Frye is a more talented ballplayer than given credit for, but he’s a guy without a position. He’s not tough enough, good enough in the post, or a good enough rebounder to be the typical PF. His skills are closer to those of a SF, but he doesn’t excel enough from the outside or as a ball handler to be a really good SF either. I think he needs to find a role on a team with a lot of very versatile players where he can be mixed and matched properly.

He’s also had a lot of nagging injuries since his first year that have hindered his development if not slowed him down.

I would take Rubio/Curry at PG if available.

I would take James Harden at SG if available.

I would take Jordan Hill at PF/C. If Lee is moved, Hill could take his spot at PF and we could bring in another piece. If Lee is not moved, Hill could play C in the same way Lee did, but probably more effectively.

Other than that, there’s not a single player I want (other than Blake Griffin who we can be sure won’t be available).

If none of those players are available, I don’t want to waste the #8 pick on a player that will not fill an important role in the D’Antoni system over the long haul. I don’t like players like Holiday, Flynn, Evans, Thabeet, Derozan and others. I see limitations. So I would advocate trading down for a couple of picks, buy a 3rd, then select a few good athletes and pray one turns into a starter. I would also be satisfied with trading down and picking up Ty Lawson and another pick.

My point was that we don’t have the foresight to say which prospects will get in a motorcycle accident, for example, next summer. I think it’s as likely the guy picked #8 will do it as the guy picked #2. (Thabeet might be a good bet to never get on a motorcycle because of the sheer awkwardness, but then again if he does get on one he’s a good bet to fall…)

I agree that there’s a great deal of risk involved in trading up or just making any draft choice in general. You always risk passing on the next whoever. All you can do is limit you downside risk and maximize your upside potential based on the information you have at hand. I just think it’s very clear that Rubio can step on the court tomorrow and be at least an NBA player, and that he’s also a good bet to continue developing and become a special NBA player. I could be wrong in the first place or maybe he gets struck by lightning tomorrow, but I think he’s worth taking some degree of risk to get instead of taking someone you know isn’t likely to be good like Jordan Hill or Demar DeRozan, for example. I think that the best risk/reward move for the Knicks would be to stay at 8 or trade down very slightly and get Lawson. At 8 I’d be thinking Lawson, Curry, or maybe Tyreke Evans (did I really say that, I’m warming up to him since his floor is so high).
It seems those Memphis rumors might be bogus anyway, and taking on salary to take Rubio hurts a possibility with a lot more upside potential as well as downside risk: getting LeBron (downside risk being the chance the Knicks are left high and dry).

I don’t know about that. TJ looks very good when healthy but he has missed a ton of time and they really limit his minutes due to that spine issue. At his best TJ looks way better but you have to consider durability and total production and TJ takes a huge hit in those areas. So I thought a push was fair. Plus Darko takes a bit more flack for being selected ahead of 3 all stars. Had he been the 7th pick who would care what he is doing now?

I actually see Frye as even with Williams as Frye looked very good his first year while Williams did next to nothing until about last year. Williams gained the edge last season but overall its closer to a push than a sure thing I’d say. I tried to consider the total body of work and not who is ahead today. Though I would give Williams much higher odds of an All Star team than I would Frye today.

On Jay Williams and Francis:

You can’t play the hindsight card about when the pick was made or who got hurt. It has to viewed absent hindsight as we wont have the advantage of hindsight when deciding if Rubio will be the best PG of his class. I’m just saying Rubio could be the best or he could not be. We will not know for years and if we are wrong we could have traded a star before we knew we had one. I’m just not a risk taker, hence my stance on betting the farm on this guy.

” Among the other things I have been hearing throughout the day – the Knicks interest in trading for the No.2 pick to swipe Rubio said to be legitimate – are a few red-not nuggets from former Italian league coach and Milan-based television analyst Dan Peterson. The former Delaware head coach, it appears, is not a fan of Brandon Jennings. During our conversation Wednesday afternoon, Peterson ripped into Jennings, who last week suggested to The Bee that Rubio was little more than a You Tube sensation.
“Ricky Rubio is not overhyped,” said Peterson, who broadcast several of Jennings’ games last season for Lottomatica Virtus Roma. “Jennings is overhyped. He has it all backwards. He is all about trying to dominate one-on-one, all concerned with individual talent. I find it hilarious.”
Peterson went on to say that he liked Jennings’ quickness and talent, but didn’t think he was NBA-ready. Rubio, he says, is NBA ready. “One of the things that happens in the NBA, everybody has a theory on what a guy can’t do. That’s all you hear. Sacramento would be very lucky to get Ricky Rubio. It would be a good place for (Rubio), the capital city of California, not too big. He is just a terrific player, though he needs to improve his three-point shooting. He gets into the lane, draws fouls, has the whole package. People would love him there. He’s a winner. I would throw myself in front of a bus for Ricky Rubio. But I would have a hard time having Brandon Jennings on my team. I would send him home.”
Ouch. Jennings DID apologize to Rubio, by the way.
Boys, boys, boys …

Why Peterson’s words matter

When trolling for information before the NBA Draft, and relying on international sources as well as NBA types for insights, I tend to avoid the couch potato/stats geeks and consult with the coaches/scouts/sources who actually observe prospects during live games and practices. Thus, Peterson is an invaluable resource. Additionally, he has a rich history with the NBA and its international expansion. As I might have mentioned before, my introduction to Peterson occurred when David Stern trotted him out to a press conference in the old Boston Garden during the Celtics-Rockets NBA Finals. The two gentlemen sat on the dais, talking about some player named “Drazen Petrovic” who would someday be an NBA star, and insisting that several other international players had the talent and desire to play in the league. As I reminded Peterson on Wednesday – and recalling that the Boston Globe’s Bob Ryan was seated alongside – I rolled my eyes, shook my head, and complained about wasting my time at a pregame press conference, when I could have been in the Celtics locker room listening to the latest witty offerings from Bird, McHale, Parish, D.J., etc. So, hey, how dumb was I? Three years later, the walls came down, Petrovic, Vlade Divac, Zarko Paspalj, Sarunas Marciulionis and Sasha Volkov signed NBA contracts, and the rest, as they say, was history. I will say it again. How dumb was I? Really, really, really dumb …”

But of course you’re right it’s subjective – no one’s going to win or lose this argument for a year or more, when we see these guys play in the NBA.

And I agree, definitely worth trying a buy a pick before you give up an asset. I wouldn’t worry about the “no” from Memphis – I doubt anyone is selling their pick before draft day. Memphis, New Orleans, Minnesota and Atlanta can always hope that someone will step up to offer a player — or hope their favorite guy falls a few spots. Once the evening gets rolling and their illusions are shattered, deals will be made.

I’m hoping that’s one minor advantage Walsh has over Thomas – no one’s about to do Zeke any favors, but I have a feeling there’s more than one GM who would take Walsh’s $3 million over $3 million from some guy they hate, like Kevin Pritchard.

Like the research, but I think a few of those examples are stilted:

-This one goes in the favor of #8: can you really call Darko and TJ Ford a push??? I’d give it to Ford. That said, the “right” pick at #2 would have been Melo, Wade, or Bosh… all get a significant edge over Ford, IMO.
-Marvin Williams looks a lot better than Frye, but I guess it’s too early to call.
-Jay Williams is a bit of a DQ, could happen to a #8 pick as easily as a #2.
-Miller has had the better career, but Francis was more highly regarded in his prime. Again, decline could happen to a #8 as easily as #2. Also, the Grizz taking Francis was clearly a mistake and Baron Davis or Lamar Odom might have been willing to play in Vancouver.

So, if I were to nullify 2002, and 1999, you’re left with twice the #8 has been better: 2000 and 2003 (again, there were better options available). So, by that would be about 15% of the time. Durant has outperformed B. Wright to date, and Beasley had a significantly better rookie season than Alexander… so if those trends continue we’re at 13% of the time.

I agree that “ceiling” is often overvalued and is a subjective measure. There is necessarily a subjective component to the draft.
In this case I think it’s valid to talk about a “ceiling,” though. Rubio has stood out subjectively and in some statistical categories at a very young age. It’s impossible to say definitively how hard he will work and how much he will improve in the coming years (as with any prospect), but it’s fair to say that he can stand out as a passer/play-maker/floor general, be a good defender who at least causes TOs, and become anywhere from a below average to well above average scorer. He’s got a high ceiling and production at a high level, unlike Holiday, Jennings, DeRozan, Mullins, and (IMO) Evans. When looking at a draft prospect you have to weigh a large number of variables, and for Rubio he gets strong grades across most categories to the point where his ceiling makes him particularly stick out in a draft where there seem to be few players capable of being All-NBA even if they reach their fullest possible potential.
There will always be draft surprises, but you have to make the best decision based on the info at hand. I guess you believe that the drafter’s (GM, decision maker within org.) ability has little to do with the outcome of a draft pick, that it’s just a numbers game/crap shoot. If so, that’s where we disagree.

If you can buy a pick to take Lawson, then absolutely I would not trade Chandler. My point wasn’t really to trade Chandler to just sort of roll the dice on a pick in the teens, but for Walshtoni to use him to get the player they really like in that range (Lawson in Walsh’s case, maybe Holiday in D’Antoni’s).
The only issue is if you buy, say, the #21 pick and Lawson (assuming he’s your guy) is off the board.

“Also, I really like Rubio and think we should try to get him. I just don’t like him enough to give up the 8, Wil, and Mobley’s expiring while taking back Jaric’s deal.” -TDM

Fair enough.