Bayless/Mayo/Gordon/Westbrook - Who Should the Knicks Take?

Vlade4life · Post #21 » by **Vlade4life** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 7:57 pm

cdash wrote:I have no doubt that they are on the trade block, the problem is: Who is going to trade for them? Crawford is the only one with any value. They need some role players, some defenders, some team players...just my opinion. Dont think I am alone there though.

Well whether they're acutally traded or not is beside the point, the point is they don't plan on keeping them any longer than they have to. So who they draft shouldn't have anything to do with these guys.

JMillott · Post #22 » by **JMillott** » Thu May 1, 2008 4:44 pm

If the Knicks miss out on Derrick Rose which I hope they will as a Celtics fan, I think they should go with Eric Gordon out of the availible guards.

I think its going to take Bayless some time to adjust to being a pro PG much like Chauncey Billups did who I find him most compareable to.

I think Eric Gordon is a surething 25 PPG scorer at SG in this league down the road and while he isn't ready to start in the NBA quite yet he can give them a high quality back up for Crawford and they can move Crawford to PG if they feel a need to extend Gordon's minutes.

That being said, I'm not so sure they should go with one of the guards over Anthony Randolph or Danilo Gallinari. I think i'd go for either of them over at least Mayo or Westbrook.

Vlade4life · Post #23 » by **Vlade4life** » Thu May 1, 2008 8:01 pm

If they're going to take a volume shooting 2 guard, they might as well take Mayo who can create for others as well as himself and his better defensive ability against 2 guards than Gordon. I like Gordon as well, but the knicks need someone who can create offense for others and not just themselves like Gordon.

cdash · Post #24 » by **cdash** » Fri May 2, 2008 8:51 am

Vlade4life wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Well whether they're acutally traded or not is beside the point, the point is they don't plan on keeping them any longer than they have to. So who they draft shouldn't have anything to do with these guys.

Huh? Whether they are actually traded or not is the point.

GoBobcats · Post #25 » by **GoBobcats** » Sun May 4, 2008 6:29 pm

#1KnicksFan · Post #26 » by **#1KnicksFan** » Sun May 4, 2008 7:48 pm

Kiki4KnicksGM wrote:Bayless has been very underrated in this draft in part due to the national exposure that D Rose and Mayo have gotten.

Bayless has an extremely high Bball IQ and solid jumper for a 19 yr old and a strong first step.

I think Bayless has strong similarities to Tony Parker and Terrell Brandon, two small stature guards who are/were more of scorers than distributors, but very strong team ball players.

I would not be surprised if Bayless made a couple of All-Stars teams in his prime.

While Bayless doesn't have the foreseeable upside of Rose or Mayo, he arguably is the best fit for the Knicks because the pressure to produce will be much lower.

To me Bayless also seems like a Walsh kind of guy. Walsh loves drafting the guy other people overlook.

nice post.

And you might just be right man.

As for the poster hankerin for some Flash Gordon - :crazy:

25 ppg my azz. And no way we'd take him over Mayo. Walsh just finished saying we need long and athletic and you want us to take a poor man's Mitch Richmond?

Vlade4life · Post #27 » by **Vlade4life** » Mon May 5, 2008 1:05 am

cdash wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Huh? Whether they are actually traded or not is the point.

It wasn't my point, my point was that these guys are not wanted on the knicks any longer so they're not part of the future team; so their play shouldn't have any bearing on who the knicks pick.

Vlade4life · Post #28 » by **Vlade4life** » Mon May 5, 2008 1:08 am

#1KnicksFan wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

nice post.

And you might just be right man.

As for the poster hankerin for some Flash Gordon - 25 ppg my azz. And no way we'd take him over Mayo. Walsh just finished saying we need long and athletic and you want us to take a poor man's Mitch Richmond?

Bayless, Mayo and Gordon are all very athletic so I don't see how Gordon doesn't fit into athletic. Neither Bayless, Mayo, or Gordon are especially long; Mayo has a pretty poor standing reach too. The knicks don't need Gordon because they need someone who can create for others, which Gordon doesn't do.

Post #29 » by **ReasonablySober** » Mon May 5, 2008 1:12 am

I think I'm one of the few that would actually consider Mayo at #1 overall. So that sort of answers the question of where I think the Knicks (or any team, really) should go with their choice of those four.

cdash · Post #30 » by **cdash** » Mon May 5, 2008 3:12 am

Vlade4life wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

It wasn't my point, my point was that these guys are not wanted on the knicks any longer so they're not part of the future team; so their play shouldn't have any bearing on who the knicks pick.

It doesnt matter if they arent wanted, if the Knicks cant trade them then they are part of the "future team". There are oodles of guys around the league on teams that dont really want them there, but that doesnt change the fact that they are still there. The play of the players on that team does have an effect on who they pick.

Dexmor · Post #31 » by **Dexmor** » Mon May 5, 2008 8:55 pm

I can't imagine this is a debate. You always go for the best player espially when the best player is far superior then the others. Rose is the best player in the draft but Mayo is the next best, guard at least. Beasley and Mayo are close but that is a different story.
Mayo is far superior. Even if the Knicks need a passer which non of those guys anyway they need a makeover more and Mayo would be a good start. Mayo could be a top 5 guard easily not to far from draft day might I add. Gorden will be like Ben Gorden. Bayless I see in the Devin Harris level and Westbrook I love but he might not be a star.
This is really no debate.

Vlade4life · Post #32 » by **Vlade4life** » Tue May 6, 2008 7:59 am

cdash wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

It doesnt matter if they arent wanted, if the Knicks cant trade them then they are part of the "future team". There are oodles of guys around the league on teams that dont really want them there, but that doesnt change the fact that they are still there. The play of the players on that team does have an effect on who they pick.

My point is that they're not going to compete with those guys anyways, so who cares if that player works well with them or not. Who they pick here is more important to the franchise than Curry, Randolph, or Crawford. And those guys will be tradeable eventually, the knicks won't have to keep them until the very end of their deals. The knicks future push is beyond those contracts, they shouldn't be trying to compete with those guys, they'd be wasting their time because they're not in the long term future.

cdash · Post #33 » by **cdash** » Tue May 6, 2008 10:48 am

I think Donnie Walsh would disagree with you there. If you surround some of those guys with players that complement them, they can be useful. Now, pairing Eddy Curry and Zach Randolph was about the dumbest thing you could do. Both are pure scorers and play no defense. If you have Curry in the post and combine him with a defensive minded big (Diop, J O'Neal, Dampier, etc.) then his limitations would be hidden a bit. Dont forget that the Knicks play in the Least and will have a new coach who the players dont hate next year. So if they make one or two decent trades, and play their card in the draft right, then its not completely insane to think that they cant compete for a playoff spot next season. I dont think they will, but its not crazy in the East.

Flash4thewin · Post #34 » by **Flash4thewin** » Fri May 9, 2008 5:49 pm

Rose is the best player in the draft? Beasley is the best then Rose then Mayo