martin wrote:It won't be with Rose, you're definitely a homer LOLiHart, Obi, RJ, Hart, IQ
I can't see R.J. Barrett on the bench because every team needs a 3rd Scorer and Grimes may never become a 20+ point per game scorer (alongside of Jalen Brunson and Julius Randle) especially not this year he won't.
I'd actually like to see...
C; Mitchell Robinson.
PF: Julius Randle.
SF: Josh Hart.
SG: R.J. Barrett.
PG: Jalen Brunson.
Moves R.J. Barrett back to his natural position of 2G (@ 6'6) while also allowing Quentin Grimes to have more of an impact (Offensive) Role amongst the 2nd unit.
C; Isaiah Hartenstein.
PF: Obi Toppin.
SG: Quentin Grimes.
PG: Immanuel Quickley.
(And Ladies and Gentlemen; that's Tom Thibs 9-Man Rotation right there).
Long story short I think the addition of Josh Hart gives Tom Thibs a lot of different rotational opportunities.
Can somebody tell me why Barrett is a "natural" SG when the guy can't shoot well? Where is this coming from?
Panos wrote:Can somebody tell me why Barrett is a "natural" SG when the guy can't shoot well? Where is this coming from?
I guess he is saying that because of RJ’s height?
One thing that impressed me with Josh Hart in last night's game is his quick decisions passing the ball. Saw several plays where he either got the rebound or a pass and moved the ball instantly.
Rookie wrote:Panos wrote:Can somebody tell me why Barrett is a "natural" SG when the guy can't shoot well? Where is this coming from?
I guess he is saying that because of RJ’s height?
Do you know what the S stands for in SG?
Panos wrote:Rookie wrote:Panos wrote:Can somebody tell me why Barrett is a natural SG when the guy can't shoot well? Where is this coming from?
I guess he is saying that because of RJs height?
Do you know what the S stands for in SG?
He's always been a natural SG and who's to harp all over his FG% etc when he's only 22 and the youngest kid on our roster with a lot of time to develop into a more efficient scorer.
@ SG he's able to use his height/size to his advantage and on both ends of the floor too (unlike @ SF).
C; Mitchell Robinson.
PF: Julius Randle.
SF: Josh Hart.
SG: R.J. Barrett.
PG: Jalen Brunson.
It's just my opinion but I believe that starting 5 would thrive together.
And I'm just not willing to make fun of RJs shooting when Quentin Grimes isn't exactly lighting it up either.
NYKMentality wrote:Panos wrote:Rookie wrote:Panos wrote:Can somebody tell me why Barrett is a natural SG when the guy can't shoot well? Where is this coming from?
I guess he is saying that because of RJs height?
Do you know what the S stands for in SG?
He's always been a natural SG and who's to harp all over his FG% etc when he's only 22 and the youngest kid on our roster with a lot of time to develop into a more efficient scorer.
@ SG he's able to use his height/size to his advantage and on both ends of the floor too (unlike @ SF).
C; Mitchell Robinson.
PF: Julius Randle.
SF: Josh Hart.
SG: R.J. Barrett.
PG: Jalen Brunson.
It's just my opinion but I believe that starting 5 would thrive together.
And I'm just not willing to make fun of RJs shooting when Quentin Grimes isn't exactly lighting it up either.
So let me get this straight: RJ is a "natural SG" because of his height at 6-6, and Hart is a SF at 6-4"? Do you guys just make this shit up? THere is nothing about RJ's game to me that makes him more of a SG than a SF. At least at SF you can get away with being a jack of all trades. At SG, you gotta be able to shoot.
Panos wrote:NYKMentality wrote:Panos wrote:Rookie wrote:Panos wrote:Can somebody tell me why Barrett is a natural SG when the guy can't shoot well? Where is this coming from?
I guess he is saying that because of RJs height?
Do you know what the S stands for in SG?
He's always been a natural SG and who's to harp all over his FG% etc when he's only 22 and the youngest kid on our roster with a lot of time to develop into a more efficient scorer.
@ SG he's able to use his height/size to his advantage and on both ends of the floor too (unlike @ SF).
C; Mitchell Robinson.
PF: Julius Randle.
SF: Josh Hart.
SG: R.J. Barrett.
PG: Jalen Brunson.
It's just my opinion but I believe that starting 5 would thrive together.
And I'm just not willing to make fun of RJs shooting when Quentin Grimes isn't exactly lighting it up either.
So let me get this straight: RJ is a "natural SG" because of his height at 6-6, and Hart is a SF at 6-4"? Do you guys just make this shit up? THere is nothing about RJ's game to me that makes him more of a SG than a SF. At least at SF you can get away with being a jack of all trades. At SG, you gotta be able to shoot.
I feel like with the way the Knicks play there isn't much of a difference. Randle and Brunson ISO or run the pick and roll and dump it off to the dunker or the open guy outside. It's also not strictly about height- Josh Hart definitely gives off more of a forward vibe than RJ does. I also think most SG's will struggle keeping Hart off of the offensive glass so it's more likely RJ gets a smaller guy to work against on his drives.
RJ's shot profile is really dependent on having strong offensive rebounding (because he misses so many layups at the rim). Having Hart and Robinson on the court should help the team.
gradyandrew wrote:Panos wrote:NYKMentality wrote:Panos wrote:Rookie wrote:Panos wrote:Can somebody tell me why Barrett is a natural SG when the guy can't shoot well? Where is this coming from?
I guess he is saying that because of RJs height?
Do you know what the S stands for in SG?
He's always been a natural SG and who's to harp all over his FG% etc when he's only 22 and the youngest kid on our roster with a lot of time to develop into a more efficient scorer.
@ SG he's able to use his height/size to his advantage and on both ends of the floor too (unlike @ SF).
C; Mitchell Robinson.
PF: Julius Randle.
SF: Josh Hart.
SG: R.J. Barrett.
PG: Jalen Brunson.
It's just my opinion but I believe that starting 5 would thrive together.
And I'm just not willing to make fun of RJs shooting when Quentin Grimes isn't exactly lighting it up either.
So let me get this straight: RJ is a "natural SG" because of his height at 6-6, and Hart is a SF at 6-4"? Do you guys just make this shit up? THere is nothing about RJ's game to me that makes him more of a SG than a SF. At least at SF you can get away with being a jack of all trades. At SG, you gotta be able to shoot.
I feel like with the way the Knicks play there isn't much of a difference. Randle and Brunson ISO or run the pick and roll and dump it off to the dunker or the open guy outside. It's also not strictly about height- Josh Hart definitely gives off more of a forward vibe than RJ does. I also think most SG's will struggle keeping Hart off of the offensive glass so it's more likely RJ gets a smaller guy to work against on his drives.
RJ's shot profile is really dependent on having strong offensive rebounding (because he misses so many layups at the rim). Having Hart and Robinson on the court should help the team.
So what "vibe" do you get from RJ? That's my whole point. I get no SG vibe from RJ. At all.
Panos wrote:gradyandrew wrote:Panos wrote:NYKMentality wrote:Panos wrote:Rookie wrote:Panos wrote:Can somebody tell me why Barrett is a natural SG when the guy can't shoot well? Where is this coming from?
I guess he is saying that because of RJs height?
Do you know what the S stands for in SG?
He's always been a natural SG and who's to harp all over his FG% etc when he's only 22 and the youngest kid on our roster with a lot of time to develop into a more efficient scorer.@ SG he's able to use his height/size to his advantage and on both ends of the floor too (unlike @ SF).
C; Mitchell Robinson.
PF: Julius Randle.
SF: Josh Hart.
SG: R.J. Barrett.
PG: Jalen Brunson.
It's just my opinion but I believe that starting 5 would thrive together.
And I'm just not willing to make fun of RJs shooting when Quentin Grimes isn't exactly lighting it up either.
So let me get this straight: RJ is a "natural SG" because of his height at 6-6, and Hart is a SF at 6-4"? Do you guys just make this shit up? THere is nothing about RJ's game to me that makes him more of a SG than a SF. At least at SF you can get away with being a jack of all trades. At SG, you gotta be able to shoot.
I feel like with the way the Knicks play there isn't much of a difference. Randle and Brunson ISO or run the pick and roll and dump it off to the dunker or the open guy outside. It's also not strictly about height- Josh Hart definitely gives off more of a forward vibe than RJ does. I also think most SG's will struggle keeping Hart off of the offensive glass so it's more likely RJ gets a smaller guy to work against on his drives. RJ's shot profile is really dependent on having strong offensive rebounding (because he misses so many layups at the rim). Having Hart and Robinson on the court should help the team.
So what "vibe" do you get from RJ? That's my whole point. I get no SG vibe from RJ. At all.
Well then consider him a Scoring Guard because guess what?
R.J. Barrett is the only 3rd option Scorer @ over 20+ Points Per Game (within the entire NBA). No other team features a 3rd option who's scoring over 20+ per game.
Yes.
For being only 22 years of age it's extremely difficult to score 20+ Points Per Game and because of it the Knicks are the only team in the NBA with 3 players all scoring 20+ (Randle/Brunson/RJ) and we're ranked #6 in Offensive Rating because of it too.
PS:
Josh Hart has played most of his entire NBA Career @ SF and I'd imagine it's because he's an excellent rebounder with great wing Defense too.
Panos wrote:NYKMentality wrote:Panos wrote:Rookie wrote:Panos wrote:Can somebody tell me why Barrett is a natural SG when the guy can't shoot well? Where is this coming from?
I guess he is saying that because of RJs height?
Do you know what the S stands for in SG?
He's always been a natural SG and who's to harp all over his FG% etc when he's only 22 and the youngest kid on our roster with a lot of time to develop into a more efficient scorer.
@ SG he's able to use his height/size to his advantage and on both ends of the floor too (unlike @ SF).
C; Mitchell Robinson.
PF: Julius Randle.
SF: Josh Hart.
SG: R.J. Barrett.
PG: Jalen Brunson.
It's just my opinion but I believe that starting 5 would thrive together.
And I'm just not willing to make fun of RJs shooting when Quentin Grimes isn't exactly lighting it up either.
So let me get this straight: RJ is a "natural SG" because of his height at 6-6, and Hart is a SF at 6-4"? Do you guys just make this shit up? THere is nothing about RJ's game to me that makes him more of a SG than a SF. At least at SF you can get away with being a jack of all trades. At SG, you gotta be able to shoot.
I don’t know what you’re arguing with me about. RJ’s shooting form is always different so it is doubtful he will ever be a consistent 3pt shooter. it looked like Thibs tried Hart at SG with Brunson and IQ and also at SF with Brunson and Barrett. Hart played well with similar results in both line ups. RJ has been not only sucking ass but has low effort except for some flashes when he seems to lock in and then fade again. For some reason Thibs is ride or die with Barret. I don’t get it but it’s his team so wtf do I know? I’m just someone who follows the team very closely….no homer
NYKMentality wrote:Josh Hart has played most of his entire NBA Career @ SF and I'd imagine it's because he's an excellent rebounder with great wing Defense too.
Oh really?
https://www.nba.com/player/1628404/josh-...
What position does it list there?
Panos wrote:NYKMentality wrote:Josh Hart has played most of his entire NBA Career @ SF and I'd imagine it's because he's an excellent rebounder with great wing Defense too.
Oh really?
https://www.nba.com/player/1628404/josh-...
What position does it list there?
I don't think NBA.COM header is an accurate source when we all clearly remember Hart @ SF for multiple years in N.O and also multiple years @ SF in Portland (including this year). And during his Knicks debut he was also playing SF too.
Panos wrote:NYKMentality wrote:Josh Hart has played most of his entire NBA Career @ SF and I'd imagine it's because he's an excellent rebounder with great wing Defense too.
Oh really?
https://www.nba.com/player/1628404/josh-...
What position does it list there?
https://www.basketball-reference.com/pla...
For position I usually check the play-by-play position estimate at basketball reference. This is also splitting hairs; generally the NBA has moved to talking about wings rather than SG and SF.
gradyandrew wrote:Panos wrote:NYKMentality wrote:Josh Hart has played most of his entire NBA Career @ SF and I'd imagine it's because he's an excellent rebounder with great wing Defense too.
Oh really?
https://www.nba.com/player/1628404/josh-...
What position does it list there?
https://www.basketball-reference.com/pla...For position I usually check the play-by-play position estimate at basketball reference. This is also splitting hairs; generally the NBA has moved to talking about wings rather than SG and SF.
It's not only splitting hairs, it's a complete diversion. The question is why is RJ a "natural SG"?
Panos wrote:Can somebody tell me why Barrett is a "natural" SG when the guy can't shoot well? Where is this coming from?
Not sure either. RJ seems to be just fine at the 3 or what many just call “Wing player” as teams might have two.
Few teams have the pure point anymore. Embiid takes the ball up after a rebound often. Back in the days Power forwards were basically short centers who had outside game, but could also low post up too.
Great players are just great players. Lebron must have a position on the boxscore but he is PG, SG, SF and PF depending on the matchup. Giannis? Center? Not if Brook is there. Were is Brook? Somtime hoisting up 3’s.
KP is 7’3 and plays front court. He plays like a 3 on the parimeter, PF or C at times too.
JHart is wing player. So is RJ. Perhaps who is guarding whom might dictate the actual position.
The SG/ SF positions are basically just wing now. There’s no difference really. RJ and Hart are both wings because neither really can be said to be more SG or SF.
Saw Hart confidently knock down a couple of threes the other night. I know that’s not really his game and he has lapses where he won’t shoot them, but if the Knicks can unlock him as a league average shooter from 3 than his impact will be unmeasurable.
gradyandrew wrote:Panos wrote:NYKMentality wrote:Josh Hart has played most of his entire NBA Career @ SF and I'd imagine it's because he's an excellent rebounder with great wing Defense too.
Oh really?
https://www.nba.com/player/1628404/josh-...
What position does it list there?
https://www.basketball-reference.com/pla...
For position I usually check the play-by-play position estimate at basketball reference. This is also splitting hairs; generally the NBA has moved to talking about wings rather than SG and SF.
There really is no such thing as SF and SG anymore.
There's guards that can shoot (SGs) and guards that can't (SGs and SFs).
Classically, SFs were small PFs who could dribble and sometimes shoot.
Now SFs are SGs who can not shoot; or SGs who are rebounders and defenders.
My positions are:
Point - can be a guard or a forward. Brings the ball up and initiates the offense.
3&D - Long tweener that can guard traditional 1-4 and can hit a 3 with 36%+ accuracy
Slash - Athletic player that can work without the ball.
Big - Can take a lot of forms, but generally a player that works on the block.
The traditional positions are becoming meaningless. But, players that can't fit into these categories are likely underperforming their positional needs.
Point - Brunson, Randle, Quick.
3&D - [Grimes 1-3] [Barrett 1-4] [McBride - 1-2]. Neither is shooting with a high enough clip to fit perfectly.
Slash - jHart, Toppin.
Big - Robinson, iHart, Sims
So, not a perfect match for my notions of positions. But not horrible. Continued growth is necessary. Happy lately with how things are improving.
