Getty Images
There are few sports conventions I dislike more than the idea that having “upside” means you won’t be effective in the short term. The latest victim of this logic is Kristaps Porzingis, the New York Knicks‘ polarizing selection at No. 4 in the 2015 NBA draft.
I see four broad categories of people with opinions on the Porzingis pick. First, there are those that hate the pick because they don’t think Porzingis will be a good NBA player. He’s skinny, he’s European, he’s slow — whatever story you want to weave. These are the Michael Rappaports across the country.
Second, there are those who hate the pick because they know the Knicks need to win now, and think that Porzingis will take years to develop. This is Stephen A. Smith. Third, there are those who like the pick because it represents the Knicks playing the “long game”, departing from their history of short-term fixes that didn’t fix things. This is, I would say, the majority of NBA analysts.
Finally, there are those who like the pick because they think Porzingis is a darn good prospect, both for the near and distant future.
I’m happy to lump myself into the fourth category, but it’s the second and third categories of people that I take issue with here. I’ve heard and read so many backhanded compliments over the past 48 hours, where analysts praise the Knicks for taking a “project” and “playing for the future”. Look, Porzingis now has over two years of experience playing in the Liga ACB, widely considered to be the second-best basketball league in the world.
People scoff every year when someone asks if the best college team could beat the worst NBA team; how can those same people argue that successful college players are more “NBA-ready” than Porzingis?
The Toronto Raptors took Bruno Caboclo at No. 20 last year – that is a project. Caboclo played in an obscure Brazilian league, whereas Porzingis played against much of the world’s top non-NBA talent. And against this talent, Porzingis actually led his team in points per game! This is not something a raw “project” could do. He was also second on his team in rebounds per game, an oft-cited weakness.
As to how Porzingis can contribute to the Knicks, I think it all starts with his ability to shoot the three. He’s NBA-ready in this area, and at over seven feet tall with a quick release, he’ll have plenty of opportunities to fire away. The Knicks have Carmelo Anthony, who’ll be taking plenty of shots, and drafted Jerian Grant, a very skilled scorer as well; they don’t need Porzingis to be much more than a spot-up guy.
Toss in a few post-ups when someone puts a wing on him, some highlights blocks courtesy of his plus athleticism and wingspan, and I’d say we have ourselves a solid rookie season.
Will Porzingis be an All-Star next season? Obviously not. Will he be Rookie of the Year? Probably not. But that doesn’t mean he can’t contribute to the Knicks right away, skinny frame and all. For reference, Andrea Bargnani, the “Euro bust” to which Porzingis keeps drawing comparisons, was about as effective his rookie year (17 points per 36, middling efficiency) as he has been since .
If you insist on comparing these players, you’re basically implying that Porzingis will have a decent rookie year.
Casey Sherman is the Toronto Raptors Beat Writer for www.RantSports.com. Follow him on Twitter @shermham
