|
|
Post by garyd on Jun 13, 2009 9:38:29 GMT -5
A few columns have indiacted that the knicks might go afte a high second round draft pick. Why do that? Well even though this is anot a specatacular nor deep draft for sure things it has some servicable players that warrant interest.
The Knicks need shot blockers, defenders and depth at some positions like the backcourt and power forward (if they trade Lee). Its in those 2 areas that the second round looks strong.
Here are some candidates at PG:
FSUs Toney Douglas; UCLAs Darren Collison; St MArys Patrick Mills and Baylors Curtis Jerrels. I wrote about Collison in a prior post.
Her are candiates at the PF/C position (mostly from the Left Coast).
USCs Taj Gibson (now 230 pounds); ASUs Jeff Pendergraph (an NBA type body); Washingtons Jon Brockamn (Big Body, good shooter but short for a PF role); and Gonzagas Josh Heytvelt. I write about several of these in a prior post. With the exxcpetion of Brockman all are in the 6-10 to 6-11 height area.
Why bother with a second rounder? Some solid backup guys are there. For instance Mbah a Moute came mid second round and has been a good NBA player. And the Knicks may lose a few players in trades or free agency. But equally important is that their contracts would be much lower than the guy(s) they replace in getting ready for the 2010 FA market.
|
|
|
|
Post by kgooglog on Jun 13, 2009 9:48:48 GMT -5
Far be it for me to put a fly in the ointment, but if NY is looking to trade their first rounder for a couple of second rounders, it may signify a financial move designed to save cap space. I did not read the columns, but second round picks do not receive the guaranteed contracts that first rounders receive.
|
|
|
|
Post by jbaer10314 on Jun 13, 2009 11:44:27 GMT -5
<< A few columns have indiacted that the knicks might go afte a high second round draft pick. Why do that? Well even though this is anot a specatacular nor deep draft for sure things it has some servicable players that warrant interest.
The Knicks need shot blockers, defenders and depth at some positions like the backcourt and power forward (if they trade Lee). Its in those 2 areas that the second round looks strong.
Here are some candidates at PG:
FSUs Toney Douglas; UCLAs Darren Collison; St MArys Patrick Mills and Baylors Curtis Jerrels. I wrote about Collison in a prior post.
Her are candiates at the PF/C position (mostly from the Left Coast).
USCs Taj Gibson (now 230 pounds); ASUs Jeff Pendergraph (an NBA type body); Washingtons Jon Brockamn (Big Body, good shooter but short for a PF role); and Gonzagas Josh Heytvelt. I write about several of these in a prior post. With the exxcpetion of Brockman all are in the 6-10 to 6-11 height area.
Why bother with a second rounder? Some solid backup guys are there. For instance Mbah a Moute came mid second round and has been a good NBA player. And the Knicks may lose a few players in trades or free agency. But equally important is that their contracts would be much lower than the guy(s) they replace in getting ready for the 2010 FA market. >>
Who was the last second round pick to stay with the Knicks beyond his rookie year? Lavor Postell. Anyone remember the guy before him? No? What a surprise.
I realize Donnie Walsh is in charge and wants to build a younger, more athletic team. However, it doesn't make much difference what round we pick in; we pack off the young players at the slightest sign of trouble. Most people associated with the franchise, whether a big shot or a fan, want success NOW, even if it means sacrificing potential All-Stars. That's why we wound up with all those hole-pluggers in seasons past and lousy records as a result.
I don't doubt the aforementioned players can develop into stars on our team. However, I'm only one person, and I don't run the franchise. I'm concerned these players, if drafted, will not get a fair chance to prove themselves, so perhaps it won't surprise anyone when I say I'm not hopeful of us drafting them in the first place
I read some recent Newsday articles about Stephen Curry's predraft workout, one in which he knocked the Knicks' socks off, and the other saying he will end workouts for other teams at least two weeks before the draft (although he promised to visit the Wizards). If the Knicks take him, I expect him to be gone next off-season because he has one flaw that wipes out all his upside--as our recent draft history has shown.
|
|
|
|
Post by irish2u2 on Jun 13, 2009 12:18:53 GMT -5
Jeff
Our recent draft history has proven pretty good. Lee, Nate, Chandler and Gallinari are all good players. Maybe even more than good. The lone exception in recent history might be Channing Frye. I don't see anything in our history that would indicate that Stephen Curry would be going anywhere if he is drafted especially since the first two years of his contract are guaranteed. The Knicks are putting their future squarely on the shoulders of younger players hoping to build a good, and cheap, core of quality players around a free agent superstar. It's smart basketball business thinking.
As for the second round I could give you a pretty formidable list of second round picks who were successful. In fact 4 picks after we took Lavor Postell with the 39th pick of the 2000 draft Milwaukee took a dude by the name of Michael Redd with the 43rd pick. Gilbert Arenas and Mehmet Okur were second round picks the next year and Carlos Boozer in 2002. In between those big names are a lot of players who have contributed to their teams like Ronald Murray, Luis Scola, Dan Gadzuric and Darius Sonaglia. Talent is there if it can be recognized, developed and then given opportunity.
|
|
|
|
Post by jbaer10314 on Jun 13, 2009 12:52:39 GMT -5
<< Our recent draft history has proven pretty good. Lee, Nate, Chandler and Gallinari are all good players. Maybe even more than good. The lone exception in recent history might be Channing Frye. I don't see anything in our history that would indicate that Stephen Curry would be going anywhere if he is drafted especially since the first two years of his contract are guaranteed. The Knicks are putting their future squarely on the shoulders of younger players hoping to build a good, and cheap, core of quality players around a free agent superstar. It's smart basketball business thinking. >>
First of all, everybody talks about Lee and Robinson as if they were locker-room cancers now that we cleared out cap space for LBJ. Everybody wants them gone because they SUPPOSEDLY want big bucks in their next contracts. Yes, that makes perfect sense, but who's to say they wouldn't do like Tim Duncan and take less money next time around so we could sign a quality free agent? (I know, I know--what Duncan did is quite rare in sports, let alone the NBA itself.)
Second, I have no problem with what the Knicks are doing with their future. Hell--they should've done it years ago, as I keep saying.
<< As for the second round I could give you a pretty formidable list of second round picks who were successful. In fact 4 picks after we took Lavor Postell with the 39th pick of the 2000 draft Milwaukee took a dude by the name of Michael Redd with the 43rd pick. Gilbert Arenas and Mehmet Okur were second round picks the next year and Carlos Boozer in 2002. In between those big names are a lot of players who have contributed to their teams like Ronald Murray, Luis Scola, Dan Gadzuric and Darius Sonaglia. Talent is there if it can be recognized, developed and then given opportunity. >>
That's the whole problem, Bill--the Knicks don't WANT to develop talent and give it opportunity!! And while it's very true one can find All-Stars in the second round, Knick fans and big shots alike simply aren't open to it because (1) we fell short of expectations since the 1994 Finals, and (2) since then the brass thought they could win with washed-up veterans instead of youth. The Yankees and Rangers are guilty of the same thinking in recent years.
Bill, my point is we quit on the young players rather than develop and help them overcome their shortcomings. This is a major, if not the only, reason we sucked for the last 15 seasons. I hope Walsh changes that, but I won't be shocked if he doesn't.
|
|
|
|
Post by irish2u2 on Jun 13, 2009 18:13:48 GMT -5
Jeff
I always keep in mind the NBA is a business and the shelf life of a NBA player can expire at any time. Players seeking a maximum contract is just good business on their part. I doubt anybody thinks Lee is a locker room cancer or even selfish at all. In fact if not for this particular window of opportunity next summer very few New York Knick fans would mind seeing David get a max deal even though objectively he may not be worth that kind of money. I know I wouldn't. Nate is a different situation. I like him a lot but his immaturity is the biggest roadblock to him right now and I just don't think he can change. I won't be staining my pillow with tears if he signs elsewhere and we don't match it.
As for developing talent try not to let the past influence the present. You are absolutely right that we spent a decade trying for instant gratification through trades and free agent signings instead of the draft. But now we have evidence all over the place that this Knicks management is not just trying to develop young talent but succeeding.
One last point. We have sucked for the last 10 years and not 15. ; )
|
|
|
|
Post by ironman95 on Jun 13, 2009 21:33:18 GMT -5
A prime example of not developing young talent is Trevor Ariza, now starting for the probable NBA championship team. Apparently Larry Brown didn't want him and Isiah went along with that. Of course there are also the Frank William's, Michael Sweetney's, Lavor Postell's and Renaldo Balkman's(jury may still be out with him). And I am sure there are others. The Knicks have had a lot of draft picks come, fade and go lately. I don't think anyone on this board wants to see David Lee go elsewhere, but are resigned to the possibility. As for Nate, I think a lot of us are ambilvilant, but I think the best way to do Nate is one of two ways. Sign and trade, or match and trade, although match may be risky. David Lee getting an invite to the Olympic tryouts, has to raise his stock. No he is not one of the NBA's 24 best players, but he has special skills that may have use in that particulal situation. I think I might be willing to pay him 9-10mil. No way, I pay Nate anywhere near that. I have a New York Knicks David Lee jersey, so it is clear where I stand on David Lee. Not my all-time favorite Knick, that would Earl the Pearl, but my favorite current Knick. Unfortunately I think some team will think Nate is worth 8-10mil and that may cause a huge problem soon. That may mean letting him walk and getting nothing in return. I can't see the Knicks doing the same with Lee. They will either sign him and keep him, sign and trade, or match and either trade or keep him. The draft is 2 weeks from today, 14 more days of analysis and torture.
|
|
|
|
Post by irish2u2 on Jun 13, 2009 21:51:36 GMT -5
Trevor Ariza is a prime example of the old regime. Wilson Chandler is a prime example of the new regime.
If Balkman ever develops a jump shot he's going to be a player. Of course when you say "if"...... ; )
I am hoping we can do a sign and trade with Nate too but I'm with Iron that if we can keep one player it's Lee. Three things that are possibly in our favor with Lee.
1) The current financial situation. It's affected the NBA and may temper the offers Lee gets.
2) The outside financial opportunities in New York to augment the income if Lee takes less money and less years than is the current plan. Lee can make a lot of money just being a star in New York.
3) He honestly loves New York and playing for the Knicks.
I still think he is gone but if anybody can match the largesse and loyalty of Tim Duncan it would be Lee.
|
|
|
|
Post by garyd on Jun 13, 2009 22:34:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by ReneNYG1 on Jun 14, 2009 8:49:11 GMT -5
With a low second or high first I would like to add North Carolina's Ellington to provide dee at the two,he's a player worthy of a roster spot and a real good allround player who does everything well and is underreated in the system he was in.
|
|
|
|
Post by ReneNYG1 on Jun 14, 2009 8:53:34 GMT -5
I meant low first or high second
|
|
|
|
Post by kgooglog on Jun 16, 2009 7:20:53 GMT -5
I remember most of us really loved Ariza during his short tenure with NY. In fact, Tim Thomas was eating up the minutes that should have went to Trevor. That said, I never heard David Lee or Nate Robinson referred to as "Locker-room Cancers"...
My hopes are that Walsh will snag Evans or trade up in order to get Hasheem Thabeet. I know the jury is out on the UConn Phenom, but this guy fills one of our two primary needs. You couldn't ask for a better fit, IMHO, with Hasheem, for he is a defensive center who blocks, defends, boards, and, by virtue of his size, alters the entire game.
My primary concern this season remains cap-space. NY must try to ship off Eddy, and if the reports of his off-season conditioning are true, than maybe there is a chance that he will be traded. I cannot see Curry, even if he is able to play NBA ball, in Mike's system. This guy can barely walk the court, let alone run on it.
One thing is for sure. Donnie Walsh is good. Real good. He won't screw up in terms of ridiculous FA signings, although I do not know his track record in terms of young talent evaluation. If Dale Davis, Antonio Davis, Reggie Miller, and Detlef Shrimp (only kidding) are any indication of Walsh's acumen, then I feel pretty damned good about our future.
|
|
|
|
Post by jbaer10314 on Jun 16, 2009 8:28:18 GMT -5
<< I never heard David Lee or Nate Robinson referred to as "Locker-room Cancers"... >>
Let me clear this up.
I never said anyone actually called them "locker-room cancers." I said we talk about them like they're "locker-room cancers" since we now have cap space to sign LeBron James. In other words, we're so hot to boot these guys, who are emerging as much-needed leaders, with LBJ in the wings. I'm sure we can have all three on our team if the brass uses their heads.
|
|
|
|
Post by irish2u2 on Jun 16, 2009 23:29:09 GMT -5
<< I never heard David Lee or Nate Robinson referred to as "Locker-room Cancers"... >> Let me clear this up. I never said anyone actually called them "locker-room cancers." I said we talk about them like they're "locker-room cancers" since we now have cap space to sign LeBron James. In other words, we're so hot to boot these guys, who are emerging as much-needed leaders, with LBJ in the wings. I'm sure we can have all three on our team if the brass uses their heads. Jeff I am pretty sure we can't have Lee and Robinson and still have room for LeBron. We are talking 15-18 million to keep both and together with the 23 million in salaries owed the 4 Knicks who under contract in 2010 (Curry, Jefferies, Gallinari and Chandler) plus what we will pay this year's draft choice and the possibility of a MLE signing this summer I don't see where we would have room for a max contract offer to LeBron James. Maybe my math is wrong but the good news is Donnie Walsh's calculator is bound to be more accurate than mine.  |
|
