Nalod wrote:Thanks JoeC! I respect Martin so when he say he does not think much of RJ’s Defense I do question myself.
But at least I was not going crazy! It was a thing!!!!!
The Two way thing was why RJ WAS held accountable and he played thru cold shooting. THibs kept him in.
With Hart and Grimes he had the defense covered if the shooting was not there.
He is passing better, has an effective move to his right, his foul shooting improved, and he stood well in the playoffs.
If he can level his 3pt shooting to the high 30%’s (he did shoot 40% year two) his efficiency will improve.
RJ is not far from being really good. I get 3rd over all pick should be allstar ceiling, and maybe he gets there but he is not flashy and has to get to about 24pts per game to get that look.
As I said previously, he is polarizing.
I agree something needs to change as he and Randle don’t bring the best out of each other. Trade is not always necessary to do that, but I don’t have the answer either.

Nalod and JoeC. I skimmed the articles cause I have to jet soon and definitely read the bolded. They were definitely complimentary. But nothing more than opinion'ish and communicating the same things I had said: he put in really good work and was always put on the best offensive player. RJ can do well on defense occasionally, there is no doubt. That was not really the ask though.

martin wrote: thought the Knicks absolutely had RJ guarding the best wing players against opponents in the way Grimes did this past year, big development step.

I have zero recollection of RJ being considered good at it or above average or maybe even near average. He put in good work and effort but that was it. He wasn't locking anyone down.

Help me understand how those articles translate to RJ being a pretty good defender? Like, some maybe even some flimsy stats that compare him to what the rest of the wing players who do the same thing? How does he rate out? How has he rated out over the whole year and then over a couple?

With Grimes, there are literally like hundreds of tweet posts have either map out all wing players showing Grimes in the upper right corner of all defenders or straight show him in the top 10 of things, meaning he is near best in the league. Every time I look at those, RJ is nearly always on the opposite end of the spectrum.

RJ was still young so we can even grade him on a 22 yo curve. Let's dig into the actual numbers.

Joe, I really appreciate the articles and reminders. I am not sure they really back up the fact that RJ was really that good. He had some great moments. OK. Now was he actually good across year?

Also, and this is just a me thing, I don't take too much weight with DailyKnicks.com articles and the like; those blogs have too many writers who vary in terms of observation skills. That's just me though.

Nalod. RJ is not polarizing to me. Cause I just am mostly looking at the data.

martin wrote:

Nalod wrote:Thanks JoeC! I respect Martin so when he say he does not think much of RJ’s Defense I do question myself.
But at least I was not going crazy! It was a thing!!!!!
The Two way thing was why RJ WAS held accountable and he played thru cold shooting. THibs kept him in.
With Hart and Grimes he had the defense covered if the shooting was not there.
He is passing better, has an effective move to his right, his foul shooting improved, and he stood well in the playoffs.
If he can level his 3pt shooting to the high 30%’s (he did shoot 40% year two) his efficiency will improve.
RJ is not far from being really good. I get 3rd over all pick should be allstar ceiling, and maybe he gets there but he is not flashy and has to get to about 24pts per game to get that look.
As I said previously, he is polarizing.
I agree something needs to change as he and Randle don’t bring the best out of each other. Trade is not always necessary to do that, but I don’t have the answer either.

Nalod and JoeC. I skimmed the articles cause I have to jet soon and definitely read the bolded. They were definitely complimentary. But nothing more than opinion'ish and communicating the same things I had said: he put in really good work and was always put on the best offensive player. RJ can do well on defense occasionally, there is no doubt. That was not really the ask though.

martin wrote: thought the Knicks absolutely had RJ guarding the best wing players against opponents in the way Grimes did this past year, big development step.

I have zero recollection of RJ being considered good at it or above average or maybe even near average. He put in good work and effort but that was it. He wasn't locking anyone down.

Help me understand how those articles translate to RJ being a pretty good defender? Like, some maybe even some flimsy stats that compare him to what the rest of the wing players who do the same thing? How does he rate out? How has he rated out over the whole year and then over a couple?

With Grimes, there are literally like hundreds of tweet posts have either map out all wing players showing Grimes in the upper right corner of all defenders or straight show him in the top 10 of things, meaning he is near best in the league. Every time I look at those, RJ is nearly always on the opposite end of the spectrum.

RJ was still young so we can even grade him on a 22 yo curve. Let's dig into the actual numbers.

Joe, I really appreciate the articles and reminders. I am not sure they really back up the fact that RJ was really that good. He had some great moments. OK. Now was he actually good across year?

Also, and this is just a me thing, I don't take too much weight with DailyKnicks.com articles and the like; those blogs have too many writers who vary in terms of observation skills. That's just me though.

Nalod. RJ is not polarizing to me. Cause I just am mostly looking at the data.

Back two years ago, I cited to these kind of articles in real time to point out Barrett's defensive prowess. Context is relevant though. That defense was not specifically good with Kemba and Fournier. Barrett taking the tougher assignment between Kemba Walker and Evan Fournier is not really an indication of much by itself. The takeaway for me WAS his willingness (desire even) to take the toughest defensive assignments.

Barrett currently lacks the foot speed to be elite like Grimes is currently. Or McBride. I think Barrett needs this offseason to get better conditioning before we re-address his defensive prowess. That quick first step allows Grimes to get closer to his opponent. This past year, Grimes clearly took the harder defensive assignments AND was good at it. I do think this discussion should get tabled until we see Barrett's offseason conditioning. Much like Robinson bulked up and then got conditioned to his new weight, Barrett needs the conditioning to handle his added bulk strength. With that conditioning, I hope to see a breakout year from him on both sides of the ball. But Grimes is the better defender.

MS wrote:I would pass on OG, he averages 61 games a year over the past 6 years. He’s one of those guys that has been overrated.

They have VanVleet, Barnes, OG, Pascal and still couldn’t make the playoffs, there is something wrong there. I would rather overpay for Bridges. RJ, Obi, first rounder for Bridges. Or whatever it takes, his offensive package is better.

If you can sign Divencenzo to pair with IQ, Hart and I Hart would be a very interesting team.

Sometimes the problem is not the player. You can have a solid player on a team that doesn’t compliment their full potential.

Knicks are on the same predicament. We have players knick fans think are garbage. Put them in a different system and they look solid.

Im not counting on the FO to make a blockbuster trade in the offseason. For a trade of this magnitude to be worth it, the returning player should be head and shoulders above RJ or Randle talentwise to justify trading anyone of them.

Im hoping any moves or trades the FO makes would be for a player no more than 30 yrs. No more moves that Will mortgage the teams future please. We just witnessed a knicks draft pick that was traded in the melo trade win a championship. Hope that doesn't happen again.

blkexec wrote:

MS wrote:I would pass on OG, he averages 61 games a year over the past 6 years. He’s one of those guys that has been overrated.

They have VanVleet, Barnes, OG, Pascal and still couldn’t make the playoffs, there is something wrong there. I would rather overpay for Bridges. RJ, Obi, first rounder for Bridges. Or whatever it takes, his offensive package is better.

If you can sign Divencenzo to pair with IQ, Hart and I Hart would be a very interesting team.

Sometimes the problem is not the player. You can have a solid player on a team that doesn’t compliment their full potential.

Knicks are on in the same predicament. We have players knick fans think are garbage. Put them in a different system and they look solid.

blkexec wrote:

martin wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

blkexec wrote:

MS wrote:I would pass on OG, he averages 61 games a year over the past 6 years. He’s one of those guys that has been overrated.

They have VanVleet, Barnes, OG, Pascal and still couldn’t make the playoffs, there is something wrong there. I would rather overpay for Bridges. RJ, Obi, first rounder for Bridges. Or whatever it takes, his offensive package is better.

If you can sign Divencenzo to pair with IQ, Hart and I Hart would be a very interesting team.

Sometimes the problem is not the player. You can have a solid player on a team that doesn’t compliment their full potential.

Knicks are in the same predicament. We have players knick fans think are garbage. Put them in a different system and they look solid.

Good point. Players can't help the systems they play in. But MS also brings up a good point. OG misses a lot of games. I wouldn't feel comfortable giving up a huge package for a guy with his durability concerns. Would also add that I'm not really impressed by OG's offense.

Feel like the number of games this is a really tough line to draw. Lonzo Ball injury same as or near same as Lavine? OG has played similar number range of games to someone like Jamal Murray over past 4 years?

Tough to compare?

I think players missing games will become the norm. Vs back in the day, you were praised for being an iron man. I believe with the amount of money owners are invested in players and player agents are more protective of their players, missing games is now load management. So it will become more and more difficult to use that as a measuring stick, regarding who we should add or not add.

Kat is different because he missed a ton of games and personally I think he's a little soft. But OG is not a soft player. Just have to decide if he will have a history of missing games, or was last year an anomaly.

The issue I have with replacing RJ with OG is we lose RJ ability to break down a teams defense. I don't care about missed layups. To me it's beneficial to the team when you have a player that can impact a teams defense. JB does this as well, but RJ is like that running back you put into the game to close it out. Tell him to keep driving. OG is a different player. So I'm on the fense between these guys. Both have their own pros and cons and both players are completely different.

You are right, Knicks do need that type of player. But he has to not turn the ball over, be able to make a layup or midrange, and be able to make passes.

He will also need to be a much better defender.

We are going to also have to acknowledge that it may take 3+ years for those things to come to fruition.

Team going to be patient about that?

martin wrote:

Nalod wrote:Thanks JoeC! I respect Martin so when he say he does not think much of RJ’s Defense I do question myself.
But at least I was not going crazy! It was a thing!!!!!
The Two way thing was why RJ WAS held accountable and he played thru cold shooting. THibs kept him in.
With Hart and Grimes he had the defense covered if the shooting was not there.
He is passing better, has an effective move to his right, his foul shooting improved, and he stood well in the playoffs.
If he can level his 3pt shooting to the high 30%’s (he did shoot 40% year two) his efficiency will improve.
RJ is not far from being really good. I get 3rd over all pick should be allstar ceiling, and maybe he gets there but he is not flashy and has to get to about 24pts per game to get that look.
As I said previously, he is polarizing.
I agree something needs to change as he and Randle don’t bring the best out of each other. Trade is not always necessary to do that, but I don’t have the answer either.

Nalod and JoeC. I skimmed the articles cause I have to jet soon and definitely read the bolded. They were definitely complimentary. But nothing more than opinion'ish and communicating the same things I had said: he put in really good work and was always put on the best offensive player. RJ can do well on defense occasionally, there is no doubt. That was not really the ask though.

martin wrote: thought the Knicks absolutely had RJ guarding the best wing players against opponents in the way Grimes did this past year, big development step.

I have zero recollection of RJ being considered good at it or above average or maybe even near average. He put in good work and effort but that was it. He wasn't locking anyone down.

Help me understand how those articles translate to RJ being a pretty good defender? Like, some maybe even some flimsy stats that compare him to what the rest of the wing players who do the same thing? How does he rate out? How has he rated out over the whole year and then over a couple?

With Grimes, there are literally like hundreds of tweet posts have either map out all wing players showing Grimes in the upper right corner of all defenders or straight show him in the top 10 of things, meaning he is near best in the league. Every time I look at those, RJ is nearly always on the opposite end of the spectrum.

RJ was still young so we can even grade him on a 22 yo curve. Let's dig into the actual numbers.

Joe, I really appreciate the articles and reminders. I am not sure they really back up the fact that RJ was really that good. He had some great moments. OK. Now was he actually good across year?

Also, and this is just a me thing, I don't take too much weight with DailyKnicks.com articles and the like; those blogs have too many writers who vary in terms of observation skills. That's just me though.

Nalod. RJ is not polarizing to me. Cause I just am mostly looking at the data.

Martin no offense, but I just think you have made your mind up on RJ, seemingly. The articles provided contain any number of different ways that back up the fact that at one time RJ was viewed as a top notch defender. There is video breakdowns in some of the origional articles. There is a sprinkling of both regular and advanced statistics that people use now. It is multiple writers from multiple sources that this site promotes on its main page thus verifying their credibility, at least in this site's eyes.

You made a post a long time ago that you aren't sold on RJ. You just aren't sold on him. You're not a hater, or anything like that you just don't like the player and no matter what data is presented it isn't going to sway your opinion. And I don't say this with any malice or "fighting words". It just is what it is and that's fine. I sometimes feel the same way about Grimes and his defense and the general overall opinion I read about him becoming some amazing star. I just don't see it. But to be fair, stuff like this the same types of evidence that is always presented in Grimes favor and for that player it is sin if it is just not accepted as fact.

blkexec wrote:

martin wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

blkexec wrote:

MS wrote:I would pass on OG, he averages 61 games a year over the past 6 years. He’s one of those guys that has been overrated.

They have VanVleet, Barnes, OG, Pascal and still couldn’t make the playoffs, there is something wrong there. I would rather overpay for Bridges. RJ, Obi, first rounder for Bridges. Or whatever it takes, his offensive package is better.

If you can sign Divencenzo to pair with IQ, Hart and I Hart would be a very interesting team.

Sometimes the problem is not the player. You can have a solid player on a team that doesn’t compliment their full potential.

Knicks are in the same predicament. We have players knick fans think are garbage. Put them in a different system and they look solid.

Good point. Players can't help the systems they play in. But MS also brings up a good point. OG misses a lot of games. I wouldn't feel comfortable giving up a huge package for a guy with his durability concerns. Would also add that I'm not really impressed by OG's offense.

Feel like the number of games this is a really tough line to draw. Lonzo Ball injury same as or near same as Lavine? OG has played similar number range of games to someone like Jamal Murray over past 4 years?

Tough to compare?

I think players missing games will become the norm. Vs back in the day, you were praised for being an iron man. I believe with the amount of money owners are invested in players and player agents are more protective of their players, missing games is now load management. So it will become more and more difficult to use that as a measuring stick, regarding who we should add or not add.

Kat is different because he missed a ton of games and personally I think he's a little soft. But OG is not a soft player. Just have to decide if he will have a history of missing games, or was last year an anomaly.

The issue I have with replacing RJ with OG is we lose RJ ability to break down a teams defense. I don't care about missed layups. To me it's beneficial to the team when you have a player that can impact a teams defense. JB does this as well, but RJ is like that running back you put into the game to close it out. Tell him to keep driving. OG is a different player. So I'm on the fense between these guys. Both have their own pros and cons and both players are completely different.

Although OG is not soft, he is a bit unaggressive. Like Hart, Randle, JB and IQ, prefer guys that can be dogs and show high level of confidence and desire to take over. Especially in a NY environment. Do like the fact that we add shooting with OG, but that need may be satisfied in FA. As long as we lose some contracts.

Agree with your point about RJ. Many don't talk about his ability to get to the hoop pretty easily.

Nalod wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

Nalod wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

martin wrote:

Nalod wrote:Thanks JoeC! I respect Martin so when he say he does not think much of RJ’s Defense I do question myself.
But at least I was not going crazy! It was a thing!!!!!
The Two way thing was why RJ WAS held accountable and he played thru cold shooting. THibs kept him in.
With Hart and Grimes he had the defense covered if the shooting was not there.
He is passing better, has an effective move to his right, his foul shooting improved, and he stood well in the playoffs.
If he can level his 3pt shooting to the high 30%’s (he did shoot 40% year two) his efficiency will improve.
RJ is not far from being really good. I get 3rd over all pick should be allstar ceiling, and maybe he gets there but he is not flashy and has to get to about 24pts per game to get that look.
As I said previously, he is polarizing.
I agree something needs to change as he and Randle don’t bring the best out of each other. Trade is not always necessary to do that, but I don’t have the answer either.

Nalod and JoeC. I skimmed the articles cause I have to jet soon and definitely read the bolded. They were definitely complimentary. But nothing more than opinion'ish and communicating the same things I had said: he put in really good work and was always put on the best offensive player. RJ can do well on defense occasionally, there is no doubt. That was not really the ask though.

martin wrote: thought the Knicks absolutely had RJ guarding the best wing players against opponents in the way Grimes did this past year, big development step.

I have zero recollection of RJ being considered good at it or above average or maybe even near average. He put in good work and effort but that was it. He wasn't locking anyone down.

Help me understand how those articles translate to RJ being a pretty good defender? Like, some maybe even some flimsy stats that compare him to what the rest of the wing players who do the same thing? How does he rate out? How has he rated out over the whole year and then over a couple?

With Grimes, there are literally like hundreds of tweet posts have either map out all wing players showing Grimes in the upper right corner of all defenders or straight show him in the top 10 of things, meaning he is near best in the league. Every time I look at those, RJ is nearly always on the opposite end of the spectrum.

RJ was still young so we can even grade him on a 22 yo curve. Let's dig into the actual numbers.

Joe, I really appreciate the articles and reminders. I am not sure they really back up the fact that RJ was really that good. He had some great moments. OK. Now was he actually good across year?

Also, and this is just a me thing, I don't take too much weight with DailyKnicks.com articles and the like; those blogs have too many writers who vary in terms of observation skills. That's just me though.

Nalod. RJ is not polarizing to me. Cause I just am mostly looking at the data.

Back two years ago, I cited to these kind of articles in real time to point out Barrett's defensive prowess. Context is relevant though. That defense was not specifically good with Kemba and Fournier. Barrett taking the tougher assignment between Kemba Walker and Evan Fournier is not really an indication of much by itself. The takeaway for me WAS his willingness (desire even) to take the toughest defensive assignments.

Barrett currently lacks the foot speed to be elite like Grimes is currently. Or McBride. I think Barrett needs this offseason to get better conditioning before we re-address his defensive prowess. That quick first step allows Grimes to get closer to his opponent. This past year, Grimes clearly took the harder defensive assignments AND was good at it. I do think this discussion should get tabled until we see Barrett's offseason conditioning. Much like Robinson bulked up and then got conditioned to his new weight, Barrett needs the conditioning to handle his added bulk strength. With that conditioning, I hope to see a breakout year from him on both sides of the ball. But Grimes is the better defender.

Won’t argue. Does not mean he is bad. Its just the knicks are better with more players and perhaps let RJ focus on other things. But yes, Grimes is better.
I don’t know that Barrett had a lack of conditioning. After not having much experience as knick fan to see development of young players I do notice the trend of players taking steps back then making progress as things “sink” in or become instinctive thru practice and execution. IQ playmaking became a priority and his shooting suffered. Then it came together. RJ has been doing this in his 4 years here. He has yet to put it all together. Still 22. Maybe that he is 4 years in gives us concern. Maybe valid point. Maybe its expectations by some fans vs. others.
Rumors of front office being frustrated by him are true? Did his playoff performance help calm them down some?
If he is a bad fit with Randle, who goes? And who comes back in a trade.
So many things to consider.

https://www.nba.com/stats/players/defense-dash-overall?DateFrom=&Season=2022-23&SeasonType=Regular%20Season&TeamID=1610612752&dir=A&sort=PCT_PLUSMINUS

Defense Dashboard agrees with you on RJ. And in fact, finds Quentin Grimes less effective.

My only other note is that today, June 13, is the last date anyone can use the "only 22" comment on RJ. Our baby boy turns 23 tomorrow.

Never saw that dashboard thing before. RJ and IQ are nearly identical, but IQ is seen as a “really good defender”, but RJ is not?

Does lapses over a few games color us fans a certain way? RJ had a bad stretch where he looked bad. We then say “he needs better conditioning”, but his work ethic reputation is and has been always good.
THere was a stretch he was running awkward and his defense was bad.
The kid is a great topic always when knick news is slow!!!! LOL

If I am being honest with myself, his inefficiency on offense colors my opinion of him generally.

Also, there is a loophole in the dFG stat which is that it only calculate shots where the defender is within 3 feet of the shooter. So, if the player doesn’t rotate or lays off the shooter, it isn’t calculated against their dFG. I think guys like Grimes, McBride and Quickley are determined to be good defenders is based on the eye test. They are consistently suffocating their player and they pass the ball up to their team. I would have to make up a stat to explain why Grimes and IQ are so good - it would be something like plays and or seconds guarded before a pass,
steal or missed shot, not resulting in a foul or points. The Suffocation Stat. And by the eye test, Quick, McBride and Quick would be pretty good in that stat.

Regarding conditioning, again that’s eye test. He seems unsure of his athletic ability against defenders. In prior seasons, his footwork was among the reasons his average athleticism didn’t matter as much. But he currently plays with his back to the basket from 23 feet out. I’m being kind when I call that conditioning because condition is something he can change. If he’s playing like that due to insecurity, we’ll, trade him now.

Nalod wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

Nalod wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

martin wrote:

Nalod wrote:Thanks JoeC! I respect Martin so when he say he does not think much of RJ’s Defense I do question myself.
But at least I was not going crazy! It was a thing!!!!!
The Two way thing was why RJ WAS held accountable and he played thru cold shooting. THibs kept him in.
With Hart and Grimes he had the defense covered if the shooting was not there.
He is passing better, has an effective move to his right, his foul shooting improved, and he stood well in the playoffs.
If he can level his 3pt shooting to the high 30%’s (he did shoot 40% year two) his efficiency will improve.
RJ is not far from being really good. I get 3rd over all pick should be allstar ceiling, and maybe he gets there but he is not flashy and has to get to about 24pts per game to get that look.
As I said previously, he is polarizing.
I agree something needs to change as he and Randle don’t bring the best out of each other. Trade is not always necessary to do that, but I don’t have the answer either.

Nalod and JoeC. I skimmed the articles cause I have to jet soon and definitely read the bolded. They were definitely complimentary. But nothing more than opinion'ish and communicating the same things I had said: he put in really good work and was always put on the best offensive player. RJ can do well on defense occasionally, there is no doubt. That was not really the ask though.

martin wrote: thought the Knicks absolutely had RJ guarding the best wing players against opponents in the way Grimes did this past year, big development step.

I have zero recollection of RJ being considered good at it or above average or maybe even near average. He put in good work and effort but that was it. He wasn't locking anyone down.

Help me understand how those articles translate to RJ being a pretty good defender? Like, some maybe even some flimsy stats that compare him to what the rest of the wing players who do the same thing? How does he rate out? How has he rated out over the whole year and then over a couple?

With Grimes, there are literally like hundreds of tweet posts have either map out all wing players showing Grimes in the upper right corner of all defenders or straight show him in the top 10 of things, meaning he is near best in the league. Every time I look at those, RJ is nearly always on the opposite end of the spectrum.

RJ was still young so we can even grade him on a 22 yo curve. Let's dig into the actual numbers.

Joe, I really appreciate the articles and reminders. I am not sure they really back up the fact that RJ was really that good. He had some great moments. OK. Now was he actually good across year?

Also, and this is just a me thing, I don't take too much weight with DailyKnicks.com articles and the like; those blogs have too many writers who vary in terms of observation skills. That's just me though.

Nalod. RJ is not polarizing to me. Cause I just am mostly looking at the data.

Back two years ago, I cited to these kind of articles in real time to point out Barrett's defensive prowess. Context is relevant though. That defense was not specifically good with Kemba and Fournier. Barrett taking the tougher assignment between Kemba Walker and Evan Fournier is not really an indication of much by itself. The takeaway for me WAS his willingness (desire even) to take the toughest defensive assignments.

Barrett currently lacks the foot speed to be elite like Grimes is currently. Or McBride. I think Barrett needs this offseason to get better conditioning before we re-address his defensive prowess. That quick first step allows Grimes to get closer to his opponent. This past year, Grimes clearly took the harder defensive assignments AND was good at it. I do think this discussion should get tabled until we see Barrett's offseason conditioning. Much like Robinson bulked up and then got conditioned to his new weight, Barrett needs the conditioning to handle his added bulk strength. With that conditioning, I hope to see a breakout year from him on both sides of the ball. But Grimes is the better defender.

Won’t argue. Does not mean he is bad. Its just the knicks are better with more players and perhaps let RJ focus on other things. But yes, Grimes is better.
I don’t know that Barrett had a lack of conditioning. After not having much experience as knick fan to see development of young players I do notice the trend of players taking steps back then making progress as things “sink” in or become instinctive thru practice and execution. IQ playmaking became a priority and his shooting suffered. Then it came together. RJ has been doing this in his 4 years here. He has yet to put it all together. Still 22. Maybe that he is 4 years in gives us concern. Maybe valid point. Maybe its expectations by some fans vs. others.
Rumors of front office being frustrated by him are true? Did his playoff performance help calm them down some?
If he is a bad fit with Randle, who goes? And who comes back in a trade.
So many things to consider.

https://www.nba.com/stats/players/defense-dash-overall?DateFrom=&Season=2022-23&SeasonType=Regular%20Season&TeamID=1610612752&dir=A&sort=PCT_PLUSMINUS

Defense Dashboard agrees with you on RJ. And in fact, finds Quentin Grimes less effective.

My only other note is that today, June 13, is the last date anyone can use the "only 22" comment on RJ. Our baby boy turns 23 tomorrow.

Never saw that dashboard thing before. RJ and IQ are nearly identical, but IQ is seen as a “really good defender”, but RJ is not?

Does lapses over a few games color us fans a certain way? RJ had a bad stretch where he looked bad. We then say “he needs better conditioning”, but his work ethic reputation is and has been always good.
THere was a stretch he was running awkward and his defense was bad.
The kid is a great topic always when knick news is slow!!!! LOL

So honest question. Do you think IQ and RJ are within the same realm on defense?

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/esidery/status/1668988796380086272