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 )
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.