# Channing Game 3...



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Future Center of the Knicks (who Zeke would take over Bogut  ) had 5 points today and 2 rebounds.

Bringing his total to 11 rebounds in 3 games. I wonder if the Wizards were playing zone too?


----------



## Knicksfan3 (Jun 23, 2005)

Yeah it wasn't pretty once again for Frye. Some people may look and say that he only played 14 minutes in the game. But if you look at David Lee, he played the same minutes and had 13 points and 6 rebounds. I know its only the Summer League, but Frye has to show us a little something here. On the flip side, Nate continutes to show us that he was worth the pick when we had the Suns take him at 21 to complete the Q Rich deal. I am really loving what Nate is doing right now and he looks like he will be a big part of the Knicks this coming year.


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

whats the excuse this time for frye? 

Butler played well along with the usual great nate

and the wizards played zone for only 1 possesion, and Douglas nailed a 3 in that posession. 

Fryes got a good hook shot...he needs ALOT of work on d.

http://www.vegassummerleague.com/box_score.cfm?game=24

it seems the boxscore has some messed up numbers....nate had like 3 dimes


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

In the articles section of www.clippersdaily.com i posted a small recap of the knicks game today that we were at. Included a few pictures from the game too...


----------



## NYKBaller (Oct 29, 2003)

he had a bad game, SL is really a guards game because you don't get the ball passed to you in the post.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

NYKBaller said:


> he had a bad game, SL is really a guards game because you don't get the ball passed to you in the post.


How does david lee look?guys a good rebounder


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

I couldnt care less about Channings summer league numbers..All I want to see is that he can hold position in the paint and block a couple of shots..The rest will come,either at the 4 or the 5...

Summer league is a test run for bigs to find out what they need to work on.Hopefully the player has the drive to then work on it..


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

*Bottom line is this..*

He is not a savior and no one in the Knicks org said that he was. IT and Herb both said he has skills...Aquire added that he didn't know any of the low post tricks that he needed to know...yet. Also said he couldn't wait to get him in the gym. People need to be patient as Frye will need time...as do most big guys. Only fools will pass judgemnet on any of the 3 this early and in Summer League. 

What can be seen is this...Nate is a talent, for sure. I can't wait to see him when it counts and get a real idea of how good he is. 

Lee is athletic, agressive, and fairly skilled. You can't teach athleticism. He may end up a starter by next year. MAYBE

Frye is active and athletic...not a plodder. He has good fundamentals and gets his hands on a lot of balls. I really think it will be 2 years before we have a real idea of how good he is.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

> Frye is active and athletic...not a plodder. He has good fundamentals and gets his hands on a lot of balls. I really think it will be 2 years before we have a real idea of how good he is.


with that said,shouldnt we have taken Bynum??

In 2 years Bynum could be a beast....


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

truth said:


> with that said,shouldnt we have taken Bynum??
> 
> In 2 years Bynum *could* be a beast....


No truth, he will be a beast. Unfortunately, NY fans aren't patient. I could care less about him scoring points right now. However, he's got to rebound and he's been a poor rebounder his entire career at Zona and now people think he's going to change that in the NBA.

Aguirre needs to show him low post tricks? He just spent 4 years in college. For shame. This is why guys need to come to the pros or NBDL (in the future) ASAP. They don't teach you how to be a pro in college. He's a 4 year product and still needs massive improvement. 

What was the age limit for again?


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

HKF said:


> No truth, he will be a beast. Unfortunately, NY fans aren't patient. I could care less about him scoring points right now. However, he's got to rebound and he's been a poor rebounder his entire career at Zona and now people think he's going to change that in the NBA.
> 
> Aguirre needs to show him low post tricks? He just spent 4 years in college. For shame. This is why guys need to come to the pros or NBDL (in the future) ASAP. They don't teach you how to be a pro in college. He's a 4 year product and still needs massive improvement.
> 
> What was the age limit for again?


it is kind of disheartening that David Lee grabs every board in sight and Channing needs to learn the "tricks" of the trade....

I thin Nykers would have been very patient with Bynum..Not so patient with Frye..The guy has expectations,no doubt..I am expecting 12 and 7 and some shot altering....And I dont mean a pick and roll 12


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

"he had a bad game, SL is really a guards game because you don't get the ball passed to you in the post."

we dont even care about Fryes offense. hes been horrible defensively.he was supposed to be the most NBA ready center we could have taken. and it seems like hes not even ahead of Jackie Butler at this point.

frye isnt supposed to "take time" to contribute, hes 22-23 years old! hes a college graduate. I cant believe this... 

he better prove me wrong.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

PennyHardaway said:


> "he had a bad game, SL is really a guards game because you don't get the ball passed to you in the post."
> we dont even care about Fryes offense. hes been horrible defensively.he was supposed to be the most NBA ready center we could have taken. and it seems like hes not even ahead of Jackie Butler at this point.
> frye isnt supposed to "take time" to contribute, hes 22-23 years old! hes a college graduate. I cant believe this...
> he better prove me wrong.


That is not a good sign...At all...But I still think Zeke is a good evaluator of talent...


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

*Chicken Littles....*

Bynum will NOT be a beast in 2 years...bank it. He probably won't even start unless they are deficient bigtime at center. Will he be a beast? Maybe. But not in 2 years. I would not have minded Bynum at 8, but i still think you guys would have been pisssin and moanin about him this summer. 

HKF...you aren't too bright about these things are you? Aquire said that Frye had to learn how to play down low in the NBA because it is nothing like what they do in college. He has been trained to follow certain rules for 4 years and now needs to learn how to respond to a much more physical set of rules. There are techniques to learn...for everyone.

Truth....Lee is not playing the same position as Frye. He ain't anchored down low. He is free to run and jump where Frye is doing the hand to hand and arm lock combat moves. Can't you guys just relax for a while? The young man has NO NBA experience, yet...and I've heard of no one at the 5 that is wowing everyone in summer league.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

*Re: Chicken Littles....*

I wanted Bynum and was willing to give him time. I always felt like Frye would be average. His summer league play isn't helping me change my mind and he won't change my mind because I feel he was an Araujo-like reach by Isiah.

I don't know why you're saying I'm not too bright alpha. Do you think I'm hurt by you saying that? Just ask truth what I felt about Frye before the draft. I didn't change what I thought about him one bit.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

*I'm not saying..*

that you changed your mind...nor am I trying to hurt you. Just tryin' to get your attention I also wanted Bynum but felt Frye would eventually be a decent center. I just felt Bynum had way more topside. My point is that you can't judge these guys so early. Big men historically take much longer to develop unless they are studs. Frye is not a stud, so we will have to wait.

BTW...curious as to your take on Qrich. Do you like him at the 2? I think I'd rather see him at the 3. Since I'm not a real fan of his, I guess I wouldn't be too broken up if we traded him for Kwame...provided IT has done his homework. I especially like Nate (hated the pick at the time) because of his "pedal to the metal" approach and think he may force a Marbury move. The fans won't sit still long with him on the bench if he continues his play. I just don't think Marbury can play without the ball.


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

im not a huge fan either, but talent wise thats a big decrease, regardless of the position kwame plays, hes a huge uknown. Q is good. better then Jamal. i like him at the 3 as well.

i think nate is perfect for our bench. how many times last season did our team fall apart when the second unit came in? They couldnt score for ****. Nate will score, and he takes high percentage shots, hes not scared of centers at ALL. if you start steph, q and jamal, that leaves nate alot of backup minutes at the 1 spot for when steph or jamal is out of the game


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

*Re: I'm not saying..*



alphadog said:


> that you changed your mind...nor am I trying to hurt you. Just tryin' to get your attention I also wanted Bynum but felt Frye would eventually be a decent center. I just felt Bynum had way more topside. My point is that you can't judge these guys so early. Big men historically take much longer to develop unless they are studs. Frye is not a stud, so we will have to wait.


I don't know, I was just really thinking when Isiah was saying he'd take Frye, he was bluffing. I listen to NY Sports Radio (on Satellite) quite a bit and they were clamoring for no HS kids, which was stupid. I love Isiah's pick of Lee, Nate and Ariza, but this Frye pick I hate, because the Knicks already have guys who are soft on the backboards and aren't intimidators (Maurice Taylor, Tim Thomas, Penny Hardaway and previously Nazr Mohammed). Bynum after two years at UConn would have been a top 5 selection (with Oden, Wright, Durant and Mayo). The Lakers got him at 10 this year. When he's a starting All-Star Center, we'll look back at this Frye pick the same way, Toronto looks at Araujo, when Kris Humphries, Al Jefferson and Robert Swift are all better players. It's just disconcerting.



> BTW...curious as to your take on Qrich. Do you like him at the 2? I think I'd rather see him at the 3. Since I'm not a real fan of his, I guess I wouldn't be too broken up if we traded him for Kwame...provided IT has done his homework. I especially like Nate (hated the pick at the time) because of his "pedal to the metal" approach and think he may force a Marbury move. The fans won't sit still long with him on the bench if he continues his play. I just don't think Marbury can play without the ball.


I will be honest, I'm not a Q-Rich fan at all, but I was sick of Kurt "no low post game" Thomas. Glad to see him go. He was too slow to guard the new breed of versatile power forwards and too undersized to truly stop any great low post offensive players. His whole game was pick and roll, so good riddance. Getting to Q, I'd like him at the 2 and Ariza at the 3(or Thomas and Ariza traded for Croshere and Artest) to give this team so much needed athleticism. If Q can stop settling for 3's and improve his shot selection (going to the rim more would be great) I'd love it.

Nate Robinson is fine with me, but I hope people realize he's an energy guy, scoring force, not a PG and trading Marbury and installing Nate would be a losing proposition. If I had my druthers, this would be the Knicks next year (if Zeke could pull it off)

New York trades: Trevor Ariza and Tim Thomas (expiring)
Indiana trades: Ron Artest and Austin Croshere

New York trades: Jamal Crawford 
Washington trades: Kwame Brown

Knicks:
PG - Stephon Marbury, Nate Robinson
SG - Quentin Richardson, Rueben Douglas, Penny Hardaway (traded soon?)
SF - Ron Artest, Austin Croshere, Jerome Williams
PF - Michael Sweetney, David Lee, Maurice Taylor
C - Kwame Brown, Channing Frye, Malik Rose

NBDL: Jackie Butler

That would be your 14 man rotation. It's a dream, but I think the 2nd deal coudl happen and the first deal could happen, only because I think Granger is the real deal and Ariza is a nice piece and they get rid of Artest's head case problems and Croshere's contract, while getting an expiring. I know Artest is a timebomb, but sometimes you got to take a chance on a guy who is one of the best 10 players in the league and would infuse this team with much needed toughness.


----------



## Debt Collector (Mar 13, 2003)

thats funny, i was just thinking about if we were to somehow get artest, how much it would mirror how we got sprewell. but i dont think larry bird is stupid enough to trade artest.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

*Please don't compare Artest to Spreewell...*

They are nothing alike except both loose cannons. Artest is way bigger and stronger. He has a better deep J, is a magnum defender, and even boards. 


I like that team, H, but it might take a bit more to get Kwame...maybe a pick as well. I see you like Douglas, too. He sure looks like he has something, to me. BTW, I did a quick check on NBA.com and see that most centers(except for the elite) board at a 7-9 clip...even less when they were young. I think Frye will suprize. I also wquestion Q's ability to defend the good 2's. Manu ate him alive. I still think if Nate turns out to be good, quickly, then Steph's days are numbered. Does anyone really think Marbury will encourage someone who is a threat to his position and popularity. This will be a test of his character.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

*Re: Please don't compare Artest to Spreewell...*

Stephon avg. 21.6 ppg, 8.3 apg on 46% shooting. Let's be honest, the only way Steph will lose his position is if Nate Robinson does other things beside scoring. People have to remember that Robinson is 5'8. Well see how he does against pros. I think Nate is a great energy change of pace guy, but I knew whoever drafted him would have a problem containing the enthusiasm for him, simply because he's a 5'8 guy who plays with a lot of energy and can do tomahawk and 360 jams and fans are just not used to a little guy having ups like that.

I always looked at him as a gimmick who could play. His gimmick is the novelty of his height and leaping ability, but then he's a very good basketball player. If Nate was 6'3, Marbury would be in trouble. As it stands now, Marbury shouldn't be in trouble at all.

Oh and if Artest was manageable, he could guard the best wing player and Q could guard the other one. SG or SF.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

*The only stat I care about*

is how well the teams plays when each guy is driving. If Nate averages 10 and 6, but disrupts the other teams offense...AND...we win more consistently because of his personality..etc...then I'll take him over anyone that doesn't make the team go as well. Reps and numbers mean nothing....just winning % matters.

You're right, though. It's merely fun speculation at this point. BTW, if Frye doesn't show improvement after Aquire has worked with him for a while, then I will gladly climb aboard your bandwagon..if there is room..hell, I'll even drive.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

*Re: The only stat I care about*

Well Nate is still 5'8. He is not stopping NBA starting points consistently. If people think he's more than a sub, they'll be disappointed. I don't think Mugsy Bogues could start at 5'3 in this NBA. PG's are on avg. 6'2.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

*Works both ways*

Guys have got to stop him as well. Bogues couldn't be stopped....he went to hole and caused mismatches at will. If the guy could shoot he'd have been an all star. He was amazing given he was actually BAD at shooting the ball.

Webb was another guy that had a nice career. Injuries limited his effectiveness later in his career. The are a few guys that are 5'11 but no where near the strength of Nate. I have seen amzing things in the time I have been watching NBA ball. A 6'6 all defensive team center (wallace) and great rebounder and a 6'4 1/2" top 10 or 15 player in the history of the game(Barkley). Their strength and heart are what set them apart. He won't shock me if he is able to do it. Every position has had it's undersized stars...it won't change. I assume yoou play or played at one time. Have younever been guarded by a smaller guy that gave you fits? I'm 6'4 and I have (basterds..). By the same token, I have guarded some 6'10+ guys that had to work very hard to score on me. Thats when it gets fun. We'll see.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

*Re: Works both ways*

I'm 6'3 and a former PG, but I always relished playing little guys because I could post them up and shoot over them with ease. Yes, Nate could be them (one of the greats), but citing NBA abnormalities over the course of a 20 year period, just proves how difficult it is (to be great and undersized).

Mugsy Bogues, Michael Adams, Spudd Webb all around the same time, but then came Dana Barros, then Boykins. Guys under 5'10, succeeding in this league (as stars) is difficult. I think he'll be a fan favorite and super sub, but as a starter in the NBA, I think he'll be a liability.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

*Re: Chicken Littles....*

Alphadog....look at HKF's rep and look at yours. 

:nonono:


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

^^that doesnt mean anything.

i really think that having nate on the bench will get us alot more wins. our second unit was just so terrible last year, they couldnt score at all. Nate is a scoring machine


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: Chicken Littles....*



The Krakken said:


> Alphadog....look at HKF's rep and look at yours.
> 
> :nonono:


just out of curiousity,what is rep and how does it work??


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

*Re: Chicken Littles....*



truth said:


> just out of curiousity,what is rep and how does it work??


It just means people agree with what you say I guess. I rarely hand it out, unless someone makes me laugh. 

Also, The Krakken has been known to make jokes. He wasn't being serious.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: Works both ways*



HKF said:


> I'm 6'3 and a former PG, but I always relished playing little guys because I could post them up and shoot over them with ease. Yes, Nate could be them (one of the greats), but citing NBA abnormalities over the course of a 20 year period, just proves how difficult it is (to be great and undersized).
> 
> Mugsy Bogues, Michael Adams, Spudd Webb all around the same time, but then came Dana Barros, then Boykins. Guys under 5'10, succeeding in this league (as stars) is difficult. I think he'll be a fan favorite and super sub, but as a starter in the NBA, I think he'll be a liability.


HKF,the odds are not stacked in Nates favor,but he is a special talent.The guy is a world class athlete,and he packs 180-185 on his frame..The truth of the matter is,if you are a 1 and under 5'11" does it matter if you are 5'6" or 5'10"?? Not really.The odds are you arent blocking anyones shot anyway,so as long as you can body up,and stop penetration you are there.You actually want the opposing pg to post you up as that is completely disruptin the opposing teams flow.Nate has what matters:speed,quickness,hops and most importantly strength.Of course skill is paramount..

You also are leaving out the one lil PG who stand above all..Calvin Murphy.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

*Re: Works both ways*

I didn't forget Calvin Murphy. He didn't play in the NBA in the last 20 years. He retired in 1983. At some point you can't go too far, because the players have changed dramatically since 1980. They are much bigger.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: Works both ways*



HKF said:


> I didn't forget Calvin Murphy. He didn't play in the NBA in the last 20 years. He retired in 1983. At some point you can't go too far, because the players have changed dramatically since 1980. They are much bigger.


True,but Calvin is the only one who really made an impact.....hes my measuring stick for lil guys....

And i agree with you..the chances of him starting in the NBA are pretty small.But of al the little guys to come out in the last 20 years,he is the most physically gifted...


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

*Re: Works both ways*

But is he the better player than Boykins, even being more physically gifted? I think they're comparable, but he will be allowed to Freelance more then Boykins was at the start of his career.

Bokyins career numbers (before the pros): 


> MIN FG% 3P% FT% RPG APG TPG BPG SPG PPG
> 94-95 E Michigan 32.5 41.3 34.3 70.3 2.4 4.5 2.3 0.1 1.7 12.5
> 95-96 E Michigan 33.3 43.2 30.7 80.4 2.3 5.8 2.5 0.1 1.9 15.5
> 96-97 E Michigan 36.3 42.3 30.0 85.2 2.1 4.6 3.6 0.0 1.9 19.1
> 97-98 E Michigan 36.9 47.2 40.7 81.6 2.3 5.5 3.2 0.1 1.9 25.7


----------



## Biggestfanoftheknicks (Apr 14, 2005)

HKF said:


> Future Center of the Knicks (who Zeke would take over Bogut  ) had 5 points today and 2 rebounds.
> 
> Bringing his total to 11 rebounds in 3 games. I wonder if the Wizards were playing zone too?



3 games into the SL season and Frye already has his first hater.


----------



## Biggestfanoftheknicks (Apr 14, 2005)

In that same vein stop with all the Nate hype. I was on board before any of you even wanted this kid in the first round and I'll tell you straight up the kid is a liablity. Boykins is almost as athletic and is an amazing shooter, if a team choses a 3 2 zone nate will have almost no penetration due to the size of the players collapsing on him. It's the SL folks.. where's that Mchale quote.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Biggestfanoftheknicks said:


> 3 games into the SL season and Frye already has his first hater.


Why am I a Frye hater? Is it because I don't think he's more than a backup big man in this league or avg. starter? Just because someone is critical of another person's game doesn't make them a hater.

What possible reason would I have to want to see Frye fail? I'd love to see him do well, but I don't believe in him at all. That doesn't make me a hater. I wanted Andrew Bynum here, but Isiah knew he didn't have two years to wait on Bynum to develop into a force.

A Frye hater? Give me a break. You don't get haters when you're an average player. Haters are people who keep dumping on a player, even when they are still producing. I'm simply spitting the truth on Frye.

Other scouts and NBA people think he is "soft" and needs to shed that label.


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

Nate seems to shoot the nba three well. have you been watching these summerleague games? 

and if theres a zone, we got jamal q and tim.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

HKF said:


> Why am I a Frye hater? Is it because I don't think he's more than a backup big man in this league or avg. starter? Just because someone is critical of another person's game doesn't make them a hater.
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> ...


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

PennyHardaway said:


> Nate seems to shoot the nba three well. have you been watching these summerleague games?
> 
> and if theres a zone, we got jamal q and tim.


i would just let TT hoist them up...hes a much better shooter than the other 2


----------



## Biggestfanoftheknicks (Apr 14, 2005)

HKF said:


> Future Center of the Knicks (who Zeke would take over Bogut  ) had 5 points today and 2 rebounds.
> 
> Bringing his total to 11 rebounds in 3 games. I wonder if the Wizards were playing zone too?


Also read the whole interview, Zeke was sick of being asked questions that he didn't want to answer. Zeke sucks with the media and just go pushed to the point where he wanted to move on and was going to say anything to do it.


----------



## Biggestfanoftheknicks (Apr 14, 2005)

HKF said:


> *A Frye hater? Give me a break. You don't get haters when you're an average player*. Haters are people who keep dumping on a player, even when they are still producing. I'm simply spitting the truth on Frye.
> 
> Other scouts and NBA people think he is "soft" and needs to shed that label.



hahhaa ironic!!!

You've made what two three threads dedicated to bashing the guy? Enough already we get it you don't like the guy really we get it. Enjoy posting about him sucking because hey its the internet just don't be a punk about it, you don't like the guy, own up to it already.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

*Re: Chicken Littles....*



HKF said:


> Also, The Krakken has been known to make jokes. He wasn't being serious.


Its all I do. :laugh:


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I don't like him as a basketball player, because I felt Zeke had better players who he didn't pick and made the pick to protect his job from the media. Do you like when better players get passed on for need based picks? How do you think Raptor fans feel seeing Araujo (the bust) picked over Josh Smith, Andre Iguodala, Sebastian Telfair, Al Jefferson and JR Smith? 

That's how Knick fans will feel later on down the road, when they look back and see how good Bynum, Granger, Graham and Green are.

Basketball is about Best Players Available. You worry about need in FA (or through trades).


----------



## Max Payne (Mar 2, 2004)

This just really sucks for the Knicks. The last thing they need is for their biggest guy to be a sucky rebounder. It's one thing for Sweets to rebound like a beast but the Knicks need a 5 man that can rip down the boards.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Biggestfanoftheknicks said:


> hahhaa ironic!!!
> 
> You've made what two three threads dedicated to bashing the guy? Enough already we get it you don't like the guy really we get it. Enjoy posting about him sucking because hey its the internet just don't be a punk about it, you don't like the guy, own up to it already.


It has to be you..is this KBF??? Own up to it..the style is exactly the same...


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Max Payne said:


> This just really sucks for the Knicks. The last thing they need is for their biggest guy to be a sucky rebounder. It's one thing for Sweets to rebound like a beast but the Knicks need a 5 man that can rip down the boards.


I havent seen any of the games,but it sounds like he is always out of position to board cause hes being too aggressive going for the block...


----------



## knickstorm (Jun 22, 2003)

HKF said:


> No truth, he will be a beast. Unfortunately, NY fans aren't patient. I could care less about him scoring points right now. However, he's got to rebound and he's been a poor rebounder his entire career at Zona and now people think he's going to change that in the NBA.
> 
> Aguirre needs to show him low post tricks? He just spent 4 years in college. For shame. This is why guys need to come to the pros or NBDL (in the future) ASAP. They don't teach you how to be a pro in college. He's a 4 year product and still needs massive improvement.
> 
> What was the age limit for again?


knick fans not patient?? when did we last have an instant impact draft pick??? never, didn't stop us from taking mediocre sweetney etc. Knick fans would not be upset if we draft green and just saw flashes for year 1.

If Kwame Brown had half the brain Frye does he'd be at least a solid contributor by now. But because Frye is obviously motivated and has the work ethic, I know he'll be fine and I'm not worried about these games.

Why is everyone on Bynum's boat all of a sudden? 2 weeks before the draft no one even looked at the kid. This guy wouldn't even start at UCONN next year, and people here claim he'll be a force in a couple years? Ridiculous, Bynum has bust written all over him. Of course if he sits on the bench for the next 2 years, everyone will just be saying he's on the Jermaine O'Neal track.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

knickstorm said:


> knick fans not patient?? when did we last have an instant impact draft pick??? never, didn't stop us from taking mediocre sweetney etc. Knick fans would not be upset if we draft green and just saw flashes for year 1.


I don't mean fans per say. I mean the media. If you listen to WFAN or ESPN1050, they are very what have you done for me lately? I sometimes watch Mike & The Mad Dog on YES and even though the Mets are rebuilding, fans still are delusional thinking the team would contend this year.

With the Knicks all I heard (on Stephen A.'s show) is don't draft a HS kid. Take Frye, I like the way he sounds. However in a city looking for a big presence, I was disappointed because better talent was on the board. Layden messed this team up so much that Isiah is afraid to take a chance, because the media would almost force Dolan's hand, even though he should give Isiah at least until the end of next season to have this franchise in the right direction (because that's how big Layden's mess was and that's when Houston would have come off the books).

Unfortunately, this Frye pick by the end of 2006-07 is going to look bad and it might doom Isiah anyway, because we know the Knicks won't be bad enough to get Greg Oden. We just know it.


----------



## knickstorm (Jun 22, 2003)

HKF said:


> I don't mean fans per say. I mean the media. If you listen to WFAN or ESPN1050, they are very what have you done for me lately? I sometimes watch Mike & The Mad Dog on YES and even though the Mets are rebuilding, fans still are delusional thinking the team would contend this year.
> 
> With the Knicks all I heard (on Stephen A.'s show) is don't draft a HS kid. Take Frye, I like the way he sounds. However in a city looking for a big presence, I was disappointed because better talent was on the board. Layden messed this team up so much that Isiah is afraid to take a chance, because the media would almost force Dolan's hand, even though he should give Isiah at least until the end of next season to have this franchise in the right direction (because that's how big Layden's mess was and that's when Houston would have come off the books).
> 
> Unfortunately, this Frye pick by the end of 2006-07 is going to look bad and it might doom Isiah anyway, because we know the Knicks won't be bad enough to get Greg Oden. We just know it.


nah I disagree. Isiah isn't making his picks based on pleasing the NY media. The mets aren't rebuilding, you're rebuilding when you unload all your big salaries. THe mets signed 2 bona-fide studs in the off season, that's no rebuilding. If they were rebuilding Piazza would've been gone by now, along with Beltran and Pedro, but they're all here. Of course the radio stations are what have you done for me lately, that's how you keep things newsy. There's no point talking about last year. AT the same time, they do look at track record. No one at the FAN said Randy JOhnson was done when he struggled, same with MAriano earlier in the year.

I dont think the Frye pick is going to look bad cause he'll be solid. But hey will there be someone drafted lower whose better?? Course there's a chance, but does that make Isiah an idiot?? Nope. If a guy looks like garbage in his workout, and ends up being a stud at the pro level, it's not your fault because there's no way you would've drafted him.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

knickstorm said:


> I dont think the Frye pick is going to look bad cause he'll be solid. But hey will there be someone drafted lower whose better?? Course there's a chance, but does that make Isiah an idiot?? Nope. If a guy looks like garbage in his workout, and ends up being a stud at the pro level, it's not your fault because there's no way you would've drafted him.


I always said that workouts are not a good indication of a player's ability because you're not playing in a game environment against people. Chris Taft dropped all the way to 42, but when he's starting 5 years from now and being productive, people are going to wonder why he dropped so far and it's going to be simply because he's not a workout warrior.

Luke Jackson was a workout warrior and even though he put up gaudy stats at Oregon as a senior, he always had the ball in his hands to do that. When he came to the pros, the ball went out of his hands and he became almost utterly useless, although everyone wants to say it was his back, but how can you hide a back injury from Doctors from July to December? If you could hide an injury that long, the team doctors should be fired.

I just don't like workout warriors, never have, never will. Shane Battier did all the drills in every single workout without tiring and he's a nice role player, but he was taken too high at No. 6.

I'm going to look at the past few drafts and see what *senior* got taken too high based off of their workouts and not the fact that they seemed to be polished products who were what they are. Nothing spectacular, just solid role players.

2005 Channing Frye
2004 No. 10 Luke Jackson (Sebastian Telfair, Josh Smith, JR Smith, Al Jefferson, Tony Allen, Trevor Ariza all selected after him)
2003 No. 7 Kirk Hinrich (he defied odds)
2002 no one
2001 No. 6 Shane Battier (Richard Jefferson, Joe Johnson, Zach Randolph, Gilbert Arenas, Tony Parker, Troy Murphy, Bobby Simmons, Jamaal Tinsley, Samuel Dalembert)
2000 (this entire draft was a bust)
1999 No. 11 Trajan Langdon (Corey Maggette, Ron Artest, Jeff Foster) 

If Frye turns out to be a solid starter, while other guys go on to become stars, it's going to be disheartening. All I'm saying.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

2004- Rafael Araujo 6-11 280 C BYU Sr.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

f22egl said:


> 2004- Rafael Araujo 6-11 280 C BYU Sr.


Oh yeah, supposedly he blew David Harrison out during a workout. I said he needed to lose a lot of weight and improve his conditioning, while he was in college, so what's the first thing you hear when he's in the pros? He's too heavy, he needs to lose weight. Only problem is, in 2003 NCAA's he got schooled by Okafor and ballooned up out of control. Now he's a stiff and a scrub.


----------



## BenDengGo (Feb 1, 2004)

so he can rebound after all 11 boards againts nets....but 10 fouls, eww


----------



## thekid (Apr 3, 2003)

The fouls in the summer can be misleading sometimes. I expect more out of a polished college player like Frye though.


----------



## Biggestfanoftheknicks (Apr 14, 2005)

Here's a scouting type from the man. You can always tell if a player is ready to contribute when the dominate. This rule is exclusive to highschool kids.Bynum didn't dominate by any stretch of the imagination in two years he'll be fine but not a beast, not at least for four. Use guys like Jefferson and Amare if you need to but watch out for 20 year olds in highschool, they'll fool ya.


Anyway so channing has to learn some things so what? No one expected him to be patrick ewing or anything close, just servicable, we all knew this. Lee is looking more and more like a steal and I'm happy to see him thrive but the scrutiny on frye is a little silly. Also show me the NYK fan that isn't ready to rebuild after this point and I'll show you the fan who's been watching since the Marbury days.


----------



## Biggestfanoftheknicks (Apr 14, 2005)

HKF said:


> .
> 
> Luke Jackson was a workout warrior and even though he put up gaudy stats at Oregon as a senior, he always had the ball in his hands to do that. When he came to the pros, the ball went out of his hands and he became almost utterly useless, although everyone wants to say it was his back, but how can you hide a back injury from Doctors from July to December? If you could hide an injury that long, the team doctors should be fired.


Um this happens all the time bro. Seriously. I wouldn't even come close to callin LJ useless.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Biggestfanoftheknicks said:


> Um this happens all the time bro. Seriously. I wouldn't even come close to callin LJ useless.


I'm not your bro. Well Ferry is already looking at people willing to take Jackson, so someone might be thinking otherwise.


----------



## Biggestfanoftheknicks (Apr 14, 2005)

HKF said:


> I'm not your bro. Well Ferry is already looking at people willing to take Jackson, so someone might be thinking otherwise.


Okay then you can be my bra.


----------

