Another brutal loss for the Knicks on Saturday. Melo was brilliant until the final shot which rimmed out. Rose again had a horrible defensive miscue.
After watching the Cavs/ Spurs game Saturday night, a few observations.
- Lebron is still awesome and the best player in the game. Kyrie was incredible as well. Pulls off moves that are rarely seen in basketball.
- Kevin Love is really struggling. Missed some wide open shots down the stretch. Offense really slows to a halt when they try to feed him. Also struggled defensively.
- Bench is really thin and no backup PG really takes a toll on Lebron and Irving. No ball handlers on the team besides those 2.
I know this has been explored before, and is highly unlikely due to them winning a championship, but the Carmelo for Kevin Love trade makes a lot of sense for all parties involved. Yes Love is younger than Anthony and having a slightly better year, but Carmelo would fit perfectly with that team. Especially when they face the Warriors ( which should be the Cavs only concern right now). Carmelo is a better spot up shooter, can create his own baskets and gives them more flexibility playing a small ball lineup the Warriors have.
In my proposed trade the Cavs get Melo, Jennings, O'Quinn and Marcus Smart. 4 players that can truly help them in a series vs the Warriors. Knicks would have to receive a draft pick, most likely the Nets pick or a combo of future picks. Any chance of this happening? Does this trade increase the Cavs' chances of repeating? As a big Melo fan, I would love to see him go thrive on a contender and this obviously helps the Knicks future.
Cavs/ Celtics/ Knicks Trade - (
New Window )
More likely we go 4-8 or 5-7 over that stretch.
Who was saying the Knicks had an easy schedule that would leave us in the playoffs in march? Over the 5 remaining games in January we might be favored in one of them and that's Dallas on the road whose been playing better.
Next month there is the Cavs Twice, Spurs, Thunder and raptors while the 3 "gimme" games are the Lakers, Nets and Sixers (are they even a gimme anymore?).
March the schedule is easier from a team perspective but there are 11 road games and among the 5 home games include the Warriors, Pacers and Pistons.
Not see if we're at a point where games against the Magic and the Sixers on the road can be counted as wins.
Quote:
the Knicks I see taken Jayson Tatum. But I think they secretely want Monk.
DX has them at 5 and 7, so right now we arent getting either.
Man what I wouldnt do for a lottery win. Fultz and KP (or even Ball/Smith) is the making of a championship core.
I think 5 is being too down on Monk. He's not a PG which will hurt him in that regard but from a talent/potential perspective I'm not sure if you can argue anyone higher than him.
Two teams that recognized that there is no prize in the NBA for trying to win as many games every single season as you can. They went about stockpiling assets differently, and I dont want to give too much credit for the KG trade heist, but both teams sacrificed the now for the later. Toronto sacrificed Bargs, who wasnt good, for picks from NY. When was the last time the Knicks traded a guy who could make them even a teeny bit better in order to get a #1 or future asset (ie not just clear cap space for pie in the sky FA dreams). I dont count the JR/Shump trade -- that was a salary cap/attitude dump. Probably about a decade, when we had extra picks in the 2005 & 2006 drafts (Nazr trade was part of that I think).
Knicks are the NBA's dumb money.
Why? Ingram looks awful. Russell has stagnated.I know they are young, but are they really going to be competetive in the next 5 years?
Isnt that good for the Knicks? It's LA or Philly.
Its not defending. Its explaining how someone defends a pick and roll. But whatever. This is why BBI fuccking blow. I try explaining a situation on how as a coach I would defend the play - and you get shit responses like yours.
Great contribution.
Quote:
The Lakers are in prime position to keep their pick. God damn it. If that actually happens I would consider swapping teams with them entirely.
Why? Ingram looks awful. Russell has stagnated.I know they are young, but are they really going to be competetive in the next 5 years?
PER is a bad stat and BI wasnt a #1 overall pick. Now that I've CYA'd, Ingram's 7.7 PER should be VERY alarming. This was floating around after Bennett struggled as a #1 overall:
Elite prospects need to be better as rookies than Ingram is. Wiggins was ~14 PER. Durant ~16 PER.
Quote:
The Lakers are in prime position to keep their pick. God damn it. If that actually happens I would consider swapping teams with them entirely.
Why? Ingram looks awful. Russell has stagnated.I know they are young, but are they really going to be competetive in the next 5 years?
I'm not trading KP for any package from the Lakers.
Knicks fan need to look to main positive. They have the hard part accomplished- drafting a potential franchise player who is developing. To be able to draft another possible franchise player to pair with him? Now we are talking.
Whenever wanted it to be Randle, Russell, and Ingram. And how about Clarkson falling off the cliff?
Quote:
The lengths you'll go to defend Rose is pretty amazing to me. He was a complete annoyance for Chicago after the first knee injury and made them wait on him. I would've thought you would be rejoicing he is no longer a Bull. I know I am going to streak through Times Square naked when he's gone this summer.
Its not defending. Its explaining how someone defends a pick and roll. But whatever. This is why BBI fuccking blow. I try explaining a situation on how as a coach I would defend the play - and you get shit responses like yours.
Great contribution.
Dude... it's not just this one comment it's EVERYTHING about him. Bringing up any kind of statistical analysis to show how he is still a good player. You jump to his defense any time any one of us makes a disparaging comment about his game.
You would be better served to just owning it. We all see it.
Quote:
The Lakers are in prime position to keep their pick. God damn it. If that actually happens I would consider swapping teams with them entirely.
Why? Ingram looks awful. Russell has stagnated.I know they are young, but are they really going to be competetive in the next 5 years?
Ingram is certainly raw and will take time to develop but I still think he can be a pretty good NBA player (not fucking KD or Larry bird or whatever he was compared to). I'll be the first to shit on anytime Ingram plays poorly but prior to yesterday, he put up a very solid string of games and showed some flashes as to why, even though he's not near Ben Simmons, was still the 2nd best player in that draft.
Russell I think is out of position. He's absolutely not a PG and absolutely cannot be asked to guard PGs. If you get Ball or Fultz or whoever, I think he will flourish at the 2 guard spot. I think he will be a solid 20+ point a night and 3-4 assists per game type guy in his prime. Not a star but a very good player to have on your team.
Randle is my favorite guy out of the bunch. Offensively, I'd say draymond green is his ceiling. He's certainly a better athlete. He can break down defenses and find shooters. His biggest issue is that the Lakers don't have a center to protect the paint, which randle can't do. He may be decent enough as a 1 on 1.
Clarkson i don't care for much but considering how much he's getting paid the Lakers realize what he is and what he isn't. He's pretty much being groomed to take over lou Williams role.
Dude... it's not just this one comment it's EVERYTHING about him. Bringing up any kind of statistical analysis to show how he is still a good player. You jump to his defense any time any one of us makes a disparaging comment about his game.
You would be better served to just owning it. We all see it.
How about I do whatever the fuck I want, and you just ignore me. I tried to give an analysis of the play. Had a discussion with another poster. Your contribution to this thread was worthless and personally - if you dont want to discuss the defense and the scheme (like I tried to do) than I persoanlly dont give a shit what you think. Sound good?
Quote:
Dude... it's not just this one comment it's EVERYTHING about him. Bringing up any kind of statistical analysis to show how he is still a good player. You jump to his defense any time any one of us makes a disparaging comment about his game.
You would be better served to just owning it. We all see it.
How about I do whatever the fuck I want, and you just ignore me. I tried to give an analysis of the play. Had a discussion with another poster. Your contribution to this thread was worthless and personally - if you dont want to discuss the defense and the scheme (like I tried to do) than I persoanlly dont give a shit what you think. Sound good?
Jesus... settle down man. Good God! It's just basketball.
Oh well, why bother discussing scheme when people just rather blame certain individuals.
Deej I remember you posted that before, Ingram has since put up better games (can't believe I'm actually defending him now).
Porter is who I think of when I see Ingram. Ingram was obviously NOT NBA ready and should've stayed longer in school. He'll be able to guard 2s and 3s, and maybe 4s if he fills out (but who knows if he will?). I think he will be a tremendous 3 and D wing one day with some scoring ability. Not necessarily an all star but someone you'd want to have at the 2-3 spots.
You wont kick yourself if Ingram turns into 2016-17 Otto Porter, but it would be disappointing. Current Otto Porter is probably good enough to be the 4th best player on a Finals team, and for that he's getting maxed. LA needs Ingram to be their best or 2nd best player.
You wont kick yourself if Ingram turns into 2016-17 Otto Porter, but it would be disappointing. Current Otto Porter is probably good enough to be the 4th best player on a Finals team, and for that he's getting maxed. LA needs Ingram to be their best or 2nd best player.
And I wholeheartedly agree with all of that. But how bad was this draft compared to that one? We're gonna come away with one true star in each of those drafts (Giannis and Simmons) and a bunch of good players and a bunch of mediocre and bad players from both of the drafts. Not sure if LA is going to be kicking themselves because they didn't take someone else (Chriss maybe?). But Chriss is still heavily flawed especially considering his deficiencies when he's playing the 4 spot.
I just don't think you can make judgements off a player's first year by any means whatsoever. Take Gary Harris (shot 30% and PER of 4.9). He didn't look like he belonged playing professional basketball. Now he looks like he's the Nuggets starting SG for the next 10 years.
And My point was outside of Simmons and Ingram I don't think this last draft is going to turn out much different than Porter's draft or was expected to be all that better. There was a clear cut 8 players because the rest were questionable NBA players and not because the top 8 was supposed to be a collection of future all stars.
Bender was the near consensus 3 guy after Ingram and Simmons and I don't think anyone was expecting him to be anything more than a 12 and 8 stretch-center with some passing. Right now he has more question marks than Ingram.
Brown was pegged as a tweener and that looks to be the case. May be a nice starter but probably nothing more.
Murray got hyped because he was the premier UK player but he's a combo guard in the worst way because he dominates the ball, takes bad shots and doesn't look to pass well. And he can't guard any position in the NBA. He seemed ideally like a future 6th man and he was taken top 5.
Buddy Hield was a senior and from what I took him to be a poor man's JJ Reddick from what I saw and what I read on him.
Dunn was a guy that was considered more upside than the rest but he still looked really raw for being a junior. At worst he was a defensive specialist. Looks to be the case so far too.
Chriss drew attention because the consensus top 7 was so bland that a 6'10" guy who can make crazy dunks and shoot 3s but not much else seemed exciting. He probably will turn out better than a few guys taken ahead of him though.
Don't think any of these guys seemed like better prospects than Porter prior to the draft. He probably would've gone higher than Hield. Porter was taken high in the draft because depsite there being nothing exciting about him, there was really nothing bad about him and looked like a safe bet to be a starter on a good team.
But anyways my point is in a redraft I'm still not sure Ingram wouldn't go #2. Certainly no one else in the top 8 outside Simmons looks better right now or excited me more from a potential standpoint. Maybe Brogdon? I'd say Brogdon is the Otto Porter of PGs. Nothing truly exceptional but no flaws at all it seems. It would be between Brogdon and Ingram for me and I'd still probably take Ingram because of the age/upside angle.
Got to give some of these guys some fucking time to develop.
I'm not. I didn't mean it to come across that way.
You are more or less stating my point for me. How can one determine Ingram will not be a good player in the NBA at one point?
I was mainly countering Deej's point. He was saying Porter wouldn't have been a top 8 pick in this draft but based off college scouting/success I don't think there's any reason to think any player outside of Simmons/Ingram in this past draft are necessarily better prospects coming in than Porter was. Porter was pretty fucking good in college at a young age.
You must've not understood the context of my argument. If we were making a declaration on Ingram on what he's going to amount to in the NBA I was making the similar declaration on guys taken after him to show that the Lakers didn't necessarily screw up the pick.
I like Brown. I think he's going to be a really good player, but my point was that he didn't look like an all star type scorer at all in college and that's not necessarily the role he'd assume in the NBA.
I think Murray will be one hell of a scorer but he had some major flaws in college simply based on physical ability (he's not exceptionally quick laterally, and has trouble guarding bigger guards, which will be a problem for any undersized 2 guard in the NBA). I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing if he ends up being a perennial 6th man of the year candidate. He's going to be better than almost everybody taken after him. I just don't see him starting for the Nuggets because he's not a PG and he has Harris, Barton and Chandler at the SG position.
To hit the gamewinners that LeBron passes up?
You wont kick yourself if Ingram turns into 2016-17 Otto Porter, but it would be disappointing. Current Otto Porter is probably good enough to be the 4th best player on a Finals team, and for that he's getting maxed. LA needs Ingram to be their best or 2nd best player.
I agree Ingram should be better. He's probably more talented. My point was it's a bit early to be calling Ingram a complete bust.
Quote:
was the #3 pick in the worst lottery in living memory (or maybe 2nd worst to KMart's year). And I think his shooting is unsustainable, which is driving a lot of his statistical improvement.
You wont kick yourself if Ingram turns into 2016-17 Otto Porter, but it would be disappointing. Current Otto Porter is probably good enough to be the 4th best player on a Finals team, and for that he's getting maxed. LA needs Ingram to be their best or 2nd best player.
I agree Ingram should be better. He's probably more talented. My point was it's a bit early to be calling Ingram a complete bust.
Oh I agree. But I think there are warning signs. Future all stars who are taken at the top of the draft tend not to come out and struggle this badly.
For example, if you had the #1 pick and expected Ingram to turn into KD and took him over Simmons you'd probably deserve to get fired. Doesn't mean Ingram has no future in the NBA/can't be an integral part of the team.
It goes back to that Winslow debate. He's a great athlete and competitor (and defender). But if he doesn't develop a jump shot is he anything more than a Marcus smart/tony Allen type?
In the playoffs he shot 2 for 22 on jump shots. The raptors had no need to guard him and left him wide open which caused issues for the heat all over on offense. Of course he was a rookie and you can't declare him as a bust until you see him enter his peak. But it's important to understand that if he doesn't develop a jump shot (a flaw that was attributed to him on multiple scouting reports) he's not someone you're going to play in crunch time situations.
2 years in, no demonstrated ability to counter a flaw. Doesn't mean he's a bust. Doesn't mean he can't improve. But it's important to note when determining his role in the NBA.
Link - ( New Window )
I'd also like to see LA add a true PG before evaluating their players/roles. I think a lot of the issues with russel and Ingram can be attributed to their reliance on taking pull up/fadeaway jumpers when that's not the role they should be playing.
However, January has been his best month so maybe he's starting to figure things out.
That being said, I agree with the KD/Ingram thing and think it's ridiculous for media and draft folks to compare every guy who comes out of college early to some all star or possible HOF guys like KD and Davis (who jump after 1 year and achieve immediate success and stardom).
More often than that, guys taken in the top 15 need some time to develop. I'm not talking 1 season or even 2. Guys like Oladipo, Porter, Russell, Booker etc weren't what they will be after 1 or 2 years in the pros, because a) their age and b) they played college for 2 years or fewer. Now, take a college player who played 4 years, had decent success, and wasn't really improving after his 2nd or 3rd year or so in the NBA, I'd say you can probably give up on that guy. That's 6 solid years of basketball play against top competition.
Geez...not a good look for Bondy.
However, January has been his best month so maybe he's starting to figure things out.
Yup, certainly. Which wouldn't be a problem if he was expected to play the 2 but given Russell is the 2 (or should be) will need to fill out a lot. Otherwise you are ending up with Terrence Ross.
Report: Magic offered first-round pick, Nikola Vucevic to Heat for Goran Dragic
Report: Magic offered first-round pick, Nikola Vucevic to Heat for Goran Dragic
That just pisses me off. Riley will probably get the mother load for Whiteside. Wouldn't be surprised if he gets dealt soon.
If the Knicks can get to the 7-9 pick they're a lot closer to a potential franchise changing player. 12 could be a no mans land by draft time. 7-9 could get you into tier 3 (Tier 1 = Filtz, Tier 2 Ball, Smith, maybe 1-2 others). Pick 12 will not. You will get a materially worse player than who is available at 6 or so.
I agree.
The Knicks future - ( New Window )
You're mentioning the one guy every few drafts that happens.
It's like blackjack. Sure, you can hit at 19 and still get 20 or 21. But the odds are better when you are at 10 or 11.