2019-2020 College/Draft thread X [marks the spot] (Knicks own #8 pick, 11/18 DRAFT)

[3toheadmelo]

I would 100% draft Wiseman if he's there on the board when we are on the clock. But at the same time, I don't want to trade Mitch.

I think you can like one without disliking the other. I'd even go as far as saying with a defensive-minded innovative schemed head coach like Thibs, they may even be intriguing if paired together in the front court.

I don’t mind having them both and seeing if they can work together. But if we are able to trade Mitch +8 to move up for Wiseman... I’ll drive Mitch to the airport. I don’t think Wiseman will drop to 8. 6 at most imo.

[mpharris36]

Like I said in a previous post. Wiseman's comp has always been Davis lite and Davis himself has stated he prefers playing the 4 than the 5. Its not impossible for both of them to be on the floor at the same time especially if Wiseman's jumper is as good as advertised. I would be through the moon if he was ended up getting him.

https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/2020-nba-draft-comparing-james-wiseman-and-onyeka-okongwu-the-top-big-man-prospects/

Don't know how to add links so I just posted it. Enjoy.

comparing a 3 game sample size per 40 mins to AD? Yeah, I'm gunna pass on that comp.

AD was a point guard in high school and shot up in size. Wiseman doesn't have that creation or handle. And I have yet to see the outside jumper in games consistently. And I won't get excited about workout clips...almost all NBA players can stroke it in empty gyms.

[HEZI]

Mitch is def good on the offensive boards. That is another plus. There's value in getting easy buckets and offensive boards, along with being an elite pick n roll finisher. That is probably why our offensive rating is a lot higher with Mitch by every metric.

Kanters problem was always on the defensive end. Kanter still grabbed offensive rebounds at a higher rate in Port and Boston the last 2 years so I dont think the Knicks bricking at a higher rate necessarily makes a big difference. Think if we had better spacing/PG play it would help Mitch a lot more then more bricks

It's a good thing to have off the bench but if we are talking about legit starter quality then those type of guys have been faded out. The Tyson Chandler's and Deandre Jordan's of the league have become situational starters and backups. This is the role some see Mitch thriving in, providing energy, rebounds and athleticism off the bench. Having somebody in front of him with more actual skill would be ideal, preferably somebody who can stretch the floor. But ultimately what we need is better perimeter players as no rim running bigs are taking any team anywhere.

I think it really all depends on the team. I def see what you guys are saying, but I just don't think it is definitive and that cut and dry. I wouldn't rush to make a decision just yet on Mitch when we have time.

Either way, if we are talking about building a contender the Knicks have so far to go and so many other more important needs. Everyone is focusing on Mitch not shooting, but really that nobody else on the roster can shoot is much more of a liability. I wouldnt even worry about Mitch. He is the least of our worries. Just pencil him in as a starter and look to add more talent around him and RJ...draft the best G and wing and go from there.

Wiseman is def a good prospect but won't be there so all these discussion is just an excuse to slander Mitch

I think the discussion is about using Mitch as an asset and being in position to draft Wiseman. That then becomes a discussion tied into the building the team and turning them into a winner part. I think it's related as some feel Wiseman is worth the gamble. It's a pretty significant conversation because it can impact us now and in the future 10 years or so. I'd probably lean with you right now, just keep Mitch and make the pick at 8 and keep building. But at the same time I'd definitely entertain offers for Mitch and look to keep building on perimeter help if possible.

[HEZI]

If you had a worthwhile person running the P&R that could pass and shoot they would absolutely have to worry about him. Our best offensive play this year was the lob to mitch. It was effective and effecient. So if we end up getting that star player that can make the right play in the P&R with shooters give mitch the lob lane that will be a very difficult play to stop.

Gobert avg 15 a game on nearly 70% from the field with very little offensive game other than rim running. If you have other good players and proper spacing that play is a threat. And Mitch is a better athlete than Gobert too.

You are living in a fantasy though. Knicks don't have Donovan Mitchell nor do they have the shooting to be the 2nd best 3 point shooting team in the league according to stats. We don't have a perimeter star and nobody knows when we will get one and we are the worst shooting team in the league and have been for a few years now and nobody knows when that will change either. That's not fantasy that's our reality. Mitchell Robinson currently doesn't help solve our main issues. Gobert can't solve our issue either and speaking of Gobert he gets exposed year after year especially in the playoffs and his inability to even have a move in the post when they dump the ball to him and he looks lost is one of their problems. Mitch still has ways to go to even reach Gobert level and even reaching that is nothing special really.

I mean if the knicks want to be relevant anytime soon they need to get a player of Donovan Mitchells quality. Those are the players that run the NBA.

Well yeah so it's not a big deal if folks want to upgrade from Mitch since guys like Mitch don't run the NBA. We're not talking about a franchise player here

[mpharris36]

You are living in a fantasy though. Knicks don't have Donovan Mitchell nor do they have the shooting to be the 2nd best 3 point shooting team in the league according to stats. We don't have a perimeter star and nobody knows when we will get one and we are the worst shooting team in the league and have been for a few years now and nobody knows when that will change either. That's not fantasy that's our reality. Mitchell Robinson currently doesn't help solve our main issues. Gobert can't solve our issue either and speaking of Gobert he gets exposed year after year especially in the playoffs and his inability to even have a move in the post when they dump the ball to him and he looks lost is one of their problems. Mitch still has ways to go to even reach Gobert level and even reaching that is nothing special really.

I mean if the knicks want to be relevant anytime soon they need to get a player of Donovan Mitchells quality. Those are the players that run the NBA.

Well yeah so it's not a big deal if folks want to upgrade from Mitch since guys like Mitch don't run the NBA. We're not talking about a franchise player here

Of course not. If it was trading mitch for a star wing/guard...or if you really believed Edwards or Ball were that talented sure. I could at least entertain that. But we are talking about trading one raw offensive rim running defensive big...for another raw offensive rim running defensive big (with the outside potential to develop a decent jumnper). That is not the risk of moving up to take Wiseman.

Like you said best option is to just sit at 8 and pick the best player. Its also not the year I would technically trade up because depending on who you talk to there isn't just a straight consensus top group of guys. That doesn't mean there isn't talent in this draft...but not trade up worthy talent. Unless you are on the train that Edwards and Ball are simply just better than the rest.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

I mean how many centers are great P&R pop bigs? Like I can count them on one hand (maybe 2) and almost all of them suck on defense. Outside of AD and that is probably why he is the best big in the league.

That's not how we should look at it, we should be future proofing our team the best we can. The crop of younger big men all seem capable of it now - Ayton, Jokic, Jaren Jackson, Embiid, KAT can all make jumpers. I think Wiseman will be like them, and Jackson, Ayton and Embiid are good to great defenders, and I think we'd all agree we'd trade half the roster for KAT or Jokic despite their defensive issues.


I think it's interesting that the Nets aren't really head over heels in love with Jarret Allen who is pretty much the same type of player, yet we're here acting like Mitch is untouchable.

I need to see more from Ayton defensively (this year was a big step forward)
JJJ has been actually pretty big disappointment defensively
Embiid is a good rim protector but I would not qualify him as a great defensive player.

But we shouldn't be using assets on bigs, guards and wings dominate the NBA. Mitch is a fine center for a really good team if you had a all-star guard/wing. Our goal shouldn't be we need to replace Mitch, our goal should be we should add more good players with Mitch as part of the core.

Ayton was very good this year, not sure what else he needs to do other than play more games, and Jackson's ability to cover in switches is a big plus. Embiid has made all-defense team and was a finalist for DPOY last year, if that doesn't qualify as a great defender I don't know what does. The Sixers defense as a whole wasn't good because of scheme and the fact Brown wanted Embiid to drop down.

I disagree, the direction the league is heading is wings & bigs, specifically versatile bigs. The team with the guards & wings + rim roller is losing to the team with the wing + big and guards they picked up off the value menu. A lot of teams are built to play small and switch everything, they know exactly how to defend Mitch because they've been doing it for a decade with players like him. Mitch isn't a core player, he's a dinosaur in an evolving NBA, we're talking about sticking to coal when the obvious direction to go is clean energy

[HEZI]

I mean if the knicks want to be relevant anytime soon they need to get a player of Donovan Mitchells quality. Those are the players that run the NBA.

Well yeah so it's not a big deal if folks want to upgrade from Mitch since guys like Mitch don't run the NBA. We're not talking about a franchise player here

Of course not. If it was trading mitch for a star wing/guard...or if you really believed Edwards or Ball were that talented sure. I could at least entertain that. But we are talking about trading one raw offensive rim running defensive big...for another raw offensive rim running defensive big (with the outside potential to develop a decent jumnper). That is not the risk of moving up to take Wiseman.

Like you said best option is to just sit at 8 and pick the best player. Its also not the year I would technically trade up because depending on who you talk to there isn't just a straight consensus top group of guys. That doesn't mean there isn't talent in this draft...but not trade up worthy talent. Unless you are on the train that Edwards and Ball are simply just better than the rest.

Wiseman is considered to be a franchise big though. Maybe he is maybe he isn't but he's a much better prospect than Robinson though. It's why I don't even take these rumors seriously, because Robinson doesn't have that type of value and not sure if the 8th pick attached to him does either.

[mpharris36]

Well yeah so it's not a big deal if folks want to upgrade from Mitch since guys like Mitch don't run the NBA. We're not talking about a franchise player here

Of course not. If it was trading mitch for a star wing/guard...or if you really believed Edwards or Ball were that talented sure. I could at least entertain that. But we are talking about trading one raw offensive rim running defensive big...for another raw offensive rim running defensive big (with the outside potential to develop a decent jumnper). That is not the risk of moving up to take Wiseman.

Like you said best option is to just sit at 8 and pick the best player. Its also not the year I would technically trade up because depending on who you talk to there isn't just a straight consensus top group of guys. That doesn't mean there isn't talent in this draft...but not trade up worthy talent. Unless you are on the train that Edwards and Ball are simply just better than the rest.

Wiseman is considered to be a franchise big though. Maybe he is maybe he isn't but he's a much better prospect than Robinson though. It's why I don't even take these rumors seriously, because Robinson doesn't have that type of value and not sure if the 8th pick attached to him does either.

I think GS would run the alter if we offered #8 and Mitch for #2. The knicks shouldn't do that though and its probably why no deal has happened because it doesn't make sense for us because like I said even if Wiseman is considered a bigtime prospect? I wouldn't go as far as saying franchise big just yet.

I know many people that think OO could be just as impactful.

[Deeeez Knicks]

It's a good thing to have off the bench but if we are talking about legit starter quality then those type of guys have been faded out. The Tyson Chandler's and Deandre Jordan's of the league have become situational starters and backups. This is the role some see Mitch thriving in, providing energy, rebounds and athleticism off the bench. Having somebody in front of him with more actual skill would be ideal, preferably somebody who can stretch the floor. But ultimately what we need is better perimeter players as no rim running bigs are taking any team anywhere.

I think it really all depends on the team. I def see what you guys are saying, but I just don't think it is definitive and that cut and dry. I wouldn't rush to make a decision just yet on Mitch when we have time.

Either way, if we are talking about building a contender the Knicks have so far to go and so many other more important needs. Everyone is focusing on Mitch not shooting, but really that nobody else on the roster can shoot is much more of a liability. I wouldnt even worry about Mitch. He is the least of our worries. Just pencil him in as a starter and look to add more talent around him and RJ...draft the best G and wing and go from there.

Wiseman is def a good prospect but won't be there so all these discussion is just an excuse to slander Mitch

I think the discussion is about using Mitch as an asset and being in position to draft Wiseman. That then becomes a discussion tied into the building the team and turning them into a winner part. I think it's related as some feel Wiseman is worth the gamble. It's a pretty significant conversation because it can impact us now and in the future 10 years or so. I'd probably lean with you right now, just keep Mitch and make the pick at 8 and keep building. But at the same time I'd definitely entertain offers for Mitch and look to keep building on perimeter help if possible.

I wonder how much value Mitch even has in a trade? We all saw rim runners get traded for basically nothing and there are some on the market in free agency. He is coming off a year where he only played 23mpg. The idea that teams are looking more and more at floor spacing/offensive C's is pretty well known at this point. Pretty much all the reasons why we should trade Mitch are also reasons why he may not have a ton of value. I am not really sure we would get a ton back. I am fine with shopping anyone if the deal is right. But I think if we keep Mitch his value will only go up and its not the right time to trade him.

I don't really know for sure what we could get back. But I don't think we would really get a top 3 pick or an impact player straight up for Mitch. Just guessing, I would think he has more value to us to just keep.

But would rather have Mitch + #8 then Wiseman too.

[2010]

I would 100% draft Wiseman if he's there on the board when we are on the clock. But at the same time, I don't want to trade Mitch.

I think you can like one without disliking the other. I'd even go as far as saying with a defensive-minded innovative schemed head coach like Thibs, they may even be intriguing if paired together in the front court.

I don’t mind having them both and seeing if they can work together. But if we are able to trade Mitch +8 to move up for Wiseman... I’ll drive Mitch to the airport. I don’t think Wiseman will drop to 8. 6 at most imo.

Having Mitch would not prevent me from drafting Wiseman. I am legitimately intrigued by the idea of both on the roster.

But I do not think we are at a point where we should be leveraging a proven commodity like Mitch to draft a similar yet risky player in Wiseman. I'd consider that a mismanagement of assets. Wiseman is not enough of a sure shot for me to deem him worthy of two assets (#8 and Mitch).

[mpharris36]

That's not how we should look at it, we should be future proofing our team the best we can. The crop of younger big men all seem capable of it now - Ayton, Jokic, Jaren Jackson, Embiid, KAT can all make jumpers. I think Wiseman will be like them, and Jackson, Ayton and Embiid are good to great defenders, and I think we'd all agree we'd trade half the roster for KAT or Jokic despite their defensive issues.


I think it's interesting that the Nets aren't really head over heels in love with Jarret Allen who is pretty much the same type of player, yet we're here acting like Mitch is untouchable.

I need to see more from Ayton defensively (this year was a big step forward)
JJJ has been actually pretty big disappointment defensively
Embiid is a good rim protector but I would not qualify him as a great defensive player.

But we shouldn't be using assets on bigs, guards and wings dominate the NBA. Mitch is a fine center for a really good team if you had a all-star guard/wing. Our goal shouldn't be we need to replace Mitch, our goal should be we should add more good players with Mitch as part of the core.

Ayton was very good this year, not sure what else he needs to do other than play more games, and Jackson's ability to cover in switches is a big plus. Embiid has made all-defense team and was a finalist for DPOY last year, if that doesn't qualify as a great defender I don't know what does. The Sixers defense as a whole wasn't good because of scheme and the fact Brown wanted Embiid to drop down.

I disagree, the direction the league is heading is wings & bigs, specifically versatile bigs. The team with the guards & wings + rim roller is losing to the team with the wing + big and guards they picked up off the value menu. A lot of teams are built to play small and switch everything, they know exactly how to defend Mitch because they've been doing it for a decade with players like him. Mitch isn't a core player, he's a dinosaur in an evolving NBA, we're talking about sticking to coal when the obvious direction to go is clean energy

Just consistency. 1 year is great. Now if you want to be considered a great defensive big you need to string seasons together. That is no knock I just said I would need to see more before we start throwing the "great" word around.

Calling mitch a dinosaur is Ludacris to me. He is the new style big. The big that can switch on the perimeter and not be exposed. The big that can run up and down the court on a fast break.

A dinosaur big is a back to the basket big. Like I said the ideal ideal position to be in is having an AD a 4 man that can play like a 5 man but with a 4 mans game. The problem he the only one like that simply put.

The rest have deficiencies in other areas. So what mitch lakes for an outside shot. KAT lacks for defending a parked car. Boston was one of the best teams in the NBA and played with a scrappy screen setting big.

If you have guards and wings that can make plays and you ask your center to defend, rebound, and catch dunks you can still win in the NBA. The jazz have been a 50+ win team built around defense around Gobert and letting Mitchell do his thing at the guard position.

Most of the bigs you mentioned had either early exits or didn't even make the playoffs.

[thebuzzardman]

I mean how many centers are great P&R pop bigs? Like I can count them on one hand (maybe 2) and almost all of them suck on defense. Outside of AD and that is probably why he is the best big in the league.

That's not how we should look at it, we should be future proofing our team the best we can. The crop of younger big men all seem capable of it now - Ayton, Jokic, Jaren Jackson, Embiid, KAT can all make jumpers. I think Wiseman will be like them, and Jackson, Ayton and Embiid are good to great defenders, and I think we'd all agree we'd trade half the roster for KAT or Jokic despite their defensive issues.


I think it's interesting that the Nets aren't really head over heels in love with Jarret Allen who is pretty much the same type of player, yet we're here acting like Mitch is untouchable. I'd trade Mitch for Wiseman, so I'd be happy to get the #2 pick if it meant we got LaMelo.

FIFY

[thebuzzardman]

All this worry about Wiseman, Mitch, LaMelo, Hayes, Okoro, whatever.

Just draft BPA at 8, unless some no brainer trade allows the team to move up.

It's gonna be years before the Knicks are any good, so it doesn't matter.

[Gravy]

Looking around on other boards for outside more objective opinions, fans often see Mitch as a Nerlens Noel type of player.

[HEZI]

Of course not. If it was trading mitch for a star wing/guard...or if you really believed Edwards or Ball were that talented sure. I could at least entertain that. But we are talking about trading one raw offensive rim running defensive big...for another raw offensive rim running defensive big (with the outside potential to develop a decent jumnper). That is not the risk of moving up to take Wiseman.

Like you said best option is to just sit at 8 and pick the best player. Its also not the year I would technically trade up because depending on who you talk to there isn't just a straight consensus top group of guys. That doesn't mean there isn't talent in this draft...but not trade up worthy talent. Unless you are on the train that Edwards and Ball are simply just better than the rest.

Wiseman is considered to be a franchise big though. Maybe he is maybe he isn't but he's a much better prospect than Robinson though. It's why I don't even take these rumors seriously, because Robinson doesn't have that type of value and not sure if the 8th pick attached to him does either.

I think GS would run the alter if we offered #8 and Mitch for #2. The knicks shouldn't do that though and its probably why no deal has happened because it doesn't make sense for us because like I said even if Wiseman is considered a bigtime prospect? I wouldn't go as far as saying franchise big just yet.

I know many people that think OO could be just as impactful.

Seriously?

Folks here didn't even want to give up Mitch for AD, lets just say he's really overrated around here. If GS really wanted Mitch I'm pretty sure they would have made an offer for him, they have the assets to get him. They aren't going to give up the 2nd overall pick for a backup to play the Javal McGee role for them though. Lets not kid ourselves, again

[HEZI]

Looking around on other boards for outside more objective opinions, fans often see Mitch as a Nerlens Noel type of player.

Because that's what he is

[3toheadmelo]

I would 100% draft Wiseman if he's there on the board when we are on the clock. But at the same time, I don't want to trade Mitch.

I think you can like one without disliking the other. I'd even go as far as saying with a defensive-minded innovative schemed head coach like Thibs, they may even be intriguing if paired together in the front court.

I don’t mind having them both and seeing if they can work together. But if we are able to trade Mitch +8 to move up for Wiseman... I’ll drive Mitch to the airport. I don’t think Wiseman will drop to 8. 6 at most imo.

Having Mitch would not prevent me from drafting Wiseman. I am legitimately intrigued by the idea of both on the roster.

But I do not think we are at a point where we should be leveraging a proven commodity like Mitch to draft a similar yet risky player in Wiseman. I'd consider that a mismanagement of assets. Wiseman is not enough of a sure shot for me to deem him worthy of two assets (#8 and Mitch).

I’m pulling the trigger. I don’t see Wiseman as a risk at all. Cause he was the #1 player coming out of high school, was in the convo of being the #1 pick until he got suspended. Now since he got suspended, it’s like people think he’s risky. I don’t. He’s much more proven than Mitch. Mitch is just a rim runner like Deandre Jordan and Capela. Wiseman has an advanced offense game and will be amongst the young great big men like Ayton, JJJ (who’s overrated but 10x better than Mitch), Jokic and Embiid. Mitch will just be a guy like Capela who is being phased out of the NBA.

[mpharris36]

Wiseman is considered to be a franchise big though. Maybe he is maybe he isn't but he's a much better prospect than Robinson though. It's why I don't even take these rumors seriously, because Robinson doesn't have that type of value and not sure if the 8th pick attached to him does either.

I think GS would run the alter if we offered #8 and Mitch for #2. The knicks shouldn't do that though and its probably why no deal has happened because it doesn't make sense for us because like I said even if Wiseman is considered a bigtime prospect? I wouldn't go as far as saying franchise big just yet.

I know many people that think OO could be just as impactful.

Seriously?

Folks here didn't even want to give up Mitch for AD, lets just say he's really overrated around here. If GS really wanted Mitch I'm pretty sure they would have made an offer for him, they have the assets to get him. They aren't going to give up the 2nd overall pick for a backup to play the Javal McGee role for them though. Lets not kid ourselves, again

How do we know they haven't made an offer for him?

[robillionaire]

I think GS would run the alter if we offered #8 and Mitch for #2. The knicks shouldn't do that though and its probably why no deal has happened because it doesn't make sense for us because like I said even if Wiseman is considered a bigtime prospect? I wouldn't go as far as saying franchise big just yet.

I know many people that think OO could be just as impactful.

Seriously?

Folks here didn't even want to give up Mitch for AD, lets just say he's really overrated around here. If GS really wanted Mitch I'm pretty sure they would have made an offer for him, they have the assets to get him. They aren't going to give up the 2nd overall pick for a backup to play the Javal McGee role for them though. Lets not kid ourselves, again

How do we know they haven't made an offer for him?

there were rumors they were interested in him at the last trade deadline

[HEZI]

I think GS would run the alter if we offered #8 and Mitch for #2. The knicks shouldn't do that though and its probably why no deal has happened because it doesn't make sense for us because like I said even if Wiseman is considered a bigtime prospect? I wouldn't go as far as saying franchise big just yet.

I know many people that think OO could be just as impactful.

Seriously?

Folks here didn't even want to give up Mitch for AD, lets just say he's really overrated around here. If GS really wanted Mitch I'm pretty sure they would have made an offer for him, they have the assets to get him. They aren't going to give up the 2nd overall pick for a backup to play the Javal McGee role for them though. Lets not kid ourselves, again

How do we know they haven't made an offer for him?

Because they are a wise enough organization to not settle for such a trade. Not just settle but to initiate such a trade doesn't make sense. They can do better than that.