| Author | Poll |
| Author | Thread |
| AUTOADVERT |
|
HofstraBBall
Posts: 27195 Alba Posts: 1 Joined: 11/21/2015 Member: #6192 |
4/21/2017 1:32 PM LAST EDITED: 4/21/2017 1:41 PM
Agree on both. Monk is a smaller version of JR that is not as good defensively. We all know how much Phil liked JR. But maybe it was JR being JR and not about his game. Smith is ball dominant. Can see all the negative reaction to him holding the ball longer than 2 seconds. Would pick Monk as he has great range and better jump shot. But think Phil picks others over them.
'Knicks focus should be on players that have grown up playing soccer or cricket' - Triplethreat 8/28/2020
|
|
Nalod
Posts: 68677 Alba Posts: 154 Joined: 12/24/2003 Member: #508 USA |
4/21/2017 1:33 PM
Finestrg wrote:Nalod wrote:Monk looks like Jennings. Smith like Rose. You see their conference record? 4-14. Is it all on him? No. My kid went to state, thats my team. It was a bad year. He is good, and he will be a good pro. He is a good defender. |
|
WaltLongmire
Posts: 27623 Alba Posts: 0 Joined: 6/28/2014 Member: #5843 |
4/21/2017 2:26 PM
LivingLegend wrote: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? Brunson dropped out of the draft, by the way...I posted it somewhere. EnySpree: Can we agree to agree not to mention Phil Jackson and triangle for the rest of our lives?
|
|
BRIGGS
Posts: 53275 Alba Posts: 7 Joined: 7/30/2002 Member: #303 |
4/21/2017 2:59 PM
WaltLongmire wrote:LivingLegend wrote: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? He dropped out of the draft but IMHO--he was a better pro PG prospect than Monk. RIP Crushalot😞
|
|
WaltLongmire
Posts: 27623 Alba Posts: 0 Joined: 6/28/2014 Member: #5843 |
4/21/2017 3:14 PM
BRIGGS wrote:WaltLongmire wrote:LivingLegend wrote: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? Monk is not a PG in my eyes...never has been. As I've said a number of times, though, he is a perfect fit on Philly, who might prefer a BJ Armstrong type guard over one who has the ball all the time. Strangely enough, the only system he might be a lead guard in might just be the Triangle, but then you take away the thing he does best, his long range shooting. He showed nothing in the end to make me think he's an NBA type PG, and I have doubts that he can defend against NBA 2s... ...but we will see. Maybe he surprises in workouts. Remember, Calipari's system hides certain players for the sake of team play. Who knows? EnySpree: Can we agree to agree not to mention Phil Jackson and triangle for the rest of our lives?
|
|
yellowboy90
Posts: 33942 Alba Posts: 0 Joined: 4/23/2011 Member: #3538 |
4/21/2017 3:14 PM
BRIGGS wrote:WaltLongmire wrote:LivingLegend wrote: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? I think he is a 31st in the mode of McCollum/Beal/Thompson. McCollum had time in school to work on his dribbling and even then he landed in a great situation that didn't force him into a starters role giving him more time. Beal has improved his game and dribbling but it took a while however he is still not a good defender. Play is good but I think he is overrated by some. He's a good defender but not great and he doesn't do much else besides shoot. If you take a McCollum you have to hope he improved his handle and become a better defender or you might end up with a guy like Booker who is a high volume inefficient chucker that doesn't play defense, |
|
BigDaddyG
Posts: 37542 Alba Posts: 9 Joined: 1/22/2010 Member: #3049 |
4/21/2017 3:15 PM
Nalod wrote:Finestrg wrote:Nalod wrote:Monk looks like Jennings. Smith like Rose. Don't care much about the ACC and it's collection of Big East traitors lol, but I read from a good number of outlets that the NC State coaching staff was a crap show. I won't hold the record against too much. You're Steve Francis comparison worries. Francis had good stats, but you can argue he wasn't a winning player. 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
|
|
LivingLegend
Posts: 23778 Alba Posts: 2 Joined: 8/13/2007 Member: #1645 |
4/21/2017 9:50 PM
WaltLongmire wrote:BRIGGS wrote:WaltLongmire wrote:LivingLegend wrote: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? I don't disagree with anything you said above but I'd ask did Westbrook or Harden show PG traits coming out of college -- I'd argue no and Westbrook today is no more a pg than MONK - he simply has the ball in his hands. On top of that he doesn't need to be a pure pg in our system -- if anything it's better he isn't a pure point. In fact Monk fits our system as a PG better than current NBA guys like Teague (ball dominant doesn't move off the ball) or draft guys like DSJ (ball dominant doesn't move off the ball). Monk could walk in here start as a guard and guard the other teams PG while at the same time giving us an electric athlete/scorer that fits the system almost perfectly. |
|
nixluva
Posts: 56258 Alba Posts: 0 Joined: 10/5/2004 Member: #758 USA |
4/22/2017 9:34 AM
LivingLegend wrote:WaltLongmire wrote:BRIGGS wrote:WaltLongmire wrote:LivingLegend wrote: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? YUP! This doesn't mean we are putting Monk ahead of all other options. Monk just happens to have the Team Oriented game. He's not Ball Dominant but he does have enough passing talent to be a guard in our style of play. In fact I think Monk would look even more dynamic in our Motion offense with all the cuts, curls, PnR and Dribble Hand Offs. |
|
Uptown
Posts: 30878 Alba Posts: 3 Joined: 4/1/2008 Member: #1883 |
4/22/2017 10:33 AM LAST EDITED: 4/22/2017 12:15 PM
I've been on the Dennis Smith bandwagon for some time....He's the prototypical lead guard in the today's NBA...If he's sitting there and Isaac's, Tatum and Fox are gone, this might be my pick....HOWEVER, former Kentucky players have been flourishing in the NBA as of late....Murray, Booker, Ulis, Cousins, Davis, Wall, Bledsoe, Towns etc....Because of this Monk is very, very intriguing. Most of the former Kentucky players seem to show another gear in the NBA.
I wonder if some of the so-called short comings of Monk, I.E. being a play maker, etc... are not due to his lack of play making ability but the fact that he played his role for the betterment of the Wildcats. Who knew Davis was this good offensively when he was in college? Who knew Booker would be this explosive? Murray? I feel like there might be more to Monks game than he showed. We know one thing, he's a world class shooter and an explosive scorer which will translate easily to the NBA. If he's sitting there, he will be very hard to pass on.... |
|
TPercy
Posts: 28010 Alba Posts: 1 Joined: 2/5/2014 Member: #5748 |
4/22/2017 11:25 AM
Dennis Smith. He is simply better at Monk at almost everything. We have to draft on BPA and not on whether the player is a triangle fit or not especially when we know that the player we are drafting will be a part of the cornerstone system we have in place for years to come while the triangle could easily dissapear. What happens after that then?
Its baffling how we are considering giving up a potential all star caliber player to an at best 6th man. The Future is Bright!
|
|
Vmart
Posts: 31800 Alba Posts: 1 Joined: 5/23/2002 Member: #247 USA |
4/22/2017 11:36 AM
Uptown wrote:I've been on the Dennis Smith bandwagon for some time....He's the prototypical lead guard in the today's NBA...If he's sitting there and Isaac's, Tatum and Fox are gone, this might be my pick....HOWEVER, former Kentucky players have been flourishing in the NBA as of late....Murray, Booker, Ulis, Cousins, Davis, Wall, Bledsoe, Towns etc....Because of this Monk is very, very intriguing. Most of the former Kentucky players seem to show another gear in the NBA. There have been busts too. But yes Kentucky players know why they went to Kentucky in the first place. |
|
Vmart
Posts: 31800 Alba Posts: 1 Joined: 5/23/2002 Member: #247 USA |
4/22/2017 11:37 AM
Uptown wrote:I've been on the Dennis Smith bandwagon for some time....He's the prototypical lead guard in the today's NBA...If he's sitting there and Isaac's, Tatum and Fox are gone, this might be my pick....HOWEVER, former Kentucky players have been flourishing in the NBA as of late....Murray, Booker, Ulis, Cousins, Davis, Wall, Bledsoe, Towns etc....Because of this Monk is very, very intriguing. Most of the former Kentucky players seem to show another gear in the NBA. There have been busts too. But yes Kentucky players know why they went to Kentucky in the first place. |
|
nyknickzingis
Posts: 23029 Alba Posts: 0 Joined: 12/8/2015 Member: #6207 |
4/22/2017 11:58 AM
I'm leaning towards Monk
After Jackson I think 6th BPA is Monk. He may be JR 2.0 but he may also become much better His ceiling is close to an all star And in the Triangle he would learn to be a willing passer and how to look for the open man. |
|
LivingLegend
Posts: 23778 Alba Posts: 2 Joined: 8/13/2007 Member: #1645 |
4/22/2017 1:17 PM
nixluva wrote:LivingLegend wrote:WaltLongmire wrote:BRIGGS wrote:WaltLongmire wrote:LivingLegend wrote: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? Yes agree on the last part of you post. Monk played 90% off the ball with relentless non stop movement -- this is the type of player we need in what Phil wants to do and he is someone the D will have to track, chase and respect. He also showed some really nice chemistry with Bam when he attacked the rim then hit Bam on lobs or they played pick roll off each other. He could do same with KP / Willy. |
|
LivingLegend
Posts: 23778 Alba Posts: 2 Joined: 8/13/2007 Member: #1645 |
4/22/2017 1:21 PM
TPercy wrote:Dennis Smith. He is simply better at Monk at almost everything. We have to draft on BPA and not on whether the player is a triangle fit or not especially when we know that the player we are drafting will be a part of the cornerstone system we have in place for years to come while the triangle could easily dissapear. What happens after that then? Smith had the ball in his hands 75% of the time at NCS -- how many 30 point games did he put up? Monk playing off the ball I believe put up 4 +30 point games -- I don't see how Monk is now a 6th man. In fact he could be a top 5 (semi-PG) 4-5 years down the road. I love his wiry, springy body and his incredible balance. |
|
LivingLegend
Posts: 23778 Alba Posts: 2 Joined: 8/13/2007 Member: #1645 |
4/22/2017 1:24 PM
nyknickzingis wrote:I'm leaning towards Monk Monk showed more effort in 1 year at U.K. Than JR has in 10+ years in th e NBA. If we are saying Monk has the talent of JR we better be picking him because JR issue was never talent. |