Author Topic: Malik Monk Thread (Merged)  (Read 4293 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Malik Monk is a stud.
« Reply #30 on: December 26, 2016, 10:18:31 AM »

Offline triboy16f

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15996
  • Tommy Points: 315
Monk has below average height, wingspan, strength for a SG

You know, Jordan Crawford once went off at a college game. 

Monk will be better but odds are stacked against him to perform the way he is now vs college players vs nba calibre player. Especially on the defensive end

Re: Malik Monk is a stud.
« Reply #31 on: December 27, 2016, 12:53:36 PM »

Offline CelticGuardian

  • Isaiah Thomas
  • Posts: 816
  • Tommy Points: 41
  • Blood. Sweat. & Tears.
Monk has below average height, wingspan, strength for a SG

You know, Jordan Crawford once went off at a college game. 

Monk will be better but odds are stacked against him to perform the way he is now vs college players vs nba calibre player. Especially on the defensive end

Man, if he's better than a guy why even compare them? I feel like that's just a lazy way to disregard someone's talent. Monk's a pure scorer, whether CelticsBlog likes it or not. On a team that bolsters a 5'9" starting pg, 7 footer, with no wingspan and no big man game, the 3# pick with no touch or feel for the game, and the worst shooter in the nba who plays heavy minutes. Yeah, Boston has no right to all of a sudden become nitpicky about a player not being the perfect athlete.

If we get #2 we take Ball. If it's #3 again and Giles fell off the map, you take Monk.

Re: Malik Monk is a stud.
« Reply #32 on: December 27, 2016, 01:05:21 PM »

Offline triboy16f

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15996
  • Tommy Points: 315
Monk has below average height, wingspan, strength for a SG

You know, Jordan Crawford once went off at a college game. 

Monk will be better but odds are stacked against him to perform the way he is now vs college players vs nba calibre player. Especially on the defensive end

Man, if he's better than a guy why even compare them? I feel like that's just a lazy way to disregard someone's talent. Monk's a pure scorer, whether CelticsBlog likes it or not. On a team that bolsters a 5'9" starting pg, 7 footer, with no wingspan and no big man game, the 3# pick with no touch or feel for the game, and the worst shooter in the nba who plays heavy minutes. Yeah, Boston has no right to all of a sudden become nitpicky about a player not being the perfect athlete.

If we get #2 we take Ball. If it's #3 again and Giles fell off the map, you take Monk.

Plenty i would take over monk at 2

Jackson, tatum, ball, fultz

Re: Malik Monk is a stud.
« Reply #33 on: December 27, 2016, 01:13:42 PM »

Offline Evantime34

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11493
  • Tommy Points: 709
  • Eagerly Awaiting the Next Fantasy Draft
Monk has below average height, wingspan, strength for a SG

You know, Jordan Crawford once went off at a college game. 

Monk will be better but odds are stacked against him to perform the way he is now vs college players vs nba calibre player. Especially on the defensive end

Man, if he's better than a guy why even compare them? I feel like that's just a lazy way to disregard someone's talent. Monk's a pure scorer, whether CelticsBlog likes it or not. On a team that bolsters a 5'9" starting pg, 7 footer, with no wingspan and no big man game, the 3# pick with no touch or feel for the game, and the worst shooter in the nba who plays heavy minutes. Yeah, Boston has no right to all of a sudden become nitpicky about a player not being the perfect athlete.

If we get #2 we take Ball. If it's #3 again and Giles fell off the map, you take Monk.

Plenty i would take over monk at 2

Jackson, tatum, ball, fultz
Having Monk at 5 seems reasonable to me. I agree that I would pick those guys above Monk and maybe Giles too, that doesn't mean that Monk won't end up being a stud.

By the time the draft happens I bet there will be a group of about 5 or 6 guys who will all be in the conversation for the best player in the class.

I think Monk can be a stud if he's in the right situation. I think playing him next to a big point guard who can defend 2's is the only way to maximize his talents. Him and Smart would fit great next to each other.

Honestly, I'd be very happy with Fultz, Tatum, Jackson, Ball, Monk or Giles. I could also see Isaac and Smith Jr. jumping into that group.
DKC:  Rockets
CB Draft: Memphis Grizz
Players: Klay Thompson, Jabari Parker, Aaron Gordon
Next 3 picks: 4.14, 4.15, 4.19

Re: Malik Monk is a stud.
« Reply #34 on: December 27, 2016, 01:16:19 PM »

Offline CelticGuardian

  • Isaiah Thomas
  • Posts: 816
  • Tommy Points: 41
  • Blood. Sweat. & Tears.
Monk has below average height, wingspan, strength for a SG

You know, Jordan Crawford once went off at a college game. 

Monk will be better but odds are stacked against him to perform the way he is now vs college players vs nba calibre player. Especially on the defensive end

Man, if he's better than a guy why even compare them? I feel like that's just a lazy way to disregard someone's talent. Monk's a pure scorer, whether CelticsBlog likes it or not. On a team that bolsters a 5'9" starting pg, 7 footer, with no wingspan and no big man game, the 3# pick with no touch or feel for the game, and the worst shooter in the nba who plays heavy minutes. Yeah, Boston has no right to all of a sudden become nitpicky about a player not being the perfect athlete.

If we get #2 we take Ball. If it's #3 again and Giles fell off the map, you take Monk.

Plenty i would take over monk at 2

Jackson, tatum, ball, fultz

I agree on Ball and Fultz

But Tatum is not a shooter. Let's be serious, his percentages don't scream future superstar, his midrange pull up everyone is getting so enamored with? Guess what? Monk's is better, it's quicker, he goes to it more, and it goes in unlike Tatum's. He's just a nice body like Jackson who's looking like another MKG. These guys would be terrible for our spacing and they'll just get in the way of Jaylen's development, which would not be fair to him.

Dude, what gives? Is there no faith for Jaylen Brown? Who we JUST drafted, Or Jae Crowder who's under contract til' 2020?

Marcus Smart is not where he suppose to be in his third year, Terry Rozier has been looking really shaky lately, IT is due for a big payday in a year and a half. Danny would be a moron to not take one of Fultz, Ball, Monk.
« Last Edit: December 27, 2016, 01:26:24 PM by CelticGuardian »

Re: Malik Monk is a stud.
« Reply #35 on: December 27, 2016, 01:24:34 PM »

Offline Evantime34

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11493
  • Tommy Points: 709
  • Eagerly Awaiting the Next Fantasy Draft
Monk has below average height, wingspan, strength for a SG

You know, Jordan Crawford once went off at a college game. 

Monk will be better but odds are stacked against him to perform the way he is now vs college players vs nba calibre player. Especially on the defensive end

Man, if he's better than a guy why even compare them? I feel like that's just a lazy way to disregard someone's talent. Monk's a pure scorer, whether CelticsBlog likes it or not. On a team that bolsters a 5'9" starting pg, 7 footer, with no wingspan and no big man game, the 3# pick with no touch or feel for the game, and the worst shooter in the nba who plays heavy minutes. Yeah, Boston has no right to all of a sudden become nitpicky about a player not being the perfect athlete.

If we get #2 we take Ball. If it's #3 again and Giles fell off the map, you take Monk.

Plenty i would take over monk at 2

Jackson, tatum, ball, fultz

I agree on Ball and Fultz
But Tatum is not a shooter. Let's be serious his percentages are Marcus Smart-esque, his midrange pull up everyone is getting so enamored with? Guess what? Monk's is better. He's just nice body like Jackson who's looking like another MKG.

 Dude, what gives? Is there no faith for Jaylen Brown? Who we JUST drafted, Or Jae Crowder who's under contract til' 2020?

Marcus Smart is not where he suppose, Terry Rozier has been looking really shaky lately, IT is due for a big payday in a year and a half. Danny would be a moron to not take one of Fultz, Ball, Monk.
Tatum shoots 92% from the 3 point line. Statistically NCAA free throw percentage is more predictive of NBA 3 point success than NCAA 3 point percentage.

Tatum and Brown can absolutely play together. The past few years our best defensive teams have been able to switch everything. Tatum and Brown's length and quickness allow them to switch screens and play together. Brown can play the 2-4 long term, Tatum can probably play the 3 and 4, Crowder can play the 3-4 (I'd be fine moving Crowder in a deal for a star or an upgrade in the frontcourt). If you spread those 3 guys minutes among shoot guard, small forward and power forward there are plenty of minutes to go around.

I'd prefer a wing to a pg. If we draft a pg, that means Isaiah or Smart is probably gone, if not this year then next. If we draft a wing, his ability to play multiple positions makes it more likely he can fit in wherever the roster needs it.
DKC:  Rockets
CB Draft: Memphis Grizz
Players: Klay Thompson, Jabari Parker, Aaron Gordon
Next 3 picks: 4.14, 4.15, 4.19

Re: Malik Monk is a stud.
« Reply #36 on: December 27, 2016, 01:33:01 PM »

Offline Boris Badenov

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4134
  • Tommy Points: 828
Monk has below average height, wingspan, strength for a SG

You know, Jordan Crawford once went off at a college game. 

Monk will be better but odds are stacked against him to perform the way he is now vs college players vs nba calibre player. Especially on the defensive end

I did some comps on height and wingspan.

He's about the same size as Beal and Steph Curry. Smaller than Gordon, a bit smaller than Redick. Smaller than Hield. About the same as McCollum. Significantly smaller than Wade or Ray Allen, or Lavine.

So I think you're right that he's below average, but he's not out on the tail end of the spectrum.

Re: Malik Monk is a stud.
« Reply #37 on: December 27, 2016, 01:34:52 PM »

Offline CelticGuardian

  • Isaiah Thomas
  • Posts: 816
  • Tommy Points: 41
  • Blood. Sweat. & Tears.
Monk has below average height, wingspan, strength for a SG

You know, Jordan Crawford once went off at a college game. 

Monk will be better but odds are stacked against him to perform the way he is now vs college players vs nba calibre player. Especially on the defensive end

Man, if he's better than a guy why even compare them? I feel like that's just a lazy way to disregard someone's talent. Monk's a pure scorer, whether CelticsBlog likes it or not. On a team that bolsters a 5'9" starting pg, 7 footer, with no wingspan and no big man game, the 3# pick with no touch or feel for the game, and the worst shooter in the nba who plays heavy minutes. Yeah, Boston has no right to all of a sudden become nitpicky about a player not being the perfect athlete.

If we get #2 we take Ball. If it's #3 again and Giles fell off the map, you take Monk.

Plenty i would take over monk at 2

Jackson, tatum, ball, fultz

I agree on Ball and Fultz
But Tatum is not a shooter. Let's be serious his percentages are Marcus Smart-esque, his midrange pull up everyone is getting so enamored with? Guess what? Monk's is better. He's just nice body like Jackson who's looking like another MKG.

 Dude, what gives? Is there no faith for Jaylen Brown? Who we JUST drafted, Or Jae Crowder who's under contract til' 2020?

Marcus Smart is not where he suppose, Terry Rozier has been looking really shaky lately, IT is due for a big payday in a year and a half. Danny would be a moron to not take one of Fultz, Ball, Monk.
Tatum shoots 92% from the 3 point line. Statistically NCAA free throw percentage is more predictive of NBA 3 point success than NCAA 3 point percentage.

Tatum and Brown can absolutely play together. The past few years our best defensive teams have been able to switch everything. Tatum and Brown's length and quickness allow them to switch screens and play together. Brown can play the 2-4 long term, Tatum can probably play the 3 and 4, Crowder can play the 3-4 (I'd be fine moving Crowder in a deal for a star or an upgrade in the frontcourt). If you spread those 3 guys minutes among shoot guard, small forward and power forward there are plenty of minutes to go around.

I'd prefer a wing to a pg. If we draft a pg, that means Isaiah or Smart is probably gone, if not this year then next. If we draft a wing, his ability to play multiple positions makes it more likely he can fit in wherever the roster needs it.

Um... so why wouldn't you take the guy that's been shooting great from distance and the free throw line? Like Monk? Just seems less about superstitious analytics and more about actual in-game production.

Re: Malik Monk is a stud.
« Reply #38 on: December 27, 2016, 01:41:16 PM »

Offline CelticGuardian

  • Isaiah Thomas
  • Posts: 816
  • Tommy Points: 41
  • Blood. Sweat. & Tears.
Plus our defense is solid as is, we don't need to spend a #3 pick in the NBA draft on a swingman that can't shoot just to help switch on defense. What we need out of this draft is a guy that's going to give us the firepower we need to compete and what our defense needs is a Center to anchor it and stop us from giving away rebounds to guys laying on the floor. Where have you been? This has been the storyline like this whole season.
« Last Edit: December 27, 2016, 01:47:01 PM by CelticGuardian »

Re: Malik Monk is a stud.
« Reply #39 on: December 27, 2016, 02:02:56 PM »

Offline Evantime34

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11493
  • Tommy Points: 709
  • Eagerly Awaiting the Next Fantasy Draft
Monk has below average height, wingspan, strength for a SG

You know, Jordan Crawford once went off at a college game. 

Monk will be better but odds are stacked against him to perform the way he is now vs college players vs nba calibre player. Especially on the defensive end

Man, if he's better than a guy why even compare them? I feel like that's just a lazy way to disregard someone's talent. Monk's a pure scorer, whether CelticsBlog likes it or not. On a team that bolsters a 5'9" starting pg, 7 footer, with no wingspan and no big man game, the 3# pick with no touch or feel for the game, and the worst shooter in the nba who plays heavy minutes. Yeah, Boston has no right to all of a sudden become nitpicky about a player not being the perfect athlete.

If we get #2 we take Ball. If it's #3 again and Giles fell off the map, you take Monk.

Plenty i would take over monk at 2

Jackson, tatum, ball, fultz

I agree on Ball and Fultz
But Tatum is not a shooter. Let's be serious his percentages are Marcus Smart-esque, his midrange pull up everyone is getting so enamored with? Guess what? Monk's is better. He's just nice body like Jackson who's looking like another MKG.

 Dude, what gives? Is there no faith for Jaylen Brown? Who we JUST drafted, Or Jae Crowder who's under contract til' 2020?

Marcus Smart is not where he suppose, Terry Rozier has been looking really shaky lately, IT is due for a big payday in a year and a half. Danny would be a moron to not take one of Fultz, Ball, Monk.
Tatum shoots 92% from the 3 point line. Statistically NCAA free throw percentage is more predictive of NBA 3 point success than NCAA 3 point percentage.

Tatum and Brown can absolutely play together. The past few years our best defensive teams have been able to switch everything. Tatum and Brown's length and quickness allow them to switch screens and play together. Brown can play the 2-4 long term, Tatum can probably play the 3 and 4, Crowder can play the 3-4 (I'd be fine moving Crowder in a deal for a star or an upgrade in the frontcourt). If you spread those 3 guys minutes among shoot guard, small forward and power forward there are plenty of minutes to go around.

I'd prefer a wing to a pg. If we draft a pg, that means Isaiah or Smart is probably gone, if not this year then next. If we draft a wing, his ability to play multiple positions makes it more likely he can fit in wherever the roster needs it.

Um... so why wouldn't you take the guy that's been shooting great from distance and the free throw line? Like Monk? Just seems less about superstitious analytics and more about actual in-game production.
Monk's in game production is strictly on the offensive end, Tatum long term can help you on the glass and on the defensive end. I think Tatum is the better all around player.
DKC:  Rockets
CB Draft: Memphis Grizz
Players: Klay Thompson, Jabari Parker, Aaron Gordon
Next 3 picks: 4.14, 4.15, 4.19

Re: Malik Monk is a stud.
« Reply #40 on: December 27, 2016, 02:27:07 PM »

Offline CelticGuardian

  • Isaiah Thomas
  • Posts: 816
  • Tommy Points: 41
  • Blood. Sweat. & Tears.
Monk has below average height, wingspan, strength for a SG

You know, Jordan Crawford once went off at a college game. 

Monk will be better but odds are stacked against him to perform the way he is now vs college players vs nba calibre player. Especially on the defensive end

Man, if he's better than a guy why even compare them? I feel like that's just a lazy way to disregard someone's talent. Monk's a pure scorer, whether CelticsBlog likes it or not. On a team that bolsters a 5'9" starting pg, 7 footer, with no wingspan and no big man game, the 3# pick with no touch or feel for the game, and the worst shooter in the nba who plays heavy minutes. Yeah, Boston has no right to all of a sudden become nitpicky about a player not being the perfect athlete.

If we get #2 we take Ball. If it's #3 again and Giles fell off the map, you take Monk.

Plenty i would take over monk at 2

Jackson, tatum, ball, fultz

I agree on Ball and Fultz
But Tatum is not a shooter. Let's be serious his percentages are Marcus Smart-esque, his midrange pull up everyone is getting so enamored with? Guess what? Monk's is better. He's just nice body like Jackson who's looking like another MKG.

 Dude, what gives? Is there no faith for Jaylen Brown? Who we JUST drafted, Or Jae Crowder who's under contract til' 2020?

Marcus Smart is not where he suppose, Terry Rozier has been looking really shaky lately, IT is due for a big payday in a year and a half. Danny would be a moron to not take one of Fultz, Ball, Monk.
Tatum shoots 92% from the 3 point line. Statistically NCAA free throw percentage is more predictive of NBA 3 point success than NCAA 3 point percentage.

Tatum and Brown can absolutely play together. The past few years our best defensive teams have been able to switch everything. Tatum and Brown's length and quickness allow them to switch screens and play together. Brown can play the 2-4 long term, Tatum can probably play the 3 and 4, Crowder can play the 3-4 (I'd be fine moving Crowder in a deal for a star or an upgrade in the frontcourt). If you spread those 3 guys minutes among shoot guard, small forward and power forward there are plenty of minutes to go around.

I'd prefer a wing to a pg. If we draft a pg, that means Isaiah or Smart is probably gone, if not this year then next. If we draft a wing, his ability to play multiple positions makes it more likely he can fit in wherever the roster needs it.

Um... so why wouldn't you take the guy that's been shooting great from distance and the free throw line? Like Monk? Just seems less about superstitious analytics and more about actual in-game production.
Monk's in game production is strictly on the offensive end, Tatum long term can help you on the glass and on the defensive end. I think Tatum is the better all around player.

Like I said above man, you don't use the #3 pick in the draft on switch defense. Warriors are winning because they overwhelm their opponents with offense, the Cavs do this too. But Tatum is no LeBron, I don't see the assist numbers, so he must be shooting it right? Well his numbers are not efficient. So I don't know exactly how he'll push the needle for us. I do know that our second unit offense tends to stagnate, where we could use a scorer when Olynyk is having one of his 41 down games and Smart is back to his normal self. I
« Last Edit: December 27, 2016, 02:33:09 PM by CelticGuardian »

Re: Malik Monk is a stud.
« Reply #41 on: December 28, 2016, 12:29:48 PM »

Offline clevelandceltic

  • Avery Bradley
  • Posts: 428
  • Tommy Points: 22
The Warriors have at least 3 plus defenders in their starting lineup. Yes they can score in bunches but they can actually defend.



Monk has below average height, wingspan, strength for a SG

You know, Jordan Crawford once went off at a college game. 

Monk will be better but odds are stacked against him to perform the way he is now vs college players vs nba calibre player. Especially on the defensive end

Man, if he's better than a guy why even compare them? I feel like that's just a lazy way to disregard someone's talent. Monk's a pure scorer, whether CelticsBlog likes it or not. On a team that bolsters a 5'9" starting pg, 7 footer, with no wingspan and no big man game, the 3# pick with no touch or feel for the game, and the worst shooter in the nba who plays heavy minutes. Yeah, Boston has no right to all of a sudden become nitpicky about a player not being the perfect athlete.

If we get #2 we take Ball. If it's #3 again and Giles fell off the map, you take Monk.

Plenty i would take over monk at 2

Jackson, tatum, ball, fultz

I agree on Ball and Fultz
But Tatum is not a shooter. Let's be serious his percentages are Marcus Smart-esque, his midrange pull up everyone is getting so enamored with? Guess what? Monk's is better. He's just nice body like Jackson who's looking like another MKG.

 Dude, what gives? Is there no faith for Jaylen Brown? Who we JUST drafted, Or Jae Crowder who's under contract til' 2020?

Marcus Smart is not where he suppose, Terry Rozier has been looking really shaky lately, IT is due for a big payday in a year and a half. Danny would be a moron to not take one of Fultz, Ball, Monk.
Tatum shoots 92% from the 3 point line. Statistically NCAA free throw percentage is more predictive of NBA 3 point success than NCAA 3 point percentage.

Tatum and Brown can absolutely play together. The past few years our best defensive teams have been able to switch everything. Tatum and Brown's length and quickness allow them to switch screens and play together. Brown can play the 2-4 long term, Tatum can probably play the 3 and 4, Crowder can play the 3-4 (I'd be fine moving Crowder in a deal for a star or an upgrade in the frontcourt). If you spread those 3 guys minutes among shoot guard, small forward and power forward there are plenty of minutes to go around.

I'd prefer a wing to a pg. If we draft a pg, that means Isaiah or Smart is probably gone, if not this year then next. If we draft a wing, his ability to play multiple positions makes it more likely he can fit in wherever the roster needs it.

Um... so why wouldn't you take the guy that's been shooting great from distance and the free throw line? Like Monk? Just seems less about superstitious analytics and more about actual in-game production.
Monk's in game production is strictly on the offensive end, Tatum long term can help you on the glass and on the defensive end. I think Tatum is the better all around player.

Like I said above man, you don't use the #3 pick in the draft on switch defense. Warriors are winning because they overwhelm their opponents with offense, the Cavs do this too. But Tatum is no LeBron, I don't see the assist numbers, so he must be shooting it right? Well his numbers are not efficient. So I don't know exactly how he'll push the needle for us. I do know that our second unit offense tends to stagnate, where we could use a scorer when Olynyk is having one of his 41 down games and Smart is back to his normal self. I

Re: Malik Monk is a stud.
« Reply #42 on: December 28, 2016, 12:38:21 PM »

Offline CelticGuardian

  • Isaiah Thomas
  • Posts: 816
  • Tommy Points: 41
  • Blood. Sweat. & Tears.
The Warriors have at least 3 plus defenders in their starting lineup. Yes they can score in bunches but they can actually defend.



Monk has below average height, wingspan, strength for a SG

You know, Jordan Crawford once went off at a college game. 

Monk will be better but odds are stacked against him to perform the way he is now vs college players vs nba calibre player. Especially on the defensive end

Man, if he's better than a guy why even compare them? I feel like that's just a lazy way to disregard someone's talent. Monk's a pure scorer, whether CelticsBlog likes it or not. On a team that bolsters a 5'9" starting pg, 7 footer, with no wingspan and no big man game, the 3# pick with no touch or feel for the game, and the worst shooter in the nba who plays heavy minutes. Yeah, Boston has no right to all of a sudden become nitpicky about a player not being the perfect athlete.

If we get #2 we take Ball. If it's #3 again and Giles fell off the map, you take Monk.

Plenty i would take over monk at 2

Jackson, tatum, ball, fultz

I agree on Ball and Fultz
But Tatum is not a shooter. Let's be serious his percentages are Marcus Smart-esque, his midrange pull up everyone is getting so enamored with? Guess what? Monk's is better. He's just nice body like Jackson who's looking like another MKG.

 Dude, what gives? Is there no faith for Jaylen Brown? Who we JUST drafted, Or Jae Crowder who's under contract til' 2020?

Marcus Smart is not where he suppose, Terry Rozier has been looking really shaky lately, IT is due for a big payday in a year and a half. Danny would be a moron to not take one of Fultz, Ball, Monk.
Tatum shoots 92% from the 3 point line. Statistically NCAA free throw percentage is more predictive of NBA 3 point success than NCAA 3 point percentage.

Tatum and Brown can absolutely play together. The past few years our best defensive teams have been able to switch everything. Tatum and Brown's length and quickness allow them to switch screens and play together. Brown can play the 2-4 long term, Tatum can probably play the 3 and 4, Crowder can play the 3-4 (I'd be fine moving Crowder in a deal for a star or an upgrade in the frontcourt). If you spread those 3 guys minutes among shoot guard, small forward and power forward there are plenty of minutes to go around.

I'd prefer a wing to a pg. If we draft a pg, that means Isaiah or Smart is probably gone, if not this year then next. If we draft a wing, his ability to play multiple positions makes it more likely he can fit in wherever the roster needs it.

Um... so why wouldn't you take the guy that's been shooting great from distance and the free throw line? Like Monk? Just seems less about superstitious analytics and more about actual in-game production.
Monk's in game production is strictly on the offensive end, Tatum long term can help you on the glass and on the defensive end. I think Tatum is the better all around player.

Like I said above man, you don't use the #3 pick in the draft on switch defense. Warriors are winning because they overwhelm their opponents with offense, the Cavs do this too. But Tatum is no LeBron, I don't see the assist numbers, so he must be shooting it right? Well his numbers are not efficient. So I don't know exactly how he'll push the needle for us. I do know that our second unit offense tends to stagnate, where we could use a scorer when Olynyk is having one of his 41 down games and Smart is back to his normal self. I

And we don't have that already? Please tell me what are Smart, AB, Crowder, and Horford. We need another big on defense dude, not a swingman. Jaylen was already drafted with the mindset that he will backup Crowder. Stevens said so himself. He's not going to give up after 1 year with Jaylen.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2016, 12:43:43 PM by CelticGuardian »

Re: Malik Monk is a stud.
« Reply #43 on: December 28, 2016, 01:11:39 PM »

Offline clevelandceltic

  • Avery Bradley
  • Posts: 428
  • Tommy Points: 22
No I think you are missing what Im saying. They have 2 top 10 offensive players that are plus defenders and a guy thats considered to be in the race for Defensive player of the year.

You mentioned Smart and AB but one of those guys sits when Monk is on the floor and its likely AB since Monk isnt a PG.

Im not sure what Brown has to do with anything. There is more room on this current team for taking Tatum than for Monk. Tatum can easily play in the Jerebko spot.

On another note, I dont think AB and Crowder can play next to each other long term because I think Crowders handle is waaaay to limited and AB isnt a playmaker. I am taking AB over Crowder thus me taking a wing even with Brown on the team.


The Warriors have at least 3 plus defenders in their starting lineup. Yes they can score in bunches but they can actually defend.



Monk has below average height, wingspan, strength for a SG

You know, Jordan Crawford once went off at a college game. 

Monk will be better but odds are stacked against him to perform the way he is now vs college players vs nba calibre player. Especially on the defensive end

Man, if he's better than a guy why even compare them? I feel like that's just a lazy way to disregard someone's talent. Monk's a pure scorer, whether CelticsBlog likes it or not. On a team that bolsters a 5'9" starting pg, 7 footer, with no wingspan and no big man game, the 3# pick with no touch or feel for the game, and the worst shooter in the nba who plays heavy minutes. Yeah, Boston has no right to all of a sudden become nitpicky about a player not being the perfect athlete.

If we get #2 we take Ball. If it's #3 again and Giles fell off the map, you take Monk.

Plenty i would take over monk at 2

Jackson, tatum, ball, fultz

I agree on Ball and Fultz
But Tatum is not a shooter. Let's be serious his percentages are Marcus Smart-esque, his midrange pull up everyone is getting so enamored with? Guess what? Monk's is better. He's just nice body like Jackson who's looking like another MKG.

 Dude, what gives? Is there no faith for Jaylen Brown? Who we JUST drafted, Or Jae Crowder who's under contract til' 2020?

Marcus Smart is not where he suppose, Terry Rozier has been looking really shaky lately, IT is due for a big payday in a year and a half. Danny would be a moron to not take one of Fultz, Ball, Monk.
Tatum shoots 92% from the 3 point line. Statistically NCAA free throw percentage is more predictive of NBA 3 point success than NCAA 3 point percentage.

Tatum and Brown can absolutely play together. The past few years our best defensive teams have been able to switch everything. Tatum and Brown's length and quickness allow them to switch screens and play together. Brown can play the 2-4 long term, Tatum can probably play the 3 and 4, Crowder can play the 3-4 (I'd be fine moving Crowder in a deal for a star or an upgrade in the frontcourt). If you spread those 3 guys minutes among shoot guard, small forward and power forward there are plenty of minutes to go around.

I'd prefer a wing to a pg. If we draft a pg, that means Isaiah or Smart is probably gone, if not this year then next. If we draft a wing, his ability to play multiple positions makes it more likely he can fit in wherever the roster needs it.

Um... so why wouldn't you take the guy that's been shooting great from distance and the free throw line? Like Monk? Just seems less about superstitious analytics and more about actual in-game production.
Monk's in game production is strictly on the offensive end, Tatum long term can help you on the glass and on the defensive end. I think Tatum is the better all around player.

Like I said above man, you don't use the #3 pick in the draft on switch defense. Warriors are winning because they overwhelm their opponents with offense, the Cavs do this too. But Tatum is no LeBron, I don't see the assist numbers, so he must be shooting it right? Well his numbers are not efficient. So I don't know exactly how he'll push the needle for us. I do know that our second unit offense tends to stagnate, where we could use a scorer when Olynyk is having one of his 41 down games and Smart is back to his normal self. I

And we don't have that already? Please tell me what are Smart, AB, Crowder, and Horford. We need another big on defense dude, not a swingman. Jaylen was already drafted with the mindset that he will backup Crowder. Stevens said so himself. He's not going to give up after 1 year with Jaylen.

Re: Malik Monk is a stud.
« Reply #44 on: December 28, 2016, 02:11:04 PM »

Offline A Future of Stevens

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1078
  • Tommy Points: 132
After reading some of the csblog analysis on Monk, I decided to really put my watching glasses on and check the kid out for myself.

He looks like the second best scorer in the class, and by far the best pure scorer in the draft.

He looks like a super version of CJ Mcol. on the blazers. I'm not sure if he is what we need out of the draft, but a balls to the wall scorer is always a good thing. Especially a high efficiency dead eye one. He just looks like a gunner that might shoot you out of a few games.
My 2017 Draft Rankings:       My 2017 FA Celtic Rankings:
1.) Markelle Fultz                   1.) Blake Griffin
2.) Josh Jackson                    2.) Gordon Hayward
3.) Lonzo Ball                        3.) No other realistic options
4.) Jayson Tatum                        move the needle much
5.) Lauri Markkanen