martin wrote:

Chandler wrote:
Honest question: Has Rose or anyone else recently said what they think the team identity should be going forward. I think that goes a long way toward determining what BPA is. BPA needs a context to assess "best"

For example, and not trying to agitate, but even Phil would say he wanted two-way, smart players and wasn't focused on athleticism as prime trait.

If we're shifting focus, we should not only draft to the "new" focus, but consider whether our existing pieces still fit that focus. Otherwise i think we'll just repeat the mistakes of awkward combinations of players and no real team

Chicken and egg. Do you start with an identity and then get the players for it or do you look at your talent and then forge an identity? If you newly hire MDA and have a young Nash as your PG, you should have that identity and build it. If you are bereft of talent and have a new coach, you let the talent simmer and build an identity from there.

Gotta guess that Rose and team have an inkling of what type of team they would aspire to build but you don't go out an announce it. You build, you trade, you sign players and the identity will come out

I agree with this to a point. Obviously if you are drafting or FA signing LBJ or some other clear alpha (Zion etc) you don't want to pass on that and you want to build around that, even if it means a change in course. but the team is still much bigger than an alpha and I don't see any such alpha in this draft at all even if we had the #1.

the last time we assembled top talent we had Amare (who previously was playing MVP level) and Melo competing for touches and different style of play. Yes we had wins but that is what held us back from winning bigger. It was an awkward pairing

I think we may have to go back to Riley (maybe JVG) where I felt this was a well assembled team

Chandler wrote:

martin wrote:

Chandler wrote:
Honest question: Has Rose or anyone else recently said what they think the team identity should be going forward. I think that goes a long way toward determining what BPA is. BPA needs a context to assess "best"

For example, and not trying to agitate, but even Phil would say he wanted two-way, smart players and wasn't focused on athleticism as prime trait.

If we're shifting focus, we should not only draft to the "new" focus, but consider whether our existing pieces still fit that focus. Otherwise i think we'll just repeat the mistakes of awkward combinations of players and no real team

Chicken and egg. Do you start with an identity and then get the players for it or do you look at your talent and then forge an identity? If you newly hire MDA and have a young Nash as your PG, you should have that identity and build it. If you are bereft of talent and have a new coach, you let the talent simmer and build an identity from there.

Gotta guess that Rose and team have an inkling of what type of team they would aspire to build but you don't go out an announce it. You build, you trade, you sign players and the identity will come out

I agree with this to a point. Obviously if you are drafting or FA signing LBJ or some other clear alpha (Zion etc) you don't want to pass on that and you want to build around that, even if it means a change in course. but the team is still much bigger than an alpha and I don't see any such alpha in this draft at all even if we had the #1.

the last time we assembled top talent we had Amare (who previously was playing MVP level) and Melo competing for touches and different style of play. Yes we had wins but that is what held us back from winning bigger. It was an awkward pairing

I think we may have to go back to Riley (maybe JVG) where I felt this was a well assembled team

Outside of Mitch and RJ, the cupboard is bare @ MSG and which ever coach is hired will be pretty much working with a clean slate. Speaking of the coach, whomever the Knicks hire will have a big say in determining the identity. Ewing, Mark Jackson, Gerald Wilkins and Oak went from a full court pressing, 3-point shooting team under Pitino, to a Grind-it-out, half-court defensive team under Riles.

One of the reasons why I like the idea of interviewing so many coaches, is it gives Rose and his staff an opportunity to listen to different philosophies and culture builders from other organizations. Rose and staff can determine which direction makes the most sense or which philosophy speaks to his staffs basketball principles, etc....

Rose mentioned something about a partnership between the coach and front office so that they are on the same page...Once the coach is in place, hopefully the pieces will come together. Crossing my fingers that this partnership will work-out much better than the previous Fiz-Mills-Perry partnership

Chandler wrote:

Uptown wrote:

Chandler wrote:

martin wrote:

Chandler wrote:
Honest question: Has Rose or anyone else recently said what they think the team identity should be going forward. I think that goes a long way toward determining what BPA is. BPA needs a context to assess "best"

For example, and not trying to agitate, but even Phil would say he wanted two-way, smart players and wasn't focused on athleticism as prime trait.

If we're shifting focus, we should not only draft to the "new" focus, but consider whether our existing pieces still fit that focus. Otherwise i think we'll just repeat the mistakes of awkward combinations of players and no real team

Chicken and egg. Do you start with an identity and then get the players for it or do you look at your talent and then forge an identity? If you newly hire MDA and have a young Nash as your PG, you should have that identity and build it. If you are bereft of talent and have a new coach, you let the talent simmer and build an identity from there.

Gotta guess that Rose and team have an inkling of what type of team they would aspire to build but you don't go out an announce it. You build, you trade, you sign players and the identity will come out

I agree with this to a point. Obviously if you are drafting or FA signing LBJ or some other clear alpha (Zion etc) you don't want to pass on that and you want to build around that, even if it means a change in course. but the team is still much bigger than an alpha and I don't see any such alpha in this draft at all even if we had the #1.

the last time we assembled top talent we had Amare (who previously was playing MVP level) and Melo competing for touches and different style of play. Yes we had wins but that is what held us back from winning bigger. It was an awkward pairing

I think we may have to go back to Riley (maybe JVG) where I felt this was a well assembled team

Outside of Mitch and RJ, the cupboard is bare @ MSG and which ever coach is hired will be pretty much working with a clean slate. Speaking of the coach, whomever the Knicks hire will have a big say in determining the identity. Ewing, Mark Jackson, Gerald Wilkins and Oak went from a full court pressing, 3-point shooting team under Pitino, to a Grind-it-out, half-court defensive team under Riles.

One of the reasons why I like the idea of interviewing so many coaches, is it gives Rose and his staff an opportunity to listen to different philosophies and culture builders from other organizations. Rose and staff can determine which direction makes the most sense or which philosophy speaks to his staffs basketball principles, etc....

Rose mentioned something about a partnership between the coach and front office so that they are on the same page...Once the coach is in place, hopefully the pieces will come together. Crossing my fingers that this partnership will work-out much better than the previous Fiz-Mills-Perry partnership

Good points.

Take it one step further: Up here in Boston, legend has it that Belichek would interview QBs in the drafting process he had little interest in drafting because (a) he already had a good one and (b) these guys wouldn't last around long enough for his pick. Why did he do this? Because he would pick their brain to see how they would think about certain situations. If nothing else he would get free intel, knowing that QB would be an opponent some day. If he was lucky, he might gain even further insight that he hadn't considered before

I hope Rose and company are doing something with this process, getting assessments (free intel) on what coaches like and don't like with the Knicks current squad, how they fit in modern NBA etc.

Good Post! As a Jets fan, I hate the Pats! But I can't deny Belicheats greatness! The fact that he would take advantage of the draft process to gain an advantage in a possible future match-up is Pure Genius! We can only hope and pray our staff is as innovative...This extended and expanded interview process should be a win-win. Using the interview process to learn tendencies and habits from top notch organizations (Spurs, Mavs, etc) that we can utilize to help us build a winner and also use to be able to compete against them.

Chandler wrote:
Honest question: Has Rose or anyone else recently said what they think the team identity should be going forward. I think that goes a long way toward determining what BPA is. BPA needs a context to assess "best"

For example, and not trying to agitate, but even Phil would say he wanted two-way, smart players and wasn't focused on athleticism as prime trait.

If we're shifting focus, we should not only draft to the "new" focus, but consider whether our existing pieces still fit that focus. Otherwise i think we'll just repeat the mistakes of awkward combinations of players and no real team

BPA is usually determined by league trends and market forces at work.

If this was the NBA about 30 years ago, then someone like Andre Drummond would be a 10 year All Star. It's much harder to understand Sam Bowie over Michael Jordan today, but back then, pivot scarcity was a real problem in the league. The league didn't have so many three point shooters. Big men were expected to deal out and take a lot of hard contact and not space the floor. Ideas and understanding of nutrition, sports science, analytics and international scouting were all rudimentary at best.

BPA is going to be a shot creating jumbo wing who can play perimeter defense with length and can space the floor with an above average three point shot. The more you remove some of those attributes mentioned before, the more positional value shifts with respect to other positions.

The league has distilled down into three groups - Wings, floor spacing/rim protecting bigs and attack guards

No team has a plan. Not a single one in all of professional sports. If you think Belichick had some master plan to draft Brady, it's just not true. The Warriors were going to trade Curry and/or Klay Thompson on several occasions, they could easily have no rings at all in this era.

There are no plans, there are only broad "concepts"

You need to be able to defend on the wing
You need to protect the rim
You need effective floor spacing, no matter what offense you run
You need to have constant ball movement to look for a clean shot
You desire cap flexibility, not raw open cap space or no cap space
You have to let what the defense gives you to determine game flow
You need to excel in three areas offensively - at the rim, three point shooting, free throw shooting
You must win the battle of turnover differential
You must be elite at converting with less than 5 seconds left on the shot clock

Whatever coaches and GMs say in the media is basically a bunch of horse****. Canned phrases and basic themes that have close to no bearing on what the team will do if the opportunity arises.

****

"I've made my living, Mr. Thompson, in large part as a gambler. Some days I make twenty bets, some days I make none. There are weeks, sometimes months, in fact, when I don't make any bet at all because there is simply no play. So I wait, plan, marshal my resources, and when I finally see an opportunity and there is a bet to make... I bet it all." - Arnold Rothstein , Boardwalk Empire

There is only one path that offers real opportunity - Make the best market based decision at the given time and place, stockpile assets with regard to league trends, then be ready to strike when an opportunity arises.

If you do your best and you fail, then you fail. You get up and keep trying. The Warriors drafted Patrick O'Bryant after they picked Curry. Did that stop them? Even the beloved Spurs blew some moves ( trading for Richard Jefferson) and picks. Reggie Lewis and Drazen Petrovic died. Grant Hill got injured and was never the same. The Warriors found cap space for Durant in part by having the league open up the largest cap spike ever in the game. There are too many moving pieces, too many potential pitfalls, for a specific plan to work.

Too many say Phil Jackson said this or David Fizdale said that or whatever in some interview or whatnot. Do you think, even if those guys knew, they would just tell everyone in the public what they were really thinking? We want two way players! Ok, everyone wants two way players. What's earth shaking about that revelation? Teenage boys want to **** Kendall Jenner. People want lots of money and power. Good looking people usually get more opportunities in life. Coaches aren't giving you anything real in these interviews, just more of the same and more of the generally obvious in the most bland way possible.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/NBADraftWass/status/1281318775640461314

smackeddog wrote:

martin wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/NBADraftWass/status/1281318775640461314

Think he'll definitely climb the draft boards- he's the only player who can actually play before now and the draft, doubt anyone else will even be allowed to work out for teams

The time off gave him time to work on his shot and it looks like it has paid off, it's only 6 games but it's a nice stretch.

BigDaddyG wrote:Argentinian cat that was featured on Posting and Toasting named Leandro Bolmaro. Reminds me a bit if Alexy Shved. His passing is next level and he's a credible ball handler. Can't shoot. Interesting second round prospect.

Very interesting prospect. He possess elite level vision and passing ability. Very slippery with the ball and understands how to run pick n roll. He's a combo guard and if you put him at the 2, he gives you another play maker on the floor along with your pg. But like you said, his biggest issue is his lack of a consistent shot.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/skpearlman/status/1283514474423562241

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/DailyKnicksFS/status/1283573271368212480

martin wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/skpearlman/status/1283514474423562241

He’s projecting Anthony abd Tobin as busts

I’ll get more into the draft when I know they are actually having a draft