What if we never drafted Frank and Kevin Knox?

[SmoothLefty21]

These hypotheticals are impossible due to the butterfly effect of a single decision. Who knows how much better or worse we'd be if we drafted different guys? Who knows which trades would have been made, or how different FA signings would have been? If we drafted Mitchell over Frank we'd certainly be a better team, so who knows if Knox is even on the board by the time we ultimately pick in 2018.

The one thing that's almost certain is that if we hit on one of the Frank/Knox picks we would have been good enough to not get the #3 pick to draft Barrett.

[ENYK]

Even at Louisville Mitchell showed flashes of NBA team running. The shorter shot clock, space and reliance on pick and roll means the athletic scorer will flourish as a pg in the league. Westbrook, Mitchell, SGA ... these types make the leap out of college.

Yeah, but point is Phil liked his lead guards big. He always saw the smaller guys (Fisher/Kerr/Paxson) as off the ball role players who weren't going to dominate the ball as much.

He always liked big backcourts period, with guys like Ron Harper, Smush Parker and Sasha Vujačić (and Lakers were high on Javaris Crittenton) as backcourt partners to his star guard. It wasn't hard to see him taking a like to a guy like Frank.

Problem is that Phil's lead guards were Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant for the bulk of his 2 coaching stints. With those guys you can have Elfrid Payton and be fine.

Yeah that's exactly the problem... He was drafting to fit his stupid a** triangle system instead of the most talent/upside available.

His scouts encouraged him to take Donovan Mitchell, but Donovan wasn't a fit for the triangle, so Phil ultimately rejected their advice.

The triangle is one of the biggest gimmicks in the history of professional sports and Phil's legacy is about 90% fiction.

[SmoothLefty21]

I would love to hear why the triangle is/was a gimmick.

[prophet_of_rage]

I'm not disagreeing. Just saying that the Knicks weren't the only team that missed. Drafting is not as easy as some fans think. Also you can just flip back to the draft threads and you'll realize most fans aren't any better at predicting the studs from the duds than the GMs they ridicule. A vast majority of fans on this board wanted Frank and the rational that many gave was comical. As far as knick fans saying they were high on Donovan Mitchel...where's that "Come on son" gif. The vast vast vast majority of people whondidnt want Frank wanted either DSJ or Malik Monk.

Sent from my SM-N975U using RealGM mobile app

I recall it being split pretty evenly between Frank and DSJ, with Monk being the most popular 3rd option (but being pretty completely dwarfed by both Frank and DSJ supporters), and Mitchell being a real fringe guy that only a few of people wanted, and even then, he was the 2nd option for most of them behind one of Frank, DSJ, or Monk. I think only like 2 or 3 guys at the time wanted Mitchell above anyone else available at 8

The last few draft threads, from about a week before draft night with polls:

Spoiler:

48 Frank, 40 DSJ, 22 Monk, 5 Kennard, 4 Mitchell

viewtopic.php?f=24&t=1577549

59 DSJ, 40 Frank, 17 Monk, 7 Mitchell

viewtopic.php?f=24&t=1578836

42 DSJ, 33 Frank, 15 Monk, 7 Mitchell

viewtopic.php?f=24&t=1579610

37 DSJ, 33 Frank, 16 Monk, 5 Mitchell

viewtopic.php?f=24&t=1580690

Finally, the night of: 46 DSJ, 46 Frank, 15 Monk, 2 Mitchell (2 Kennard)

viewtopic.php?f=24&t=1581419

So at the end, it was a dead split between Frank and DSJ, with Monk coming in a distant 3rd, and Mitchell having less than 2% support (same number of people wanted Luke Kennard), with his peak being around 7%

Also, I believe the consensus at the time was, if we had picked DSJ, Dallas would've picked Frank right after. I do wonder how that turns out, had we drafted DSJ and kept him, cause he did show a lot of potential early on, and how that would've affected a potential KP trade since he was (allegedly) the primary asset we wanted back for KP

So basically we don't know what the Hell we talmbout.

Sent from my SM-N970W using Tapatalk

[prophet_of_rage]

Mitchell was high on our radar, but Phil Jackson ultimately decided Frank was a better fit for the triangle

This.

Not only were the Knicks high on Mitchell, they were also blown away in their workout with Bam. I have no clue what phil Jackson saw in Frank that made him think he was a better fit than either of the those guy, or other guys drafted behind Frank. Just a horrendous pick. And after that the Knox pick was equally as bad. Those two drafts will forever live in infamy for us.

Phil doesn't like point guards and Mills wanted athletes. They swung the pendulum too far both ways.

Sent from my SM-N970W using Tapatalk

[prophet_of_rage]

Mitchell is basically a small SG that can be a playmaker in many instances.

But at then end of the day, he's a small guard. That's a strike against him in Phil Jackson's book. Phil preferred big guards. He thought of smaller guards as role players (Kerr, Paxson, Fisher).

Even at Louisville Mitchell showed flashes of NBA team running. The shorter shot clock, space and reliance on pick and roll means the athletic scorer will flourish as a pg in the league. Westbrook, Mitchell, SGA ... these types make the leap out of college.

Yeah, but point is Phil liked his lead guards big. He always saw the smaller guys (Fisher/Kerr/Paxson) as off the ball role players who weren't going to dominate the ball as much.

He always liked big backcourts period, with guys like Ron Harper, Smush Parker and Sasha Vujačić (and Lakers were high on Javaris Crittenton) as backcourt partners to his star guard. It wasn't hard to see him taking a like to a guy like Frank.

Phil was a senile old fossil.

Sent from my SM-N970W using Tapatalk

[NoDopeOnSundays]

Doing the what if game, we probably don't trade Kristaps and end up with SGA/Mitchell who could attract KD/Kyrie since they'd be able to trade one of them in a package for Harden.

[prophet_of_rage]

I would love to hear why the triangle is/was a gimmick.

It hasn't been a successful NBA offence without Tex Winters teaching it and without an MJ/Pippen/Bryant/Shaq/Gasol playing it.

The spacing is now kind of antiquated and the NBA has moved away from pattern offences.

Sent from my SM-N970W using Tapatalk

[SmoothLefty21]

I would love to hear why the triangle is/was a gimmick.

It hasn't been a successful NBA offence without Tex Winters teaching it and without an MJ/Pippen/Bryant/Shaq/Gasol playing it.

The spacing is now kind of antiquated and the NBA has moved away from pattern offences.

Sent from my SM-N970W using Tapatalk

That is all true. That also does not mean it's a gimmick.

[prophet_of_rage]

I would love to hear why the triangle is/was a gimmick.

It hasn't been a successful NBA offence without Tex Winters teaching it and without an MJ/Pippen/Bryant/Shaq/Gasol playing it.

The spacing is now kind of antiquated and the NBA has moved away from pattern offences.

Sent from my SM-N970W using Tapatalk

That is all true. That also does not mean it's a gimmick.

The gimmick was that it was some mystical offence. The offence itself isn't a gimmick. It was a pattern with some motion principles.

Sent from my SM-N970W using Tapatalk

[nedleeds]

What if James Dolan had been struck by lightning flying a kite as an 8 year old?

[moocow007]

Doing the what if game, we probably don't trade Kristaps and end up with SGA/Mitchell who could attract KD/Kyrie since they'd be able to trade one of them in a package for Harden.

I think that's a way too positive what if my friend.

[moocow007]

What if James Dolan had been struck by lightning flying a kite as an 8 year old?

In grief dad Charles would have had another child Jeffrey Dolan and, raised with an even bigger silver spoon, end up running this franchise in to the ground even more.

[dc]

I would love to hear why the triangle is/was a gimmick.

It hasn't been a successful NBA offence without Tex Winters teaching it and without an MJ/Pippen/Bryant/Shaq/Gasol playing it.

The spacing is now kind of antiquated and the NBA has moved away from pattern offences.

That is all true. That also does not mean it's a gimmick.

The triangle isn't a gimmick. It works, even in this age. The reason it isn't used much is because it takes a long time to learn, and teams aren't necessarily going to have the patience to stick with the plan when there are a number of offenses that are just as effective that don't take nearly as long to learn.

[moocow007]

It hasn't been a successful NBA offence without Tex Winters teaching it and without an MJ/Pippen/Bryant/Shaq/Gasol playing it.

The spacing is now kind of antiquated and the NBA has moved away from pattern offences.

That is all true. That also does not mean it's a gimmick.

The triangle isn't a gimmick. It works, even in this age. The reason it isn't used much is because it takes a long time to learn, and teams aren't necessarily going to have the patience to stick with the plan when there are a number of offenses that are just as effective that don't take nearly as long to learn.

The Triangle requires very specifically skilled players as well as top tier bale-out guys that can do their own thing if the Triangle produces nothing on any given play. It requires a lot of time absolutely, but also a lot of effort and a lot of talent. It's why despite it being the winning formula for Phil in both Chicago and LA that no one else has really used it. You have to have a Phil Jackson like level of getting the team to execute it AND you need some GOAT level players to elevate it. It's not easy to build it and it's not easy to coach it. And I'm saying this as a huge Phil Jackson (as a head coach) fan and probably one of the biggest Bulls fans from the Knick fan base.

[nyczlegacy]

Haha, if we drafted Donovan Mitchell he'd be playing on the Shanghai Sharks rn

[DickGrayson]

it doesn't work like that.

they don't draft haliburton if they have mitchell

they don't draft rj if they have porter jr.

teams don't always draft with the same mentality.

If Porter Jr is the best player available, teams will take them. Game goes for Haliburton.

Especially in current NBA where you can have same positions share rotation minutes on the floor.

Hypothetically

Haliburton
Mitchell
Barrett
Porter Jr
Robinson

isn't "impossible".

However, if Mitchell leads the Knicks to the playoffs and we don't have lottery picks. If he doesn't, then there's purpose to drafting guys like Porter Jr or Haliburton if available.



We have Knox and Frank because we're a bad drafting team. A good drafting team would of had Porter Jr, Mitchell and Haliburton, which is the point of the post that you missed.

[frothbrain]

You guys have to understand this team's picks will always under perform relative to the players around their draft spot because management does not develop them. They draft and then sign **** veterans to play the critical development minutes that should be going to them.

Leon Rose is doing the same exact thing Perry and Mills did before him by hiring a washed up, one dimensional coach in Thibodeau.

[WargamesX]

I think the concept of this thread is wrong. It’s not about if we pick Knox or Frank… we should have been worst to get better talent overall. Two of the most talented guys this team ever drafted RJ and KP were top 5 picks. We got lucky of IQ and Mitch, but those drafts the Knicks should have not struggled to win BS games. We would have had better options and likely better players.

[knickabocker88]

They become competent NBA players with other franchises.

Remember Phil wanted to trade KP for Tatum or Booker and this board and the city had a meltdown.