**Official '11 NYK LOCKOUT thread*** lockout over

[kn0wledgeable]

i'd rather we take klay thompson, burks, or brooks than jimmer, but i wouldn't even be mad if we get him. jimmer would be good off the bench. if we get jimmer, i doubt we'll try and pick up flynn. gonna be interesting to see how things play out.

 

[patrick chewing]

Originally Posted by Ballinsam23

how is this the classic knicks though?

We never move up, and we always regret it. Thats more classic.

Agreed. Every year the knicks are rumored to move up in the draft, but we never do. Closest we come is paying for a late 1st rounder. I'm down to get Jimmer, my second choice would be Farried. We cant afford to loose too much depth tho, so im not sure how smart it is to move up.

 

[the gr8]

imo the Knicks will totally regret walking away from this draft without Faried. He is EXACTLY what we need as a big man to come off the bench and back up Amare. idk how we get him whether it be at 17 or if he falls later and we buy a pick, but my feeling on him is very similar to how i knew the Knicks would regret not buying a later pick to draft DeAndre Jordan if he fell late in the 1st round or the 2nd round, because he was exactly what we needed, and of course i totally regret that move as a Knicks fan now.

Faried should be in a Knicks uniform next season, he may be the one player we need the most in the draft imo. Not in the aspect that he will fit in better than anybody esle and we should definitley take him no matter what, but in the manner that he fills the key role of a defensive minded rebounding/hustling big man that NOBODY else in the draft can fill for us. For instance if we pass up on a PG there will always be another one to choose from, same with the 2 guards with Thompson, Brooks, Burks, etc. But Faried is the only player in the draft who would contribute what he does for this team and imo that could be our biggest need besides a starting center (and there are none unless we can snag Bismark) or a franchise PG (which could certainly not be found in this draft even IF we draft a PG).

That is why i think for the need he would fill, and the motor that he has, Faried is our SAFEST option at filling a key hole for this team and also why i think that no matter who we come away with on Thurday night, whether it is 1 player or 3+, IMO Faried should be amongst them. Not necessarily saying he is the highest on my list or will pan out the best, but he brings something that nobody else does.

 

[ruffrydya08]

^^Faried would be such a great pick IMO. 
It's not about moving up IMO, it's about doing NOTHING to help the team through the draft. IDC about moving up, whoopty damn doo. They move up , congrats, am I supposed to take a little victory out of the fact that we moved up in the draft? And then to move up to take someone who doesn't address ONE weakness that we have? That's classic Knicks for you.

 

[big j 33]

Faried is 6'6, and 6'8 in shoes is generous. Draft him with the intentions of playing heavy minutes and we're penciling in Amare at the 5. I'm not cool with that.

If we get a 2nd 1st rounder, then sure, take Faried if he's available later on, but he just isn't big enough in my mind. I understand our need for rebounding and hustle, but we do have other needs as well. If a better option at another need, that is to say a PG or a shooting/athletic SG, is available... I take that over Faried. The man is the same height as Landry Fields

And while he has a 7 foot wingspan and 9 foot standing each, that's not enough to make up the difference. He can rebound and hustle, and he could find a great role in a team... but we need someone who can do those things, just bigger.

 

[ruffrydya08]

J I feel you but the height thing is a moot point IMO. It's nitpicking. Dudes ball in shoes I could care less what anyone is in bare feet. Dudes always be like well he's this and that with no shoes..never seen anyone ball in barefeet. IMO rebounding and motor are the 2 attributes that always translate at the next level.

 

[|A-Man|]

A 6'8 pf is a no for me. No sense in banking on him being the next Ben Wallace or at the least Reggie Evans when we can have Reggie in FA.

 

[the gr8]

Originally Posted by Big J 33

Faried is 6'6, and 6'8 in shoes is generous. Draft him with the intentions of playing heavy minutes and we're penciling in Amare at the 5. I'm not cool with that.

If we get a 2nd 1st rounder, then sure, take Faried if he's available later on, but he just isn't big enough in my mind. I understand our need for rebounding and hustle, but we do have other needs as well. If a better option at another need, that is to say a PG or a shooting/athletic SG, is available... I take that over Faried. The man is the same height as Landry Fields

And while he has a 7 foot wingspan and 9 foot standing each, that's not enough to make up the difference. He can rebound and hustle, and he could find a great role in a team... but we need someone who can do those things, just bigger.

agree with RuffRyda height is SUCH a moot point. Look at dudes like Ben Wallace and Barkley nobody was *****ing about his height because he had that explosiveness and that motor to make up for it. If you could grab 14+ boards per game, 2+ blocks per game and also 2 steals, than i care more about that. Besides, if you wanna get all nitpicky about measurements and what not, dude had a 9'0 standing reach which is more important when it comes to rebounding and blocking shots, along with a very good 35" vertical to add to the already solid 9'0 standing reach. Nobody is rebounding and blocking shots with their heads without jumping. I dont even give a !*%# that much about these combine measurements but if i DID and im evaluating a PF to see how his blocking/rebounding will adapt in the next level im looking at reach (with hands) more than the height where his head is at, and also their vertical.

Im not saying that he is thge answer at 4 and we should play Stat at the 5. We still need a legit 7 foot center and Amare should be starting at the 4 and no place else. But in a weak draft to get a guy like Faried with his defense and his motor, a guy who would do all the dirty work off the bench like a Charles Oakley for YEARS to come in a set role than i think you have had a successful draft. When you got a guy like Stat at the 4 you need a guy like Faried to come in and back him up, this is why i have liked the idea of bringing a Reggie Evans type person over here to do the same exact thing except that Faried is more talented of an overall player, a better shot blocker, and he is way more explosive/athletic and can run the floor well. He would bring us alot of tip ins/put backs on the offensive side as well and we all saw how valuable that was in the NBA finals with Tyson Chandler raving havoc

 

[ballinsam23]

double

 

[big j 33]

Ok, then ignore the 6'6', and see the 6.75' in shoes. And I do agree, he can hustle and he can rebound, those two skills will be useful. But at his size he'd be a hustle big off the bench... or you try starting him and that puts Amare at the 5, and that's too small with not enough defense for my tastes.

Like I said... I like Faried and if we can get another pick later on, I'd be interested in taking a chance on him... but a rebounding big is not our only need.

 

[duba169]

height isn't the be all end all of rebounding. Zach Randoplh can't jump over a phone book and he ain't 7 foot but he's a great rebounder

but taking a forward AGAIN is kinda disheartening when we have so many holes

 

[ballinsam23]

Ok lets not move up and draft some bum with our current pick. Who are we gonna get with 17? Unless someone falls, no one.

Should we have moved up in 2009 and draft ANYONE ahead of jordan hill? Yes. Do we have the ability to move up and draft Klay, Jimmer, or Bismack? Yes. We gotta learn from our mistakes.

Jimmer has the ability to do what curry is doing in the NBA. Add curry to our team and we just got much better.

Who i REALLY want is Klay though. Those Reggie Miller comparisons arent too far off. No thanks to a 6'8 center too. It seems like everytime we draft a PF/C he's been a complete bust dating all the way back to Ewing (Frye and Gallo get a pass).

 

[big j 33]

Originally Posted by THE GR8

Originally Posted by Big J 33

Faried is 6'6, and 6'8 in shoes is generous. Draft him with the intentions of playing heavy minutes and we're penciling in Amare at the 5. I'm not cool with that.

If we get a 2nd 1st rounder, then sure, take Faried if he's available later on, but he just isn't big enough in my mind. I understand our need for rebounding and hustle, but we do have other needs as well. If a better option at another need, that is to say a PG or a shooting/athletic SG, is available... I take that over Faried. The man is the same height as Landry Fields

And while he has a 7 foot wingspan and 9 foot standing each, that's not enough to make up the difference. He can rebound and hustle, and he could find a great role in a team... but we need someone who can do those things, just bigger.

agree with RuffRyda height is SUCH a moot point. Look at dudes like Ben Wallace and Barkley nobody was *****ing about his height because he had that explosiveness and that motor to make up for it. If you could grab 14+ boards per game, 2+ blocks per game and also 2 steals, than i care more about that. Besides, if you wanna get all nitpicky about measurements and what not, dude had a 9'0 standing reach which is more important when it comes to rebounding and blocking shots, along with a very good 35" vertical to add to the already solid 9'0 standing reach. Nobody is rebounding and blocking shots with their heads without jumping. I dont even give a !*%# that much about these combine measurements but if i DID and im evaluating a PF to see how his blocking/rebounding will adapt in the next level im looking at reach (with hands) more than the height where his head is at, and also their vertical.

Im not saying that he is thge answer at 4 and we should play Stat at the 5. We still need a legit 7 foot center and Amare should be starting at the 4 and no place else. But in a weak draft to get a guy like Faried with his defense and his motor, a guy who would do all the dirty work off the bench like a Charles Oakley for YEARS to come in a set role than i think you have had a successful draft. When you got a guy like Stat at the 4 you need a guy like Faried to come in and back him up, this is why i have liked the idea of bringing a Reggie Evans type person over here to do the same exact thing except that Faried is more talented of an overall player, a better shot blocker, and he is way more explosive/athletic and can run the floor well. He would bring us alot of tip ins/put backs on the offensive side as well and we all saw how valuable that was in the NBA finals with Tyson Chandler raving havoc

First, chill the !%@$ out. I like the guy, and I'm well aware you don't block with your head, that's the same stuff I've been saying in Biyombo's defense... but Faried just isn't big enough for me to want him with our first choice. I know he has a 9 foot reach, I said that in my first post.. that's not news to me. I don't think he's big or strong enough to defend bigger 4's in the league, add that to Amare's poor defense and I don't like them playing together. Yeah, he would be a great energy guy off the bench, I don't doubt that and I've even said that... but I just don't think taking a hustle man/rebounder to back up Amare is the most pressing need if we only have one 1st round pick.

 

[|A-Man|]

If we don't make any moves and stick with out pick I'm fine with Brooks or Selby since at that point I think we'd just be acquiring assets for a future trade. Want Klay, don't think he'll fall to us since apparently his stock is rising.

Undersized players at any position really isn't what we need. Dudes say height don't matter and bring up Wallace or Barkley like they aren't exceptions every decade. Attaining Jimmer doesn't make sense unless he's convincing ppl he'll be an immediate impact player.

 

[al3xis]

I wouldn't be displeased with either Klay or Faired.

but with Faired, you are essentially drafting a hustle guy to come off the bench. If that's his role and he's good at it, great. But just have to accept that's what you're getting.

Klay...well, it means Landry won't be here past next year and you probably will get crap in return for him. and it's kind of stupid since you held off on dealing him to Denver and maybe could have kept Will around instead.

 

[|A-Man|]

^Too old but I'm sure ignoring him will bite us in the %*% when he becomes the next Kevin Love

Originally Posted by Al3xis

Klay...well, it means Landry won't be here past next year and you probably will get crap in return for him. and it's kind of stupid since you held off on dealing him to Denver and maybe could have kept Will around instead.

Think you mean Gallo. Will still would've been a FA.

We can still package Landry for a pg if we get Klay or any other sg in this draft. Don't see why they can't coexist if Landry is still starting. We only got like 4 guys on the roster coming back with us probably resigning S. Williams.

 

[pmatic]

6'11 and 260 lbs...20 years old (21 in Oct)...produced (17 PPG and 10 RPG)...inside-outside threat.

Not a good athlete but why isn't he being talked about?

 

[harlemtothebronx]

Jimmer?

He doesn't fill a void, IMO. Unless we're planning on using him or Fields to get a big man.

 

[al3xis]

That's the thing, Why are we drafting a bench player?

If we go with Klay or a Brooks, they clearly don't see Landry staying long. Or starting.

and with the way he finished the year I can't imagine his trade value being too high. Plus the guy can walk after next year, and if we draft Klay, no room to pay for a back up.

so you're left trying to package him (with what?) for a mediocre PG or big man.


We NEED a PG after next year, we NEED a center now.

If we still believe in Landry, then drafting 2-4 is just going to end up being a somewhat backwards move regardless of who it is/how good they become. Unless it's Faired or a similar 4 because we're so thin up-front. I can see value in that. I see no value in taking a 2guard.


*I've said my stance on Jimmer. Like him, but not on this team. But at least if you drafted him, it's with the intention of being a PG.

 

[duba169]

shocked that 90 percent of real gm knicks is screaming to trade up for jimmer

 

[|A-Man|]

Well I'm not seeing it as drafting for a bench player (although we do need a better bench). I don't see much wrong with the scenario of a sg we draft possibly beating out Fields for the starting spot and Fields off the bench. Especially if it's clear who's the better sg between the two. Not to mention their (improved) play during the season helps a great deal for future trades.

As far as packaging it'd be for a big man. If we desperately need a pg we can do something with Billups, Fields, TD, etc. as far as trades.

 

[ballinsam23]

---

The Knicks are making a play for Omri Casspi. Knicks brass believe Toney Douglas and $3M can get it done.

 

[al3xis]

Fields gets beat out then what's left of him?

kills his value and are left trying to dump him for anything or debating on giving him a new contract or not next summer.

If a Landry was on a rookie contract, it'd be okay..we'd still have him for a few years, now you have to make a decision in 1 year. don't think he's hanging around to come off the bench (and/or) taking less money.

If he still held the value he had mid-year and the thought was Klay (or someone else) is just superior..then you could move him. Now? You're gona get stuck. Or not cash in on the value he had 6 months ago.

 

[king x riece]

Originally Posted by PMatic

6'11 and 260 lbs...20 years old (21 in Oct)...produced (17 PPG and 10 RPG)...inside-outside threat.

Not a good athlete but why isn't he being talked about?

We talked about him a couple weeks ago.

 

[you go boy]

first of all trading toney douglas for johnny flynn makes no sense... douglas is definitely better and all the knicks got off the bench... if they trade toney at least get a good point guard like andre miller or somebody with value...and trading up to get jimmer is also dumb... i wouldn't mind picking him up if he falls at 17 our spot but if we trade up we need to get a big man like bismack...our biggest need is the center position and then the 1 and 2 position... id get that guy out of providence too...hes 2nd best in the league in scoring so thats showing something

i forgot to add that we need to draft and sign players we need and not just some guy that shoots 3s all day like in dantonis system...pickup guys that can actually play and give them playing time instead of benching them...for example if we had another coach sheldon williams would have played more in the playoffs.. this isn't a discussion about why the knicks lost without sheldon

... my point is mike and him being so stubborn about his system instead of using the right player for that time