never enough except when it's just about right.
- The Tick
|
nixluva
Posts: 56258 Alba Posts: 0 Joined: 10/5/2004 Member: #758 USA |
4/21/2017 12:53 PM
Vmart wrote:nixluva wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Knicks arent taking Monk This is what i'm getting at. The Triangle has never really been about high assist PG's. You have an offense that is predicated on short simple passes and mostly MOTION. It's the Curls, Dribble Hand Offs and Back Cuts that really lead to most of the offense. If you just watch how the Knicks play it's a very simple style for any guard. As an example in this style you don't need a PG that has supreme passing ability. You need a PG that can handle well enough and make the simple play. No one can point to a great PG that played for Phil. It's not necessary for this style. All the passing should happen within 2-3 seconds and the passes are mostly very short and easy passes. This is why Baker has been able to adapt despite never being a PG. I think Monk is more than capable of handling the Role in this style of ball. |
EnySpree
Posts: 44917 Alba Posts: 138 Joined: 4/18/2003 Member: #397 |
4/21/2017 1:03 PM
In respect to what we want to do offensively? Monk is a good fit.... he's essentially George Hill with Baron Davis jumping ability... like oh **** I forgot he could jump like that type of hops
Subscribe to my Podcast https://youtube.com/c/DiehardknicksPodcast
https://twitter.com/DiehardknicksPC?t=z5pqPMhdiAZNwzcCGMkiFw&s=09
|
WaltLongmire
Posts: 27623 Alba Posts: 0 Joined: 6/28/2014 Member: #5843 |
4/21/2017 1:05 PM
BigDaddyG wrote:WaltLongmire wrote:Not the biggest fan of either, but Smith can handle the ball. Never know what they show in a workout. I know there are debates on whether you put more emphasis on a players body of work...or the workouts they do for a team, where the team can put them through drills that show them if they fit in with what that team wants from a player. Just found this series of video assessments... Have to say that when Smith is motivated he can be a good defender from what I see in this video- especially when he is on the ball... though there are moments where he reminds me of Harden when he is off the ball. Just have to trust your talent evaluators. EnySpree: Can we agree to agree not to mention Phil Jackson and triangle for the rest of our lives?
|
LivingLegend
Posts: 23670 Alba Posts: 2 Joined: 8/13/2007 Member: #1645 |
4/21/2017 1:19 PM
nyk4ever wrote:well briggs says that 18yo malik monk is going to remain at 200lbs the rest of his life, so why would i want him? Yeah - I would definitely go with Brunson Jr (elite athlete) over Monk who is very pedestrian and does nothing at NBA level to be considered a top 10 pick. I don't like Monk's ability to --- score from anywhere, score off the catch, bounce, mid-range, long-range, off glass, floaters or dunks and I hate his lightening quick release, great wrist action, high-release, elevation, toughness or his clutch shot making. I hate all that stuff -- give me Brunson or some stiff big instead (Frank Kaminsky rings a bell - can we trade #7 for Big Frank the Tank). |
Finestrg
Posts: 27296 Alba Posts: 1 Joined: 1/1/2006 Member: #1069 |
4/21/2017 1:21 PM
I want Dennis Smith BAD. NBA-ready true point guard with star potential. Very high impact potential/extremely low bust potential. Already does everything well and there's room for growth (i.e. jumper's already good but he'll get even better, etc.). I love this kid. Didn't play like a freshman--he played like a 3 or 4 yr college player. I think they're nuts to pass on him if he's there. Our very own Damian Lillard right here for years to come.
|
LivingLegend
Posts: 23670 Alba Posts: 2 Joined: 8/13/2007 Member: #1645 |
4/21/2017 1:22 PM LAST EDITED: 4/21/2017 1:24 PM
BRIGGS wrote:Knicks arent taking Monk This makes perfect sense since Monk doesn't fit the triangle at all given his great off ball movement, cutting/slashing and quick/release distance shooting. DSJ on the other hand is a perfect triangle fit with his ball dominant pound the dribble style, suspect attitude and complete stand around game off the ball. |
Nalod
Posts: 68482 Alba Posts: 154 Joined: 12/24/2003 Member: #508 USA |
4/21/2017 1:22 PM
Monk looks like Jennings. Smith like Rose.
Too soon, too soon! |
yellowboy90
Posts: 33942 Alba Posts: 0 Joined: 4/23/2011 Member: #3538 |
4/21/2017 1:27 PM
WaltLongmire wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:WaltLongmire wrote:Not the biggest fan of either, but Smith can handle the ball. This is why the answer is Smith. Too many people are just focusing on the triangle and how the player would fit in offensively as a scorer but they are missing the bigger picture. Monk is undersized SG that doesn't rebound, pass, or defend but Smith can do it all. Now will it take a coach to keep him motivated sure but it is also up to the GM to get talent around him to keep him for thinking he has to force it. I think it would be best to keep the expectations low and start Smith off the bench to begin the season and then see what happens. |