moocow007 wrote:thebuzzardman wrote:moocow007 wrote:
The Knicks would be absolutely insane to take Nesmith 6. Can we stop with the over inflated emphasis on 3 point shooting?
3 point shooting emphasis is fine, when it's for role players and guys down lower in the draft.
And that sir is my point. Folks may have missed the part where I was specifically responding to the OP who had Nesmith being the 6th overall pick. To take Nesmith 6th overall would ABSOLUTELY be over inflating the emphasis on 3 point shooting. The Knicks need someone that can take their bottom of the barrel **** ass inefficient offense and make it better not a guy that can shoot spot up 3's. Spot up 3's is not going to make the Knicks 28th ranked offensive efficiency better. A 3 point shooter is not going to prevent the Knicks from having to rely on RJ Barrett to be a POINT SG or Julius Randle from having to be Lebron James in trying to create offense for himself and others on a crap team (neither of which either guy has any business being) or prevent a team that still looks like it's totally lost on offense. The Knicks need a shot creator, someone that can run and offense and create easy shot opportunities for himself and others. Failing that, the Knicks need someone that can be a no.1 option that can create his own shot easily (something that RJ Barrett and Julius Randle...and pretty much every single Knick...struggled with mightily last season). When the guy that can best create his own shot is a 2nd rounder from the previous seasons draft that you barely play, it's pretty clear what they need (the only guy that I would trust in being able to create his own shot in crunch time on this team is ISO Zo...and that's not a good thing).
I think you covered it a couple of posts later on. I replied before I saw them, or maybe it was my way of agreeing and I had seen it; can't remember. Shooting is nice, it's necessary and it's been a Knick weakness for what feels like forever, maybe minus the years of Novak, and even then it was an issue, as there wasn't another Novak to go with Novak.
Anyway agree the Knicks need a creator of some kind. Ideally, it's a guy who can create for himself and others, but honestly, they could use nearly any variation - the caveat here being they are a few years away no matter what. What I mean by that is, if the guy is good at breaking down the defense but maybe isn't the most reliable scorer, while not ideal, that'll do. Or, a guy is good at creating his own shot\breaking down the defense but isn't the most willing passer, that would be ok as well.
These are the kind of players if the Knicks have to "settle" on around 6,7,8 they should go for.
Now, if it was a deeper draft and and there were some VERY bonafide C's and PF's AND IF lets say the truly good PG's were right at the top and went 1-3, in that scenario I could support the Knicks drafting a BPA guy, as the team is 2 or 3 years away and needs to accumulate talent.
However, while there's a general consensus around the top 2 or 3 picks, the draft seems to have good, but not great, guard depth and PG depth in particular, so Knicks should draft need in this draft. For the purposes of exaggeration, there's no need "Bowie" with Jordan after him in the draft.
TLDR, agreeing the Knicks need a player who can break down the defense and orchestrate and that's a PG.
