SupremeCommander wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:

fishmike wrote:I thought Culver got exposed in the tourney. There is no way I look at Culver with RJ sitting there. RJ was the top rated player going into the year. That didnt really change, what happened was Zion and Ja really blew up. RJ did not disappoint. There is nothing not to like about RJ at 3. Literally nothing. This is about as no brainer as it gets for us

Agree. Don't get cute. take RJ. Anything else should just pertain to the Knicks just doing their homework and/or gauging market value.

I think the thing irritating me the most about this Culver smoke is didn't we literally just trade away two SGs who were rotation level SGs? We jumped at the chance to trade THJ and Courtney Lee to develop the next one? Fuck that

Not really, the problem with Tim jr and Lee was their contracts, we couldn’t sign two max contracts with them on the books.

https://www.thestepien.com/2019/04/05/projecting-jarrett-culver/

First, let me say I think the separation between Barrett, Culver and Morant as the best secondary creator in the class is very small, and there are arguments for and against all 3 prospects. There are a few reasons why I’m leaning Culver, and some have already been stated earlier on. Why I’m going Culver > Barrett is based on me trusting Culver’s mentality and IQ more, along with better finishing and higher shooting upside. Barrett has an issue of predetermining his drives and it often results in overly contested shots or turnovers. His footwork and athleticism take a significant hit when he’s in tight spaces, which is the opposite of Culver. RJ’s lower body is also stiff and a lot of his buckets around the basket come from barreling into somebody, which will be harder at the next level.