lol...."stress free", seriously?
Lawson is a NCAA Champion and a proven leader, he could play with stress or without.
And coming off the bench, theres no room for error. You have to impress the team as a rookie. I don't know how being a NBA rookie, esecpailly a PG is "stress free", especially when the standard is Chauncey Billups. When your a starter, your job and position is already SET, you could make errors but the coach is still going to stick with you, look at D'Antoni and Duhon for example.
Lawson is going to be a top 5 PG in the NBA, mark my words...I wanted Rubio, if not Rubio, then Lawson.
I was telling people we had to draft Lawson at 8, and people said it was too high.
It's hard to really fathom what went on with the Knick's draft strategy. I really wanted Eric Gordon but they selected Danillo Galinari. I was perplexed b/c I thought Gordon could have been molded into a Steve Nash clone.
BUT, after watching the NBA playoffs last season (watching the success that 6"10' point-forwards who can shoot were having) and then seeing Danillo with my own eyes this year... WELL, I can tell you that I think the Knicks made a fantastic choice.
Danilo has the talent, the touch, the competitiveness and brains that are rare to find in a true 6"10' body! Gordon is solid (and Lopez emerged as a legit center), but I have to give credit where credit is due.
WITH THAT SAID..... Let's take a look at the last draft. WAY TOO EARLY to judge. I mean, look at Courtney Lee. He looked great playing a role in ORL last year but is doing nothing this year. SO, playing a reserve role in DEN is alot different than being stuck here in NY.
STILL.... I was one person (and I'm a Duke fan) who was high on Ty Lawson. He was clearly the MVP (though Tyler Hansboro got the attention). When Lawson played well, UNC was unbeatable. He runs, is tough (NBA ready) and makes big shots. He would have been a terrific PG here.
The question remained: was he worth the 8th pick? As it turned out though (and Walsh is pal's with Minny's new GM) Ty Lawson could've been had IF.... Would Chandler get it done? Was that a fair trade? Who knows.
As for BJ and the rest of our options.... LOOK, we have to reserve judgement and see how it plays out. David Lee will not be here next year. Jordan Hill has the shooting touch to be the perfect D'ant PF. He's also a fresh, raw, big body. Let's not base our evaluations on who is best through 10 games, but who is best in 3 years.
I also liked Douglas.... STILL, Blair was a NO BRAINER. The knees might have scared you.... but if we drafted Hill and Blair, and traded for Lawson. I would be happy (and maybe we still trade for Rubio).
SO, if we end up getting Rubio here, and Hill becomes a force.... Like Danillo.... we'll forget about everything else.
I would have loved to have Lawson too. Unbridled speed, D, Winner, instant factor.
If it weren't for Douglas [who's still pretty raw], this year would be fubar.
Hill is a muppet. Sadly, Donnie was trying to fill Lee's potential post exit void. Now as it turns out, Lee is playing like a ballerina and Hill constantly fails to impress.
I'm ****ing sick of this year so far.
frederic weis over ron artest (kicked off the bull**** of the past decade)
jordan hill over brandon jennings... hope its not the start of another nightmare!!!
Why is everyone labeling Hill a bust? He hasn't even been given consistent minutes on this team. I honestly like what I've seen from Hill. He's aggressive, goes for rebounds, and can shoot pretty well. Of course he's going to make mistakes, he's a ROOKIE. Also like I said before, there's no one on the coaching staff to teach this kid to take his game to the NBA level. Herb Williams is not going to cut it. I think given more time to play, Hill is going to become into a great player. He has the work ethic and mature mentality to do it.
now George Karl will take whatever he gets from his rookie, sure; but no way Lawson "has" to do anything but sit back and learn. If he struggles its like "ok he's a rookie and we have Chauncy" and if he doesnt perform well, the team is in just as good a position to make it far in the playoffs without him.
Please show me the pressure to perform.
Having Chauncy play in front of you doesnt create a standard, but rather provides a cushion.
Now about the fact that he is a former NCAA championship winner making him ready made for the league, not all NCAA championship PG's handle the pressure of The NBA, remember Tyus Edney or Mateen Cleaves?
I'm not sayin Lawson wont be a top 5 PG one day, I'm just saying there is no way he would look as good being a ful-time starter his rookie season, especially playing with our group of misfits!
I am also saying that it is too early to dismiss Hill, Rasheed Wallace looked like a bust during the early part of his rookie season -I live in DC and I can remember laughing at the then Bullets for drafting him- but he came on strong at the end and we all know now he is one of the better PFs in the league.
You ever heard of first impressions?
As a NBA rookie, the stress levels are high, this is well known.
You're entering a new job and no one knows what you can do.
When your established and starting, everything is already set and the stress is MUCH less because you know whats coming....awareness is high and assertion is there.
and having one of the best playing infront of you just increases the standard, which is more stress due to higher expectations.
Lawson has been awesome man, what are you crying about?
Lawson is a leader, he's no shoot first chuck machine like Jennings, Lawson has timeless passing skills and would upgrade this team everyway possible Hill can never do.
Lawson uplifts his teammates when he plays well.
Hill uplifts himself when he plays well...we have way too many individual players, when they play well, its all individual....very isolated production.
Comparing Hill to Rasheed is type ignorant, considering Rasheed was an extremely talented prospect, probably the most talented of our decade; who many believe he underacheived despite a very good career.
Hill is going to do things, but nothing special.
He's not worth the 8th.
Its not too early to say he's a bust at 8.
It was a bad pick.
It is a bad pick.
It will be a bad pick.
Give your hopes up and realize the Knicks passed on their biggest weakness: a point guard.
Our defense is HOPELESS, but we're suppose to have a good offense.
The key to that good offense is a point guard, which we don't have.
No point guard = non competitive basketball because you dont have a ball handler who can create offense, just a lot of guys running out of the paint to swing the ball around the 3pt line...
Its just mad foolish to support the Hill pick.
He's a PF, not a center.
We have Lee, who may not be here for the future, but Hill won't have a productive 1st season...dude isn't suppose to be a project, he's an upper class man from the NCAA....no 1 and done guy.
Lets say Hill gets minutes.
What is he going to do?
Enough of this lameness...Wilson Chandler type hype....a guy is young and produces a little and everyone wants to gloryfy him for being average.
Enough of average....Lawson is a great prospect who can propel this offense into efficient and faster scorer.
We're trying to run a fast break offense with slow-minded and slow-motioned players (Jefferies, Gallinari(not slow minded) Duhon, Lee, Harrington, etc)
Not drafting Lawson will haunt us for years....just like not drafting Lopez the year before.
**** if we had Lawson Blair and Lopez...sign James ...thats a championship team right htere.
Seriously, Hill has looked good in limited minutes. I have been shocked by his shooting touch, and he looks good crashing the boards. The reason he looks kind of lost on D and fouls too much is because he has barely played, Mike D needs to give him a shot. Honestly, I'd try giving him all of Jeffries minutes just for the hell of it and see what happens. We all agree we desperately need a PG though, it is getting kind of ridiculous watching Duhon try and run this team.
Ok.....most of your reply was talking about how good Lawson is/will be, which is a point that I supported you on in my first reply. So dont see how I am "crying about anything"
I am not saying Hill will be a better player than Lawson, but I am saying Hill will be a better player than what he is showing so far. Is he the 8th best rookie in the league after 10 games, no! But Charlie V. was better than Deron Williams after 10 games, Damon Stoudimire was better than Antonio McDyess after a full season and who had the better career.....think about it
Plus rememeber a few years back when people were crying about us not drafting Marcus Williams after he had an impressive start to his rookie season...where is he now?.....I guess it is important for me to make sure you know that I am not comparing Williams to Lawson, I dont want 3000 word reply contrasting Lawson and Williams games! My point is...rookie stats mean jack
Now Jr., true foolishness is not me hoping for the best out of the player we drafted, but rather sitting back and talking shouldve, couldve,wouldve.
Lawson wasnt drafted by the Knicks
Lawson is not a Knick
And will never be a Knick
Now the Rasheed Wallace comparison is totally accurate considering I am not comparing how they play, but rather the fact that Rasheed was a rookie PF who struggled at first too, get it? And for the record scouts consider Hill to be a "talented prospect" too. You act as if drafting Hill was like drafting a no name player like Balkman. Early Mock drafts had him as high as 4 or 5
Also you still have not at all made sense of your argument that there is a lot of pressure on a backup PG who is playing behind an elite PG.....
I mean could anyone really tell off he top of their head the backups for Chris Paul, Deron Williams,Jason Kidd, Nash, or even Nelson? No! because their role is minimal; come in play some spot minutes and try to weather the storm and not make too many blunders while the starting PG is sitting.....the ideal role for a rookie PG!
Try Again on your points if you can.
What we do not knowis his heart. Is he ferocious? Will he attack the boards and play defense with a chip on his shoulder? I have not seen an inkling to this so far.
AGAIN, I do think Hill has potential. He might be something. HIs thing is he'll take at least 203 years before we start to see something emerge (more than him just socring points). BUT, in the meantime, if he can just become a potent scorer.... we can live with it.
The big issue is this: Can Chandler, Gall & Hill coexist? Do the compliment one another? Can they be a SG-SF-PF or a SF-PF-C combination? Especially if you sourround them with talent? Does this work with potential free agents?
Is this a fearsome fivesome?
Could this work with Lebron James?
AGAIN, i must admit, I was on record saying I didn't want to draft BJ (and that I wanted Eric Gordon). I like Gallo now, and my BJ thinking was based on rumor and innuendo, and we still might be happy with the Jordan pick. Will it be too late? Would having BJ over Hill been enough to lure Lebron? Will we lose out on attracting free agents b/c of Hill? We'll see!