Knicks · bench is likely what's going to get the wins and that's great (page 3)

Panos wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Panos wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Panos wrote:I think its time to revive this thread.
While Brunson is out this is still true. When he was healthy, it was totally Brunson + Randle + IQ getting the wins, but now its a different story.
IQ + Hart + Hart + Deuce played most of the second half last night and they were NASTY.

the big question is if McBride ascends what do we do with our glut at guard?
PG Brunson/IQ/McBride/Rose
SG RJ/Grimes/JHart/Fournier

We obviously play 3 guard sets and our size up front compensates, but improving this balance (and we have talent/players that are desirable)

We have Fournier/Rose expiring deals along with IQ/McBride/Grimes/RJ are potential pieces (assuming Brunson/JHart are staying)

Again, I don't consider RJ a SG, so I don't see a problem.

PG Brunson/McBride
SG Grimes/IQ/JHart
SF RJ/JHart

EF and Rose are perma-benched.

why not?
He earned the 3rd pick in the draft playing SG at Duke.
He played his first two seasons with the Knicks playing SG next to Reggie.
We tried moving him to SF. Has it worked? Is he now a SF? I would say he's not. However you I was forced to agree he was a SF I would say we need a new one. Wiggins took like 7 years of RJ play to get better. Not sure I have that patience and RJ is smaller. If nothing better comes along we just keep playing 3 guard sets.

If we are keeping RJ I would love to get him back to SG, but as mentioned IQ/Grimes/JHart are taking those minutes and deservedly.

Because he is slow and is not a shooter. He's basically a SF/PF tweener.

he doesnt box (much) out and cant guard bigs (really well) so.... and he's 100% a shooter. He SHOOTS it all the time. Lots

There's just no way SF is his best position in this league. When he plays SG he gives you an advantage (size). What advantage does he give you at SF/PF?

If anything he was really showing a breakout end of his sophomore season. He had everyone thinking year 3 is all star. Then they played him next to Fournier, moved him to SF and its not been good since. What am I missing?

I wont even disagree with you on his position... but I will say this. At SG? RJ intrigues me and there's somethings I like (size, rebounding, bullyball). Playing him at forward is meh at best. We play him there because we have 50 SGs. I dont want RJ to the Knicks SF.

Im thinking RJ is a SF and have for some time.
As to his defined ceiling? He is 22.
Wiggins is like 6-8 with 7 foot wingspan. Same as Randle.
RJ is 6-10 span.
Not much to argue. WE all want a better RJ. SOme want him gone with no clarit to replace him other than "Better". Sometimes you get a change, and its not for the better.
OG anunoby is not a star SF either. But he would be new.
All signs point at this moment that we are committed to RJ. THat can change of course.
For what its worth, his points in the paint are vastly improved this year.

Nalod wrote:Im thinking RJ is a SF and have for some time.
As to his defined ceiling? He is 22.
Wiggins is like 6-8 with 7 foot wingspan. Same as Randle.
RJ is 6-10 span.
Not much to argue. WE all want a better RJ. SOme want him gone with no clarit to replace him other than "Better". Sometimes you get a change, and its not for the better.
OG anunoby is not a star SF either. But he would be new.
All signs point at this moment that we are committed to RJ. THat can change of course.
For what its worth, his points in the paint are vastly improved this year.

RJ hasn't started his new contract yet. So I don't think this is a discussion anymore. If we can pay guys like EF and Rose to ride the pine, then the FO and Thibs will give RJ plenty of room to develop and meet his ceiling. Fans will say and react off emotions, which change from game to game. But this FO doesn't think short term. They plan ahead and make logical moves.