Malik Monk’s Other Dimensions May Be Hiding in Plain Sight

The Kentucky product is one of the safest bets in the lottery — a bona fide scorer with limitless range. But for him to live up to his potential draft slot, he’ll have to show more in the NBA than he did in Lexington. There’s a history of Wildcats who have done just that.

Malik Monk is the most explosive scorer in the draft. The Kentucky freshman became a household name when he dropped 47 points on North Carolina, including a game-winning 3-pointer in the final seconds, in December. Monk has a rare combination of athleticism and shooting ability, with unlimited range and a lightning-quick release that allows him to get a shot off from anywhere on the floor. He could go as high as no. 3 overall to Philadelphia, but he may not have the upside of some of the more versatile players projected to go in that range, like Kansas freshman Josh Jackson or De’Aaron Fox, his backcourt partner at Kentucky. There’s a ceiling to how good a one-dimensional player can be, no matter how good he is at that one dimension.

The 76ers need players like Monk, who can fill it up from beyond the 3-point line, to space the floor for Ben Simmons and Joel Embiid. However, taking a player with a lower ceiling because of how his game meshed with the rest of the young core would be a dramatic reversal of former GM Sam Hinkie’s draft philosophy, unless the Sixers think Monk would be able to handle a bigger role in the NBA than the one he had at Kentucky. The difficult part about projecting Monk to the next level is that he wasn’t asked to do much in college beyond get buckets. Big-time scorers aren’t normally considered role players, but that’s exactly what Monk was in his only season in college. What teams picking in the lottery have to figure out is whether he could have done more in a different situation. If volume 3-point shooting is the foundation of his game, but not the full extent of it, he could be worthy of a high lottery pick.

Monk would hardly be the first Wildcat unable to show everything he could do under John Calipari. Since Cal came to Lexington, he has made bringing in all-star teams an annual tradition. In seven seasons, he has had 28 players drafted in the NBA, including 14 lottery picks, and he will likely have three more (Monk and fellow freshmen Fox and Bam Adebayo) taken this year. Most college players change their game to adjust to playing with more talent in the NBA. Cal’s players have the opposite problem. Eric Bledsoe went from being an average spot-up shooter in college to a star point guard in the NBA. Karl-Anthony Towns, one of the most versatile offensive big men in the league, played almost exclusively out of the low post at Kentucky. Two seasons after being a shooting specialist who came off the bench on a team that went 38–1, Devin Booker scored 70 points in an NBA game.

Calipari’s recruiting philosophy has always been to go after as many elite prospects as possible and then figure out how they all fit together once they get to campus. For the most part, his teams are able to overwhelm opponents with the sheer weight of their combined length and athleticism, even if the skill sets of his best players don’t complement each other all that well. One of the common problems on many of his teams at Kentucky has been a lack of perimeter shooting, and that was especially glaring this season, when Monk was often the only Wildcat on the floor who defenses respected from behind the 3-point line. He will never be in a situation like that in the NBA, and playing with more skilled perimeter players around him could allow him to diversify his game.

I think Monk can be great, I mean if I had to pick the best chance for any prospect to be the next Steph Curry Monk would be an easy guess. Monk's ability to be a 2-way player has legit red flags. He's very small...

fishmike wrote:not for nothing the article stinks. There is no mention of what Monk's hidden dimensions are, only that because so many KY players have blossomed they must be there.

I think Monk can be great, I mean if I had to pick the best chance for any prospect to be the next Steph Curry Monk would be an easy guess. Monk's ability to be a 2-way player has legit red flags. He's very small...

WTF? Dude the article did in fact cover how he could be much better. In particular his underutilized PnR Ball Handler game and Slashing ability. At the NBA Level Monk is not going to be strictly a SG. I See him being groomed as a PG. IMO he'll improve his decision making with more reps and better targets. NBA spacing will help Monk as well.

nixluva wrote:

fishmike wrote:not for nothing the article stinks. There is no mention of what Monk's hidden dimensions are, only that because so many KY players have blossomed they must be there.

I think Monk can be great, I mean if I had to pick the best chance for any prospect to be the next Steph Curry Monk would be an easy guess. Monk's ability to be a 2-way player has legit red flags. He's very small...

WTF? Dude the article did in fact cover how he could be much better. In particular his underutilized PnR Ball Handler game and Slashing ability. At the NBA Level Monk is not going to be strictly a SG. I See him being groomed as a PG. IMO he'll improve his decision making with more reps and better targets. NBA spacing will help Monk as well.

If you go back and read Steph Curry's pre-draft analysis, it sounds a lot like Monk's with Curry being a slightly better shooter and Monk being more athletic. As of right now, I lean towards drafting Monk. Ntilkina may have been the move if we had more pieces currently in place.

Full disclosure (and I have to always say this) - I wanted Mudiay over Okafor, Russell and KP so I have no credibility! lol

newyorknewyork wrote:

Welpee wrote:I've decided Monk or Ntilkina are the two guys I would be OK with out of this draft given our draft position. I want no part of Dennis Smith. Too many red flags for me. Even if he has Westbrook-like talent he has team killer written all over him from what I've read.

If you go back and read Steph Curry's pre-draft analysis, it sounds a lot like Monk's with Curry being a slightly better shooter and Monk being more athletic. As of right now, I lean towards drafting Monk. Ntilkina may have been the move if we had more pieces currently in place.

Full disclosure (and I have to always say this) - I wanted Mudiay over Okafor, Russell and KP so I have no credibility! lol

Curry gave you 3 years of data and proved he could give you PG level vision and passing. Displaying some high level hard to make passes. Remember watching the Bob Knight break down of his game and becoming convinced he was the real deal.

With Monk we are only hoping. At the same time Curry became Curry due to his tireless work ethic. If Monk is willing to put in the same type of work then who know what he can become. But thats on him.

There were a lot of question marks about Curry too when he was drafted so he was far from being considered a can't miss pick. But let's be real, anybody you pick at 8 is going to have question marks. It's not like Ntilkina or Dennis Smith or anybody else projected to be available at 8 are going to be safer picks. Beside, can we afford to be safe? We need home run picks.

nixluva wrote:PHUCK the jokes and personal attacks! Guys see what they want and have Blind spots for what is right in front of them! The article did touch on different aspects of Monk's game.

Monk was excellent in the pick-and-roll this season, in an admittedly small sample size of 66 possessions. When you include the shots that came from his passes, he generated 1.015 points per possession, putting him in the 85th percentile of NCAA players. Defenses have a tough time guarding Monk in the two-man game because of how quickly he can rise and fire off the dribble. You can’t go under the screen on Monk, and dropping back even a little is an invitation for him to shoot

As a POINT GUARD versus a SG Monk will have more opportunities as a PnR Ball Handler so YES this is a hidden dimension to his game! Also teams packed it in against UK since they didn't have other 3pt threats. That's going to change in the NBA!!!

Monk doesn't have to turn into CP3 in order to be effective as a PG for the Knicks in the Triangle!!!
There's some ability to work with

CrushAlot wrote:

nixluva wrote:PHUCK the jokes and personal attacks! Guys see what they want and have Blind spots for what is right in front of them! The article did touch on different aspects of Monk's game.

Monk was excellent in the pick-and-roll this season, in an admittedly small sample size of 66 possessions. When you include the shots that came from his passes, he generated 1.015 points per possession, putting him in the 85th percentile of NCAA players. Defenses have a tough time guarding Monk in the two-man game because of how quickly he can rise and fire off the dribble. You can’t go under the screen on Monk, and dropping back even a little is an invitation for him to shoot

As a POINT GUARD versus a SG Monk will have more opportunities as a PnR Ball Handler so YES this is a hidden dimension to his game! Also teams packed it in against UK since they didn't have other 3pt threats. That's going to change in the NBA!!!

Monk doesn't have to turn into CP3 in order to be effective as a PG for the Knicks in the Triangle!!!
There's some ability to work with

Nix, I thought you posted the whole article. I didn't read your intro. I apologize. I know you are passionate and have facts to back up your points.

Sorry I got heated. I just get tired of some of Cliche Nix Attacks trying to make me sound irrational. I'm not an idiot and after a while it gets beyond annoying to read jokes suggesting I am.

technomaster wrote:How does he compare to some of his predecessors at UK - last year's Jamal Murray (#7 overall pick)?

Or perhaps someone like Brandon Knight - who I'd imagine is expendable in Phoenix?

IMO Monk compares with those guys. He's still in need of development and the role Monk is put in will have an impact. Monk is already Triangle ready in that he's used to giving up the Ball EARLY and going into motion. He looks like a great fit.

nixluva wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

nixluva wrote:PHUCK the jokes and personal attacks! Guys see what they want and have Blind spots for what is right in front of them! The article did touch on different aspects of Monk's game.

Monk was excellent in the pick-and-roll this season, in an admittedly small sample size of 66 possessions. When you include the shots that came from his passes, he generated 1.015 points per possession, putting him in the 85th percentile of NCAA players. Defenses have a tough time guarding Monk in the two-man game because of how quickly he can rise and fire off the dribble. You can’t go under the screen on Monk, and dropping back even a little is an invitation for him to shoot

As a POINT GUARD versus a SG Monk will have more opportunities as a PnR Ball Handler so YES this is a hidden dimension to his game! Also teams packed it in against UK since they didn't have other 3pt threats. That's going to change in the NBA!!!

Monk doesn't have to turn into CP3 in order to be effective as a PG for the Knicks in the Triangle!!!
There's some ability to work with

Nix, I thought you posted the whole article. I didn't read your intro. I apologize. I know you are passionate and have facts to back up your points.

Sorry I got heated. I just get tired of some of Cliche Nix Attacks trying to make me sound irrational. I'm not an idiot and after a while it gets beyond annoying to read jokes suggesting I am.

I stick by what I say though... I like Monk as a prospect, but there is a ton he hasn't show and was a pretty average defender in college with Fox taking the tougher guard pretty much every time.

Now I do think Monk as the lowest bust potential. He's gonna be a useful rotation guy, but he certainly *appears* to lack the 2-way upside of a guy like Ntilikina with great hops AND a 7 foot plus wingspan. We will see who Phil likes. Monk is prob the most sure thing to note bust, but do you see him shutting anyone down in the NBA? Anyone? Thats part of it... at least if we are talking building block guys. I would like a building block guy vs. a role player. Now there is more risk in that as well... so I do ack the pendulum swings both ways