Seems we look at Gleague as the panacia for players who have yet to develop properly and think its the exlicer to fix it.
Can't defend it as it helped other players. Its stupid to flat out reject or endorse as its subjective to the player and the team.
Knox and Frankie have played at NBA levels but not to a desired level. What is the metric to send a kid down?
Kid works hard, is making improvement and needs to apply it in games. Does doing it at a lower level ALWAYS work? What is the structure and talent level that determines other than hindsight?
Can't hurt? I suppose we fans know whats best. Im not one way or the other. If it helps, Im all for it. Just not gonna sit here and post judge the subjective. Just like Im not in the "Free Iggy" camp becuse he has done well there. Many players can score in teh Gleague and get a call up and never to be heard from again. Its a bigger game than we imagine.
I go to a few Gleague games a year up in Greensboro and have seen Chasson Randle easily be the best player the court. Billy Garrett looked great, Hickson showed me some good games last year. "War" Plumlee looked like a defensive juggernut and massive force on the court. He talked the team thru each position. These guys can't make it up in the NBA.

Damian Wilkens.........
NBA Stats: https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/wilkida02.htm

NBA journeyman 8 years in the NBA. Then to europe. Wanted to come back, at age 36 spends three years in the Gleague.
Look at Gleague stats:https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/wilkida02.html

Saw this guy at age 37 and he was the floor coach. He played point forwardm, pointed, told guys what to do. You can sit close enough and hear it. Sat first row under the basket enough to also hear them on the bench. He could do what ever he wanted. Often he came back int he game and let to late game rally to win or fall short. He was that good at EVERYTHING. This is my perspective from what I saw in a few games and this was at age 37: A journeyman player dominate.
"So why not let Frank and Knox go down and dominate"? Its a fair question. If they do, whats the point? You think coaches don't see **** in practice to know what level they should be at? If you send down Dennis and he kicks ass, whats the point if he can't do it int he NBA? "Build his confidence"? Not really. Its not like he would think "oh, See I can do that!!". ITs not the NBA!

Nalod wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:I think you need to look at each player individually. Scouting reports for Frank prior to the draft said that if he was going to play on the ball in the nba he would be best served starting in the g league. Knox came into a situation where he was a member of the youngest team in the league, rebuilding and planning on giving him plenty of minutes. Knox was done a disservice this year but he played over 2100 minutes as a rook against nba players.

I get it. Which is why you don't always send every player down. Knox a disservice? why, he was rookie of the month!
He was inconsistent. Its what teenagers do. This year he was held to a higher standard.
He needed to work on Defense, going to the rim stronger, and rebounding! Lets say he goes and tears it up? Then comes in and struggles. What does that tell you? There is a gap. We know there is a gap. We see it all the time.
You know the 82 game season is long and its not just one body of work. I saw frank and knox play great stretches in the NBA in some games. So we know they could do it in the Gleague. So what does it prove? That fans are right or know better? We don't . There is a gap. I have seen it. You have seen it.
I think Fiz was right to play him. He did not break. He got a baselline of what he needs to work on.
Same thing with RJ. he got better as the season went on. Foul shooting improved. He played a lot. He is not a star or did he tear it up. He created a baseline.

BigDaddyG wrote:How often are guys shuttled back and forth the same day? I've seen it done a few times. In the instances it's done, it's usually a guy who wasn't expected to play in the first place. The minutes are there for Knox to grab. He's got to take them.

Nalod wrote: What I see is we know he can shoot. But if he is busyin the head with other things the flow he is accustomed to is not there and the shot suffers. But it comes back when the rest of the game gets in synch.
Being an outsider Im just projecting my opinion and perhaps mixed with HOPE!!!!

That's what Knox keeps saying. He knows the offense will be there but he's concentrating on defense this year. Calipari said it will only be his third year when he puts everything together. (and plays fluidly without thinking about stuff.) Problem is, like Nolad says, everyone leaves college early instead of developing more. So they got to develop in the NBA. One and done and chase the plum.

Does anybody know if he fits the system we play, I doubt it, because there was no system.

Who is the leader on the team that he can look up to, Morris the guy we traded for a 28th pick, or clueless randle.

The lack of some of the basic foundation of development is lacking all through out the franchise.

The knicks have a G league team that they used to develop players, but when was the last time we actually develop a player that came up to the NBA and helped the team for more then a handful of games.

This franchise needs ready made players..

knicks1248 wrote:Does anybody even know what Knox role has been on the knicks, I'm sure he has no idea either because he was never given one.

Does anybody know if he fits the system we play, I doubt it, because there was no system.

Who is the leader on the team that he can look up to, Morris the guy we traded for a 28th pick, or clueless randle.

The lack of some of the basic foundation of development is lacking all through out the franchise.

The knicks have a G league team that they used to develop players, but when was the last time we actually develop a player that came up to the NBA and helped the team for more then a handful of games.

This franchise needs ready made players..

You ask questions that others have given opinions to. Seemingly your opinion is “If I don’t know it, then neither does the players”.

What other teams has used the Gleague to developers players you can point to levels of success? Somtimes the players themselves mature and are ready to make the jump. Some players rehabbed as free agents in Gleague and came back. But what team and players in real time can you point to doing it well?

But Lee's development is the blueprint imo. He wanted PT so he decided he was going to become a strong rebounder, and that would be his nitch. Once rebounding was his thing he worked on finishing around the basket. Once finishing around the basket became automatic, he worked on back to basket game. Once the back to basket game was on point, he worked on that 15-18ft jumper. Once his ability to score made him a strong offensive threat, his passing ability was next to follow.

Knox has a 7ft wing span and a good amount of athleticism. Drafted in the lottery due to his physical gifts which gave him high potential. Don't focus on being a star offensive juggernaut at this stage. Defense will probably always be a work in progress. First order of buisness should be to attack that glass. This alone will get him easy scoring opportunities and more touches. Then gradually expand from there. He would already be coming in as a better outside shooter than Lee was.

Nalod wrote: What is the metric to send a kid down?
Kid works hard, is making improvement and needs to apply it in games. Does doing it at a lower level ALWAYS work? What is the structure and talent level that determines other than hindsight?

The NBA talent pool can be essentially broken down into Tiers ( i.e. Top 3 guys, then next top 10 guys, then next top 25 guys, etc)
The difference/ability and impact of a Kevin Durant or Anthony Davis versus the 25th best NBA player is huge. It's miles and miles long. The 25th best player in the NBA is also exponentially more valuable than the 60th guy. The 12th man on every roster is likely miles better than the best G League guys ( You need to SUBTRACT former NBA veterans who are on G League teams from this discussion, guys who want to keep some ball going, get their medical and hope to stay relevant to get a call up to cover an injury)

Think about when Serena Williams went against like the 250th or 300th ranked male player in the world and he completely smoked her and he was clearly going easy on her.

If you are in the discussion where a G League stint is up on the table ( Again, barring an injury/rehab assignment, that's different), it means you are, at best, an NBA role player. If you can't break through, you can't fill a role. If you are a young player on a NBA roster, and you are still in your optimal developmental window, if you can't show you can fill a role, eventually you will get the boot too.

There are high school teams that could completely smoke the WNBA All Stars on a regular basis.

Think about the worst NBA scrub you can think of, then put him against nearly anyone else not in the pros and you will see carnage like it was a John Wick sequel.

Occasionally you'll get a Jeremy Lin or a Danny Green story or a Fred Van Fleet story and a lot of that was opportunity.

** Taking the 500th best basketball player in the world, then sending him to play against the 1035th best, is not going to likely help him**

Frank N doesn't have any more excuses. He's had plenty of time, minutes and seasons to show his worth. He's also had the Knicks entire resource base, and CAAs when he was with them, to work on being a better player.

"Development" is a word used in interviews to make things sound good. You aren't going to get a WNBA All Star to suddenly be able to play D1 College Male basketball. No coaching in the world will do that. Again , REMOVE all formerly established NBA veterans playing in the G League, then remove clear rehab/injury related assignments. The rest? They just aren't good enough to make the NBA.

The few guys that break through usually need more minutes or needed recovery from some injury or there is a character issue/personality glitch that needs to be resolved. But typically these guys are still in their optimal developmental window.

Frank N is a sunk cost. He's a role player who hasn't shown he's particularly efficient at it. (If you won't attack the rim, you need an elite three point shot)

The way you could develop players? Take them young, like 7-8 years old, then bring them into a barracks/confined situation close to the military methodology. Control nutrition, education and training. Let them live, eat, sleep, work, study and **** basketball. That's it. That's what it would take to truly "develop" someone. But we don't live in a modern society that would accept this. I'm basically saying Enders Game is the correct format. This way you could instill lifelong fundamentals, instead of trying to get a coach to unbreak a 20 year old who has done something the wrong way tens of thousands of times already.

Most of you who scream "development" would also be the first to oppose any structure where real development would happen.