RealGM 2017 Fan Forum Mock Draft - NYK #8

[hundreth]

Oh come on. That "We're not going to be there" refers to a championship (see the next sentence).



? So what is the point of signing 30+ veterans to large contracts for? To spend money? What is NOah for? What is Lee for? What is Lance Thomas for? What was trading for Rose, Calderon, etc. for?



He's still got plenty of time to do that. He's already fired the guy that was supposed to be tailing KP and making sure he does what he needs to do.

You're gravely misconstruing the comment in order to fit your narrative that Phil is inept, and doesn't know what he is doing. Saying he hopes to make the playoffs is not the same thing as trying to win now. He's said on many occasions that he's trying to find the right type of player. That player might be Monk, and he might draft him, but it won't be because he's trying to win now.

So Jackson didn't make all those moves he has made? What narrative? Am I going to wake up tomorrow and find that Noah was signed to a 3 year $24 million contract? Why don't you actually answer why Jackson has made the moves he's made? This includes giving Carmelo Anthony that ludicrous NTC? If his goal wasn't to win then he's even worse than he already is. At least you can argue that those moves (at the time) made sense in an attempt to win.

What I've listed is either what Jackson said or what Jackson has done. You on the other hand is telling me that I'm misconstruing what he said because he actually doesn't mean what he said (because somehow you know better what he actually means?)...and apparently doesn't mean what he's done either since you've skipped that. Usually...what a person does, is a pretty good indication of what he's trying to do. In Jackson's case, he's been trying to win since he got hired. What would change that all of a sudden?

You're the one with the narrative. Literally. You are telling me that he didn't mean what he said and that I should instead interpret to fit him favorably.

Not getting into your debate, but just commenting on a few things. Finding players for Melo to make one last run with a team built around him in Rose and Noah doesn't necessarily mean Phil has the same plan for this year and the future. Circumstances change, you can't assume Phil is stuck on the same plan as last summer.

It's pretty clear the Melo / Rose / Noah experiment failed and we adjusted as a franchise mid season and went into tank mode. Phil was hoping Rose could recapture his brilliance here and alongside Melo take us into the playoffs where KP builds some playoff experience and the team builds a winning culture now. If this happened, it's likely Phil would have continued building around this core. Fortunately or unfortunately, this core wasn't able to do it - and we're geared towards building a young nucleus for the future.

[hundreth]

To answer the thread question, I'm very slightly leaning towards Frank.

It's tough, because Monk is a known commodity and will help us win games now. He's going to be good. Unfortunately his physical tools and gunner style limit his upside tremendously. Frank on the other hand is a complete question mark.

I believe Frank is the better pick because his floor could easily be a 3+D guard based on his physical tools alone. Even if he doesn't develop into a competent PG, lengthy 3+D guards are always in demand in this league - even years down the road. If we suck this year with Frank, we'll get another pick to add to our core and continue forward. Frank will continue to have trade value for his defense and shooting, European fundamentals and unselfishness.

On the other hand, if we pick Monk we might get a fringe all star gunner who carries us to just a good enough record to miss the playoffs. If Monk doesn't become a star, we are in treadmill territory. By the time we realize he isn't becoming a star, his athleticism will start to fade and his physical tools / gunner reputation will start to show up. His trade value will go down, and we will essentially be left with nothing.

I'd love to have both though, I think they would compliment each other really nicely.

[DaGawd]

To answer the thread question, I'm very slightly leaning towards Frank.

It's tough, because Monk is a known commodity and will help us win games now. He's going to be good. Unfortunately his physical tools and gunner style limit his upside tremendously. Frank on the other hand is a complete question mark.

I believe Frank is the better pick because his floor could easily be a 3+D guard based on his physical tools alone. Even if he doesn't develop into a competent PG, lengthy 3+D guards are always in demand in this league - even years down the road. If we suck this year with Frank, we'll get another pick to add to our core and continue forward. Frank will continue to have trade value for his defense and shooting, European fundamentals and unselfishness.

On the other hand, if we pick Monk we might get a fringe all star gunner who carries us to just a good enough record to miss the playoffs. If Monk doesn't become a star, we are in treadmill territory. By the time we realize he isn't becoming a star, his athleticism will start to fade and his physical tools / gunner reputation will start to show up. His trade value will go down, and we will essentially be left with nothing.

I'd love to have both though, I think they would compliment each other really nicely.

Or Monk could turn out to be the next Klay, McCollum or Steph Curry and we'd be left sitting with our dick in our hands again...

[hundreth]

To answer the thread question, I'm very slightly leaning towards Frank.

It's tough, because Monk is a known commodity and will help us win games now. He's going to be good. Unfortunately his physical tools and gunner style limit his upside tremendously. Frank on the other hand is a complete question mark.

I believe Frank is the better pick because his floor could easily be a 3+D guard based on his physical tools alone. Even if he doesn't develop into a competent PG, lengthy 3+D guards are always in demand in this league - even years down the road. If we suck this year with Frank, we'll get another pick to add to our core and continue forward. Frank will continue to have trade value for his defense and shooting, European fundamentals and unselfishness.

On the other hand, if we pick Monk we might get a fringe all star gunner who carries us to just a good enough record to miss the playoffs. If Monk doesn't become a star, we are in treadmill territory. By the time we realize he isn't becoming a star, his athleticism will start to fade and his physical tools / gunner reputation will start to show up. His trade value will go down, and we will essentially be left with nothing.

I'd love to have both though, I think they would compliment each other really nicely.

Or Monk could turn out to be the next Klay, McCollum or Steph Curry and we'd be left sitting with our dick in our hands again...

Steph is Steph because of his IQ. Klay is Klay because of his physical tools and defense. McCollum is... nothing special.

What makes Monk special aside from his ability to take and make tough shots? Also, we wouldn't be left sitting with our dick in our hands, we'd be left with a tall guard who can shoot and defend, and most likely another top pick next year.

[DaGawd]

To answer the thread question, I'm very slightly leaning towards Frank.

It's tough, because Monk is a known commodity and will help us win games now. He's going to be good. Unfortunately his physical tools and gunner style limit his upside tremendously. Frank on the other hand is a complete question mark.

I believe Frank is the better pick because his floor could easily be a 3+D guard based on his physical tools alone. Even if he doesn't develop into a competent PG, lengthy 3+D guards are always in demand in this league - even years down the road. If we suck this year with Frank, we'll get another pick to add to our core and continue forward. Frank will continue to have trade value for his defense and shooting, European fundamentals and unselfishness.

On the other hand, if we pick Monk we might get a fringe all star gunner who carries us to just a good enough record to miss the playoffs. If Monk doesn't become a star, we are in treadmill territory. By the time we realize he isn't becoming a star, his athleticism will start to fade and his physical tools / gunner reputation will start to show up. His trade value will go down, and we will essentially be left with nothing.

I'd love to have both though, I think they would compliment each other really nicely.

Or Monk could turn out to be the next Klay, McCollum or Steph Curry and we'd be left sitting with our dick in our hands again...

Steph is Steph because of his IQ. Klay is Klay because of his physical tools and defense. McCollum is... nothing special.

What makes Monk special aside from his ability to take and make tough shots? Also, we wouldn't be left sitting with our dick in our hands, we'd be left with a tall guard who can shoot and defend, and most likely another top pick next year.

More like Steph is Steph because of his shooting ability...and handle (Something Monk doesnt have yet but who knows if he could develop it). Monk also has ELITE athleticism. I feel like he has the potential to be a big time player in the NBA if he can develop some PG instincts. Time will tell tho. Not sold on Frank at all, but we will see with him also

[moocow007]

You're gravely misconstruing the comment in order to fit your narrative that Phil is inept, and doesn't know what he is doing. Saying he hopes to make the playoffs is not the same thing as trying to win now. He's said on many occasions that he's trying to find the right type of player. That player might be Monk, and he might draft him, but it won't be because he's trying to win now.

So Jackson didn't make all those moves he has made? What narrative? Am I going to wake up tomorrow and find that Noah was signed to a 3 year $24 million contract? Why don't you actually answer why Jackson has made the moves he's made? This includes giving Carmelo Anthony that ludicrous NTC? If his goal wasn't to win then he's even worse than he already is. At least you can argue that those moves (at the time) made sense in an attempt to win.

What I've listed is either what Jackson said or what Jackson has done. You on the other hand is telling me that I'm misconstruing what he said because he actually doesn't mean what he said (because somehow you know better what he actually means?)...and apparently doesn't mean what he's done either since you've skipped that. Usually...what a person does, is a pretty good indication of what he's trying to do. In Jackson's case, he's been trying to win since he got hired. What would change that all of a sudden?

You're the one with the narrative. Literally. You are telling me that he didn't mean what he said and that I should instead interpret to fit him favorably.

Not getting into your debate, but just commenting on a few things. Finding players for Melo to make one last run with a team built around him in Rose and Noah doesn't necessarily mean Phil has the same plan for this year and the future. Circumstances change, you can't assume Phil is stuck on the same plan as last summer.

It's pretty clear the Melo / Rose / Noah experiment failed and we adjusted as a franchise mid season and went into tank mode. Phil was hoping Rose could recapture his brilliance here and alongside Melo take us into the playoffs where KP builds some playoff experience and the team builds a winning culture now. If this happened, it's likely Phil would have continued building around this core. Fortunately or unfortunately, this core wasn't able to do it - and we're geared towards building a young nucleus for the future.

No problem on the getting in...that's what this board is for.

But...what makes you think Jackson went into tank mode midseason? The fact that the Knicks sucked doesn't mean that the tank was on. Rather it just meant the Knicks sucked. Playing the younger guys? Did they really have much choice? Porzingis was injured and there was no reason to risk rushing him back in what clearly was another failure of a season. Noah was well done by then. Rose was injured. Anthony was hobbling. Jennings wanted out. Thomas was injured. That's 6 out of the 9 or 10 guys that were projected to be part of the rotation.

What indication is there that Jackson has changed direction? He mentioned looking to sign defensive minded veterans in the offseason well after it was clear this team was toast. He mentioned (and I quoted) that the team could make the playoffs next year (this team, the crap team). Could he? Sure. But nothing he's said or done indicates that. And in lieu of any redress you go with what he clearly has been trying to do since he got here...he's trying to win.

What you are saying is what he should do and what I'd imagine most sane Knick fans hope he does, but he's shown no indication of doing it...or even knowing how to go about rebuilding (see last 3 years).

[TheDavinciCHODE]

Why is everyone so high on Monk when there have been so few good players with his skill set and dimensions.

He isn't a playmaker
Has no defensive upside
Doesn't contribute when he isn't scoring

What makes people think he won't be monta ellis?

The league is phasing these guys out. Not saying he's going to be bad or anything, he's definitely going to be at least a solid scorer in the NBA and probably much more, but in terms of a guy you want to be one of your franchise cornerstones? I really don't see it.

Which players like Monk have been successful in the nba recently?

A small 2 guard who only scores and is valuable with the ball in his hands and doesn't play defense or make plays.....?

Which current nba players are successful in this way?

Who's a more valuable player. George Hill or Jamal Crawford? Would you rather have Jrue Holiday or Monte Ellis?

Ideally, I'd like to get Issac or Smith since Smith at least has legit superstar upside, but if it came down to these two guys, It's gotta be ntilikina

Even though Monk clearly has great scoring potential, I don't see him being a star NBA player. It's just so hard when you don't have other translatable skills and are so undersized. Kemba Walker is literally the ceiling on him and that's a long shot.

[GONYK]

Why is everyone so high on Monk when there have been so few good players with his skill set and dimensions.

He isn't a playmaker
Has no defensive upside
Doesn't contribute when he isn't scoring

What makes people think he won't be monta ellis?

The league is phasing these guys out. Not saying he's going to be bad or anything, he's definitely going to be at least a solid scorer in the NBA and probably much more, but in terms of a guy you want to be one of your franchise cornerstones? I really don't see it.

Which players like Monk have been successful in the nba recently?

A small 2 guard who only scores and is valuable with the ball in his hands and doesn't play defense or make plays.....?

Which current nba players are successful in this way?

Who's a more valuable player. George Hill or Jamal Crawford? Would you rather have Jrue Holiday or Monte Ellis?

Ideally, I'd like to get Issac or Smith since Smith at least has legit superstar upside, but if it came down to these two guys, It's gotta be ntilikina

Even though Monk clearly has great scoring potential, I don't see him being a star NBA player. It's just so hard when you don't have other translatable skills and are so undersized. Kemba Walker is literally the ceiling on him and that's a long shot.

I don't think anyone outside of Fultz will be a franchise cornerstone in this draft.

Monk does have all of those downsides, but he is the best shooter in the top 10 by a mile, and that is being emphasized in the league now more than ever.

He may be another Monta Ellis type, but that is pretty good value for the 8th pick in the draft. Not saying I definitely want him to be the pick, but let's not act like a suped up JJ Reddick doesn't have value in the league.

[Mecca]

To answer the thread question, I'm very slightly leaning towards Frank.

It's tough, because Monk is a known commodity and will help us win games now. He's going to be good. Unfortunately his physical tools and gunner style limit his upside tremendously. Frank on the other hand is a complete question mark.

I believe Frank is the better pick because his floor could easily be a 3+D guard based on his physical tools alone. Even if he doesn't develop into a competent PG, lengthy 3+D guards are always in demand in this league - even years down the road. If we suck this year with Frank, we'll get another pick to add to our core and continue forward. Frank will continue to have trade value for his defense and shooting, European fundamentals and unselfishness.

On the other hand, if we pick Monk we might get a fringe all star gunner who carries us to just a good enough record to miss the playoffs. If Monk doesn't become a star, we are in treadmill territory. By the time we realize he isn't becoming a star, his athleticism will start to fade and his physical tools / gunner reputation will start to show up. His trade value will go down, and we will essentially be left with nothing.

I'd love to have both though, I think they would compliment each other really nicely.

Or Monk could turn out to be the next Klay, McCollum or Steph Curry and we'd be left sitting with our dick in our hands again...

Steph is Steph because of his IQ. Klay is Klay because of his physical tools and defense. McCollum is... nothing special.

What makes Monk special aside from his ability to take and make tough shots? Also, we wouldn't be left sitting with our dick in our hands, we'd be left with a tall guard who can shoot and defend, and most likely another top pick next year.

[HarthorneWingo]

To answer the thread question, I'm very slightly leaning towards Frank.

It's tough, because Monk is a known commodity and will help us win games now. He's going to be good. Unfortunately his physical tools and gunner style limit his upside tremendously. Frank on the other hand is a complete question mark.

I believe Frank is the better pick because his floor could easily be a 3+D guard based on his physical tools alone. Even if he doesn't develop into a competent PG, lengthy 3+D guards are always in demand in this league - even years down the road. If we suck this year with Frank, we'll get another pick to add to our core and continue forward. Frank will continue to have trade value for his defense and shooting, European fundamentals and unselfishness.

On the other hand, if we pick Monk we might get a fringe all star gunner who carries us to just a good enough record to miss the playoffs. If Monk doesn't become a star, we are in treadmill territory. By the time we realize he isn't becoming a star, his athleticism will start to fade and his physical tools / gunner reputation will start to show up. His trade value will go down, and we will essentially be left with nothing.

I'd love to have both though, I think they would compliment each other really nicely.

Or Monk could turn out to be the next Klay, McCollum or Steph Curry and we'd be left sitting with our dick in our hands again...

You're dreaming.

CJ McCallum (SG) - 6'4" with 7' wingospan

Klay Thompson (SG) - 6'7" with 7' wingospan

Monk (SG) - 6'3" with 6'3.5" wingospan

Please.

Steph Curry? "The next Steph Curry"? Monk's not even a PG he has no handle like Curry and forget about the court vision and passing aspect of Curry's game. None of it, not even in the same league. Bobby Knight said that Curry was the best passer he's ever seen before that draft.

[DaGawd]

To answer the thread question, I'm very slightly leaning towards Frank.

It's tough, because Monk is a known commodity and will help us win games now. He's going to be good. Unfortunately his physical tools and gunner style limit his upside tremendously. Frank on the other hand is a complete question mark.

I believe Frank is the better pick because his floor could easily be a 3+D guard based on his physical tools alone. Even if he doesn't develop into a competent PG, lengthy 3+D guards are always in demand in this league - even years down the road. If we suck this year with Frank, we'll get another pick to add to our core and continue forward. Frank will continue to have trade value for his defense and shooting, European fundamentals and unselfishness.

On the other hand, if we pick Monk we might get a fringe all star gunner who carries us to just a good enough record to miss the playoffs. If Monk doesn't become a star, we are in treadmill territory. By the time we realize he isn't becoming a star, his athleticism will start to fade and his physical tools / gunner reputation will start to show up. His trade value will go down, and we will essentially be left with nothing.

I'd love to have both though, I think they would compliment each other really nicely.

Or Monk could turn out to be the next Klay, McCollum or Steph Curry and we'd be left sitting with our dick in our hands again...

You're dreaming.

CJ McCallum (SG) - 6'4" with 7' wingospan

Klay Thompson (SG) - 6'7" with 7' wingospan

Monk (SG) - 6'3" with 6'3.5" wingospan

Please.

Steph Curry? "The next Steph Curry"? Monk's not even a PG he has no handle like Curry and forget about the court vision and passing aspect of Curry's game. None of it, not even in the same league. Bobby Knight said that Curry was the best passer he's ever seen before that draft.

Y'all killing me with this wing span stuff man

[NY2TheBay]

Y'all killing me with this wing span stuff man

Preach!

[3toheadmelo]

Or Monk could turn out to be the next Klay, McCollum or Steph Curry and we'd be left sitting with our dick in our hands again...

You're dreaming.

CJ McCallum (SG) - 6'4" with 7' wingospan

Klay Thompson (SG) - 6'7" with 7' wingospan

Monk (SG) - 6'3" with 6'3.5" wingospan

Please.

Steph Curry? "The next Steph Curry"? Monk's not even a PG he has no handle like Curry and forget about the court vision and passing aspect of Curry's game. None of it, not even in the same league. Bobby Knight said that Curry was the best passer he's ever seen before that draft.

Y'all killing me with this wing span stuff man

it's like talent doesn't even matter anymore, only wingspan does

[DaGawd]

You're dreaming.

CJ McCallum (SG) - 6'4" with 7' wingospan

Klay Thompson (SG) - 6'7" with 7' wingospan

Monk (SG) - 6'3" with 6'3.5" wingospan

Please.

Steph Curry? "The next Steph Curry"? Monk's not even a PG he has no handle like Curry and forget about the court vision and passing aspect of Curry's game. None of it, not even in the same league. Bobby Knight said that Curry was the best passer he's ever seen before that draft.

Y'all killing me with this wing span stuff man

it's like talent doesn't even matter anymore, only wingspan does

Dead ass lol

[alphad0gz]

To answer the thread question, I'm very slightly leaning towards Frank.

It's tough, because Monk is a known commodity and will help us win games now. He's going to be good. Unfortunately his physical tools and gunner style limit his upside tremendously. Frank on the other hand is a complete question mark.

I believe Frank is the better pick because his floor could easily be a 3+D guard based on his physical tools alone. Even if he doesn't develop into a competent PG, lengthy 3+D guards are always in demand in this league - even years down the road. If we suck this year with Frank, we'll get another pick to add to our core and continue forward. Frank will continue to have trade value for his defense and shooting, European fundamentals and unselfishness.

On the other hand, if we pick Monk we might get a fringe all star gunner who carries us to just a good enough record to miss the playoffs. If Monk doesn't become a star, we are in treadmill territory. By the time we realize he isn't becoming a star, his athleticism will start to fade and his physical tools / gunner reputation will start to show up. His trade value will go down, and we will essentially be left with nothing.

I'd love to have both though, I think they would compliment each other really nicely.

Or Monk could turn out to be the next Klay, McCollum or Steph Curry and we'd be left sitting with our dick in our hands again...

You're dreaming.

CJ McCallum (SG) - 6'4" with 7' wingospan

Klay Thompson (SG) - 6'7" with 7' wingospan

Monk (SG) - 6'3" with 6'3.5" wingospan

Please.

Steph Curry? "The next Steph Curry"? Monk's not even a PG he has no handle like Curry and forget about the court vision and passing aspect of Curry's game. None of it, not even in the same league. Bobby Knight said that Curry was the best passer he's ever seen before that draft.

In a response centered around wingspan, you conveniently left out Curry's 6' wingspan....under square by 3 inches. It hasn't hampered ANY part of his game. Wingspan is just the cherry on top, not the whole sundae.

[alphad0gz]

Saying a prospect has an enormous top side scares me. It generally means he hasn't developed very far at this point. This is true with Frank. We don't know that anything other than his size will translate to the NBA. He is very inconsistent as a shooter (streaky) and despite his reputation in a lower level Euro league as a good defender, it remains to be seen if he can stay in front of NBA talent guards. Everything else, and I mean everything is projection based on ......well hope. I would not be shocked to see him drop out of the top 10, at least.

[hundreth]

So Jackson didn't make all those moves he has made? What narrative? Am I going to wake up tomorrow and find that Noah was signed to a 3 year $24 million contract? Why don't you actually answer why Jackson has made the moves he's made? This includes giving Carmelo Anthony that ludicrous NTC? If his goal wasn't to win then he's even worse than he already is. At least you can argue that those moves (at the time) made sense in an attempt to win.

What I've listed is either what Jackson said or what Jackson has done. You on the other hand is telling me that I'm misconstruing what he said because he actually doesn't mean what he said (because somehow you know better what he actually means?)...and apparently doesn't mean what he's done either since you've skipped that. Usually...what a person does, is a pretty good indication of what he's trying to do. In Jackson's case, he's been trying to win since he got hired. What would change that all of a sudden?

You're the one with the narrative. Literally. You are telling me that he didn't mean what he said and that I should instead interpret to fit him favorably.

Not getting into your debate, but just commenting on a few things. Finding players for Melo to make one last run with a team built around him in Rose and Noah doesn't necessarily mean Phil has the same plan for this year and the future. Circumstances change, you can't assume Phil is stuck on the same plan as last summer.

It's pretty clear the Melo / Rose / Noah experiment failed and we adjusted as a franchise mid season and went into tank mode. Phil was hoping Rose could recapture his brilliance here and alongside Melo take us into the playoffs where KP builds some playoff experience and the team builds a winning culture now. If this happened, it's likely Phil would have continued building around this core. Fortunately or unfortunately, this core wasn't able to do it - and we're geared towards building a young nucleus for the future.

No problem on the getting in...that's what this board is for.

But...what makes you think Jackson went into tank mode midseason? The fact that the Knicks sucked doesn't mean that the tank was on. Rather it just meant the Knicks sucked. Playing the younger guys? Did they really have much choice? Porzingis was injured and there was no reason to risk rushing him back in what clearly was another failure of a season. Noah was well done by then. Rose was injured. Anthony was hobbling. Jennings wanted out. Thomas was injured. That's 6 out of the 9 or 10 guys that were projected to be part of the rotation.

What indication is there that Jackson has changed direction? He mentioned looking to sign defensive minded veterans in the offseason well after it was clear this team was toast. He mentioned (and I quoted) that the team could make the playoffs next year (this team, the crap team). Could he? Sure. But nothing he's said or done indicates that. And in lieu of any redress you go with what he clearly has been trying to do since he got here...he's trying to win.

What you are saying is what he should do and what I'd imagine most sane Knick fans hope he does, but he's shown no indication of doing it...or even knowing how to go about rebuilding (see last 3 years).

What makes me think Jackson changed direction? Very simple. You don't publicly belittle your best player in front of the media if you're in win now mode. Phil has flat out said we aren't in win now mode and he hopes Carmelo leaves to a team where he can win - which is not us.

“We’ve not been able to win with him on the court at this time. I think the direction with our team is that he is a player that would be better off somewhere else and using his talents somewhere where he can win or chase that championship,” Jackson said. “Right now we need players that are really active, can play every single play defensively and offensively. That’s really important for us. We’re starting to get some players on the court we can do that. That’s the direction we have to go.”

We'd like him to have success,"Jackson said of Carmelo Anthony, per ESPN. "The opportunity is narrowing. We'd just like him to have success somewhere. We're not going to be there. Hopefully, we'll be maybe a playoff team next year. It would be tough to consider us a possible champion."

What left is there to decipher?

[kane2021]

The hype on this French kid is laughable. Take any other top pg prospect in this draft and put him against that competition. They'd whip those dudes into pancake batter. Yet this kid is a reserve putting up Ron baker numbers.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[nykballa2k4]

Saying a prospect has an enormous top side scares me. It generally means he hasn't developed very far at this point. This is true with Frank. We don't know that anything other than his size will translate to the NBA. He is very inconsistent as a shooter (streaky) and despite his reputation in a lower level Euro league as a good defender, it remains to be seen if he can stay in front of NBA talent guards. Everything else, and I mean everything is projection based on ......well hope. I would not be shocked to see him drop out of the top 10, at least.

I actually trust the Knicks scouting crew. If they say that Frank is the real deal, then that's trustworthy. They may work out Monk and Frank together. Ultimately, I agree, the whole hype of upside is usually about a 20-80 thing where there will be 2 players who hit and 8 who miss.
Overall, Curry was an unlikely star (that's why he was so likable). I don't think we should be hoping that lightening strikes twice.

[BeagleBoss]

Monk

Sent from my SM-G930V using RealGM mobile app