newyorknewyork wrote:

Nalod wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:Fiz is right in line with how I'm thinking, this kid is more suited for sf in this system.

ya'll keep thinking I don't like him, when it's more about me not liking him as a PG.

Ntilikina won’t be starting at point guard Friday as he did Monday against the Wizards — instead, Ron Baker will be the fourth different Knick to start there in five preseason games — but Fizdale wants to see Ntilikina guard the four, potentially another way to increase his minutes.

Though the coach said he wouldn’t put the 6-foot-6 Frenchman “on a big old beast four,” he figured the Nets — with perhaps DeMarre Carroll or Rondae Hollis-Jefferson at the position — might offer a good opportunity to begin trying it.

“Brooklyn is fast-paced, they usually play four perimeters and a big guy. Why not? Let’s see it,” Fizdale said. “The fours that play in our league now … how teams are playing, they’re playing perimeter guys at that spot. Frank, that’s why I said he gives me so many options for having a ball-handler that can do multiple things and guard multiple people. So that’s where I think the flexibility comes in.”

That's what I love about this coach, he is going to find the best possible way for you to capitalize on your strength.

I just think you prolong his development "in this system" if you force point guard responsibilities on him, too much thinking and not enough reacting. The kid just spent 4 yrs learning how to play the game a different way(and you know how you absorb info as a teenager)so he's 2 yrs in the hole compared to these AAu players who come in more NBA ready.....L him defend and be a glue guy and take the open shot. I think Point fwd is a good role for him (in this fast pace system).

That's all I'm saying, it's never been about me not liking him, at least Fiz is thinking outside the box

Can a box have three sides? I thought you had that triangle taint all over Frank?

Can a "Box" have shaped like a Triangle? You had him in a PG box and for weeks he been telling everyone all things are open. You put him in a Triangle box. Rainman like because your get fixated on things.
So now a player who passes and plays different is "outside the AAU" box? That's ok too, no diva like rants, preening after dunks, and yelling at his coaches. Works for me.

The triangle was never dependent on a "PG" other than basic guard functions. The Triangle requires all 5 players to be able to read and react to the defense simultaneously. Executing faster than the defense can recover. Even if you had an expert triangle player playing PG. It wouldn't matter if the other 4 players weren't able to read and react at the same speed. So most likely Phil was looking for multiple triangle type of players. Which would be pretty much be players that can read and react who had solid all around games. Who also provided size and length. These are players that can probably play on any team in any system. Since size, length, IQ and all around games would be welcome on any team.

This is all very accurate. It slaps in the face that Frank was drafted to be a PG. Phils Triangle teams did not have traditional PG's. Fiz says the same thing. Uh oh.....Fiz is thinking out side the box according to knicks1248.
"Ability to read and react to defense simultaneously". That AAU thing must teach them to NOT do this. Otherwise you don't get a shoe deal. Etc..........
Sounds like Frank was drafted to be a good basketball player.
Remember when knick fans liked good defensive players?

Nalod wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

Nalod wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:Fiz is right in line with how I'm thinking, this kid is more suited for sf in this system.

ya'll keep thinking I don't like him, when it's more about me not liking him as a PG.

Ntilikina won’t be starting at point guard Friday as he did Monday against the Wizards — instead, Ron Baker will be the fourth different Knick to start there in five preseason games — but Fizdale wants to see Ntilikina guard the four, potentially another way to increase his minutes.

Though the coach said he wouldn’t put the 6-foot-6 Frenchman “on a big old beast four,” he figured the Nets — with perhaps DeMarre Carroll or Rondae Hollis-Jefferson at the position — might offer a good opportunity to begin trying it.

“Brooklyn is fast-paced, they usually play four perimeters and a big guy. Why not? Let’s see it,” Fizdale said. “The fours that play in our league now … how teams are playing, they’re playing perimeter guys at that spot. Frank, that’s why I said he gives me so many options for having a ball-handler that can do multiple things and guard multiple people. So that’s where I think the flexibility comes in.”

That's what I love about this coach, he is going to find the best possible way for you to capitalize on your strength.

I just think you prolong his development "in this system" if you force point guard responsibilities on him, too much thinking and not enough reacting. The kid just spent 4 yrs learning how to play the game a different way(and you know how you absorb info as a teenager)so he's 2 yrs in the hole compared to these AAu players who come in more NBA ready.....L him defend and be a glue guy and take the open shot. I think Point fwd is a good role for him (in this fast pace system).

That's all I'm saying, it's never been about me not liking him, at least Fiz is thinking outside the box

Can a box have three sides? I thought you had that triangle taint all over Frank?

Can a "Box" have shaped like a Triangle? You had him in a PG box and for weeks he been telling everyone all things are open. You put him in a Triangle box. Rainman like because your get fixated on things.
So now a player who passes and plays different is "outside the AAU" box? That's ok too, no diva like rants, preening after dunks, and yelling at his coaches. Works for me.

The triangle was never dependent on a "PG" other than basic guard functions. The Triangle requires all 5 players to be able to read and react to the defense simultaneously. Executing faster than the defense can recover. Even if you had an expert triangle player playing PG. It wouldn't matter if the other 4 players weren't able to read and react at the same speed. So most likely Phil was looking for multiple triangle type of players. Which would be pretty much be players that can read and react who had solid all around games. Who also provided size and length. These are players that can probably play on any team in any system. Since size, length, IQ and all around games would be welcome on any team.

This is all very accurate. It slaps in the face that Frank was drafted to be a PG. Phils Triangle teams did not have traditional PG's. Fiz says the same thing. Uh oh.....Fiz is thinking out side the box according to knicks1248.
"Ability to read and react to defense simultaneously". That AAU thing must teach them to NOT do this. Otherwise you don't get a shoe deal. Etc..........
Sounds like Frank was drafted to be a good basketball player.
Remember when knick fans liked good defensive players?

So what are you saying? Frank is not our best PG? More of a back up multi position player. And In a draft where it was said there were numourous high level PG's, Phil picked a guy that was not suited to be a typical NBA PG but nore of a Triangle guy?

CrushAlot wrote:

Nalod wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

Nalod wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:Fiz is right in line with how I'm thinking, this kid is more suited for sf in this system.

ya'll keep thinking I don't like him, when it's more about me not liking him as a PG.

Ntilikina won’t be starting at point guard Friday as he did Monday against the Wizards — instead, Ron Baker will be the fourth different Knick to start there in five preseason games — but Fizdale wants to see Ntilikina guard the four, potentially another way to increase his minutes.

Though the coach said he wouldn’t put the 6-foot-6 Frenchman “on a big old beast four,” he figured the Nets — with perhaps DeMarre Carroll or Rondae Hollis-Jefferson at the position — might offer a good opportunity to begin trying it.

“Brooklyn is fast-paced, they usually play four perimeters and a big guy. Why not? Let’s see it,” Fizdale said. “The fours that play in our league now … how teams are playing, they’re playing perimeter guys at that spot. Frank, that’s why I said he gives me so many options for having a ball-handler that can do multiple things and guard multiple people. So that’s where I think the flexibility comes in.”

That's what I love about this coach, he is going to find the best possible way for you to capitalize on your strength.

I just think you prolong his development "in this system" if you force point guard responsibilities on him, too much thinking and not enough reacting. The kid just spent 4 yrs learning how to play the game a different way(and you know how you absorb info as a teenager)so he's 2 yrs in the hole compared to these AAu players who come in more NBA ready.....L him defend and be a glue guy and take the open shot. I think Point fwd is a good role for him (in this fast pace system).

That's all I'm saying, it's never been about me not liking him, at least Fiz is thinking outside the box

Can a box have three sides? I thought you had that triangle taint all over Frank?

Can a "Box" have shaped like a Triangle? You had him in a PG box and for weeks he been telling everyone all things are open. You put him in a Triangle box. Rainman like because your get fixated on things.
So now a player who passes and plays different is "outside the AAU" box? That's ok too, no diva like rants, preening after dunks, and yelling at his coaches. Works for me.

The triangle was never dependent on a "PG" other than basic guard functions. The Triangle requires all 5 players to be able to read and react to the defense simultaneously. Executing faster than the defense can recover. Even if you had an expert triangle player playing PG. It wouldn't matter if the other 4 players weren't able to read and react at the same speed. So most likely Phil was looking for multiple triangle type of players. Which would be pretty much be players that can read and react who had solid all around games. Who also provided size and length. These are players that can probably play on any team in any system. Since size, length, IQ and all around games would be welcome on any team.

This is all very accurate. It slaps in the face that Frank was drafted to be a PG. Phils Triangle teams did not have traditional PG's. Fiz says the same thing. Uh oh.....Fiz is thinking out side the box according to knicks1248.
"Ability to read and react to defense simultaneously". That AAU thing must teach them to NOT do this. Otherwise you don't get a shoe deal. Etc..........
Sounds like Frank was drafted to be a good basketball player.
Remember when knick fans liked good defensive players?

Frank was drafted as a point guard. Is anyone questioning that? History doesn't have to be revised here to make Frank a good or bad pick. The fact that the guy that drafted him wanted to implement a system where the point guard's role is different from what it is in the modern nba does come into play a bit. Now that there is a new regime in place that is allowing the coach to run his own system, Frank is being looked at as a player that can be a secondary ball handler that plays a little point guard. The Knicks had Frank playing the point almost exclusively for the first two thirds of the season last year and the mantra at the time was that he needed to get more minutes to grow and improve at the position. Nothing wrong with a young player being drafted for one position and ending up in another or being used for his versatility instead of fitting just one defined role.

Find it funny that after years of guys defending Phil and the Triangle, its now a bad thing to connect players to both. Why is it so strange to some that the players picked by Phil were because he thought they were best suited for his syatem? Agree that Frank was picked as a Triangle PG. Pretty logical to think the Triangle master wouls pick guys to fit the Triangle.

Some Think its bagging on Frank because I say Phil passed on other PG's that were better suited for most NBA systems and went with the type of PG better suited for the Triangle. Problem I had was that I knew Phil and his triangle would be ahort lived. Now that Phil is gone, along with his system, we are seeing that Frank is having trouble fitting the role of PG on a non Triangle system. Now do I think he can eventually do so, I dont know. Only thing anyone knows is that he is a very good defender and very young. So now we all just have to move on and see what he turns out to be. Hopefully he turns into someone who can help us get to the next level.

Nalod wrote:Phils 11 championship teams did not often employ prototypical PG's as ball handlers. ANd, they did not often draft 8th. Kukoc was 19 and was a role player. Otherwise they did not draft very young either.
So phil was thinking long view. Phil never was the boss a minute of Franks on the court so we don't know what he and Gaines were thinking other than long view.
The Little guys could shoot, not break down the defense with the ball. Frank didn't play with 2-3 HOF's or all stars much.
Little to compare. Its what what frank is but what Phil envisioned he could become. Until Phil says we really don't know beyond what was said at the draft.

Don't think Phil was the one that put those teams together back then. Besides, we all know they didn't need much except for their most important ingredient. And it was not anything mentioned above.

HofstraBBall wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Nalod wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

Nalod wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:Fiz is right in line with how I'm thinking, this kid is more suited for sf in this system.

ya'll keep thinking I don't like him, when it's more about me not liking him as a PG.

Ntilikina won’t be starting at point guard Friday as he did Monday against the Wizards — instead, Ron Baker will be the fourth different Knick to start there in five preseason games — but Fizdale wants to see Ntilikina guard the four, potentially another way to increase his minutes.

Though the coach said he wouldn’t put the 6-foot-6 Frenchman “on a big old beast four,” he figured the Nets — with perhaps DeMarre Carroll or Rondae Hollis-Jefferson at the position — might offer a good opportunity to begin trying it.

“Brooklyn is fast-paced, they usually play four perimeters and a big guy. Why not? Let’s see it,” Fizdale said. “The fours that play in our league now … how teams are playing, they’re playing perimeter guys at that spot. Frank, that’s why I said he gives me so many options for having a ball-handler that can do multiple things and guard multiple people. So that’s where I think the flexibility comes in.”

That's what I love about this coach, he is going to find the best possible way for you to capitalize on your strength.

I just think you prolong his development "in this system" if you force point guard responsibilities on him, too much thinking and not enough reacting. The kid just spent 4 yrs learning how to play the game a different way(and you know how you absorb info as a teenager)so he's 2 yrs in the hole compared to these AAu players who come in more NBA ready.....L him defend and be a glue guy and take the open shot. I think Point fwd is a good role for him (in this fast pace system).

That's all I'm saying, it's never been about me not liking him, at least Fiz is thinking outside the box

Can a box have three sides? I thought you had that triangle taint all over Frank?

Can a "Box" have shaped like a Triangle? You had him in a PG box and for weeks he been telling everyone all things are open. You put him in a Triangle box. Rainman like because your get fixated on things.
So now a player who passes and plays different is "outside the AAU" box? That's ok too, no diva like rants, preening after dunks, and yelling at his coaches. Works for me.

The triangle was never dependent on a "PG" other than basic guard functions. The Triangle requires all 5 players to be able to read and react to the defense simultaneously. Executing faster than the defense can recover. Even if you had an expert triangle player playing PG. It wouldn't matter if the other 4 players weren't able to read and react at the same speed. So most likely Phil was looking for multiple triangle type of players. Which would be pretty much be players that can read and react who had solid all around games. Who also provided size and length. These are players that can probably play on any team in any system. Since size, length, IQ and all around games would be welcome on any team.

This is all very accurate. It slaps in the face that Frank was drafted to be a PG. Phils Triangle teams did not have traditional PG's. Fiz says the same thing. Uh oh.....Fiz is thinking out side the box according to knicks1248.
"Ability to read and react to defense simultaneously". That AAU thing must teach them to NOT do this. Otherwise you don't get a shoe deal. Etc..........
Sounds like Frank was drafted to be a good basketball player.
Remember when knick fans liked good defensive players?

Frank was drafted as a point guard. Is anyone questioning that? History doesn't have to be revised here to make Frank a good or bad pick. The fact that the guy that drafted him wanted to implement a system where the point guard's role is different from what it is in the modern nba does come into play a bit. Now that there is a new regime in place that is allowing the coach to run his own system, Frank is being looked at as a player that can be a secondary ball handler that plays a little point guard. The Knicks had Frank playing the point almost exclusively for the first two thirds of the season last year and the mantra at the time was that he needed to get more minutes to grow and improve at the position. Nothing wrong with a young player being drafted for one position and ending up in another or being used for his versatility instead of fitting just one defined role.

Find it funny that after years of guys defending Phil and the Triangle, its now a bad thing to connect players to both. Why is it so strange to some that the players picked by Phil were because he thought they were best suited for his syatem? Agree that Frank was picked as a Triangle PG. Pretty logical to think the Triangle master wouls pick guys to fit the Triangle.

Some Think its bagging on Frank because I say Phil passed on other PG's that were better suited for most NBA systems and went with the type of PG better suited for the Triangle. Problem I had was that I knew Phil and his triangle would be ahort lived. Now that Phil is gone, along with his system, we are seeing that Frank is having trouble fitting the role of PG on a non Triangle system. Now do I think he can eventually do so, I dont know. Only thing anyone knows is that he is a very good defender and very young. So now we all just have to move on and see what he turns out to be. Hopefully he turns into someone who can help us get to the next level.

The point of (my) post was to eventually connect how the triangle and position less basketball are very similar. So even if Frank was viewed as a triangle friendly player by some on the board. Those principals still work within this position less era of basketball that the NBA has been heading into. IMO triangle PG is also the wrong term. Triangle player would be more accurate. Ron Harper was a 20 pt shooting guard for the first 8 years of his career. He was able to move to PG with the Bulls under the same ideals of position less basketball. Our current coach preaches positions less basketball so its very relevant.

Fans excited about the pick saw how he fit the NBA's movement towards position less ball and the different possibilities he could potentially bring.

BigDaddyG wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Nalod wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

Nalod wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:Fiz is right in line with how I'm thinking, this kid is more suited for sf in this system.

ya'll keep thinking I don't like him, when it's more about me not liking him as a PG.

Ntilikina won’t be starting at point guard Friday as he did Monday against the Wizards — instead, Ron Baker will be the fourth different Knick to start there in five preseason games — but Fizdale wants to see Ntilikina guard the four, potentially another way to increase his minutes.

Though the coach said he wouldn’t put the 6-foot-6 Frenchman “on a big old beast four,” he figured the Nets — with perhaps DeMarre Carroll or Rondae Hollis-Jefferson at the position — might offer a good opportunity to begin trying it.

“Brooklyn is fast-paced, they usually play four perimeters and a big guy. Why not? Let’s see it,” Fizdale said. “The fours that play in our league now … how teams are playing, they’re playing perimeter guys at that spot. Frank, that’s why I said he gives me so many options for having a ball-handler that can do multiple things and guard multiple people. So that’s where I think the flexibility comes in.”

That's what I love about this coach, he is going to find the best possible way for you to capitalize on your strength.

I just think you prolong his development "in this system" if you force point guard responsibilities on him, too much thinking and not enough reacting. The kid just spent 4 yrs learning how to play the game a different way(and you know how you absorb info as a teenager)so he's 2 yrs in the hole compared to these AAu players who come in more NBA ready.....L him defend and be a glue guy and take the open shot. I think Point fwd is a good role for him (in this fast pace system).

That's all I'm saying, it's never been about me not liking him, at least Fiz is thinking outside the box

Can a box have three sides? I thought you had that triangle taint all over Frank?

Can a "Box" have shaped like a Triangle? You had him in a PG box and for weeks he been telling everyone all things are open. You put him in a Triangle box. Rainman like because your get fixated on things.
So now a player who passes and plays different is "outside the AAU" box? That's ok too, no diva like rants, preening after dunks, and yelling at his coaches. Works for me.

The triangle was never dependent on a "PG" other than basic guard functions. The Triangle requires all 5 players to be able to read and react to the defense simultaneously. Executing faster than the defense can recover. Even if you had an expert triangle player playing PG. It wouldn't matter if the other 4 players weren't able to read and react at the same speed. So most likely Phil was looking for multiple triangle type of players. Which would be pretty much be players that can read and react who had solid all around games. Who also provided size and length. These are players that can probably play on any team in any system. Since size, length, IQ and all around games would be welcome on any team.

This is all very accurate. It slaps in the face that Frank was drafted to be a PG. Phils Triangle teams did not have traditional PG's. Fiz says the same thing. Uh oh.....Fiz is thinking out side the box according to knicks1248.
"Ability to read and react to defense simultaneously". That AAU thing must teach them to NOT do this. Otherwise you don't get a shoe deal. Etc..........
Sounds like Frank was drafted to be a good basketball player.
Remember when knick fans liked good defensive players?

So what are you saying? Frank is not our best PG? More of a back up multi position player. And In a draft where it was said there were numourous high level PG's, Phil picked a guy that was not suited to be a typical NBA PG but nore of a Triangle guy?

Numerous high level PGs? There was really only one guy prognosticators made a case for at PG, and that was DSJ. I'm not really a fan of his game, but I guess that could change over time. Mitchell? No one had him rated that high and no one considered a PG. I still don't really consider him a PG.

He was a great triangle option. Go figure. In today's position less era. His close to 7ft wing space and his muscular build allowing him to guard on the switch makes him valuable alone. The triangle wouldn't have required a pure PG so he would have fit nicely given his size, length, athleticism, 3 point stroke if that's the route we were taking. He can also develop better PG ability down the road. Can't really teach a lot of the things he possessed. He was also the best defensive guard in the ACC. I liked him better as a prospect then Smith.

HofstraBBall wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Nalod wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

Nalod wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:Fiz is right in line with how I'm thinking, this kid is more suited for sf in this system.

ya'll keep thinking I don't like him, when it's more about me not liking him as a PG.

Ntilikina won’t be starting at point guard Friday as he did Monday against the Wizards — instead, Ron Baker will be the fourth different Knick to start there in five preseason games — but Fizdale wants to see Ntilikina guard the four, potentially another way to increase his minutes.

Though the coach said he wouldn’t put the 6-foot-6 Frenchman “on a big old beast four,” he figured the Nets — with perhaps DeMarre Carroll or Rondae Hollis-Jefferson at the position — might offer a good opportunity to begin trying it.

“Brooklyn is fast-paced, they usually play four perimeters and a big guy. Why not? Let’s see it,” Fizdale said. “The fours that play in our league now … how teams are playing, they’re playing perimeter guys at that spot. Frank, that’s why I said he gives me so many options for having a ball-handler that can do multiple things and guard multiple people. So that’s where I think the flexibility comes in.”

That's what I love about this coach, he is going to find the best possible way for you to capitalize on your strength.

I just think you prolong his development "in this system" if you force point guard responsibilities on him, too much thinking and not enough reacting. The kid just spent 4 yrs learning how to play the game a different way(and you know how you absorb info as a teenager)so he's 2 yrs in the hole compared to these AAu players who come in more NBA ready.....L him defend and be a glue guy and take the open shot. I think Point fwd is a good role for him (in this fast pace system).

That's all I'm saying, it's never been about me not liking him, at least Fiz is thinking outside the box

Can a box have three sides? I thought you had that triangle taint all over Frank?

Can a "Box" have shaped like a Triangle? You had him in a PG box and for weeks he been telling everyone all things are open. You put him in a Triangle box. Rainman like because your get fixated on things.
So now a player who passes and plays different is "outside the AAU" box? That's ok too, no diva like rants, preening after dunks, and yelling at his coaches. Works for me.

The triangle was never dependent on a "PG" other than basic guard functions. The Triangle requires all 5 players to be able to read and react to the defense simultaneously. Executing faster than the defense can recover. Even if you had an expert triangle player playing PG. It wouldn't matter if the other 4 players weren't able to read and react at the same speed. So most likely Phil was looking for multiple triangle type of players. Which would be pretty much be players that can read and react who had solid all around games. Who also provided size and length. These are players that can probably play on any team in any system. Since size, length, IQ and all around games would be welcome on any team.

This is all very accurate. It slaps in the face that Frank was drafted to be a PG. Phils Triangle teams did not have traditional PG's. Fiz says the same thing. Uh oh.....Fiz is thinking out side the box according to knicks1248.
"Ability to read and react to defense simultaneously". That AAU thing must teach them to NOT do this. Otherwise you don't get a shoe deal. Etc..........
Sounds like Frank was drafted to be a good basketball player.
Remember when knick fans liked good defensive players?

So what are you saying? Frank is not our best PG? More of a back up multi position player. And In a draft where it was said there were numourous high level PG's, Phil picked a guy that was not suited to be a typical NBA PG but nore of a Triangle guy?

Numerous high level PGs? There was really only one guy prognosticators made a case for at PG, and that was DSJ. I'm not really a fan of his game, but I guess that could change over time. Mitchell? No one had him rated that high and no one considered a PG. I still don't really consider him a PG.

Several experts had it as a talented PG heavy draft.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theringer.com/platform/amp/2016/9/22/16077298/2017-nba-draft-point-guards-markelle-fultz-dennis-smith-jr-ef66c2bf3653

https://www.google.com/amp/s/syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/2683766-the-2017-nba-draft-class-is-absolutely-stacked-at-pg-position.amp.html

Yeah, but all those guys were slotted ahead of where we were picking. I was hoping Fox would fall, but he was snapped up before us.

newyorknewyork wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Nalod wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

Nalod wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:Fiz is right in line with how I'm thinking, this kid is more suited for sf in this system.

ya'll keep thinking I don't like him, when it's more about me not liking him as a PG.

Ntilikina won’t be starting at point guard Friday as he did Monday against the Wizards — instead, Ron Baker will be the fourth different Knick to start there in five preseason games — but Fizdale wants to see Ntilikina guard the four, potentially another way to increase his minutes.

Though the coach said he wouldn’t put the 6-foot-6 Frenchman “on a big old beast four,” he figured the Nets — with perhaps DeMarre Carroll or Rondae Hollis-Jefferson at the position — might offer a good opportunity to begin trying it.

“Brooklyn is fast-paced, they usually play four perimeters and a big guy. Why not? Let’s see it,” Fizdale said. “The fours that play in our league now … how teams are playing, they’re playing perimeter guys at that spot. Frank, that’s why I said he gives me so many options for having a ball-handler that can do multiple things and guard multiple people. So that’s where I think the flexibility comes in.”

That's what I love about this coach, he is going to find the best possible way for you to capitalize on your strength.

I just think you prolong his development "in this system" if you force point guard responsibilities on him, too much thinking and not enough reacting. The kid just spent 4 yrs learning how to play the game a different way(and you know how you absorb info as a teenager)so he's 2 yrs in the hole compared to these AAu players who come in more NBA ready.....L him defend and be a glue guy and take the open shot. I think Point fwd is a good role for him (in this fast pace system).

That's all I'm saying, it's never been about me not liking him, at least Fiz is thinking outside the box

Can a box have three sides? I thought you had that triangle taint all over Frank?

Can a "Box" have shaped like a Triangle? You had him in a PG box and for weeks he been telling everyone all things are open. You put him in a Triangle box. Rainman like because your get fixated on things.
So now a player who passes and plays different is "outside the AAU" box? That's ok too, no diva like rants, preening after dunks, and yelling at his coaches. Works for me.

The triangle was never dependent on a "PG" other than basic guard functions. The Triangle requires all 5 players to be able to read and react to the defense simultaneously. Executing faster than the defense can recover. Even if you had an expert triangle player playing PG. It wouldn't matter if the other 4 players weren't able to read and react at the same speed. So most likely Phil was looking for multiple triangle type of players. Which would be pretty much be players that can read and react who had solid all around games. Who also provided size and length. These are players that can probably play on any team in any system. Since size, length, IQ and all around games would be welcome on any team.

This is all very accurate. It slaps in the face that Frank was drafted to be a PG. Phils Triangle teams did not have traditional PG's. Fiz says the same thing. Uh oh.....Fiz is thinking out side the box according to knicks1248.
"Ability to read and react to defense simultaneously". That AAU thing must teach them to NOT do this. Otherwise you don't get a shoe deal. Etc..........
Sounds like Frank was drafted to be a good basketball player.
Remember when knick fans liked good defensive players?

Frank was drafted as a point guard. Is anyone questioning that? History doesn't have to be revised here to make Frank a good or bad pick. The fact that the guy that drafted him wanted to implement a system where the point guard's role is different from what it is in the modern nba does come into play a bit. Now that there is a new regime in place that is allowing the coach to run his own system, Frank is being looked at as a player that can be a secondary ball handler that plays a little point guard. The Knicks had Frank playing the point almost exclusively for the first two thirds of the season last year and the mantra at the time was that he needed to get more minutes to grow and improve at the position. Nothing wrong with a young player being drafted for one position and ending up in another or being used for his versatility instead of fitting just one defined role.

Find it funny that after years of guys defending Phil and the Triangle, its now a bad thing to connect players to both. Why is it so strange to some that the players picked by Phil were because he thought they were best suited for his syatem? Agree that Frank was picked as a Triangle PG. Pretty logical to think the Triangle master wouls pick guys to fit the Triangle.

Some Think its bagging on Frank because I say Phil passed on other PG's that were better suited for most NBA systems and went with the type of PG better suited for the Triangle. Problem I had was that I knew Phil and his triangle would be ahort lived. Now that Phil is gone, along with his system, we are seeing that Frank is having trouble fitting the role of PG on a non Triangle system. Now do I think he can eventually do so, I dont know. Only thing anyone knows is that he is a very good defender and very young. So now we all just have to move on and see what he turns out to be. Hopefully he turns into someone who can help us get to the next level.

The point of (my) post was to eventually connect how the triangle and position less basketball are very similar. So even if Frank was viewed as a triangle friendly player by some on the board. Those principals still work within this position less era of basketball that the NBA has been heading into. IMO triangle PG is also the wrong term. Triangle player would be more accurate. Ron Harper was a 20 pt shooting guard for the first 8 years of his career. He was able to move to PG with the Bulls under the same ideals of position less basketball. Our current coach preaches positions less basketball so its very relevant.

Fans excited about the pick saw how he fit the NBA's movement towards position less ball and the different possibilities he could potentially bring.

Would agree with most. Don't know if PG's in the NBA are position less though. The 2 to 5, definitely. But yeah, after the fact and now that Frank is a Knick, agree that he is multi positional. excellent defender, long and brings value. My point is that the Knicks desperately needed a true PG and it was a good year to pick one up. And because Phil chose the one that was better suited to be multi positional (For the Trinagle), we are still looking for one.

That's fair. We also could have had SGA this past draft but passed up that opportunity for a unique forward piece. Dallas also went after Jalen Brunson in the 2nd round after trading up for point forward Doncic because I don't think they want DSJ restricted with pure PG duties 24/7 but want to free him up to be who he is.

https://hoopshype.com/2018/10/02/dallas-mavericks-dennis-smith-luka-doncic-scouting-report-analysis/

He shot just 39.5 percent from the field on 14.8 attempts per game, and he hit only 31.3 percent of his three-pointers on 4.9 attempts per game. The 20-year-old must significantly improve his shooting as he continues developing.

Jonathan Tjarks recently spoke about why Smith could be poised for a much better sophomore season now that he’s playing next to rookie Luka Doncic, who is an incredible passer (via The Ringer):

“I’ve got a fun stat for you guys. Dennis was way better on catch-and-shoot threes than versus off-the-dribble threes last year. The problem was that he had nobody to get him open threes because nobody on the Mavs can pass.”

Last season, Smith averaged 0.66 points per possession on jump shots off the dribble. He shot 78-of-280 (27.9 percent) on these attempts, among the worst in the league among those with as many opportunities.

Meanwhile, the point guard averaged 1.05 PPP on catch-and-shoot jump shots. His field goal percentage was much better, shooting 50-of-142 (35.2 percent) during his first season in the league. And, as originally noted by Bobby Karalla, Smith was 31-for-63 (49.2 percent) when he was unguarded. He shot almost the exact same field goal percentage on this play type in college, suggesting these numbers aren’t a fluke.

StarksEwing1 wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Nalod wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

Nalod wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:Fiz is right in line with how I'm thinking, this kid is more suited for sf in this system.

ya'll keep thinking I don't like him, when it's more about me not liking him as a PG.

Ntilikina won’t be starting at point guard Friday as he did Monday against the Wizards — instead, Ron Baker will be the fourth different Knick to start there in five preseason games — but Fizdale wants to see Ntilikina guard the four, potentially another way to increase his minutes.

Though the coach said he wouldn’t put the 6-foot-6 Frenchman “on a big old beast four,” he figured the Nets — with perhaps DeMarre Carroll or Rondae Hollis-Jefferson at the position — might offer a good opportunity to begin trying it.

“Brooklyn is fast-paced, they usually play four perimeters and a big guy. Why not? Let’s see it,” Fizdale said. “The fours that play in our league now … how teams are playing, they’re playing perimeter guys at that spot. Frank, that’s why I said he gives me so many options for having a ball-handler that can do multiple things and guard multiple people. So that’s where I think the flexibility comes in.”

That's what I love about this coach, he is going to find the best possible way for you to capitalize on your strength.

I just think you prolong his development "in this system" if you force point guard responsibilities on him, too much thinking and not enough reacting. The kid just spent 4 yrs learning how to play the game a different way(and you know how you absorb info as a teenager)so he's 2 yrs in the hole compared to these AAu players who come in more NBA ready.....L him defend and be a glue guy and take the open shot. I think Point fwd is a good role for him (in this fast pace system).

That's all I'm saying, it's never been about me not liking him, at least Fiz is thinking outside the box

Can a box have three sides? I thought you had that triangle taint all over Frank?

Can a "Box" have shaped like a Triangle? You had him in a PG box and for weeks he been telling everyone all things are open. You put him in a Triangle box. Rainman like because your get fixated on things.
So now a player who passes and plays different is "outside the AAU" box? That's ok too, no diva like rants, preening after dunks, and yelling at his coaches. Works for me.

The triangle was never dependent on a "PG" other than basic guard functions. The Triangle requires all 5 players to be able to read and react to the defense simultaneously. Executing faster than the defense can recover. Even if you had an expert triangle player playing PG. It wouldn't matter if the other 4 players weren't able to read and react at the same speed. So most likely Phil was looking for multiple triangle type of players. Which would be pretty much be players that can read and react who had solid all around games. Who also provided size and length. These are players that can probably play on any team in any system. Since size, length, IQ and all around games would be welcome on any team.

This is all very accurate. It slaps in the face that Frank was drafted to be a PG. Phils Triangle teams did not have traditional PG's. Fiz says the same thing. Uh oh.....Fiz is thinking out side the box according to knicks1248.
"Ability to read and react to defense simultaneously". That AAU thing must teach them to NOT do this. Otherwise you don't get a shoe deal. Etc..........
Sounds like Frank was drafted to be a good basketball player.
Remember when knick fans liked good defensive players?

Frank was drafted as a point guard. Is anyone questioning that? History doesn't have to be revised here to make Frank a good or bad pick. The fact that the guy that drafted him wanted to implement a system where the point guard's role is different from what it is in the modern nba does come into play a bit. Now that there is a new regime in place that is allowing the coach to run his own system, Frank is being looked at as a player that can be a secondary ball handler that plays a little point guard. The Knicks had Frank playing the point almost exclusively for the first two thirds of the season last year and the mantra at the time was that he needed to get more minutes to grow and improve at the position. Nothing wrong with a young player being drafted for one position and ending up in another or being used for his versatility instead of fitting just one defined role.

Find it funny that after years of guys defending Phil and the Triangle, its now a bad thing to connect players to both. Why is it so strange to some that the players picked by Phil were because he thought they were best suited for his syatem? Agree that Frank was picked as a Triangle PG. Pretty logical to think the Triangle master wouls pick guys to fit the Triangle.

Some Think its bagging on Frank because I say Phil passed on other PG's that were better suited for most NBA systems and went with the type of PG better suited for the Triangle. Problem I had was that I knew Phil and his triangle would be ahort lived. Now that Phil is gone, along with his system, we are seeing that Frank is having trouble fitting the role of PG on a non Triangle system. Now do I think he can eventually do so, I dont know. Only thing anyone knows is that he is a very good defender and very young. So now we all just have to move on and see what he turns out to be. Hopefully he turns into someone who can help us get to the next level.

The point of (my) post was to eventually connect how the triangle and position less basketball are very similar. So even if Frank was viewed as a triangle friendly player by some on the board. Those principals still work within this position less era of basketball that the NBA has been heading into. IMO triangle PG is also the wrong term. Triangle player would be more accurate. Ron Harper was a 20 pt shooting guard for the first 8 years of his career. He was able to move to PG with the Bulls under the same ideals of position less basketball. Our current coach preaches positions less basketball so its very relevant.

Fans excited about the pick saw how he fit the NBA's movement towards position less ball and the different possibilities he could potentially bring.

Would agree with most. Don't know if PG's in the NBA are position less though. The 2 to 5, definitely. But yeah, after the fact and now that Frank is a Knick, agree that he is multi positional. excellent defender, long and brings value. My point is that the Knicks desperately needed a true PG and it was a good year to pick one up. And because Phil chose the one that was better suited to be multi positional (For the Trinagle), we are still looking for one.

That's fair. We also could have had SGA this past draft but passed up that opportunity for a unique forward piece. Dallas also went after Jalen Brunson in the 2nd round after trading up for point forward Doncic because I don't think they want DSJ restricted with pure PG duties 24/7 but want to free him up to be who he is.

https://hoopshype.com/2018/10/02/dallas-mavericks-dennis-smith-luka-doncic-scouting-report-analysis/

He shot just 39.5 percent from the field on 14.8 attempts per game, and he hit only 31.3 percent of his three-pointers on 4.9 attempts per game. The 20-year-old must significantly improve his shooting as he continues developing.

Jonathan Tjarks recently spoke about why Smith could be poised for a much better sophomore season now that he’s playing next to rookie Luka Doncic, who is an incredible passer (via The Ringer):

“I’ve got a fun stat for you guys. Dennis was way better on catch-and-shoot threes than versus off-the-dribble threes last year. The problem was that he had nobody to get him open threes because nobody on the Mavs can pass.”

Last season, Smith averaged 0.66 points per possession on jump shots off the dribble. He shot 78-of-280 (27.9 percent) on these attempts, among the worst in the league among those with as many opportunities.

Meanwhile, the point guard averaged 1.05 PPP on catch-and-shoot jump shots. His field goal percentage was much better, shooting 50-of-142 (35.2 percent) during his first season in the league. And, as originally noted by Bobby Karalla, Smith was 31-for-63 (49.2 percent) when he was unguarded. He shot almost the exact same field goal percentage on this play type in college, suggesting these numbers aren’t a fluke.

I honestly wanted no part of DSJ. Yes he can score but as we have seen for 15 years we have had plenty of offensive players but not many wins. Obviously if I had a choice in that draft I would of taken donovan mitchell but between the two guards I was happy getting frankie because I saw the potential for a good two way player and maybe elite defender which are harder to come by IMO

His shooting was inefficient, his assist to turnover ratio was 1.84 which wasn't good at all, and his defense at the point of attack was shaky. He is very much a work in progress at the point guard position when it comes to the actual substance of a *point guard*.

He hasnt exactly shown himself that he can efficiently run and offense with the ball in his hands on a consistent basis his rookie year.