thebuzzardman wrote:knickstape4ever wrote:He's no Mitchell Robinson. Knox will be a solid pro in a few years...but I dont think he'll ever be a star. He's just so inefficient; his shot selection is poor, he doesn't make plays for others, and he's bad on defense
But at least we got Mitch who IMO could be a all-star. He's so incredibly efficient and he's perfect for today's NBA as a rim protector/rim runner. I can't believe he is so good so quickly, despite not playing college bball. Mitch was the deal gem of the draft and if it came down to it I'd keep him in a heartbeat over Knox. IMO it'd be a mistake to trade Mitch b/c he can be a all-star. I'm excited to see what's to come from him as he gets more comfortable and fills out his frame.
....and to think he'd be so good after seeing that DX interview when he was asked what kinda player he was and he responded...."probably...be like chill...kinda." I love the kid, he's gold
Love Mitch but he's as limited offensively right now nearly as much as Knox is defensively.
Well...maybe not, but they're both projects. Mitch has the benefit of being good defensively while being offensively limited is no longer as bad a thing as it used to be, from the C position.
NBA sort of interesting now. In lots of 19 year olds getting drafted, and soon 18 year olds, teams are going to draft projects who quite often aren't getting their sh*t together until the time their contract is up - and possibly not even the finished product, even then.
So, they'll be some guessing/analysis around guys like KP level guys, where "Is this basically what he is, or will he be a lot more" and is the max cat deal worth it or not.
Lower level guys like Knox or Frank etc there's gambles a well, but I guess the financial implications aren't as bad.
Then again, the Knicks basically were the team to take the incorrect flyer on THJr at that time - more or less. Not exactly the same.
Scouting and philosophy of system matters as much or more than ever.
I wonder if the CBA will change, driven as much by owners, as players. I mean, all good for the owners in that they get 4 or 5 cheap years, but interesting if there's any thoughts around it, especially with the soon to be influx of 18 year olds.