Knicks - Celtics PG: Do we need Woody back?

[Chanel Bomber]

Did anyone else see how dejected Julius was after Smart hit that last minute 3? The one where Bullock doubled Tatum for no f*cking reason? I genuinely felt bad for Randle at that moment. You could see he was just feeling like.. damn.. we just can't get over the hump. He also might have been mad at Bullock for doubling Tatum. Like wtf are you doing, Bullock..

I really felt bad for him. You can see how all of this is killing him. He knows his squad just doesn't have the players to close out games.

That was kind of sad to see. If the Knicks don't make significant improvements in the off-season, I could see him saying f*ck it.. if they're not going to make enough moves for us to go to the next level, I'm out of here. He's not getting any younger, and he knows he's in his prime right now. He might want to go to a winning organization for the rest of his prime years.

I don't recall this but if true then that's a lack of leadership on his part.

That's the Steve Mills reaction when the Knicks got the 4th pick back in 2015.

It shows a lack of belief. It inspires no confidence.

I am convinced the Knicks need RJ to surpass Randle as a player for the team to succeed. He's more composed than Randle. And I don't say this to question Randle's character, but Randle has shown that he can let emotions get the best of him. I don't think it sets the right tone for the rest of the team. I much prefer RJ's pokerface demeanor.

Also Randle is in no position to demand roster moves or to expect any special treatment from an organization. He hasn't proven yet that he can effectively contribute to winning. Still no playoff appearance in 7 NBA seasons. He may be an All-Star, but he hasn't earned anything in my book. He needs to play better than he has since the All-Star break, period.

[K_ick_God]

Did anyone else see how dejected Julius was after Smart hit that last minute 3? The one where Bullock doubled Tatum for no f*cking reason? I genuinely felt bad for Randle at that moment. You could see he was just feeling like.. damn.. we just can't get over the hump. He also might have been mad at Bullock for doubling Tatum. Like wtf are you doing, Bullock..

I really felt bad for him. You can see how all of this is killing him. He knows his squad just doesn't have the players to close out games.

That was kind of sad to see. If the Knicks don't make significant improvements in the off-season, I could see him saying f*ck it.. if they're not going to make enough moves for us to go to the next level, I'm out of here. He's not getting any younger, and he knows he's in his prime right now. He might want to go to a winning organization for the rest of his prime years.

I don't recall this but if true then that's a lack of leadership on his part.

That's the Steve Mills reaction when the Knicks got the 4th pick back in 2015.

It shows a lack of belief. It inspires no confidence.

I am convinced the Knicks need RJ to surpass Randle as a player for the team to succeed. He's more composed than Randle. And I don't say this to question Randle's character, but Randle has shown that he can let emotions get the best of him. I don't think it sets the right tone for the rest of the team. I much prefer RJ's pokerface demeanor.

Also Randle is in no position to demand roster moves or to expect any special treatment from an organization. He hasn't proven yet that he can effectively contribute to winning. Still no playoff appearance in 7 NBA seasons. He may be an All-Star, but he hasn't earned anything in my book. He needs to play better than he has since the All-Star break, period.

Yeah I'm not confident in Randle getting to greatness. Maybe it's some emotion but it also just seems like he is okay with giving up possessions. Runs into stationary defenders a lot and loses the ball. He feels he needs to play recklessly to an extent, and that's not so bad. But as a 1st scorer that's an issue.

[3toheadmelo]

Read on Twitter

[KnickMan]

It's kinda crazy how this team went from being fun to unwatchable and borderline impossible to root for in the span of weeks.

Maybe it's the hopes for a trade that vanished after the deadline.

Or just the phenomenon known as erosion.

The post ASB schedule got tougher and our true colors showed. we were never that good, we just had the 5th easiest schedule in the league.

THIS. This has been the case all year. This team is starting or giving big minutes to 3-4 journeymen who would be lucky to get 10-15 a game on almost every other team. They overachieved, at the expense of development of our younger players and here we are. When Thibs actually played most of youth in the Detroit blow up, they actually increased the lead, I thought maybe the light bulb would go off and he might give a Harper and Knox a bit more run; give Obi 20 or minutes, but no, back to Thibs being Thibs.

[NewKnicks]

It's probably less about moving up as it is drafting well. Again, guys are taken all over the Draft who are much better than the guys before them. People cite the 2003 Draft but that is much more rare than common, that the best players are bunched at the top. Really not much reason to say this year will be different.

And even 2003 had Darko, Kaman, Ford, Sweetney, Hayes in the top 10. Only Darko top 3 but still. Even that one was not that linear really.

Pretty much every single 'expert' out there agrees that this is one the best drafts in awhile. There's talk of every player in the top 5 potentially being a franchise player. If you disagree with that, tell me which player should not be considered one, and why. But will they all pan out? Who knows. But as a comparison, none of these same experts called any player in last years draft a franchise player, besides maybe Lamelo.

So for you to say it's 'less about moving up as it is drafting well' is pretty ridiculous. Obviously (to everyone but you), it's more about moving up than it is drafting well in this incredibly stacked (at the top) draft.

You do your analysis of each guy and I'll do my analysis of the fact that every Draft is a lottery. Many top picks are busts, the order is never 1-30 in quality. Luka is the best young player in the NBA and was not taken 1.

It's like trying to pick the right stock versus knowing that your portfolio should be balanced and not reliant on any one company's shares. Which do you think is more likely to succeed?

Even in 2003, the only guy picked in the right order was LeBron lol. Bosh IMO was a better player than Melo, Darko sucked, Wade should've been 2.

So yeah you don't have a lot of support for what you're proposing. The Draft itself is still a lottery, plain and simple. Nobody picks the right guys regularly.

And as far as No. 1 picks go, LeBron is actually exceedingly rare. Many of them, about half, aren't dominant players. Some are not good at all.

Anyway OT imagine plugging Luka into RJ and Mitch. Now that's fire.

Umm, I do have a lot of support for what I'm proposing. And it's not a proposal. If you don't think it's better to move up in this draft I can't help you.

[NewKnicks]

Did anyone else see how dejected Julius was after Smart hit that last minute 3? The one where Bullock doubled Tatum for no f*cking reason? I genuinely felt bad for Randle at that moment. You could see he was just feeling like.. damn.. we just can't get over the hump. He also might have been mad at Bullock for doubling Tatum. Like wtf are you doing, Bullock..

I really felt bad for him. You can see how all of this is killing him. He knows his squad just doesn't have the players to close out games.

That was kind of sad to see. If the Knicks don't make significant improvements in the off-season, I could see him saying f*ck it.. if they're not going to make enough moves for us to go to the next level, I'm out of here. He's not getting any younger, and he knows he's in his prime right now. He might want to go to a winning organization for the rest of his prime years.

I don't recall this but if true then that's a lack of leadership on his part.

That's the Steve Mills reaction when the Knicks got the 4th pick back in 2015.

It shows a lack of belief. It inspires no confidence.

I am convinced the Knicks need RJ to surpass Randle as a player for the team to succeed. He's more composed than Randle. And I don't say this to question Randle's character, but Randle has shown that he can let emotions get the best of him. I don't think it sets the right tone for the rest of the team. I much prefer RJ's pokerface demeanor.

Also Randle is in no position to demand roster moves or to expect any special treatment from an organization. He hasn't proven yet that he can effectively contribute to winning. Still no playoff appearance in 7 NBA seasons. He may be an All-Star, but he hasn't earned anything in my book. He needs to play better than he has since the All-Star break, period.

Here ya go, Chanel. Go to a minute 16 in, and pay attention to Randle..

Watch on YouTube

[K_ick_God]

Pretty much every single 'expert' out there agrees that this is one the best drafts in awhile. There's talk of every player in the top 5 potentially being a franchise player. If you disagree with that, tell me which player should not be considered one, and why. But will they all pan out? Who knows. But as a comparison, none of these same experts called any player in last years draft a franchise player, besides maybe Lamelo.

So for you to say it's 'less about moving up as it is drafting well' is pretty ridiculous. Obviously (to everyone but you), it's more about moving up than it is drafting well in this incredibly stacked (at the top) draft.

You do your analysis of each guy and I'll do my analysis of the fact that every Draft is a lottery. Many top picks are busts, the order is never 1-30 in quality. Luka is the best young player in the NBA and was not taken 1.

It's like trying to pick the right stock versus knowing that your portfolio should be balanced and not reliant on any one company's shares. Which do you think is more likely to succeed?

Even in 2003, the only guy picked in the right order was LeBron lol. Bosh IMO was a better player than Melo, Darko sucked, Wade should've been 2.

So yeah you don't have a lot of support for what you're proposing. The Draft itself is still a lottery, plain and simple. Nobody picks the right guys regularly.

And as far as No. 1 picks go, LeBron is actually exceedingly rare. Many of them, about half, aren't dominant players. Some are not good at all.

Anyway OT imagine plugging Luka into RJ and Mitch. Now that's fire.

Umm, I do have a lot of support for what I'm proposing. And it's not a proposal. If you don't think it's better to move up in this draft I can't help you.

You yourself said the 'experts' say this Draft is great lol. The quotation mark says it all. Draft expertise itself is a very dubious concept.

All you're saying is that the Draft is supposed to be good in general. That doesnt

a) reduce the risk to drafting a bust in the top 5 to anything close to 0 and probably not even like 20%. The risk is higher, or

b) mean you cannot find a good player 10-20. In fact, if anything, your argument raises the odds of picking a good player 10-20, or

c) make it highly likely or anything close that you'll draft a better player at 4 than you'll draft at 15, in fact the odds are probably at best only a little better that you can draft a better player top 5 than you can draft at 15 --

If I had to throw out a hypothesis number for research purposes, the split would be something like 30% chance of finding a great player in the top 5 and 15% at 15. Notable difference, for sure, but one that is out of proportion with your latest hysterical pronouncement Mr Perfect.

[Chanel Bomber]

Read on Twitter

This is simply absurd.

I'm tired of hearing about how good of a coach Thibs is.

I don't buy it.

[BKAY]

lol you guys are actually crazy with expectations.... im hopeful we'll make the playoffs whether through play in or straight up but we have already crushed this season's expectations

14. New York Knicks — UNDER 21.5
The Knicks under is typically one of the safest bets, and this is a trash roster with little talent. But it’s a trash roster led by Tom Thibodeau, who’s liable to find any speck of talent and play him 47.1 minutes a night seeking any possible win. Thibs makes the Knicks better defensively, less likely to tank, and less likely to play and develop the youngsters, and that hurts the under.
But make no mistake about it: this team is terrible.

[NewKnicks]

You do your analysis of each guy and I'll do my analysis of the fact that every Draft is a lottery. Many top picks are busts, the order is never 1-30 in quality. Luka is the best young player in the NBA and was not taken 1.

It's like trying to pick the right stock versus knowing that your portfolio should be balanced and not reliant on any one company's shares. Which do you think is more likely to succeed?

Even in 2003, the only guy picked in the right order was LeBron lol. Bosh IMO was a better player than Melo, Darko sucked, Wade should've been 2.

So yeah you don't have a lot of support for what you're proposing. The Draft itself is still a lottery, plain and simple. Nobody picks the right guys regularly.

And as far as No. 1 picks go, LeBron is actually exceedingly rare. Many of them, about half, aren't dominant players. Some are not good at all.

Anyway OT imagine plugging Luka into RJ and Mitch. Now that's fire.

Umm, I do have a lot of support for what I'm proposing. And it's not a proposal. If you don't think it's better to move up in this draft I can't help you.

You yourself said the 'experts' say this Draft is great lol. The quotation mark says it all. Draft expertise itself is a very dubious concept.

All you're saying is that the Draft is supposed to be good in general. That doesnt

a) reduce the risk to drafting a bust in the top 5 to anything close to 0 and probably not even like 20%. The risk is higher, or

b) mean you cannot find a good player 10-20. In fact, if anything, your argument raises the odds of picking a good player 10-20, or

c) make it highly likely or anything close that you'll draft a better player at 4 than you'll draft at 15, in fact the odds are probably at best only a little better that you can draft a better player top 5 than you can draft at 15 --

If I had to throw out a hypothesis number for research purposes, the split would be something like 30% chance of finding a great player in the top 5 and 15% at 15. Notable difference, for sure, but one that is out of proportion with your latest hysterical pronouncement Mr Perfect.

All those points might have some validity, but not in this specific draft. Could some of them be busts? Of course. I will never dispute that point. But it you want the franchise changing talent, it's going to be in top 5 this year. Could there be a few surprises? Sure. Anyway, no point in going further. I'm going to stick to my guns and so are you.

[NewKnicks]

Did anyone else see how dejected Julius was after Smart hit that last minute 3? The one where Bullock doubled Tatum for no f*cking reason? I genuinely felt bad for Randle at that moment. You could see he was just feeling like.. damn.. we just can't get over the hump. He also might have been mad at Bullock for doubling Tatum. Like wtf are you doing, Bullock..

I really felt bad for him. You can see how all of this is killing him. He knows his squad just doesn't have the players to close out games.

That was kind of sad to see. If the Knicks don't make significant improvements in the off-season, I could see him saying f*ck it.. if they're not going to make enough moves for us to go to the next level, I'm out of here. He's not getting any younger, and he knows he's in his prime right now. He might want to go to a winning organization for the rest of his prime years.

I don't recall this but if true then that's a lack of leadership on his part.

That's the Steve Mills reaction when the Knicks got the 4th pick back in 2015.

It shows a lack of belief. It inspires no confidence.

I am convinced the Knicks need RJ to surpass Randle as a player for the team to succeed. He's more composed than Randle. And I don't say this to question Randle's character, but Randle has shown that he can let emotions get the best of him. I don't think it sets the right tone for the rest of the team. I much prefer RJ's pokerface demeanor.

Also Randle is in no position to demand roster moves or to expect any special treatment from an organization. He hasn't proven yet that he can effectively contribute to winning. Still no playoff appearance in 7 NBA seasons. He may be an All-Star, but he hasn't earned anything in my book. He needs to play better than he has since the All-Star break, period.

I went back and watched a few times, even in slow-mo, and it really looks like Julius is pissed about the double.. like what..why? Oh **** here goes the shot.. damn.. what are you doing??

At least that's how interpret it.

Would love to hear what you think.

[K_ick_God]

Umm, I do have a lot of support for what I'm proposing. And it's not a proposal. If you don't think it's better to move up in this draft I can't help you.

You yourself said the 'experts' say this Draft is great lol. The quotation mark says it all. Draft expertise itself is a very dubious concept.

All you're saying is that the Draft is supposed to be good in general. That doesnt

a) reduce the risk to drafting a bust in the top 5 to anything close to 0 and probably not even like 20%. The risk is higher, or

b) mean you cannot find a good player 10-20. In fact, if anything, your argument raises the odds of picking a good player 10-20, or

c) make it highly likely or anything close that you'll draft a better player at 4 than you'll draft at 15, in fact the odds are probably at best only a little better that you can draft a better player top 5 than you can draft at 15 --

If I had to throw out a hypothesis number for research purposes, the split would be something like 30% chance of finding a great player in the top 5 and 15% at 15. Notable difference, for sure, but one that is out of proportion with your latest hysterical pronouncement Mr Perfect.

All those points might have some validity, but not in this specific draft. Could some of them be busts? Of course. I will never dispute that point. But it you want the franchise changing talent, it's going to be in top 5 this year. Could there be a few surprises? Sure. Anyway, no point in going further. I'm going to stick to my guns and so are you.

D. Mitchell is franchise changing. Mitch still has a shot to be without O. Luka was 3rd but definitely nobody thought he was this good. It's not clearcut is all.

[NewKnicks]

You yourself said the 'experts' say this Draft is great lol. The quotation mark says it all. Draft expertise itself is a very dubious concept.

All you're saying is that the Draft is supposed to be good in general. That doesnt

a) reduce the risk to drafting a bust in the top 5 to anything close to 0 and probably not even like 20%. The risk is higher, or

b) mean you cannot find a good player 10-20. In fact, if anything, your argument raises the odds of picking a good player 10-20, or

c) make it highly likely or anything close that you'll draft a better player at 4 than you'll draft at 15, in fact the odds are probably at best only a little better that you can draft a better player top 5 than you can draft at 15 --

If I had to throw out a hypothesis number for research purposes, the split would be something like 30% chance of finding a great player in the top 5 and 15% at 15. Notable difference, for sure, but one that is out of proportion with your latest hysterical pronouncement Mr Perfect.

All those points might have some validity, but not in this specific draft. Could some of them be busts? Of course. I will never dispute that point. But it you want the franchise changing talent, it's going to be in top 5 this year. Could there be a few surprises? Sure. Anyway, no point in going further. I'm going to stick to my guns and so are you.

D. Mitchell is franchise changing. Mitch still has a shot to be without O. Luka was 3rd but definitely nobody thought he was this good. It's not clearcut is all.

You know why it's completely clear cut? Look at every single mock draft out there. EVERY SINGLE ONE. And the same 5 players are the top 5 picks. You know why that is? I'll let you figure that out.

Mitchell is too old and too small for my liking. I like the kid, but I doubt he's going to be special. More like a decent offensive player (he didn't have too many high point totals for the year), who plays some really bad azz on the ball D. I'm not saying he's going to be a bust, I just highly doubt he'll ever be a superstar. I'm always drafting a player who has superstar potential over a starter-level player in the draft. 100/100 times.

Also, a lot of people like Mitchell on this board, but I don't think any of them would take Mitchell over any player in the top 5.

[NewKnicks]

lol you guys are actually crazy with expectations.... im hopeful we'll make the playoffs whether through play in or straight up but we have already crushed this season's expectations

14. New York Knicks — UNDER 21.5
The Knicks under is typically one of the safest bets, and this is a trash roster with little talent. But it’s a trash roster led by Tom Thibodeau, who’s liable to find any speck of talent and play him 47.1 minutes a night seeking any possible win. Thibs makes the Knicks better defensively, less likely to tank, and less likely to play and develop the youngsters, and that hurts the under.
But make no mistake about it: this team is terrible.

Damn. This guy was spot on. We're not terrible, but we definitely lack a lot of talent.

[Chanel Bomber]

Did anyone else see how dejected Julius was after Smart hit that last minute 3? The one where Bullock doubled Tatum for no f*cking reason? I genuinely felt bad for Randle at that moment. You could see he was just feeling like.. damn.. we just can't get over the hump. He also might have been mad at Bullock for doubling Tatum. Like wtf are you doing, Bullock..

I really felt bad for him. You can see how all of this is killing him. He knows his squad just doesn't have the players to close out games.

That was kind of sad to see. If the Knicks don't make significant improvements in the off-season, I could see him saying f*ck it.. if they're not going to make enough moves for us to go to the next level, I'm out of here. He's not getting any younger, and he knows he's in his prime right now. He might want to go to a winning organization for the rest of his prime years.

I don't recall this but if true then that's a lack of leadership on his part.

That's the Steve Mills reaction when the Knicks got the 4th pick back in 2015.

It shows a lack of belief. It inspires no confidence.

I am convinced the Knicks need RJ to surpass Randle as a player for the team to succeed. He's more composed than Randle. And I don't say this to question Randle's character, but Randle has shown that he can let emotions get the best of him. I don't think it sets the right tone for the rest of the team. I much prefer RJ's pokerface demeanor.

Also Randle is in no position to demand roster moves or to expect any special treatment from an organization. He hasn't proven yet that he can effectively contribute to winning. Still no playoff appearance in 7 NBA seasons. He may be an All-Star, but he hasn't earned anything in my book. He needs to play better than he has since the All-Star break, period.

I went back and watched a few times, even in slow-mo, and it really looks like Julius is pissed about the double.. like what..why? Oh **** here goes the shot.. damn.. what are you doing??

At least that's how interpret it.

Would love to hear what you think.

No you're absolutely right.

And to be fair Bullock's decision to double at that particular moment was puzzling.

But ever since the All-Star break, Randle has overtly lost his cool on too many occasions. I mean I shared his anger through my screen in most instances, but as the leader of the team, it sends the wrong message to the rest of the squad.

[NewKnicks]

I don't recall this but if true then that's a lack of leadership on his part.

That's the Steve Mills reaction when the Knicks got the 4th pick back in 2015.

It shows a lack of belief. It inspires no confidence.

I am convinced the Knicks need RJ to surpass Randle as a player for the team to succeed. He's more composed than Randle. And I don't say this to question Randle's character, but Randle has shown that he can let emotions get the best of him. I don't think it sets the right tone for the rest of the team. I much prefer RJ's pokerface demeanor.

Also Randle is in no position to demand roster moves or to expect any special treatment from an organization. He hasn't proven yet that he can effectively contribute to winning. Still no playoff appearance in 7 NBA seasons. He may be an All-Star, but he hasn't earned anything in my book. He needs to play better than he has since the All-Star break, period.

I went back and watched a few times, even in slow-mo, and it really looks like Julius is pissed about the double.. like what..why? Oh **** here goes the shot.. damn.. what are you doing??

At least that's how interpret it.

Would love to hear what you think.

No you're absolutely right.

And to be fair Bullock's decision to double at that particular moment was puzzling.

But ever since the All-Star break, Randle has overtly lost his cool on too many occasions. I mean I shared his anger through my screen in most instances, but as the leader of the team, it sends the wrong message to the rest of the squad.

No doubt Julius has started to show his emotions (in a negative way) way too often since the All-Star break.

But in this specific example, I could see any other player reacting the same way. Like.. I'm trying to win here dammit.. what the f*ck are we doing doubling? I got my guy..

But I agree with you. He needs to stop with the complaining/pouting crap. It's not a good look.

[K_ick_God]

All those points might have some validity, but not in this specific draft. Could some of them be busts? Of course. I will never dispute that point. But it you want the franchise changing talent, it's going to be in top 5 this year. Could there be a few surprises? Sure. Anyway, no point in going further. I'm going to stick to my guns and so are you.

D. Mitchell is franchise changing. Mitch still has a shot to be without O. Luka was 3rd but definitely nobody thought he was this good. It's not clearcut is all.

You know why it's completely clear cut? Look at every single mock draft out there. EVERY SINGLE ONE. And the same 5 players are the top 5 picks. You know why that is? I'll let you figure that out.

Mitchell is too old and too small for my liking. I like the kid, but I doubt he's going to be special. More like a decent offensive player (he didn't have too many high point totals for the year), who plays some really bad azz on the ball D. I'm not saying he's going to be a bust, I just highly doubt he'll ever be a superstar. I'm always drafting a player who has superstar potential over a starter-level player in the draft. 100/100 times.

Also, a lot of people like Mitchell on this board, but I don't think any of them would take Mitchell over any player in the top 5.

What? You're saying that the guys picking who the best players are going to be all say the best players will go 1-5. What situation where there would be where an 'expert' says the best 5 guys in the draft will be taken 2, 7, 9, 12 and 13? What sense would that make?

This is a circular argument you're making. Yes if you think someone is top 5 then you'll list them top 5.

[NewKnicks]

D. Mitchell is franchise changing. Mitch still has a shot to be without O. Luka was 3rd but definitely nobody thought he was this good. It's not clearcut is all.

You know why it's completely clear cut? Look at every single mock draft out there. EVERY SINGLE ONE. And the same 5 players are the top 5 picks. You know why that is? I'll let you figure that out.

Mitchell is too old and too small for my liking. I like the kid, but I doubt he's going to be special. More like a decent offensive player (he didn't have too many high point totals for the year), who plays some really bad azz on the ball D. I'm not saying he's going to be a bust, I just highly doubt he'll ever be a superstar. I'm always drafting a player who has superstar potential over a starter-level player in the draft. 100/100 times.

Also, a lot of people like Mitchell on this board, but I don't think any of them would take Mitchell over any player in the top 5.

What? You're saying that the guys picking who the best players are going to be all say the best players will go 1-5. What situation where there would be where an 'expert' says the best 5 guys in the draft will be taken 2, 7, 9, 12 and 13? What sense would that make?

This is a circular argument you're making. Yes if you think someone is top 5 then you'll list them top 5.

I really have a hard time following what you're trying to get across in some of your posts.

I guess I'm not making any sense to you, which is fine by me. I think my arguments are clear and concise. I'm not going any deeper with you on this. I've made my points, you've made yours. Let's end it here.

[Chanel Bomber]

All those points might have some validity, but not in this specific draft. Could some of them be busts? Of course. I will never dispute that point. But it you want the franchise changing talent, it's going to be in top 5 this year. Could there be a few surprises? Sure. Anyway, no point in going further. I'm going to stick to my guns and so are you.

D. Mitchell is franchise changing. Mitch still has a shot to be without O. Luka was 3rd but definitely nobody thought he was this good. It's not clearcut is all.

You know why it's completely clear cut? Look at every single mock draft out there. EVERY SINGLE ONE. And the same 5 players are the top 5 picks. You know why that is? I'll let you figure that out.

Mitchell is too old and too small for my liking. I like the kid, but I doubt he's going to be special. More like a decent offensive player (he didn't have too many high point totals for the year), who plays some really bad azz on the ball D. I'm not saying he's going to be a bust, I just highly doubt he'll ever be a superstar. I'm always drafting a player who has superstar potential over a starter-level player in the draft. 100/100 times.

Also, a lot of people like Mitchell on this board, but I don't think any of them would take Mitchell over any player in the top 5.

Yet the consensus top 5 picks never turn out to be the 5 best players from any draft class. You can argue the consensus top 5 panned out in 1991 and 1994. 1995, 2003 and 2005 came very close. Those drafts aside, the consensus top 5 is consistently proven wrong.

You might be putting too much stock into these mock drafts. Declaring some players have superstar potential and some others don't is entirely subjective and arbitrary, even from the best draft experts.

I remember I was still just a lurker back in 2015 but I remember some posters being up in arms when Jalen Rose suggested the Knicks should draft Devin Booker at #4. For a lot of people, the idea was ludicrous, because of his perceived lack of upside. Of course, Booker was the 13th pick, and is now considered the best player from his class and has a 70-point game on his resume. Jalen has a good eye for talent by the way.

[NewKnicks]

D. Mitchell is franchise changing. Mitch still has a shot to be without O. Luka was 3rd but definitely nobody thought he was this good. It's not clearcut is all.

You know why it's completely clear cut? Look at every single mock draft out there. EVERY SINGLE ONE. And the same 5 players are the top 5 picks. You know why that is? I'll let you figure that out.

Mitchell is too old and too small for my liking. I like the kid, but I doubt he's going to be special. More like a decent offensive player (he didn't have too many high point totals for the year), who plays some really bad azz on the ball D. I'm not saying he's going to be a bust, I just highly doubt he'll ever be a superstar. I'm always drafting a player who has superstar potential over a starter-level player in the draft. 100/100 times.

Also, a lot of people like Mitchell on this board, but I don't think any of them would take Mitchell over any player in the top 5.

Yet the consensus top 5 picks never turn out to be the 5 best players from any draft class. You can argue the consensus top 5 panned out in 1991 and 1994. 1995, 2003 and 2005 came very close. Those drafts aside, the consensus top 5 is consistently proven wrong.

You might be putting too much stock into these mock drafts. Declaring some players have superstar potential and some others don't is entirely subjective and arbitrary, even from the best draft experts.

I remember I was still just a lurker back in 2015 but I remember some posters being up in arms when Jalen Rose suggested the Knicks should draft Devin Booker at #4. For a lot of people, the idea was ludicrous, because of his perceived lack of upside. Of course, Booker was the 13th pick, and is now considered the best player from his class and has a 70-point game on his resume. Jalen has a good eye for talent by the way.

I'm only using the mocks as points to back up my evaluation of players. I watched them all extensively. I don't need anyone giving me their opinion.

Look, I know every draft is a crapshoot. I'm not stupid. I'm not saying they will all be stars. But I'll take any one of them over anyone else in the draft. All 5 would easily be the number 1 pick last year. Do you dispute that?