Draft Thread: Knicks got #3 - Combine and Beyond

[F N 11]

Kyrie
Rj
Kd
Knox
Mitch or DJ

Thats a very versatile lineup. Best team in the league imo outside of the warriors.

incoming a million post about how you cant win with young players.

[GONYK]

As I said earlier... I remember Wade @ Marquette - RJ has a similar game. And RJ's a winner... has won at every level. Take a look at how close his stats are to Wade's as a sophomore. RJ's going to be good. Maybe not immediately but within a couple of years. Too much personal support to go along with abilities to not be good.

Think the differences there are that Wade had a knack for getting to the line more which helped his efficiency stay afloat, but the trade off is that RJ seems way more comfortable shooting from range than Wade ever did, so the hope would be that even though RJ may not get to the line at an elite rate he'll eventually be able to shoot somewhere from 33-38% from 3 on decent volume to help his efficiency mixed in with his ability to get to the line at an ok rate. Still a long way to go...

I could very well be wrong... but I don't remember Marquette Wade getting to the line like Pro Wade did. From what I recall (again, I could be wrong) he used that mid range game as his bread & butter and was able to knife through defenses. This is what I see right now from RJ. Neither was a very good from deep @ the collegiate level.

Wade averaged 8 ft's a game his last year at Marquette

But Barret averaged more than Wade did as a freshman

[GONYK]

Kyrie
Rj
Kd
Knox
Mitch or DJ

Thats a very versatile lineup. Best team in the league imo outside of the warriors.

incoming a million post about how you cant win with young players.

Can you name a team who has?

Talking rings

[Knicksfan1992]

As I said earlier... I remember Wade @ Marquette - RJ has a similar game. And RJ's a winner... has won at every level. Take a look at how close his stats are to Wade's as a sophomore. RJ's going to be good. Maybe not immediately but within a couple of years. Too much personal support to go along with abilities to not be good.

Think the differences there are that Wade had a knack for getting to the line more which helped his efficiency stay afloat, but the trade off is that RJ seems way more comfortable shooting from range than Wade ever did, so the hope would be that even though RJ may not get to the line at an elite rate he'll eventually be able to shoot somewhere from 33-38% from 3 on decent volume to help his efficiency mixed in with his ability to get to the line at an ok rate. Still a long way to go...

In your opinion, what separates Barret from Tyreke Evans as a prospect?

It's hard for me to tell you the difference between the 2 as prospects because I wasn't paying as much attention to the draft back then. Although, physically, they are very similarly built and they seem to have the same weaknesses and strengths. I think Tyreke is an inch shorter than RJ's last known measurement but he had a longer wingspan so it sort of equaled out reach-wise. One of the problems with Reke was obviously his development, for some reason, ( I think we found out recently lol) stalled after his rookie year. He never got his jumper consistent enough to warrant having the ball in his hands as much as he wanted it and he became a "big stats bad team" guy or a 6th man on a contender.

I guess the main difference would be mentality but I think I''m more optimistic about RJ's jumper the more I look at it and would hope that he would be markedly better than Tyreke's career 32% from 3.... It just seems like RJ cares more about basketball than we found out Tyreke did. He's got the pedigree and has played and won on the biggest stages in amateur basketball. He works with Drew Hanlen who is known for fixing jumper mechanics and his detailed oriented process in doing so.

[KnixinSix]

I'm not trying to get involved in your guys spat here... but RJ played some of his best team ball in the tournament. Not a good example for RJ's selfish tendencies.

it’s really the shots he was taking and the times at which he decided to take them during a few games in the tournament. I know that his assist numbers were gaudy but go back and look at those college game threads a few of us we’re complaining about his shot selection. listen, the kid has all the talent in the world and i’ll be happy if the knicks decide to draft him, but he has clear flaws in his game. I just feel like now because he’s projected to go to us people are playing revisionist history. that doesn’t mean I have no faith he can correct those flaws but they are there.

He was a freshman. A freshman. Very few kids come in as an NBA finished product as a freshman in College. However what you look for is: are all the tools there? Has he at least flashed that he can do all or almost all things that an elite player can do at his position? The answer for Barrett there is YES. But he will have to grow in the NBA and that might take a couple years.

Knox on the other hand has never shown he can play D. I believe he can be a scorer with length and score in mutliple ways. Efficiency? That's still a question but D is an even bigger question mark with him. Which is why I see his upside as Keith Van Horn. Nice player but usually not the type of player you win a championship with as a major contributor.

[Capn'O]

Lack of cocaine?

I responded before I saw this accurate post

I don't blame either of you for making the obvious joke, but the question remains.

The point being his career may have been derailed somewhat by his extracurriculars. My understanding of the NBA's current drug program is that he must have had previous incidents, including counselling, to ultimately arrive at the ban. The outcome of his career affects our current view of his worth as a prospect. His rookie season was VERY good and another player starting from that base may be able to accomplish much more.

[shtolky]

Kyrie
Rj
Kd
Knox
Mitch or DJ

Thats a very versatile lineup. Best team in the league imo outside of the warriors.

incoming a million post about how you cant win with young players.

Can you name a team who has?

Talking rings

Define young? That could mean a bunch of different things. What's the max age? You're talking starters only or role players too?

[GONYK]

incoming a million post about how you cant win with young players.

Can you name a team who has?

Talking rings

Define young? That could mean a bunch of different things. What's the max age? You're talking starters only or role players too?

Starters.

Players with less than 3 years experience.

No more than 2 years of NCAA experience.

[F N 11]

Kyrie
Rj
Kd
Knox
Mitch or DJ

Thats a very versatile lineup. Best team in the league imo outside of the warriors.

incoming a million post about how you cant win with young players.

Can you name a team who has?

Talking rings

But just last year people were up in arms about Tatum and co making it far. Add KD and Kyrie to Mitch and Co I think we can reach far. I cant name one tbh. The point is we can win with young players developing. I think of the young OKC team that couldnt get over the hump. Our young guys developing with the help of vets in Kyrie, KD, and ring chasers it wont be that bad.

[shtolky]

Can you name a team who has?

Talking rings

Define young? That could mean a bunch of different things. What's the max age? You're talking starters only or role players too?

Starters.

Players with less than 3 years experience.

No more than 2 years of NCAA experience.

With that criteria, then no. Closest I can think off off the top of my head are the 2006 Heat (Wade and Haslem), and the 2004 Pistons (Prince).

[GONYK]

I responded before I saw this accurate post

I don't blame either of you for making the obvious joke, but the question remains.

The point being his career may have been derailed somewhat by his extracurriculars. My understanding of the NBA's current drug program is that he must have had previous incidents, including counselling, to ultimately arrive at the ban. The outcome of his career affects our current view of his worth as a prospect. His rookie season was VERY good and another player starting from that base may be able to accomplish much more.

I'm not really commenting on the career trajectory.

I'm literally talking about the player comparison.

People are going with Wade or Harden, but I don't see that level of shiftiness.

Young Reke had handle, but definitely more of a straight line player that utilized strength moreso than wiggle.

[KnixinSix]

incoming a million post about how you cant win with young players.

Can you name a team who has?

Talking rings

But just last year people were up in arms about Tatum and co making it far. Add KD and Kyrie to Mitch and Co I think we can reach far. I cant name one tbh. The point is we can win with young players developing. I think of the young OKC team that couldnt get over the hump. Our young guys developing with the help of vets in Kyrie, KD, and ring chasers it wont be that bad.

For us to make it really far RJ would need to be a major all around contributor year 1. With KD and Kyrie and keeping key players we probably are a playoff 2nd round team with that alone. But to be more RJ has to star right away.

[alphad0gz]

ad can still improve with playmaking part of his game. it’s what he needs to be at the giannis level of one man team.

So he can improve but our young guys can't?? The young guys have a great chance to be good-very good. I'm not a fan of Frank's as a critical part, and I haven't seen anything from Knox that makes me believe in him, either. I DO think Barrett will be special and Mich is not remotely close to his ceiling. Will it be like AD? I'm guessing not since they are completely different players, but he can (and will) be special in his own right. Smith Jr can be an allstar and Trier and Dot will be excellent pieces. I'm not a fan of Kyrie because of health and no record of winning at a high level without James. I really like AD but I don't want to gut the team for a chance to win that depends on the "big three" all staying healthy. That could go very badly. Besides, I like to watch our own guys develop. I hate the "instant winner" mentality that encompasses all sports.

[SelbyCobra]

I just feel like now because he’s projected to go to us people are playing revisionist history. that doesn’t mean I have no faith he can correct those flaws but they are there.

There's definitely an element of truth to this.

There's also an element of truth to the flipside - the NBA zeitgeist of the 2018-19 NCAA season was ZIONZIONZIONZIONZION to the point that every other player in the draft landscape got irrationally discounted. In this internet age there's an accepted phenomenon of extreme opinions - you either are all in on something, or it's the worst thing in the world. Not everyone is knee deep in that thinking, and many people go out of their way to work outside it, but it's virtually impossible to avoid it all together.

So yeah, there's absolutely some rose-colored-glasses optimism at play here altering opinions, but there's also a ton of sobering up from the Zion head rush and realizing it wasn't this wasn't the massive Powerball drawing with only one winning ticket that we all had been corrupted by to varying degrees.

I think there are three real truths about the 2019 draft and Barrett's place in it without getting into any nitty gritty details about his statistical profile or scouted tendencies:

• Zion Williamson is unquestionably the best prospect by every important evaluative method.
• It is a three player draft in terms of present day pick value, meaning other players may be better after they are drafted and play in the league, but right now in May 2019, Zion, Ja, and RJ are objectively accepted as being above the rest by the majority.
• RJ Barrett being one of those three players means that there are meaningful odds of being the best player in the draft longterm. It's not probable - that's Zion - but he has a separate, personal entry on the Vegas odds board, outside of simply being listed as "Field" (like basically everyone outside the top 3 would be)

So I think that we're seeing these three "facts", if you will, presented in different orders and with different emphasis based on a swirl of both optimism AND the simple, forced realization that there are legitimate chances/odds beyond Zion. I think you're someone who worked hard to operate outside that Powerball Haze, so when you see people shaking it's influence you perceive it as irrational optimism.

[GONYK]

incoming a million post about how you cant win with young players.

Can you name a team who has?

Talking rings

But just last year people were up in arms about Tatum and co making it far. Add KD and Kyrie to Mitch and Co I think we can reach far. I cant name one tbh. The point is we can win with young players developing. I think of the young OKC team that couldnt get over the hump. Our young guys developing with the help of vets in Kyrie, KD, and ring chasers it wont be that bad.

It's possible, but would you bet on Knox, RJ, Mitch being championship level players physically and mentally within the next 3 years? That is KD's window.

I don't think it's incredibly likely, even if those guys develop into really nice players. That would be a pretty crazy development pace.

[Capn'O]

I don't blame either of you for making the obvious joke, but the question remains.

The point being his career may have been derailed somewhat by his extracurriculars. My understanding of the NBA's current drug program is that he must have had previous incidents, including counselling, to ultimately arrive at the ban. The outcome of his career affects our current view of his worth as a prospect. His rookie season was VERY good and another player starting from that base may be able to accomplish much more.

I'm not really commenting on the career trajectory.

I'm literally talking about the player comparison.

People are going with Wade or Harden, but I don't see that level of shiftiness.

Young Reke had handle, but definitely more of a straight line player that utilized strength moreso than wiggle.

In that regard, I like the DeRozan comp more. Though as prospects they were similar.

[awy]

ad can still improve with playmaking part of his game. it’s what he needs to be at the giannis level of one man team.

So he can improve but our young guys can't?? The young guys have a great chance to be good-very good. I'm not a fan of Frank's as a critical part, and I haven't seen anything from Knox that makes me believe in him, either. I DO think Barrett will be special and Mich is not remotely close to his ceiling. Will it be like AD? I'm guessing not since they are completely different players, but he can (and will) be special in his own right. Smith Jr can be an allstar and Trier and Dot will be excellent pieces. I'm not a fan of Kyrie because of health and no record of winning at a high level without James. I really like AD but I don't want to gut the team for a chance to win that depends on the "big three" all staying healthy. That could go very badly. Besides, I like to watch our own guys develop. I hate the "instant winner" mentality that encompasses all sports.

AD's improvement in passing the ball is more impactful because he's already a top 5 play finisher in the game. young guys like knox etc can't sniff that territory so while they can improve they'll never be that good.

[awy]

I just feel like now because he’s projected to go to us people are playing revisionist history. that doesn’t mean I have no faith he can correct those flaws but they are there.

There's definitely an element of truth to this.

There's also an element of truth to the flipside - the NBA zeitgeist of the 2018-19 NCAA season was ZIONZIONZIONZIONZION to the point that every other player in the draft landscape got irrationally discounted. In this internet age there's an accepted phenomenon of extreme opinions - you either are all in on something, or it's the worst thing in the world. Not everyone is knee deep in that thinking, and many people go out of their way to work outside it, but it's virtually impossible to avoid it all together.

So yeah, there's absolutely some rose-colored-glasses optimism at play here altering opinions, but there's also a ton of sobering up from the Zion head rush and realizing it wasn't this wasn't the massive Powerball drawing with only one winning ticket that we all had been corrupted by to varying degrees.

I think there are three real truths about the 2019 draft and Barrett's place in it without getting into any nitty gritty details about his statistical profile or scouted tendencies:

• Zion Williamson is unquestionably the best prospect by every important evaluative method.
• It is a three player draft in terms of present day pick value, meaning other players may be better after they are drafted and play in the league, but right now in May 2019, Zion, Ja, and RJ are objectively accepted as being above the rest by the majority.
• RJ Barrett being one of those three players means that there are meaningful odds of being the best player in the draft longterm. It's not probable - that's Zion - but he has a separate, personal entry on the Vegas odds board, outside of simply being listed as "Field" (like basically everyone outside the top 3 would be)

So I think that we're seeing these three "facts", if you will, presented in different orders and with different emphasis based on a swirl of both optimism AND the simple, forced realization that there are legitimate chances/odds beyond Zion. I think you're someone who worked hard to operate outside that Powerball Haze, so when you see people shaking it's influence you perceive it as irrational optimism.

rj is solely a trade value pick. would be a very bad piece to actually try and build around.

[taj2133]

Possible tampering on the bulls jimmy butler dinner with bulls head coach jim boylen last night in chicago?

Read on Twitter

[2010]

Who has better upside on their outlook as a jump shooter? RJ or Morant?

Who has more upside defensively? RJ or Morant?