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.

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

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?

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

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?

ESOMKnicks wrote:

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

Does the nickname Maple Mamba ring a bell?

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

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.