'14 Draft Thread - Parker Declares. List your top 4

[ackypoo]

As long as the guy is a willing passer, I don't think your PG has to be Mike Conley or Steve Nash to effectively run the position. The kid's 22 years old, plays good perimeter defense, has a great work ethic, and showed promising growth in a season where everything else pretty much went to ****. I don't see a need to pigeon-hole him in a "bench 3&D guy" role when he's shown the potential to be more than that.

I agree, and I wouldn't form any judgments about Knight's willingness to pass/distribute based on the season just ended. The Bucks' offense was so often poorly spaced that passing opportunities were limited. I don't think it was so much a matter of the choice of passing to a poor shooter or taking it himself. It was a function of the geometry of the game and not having passing lanes or even many run-of-the-mill pick-and-roll opportunities.

What about the fact that Detroit already gave up on him?

not to mention its fairly easy to judge is passing on the break where spacing isnt an issue. horse blinders knight.

[poolshark52]

I just can't see Aaron Gordon as anything more than an off the bench guy.

I agree. He screams Tyrus Thomas to me.

Except that Tyrus was stupid. Actually, they are really different. Now, you might say that Gordon screams bust, and if that is all you are getting at then I get it. But, Gordon is a high BBIQ player--just doesn't have a real position, and is limited offensively. Plus, he tries really hard. Tyrus was extremely low BBIQ player, very lazy.

[Bucksfan28]

I guess I don't get why people are freaked out about him being a 35 mpg starting pg but essentially ok with him as a 6th man combo guard off the bench. Knight is a damn good player who can score and play d. We don't have to build around him but I definitely want him on this team going forward.

Anyone else think he could have a billups like career? He seems like a natural leader who will find a way to get it.

Huge difference between starting point guard and 6th man 3&D guy off the bench. One is responsible for creating and running the offense for a majority of the game, the other has his minutes rationed depending on how hot or cold he might be.

It entirely depends on what role Knight is going to play under the new coaching staff. People get a little too caught up in the traditional "distributor" role of a PG and subsequently downgrade Knight for not possessing great vision.

Mario Chalmers, George Hill, and Devin Harris are some examples of PGs on contending squads who aren't great distributors or have average court vision, and their coaches realize this and create a specific role for them to excel in. This is where having a coach not named Larry Drew will help.

As long as the guy is a willing passer, I don't think your PG has to be Mike Conley or Steve Nash to effectively run the position. The kid's 22 years old, plays good perimeter defense, has a great work ethic, and showed promising growth in a season where everything else pretty much went to ****. I don't see a need to pigeon-hole him in a "bench 3&D guy" role when he's shown the potential to be more than that.

Devin Harris comes off the bench. Chalmers runs alongside the best player in the world.

Knight doesn't need to be crafted in the traditional mold of a distributing point, but as numerous people have hammered home already, he forces shots and displays no court vision far too often. I think Knight detractors will gladly eat crow if he turns it around, but such a change seems too much of a pipedream.

[sidney lanier]

As long as the guy is a willing passer, I don't think your PG has to be Mike Conley or Steve Nash to effectively run the position. The kid's 22 years old, plays good perimeter defense, has a great work ethic, and showed promising growth in a season where everything else pretty much went to ****. I don't see a need to pigeon-hole him in a "bench 3&D guy" role when he's shown the potential to be more than that.

I agree, and I wouldn't form any judgments about Knight's willingness to pass/distribute based on the season just ended. The Bucks' offense was so often poorly spaced that passing opportunities were limited. I don't think it was so much a matter of the choice of passing to a poor shooter or taking it himself. It was a function of the geometry of the game and not having passing lanes or even many run-of-the-mill pick-and-roll opportunities.

What about the fact that Detroit already gave up on him?

I guess they wanted to see what they could do with a PG like Brandon Jennings. Now they know.

[skones]

As long as the guy is a willing passer, I don't think your PG has to be Mike Conley or Steve Nash to effectively run the position. The kid's 22 years old, plays good perimeter defense, has a great work ethic, and showed promising growth in a season where everything else pretty much went to ****. I don't see a need to pigeon-hole him in a "bench 3&D guy" role when he's shown the potential to be more than that.

I agree, and I wouldn't form any judgments about Knight's willingness to pass/distribute based on the season just ended. The Bucks' offense was so often poorly spaced that passing opportunities were limited. I don't think it was so much a matter of the choice of passing to a poor shooter or taking it himself. It was a function of the geometry of the game and not having passing lanes or even many run-of-the-mill pick-and-roll opportunities.

What about the fact that Detroit already gave up on him?

They also took Jennings on a multi year deal?

[emunney]

As long as the guy is a willing passer, I don't think your PG has to be Mike Conley or Steve Nash to effectively run the position. The kid's 22 years old, plays good perimeter defense, has a great work ethic, and showed promising growth in a season where everything else pretty much went to ****. I don't see a need to pigeon-hole him in a "bench 3&D guy" role when he's shown the potential to be more than that.

I agree, and I wouldn't form any judgments about Knight's willingness to pass/distribute based on the season just ended. The Bucks' offense was so often poorly spaced that passing opportunities were limited. I don't think it was so much a matter of the choice of passing to a poor shooter or taking it himself. It was a function of the geometry of the game and not having passing lanes or even many run-of-the-mill pick-and-roll opportunities.

What about the fact that Detroit already gave up on him?

What about the fact that Detroit traded him and Middleton so they could give Jennings a huge contract? Detroit doesn't know wtf they're doing.

[emunney]

I think Knight was counseled to be extremely aggressive by Van Exel. I have no problem giving him a shot to start next to two playmakers. At the very least, I have no problem getting a good coach in here to figure it out. Unless we can get something valuable for him, trading him seems like a bad idea. He's the kind of player we should be looking to bring in, not discard. Young, talented, hasn't put it all together yet.

[Ron Swanson]

Devin Harris comes off the bench. Chalmers runs alongside the best player in the world.

Knight doesn't need to be crafted in the traditional mold of a distributing point, but as numerous people have hammered home already, he forces shots and displays no court vision far too often. I think Knight detractors will gladly eat crow if he turns it around, but such a change seems too much of a pipedream.

I don't see how it's that much of a pipe dream given his growth between where he was at season's start (AST/TO ratio of 1.3) to where he ended up at the end of the year (1.8), and I'm far from being the biggest Knight supporter on this board.

And like others have said, Knight forcing up shots has less to do with his mentality and more to do with the fact that he was our only guy that could score with consistency all season. And let's not act like he was terribly inefficient either (53 TS%). He's not Derrick Rose, but when he was attacking the basket, you saw that he was able to effectively draw the defense in and create open looks for our shooters.

If you can get a coach to teach him to cut down on the 3's (only shot 32% last season) and dribble/penetrate the lane more, he can certainly create offense for those around him. I just don't get why people are so quick to write him off given the improvement he's shown over the last half season. I'm much more interested in giving him minutes with some talent around him than I am for trading him for a late 1st round pick.

[Max Green]

I think Knight was counseled to be extremely aggressive by Van Exel. I have no problem giving him a shot to start next to two playmakers. At the very least, I have no problem getting a good coach in here to figure it out. Unless we can get something valuable for him, trading him seems like a bad idea. He's the kind of player we should be looking to bring in, not discard. Young, talented, hasn't put it all together yet.

[Thunder Muscle]

So which one of the top 4 players is most likely to decline working out with us?

[jr lucosa]

I don't hate Brandon Knight, and I'm also not looking to move him for just anything. If we get a decent offer come draft time I'll bite, otherwise I would rather have him off the bench. If you can put him in a role where we are not relying on him to initiate the offense or make too many passes that need to be accurate then fine, I just don't see how that's as a starter seeing as how Middleton is a better defender, shooter, decision maker, etc. but I have no problem with him on this roster next season.

If we get any decent offer for him though, like any first round pick, I'm pulling the trigger and starting the contract clock back over because Knight is about to enter a contract year and has 3 seasons of putting up box score numbers and someone is going to pay him for that in a year whether he takes the appropriate steps forward or not.

[Nowak008]

A top 10-15 player who can play like the best player in the league on any given night isn't worth the #1 pick because he isn't essentially LeBron James or Kevin Durant? Considered me baffled what a few people think we're getting out of the first pick in this draft.

I want a top 15 player with this pick and while I think Howard is a top 15 player in the league... I don't think SF version of him would be. I'd put that on the prime Joe Johnson/Iggy level. Guys that I would love to have on the team, but not superstars, probably 20-30 in the league range.

Now if you would guarantee me he was a top 30 player I'd take him, the problem is he could be Marvin Williams too.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums mobile app

[SupremeHustle]

So which one of the top 4 players is most likely to decline working out with us?

Exum because, according to his agents, we already have a PG.

[paulpressey25]

So which one of the top 4 players is most likely to decline working out with us?

Depends on who is running the team at that time. If we have a "cool" GM, I think everyone works out for us.

[Max Green]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/Bucks/status/464451659901304832[/tweet]

[mlloyd10]

If some of the reports are true that the 76ers want wiggins - I would so trade #1 for #2 and #10 (assuming the order stays the same) and they would trade

[Bucksfan28]

Devin Harris comes off the bench. Chalmers runs alongside the best player in the world.

Knight doesn't need to be crafted in the traditional mold of a distributing point, but as numerous people have hammered home already, he forces shots and displays no court vision far too often. I think Knight detractors will gladly eat crow if he turns it around, but such a change seems too much of a pipedream.

I don't see how it's that much of a pipe dream given his growth between where he was at season's start (AST/TO ratio of 1.3) to where he ended up at the end of the year (1.8), and I'm far from being the biggest Knight supporter on this board.

And like others have said, Knight forcing up shots has less to do with his mentality and more to do with the fact that he was our only guy that could score with consistency all season. And let's not act like he was terribly inefficient either (53 TS%). He's not Derrick Rose, but when he was attacking the basket, you saw that he was able to effectively draw the defense in and create open looks for our shooters.

If you can get a coach to teach him to cut down on the 3's (only shot 32% last season) and dribble/penetrate the lane more, he can certainly create offense for those around him. I just don't get why people are so quick to write him off given the improvement he's shown over the last half season. I'm much more interested in giving him minutes with some talent around him than I am for trading him for a late 1st round pick.

I'm not in the trade Knight camp. But I see him better suited in a role that's not starting point guard.

[SkilesTheLimit]

The worst thing imaginable is if we botch this pick and/or process by having front office flux.

I thought the benefit of having the sale transpire at season's end was to get management settled prior to the lottery/draft.

We can't afford to "miss" on this pick.

[mattg]

I would only trade knight for a top 20 pick. Late first you're simply not going to find a prospect even on his level.

[skones]

I would only trade knight for a top 20 pick. Late first you're simply not going to find a prospect even on his level.

The odds are against you to find a player who produces at his level from 10-20 as well. He's the type of player who, if you trade, you get underwhelming pick value in comparison to a deal that nets you an actual player.