Malik Monk

TheProdigy · Post #81 » by **TheProdigy** » Sat Dec 31, 2016 7:58 pm

Showtime:Part2 wrote:Malik monk should be compared to kobe Bryant (minus the defense and passing) not jr smith. What he is doing as a freshman is insane. He has zero holes as a scorer... as a freshman. If this kid doesn't go top 3 it will be a travesty. He's better than Jackson

I'm seeing a cross between Monta Ellis and Gilbert Arenas. He has Ellis' athleticism and Arenas' jump shot.

jrob23 · Post #82 » by **jrob23** » Sat Dec 31, 2016 10:37 pm

Showtime:Part2 wrote:Malik monk should be compared to kobe Bryant (minus the defense and passing) not jr smith. What he is doing as a freshman is insane. He has zero holes as a scorer... as a freshman. If this kid doesn't go top 3 it will be a travesty. He's better than Jackson

he does have holes. He hasn't shown the ability to put it on the floor and drive by his guy. He has no post up game. He's undersized for an NBA SG and his defense is below average. He does have the ability to address all these things. If guys like Kobe or Lebron had played in college they'd have dominated like we've not seen for decades because unlike Monk, they had elite size

BillyKingGM · Post #83 » by **BillyKingGM** » Mon Jan 2, 2017 4:47 pm

Showtime:Part2 wrote:Malik monk should be compared to kobe Bryant (minus the defense and passing) not jr smith. What he is doing as a freshman is insane. He has zero holes as a scorer... as a freshman. If this kid doesn't go top 3 it will be a travesty. He's better than Jackson

0 holes? How many shots does he make at the rim that aren't in transition? It might be less than games played...

cksdayoff · Post #84 » by **cksdayoff** » Mon Jan 2, 2017 4:59 pm

his one big hole is that he is a 6'3 shooting guard with an average wingspan. he's pretty damn athletic though, and i hope to god he has or will develop an elite work ethic, because he has crazy range and a good stroke and he looks like he could be an elite shooter.

No-Man · Post #85 » by **No-Man** » Mon Jan 2, 2017 5:02 pm

Listen if there is a guy that comes close to break the archetype is him, but I will stay stick with going and favor the archetype first and foremost.
I pray that Calipari gets him to do some more ballhandling to clear up or have a better idea about him.

Unbreakable99 · Post #86 » by **Unbreakable99** » Tue Jan 3, 2017 6:20 am

Do you guys think Monk will be a better player than CJ McCollum?

Mulhollanddrive · Post #87 » by **Mulhollanddrive** » Tue Jan 3, 2017 7:08 am

Check out DraftExpress Malik Monk weaknesses - the ball handling part is really ugly, probably why he hasn't done it.

I was hoping he'd be able to be one of those combos that ends up at PG like a Westbrook, Arenas, Iverson.

SelfishPlayer · Post #88 » by **SelfishPlayer** » Tue Jan 3, 2017 10:31 am

Unbreakable99 wrote:Do you guys think Monk will be a better player than CJ McCollum?

LOL, Portland is NEVER going to trade CJ to the Sixers for the lower of the Lakers/Sixers picks. CJ is worth more than just a high lottery pick that isn't top 3.

Some Sixers fans actually would rather draft Malik Monk over trading that pick for CJ McCollum. :banghead:

Gambling that Monk becomes better at being a CJ McCollum than CJ McCollum already is. :noway:

It doesn't matter much anyway because Portland surely isn't trading away a sure thing for a possible.

tsmith · Post #89 » by **tsmith** » Tue Jan 3, 2017 11:49 am

SelfishPlayer wrote:
Unbreakable99 wrote:Do you guys think Monk will be a better player than CJ McCollum?

LOL, Portland is NEVER going to trade CJ to the Sixers for the lower of the Lakers/Sixers picks. CJ is worth more than just a high lottery pick that isn't top 3.

Some Sixers fans actually would rather draft Malik Monk over trading that pick for CJ McCollum.
Gambling that Monk becomes better at being a CJ McCollum than CJ McCollum already is.
It doesn't matter much anyway because Portland surely isn't trading away a sure thing for a possible.

He didnt mention anything about trading LA pick for CJ??

Unbreakable99 · Post #90 » by **Unbreakable99** » Tue Jan 3, 2017 12:45 pm

SelfishPlayer wrote:
Unbreakable99 wrote:Do you guys think Monk will be a better player than CJ McCollum?

LOL, Portland is NEVER going to trade CJ to the Sixers for the lower of the Lakers/Sixers picks. CJ is worth more than just a high lottery pick that isn't top 3.

Some Sixers fans actually would rather draft Malik Monk over trading that pick for CJ McCollum.
Gambling that Monk becomes better at being a CJ McCollum than CJ McCollum already is.
It doesn't matter much anyway because Portland surely isn't trading away a sure thing for a possible.

Huh? What in the world are you talking about? Nowhere did I even bring up trading a pick for McCollum. Can you read?

LordCovington33 · Post #91 » by **LordCovington33** » Tue Jan 3, 2017 12:49 pm

Unbreakable99 wrote:
SelfishPlayer wrote:
Unbreakable99 wrote:Do you guys think Monk will be a better player than CJ McCollum?

LOL, Portland is NEVER going to trade CJ to the Sixers for the lower of the Lakers/Sixers picks. CJ is worth more than just a high lottery pick that isn't top 3.

Some Sixers fans actually would rather draft Malik Monk over trading that pick for CJ McCollum.
Gambling that Monk becomes better at being a CJ McCollum than CJ McCollum already is.
It doesn't matter much anyway because Portland surely isn't trading away a sure thing for a possible.

Huh? What in the world are you talking about? Nowhere did I even bring up trading a pick for McCollum. Can you read?

Was going to say the same? :roll:

SelfishPlayer · Post #92 » by **SelfishPlayer** » Tue Jan 3, 2017 12:56 pm

Unbreakable99 wrote:[

Huh? What in the world are you talking about? Nowhere did I even bring up trading a pick for McCollum. Can you read?

SelfishPlayer wrote:
Unbreakable99 wrote:If Giles is sitting there and we are on the clock with the Lakers pick I might trade the pick to a team with a good veteran back court or wing player. It would need to be a team that needs to make a move and wants to shake things up. For example I may trade it to Portland for McCollum. I know Portland loves McCollum and they see themselves as a light splash brothers but if they get bounced early again they may want to make a move. Giles could have that star status enough to make them take a chance on the next Chris Webber on who I read that is Giles' comparison. Or maybe get Utah in a 3 team trade and get Haywood. I want guards and wings. We have our front court in Simmons and Embiid. I didn't say I would make the trades but I would think about it and see what it's worth to get a good veteran who plays outside 18 feet.

I like your thinking but It would take the #1 pick to get McCollum. His name gets thrown around here too much for too little.

viewtopic.php?f=26&t=1456551&start=640#start_here

Unbreakable99 · Post #93 » by **Unbreakable99** » Tue Jan 3, 2017 1:06 pm

SelfishPlayer wrote:
Unbreakable99 wrote:[

Huh? What in the world are you talking about? Nowhere did I even bring up trading a pick for McCollum. Can you read?

SelfishPlayer wrote:
Unbreakable99 wrote:If Giles is sitting there and we are on the clock with the Lakers pick I might trade the pick to a team with a good veteran back court or wing player. It would need to be a team that needs to make a move and wants to shake things up. For example I may trade it to Portland for McCollum. I know Portland loves McCollum and they see themselves as a light splash brothers but if they get bounced early again they may want to make a move. Giles could have that star status enough to make them take a chance on the next Chris Webber on who I read that is Giles' comparison. Or maybe get Utah in a 3 team trade and get Haywood. I want guards and wings. We have our front court in Simmons and Embiid. I didn't say I would make the trades but I would think about it and see what it's worth to get a good veteran who plays outside 18 feet.

I like your thinking but It would take the #1 pick to get McCollum. His name gets thrown around here too much for too little.

viewtopic.php?f=26&t=1456551&start=640#start_here

Again what in the world are you talking about? And again can you read? Where in my post did I bring up trading a pick for McCollum? I'll wait. Just say you were wrong and trying to act like I said something I didn't say. And most importantly why are you bringing up a quote from me that wasn't a response to my intial question that you responded to? Is this real life?

Notanoob · Post #94 » by **Notanoob** » Wed Jan 4, 2017 1:05 am

It sucks that Kentucky has so little shooting. If Monk wasn't the only guy who could space the floor for them, we might actually be able to see if he can attack the basket a bit or if he really is limited to jump shooting entirely. As it stands we're speculating a little bit, since it seems he's been told to stay outside since everyone else is limited as a shooter.

In any event I prefer Fox as a player to Monk.

jonjames · Post #95 » by **jonjames** » Wed Jan 4, 2017 2:12 am

Malik Monk putting on a show.

Mulhollanddrive · Post #96 » by **Mulhollanddrive** » Wed Jan 4, 2017 5:00 am

Looking at shooting guards taken in the top 10 since 2006 who averaged 17+ as a Freshman:

Brandon Knight 17
James Harden 17
CJ McCollum 19
Dangelo Russell 19
Jamal Murray 20
OJ Mayo 20
Eric Gordon 20
Stephen Curry 21
Malik Monk 22

I want to believe in Malik Monk as I think my team is going to draft him (Phoenix).

doordoor123 · Post #97 » by **doordoor123** » Wed Jan 4, 2017 5:20 am

Mulhollanddrive wrote:Looking at shooting guards taken in the top 10 since 2006 who averaged 17+ as a Freshman:

Brandon Knight 17
James Harden 17
CJ McCollum 19
Dangelo Russell 19
Jamal Murray 20
OJ Mayo 20
Eric Gordon 20
Stephen Curry 21
Malik Monk 22

I want to believe in Malik Monk as I think my team is going to draft him (Phoenix).

Why would Phoenix draft him? To play behind Bledsoe and Booker along with Knight and Ulis?

Mulhollanddrive · Post #98 » by **Mulhollanddrive** » Wed Jan 4, 2017 5:53 am

Phoenix GM Ryan McDonough has acquired 6 of the 11 Kentucky guards that were drafted top 34 since 2006.

And if we're picking 4-8 Monk (and Fox) are in that range.

The scary thing is he could end up as Brandon Knight who he'd be replacing and it'd be a complete waste.

jrob23 · Post #99 » by **jrob23** » Wed Jan 4, 2017 5:56 am

jonjames wrote:Malik Monk putting on a show.

I actually thought it was a bad game for him. He was one dimensional and took and missed some bad shots. He's simply not big enough and consistent enough for me just yet. He should be filling up a stat sheet but because of his size and handle limitations he can't. That, and his defense is why he's overrated. I'm sure he'll still go in the lottery but I'd take all the PG and another half dozen guys before I took him.

Unbreakable99 · Post #100 » by **Unbreakable99** » Wed Jan 4, 2017 3:45 pm

Who do you guys think is the better prospect between Malik Monk and Jamal Murray?