Knicks · Anyone here wanted Mikal Bridges over Kevin Knox? (page 3)

DSJ and Monk were the two discussed heavily in the 2017 draft although Frank certainly had support. And they were the two most brought up (esp DSJ) when Frank was a "bust" and a "triangle pick" two weeks into his career. Whatever -- it would seem Frank is the better of the three at least for now, if still not up to what we'd like. As for conveniently revisionist phonies like Stephen A and Michael Kay who proclaim we should have picked Donovan Mitchell -- well yeah. Only at the time I truly believe if we had, the amount of pants wetting would have caused an overflow of the East River because he was "a reach." You know, like Quickley.

Welpee wrote:
So focusing on Knox and Frank and ignoring RJ, Porzingis, Quickley, Robinson proves what?

Oh, puhleeze, on what planet did we develop Porzingis? In his two healthy seasons the coaching staff did absolute ZERO to utilize his skills and abilities. He was just put out there on the court and told to improvise. Ever since Ewing roamed the court, the Knicks' offensive strategy has been "dump the ball to your best player and let him try to score the best he can". Porzingis could have been a thousand times more effective in a motion-and-passing oriented TEAM offense, scoring off numerous cuts, putbacks and open threes. Instead it was mid-court and post isolations all the time, where he was often abused by players giving up 5-7 inches in height, put up bad shots, and finally got winded, he is simply not a natural one-on-one scorer.

RJ came in with expectations of a next Kobe or TMac. His rookie season tempered those expectations heavily, to say the least, he was not even on the all-rookie team. IQ proved he was special the moment he entered the preseason games - he was a smart late first round pick rather than a development success. MitchRob, yeah fine, that one was a development success. I only hope he someday learns what a jump shot is, and does not bolt the team in a year or two.

ESOMKnicks wrote:

Welpee wrote:
So focusing on Knox and Frank and ignoring RJ, Porzingis, Quickley, Robinson proves what?

Oh, puhleeze, on what planet did we develop Porzingis? In his two healthy seasons the coaching staff did absolute ZERO to utilize his skills and abilities. He was just put out there on the court and told to improvise. Ever since Ewing roamed the court, the Knicks' offensive strategy has been "dump the ball to your best player and let him try to score the best he can". Porzingis could have been a thousand times more effective in a motion-and-passing oriented TEAM offense, scoring off numerous cuts, putbacks and open threes. Instead it was mid-court and post isolations all the time, where he was often abused by players giving up 5-7 inches in height, put up bad shots, and finally got winded, he is simply not a natural one-on-one scorer.

RJ came in with expectations of a next Kobe or TMac. His rookie season tempered those expectations heavily, to say the least, he was not even on the all-rookie team. IQ proved he was special the moment he entered the preseason games - he was a smart late first round pick rather than a development success. MitchRob, yeah fine, that one was a development success. I only hope he someday learns what a jump shot is, and does not bolt the team in a year or two.

Who in God's name ever had that expectation of RJ?

TPercy wrote:You can’t tell me we were foolish to think this guy was an NBA player. I think he still has it in him but as I said, his window is getting smaller.

The drive to be great isn't there. He is the anti-RJ

In baseball there was an expression - “million dollar arm, ten cent head.” Maybe for some it’s a “dollar store heart.”

joec32033 wrote:

ESOMKnicks wrote:

Welpee wrote:
So focusing on Knox and Frank and ignoring RJ, Porzingis, Quickley, Robinson proves what?

Oh, puhleeze, on what planet did we develop Porzingis? In his two healthy seasons the coaching staff did absolute ZERO to utilize his skills and abilities. He was just put out there on the court and told to improvise. Ever since Ewing roamed the court, the Knicks' offensive strategy has been "dump the ball to your best player and let him try to score the best he can". Porzingis could have been a thousand times more effective in a motion-and-passing oriented TEAM offense, scoring off numerous cuts, putbacks and open threes. Instead it was mid-court and post isolations all the time, where he was often abused by players giving up 5-7 inches in height, put up bad shots, and finally got winded, he is simply not a natural one-on-one scorer.

RJ came in with expectations of a next Kobe or TMac. His rookie season tempered those expectations heavily, to say the least, he was not even on the all-rookie team. IQ proved he was special the moment he entered the preseason games - he was a smart late first round pick rather than a development success. MitchRob, yeah fine, that one was a development success. I only hope he someday learns what a jump shot is, and does not bolt the team in a year or two.

Who in God's name ever had that expectation of RJ?

Yeah, at that point no use trying to have a sensible discussion with him. So if someone plays poorly we didn't develop them, if they play well the team gets no credit? And the big knock on RJ during the draft was that he wasn't ultra athletic. Yet somebody expected him to be the next Kobe or TMac, two ultra athletic players? Ridiculous.

joec32033 wrote:

ESOMKnicks wrote:

Welpee wrote:
So focusing on Knox and Frank and ignoring RJ, Porzingis, Quickley, Robinson proves what?

Oh, puhleeze, on what planet did we develop Porzingis? In his two healthy seasons the coaching staff did absolute ZERO to utilize his skills and abilities. He was just put out there on the court and told to improvise. Ever since Ewing roamed the court, the Knicks' offensive strategy has been "dump the ball to your best player and let him try to score the best he can". Porzingis could have been a thousand times more effective in a motion-and-passing oriented TEAM offense, scoring off numerous cuts, putbacks and open threes. Instead it was mid-court and post isolations all the time, where he was often abused by players giving up 5-7 inches in height, put up bad shots, and finally got winded, he is simply not a natural one-on-one scorer.

RJ came in with expectations of a next Kobe or TMac. His rookie season tempered those expectations heavily, to say the least, he was not even on the all-rookie team. IQ proved he was special the moment he entered the preseason games - he was a smart late first round pick rather than a development success. MitchRob, yeah fine, that one was a development success. I only hope he someday learns what a jump shot is, and does not bolt the team in a year or two.

Who in God's name ever had that expectation of RJ?

He came into his college career as the automatic projected 1st overall pick, but Zion and Morant had something to say about that

I don't know where that comparison came from, but there was no question his expectations were/are HIGH, all star at worse

knicks1248 wrote:

joec32033 wrote:

ESOMKnicks wrote:

Welpee wrote:
So focusing on Knox and Frank and ignoring RJ, Porzingis, Quickley, Robinson proves what?

Oh, puhleeze, on what planet did we develop Porzingis? In his two healthy seasons the coaching staff did absolute ZERO to utilize his skills and abilities. He was just put out there on the court and told to improvise. Ever since Ewing roamed the court, the Knicks' offensive strategy has been "dump the ball to your best player and let him try to score the best he can". Porzingis could have been a thousand times more effective in a motion-and-passing oriented TEAM offense, scoring off numerous cuts, putbacks and open threes. Instead it was mid-court and post isolations all the time, where he was often abused by players giving up 5-7 inches in height, put up bad shots, and finally got winded, he is simply not a natural one-on-one scorer.

RJ came in with expectations of a next Kobe or TMac. His rookie season tempered those expectations heavily, to say the least, he was not even on the all-rookie team. IQ proved he was special the moment he entered the preseason games - he was a smart late first round pick rather than a development success. MitchRob, yeah fine, that one was a development success. I only hope he someday learns what a jump shot is, and does not bolt the team in a year or two.

Who in God's name ever had that expectation of RJ?

He came into his college career as the automatic projected 1st overall pick, but Zion and Morant had something to say about that

I don't know where that comparison came from, but there was no question his expectations were/are HIGH, all star at worse

Huge difference between saying someone is projected to be an all-star and saying he came with "expectations to be the next Kobe or TMac." Very wide gap between those statements.

He was touted as top of the class preseason and was eclipsed by Zion and Morant. Not sure about any labels outside of “Maple Mamba” but nobod was really calling him “The next” anything from what I recall. Given his Summer league start and quick acclimation which he seems to do at a steady pace I’d say he is developing. Was it Fiz, miller or Thibs???? Its Knicks!!!! Why not just enjoy it.

I wanted Miles Bridges over both. Still not out of the question that he develops into the best player. Doesn't really matter. It's done. Knox is our guy until he isn't.

joec32033 wrote:
Who in God's name ever had that expectation of RJ?

Does the nickname Maple Mamba ring a bell?

ESOMKnicks wrote:

joec32033 wrote:
Who in God's name ever had that expectation of RJ?

Does the nickname Maple Mamba ring a bell?

So a nickname is an expectation?

As I already wrote, I was pleased with that pick. I thought both Mikal and Miles were “safer” picks, but I believed Knox had all the predispositions to be a better player than both. But Knox unfortunately did not use those potentials and did not become even close to the player I hoped he could be. “Motor” was constantly mentioned as his problem and this unfortunately proved to be true. A similar thing happened to Frank.

As it seems for now, from 4 years of picking in the top 10, RJ will be the only one to be a really good player. OK, Obi is a rookie and hasn’t gotten a chance yet so I won’t (for now) include him in that story.

ESOMKnicks wrote:

joec32033 wrote:
Who in God's name ever had that expectation of RJ?

Does the nickname Maple Mamba ring a bell?

Harold Miner was expected to be the next Michael Jordan because he had the nickname "Baby Jordan?"
Eddy Curry was expected to be the next Shaquille O'Neal because he had the nickname "Baby Shaq?"

So I guess the nickname "French Prince" meant Frank was expected to be the next Will Smith?

Welpee wrote:

ESOMKnicks wrote:

joec32033 wrote:
Who in God's name ever had that expectation of RJ?

Does the nickname Maple Mamba ring a bell?

Harold Miner was expected to be the next Michael Jordan because he had the nickname "Baby Jordan?"
Eddy Curry was expected to be the next Shaquille O'Neal because he had the nickname "Baby Shaq?"

So I guess the nickname "French Prince" meant Frank was expected to be the next Will Smith?

Or the Next Fred Weis????

Nalod wrote:

Welpee wrote:

ESOMKnicks wrote:

joec32033 wrote:
Who in God's name ever had that expectation of RJ?

Does the nickname Maple Mamba ring a bell?

Harold Miner was expected to be the next Michael Jordan because he had the nickname "Baby Jordan?"
Eddy Curry was expected to be the next Shaquille O'Neal because he had the nickname "Baby Shaq?"

So I guess the nickname "French Prince" meant Frank was expected to be the next Will Smith?

Or the Next Fred Weis????

This is really starting to give me the same anxiety I get when I am getting ready to explain 3rd grade math to my general foreman, because common sense.

Me