Brandon Knight Needs to be Traded ASAP

[lilfishi22]

Would much rather have I.T. aka MIGHTY MOUSE, AKA EAST ALLSTAR!!!

At his price point and production, I'd agree. IT had a sort of confidence and swag that Knight have always seemed to lack. There are spurts of confidence from Knight when he's hitting shots but when he's not, you can see it in his body language. IT never really had that issue and that's part of the reason why he's been so good despite being 5'10

[MrMiyagi]

I swear, everyone's complaints of Knight are being amplified by not really watching the rest of the league - as in sitting down and watching multiple full games of a team/player. Everyone is really making their opinions on highlights and lowlights in order to assert untrue claims. Every player has their problems, not just Knight.

Don't believe me? Here's the spectacular Klay Thompson, a guy everyone would probably trade Knight for hands down. Guess what happens when Steph isn't there?

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=As1x66KPhsM[/youtube]

But that's fine, Klay isn't a great ball-handler or passer, he's more of a shooter and no one is a better shooter than Klay except Steph. Fine. Is that what this whole thing with Knight is about? Not being clear-cut #1 at some skill? Because he's pretty good at a lot of things - dare I say some more than Klay - but we don't want pretty good at a lot of things, we want excellent at 1.

Infallible reasoning. A+. If Knight maybe grew another 4 inches to be a prototypical SG, could learn to guard his own shadow and became an elite marksmen from beyond the mark (over 40%) on a expanded clip then maybe you have an argument

That's the issue isn't it? He's not the prototype. Prototypes are always good, always right. Infallible. Give me any prototypical players in the history of the NBA and I'll show you a great player. Is that it? No, it's the other way around isn't it, all great players were prototypes, though, right? Charles Barkley was a prototype. Kevin Durant is a prototype. Shaq was a prototype. Lebron is a prototype. Magic was a prototype. Kareem was a prototype. Dirk is a prototype. Jason Kidd was a prototype.

But those were all different. Knight obviously isn't anywhere near those guys' talent level. Is that really it, or has no one utilized Brandon Knight in the way he needs to be utilized? Who has Knight had on his team that makes you think "That team should've been in the playoffs if it weren't for Knight!"? The answer is none of them. And yet it's his fault for not finding a way to drag terrible teams to the playoffs or to a 30+ win season at least.

And this isn't even to mention everyone bitching at McD for the roster turnover but we demand that he turn the roster over more..... It's flat out stupid.

[MrMiyagi]

More proof that Thompson has flaws. viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1392485#start_here

And I'm really not trying to hate on Klay, he's a good player, but people around here look at the rest of the league and see perfect players who will fix everything but that isn't the case.

[lilfishi22]

The only things I like about Klay is that he's a fantastic catch and shoot player who doesn't hesitate and he's also a a fairly cerebral player. In saying that, I still think he's a good fit on the Suns, in the same way Booker has been a great fit for us so far.

Not saying we should trade for him or anything.

[GMATCallahan]

That's the issue isn't it? He's not the prototype. Prototypes are always good, always right. Infallible. Give me any prototypical players in the history of the NBA and I'll show you a great player. Is that it? No, it's the other way around isn't it, all great players were prototypes, though, right? Charles Barkley was a prototype. Kevin Durant is a prototype. Shaq was a prototype. Lebron is a prototype. Magic was a prototype. Kareem was a prototype. Dirk is a prototype. Jason Kidd was a prototype.

But those were all different. Knight obviously isn't anywhere near those guys' talent level. Is that really it, or has no one utilized Brandon Knight in the way he needs to be utilized? Who has Knight had on his team that makes you think "That team should've been in the playoffs if it weren't for Knight!"? The answer is none of them. And yet it's his fault for not finding a way to drag terrible teams to the playoffs or to a 30+ win season at least.

And this isn't even to mention everyone bitching at McD for the roster turnover but we demand that he turn the roster over more..... It's flat out stupid.

Since gauging tone can be difficult on the Internet, is the part in bold facetious or fully serious? Because some of those players indeed constituted "prototypes," more or less, and some definitely did not.

[bwgood77]

Infallible reasoning. A+. If Knight maybe grew another 4 inches to be a prototypical SG, could learn to guard his own shadow and became an elite marksmen from beyond the mark (over 40%) on a expanded clip then maybe you have an argument.
That's the issue isn't it? He's not the prototype. Prototypes are always good, always right. Infallible. Give me any prototypical players in the history of the NBA and I'll show you a great player. Is that it? No, it's the other way around isn't it, all great players were prototypes, though, right? Charles Barkley was a prototype. Kevin Durant is a prototype. Shaq was a prototype. Lebron is a prototype. Magic was a prototype. Kareem was a prototype. Dirk is a prototype. Jason Kidd was a prototype.

But those were all different. Knight obviously isn't anywhere near those guys' talent level. Is that really it, or has no one utilized Brandon Knight in the way he needs to be utilized? Who has Knight had on his team that makes you think "That team should've been in the playoffs if it weren't for Knight!"? The answer is none of them. And yet it's his fault for not finding a way to drag terrible teams to the playoffs or to a 30+ win season at least.

And this isn't even to mention everyone bitching at McD for the roster turnover but we demand that he turn the roster over more..... It's flat out stupid.

Since gauging tone can be difficult on the Internet, is the part in bold facetious or fully serious?

Well he's been missing for a while, but based on history, facetious. Many of his posts used to be in green, until people complained about that. Knowing his view on things, facetious.

[GMATCallahan]

Well he's been missing for a while, but based on history, facetious. Many of his posts used to be in green, until people complained about that. Knowing his view on things, facetious.

... because the thing is, Kareem and Shaq would qualify as "prototypical" centers, and Jason Kidd would be a prototypical, if antiquated, point guard ...

[Jsbath]

I want

Knight + leuer x schorroeder + splitter

Schorroeder is really pg a great director and have iq


Enviado desde mi iPhone utilizando Tapatalk

[bwgood77]

Well he's been missing for a while, but based on history, facetious. Many of his posts used to be in green, until people complained about that. Knowing his view on things, facetious.

... because the thing is, Kareem and Shaq would qualify as "prototypical" centers, and Jason Kidd would be a prototypical, if antiquated, point guard ...

Yeah, I don't know....because most of the other guys are not really prototypical. His point may have been some are, some are not.

I haven't really been a fan of Knight, particularly as a primary ball handler. Between his bone headed turnovers to cost us some games at the end (and just turnovers in general) and hoisting up bad shots instead of making his primary goal to set up others.

Honestly I think part of the problem with players like Knight (and perhaps Bledsoe to an extent) is that they grew up idolizing Kobe, and not many players can play like that, and you shouldn't play like that if you are surrounded by better shooters, or at least have other good shooters and scorers. And he is SO streaky, it's frightening.

I think he makes a pretty good 2 next to Bledsoe, but then you'd have to play Booker at 3 and Warren at 4? I don't think that works. at least not yet, and Knight/Bledsoe would take 70% of the shots and waste the younger guys.

The problem with making him 6th man is, I still don't like him as a primary ball handler, but perhaps he is much better against backups. It's just tough to know what is the RIGHT role for him.

[bwgood77]

I want

Knight + leuer x schorroeder + splitter

Schorroeder is really pg a great director and have iq


Enviado desde mi iPhone utilizando Tapatalk

Knight for Schroeder makes sense, but I'd rather not add in Leuer. He expires anyway and I'd like to re-sign him. Don't really think we need Splitter either unless we trade Chandler.

[GMATCallahan]

I think overall, he might end up the 'smarter' and more 'efficient' player, and better shooter, but he'll never be the defender, or driver Bledsoe is. Right now, though, he's just not playing smart, and is incredibly inconsistent.

If you were to ask me today, which one I'd rather move forward with, I'd probably say Knight. Problem is, you know what you are getting with Bledsoe right now, whereas Knight, we don't. The whole 'devil you know, devil you don't know' question. And Knight does have a bit more length, though Bledsoe is longer than your standard 6'1" PG, so either, or neither, are ok in that respect for a PG, but I agree that playing both at the same time is not optimal, and would love to see more of the Knight/Booker backcourt develop together. I know many feel Knight is a better 2 than 1, but if that's the case, then I'd rather keep Bledsoe, so that we can keep Booker on the court more often.

The reason why one might considering moving forward with Knight instead of Bledsoe, in my opinion, is the latter's knees, combined with the fact that he is two years older.

I doubt that Knight will end up being more efficient than Bledsoe or that either guard will advance much further than where he is now. More or less, they "are what they are." If they can become more refined versions of themselves, though, and if the Suns can acquire a multidimensional forward with excellent passing ability, Phoenix can become a respectable club with them. If not, then you might as well try to win a championship with a young Stephon Marbury—who, incidentally, constituted a much better playmaker than either Bledsoe or Knight.

I honestly believe Warren can be that multidimensional SF, and unless we get a better option in the next month, Leuer, if given the time and patience, may be able to perform that as a 'poor-man's version of [insert name here]'.

But if we want to compete, we are going to need an upgrade at PF, I believe. And yes, this is 'box-score scouting', but a 6'10", 240 averaging a per36, 15.5/10 stat line (true: 9/6 stat line on 21 minutes) and EFG .551 and 3PT of 43.3%, is not a bad 'filler' until such time we can get that 'star'.

I agree that Leuer is not bad as "filler" yet that the Suns will need an upgrade at power forward. But Warren is not the passing or creative forward that the Suns need. He is a potentially useful scoring specialist who will primarily play off others, and Phoenix is going to need something more at forward—whether at power forward or small forward. The Suns are going to need someone who makes the game easier for others—including Bledsoe and Knight.

[Jsbath]

I want

Knight + leuer x schorroeder + splitter

Schorroeder is really pg a great director and have iq


Enviado desde mi iPhone utilizando Tapatalk

Knight for Schroeder makes sense, but I'd rather not add in Leuer. He expires anyway and I'd like to re-sign him. Don't really think we need Splitter either unless we trade Chandler.

Splitter is only for make the traspase and then is posible traspase he

Sorry for my poor english I write from spain


Enviado desde mi iPhone utilizando Tapatalk

[MrMiyagi]

Well he's been missing for a while, but based on history, facetious. Many of his posts used to be in green, until people complained about that. Knowing his view on things, facetious.

... because the thing is, Kareem and Shaq would qualify as "prototypical" centers, and Jason Kidd would be a prototypical, if antiquated, point guard ...

Kareem was an insanely good passer - a quality generally not listed for "prototypical" centers, making him unique. Shaq at the beginning of his career was so athletically on another planet that you can't say you want a guy like Shaq at center because you're never going to see another Shaq. Jason Kidd was a point guard who couldn't shoot and rebounded like no other 6'4 guy.

Although you can say they meet the standard mold for their position - Shaq and Kareem being 7 footers who play down low, rebound and block shots, Kidd being a small ballhandler who set up teammates - they all do things that are not expected of their positions, especially for the time they entered the league.

I think people mistake the word "prototype" with "ideal". Shaq and Kareem are IDEAL centers, Jason Kidd is an IDEAL point guard, they are not prototypical.

When you make a prototype you are meeting a certain set of standards. A prototype airplane needs to be able to fly, so it needs wings large enough to support the weight of its building materials. A Cessna 172 is a prototypical airplane. A 747 is not a prototypical airplane, but it's a pretty ideal one.

[MrMiyagi]

It's like a square is a rectangle but a rectangle is not necessarily a square.

[Mulhollanddrive]

Interesting stat:

Brandon Knight has shot over 50%..... 4 times this season.

And he's averaging the same FG% as his career, so that indicates it's not even a bad year.

[Fo-Real]

I cant tell anymore if he is just horrible at running the team, the offense is terrible an cant be ran, or everyone has just given up. So many trips down the court that the ball does not cross the three point line until there is like 4 seconds left on the shot clock. The stupid little step back dribble hand off at the top of the key, and the following swing around the top of the key while the other 3 players stand spread out behind the three point line, only to take a long contested two, with no one down to rebound..... this is like 85 percent of our offense lately. I dont know if we can even blame knight because who knows if they are failing to run any idea of an offense, or if this is what is intended, either way its TERRIBLE!!!

[TASTIC]

Interesting stat:

Brandon Knight has shot over 50%..... 4 times this season.

And he's averaging the same FG% as his career, so that indicates it's not even a bad year.

He needs to work on instead of stepping into a 20 footer, stepping back and making it a three.

I'd be ok with him shooting 42% from the field if he took 7+ 3PT FGA and made 36-38% of them.

Wow didn't realise he leads the entire NBA in minutes played!?!

[AtheJ415]

Interesting stat:

Brandon Knight has shot over 50%..... 4 times this season.

And he's averaging the same FG% as his career, so that indicates it's not even a bad year.

It does though, because FG% is a bad number. Effective FG% and TS% are both better. His 3 point shooting is down, which is huge because of how many he takes. The reason his career FG% is low, is because he takes a ton of 3s. 3s have more value than a typical FG, which is a 2 (33% on 3s = 50% on 2s).

If your expectation for any guy who shoots that many 3s is to shoot over 50%, then he'd have to be Steph Curry or Steve Nash. Nobody else is capable of that.

Knight on the year is shooting better from 2, but worse from 3, but either way we are losing that tradeoff because we would rather have him at 36%+ from 3.

[AtheJ415]

Interesting stat:

Brandon Knight has shot over 50%..... 4 times this season.

And he's averaging the same FG% as his career, so that indicates it's not even a bad year.

He needs to work on instead of stepping into a 20 footer, stepping back and making it a three.

I'd be ok with him shooting 42% from the field if he took 7+ 3PT FGA and made 36-38% of them.

Wow didn't realise he leads the entire NBA in minutes played!?!

Yup. Jeff's doing a truly fantastic job of getting him to improve his shot selection and discipline.

[GMATCallahan]

Well he's been missing for a while, but based on history, facetious. Many of his posts used to be in green, until people complained about that. Knowing his view on things, facetious.

... because the thing is, Kareem and Shaq would qualify as "prototypical" centers, and Jason Kidd would be a prototypical, if antiquated, point guard ...

Yeah, I don't know....because most of the other guys are not really prototypical. His point may have been some are, some are not.

I haven't really been a fan of Knight, particularly as a primary ball handler. Between his bone headed turnovers to cost us some games at the end (and just turnovers in general) and hoisting up bad shots instead of making his primary goal to set up others.

Honestly I think part of the problem with players like Knight (and perhaps Bledsoe to an extent) is that they grew up idolizing Kobe, and not many players can play like that, and you shouldn't play like that if you are surrounded by better shooters, or at least have other good shooters and scorers. And he is SO streaky, it's frightening.

I think he makes a pretty good 2 next to Bledsoe, but then you'd have to play Booker at 3 and Warren at 4? I don't think that works. at least not yet, and Knight/Bledsoe would take 70% of the shots and waste the younger guys.

The problem with making him 6th man is, I still don't like him as a primary ball handler, but perhaps he is much better against backups. It's just tough to know what is the RIGHT role for him.

... funny, after the Sacramento loss, I was going to write that Knight is a mini-poor man's Kobe Bryant as much as he is a point guard. He just settles for too many difficult, low-percentage shots and does not possess the patience, consistent decision-making ability, and passing accuracy to be a worthwhile point guard. He can deliver some good passes, and his court vision is decent enough in my estimation, but he settles for Option A) too often even when Option A) is not a terrific option or the right play to make. And to some extent, Bledsoe is like that too.

And Option A) may be something that is fleeting, or that he may have predetermined, and the result is too many forced shots and forced passes. The greatest offensive point guards, such as Kevin Johnson, Steve Nash, and Chris Paul, rarely predetermine anything. They may possess a general idea of what they ideally want to do, but they keep their options open so that they can make the most efficient play based on how the defense ultimately reacts, kind of like a great hitter in baseball who tracks the ball that extra split-second in order to better determine if he should swing at it. Of course, to be able to do that and hit the ball "deep" in the strike zone with authority, you need excellent bat speed and hands, or the ability to go the other way, and not everyone possesses those attributes. Likewise, a great point guard needs great skill.

You know, there were times when Kevin Johnson was dribbling into space in transition or on the break and knew that he had the jumper if he wanted it, but he did not want to foreclose anything. So occasionally, he would look one way, look the other, maybe even look back to the bench before then shooting the jumper if he nothing better materialized—much like a quarterback in the NFL who knows that he has a certain receiver down the sideline if he wants to take that shot but first checks the "hot routes" to see if he finds something that he likes better, knowing that he still has time to go back to that receiver down the sideline.

But that kind of thing requires a certain level of command and skill, and then we run into the glaring problem of Knight and Bledsoe having both played just one year of college. It shows, and point guards rarely develop that nuance by just going to college for one year. One-and-done "point guards" Kyrie Irving and Derrick Rose lack it too, but at least they possess overwhelming scoring ability (or at least Rose did, even though I consider him one of the most overrated players in NBA history regardless).

How often, for instance, do you see Knight or Bledsoe "reuse" a ball-screen? You know, the defender went under the screen but I want to create, so I am going to reuse the screen in the other direction at a slightly lower or dipping location, this time forcing or encouraging the defender to go over the pick and allowing me to penetrate or find more space for my jumper. Or the defender just got over the screen and did not give me an ideal driving angle, so I am going to reverse-pivot and reuse the screen to the other side. Or I did not like the initial results, and rather than settling or forcing something, I am just going to run the screen/roll again. Or I am going to move the ball a little, get a teammate a touch, and then get it back and try the play again, this time with some better spacing. Or before running it, I am going to start at an angle, pivot away from the screen to create misdirection and throw the defender off, and then come off the pick with the defender now trailing or out of the picture, allowing me to turn the corner or forcing the big man to step out too high, enabling me to turn the corner or split the defense, or else freeing up the screener.

K.J., for instance was a master at all that sort of stuff. Actually, Isaiah Thomas is good at a lot of that stuff. He is not the best decision-maker, the most accurate passer, or the most consistent finisher due to his lack of size, but he has those little actions, footwork, and know-how sorts of things that rendered him the Suns' best half-court penetrator and pick-and-roll guard a year ago. And of course, he spent three years in college.

Of course, if the first available option is a good one based on your skill-set, you should take it. As Nash stated after Game Four of the 2005 Western Conference Semifinals at Dallas, when he scored 48 points, “The shots were there.” But the difference between a real point guard and an impostor is partly the ability to recognize the prospective efficiency of options as they appear, to potentially withhold commitment based on that recognition, and to create or rifle through other options instead. But neither Knight nor Bledsoe is that kind of point guard, and their growth potential is pretty limited—they have not progressed much, statistically, in recent seasons. So the Suns are going to need a playmaking forward who makes the game easier for them at least as much as vice versa.

As for a lineup that features Bledsoe, Knight, Booker, and Warren simultaneously, that should be reserved for specialty situations where the Suns really need to change the tempo of the game or try to mount a comeback with offense. That lineup would be too small and lack enough defense and rebounding. But Bledsoe, Knight, and Booker could form a reasonable three-guard rotation, with two of the three on the floor at the same time and occasionally all three playing with a bigger power forward.

With the possible exception of Booker, though, the Suns should not be overly committed to any of these players long-term.