fishmike wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

Nalod wrote:somebody is always to blame.
RJ is the new Randle.

Who was the new Payton.

Who was the new Randle.

What was the new Hardaway.

Think I can get as far back as Jared Jeffries off the top of my head.

Though credit where credit is due... 'Avi Lee' was a clever burn.

this is where you guys just have it wrong. Who's "blaming" RJ? For what? The Knicks are having a great season. I love the team. You guys inject your own words and then respond to yourselves.

Team is great. There's some holes and its early and there's gonna be a lot of changes. I'll be shocked if there isnt. Right now you look at who is playing well and who is playing poorly. That's it. Its not RJ hate and Obi slander. These are the guys struggling while the others are thriving. That's it. I know it's drama free, sorry about that. Just talking about how it plays out. Either they get better or we see less of them or nothing changes and team is what it is for now. Chat chat chat

thanks for sharing your thoughts

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

fishmike wrote:Another Kobe like performance last night. Thibs couldnt get RJ out of the game fast enough. 4 TOs, 4 PFs and 4 baskets made. There's a word for that... its trash. Trash with a green check mark.

Gotta say, I find this argument curious....

....And A knock on Barrett's game is he didn't shoot enough?

what argument? I didnt say he didnt shoot enough, you did.

I said he stunk and the coach couldnt yank him fast enough.

He played 27 mins, which was in-line with everyone but Randle and Brunson.

I provided some stats of why he stunk.

What stinks about taking 8 shots and making 4 of them?

True that the shooting percentage was good. However, it is more about fans pointing out what he is NOT doing while on the floor.

That's fine.

But when an individual makes the point Barrett should be shooting less so teammates who are more efficiently can shoot more, dinging him for shooting 8 shots (making 4 of them) seems inconsistent to me.

It seems the decision to shoot 8 efficient shots would go in the good and not the bad column.

Which seems pretty obvious. Something that has cost him minutes and the confidence of Thibs to go with him at the end of games.
Guess best way to explain it is to say look at what the guy that has replaced him at the end of games is doing. JHart is what RJ needs to play more like. Pass, defend, hustle and affect the game in more than going 4-8. Think he can, but he has been a black hole on offense and absent on defense way too many times this year. He had a crucial fast break in the fourth off a turnover in which he basically went 1 on 3. And yes, we can probably say that of several other players but because of his perceived minimal team play and lack of other contributions, more fans are getting impatient. Still want to give RJ more time because I feel he is a beast going to the basket but the tunnel vision and lack of other hustle stats are growing tiresome. He is hitting many as just interested in scoring. Hard to argue if you look at his demeanor and energy if he is not scoring. Just my opinion.

I got no problem with that. All reasonable.

I still think all roads lead to barrett criticisms and peaking after what has been a rare loss is what it is.

Can't really say that anyone was to blame for the loss due to their offensive performance. Although 4 TO's is pretty bad.
I would point more to an all around inability to stop everyone on Minny's team from scoring. Which may be at the focus of the RJ criticism. As he has had a tough year in that regard. Once again, my only point is that RJ needs to do other things besides score or shoot. He needs to set others up, play more energetic defense, cut down on bad TO's and add more hustle plays like getting loose balls. If he doesn't, it will assure that Thibs will go with others to close and that Knick fans will question their commitment to his development.

I think it was one of those games that happens during an 82 game NBA regular season. Not saying the Knicks played great D and the Wolves shot crazy good anyway. But sometimes a bad game is just a bad game.

But I know "fans" need to autopsy every loss, declare a team can't perform like that in the postseason (duh), fix the team for next year, and most importantly pile on the appointed boogeyman given the slightest provocation (like 4 TOs), and I realize NOT doing that and finding it comical when it happens puts me as odds with most other "fans".

As it pertains to RJ, again the macro view informs my expectations. I don't expect Barrett to suddenly become the player people want him to be. IF it happens, it will likely happen slowly and non-linearly.

I think there are some signs 2022-23 progress was made and is being made, but he's just not going to become Josh Hart II overnight because someone thinks he should flip a switch and do the things he does.

I just can't wrap my head around getting frustrated over what one should expect. He's GONNA to have less than desirable games over the last 9 and in the playoffs. Already baked into the pie (for me, anyway). But as you point out, he'll likely have some good ones too,.Just who he is right now.

Agree with most but I am sure you understand this is forum for fans to vent, talk about what could be better and yes, who they feel is the player they are most disappointed with. Do not think anyone was preaching to run him out of town before our next game. Just that he had yet another game in which he showed the deficiencies some have been waiting for him to improve on over the last three years.

Everyone here is hoping he turns it around by playoff time. But no fault in some pointing out games he shows he hasn't.

And yes, he is this years Randle. Playing okay but most expected more.

There's ALWAYS a boogeyman.

Barrett is now it.

You can rationalize it all you like.

But this a "Fire Thibs" thread.

That all roads lead back to the boogeyman on sports forums isn't fiction. It's a real thing.

Some of us find that regular and cool.

Some of us don't.

fishmike wrote:

joec32033 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

NYKMentality wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Not really, RJ isnt playing well enough to start.

Um...

Yes he is.

He's only 22 years old but yet averaging 20 Points off .468% from the field since the All-Star break and averaging 20 points throughout the entire season.

"RJ ISN'T PLAYING WELL ENOUGH TO START".

Give me a break.

Thank the basketball Gods Coach Thibs doesn't have your mindset because then kids like R.J. wouldn't be allowed to start, wouldn't be allowed to develop, wouldn't be allowed to make mistakes and would be STUCK ON THE BENCH.

Open your eyes. Wait... are you blind? Shit if you are Im an even bigger ******* than normal. Assuming you can look however maybe try to "see"

Knicks play 9 guys. The two weakest players in the rotation are RJ and Obi and its not even close or debatable. Another Kobe like performance last night. Thibs couldnt get RJ out of the game fast enough. 4 TOs, 4 PFs and 4 baskets made. There's a word for that... its trash. Trash with a green check mark.

Pop quiz... of ALL the guys in the rotation this year who's the LEAST efficient?

Who's got the WORST defensive metrics?

Guess who's got the WORST rebounding % on the team and doesnt play PG?

We ALL (that A L L with a GREEN CHECK BOX) WE ALL want RJ to play better. I'm just glad he's young and has another dozen years to become elite

Its not... its why RJ should be a bench guy. Start Hart who's got a real BB IQ. Play RJ off the bench. When Brunson/Randle sit its a more uptempo game and lets see RJ taking more of his shots vs. the other team's bench.
I really want RJ to play better. He's not and wildly inconsistent. We feature him with the bench. He's not the defender Hart or Grimes or IQ are. Folks get sensitive about RJ hate/slander and sometimes its just a case of playing the guy who's playing poorly for an extended period of time LESS

2 different perspectives. I currently see Grimes as the weak link in the starting rotation (agree about Obi off the bench). Grimes and RJ offer 2 different skill sets, but I think the illusion of lost opportunity will always make Grimes look shinier (same principle as everyone loving the backup quarterback).

Grimes played great against c level competition in summer league (although he choked in the chamionship game), and played well in an exhibition where no one is playing defense. Me personally, I think Grimes is a very good player but I think the illusion of lost opportunity really gets people thinking he is better than he is. I have seen no signs against NBA competition that Grimes offensively can perform like RJ.

I know you like to use efg%, so I'll use that...

Barett (47.7) has a higher career efg% than

Sprewell (46.4)
Rip Hamilton (46.9)
Caron Butler (46.9)
Ron Harper (46.8)
Starks (47.6)
Horton Tucker (47.5)
Tracy McGrady (47)

And is in range of:
Houston (49.8)
Drexler (49.5)
Richmond (49.7)
Pierce (50)
Roy (49.2)
Anthony (48.5)
Wade (49.5)
Marion (50)
Butler (49.7)
Derozan (48.2)
Jason Richardson (50.2)
Wiggins (49)
Pippen (50.4)
Kukoc (49.2)
Majerle (50.5)
Glenn Robinson (48.5)
Mike Redd (50.3)
Larry Johnson (50.5)
Grant Hill (49.2)
Vince Carter (48.9)

Most stars seem to be at arouns the 49-51% mark (give or take), and guys that are fringe all stars seem to come in just below that (yes, I individually searched players-more than I listed- to get a sample size and I tried to keep to swing players. I probably looked at about 40 players-you'll just have to take my word for it)

Grimes is at 56.9 career.
AS a comparison, the only players that are up that high are a few superstars (Curry, Durant, Kawai, Klay) and specialized shooters or post players.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/efg_pct_career.html

I dont understand this post at all. What do ANY of those players have to do with RJ being the worst player in our rotation? Not to mention that most of those guys are from a different era.

I have seen no signs against NBA competition that Grimes offensively can perform like RJ.

As for your comparison to Grimes you leave out defense which is literally why Grimes is the starter. As for offense Grimes wasnt handed 20 shots a game as a rookie, so we dont know. Like someone like IQ or even Brunson he's going to have to earn his shots and that's fine.

The question remains. When do we start to distribute some of the 16 shots being taken by the lest efficient guy we have to other's who have shot the ball better all year? That's it man. Its really a very simple discussion that doesnt need stats from guys who played 20+ years ago.

As I told Martin, you tend to fall back on efg% as a measuring stick. I posted the numbers as a comparison only, and here is my explanations:

Fish always uses efg% and I posted some stats as a comparison. I feel the different era's stuff is moot when it comes to certain analytics, this one in particular. While modern day NBA gives the offense much more of an advantage, I think any type of % would be offset by the fact that the number of lower percentage shots taken (3 pointers) balances that out. Meanwhile, in the older eras, the 3 point shot wasn't a weapn as much and as such alot of higher percentage shots were taken-but that is offset by the fact the defense had much more of a free reign to be physical and offset the easier percentage shots.

I have never left out defense. I think Grimes is a better defender than Barrett (this year), but I fail to buy into the lockdown defender groupthink. I have seen him blow too many assignments, get bamboozled too many times, and get blown by enough to rate him as an average to above average defender at best. Not stating fact, just my opinion of what I watch. He isn't anything special on defense. At least not yet.

And I get why he is the starter. He is a type of glue player good teams have. Where I disagreed was where it was said that Barrett was "one of the 2 weakest links in the rotation". I don't see it that way. I think you can put Quickley into Grimes spot and not lose anything, and actually maybe gain some creativity and playmaking without sacrificing anything Grimes brings to the table. You could probably replace Grimes in the rotation with McBride and with extra time, get better defense with comparable offense. Don't see who you can slide into Barrett's spot to give you what he gives you (although I'm sure you have a solution to this one I didn't think of).

https://nypost.com/2023/03/24/ex-knicks-julius-randle-rip-job-resurfaces-after-latest-meltdown/

gradyandrew wrote:joe, your explanation about efg% makes no sense. Since 3's count more than 2's efg% adjusts for this. A .400 3 point shooter would have an efg% of .600 because those 4 threes equal 12.points, the same as 6 twos. That's why it's the go to stat.

Percentages are never a good stat. Especially ones that are "adjusted" by giving things random values. I am not motivated enough, not smart enough nor am I interested enough to delve into what advance stats are good, bad or indifferent. That isn't the point of the thread either.

I am smart enough to post the same advance stat from multiple players to show that player A who is considered this horrible shooter has a similar advance stat to some players who are considered very good players.

Philc1 wrote:eFG is just a way for the RJ Haters to ninja a metric to prove he’s worse than Andrea Bargnani when pretty much all other evidence indicates he’s been a big part of the turnaround last 3 seasons

Good take.
“If you torture the numbers enough it will confess to anything”.

One game he looks tired, he “fat and out of shape”.

martin wrote:ungodly wild right?

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/KnicksMuse/status/1640747578579927042

Knicks are 21st in EFG%
Knicks are 5th in PP/100

Bottom line is this staff have built a super effective offense around a bunch of ISO and drive and dish guys.

Thibs has also held everyone accountable on the defensive side.

HofstraBBall wrote:I can still remember all those Thibs posts that were claiming Thibs was too stubborn, did not play/develop the yoot and only played his favorites. Thibs has done a great job developing IQ, Grimes, RJ, MR and Deuce. Obi is next. Done a great job playing those, who have earned it, down the stretch.

Thibs has also held everyone accountable on the defensive side.

I think both can be true regarding thibs past and present.

Would love to see the twin tower lineup and small ball line. Of course Obi will have a career year, knowing he doesn’t have to look over his shoulder.

This is good for the Knicks and Jules. He gets some rest and watches the team from the outside. It also increases the confidence and responsibility of key role players.

gradyandrew wrote:I thought he did a really good coaching job last night sticking with the guys who won the game.

Thibs is at his best when there is adversity