Would you trade RJ Barrett for the #1 pick in this year’s draft?

ptmilo wanted it, so here ya go.

And part of the deal is that you can’t trade the pick once you get it. So it’s strictly Barrett for whoever you pick at #1.

Would you trade RJ Barrett for the #1 pick in this draft (assuming you kept the pick)?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
Liked it? Take a second to support Brian Cronin on Patreon!

227 thoughts to “Would you trade RJ Barrett for the #1 pick in this year’s draft?”

  1. Paraphrasing my comment from the last thread, I feel more confident in RJ becoming an above-average NBA player than I do anyone we could take with the number 1 pick. LaMelo and some of these other guys might have a higher ceiling, but they also have a much higher bust potential, IMO.

  2. Re: Jowles’ comment in the last thread, yeah, despite the fanfare, Mitchell is probably in the high-volume, low-efficiency max player category that we all wring hands over, but he’s definitely got more value than Frenchie McBricksalot.

  3. I voted no mostly for the same reasons as Alan. My worry with RJ is that due to reputation/draft position he might not be allowed (or more importantly allow himself) to be a complimentary piece rather than the focal point of a team. But the same thing probably goes for whoever you’re going to pick at one so I’ll stick with RJ.

  4. I’m such a no on this one. I think LaMelo has only one skill, which might actually put him ahead of some of our other recent picks but there’s a huge, many-year improvement curve needed to get him to all-around actual basketball player, and we have enough of those “if they could only learn to…” on the bench already. I actually think Wiseman has real possible superstar potential, but also real bust potential, and I don’t feel good taking a swing on that. Especially because we actually have Mitch. I would so rather stay at 8 and hope Tyrese lands in our laps (and we don’t pass on him), as I think he has a real star (not superstar) ceiling that’s reachable, and not in 4-5 years. I just want a good player that doesn’t have a gaping hole (or multiple holes) in his play.

  5. Yes. Anthony Edwards is a fairly similar prospect to RJ but profiles as a better shooter and more impactful defender. RJ is a better playmaker, but then again, how much playmaking do you even want RJ doing on a good team?

    That’s not to say I would take Edwards #1 overall, I wouldn’t, just that there’s a comparable-but-better prospect which to me kind of automatically answers the question.

  6. I would so rather stay at 8 and hope Tyrese lands in our laps (and we don’t pass on him), as I think he has a real star (not superstar) ceiling that’s reachable, and not in 4-5 years.

    As I understand the question, this is not a trade up. It’s a one-for-one. So we’d have #1 and #8.

    Pretty good chance at coming away from this draft with LaMelo/Hayes and Okongwu in this scenario. I’d trade RJ for that.

  7. thank you brian. it’s about time the universe started bending to my whims. while i’m hot can we get kelly loeffler to stick to sports pls.

    i think it’s sort of an interesting q that is as much about the philosophy of the draft as about rj in particular. first issue is the value barbell that has emerged as the entry age has declined. you get a lot of value from (1) a player who is good quickly, often erring toward older entrants or guys with skill combinations that tend to peak earlier or (2) stars who are so good they provide value even at the 25pct max level (and often also on rookie deals). but you get much less value on picking the next rudy gay or jerry stackhouse, who won’t have a ton of excess value from 19-22 and thereafter are as good a bet to be dear as cheap; guys you could pick up in free agency at similar prices.

    the second q is how much more information do we have about rj’s ceiling today than we did last june? of course this is subject to personal rj preferences, but in general i sense a decent mix between optimists and pessimists, both at the draft and today. but is the distribution uniform? that is, i could at least imagine a lot of rj optimists feeling equally or more excited about the median rj outcome but worse about the miracle case after last year. i know when i try to summon moments of rj optimism, i can no longer even humor the possibility of genuine stardom. and it’s pretty unlikely rj is going to provide a ton of excess value during his rookie deal.

    if so, then an rj optimist might still be willing to swap him for an even modestly higher chance at a miracle (but perhaps a lower median baseline), as represented by the top pick in a bottom heavy draft sporting a nearly universal who-the-hell-knows guy like lamelo. this would
    imply a lopsided poll toward trading him, but that doesn’t seem right? meaning, if i had to bet i’d say the keep him side would get more votes.

  8. One thing in RJ’s favor is that you know he works his ass off- he’s got a lower ceiling than Edwards but he’s probably more likely to actually reach that ceiling. The top three all have attitude questions- RJ has none.

  9. i think it’s sort of an interesting q that is as much about the philosophy of the draft as about rj in particular. first issue is the value barbell that has emerged as the entry age has declined. you get a lot of value from (1) a player who is good quickly, often erring toward older entrants or guys with skill combinations that tend to peak earlier or (2) stars who are so good they provide value even at the 25pct max level (and often also on rookie deals). but you get much less value on picking the next rudy gay or jerry stackhouse, who won’t have a ton of excess value from 19-22 and thereafter are as good a bet to be dear as cheap; guys you could pick up in free agency at similar prices.

    I think something that gets lost in all of this, though, is team chemistry. Maybe I’m just a romantic and this is definitely fanboi type stuff, but I’d much rather watch a winning Knicks team in 4 or 5 years with RJ on it than the same winning Knicks team with some random free agent we pick up. And I think even if those 2 players are similar players, the team that kept its draft pick, developed him and watched him become the player he’s meant to become has a better chance of being good than the team that just randomly picks up Rudy Gay or whoever.

    Once a team is good, then its one thing to plug in a FA you find to upgrade the team or fill a specific need and they fit into that role that is required. But I think its important for bad teams to develop their players and let those players learn how to play with each other. Its one of the reasons I voted no. Sure, maybe LaMelo will be better but RJ and Mitch and Knox and Frank now have a history playing together. Not saying I want to keep all those dudes, but since htey are young, I’d rather keep at least RJ and Mitch and add to that core with our #8 pick then take a step back by getting rid of RJ.

    Also, RJ just needs to learn how to shoot. Its a big if but not insurmountable.

  10. One thing in RJ’s favor is that you know he works his ass off- he’s got a lower ceiling than Edwards but he’s probably more likely to actually reach that ceiling. The top three all have attitude questions- RJ has none.

    This has been part of my thinking, too. RJ may not ultimately learn to shoot, but it won’t be for lack of trying. And Mills and Perry did him zero favors in the way they constructed last year’s team. Barely any shooting, and so many big men that he basically had to play guard by default. Whether or not Rose makes some win-now moves, it also seems clear that he has a lot of smart people in that front office, that they all recognize why things didn’t go so well for RJ last year, and that they consider his success one of their top priorities for this season, which would include more shooting around him, a better playmaker than Frank or DSJ, and maybe some opportunities for him to play the 4, as well as the 3.

  11. RJ was really, really bad last year. His baseline is fringe NBA player, and he has a long way to go to even sniff replacement level–there was a lot of scary stuff from him last season. That said, his talent is obvious, and there are quite a few scenarios where he breaks good rather than bad, I think. He’s genuinely good at getting to the line and is strong as hell. But his shooting needs to develop a lot and I don’t think it will–he was a horrific jump shooter last year iirc. And you can’t feast at the line when you shoot 60% from it, so RJ’s best offensive weapon is less effective than it should be. His passing was also not as good as advertised last year. I’m hoping some of his issues are positional, because like everyone else here it’s obvious to me that he should be at the 3, not the 2. I’m low on RJ but I don’t think he’s a bust.

    I do think Edwards and LaMelo are straightforwardly better prospects, however (as are Hayes and Okongwu but I won’t argue those as much since they’re more controversial). LaMelo’s baseline is his brother with better offense and worse defense, but it’s gonna be almost impossible for LaMelo to be shockingly bad on defense because he’s 6’6 with a 6’10 wingspan guarding the point. He may be a terrible team defender but good enough on man coverage to cancel some of that out into a merely below average defender. And if he learns how to shoot, forget about it–he’s a bona fide star. Edwards is a more interesting case, but I think his range of outcomes is wider on the top end than RJ’s. It’s doubtful Edwards can be much worse than baseline RJ, since baseline RJ is fringe NBA player. But it’s pretty obvious that if Edwards leverages his insane athleticism and becomes a good shooter that he’s going to be very, very good, way better than RJ even if RJ makes good on his promise. So yes, I’d trade RJ for the #1 pick without blinking.

    How I’d rank RJ coming out of Duke on my big board this year:
    1. LaMelo
    2. Okongwu
    3. Hayes
    4. Ant-Man
    5. Hali/Avdija
    6. RJ/Okoro/Vassell

  12. it’s close either way…. the main question is… does rj go #1 in this draft? he’s definitely in the discussion….. and he’d probably be near consensus if we were just looking at purely his duke year…..

    obviously his rookie year left a lot to be desired but there are definitely signs of a breakout coming…. it all hinges on his shooting though and he improves at all then there’s enough there for a standout player….

    edwards is my #1 at the moment…. and i think he’s probably a more balanced prospect overall than rj…. better driving…. better shooter off the catch… better shooter off the dribble…. and he definitely has more wiggle to his game…. his problem is similar to rj’s …. his shot selection and his feel for the game….

    we know rj thinks about the right things about the game… and he’s definitely fixed some things related to his shot selection and knows what he needs to work on…. we don’t know if edwards will get on that path…. we don’t even know if rj will even make tangible progress….. that’s what makes judging prospects so tough…

    on pure ratings coming out of college… edwards is probably slightly better…. taking into rj’s rookie year… edwards is still better but more murky… there were good and some bad things with rj….

    so in a vacuum if it was offered up to me i might take it but i wouldn’t offer it up without other things included in the deal…..

  13. RJ averaged 30 minutes a night and was 6th in total minutes for NBA rookies. The 5 people in front of him were all older than him. One of them was 22 and the other was 24. He averaged 30 minutes a night on a horrible team as an NBA rookie and it never seemed to bum him our or bring him down. I guess I’m higher on him than a lot of people. While shooting is a big thing for him to overcome, its the one main thing he was to work on to become a good player. Its not like he has 5 or 6 areas of glaring weakness. He has one. Its a big one for sure but with his demeanor and work ethic, along with better coaching I believe he can get there. His numbers in February were promising.

  14. Maybe I’m just a romantic and this is definitely fanboi type stuff, but I’d much rather watch a winning Knicks team in 4 or 5 years with RJ on it than the same winning Knicks team with some random free agent we pick up.

    i can sympathize with occupying this arbitrary space on the root for the illusion of teamselfness continuum, as noted nba fanatic derek parfit would have said. so much so that i may have been the only diehard in the universe torn on whether i want lebron to pick us.

    And I think even if those 2 players are similar players, the team that kept its draft pick, developed him and watched him become the player he’s meant to become has a better chance of being good than the team that just randomly picks up Rudy Gay or whoever.

    i don’t think it’s fully appreciated how rare it has become for good but not great players to remain an important part of a team who drafted them through their post rookie contract. if we take #25-150 in vorp for this year as a proxy for good but not great, i think only five guys in the league fit this bill: aaron gordon,
    steven adams, marcus smart, cj mccollum and myles
    turner. with a possible head nod to norman powell.

  15. RJ’s value on this board is generally “average” at best, and since fanbases always overvalue their players (see: Ntilikina, Frank), the odds aren’t really in RJ’s favor.

    And I don’t care about roster construction. Dude got learn’t by Steve Freakin’ Nash and couldn’t even muster 3 assists a game?? I’m obviously going to root for him but am bracing for the worst.

  16. I voted No.
    It’s too early for me to project RJ’s career.
    He’s obviously talented.
    Don’t seem much better or much worse than the high picks of this draft.

    Otoh it’s not too early to see his high character or question his heart.

    I DEFINITELY want this guy on my team.

  17. As to the trade, I think there’s a very good chance that RJ would have been the consensus #1 pick in this draft, even as a freshman. If he entered the draft as is, I still think he is a candidate to be taken at #1. So it’s kind of a 50-50 move to me.

  18. was checking around bleacher report and noticed begley mentioned that supposedly the knick FO is looking to add players to compliment RJ…as in – they most likely would not entertain trading him anytime soon…

    i think the real big question this season is – how long a contract do you give to frank…four at an aav of 8 million maybe?

  19. Never thought I’d see reference to an analytic philosopher on KB (other than maybe Robert Nozick given his famous Wilt Chamberlain example), but of course it’s pt who does it. Warms the cockles of my philosopher’s heart

  20. I’ve never seen him play, but Edwards sounds like (and seems to have played a similar role in college as) Eric Gordon when he was coming out of Indiana. Is that off? (Gordon had a higher college ts% because of his ridiculously high FTr, which didn’t sustainably translate to the nba).

    That said, I would trade RJ Barrett for Anthony Edwards because I can nickname him “Goose”, and that would make me happy.

  21. I voted “no”. Not because I’m opposed to trading him, I hated him as a prospect and he was terrible last year, but I think a hyped 3rd overall pick in last year’s draft has more trade value than the top pick in this year’s shitty draft. If we were going to trade him I’d want more back than my pick of players who are maybe at best a coin flip of becoming functional NBA players.

  22. Voted No. The deciding factor was basically cost.

    There’s no one I desperately want in this draft at #1, except maybe Okongwu or Wiseman who both play Mitch’s position. As pessimistic as I am on RJ, he’s not notably worse than any of the top prospects in this year’s draft. Maybe I’d trade him for a better defender like Okoro, but Okoro’s flaws are well documented.

  23. IDK, has no one invoked Gettier at some point to justify their critique of another poster’s claims of ‘knowing’ a player will work out? Or attempted to invoke Russell while justifying their rating system from the principles of logic?

    I vaguely recall a discussion on Thomas Kuhn at some point.

    Poorly understood analytic philosophy is a big part of what we do here.

  24. do you remember other instances from that day as well…

    June 19, 2019 at 2:39 pm
    seems like we all have til tomorrow to place our final bets – but, at this point, mark me down for picking and keeping RJ…

    honestly, this has been my usual thought process – draft and develop, which we never, ever do…that bit from milo about ranked VORP players 25 thru 150 only having a handful of team draft picks in it makes me much more skeptical about giving frank the 82 million 5 year deal…there may just be a slight chance frank won’t be one of the top 25 in VORP in the next few years…could be, but, just maybe not…

  25. It’s hard to answer a question like this without having a strong opinion on the quality and potential upside of the players near the top of the draft this year. Since we haven’t seen as much of them as we usually see, it’s more of a crapshoot than usual.

    On the flip side, I think we know more about RJ now than we did before the draft last year.

    Setting aside ridiculously bad models, I like him more now than I did when we drafted him. To be clear, that’s not necessarily a strong endorsement.

    Going into last year EVERYONE knew his shot was going to be an issue. However, many people also thought defense and attitude could be problems. So there was a huge risk we were getting a an overhyped low level starter or bench player.

    I think last year he showed that he’ll be able to defend at the NBA adequately and his attitude was great. And for all the panic over his shot and efficiency, he hit 32% of his 3s last year. The gap between where he is now and being adequate could come as soon as next year at age 20. That’s hardly a problem for long term thinkers like this group that usually wait until 21 before throwing in the towel and calling a kid a bust. smh lmao

    His big problem last year was spacing and a skillset that requires him to get to the basket to be efficient. The lack of space was why Randle’s efficiency also plummeted.

    RJ is fine. We have a very good player. We will simply have to wait 3-4 years to see if can become a major piece on contending team or more of a 3rd player.

  26. It’s a very fun question. I think it’s really close but ultimately I voted yes for basically the same reason it sounds like pt did:

    i know when i try to summon moments of rj optimism, i can no longer even humor the possibility of genuine stardom. and it’s pretty unlikely rj is going to provide a ton of excess value during his rookie deal.

    With the first point being the most important one. Although I’d amend the word choice from “stardom” to “superstardom” but everyone defines those at different places (I think RJ can make it to all-star level but all-NBA would shock me). I never totally bought into his true top end upside and that belief has only declined since we picked him (mainly because after watching him more I’m less impressed by his playmaking and athleticism than I was coming out of Duke). So I’d reroll the dice with Edwards or Lamelo even though I think their median outcomes as NBA players are lower than RJ because I think the top end of the curve matters enough to be a determining factor.

  27. edwards’ is some cross between markelle fultz and oladipo…. he’s not nearly as creative as fultz is but he’s more athletic in the mold of oladipo….

  28. who won’t have a ton of excess value from 19-22 and thereafter are as good a bet to be dear as cheap; guys you could pick up in free agency at similar prices.

    This is the problem I’ve been bringing up for a couple of years now.

    Those rookie deals are not particularly attractive now except if you LUCK OUT in the draft and get an early bloomer superstar. Even then, some of those guys leave in free agency exactly when they are starting to hit their prime. You are also sometimes forced into a decision on whether to extend and pay them before you are really sure one way or the other where the top is. The idea that the draft is some panacea is delusional. Draft picks are one of several assets a team can have, but one that is probably worth less now than it used to be.

  29. rj was never going to be a superduperstar… but he still has a chance to be a very good player…. and some call that a star even….

    i think people are too tied up in the shooting numbers…. and things like TS are really poor fwd looking indicators…. if rj’s shooting numbers improve even a little bit those secondary numbers make rj into a pretty bonafide starter… even on something like low 50s TS.. and he only really needs something like a 70% ft and 45% from the field to achieve that….

    it’s not guaranteed but that’s a pretty low bar….

  30. One week ago i had 7/100 from 3pt range
    Today i went 10/29
    Improving your Shooting percentage ain’t exactly … impossible

  31. Hell no to trading RJ for the #1 pick in one of the worst drafts ever. The kid just turned 20, is an incredibly hard worker and I don’t need to list all the great players who had shitty rookie seasons.

    Can we just show a little patience for once and let the kid play a 2nd season?

  32. i think people are too tied up in the shooting numbers…. and things like TS are really poor fwd looking indicators…. if rj’s shooting numbers improve even a little bits

    IMO people aren’t giving enough consideration to teammates, system, coaching, and role. All those things matter a bit too. That’s sort of understandable on a stats based board because you can’t easily turn those things into another number to add to or subtract from the bottom line. You have to be comfortable thinking in terms of pluses and minuses. Not everyone is.

    What is astounding is people being so “rebuild via draft” oriented and also so quick to pull the trigger on calling a young player mediocre if he’s not immediately putting up impressive boxscore stats and scoring well on garbage models. All of RJ, Knox, Robinson, Frank, DSjr, and Iggy are barely out of diapers in basketball terms. They all have 4-5 years of improving to do in various areas. We have no idea what their tops will be yet. Some players bloom early, some later, some not at all. You just want to see them developing physically, mentally, and working hard to get better and play smarter. You have be patient. Not everyone comes out of the draft and is an immediate impact superstar or impact role player. Not everyone has to be a superstar. You need high level role and bench players too.

  33. Can we just show a little patience for once and let the kid play a 2nd season?

    I mean, I don’t think it’s a sign of “impatience” to entertain the idea of trading 2019’s #3 pick for 2020’s #1 pick.

    I consider myself “patient” with Barrett in that even though he was very unproductive overall, he showed enough potential that I’m willing to hold out hope and account for him going forward (contrast that to Ntilikina who is bad at almost everything and would require an amount of “improvement” that does not really happen to be worth accounting for). That seems like a decent test for “patience” in this context.

    I don’t see why patience with a player should mean “valuing them more highly than a detached observer would.”

  34. What is astounding is people being so “rebuild via draft” oriented and also so quick to pull the trigger on calling a young player mediocre if he’s not immediately putting up impressive boxscore stats and scoring well on garbage models.

    Typical straw man nonsense. Literally no one is doing this. Discussion of RJ, from both the pessimists and optimists, has included nuanced analysis of his skillset. No one is saying “he had a bad BPM as a rookie so he will be bad going forward.” His aggregators have been cited to make the obvious point that he was unproductive overall as a rookie, simply because it’s the easiest way to make that point (the alternative is comparing all of his statistics to league average baselines or something similarly tedious and unnecessary).

    Similarly, people aren’t down on Frank because his box score aggregators are bad. It’s, you know, his utter lack of NBA level skills. To the extent people cite his aggregators it’s because, again, it’s the quickest way to make the obvious point that he has not been remotely productive to this point in his career.

    When evaluating whether or not a player will be productive in the future, the fact that they haven’t been productive in the past is certainly a factor but no one has said it’s dispositive. “An utter lack of projectable NBA skills” on the other hand is a factor that’s a lot closer to dispositive. Thus I am more optimistic about Barrett than Frank despite their similarly awful box score aggregators. This is not complicated!

  35. The question is insanely muddled by a combo of COVID NCAA cancellations and our very own 8th avenue freeze out. RJ and the 2020 freshmen entering the draft have had like 8 months to work on their bodies and games, and the scouts and FOs have vastly more info on where players currently stand. This could mean that the draftees are not the same players they would have been in June. This is especially true for Wiseman, who essentially pulled a Mitch and who might have been the most dominant player in the NCAA had he stayed. Not sure how hard he’s been working, but if he took the time off seriously, maybe he’s a less fragile Joel Embiid right from the get-go. Maybe Edwards is taking 1000 3’s a day and hitting them at 60%.

    But the more I read what’s written here, the more I think the question can’t be answered without current info that scouts, coaches and GMs will be privy to. And the more I think about it, the more I could be talked into making the trade, if only for an extra shot at a superstar, which I don’t see RJ becoming.

  36. If you look at Giannis stats and videos from his first years in the league and you clearly see the league’s future MVP then you are probably a Wizard.

  37. What’s the lowest pick in this draft you would trade Kevin Knox for? (Please don’t say #60)

    This is a good question and a tough one because I genuinely believe there will be UDFAs who go on to have better careers than Knox. However I will not be making the pick, so I’ll say 50. Most of the intriguing second rounders (off the top of my head Reed, Flynn, Riller, Dotson) will probably be gone by then.

  38. thenoblefacehumper: Similarly, people aren’t down on Frank because his box score aggregators are bad. It’s, you know, his utter lack of NBA level skills.

    This is way over the top. For one, he had a positive DBPM. He also had a positive WS48. His TS improved 80 points from the previous year. His ast/tov ratio was reasonably good for a guy averaging 5.2 assists per 36. His FTr went up 70 points and he shot 86% from the line (which bodes well for his 3-pt% improving if I recall).

    I get your frustration with strat, but you can make your points and keep it real at the same time. Frank’s got along way to go, but not nearly as far as your comment above implies. He’s the same degree of improvement he made last year from being a very adequate rotation player.

  39. thenoblefacehumper: This is a good question and a tough one because I genuinely believe there will be UDFAs who go on to have better careers than Knox. However I will not be making the pick, so I’ll say 50. Most of the intriguing second rounders (off the top of my head Reed, Flynn, Riller, Dotson) will probably be gone by then.

    The odds of a pick at #50 or later becoming an NBA rotation player have to be like 10% or lower. I don’t think that’s true for Knox. I would probably need something like our Clips pick. Maybe something in the 30’s.

  40. Arbitrary endpoints alert: Barrett’s top 30 games in single-game USG% yielded a 5-25 mark for the Knicks. He was really, really bad this year.

  41. i would go as low as 50 for knox. not to say i’m confident he’s a worse bet than the 50, but he’s already two years into his rookie deal. and tho his salary is tame, it’s still $5-$6m vs the near min for a 2nd. and yes i’m also pretty pessimistic on him ever getting there.

    on the other hand i probably wouldn’t trade frank for quite as low the 50 even tho he’s heading into year 4 and has thus far been an awful offensive player. i’m not sure it would be consistent to hold this belief unless i was also willing to actually sign him to a “value” extension right now, whatever the hell that might be, since otherwise i am left with nothing but his rfa rights. so this is now officially the extend frank thread.

  42. I voted no on the trade. It’s a close question because the top players in last years draft were so much better than anyone in this year’s draft that RJ could easily have been number one this year. All the players in this years draft have flaws as big as RJ does. And I agree with Early Bird that having a number three’s salary instead of a number one’s is a good thing for us. I also trust Thibs enthusiasm for RJ and give weight to RJ’s work ethic and character.

  43. RJ Barrett and Giannis – are they a good comparison? RJ has had basically every resource available to him to make him a great basketball player. Giannis definitely did not.

    RJ also appears to have very little projection physically, to use a baseball term. The guy is already completely yoked. I don’t know, maybe there is another level there, maybe not, but Giannis was a stick figure when he came into this league.

    I agree Frank at least has one carrying tool. His defense really is good. I don’t think a Pat Beverley type career is out of the question. Pat Beverley didn’t make the NBA till he was 24.

    I already said I would trade RJ. I don’t really see the difference in expected value between him and all the guys a year younger than him. I don’t think the difference in timeline matters. Maybe the difference in salary matters a bit?

    It’s a choice between the certainty that RJ was a terrible rook and the uncertainty created by the lack of data created by the pandemic for the 2020 draftees.

    Still, I think I’d rather have Okongwu or the possible upside of Ball to be a real NBA pg.

    My base case probably remains that RJ disappoints but that so does everyone else we might reasonably take other than my man from USC, who I have more shares of right now than is really appropriate given how little we saw of him.Crushing on him so hard he’ll end up the next Anthony Bennett.

  44. I’m all for keeping RJ through his rookie contract, same with Frank & Knox. But that doesn’t mean I’m confident in any of them being worth the wait. Nor do I hold onto them at all costs.

    RJ sucked last year and wasn’t as stellar in college as HS. Scouts projected RJ because his sky high usage and HS accomplishments. That’s not a player I love. So down on him based on his college numbers & rookie numbers.

    I do think Frank played well enough last year to intrigue me. He needs to take another step forward this year to warrant a contract beyond the near minimum.

  45. No, and Lakers in 6.

    I was never that high on RJB, but I’d like to see how his second year goes. Also, though I never wanted Knox, I wouldn’t take just a single 2nd rounder for him. If not a late first, just keep running him out there and see what happens with the new coach.

  46. RJ was bad, and I didn’t even like him as a college player. But I think he’s worth another look. He was asked to do a lot as a rookie, and he wasn’t put in a position to make the most of his strengths. For much of the season the Knicks were goofing around doing whatever Fizdale was trying to do.

    RJ played a little more defense than I thought he would and other than throwing the ball into the basket he seems like a relatively well-rounded player. He’s just very, very bad at throwing the ball into the basket. He’s bad at it in all sorts of different ways.

    If he gets better at that, you have something, because other than that he can play in the NBA. He’s not a total unsalvageable mess like Knox or something.

  47. There have been so many variables clouding the ability to accurately assess RJ, Frank and Knox. If there’s two things we can look forward to, it’s a) stability of management and b) a coach/coaching staff who knows what he’s doing in terms of developing and assessing young players. We know Thibs is going to coach to win, and young players are going to be properly supported but are going to have to earn what they get. The biggest problem for RJ, Knox and Frank is that they have been spoiled on the one hand, and poorly utilized on the other. That’s the main reason I wouldn’t sell low on any of them.

  48. RJ’s ceiling is Demar Derozan.

    You’ve made this comparison before, always as a subtle dig or insult.

    Demar Derozan is a 4 time all-star, 2 time all-nba player. He was the starter for a Raptors team that made 5 straight playoff appearances and even made the ECF.

    You act like Demar Derozan is a shitty player and I guess he doesn’t fit your ideal player because he’s not a great 3 point shooter. But Demar Derozan was good enough to be the centerpiece in a trade for Kawhi Leonard.

    If RJ turns into Demar Derozan and remains a Knick for the majority of his career, he’d be one of the best players in franchise history and would probably have his jersey retired.

  49. JK47:

    If he gets better at that, you have something, because other than that he can play in the NBA. He’s not a total unsalvageable mess like Knox or something.

    I’m pretty confident that RJ has the ability to be something as an NBA player. Even without much improvement as an outside shooter I can talk myself into the idea that he might make it; he shot the three non-disastrously last year, it was really the two pointers (and related FTs) that sunk his efficiency and there’s mitigating factors there – in particular just the total lack of spacing we put on the court in basically every lineup. Put him in a more functional environment, get him to cut out the more difficult two point attempts, and assume he figures out a little bit what it takes to finish at the rim in an NBA environment and I think you can get most of the way to a useful player without even projecting real improvement in his shot.

    Like I said upthread though I’d still take the trade because while there’s real bust potential at the top of the draft there’s also real high level star potential, and because I think there’s a real risk that even if it becomes clear that what RJ should become as an NBA player is a functional 2nd/3rd wing the Knicks spend a lot of years and money chasing the idea of his stardom.

  50. Yeah, Derozan’s not an analytics-friendly player, and ideally he’d be the third-best player on your team, but even having peak Derozan as your second-best player will do you a lot of good. I’d take that outcome for RJ in a heartbeat.

  51. Also worth saying that a big part of the problem with DeRozan’s skillset is that as Alan said you want him to be a supporting piece on your team but his very poor defense and unwillingness to even take the three make him an extremely awkward fit as a role player. RJ had 4.2 3PA/36 last year and DeRozan has broken 2 3PA/36 twice in his career and 3 once (career high of 3.8) – the last two years he took 80 3-pointers total in around 5000 minutes. I also think RJ has better defensive tools (whether he will become an adequate defender is an open question but I think there were some good signs last year). A DeRozan level player with a better mix of skills for being a role player would be a much more appealing player to a team trying to hit a championship level than actual DeRozan.

  52. It’s a sad commentary on the Knicks that Derozan probably might rate as one of our all time greats. He’s a good not great player though and you’ll struggle to ever get to the ECF if he is your max contract guy.

    I do appreciate how productive he was with the most inefficient skill set possible.

  53. This is way over the top. For one, he had a positive DBPM. He also had a positive WS48. His TS improved 80 points from the previous year. His ast/tov ratio was reasonably good for a guy averaging 5.2 assists per 36. His FTr went up 70 points and he shot 86% from the line (which bodes well for his 3-pt% improving if I recall).

    And yet, all of these figures are well below league average for a point guard outside of the 0.4 DBPM (whop dee doo) and the FT% (based on all of 59 shots).

    A guy getting to “well below average almost across the board” in his third season is not encouraging by any objective standard. If that’s where RJ is in his third season, my opinion of him will be significantly lower than it is right now. If Frank was on another team and someone here suggested trading anything at all for him they’d be rightfully panned.

    I don’t feel like harping on this because it’s a largely irrelevant issue–I am all for playing Frank while he’s under contract and seeing if we can salvage any value. I would not, to any extent whatsoever, account for him while building the rest of the roster though and think anyone who thinks we should is not looking at the situation objectively.

    As for an extension…I mean, it’s truly hard to justify anything more than 4/$10M or something. I’d offer something in that range and tell him he’s free to beat it on the open market. If he does we can make a decision about matching from there.

  54. The odds of a pick at #50 or later becoming an NBA rotation player have to be like 10% or lower. I don’t think that’s true for Knox. I would probably need something like our Clips pick. Maybe something in the 30’s.

    The analysis doesn’t end here though. Knox has burned through two years of his rookie deal while giving us nothing. With a second rounder we get to reset that clock.

    Also, even if we accept the 10% figure for a late pick I’m not sure about a player with Knox’s college profile + NBA body of work having a greater than 10% chance of being a rotation player.

  55. You’ve made this comparison before, always as a subtle dig or insult.

    Demar Derozan is a 4 time all-star, 2 time all-nba player. He was the starter for a Raptors team that made 5 straight playoff appearances and even made the ECF.

    I’m not here to defend Derozan who I think is very good player, but nothing special. However, his harshest critics are basing their opinions on a broken model that doesn’t capture his value fully.

    It’s the flip side foolishness that makes them think Robinson is one of the best players in the NBA despite the fact that he can’t play defense intelligently enough to stay on the court for 36 minutes and any high caliber defense could shut him down to the point of being irrelevant if they thought he was significant enough to even warrant game planning against (which they usually don’t) .

    Robinson is an athletic freak with a limited offensive and defensive skillset than can have a big impact against some matchups on some nights, but he has a LONG WAY to go on both sides to be a star player. It’s just that he’s such a tantalizing athletic freak that if he can learn to defend properly and add skills to his offense over time, he CAN become something special. That’s what everyone sees. The current boxscore metrics are laughably wrong though. He wouldn’t start on almost any top team unless they were really weak at C.

  56. Strat literally no one has even cited DeRozan’s box score aggregators in this thread nor has anyone ever said “Mitch’s WS48/BPM is X therefore he is the Yth best player in the NBA.” This is starting to feel like a hallucination.

  57. thenoblefacehumper: The analysis doesn’t end here though. Knox has burned through two years of his rookie deal while giving us nothing. With a second rounder we get to reset that clock.

    Also, even if we accept the 10% figure for a late pick I’m not sure about a player with Knox’s college profile + NBA body of work having a greater than 10% chance of being a rotation player.

    The data on 19yo players in their first two years is so limited that I’m not sure it is worthwhile looking at, not to mention coming in to such a dysfunctional situation and getting oodles of undeserved playing time. (I would actually be willing to bet a small sum at even money that he becomes a rotation player in the NBA at some point in the next 5 years.)

    In any case, you would be selling at absolute rock bottom trading him for pick #50. If the rumor that the Clips preferred him in a trade for Paul are true, he clearly has more market value than that even as is, justified or not. Even if Thibs can develop and showcase him to the point where he is an asset as a trade throw-in, that’s a better strategy than to dump him for a virtually worthless 2nd rounder.

  58. I get your frustration with strat, but you can make your points and keep it real at the same time.

    Don’t worry about me. I don’t waste the energy debating him anymore.

    My bar on Frank is his becoming an impact defender that can disrupt the flow of the opposing team’s offense on occasion, make some plays on offense, play the right way, and add a more consistent 3 point shot so defenses can’t sag off him. That will make it easier for him to penetrate once in awhile to create more plays and keep teams from making adjustments that hurt other players like RJ, Randle, and Robinson (in the same way those guys hurt each other too).

    A player like that can be a critical piece to championship. Not every player is going to be a high volume efficient scorer. That’s an essential but different role that we need to fill eventually.

    I don’t care what idiotic brain damage level stupid models say about his value or that some people actually believe that trash.

    He’s a plus defender now that show signs of being an impact defender at times when he’s 100% healthy and they aren’t forcing switches just to get him off their impact guards because he’s pestering them so much. He’s inching forward on offense, but has been hindered by injuries and lack of confidence (or maturity). However, he’s still on a glide path to become exactly the player I hope he becomes if he stays heathy and is given a chance to grow and mature.

    If people want to argue about his contract value they should stop whining and listen to me when I say drafting these 18 years old kids is not all it’s cracked up to be unless you get extremely lucky. They often aren’t good values because most of these kids need a few years to be worth what you pay them right away and you often have to decide what to do with them before you know what their top is. That’s a separate issue from whether Frank will eventually be a contributing player on a very good team.

  59. thenoblefacehumper: And yet, all of these figures are well below league average for a point guard outside of the 0.4 DBPM (whop dee doo) and the FT% (based on all of 59 shots).

    But you said he still has an utter lack of NBA skills. That’s simply not true. He is an above-average defender by any objective measure, and his FT% over 3 years is .783 and has improved every year, and he was a decent FT shooter in France as well. There’s plenty to criticize without unnecessarily bashing what he actually does well.

    It would also be interesting to examine the long-term outcomes of players who between their age 20 and 21 seasons improved their TS% by 80 points, WS48 by 82 points, and BPM by 2.8 points. You seem unwilling to consider that he simply came into the league too early and was force-fed massive minutes at a position he was not suited for in a league where he was physically over his head. Even though he only went from league worst as a 19yo to well below average but significantly improving as a 21 year old (he’s still younger than Obi Toppin) the trajectory shouldn’t be dismissed to the degree that you are implying. This is especially true in light of Thibs’ hiring. Again, I’d be willing to bet a small sum that he becomes a bonafide NBA rotation player in the next 4 years.

  60. If the rumor that the Clips preferred him in a trade for Paul are true, he clearly has more market value than that even as is, justified or not.

    I’ve been super hard on Knox because I wanted Mikal Bridges to be teamed with Frank and KP, but anyone that thinks they know what Knox’s top is at this point is overestimating their ability to see the future.

    The first time I saw Knox live I thought I was looking at 14 year old kid that just hit puberty. He was extremely underdeveloped physically for an NBA player, it’s a marvel he didn’t get carried out on a stretcher once a month. He added some strength and weight last year and will probably do the same for next year. If the Clippers are interested it’s because they see he has some pretty good offensive skills for a guy his height but can’t execute well because he’s so wildly overmatched physically and hasn’t been taught well. The first year he was given a full green light (insanity) and last year he was buried. A good coaching staff will get him back on the right track. He’s going to be a good offensive player even if it’s off the bench. The more significant worry is his defense, He tried harder last year, but he has a long way to go.

  61. Saying RJs ceiling is DeRozan is not saying he will become DeRozan. Saying RJs ceiling is DeRozan means he might get to that point if everything breaks right and should be considered an unlikely outcome. A poor man’s DeRozan is probably unplayable in the modern NBA. High-usage, low efficiency is a bad combination. Or do we need to rehash that conversation again??

  62. I think RJ’s pedigree and the fact that he came into the league with an NBA ready body and also his demeanor on the court are actually reasons why some of his detractors are pessimistic about him. They think he is a finished product all ready. Forgetting that he is still super young and came into the league at 19 years old.

    He could still grow another inch or two. He can still add muscle to his frame. He can still learn the nuances of the game and get better at his weaknesses despite the fact that he’s been playing for awhile now and has NBA pedigree. Kobe was far from a finished product his rookie year as well.

    The Maple Mamba has tons of upside left to him.

  63. And I need to reiterate that I think both Frank and Knox were bad picks, and nothing will change that, period. This conversation is about looking forward, not back.

  64. Knox does have physical projection left. And his jumper is completely pure about 25% of the time. He also can sell a lot of roller skates to giraffes.

  65. Demar Derozan but without the free throw shooting isn’t much to get excited for.

    It’s like saying OJ Simpson but without the football career.

  66. Re: RJ vs, DeRozan, sure, there are similarities but RJ seems to be a headier player and to have more upside as a leader…he has some Marcus Smart intangibles to his game, especially on D. I’m pretty sure he understands that he MUST improve his 3-point shot and FT% to max out his potential in today’s NBA. Now working at it doesn’t mean he will make the necessary improvement, but if not it won’t be for lack of trying. DeRozan never seemed to grasp or accept that to the degree he needed to.

  67. Strat replying to a short post about DeRozan with a multi-paragraph rant about how Mitchell Robinson is overrated by box score metrics is that pure Strat content I’m here for.

  68. I actually don’t like the Derozan comparison, as he’s much more of an above-the-rim player than RJ. Also, RJ shot like .60 points better from three than Derozan in his rookie season.

    It would be great if RJ’s passing could evolve the way Derozan’s has, though.

    I was pleasantly surprised by RJ’s defense despite the dumb switching stuff Fiz employed. And I believe he will become an average shooter once the game slows down for him.

    I think Rudy Gay — hopefully with more passing — is a more likely outcome for RJ. The key to him becoming a borderline all-star really will be his passing and if the offense can actually run through him a good chunk of the time. Then he starts creeping closer to a Doncic-type profile.

    But this is where RJ’s height/length really hurts him, and that’s why I think LaMelo has more upside as a big creator (he also is a better passeer and has a much better handle.)

  69. The extra year of team control is the best reason to do this trade, but I voted no bc I think RJ is a better prospect than Edwards and Ball.

    I’m inclined to cut RJ some slack because of how poorly he was deployed for so long by Fizdale. I may be the patron saint of making excuses for our prospects, but honestly how well do you think Anthony Edwards would perform next year if his coach asked him to be the point guard on a team with three bigs and a wing who can’t shoot? The equivalent misuse of Ball would be sticking him in corner to shoot 3’s.

  70. Maybe we are sleeping on Oturu? From the Minny Star Tribune:

    Oturu, who is 6-foot-10 and 240 pounds, shot 67.5 percent from three-point range (104 for 154) and 87 percent from the free throw line (87 for 100) at the P3 Sports Science facility in Santa Barbara, Calif.

    In other testing results, Oturu’s box lane agility drill (11.37 seconds), 3/4 court sprint (3.28 seconds), standing vertical jump (29.5 inches) and max vertical (35.5 inches) topped averages at his position from the 2019 NBA Draft combine in Chicago.

    Overall, his 2020 pre-draft assessment was pretty impressive for an athlete at his size and length, which included measurements of a 7-4 wingspan, 9-2 standing reach and 9.25-inch hand width.

  71. Stein reporting that they’re now talking about starting the season on Christmas again. Makes sense under the logic that this season is going to be screwed up no matter what so you might as well do what you can to preserve the idea of a normal 21-22 season, but goodness that’s a quick turnaround. Christmas is only 9 weeks from today so that would put us only about 6 weeks out from training camp.

  72. very good player, but nothing special

    ????????????

    Then he starts creeping closer to a Doncic-type profile.

    RJ will never have a single season as good as Doncic’s sophomore year. They look like they play a completely different game when the ball’s in their respective hands.

    Doncic just got an All-NBA FIRST team selection during a season in which he turned 21. That’s just insane. Do we ever see Barrett making a third team? I don’t.

  73. We Knicks fans condescending to players like Bradley Beal and Demar DeRozan remains a chuckle, but on the broader point, I’m not making any kind of judgment on Frank/Knox/RJ until they’re coached up by Thibs. They’re all still very young and Fizdale was a clown.

  74. my other post got caught up in ‘moderation’ whatever that means….

    i voted to keep rj… but i wouldn’t offer the deal but if it was offered to me i would take it….

    edwards is #1 on my board and he’s a better prospect than rj was…. better balance around his box score numbers and has better ball skills….

    rj’s year wasn’t good… but it wasn’t good in the same way that frank and knox’s rookie year was… it’s salvagable and the only real skill that they need to establish in their rookie year is to be able to create and finish easy opportunities while contributing in other areas…. rj did that…

    efficiency doesn’t come until later….. and this occurs with just about every rookie… while you do want some modicum of efficiency… and he’s probably not going to have harden level of efficiency…. he doesn’t need to be harden either to be good to very good….

    i had his projection somewhere between a jason richardon, richard jefferson and vince carter…. he’s in that neighborhood still but his sophomore year is going to be huge in determining his trajectory….

  75. and for the record…. frank and knox should be traded for anyone resembling nba ability…

    there’s no upside left with those guys…..

  76. djphan:
    and for the record…. frank and knox should be traded for anyone resembling nba ability…

    there’s no upside left with those guys…..

    I truly don’t get how you can come to that conclusion about two guys that are younger than Obi Toppin.

  77. i come to that conclusion that if you don’t establish some sort of baseline nba ability in some key areas that your chances of staying in the nba is close to zero….

    you basically become a lance thomas … someone who hangs around a roster and needs to get lucky to get another contract…. sometimes they do because they impress the right people in the right way other than what they do on the court… or they shoot lights out for 800 minutes….. but in the end… they suck and they’re generally interchangeable with whatever is available in the gleague….

    particularly with knox… he doesn’t offer anything ….. he’s not even a 3pt specialist…. he doesn’t rebound very well for his position…. doesn’t put up any defensive numbers at all… overall just very disinterested on that end at that…. and he can’t make a layup….

    frank we have a longer history with… and with pg’s sometimes you have to be more patient… but he hasn’t really improved in 3 years… his efficiency gains came from shooting less…. which at his already low usage is just plain bad….

    you can stick a fork in them….. i’ll be happy to eat crow and ppl can copy/paste this in 3 years just like my comments about these guys right when they were drafted….. absolutely nothing has changed and i find it so puzzling that even with the benefit of seeing them up close for this long that people will goto great lengths finding something positive….

    like what do you think of malik monk? he must be like some future all-nba player right?

  78. Trade RJ for the #1, then trade down. Phase 3 is wins.

    BZZZT! Against the rules! DRed disqualified from this discussion… and maybe from GM For Life duties?!?!?!

  79. What djphan said. It’s not their lack of production, it’s the way they come to the lack of production. Namely, by being bad at almost everything.

    Barrett was unproductive because he was wildly inefficient, but he demonstrated a penchant for getting to the line, rebounded well for a guard/wing, showed some playmaking ability, and was at least an average defender. It’s not impossible, or even particularly difficult, to see how he makes the leap to productive player.

    Ntilikina and Knox on the other hand have not demonstrated that they have a framework to build on. “Get a lot better at almost everything” is not a realistic path to productivity.

    People are missing that I’m not saying I have no hope for them because they’ve been bad NBA players–that’s not abnormal at their ages. Most successful NBA careers mirror a bad-to-good arc to some extent. I have no hope for them because they haven’t even given us a picture of what the “good” versions of them could look like.

    We’ve gone through this exercise with Frank before: there’s almost no 3PT% you can give him that would make him a genuinely productive player because he’s also bad at all other aspects of scoring. If he’s a point guard, his AST% is bad. If he’s a shooting guard, his, well, shooting ability (and scoring ability more broadly) is bad.

    As for Knox, it’s possible he can become an above average 3PT shooter but that on its own is probably not enough to be “rotation level” unless he becomes truly Novakian (not going to happen). There are guys on the waiver wire who can probably give you 37% or whatever from 3 while not offering anything else.

  80. Recently i watched a video of Frank workout and having 10/11 3s in a row.
    I’m not the same person anymore.

  81. Bashing and mocking knicks players is a habbit most knicks fans have (including me) that always provides a sense of self-indulgence and false security via the action of accurate prognosis.
    I just hope that Thibs changes that shitradition after years of unorthodox and “whatever” coaching and turns us into a serious team with Normal Looking and Stat Cooking Nba young projects.

  82. I find that many people evaluate players by what they have done rather than what they are. It’s fine to do that with most NBA players. Fred Van Vleet, for example, is well characterized by what he’s done in the NBA. But for players as young as Ntilikina, Barrett and Knox, any one of them could still be in college, and they’d probably stand out there as good players worthy of a first round pick. To me it’s irrelevant that Ntilikina was horrid on offense his first two seasons. I just look at his latest season and think in what ways he’ll get better. I can’t imagine him becoming an offensive star, but I can easily imagine him developing a good enough three point shot that defenses will pay for leaving him open. That and a little more creativity in his passing and he’s a very useful player. Knox is harder to imagine becoming that useful, but if he gets better at defense and can shoot from distance he will have a role. Because of this thinking, I wouldn’t trade any of them for less than a first round pick unless we had to have the roster spot for some reason.

  83. thenoblefacehumper: Ntilikina and Knox on the other hand have not demonstrated that they have a framework to build on. “Get a lot better at almost everything” is not a realistic path to productivity.

    This is simply false. Ntilikina would probably have been one of the best players in the NCAA last year with his current level of skill and would have undoubtably been a lottery pick in this draft if he came into the draft now rather than 2 years too early. This is less true about Knox…who may have been the same player as a sophomore and junior as he was as a freshman. The NBA game seems too fast for him thus far, and I agree that it may take a long time for that to change. Ntilikina has had a positive actual on/off numbers all three years, and last year the team was 4.8 points better per 100 possessions when he was on the court vs. off the court. Obviously some of that has to do with who he played with, but he certainly wasn’t killing the team or targeted by opponents when he was on the court.

    The majority of NBA players were not in the NBA before age 21, much less played 3000 minutes by age 22, so there’s no way of knowing whether they would have been better than Frank had they been drafted at age 18. Take Fred VanVleet. He entered the league at age 22 and put up advanced numbers nearly identical to Frank’s in a whopping 294 minutes. What would he have done had he entered the NBA at age 19 and 20 and played 3000 minutes on a shitty team? We’ll never know because he sucked as a college freshman and no one would have even thought about drafting him. Same with Spencer Dinwiddie. TJ McConnell didn’t enter the league until age 23. Malcolm Brogdan age 24. The list goes on and on.

    The proposition that Frank is hopeless at age 22 because he didn’t improve enough from age 19-21 is total conjecture, unless you have some magic way to account for every player who was not anywhere near the NBA until they were his current age. Unless you think those players consciously avoided the draft at age 18 because they didn’t want to become millionaires too soon.

  84. This is simply false. Ntilikina would probably have been one of the best players in the NCAA last year with his current level of skill and would have undoubtably been a lottery pick in this draft if he came into the draft now rather than 2 years too early.

    i know we want to will frank into existence… but this is pretty hyperbolic for someone who said that frank wasn’t even a great pick….

  85. djphan: i know we want to will frank into existence… but this is pretty hyperbolic for someone who said that frank wasn’t even a great pick….

    I was waiting for someone else to comment on that gem…i almost spit my beer back into my glass…as Joey Biden would say “c’mon ma”….might want to put the bong down…

  86. pepper: I was waiting for someone else to comment on that gem…i almost spit my beer back into my glass…as Joey Biden would say “c’mon ma”….might want to put the bong down…

    Obviously you missed (or are willfully ignoring) the post I made earlier in this very thread (and countless times before) I’ll italicize it for you so you might be able to see it better:

    Z-man:
    And I need to reiterate that I think both Frank and Knox were bad picks, and nothing will change that, period. This conversation is about looking forward, not back.

    If that doesn’t work, let me know…I’ll try bold and caps, or using smaller words…

  87. oh…i read it…and was purely reacting to the idea that frank nililikeeena would have been one of the best players in the ncaa this year…on what basis eggzacccly is that opinion formed?

  88. That he posted a positive WS48 in 1000 minutes the NBA this year, which very few NCAA guards would be able to do.

  89. More generally, it is pretty widely accepted that any NBA player who is not in the bottom 10 would likely crush it in the NCAA. The converse isn’t true, of course.

    If you are intelligent enough, you would get that what I am saying is that it is highly likely that Ntilikina would have crushed it last year in the NCAA and been a sure lottery pick if he came out this year. That does NOT mean that he would have been a SMART pick or would be bound for NBA success…he’d be as much of a crap shoot as any of this year’s lottery picks, many of whom will not pan out. But he could also blossom into a very good NBA player, just like some of this year’s lottery picks would.

    I don’t think he should be written off just because he entered the draft two years too young. If he was a rookie last year after a couple more years of seasoning in France or the NCAA, it seems reasonable to project that he would have put up at least the same numbers that he did, and the same folks who are writing him off now would be saying “hey, not bad for a rookie!”

  90. Friendly Reminder:
    Let’s not also forget that Frankie had a pretty nice National teams World Cup and a guttsy/clutchy performance when France eliminated team usa in the
    Quarter Final Upset.

  91. This is simply false. Ntilikina would probably have been one of the best players in the NCAA last year with his current level of skill and would have undoubtably been a lottery pick in this draft if he came into the draft now rather than 2 years too early.

    I’m just not seeing this at all. Dude is 22 years old already.

    If he would have played NCAA ball he probably would have Felipe Lopez’ed himself into the second round.

  92. JK47: I’m just not seeing this at all. Dude is 22 years old already.

    If he would have played NCAA ball he probably would have Felipe Lopez’ed himself into the second round.

    lol

  93. This discussion does raise another grievance I have had with both the Knicks coaching/FO tandem and some Frankophiles here. I said over and over again during Frank’s first two years that he should have had played ample time in the G-League, sort of like Iggy did last year. Then we’d have a much less muddled picture of Frank as a prospect. Take Iggy….he played reasonable well down there, and most of us would agree that it’s a higher level of comp than the NCAA. Had Frank Felipe Lopez’d it down there, then we could say with more certainty that he was unlikely to make it in the NBA.

  94. ok..mister “if you are intelligent enough” …i know I will not reach whatever heights you are at but…..lets go to Principles of Sound Reasoning 101…I think I took that my freshmen year…

    Goes like this:

    Frank N = Best player in NCAA as per zmon
    Best player in NCAA = first coupla picks in the draft
    Then it follows that any team with first couple of picks would happily swap that pick out for Frank ….uh….hmm…nope

  95. pepper: Frank N = Best player in NCAA as per zmon

    Again, you are revealing a reading comprehension problem. I said “one of the best players in the NCAA, which could mean in the top 50, top 20, top 10 or top 2. You immediately reduced it to the #1 player.

  96. Dear Frank,

    Z-man, me, and Tarrytown Practice Facility Stan believe in you.

    Don’t listen to these stat weirdos

  97. What a delightful new rivulet forming off of the How Good Is Frank River!

    Adding to the notes: Section IX, subsection XXIII of the International Frank Argument, which will henceforth be known as “How Good Of An NCAA Player Would Frank Have Been?”

    God bless young Frank. How is he not a 20-year vet at this point?

  98. djphan: so you see what Kevin Knox did at uk… and what he’s done in the nba….

    and you still think that?

    Here’s what I said about Knox:

    Z-man: This is less true about Knox…who may have been the same player as a sophomore and junior as he was as a freshman. The NBA game seems too fast for him thus far, and I agree that it may take a long time for that to change.

    Frank played MUCH better last year than Knox did. So we’re comparing apples to oranges. Be that as it may, Knox was a decent NCAA player (19 and 7 per 40 on decent efficiency, .133 WS40, 5.1BPM against top competition) as one of the youngest notable freshmen in a top conference. Not as good as SGA but certainly very good. Do you actually think he would have been a worse NCAA player as a 20yo junior??

    I think you, pepper and sadly, JK47 are either trolling (c’mon JK) or oblivious to the huge chasm between the NCAA and the NBA. Just about any NBA player, even the shitty ones, would dominate against college competition, even in the best conferences. Even average G-League players would be stars in most conferences. It is almost a certainty that Frank would have dominated down there last year.

  99. Ntilikina would probably have been one of the best players in the NCAA last year with his current level of skill and would have undoubtably been a lottery pick in this draft if he came into the draft now rather than 2 years too early.

    I’ll have one of whatever Z-Man’s drinking

  100. Also, let’s not overreact to what I’m saying. We know that being a dominant college player does not in any way guarantee success in the NBA. If you are a top-10 player at your position in any given year, the odds are well better than 50% that you will not make it in the NBA. Let’s take the 2015 draft, widely believed to be a deep and talented class at the time. Five years later, of the 46 NCAA players drafted, 7 never played a minute, 8 more played less than 1,000 minutes. Of the ones who played over 1,000 minutes, only 25 have positive cumulative VORP and only 8 have a positive career BPMs….all bigs except for DAR. Of those 8, only 4 were drafted in the lottery.

    One player from that class was pick #15 Kelly Oubre, who JK seems pretty intrigued with, even though he sucked ass as bad a Frank as a 21yo in his second NBA season and continued to suck ass for 6000+ NBA minutes He has never posted a positive BPM, has a career VORP of 0.2, and topped out at a WS48 of .093 at age 24.

  101. thenoblefacehumper: I’ll have one of whatever Z-Man’s drinking

    Maybe you can explain to me why Frank and Oubre are such vastly different cases. Or are you saying that Oubre doesn’t belong in an NBA rotation? Or that he should have been written off after his age 21 season?

  102. ***he posted a positive WS48 in 1000 minutes the NBA this year, which very few NCAA guards would be able to do.***

    Huh? Maybe my reading comprehension is off too. Lots of guards post ws48 in 1000 minutes, regardless of age. Do the names Shake Milton, Jalen Brunson, Trent jr, Aaron Holiday, Devonte Graham, Josh Okogie, Jevon Carter, Bruce Brown, and De’Anthony Melton mean anything? They were all picked outside the lottery LAST YEAR and have posted better career ws48s than Frank’s cherry picked “1000 mins”. His draft year has lots too. Like, dozens.

  103. Donnie Walsh:
    ***he posted a positive WS48 in 1000 minutes the NBA this year, which very few NCAA guards would be able to do.***

    Huh? Maybe my reading comprehension is off too. Lots of guards postws48 in 1000 minutes, regardless of age. Do the names Shake Milton, Jalen Brunson, Trent jr, Aaron Holiday, Devonte Graham, Josh Okogie, Jevon Carter, Bruce Brown, and De’Anthony Melton mean anything? They were all picked outside the lottery LAST YEAR and have posted better career ws48s than Frank’s cherry picked “1000 mins”. His draft year has lots too. Like, dozens.

    And all of them were exceptional college players! You actually proved my point! Thanks DW!

    (unless you thought I was saying “very few *elite* college players can post a WS48 better than Frank as a 21yo in the nba…then you do indeed have a reading comprehension problem)

  104. I thought you were saying that Frank would be drafted highly this year as a 22 year old because he has proven himself at the NBA level relative to others his age. And these guys were all drafted well outside the lottery, many of them as 22 year olds, and all of them playing better nba minutes than frank has.

  105. Z-man: His draft year has lots too. Like, dozens.

    Please find me 5 guards who played 1000 minutes in the NBA in their 21yo season or before and had a WS48 higher than Frank’s. Otherwise they don’t apply to this discussion. We’re talking about whether we should write Frank off based on his 21yo NBA season. That you have to twist what I’m saying to come up with examples proves my point. Anyone who had a better season than Frank in the NBA at age 21was almost certainly a dominant NCAA player, and if they didn’t come out until age 22 or above, they probably would have been terrible had they come out earlier. So a dominant 2-year college guard with a 7′ wingspan would probably have garnered lots of attention, and if he put up Frank’s numbers in his rookie season, no one would be saying he would likely be out of the league in a couple of years.

  106. Donnie Walsh:
    I thought you were saying that Frank would be drafted highly this year as a 22 year old because he has proven himself at the NBA level relative to others his age. And these guys were all drafted well outside the lottery, many of them as 22 year olds, and all of them playing better nba minutes than frank has.

    No, I’m saying that if frank played two years of college ball, he probably would have been drafted either in the lottery or somewhere high in the first round based on his wingspan, defense and “perception” of guard skills. And if he then went on to put up the numbers he did as a rookie, we’d be saying “hey, that’s pretty good for a rookie, kid has potential.” But since he was drafted so young and way too high and then not put in the G-League where he belonged, the KB crowd has soured on him prematurely, likely out of frustration with the poor decision to draft him when we did. I’m saying that purely objectively, it is too soon to write him off. Again, he’s still younger than most of the guys you are citing.

    I am NOT saying that he SHOULD have been a lottery pick, or SHOULD be one this year. But freaky wingspans are intriguing to GMs and scouts, and players rise and fall in drafts every year just on the basis of wingspan.

  107. Oubre is a good analog for Frank…his “perceived” value around the NBA is greater than his play merits. That’s why he is still “intriguing” despite being grossly overpaid for his statistical production. I think it’s quite possible that Frank has a similar career path…meaning someone will see more than what is really there and consider him an asset in a trade. But the larger point is that Oubre turned out to be a legit (if middling-to-mediocre) NBA rotation player, and the same will likely be true for Frank.

  108. What a delightful new rivulet forming off of the How Good Is Frank River!

    Adding to the notes: Section IX, subsection XXIII of the International Frank Argument, which will henceforth be known as “How Good Of An NCAA Player Would Frank Have Been?”

    God bless young Frank. How is he not a 20-year vet at this point?

    :)

    okay, mark me down for thinking frank would have been a top 20 pick after 2 seasons at a top college program…

    am I the only one who remembers watching him disrupt opposing team offenses with his perimeter defense last season…along with mitch’s blocks, ol’ mister frank definitely brought energy with his defense…he’s learning to distribute (definitely doesn’t have a natural feel for passing or dribbling), and, his shot does not look broken…

    the problem is his salary, which on our team we can afford…see if he further develops…figure out a decent cost to extend him…

    my main concern with frank is his durability…maybe the knicks can help him figure that out…

  109. I think you, pepper and sadly, JK47 are either trolling (c’mon JK) or oblivious to the huge chasm between the NCAA and the NBA. Just about any NBA player, even the shitty ones, would dominate against college competition, even in the best conferences.

    The argument you’re making is kind of weird.

    If Frank comes out of, I dunno, say Arizona State as a 21-year old Junior after a reliably Frank Ntilikina-esque season, that guy is a lottery pick? I just kinda doubt it. College juniors get dinged all the time because they’ve burned some of their upside already.

    It seems kind of obvious to me that three years of NCAA ball would have exposed Frank Ntilikina’s limitations, and he would be (correctly) viewed as a fringe role player in the NBA with a relatively low ceiling. The only 21 and over players being looked at as lottery picks in this year’s weak draft are guys who really lit it up in college.

  110. If Frank doesn’t get drafted in the lottery next year based on his NBA skills applied to college level basketball, maybe he’ll get drafted 1-14 in the following year when his NBA skills will be displayed as a 24 years old college player. Did I get it right? If not please allow for another year, or decade to figure it out.

  111. I don’t know why you’re using WS/48, nobody uses that anymore. BPM and VORP are both better all-in-one stats and his are -3.2 and -0.4. Something like PIPM is even better but I don’t have it for last season; for his first two seasons it was -1.7 and -2.6.

  112. I don’t understand how anyone would think that Frank wouldn’t have been a dominant player (meaning top 25-50 in the country) in the NCAA. at ages 19 and 20. In 2019 he played 8 Eurocup games for France’s national team against top international competition (MUCH better than NCAA) he more than held his own. We’ve already established that NCAA players who put up a positive WS48 as a NBA guard at age 21 were top NCAA players (and very few do, thanks again for pointing that out DW). You don’t think he would have been more highly regarded than #20 Matisse Thybulle?

  113. In less contentious news, the idea of the NBA trying to start the season by Christmas would make a mess of the offseason. Would teams be more inclined to run it back with their 2019-20 rosters rather than make big moves when there will barely be any preseason to get the new pieces acclimated?

  114. I had a lot of detractors when we drafted Frank because I dared to predict what turned out to be 100% correct (bruno, ras, are you still out there?) In 3 years, it will just be a different collection of folks eating crow.

    (DW Lagavulan 8, but sadly only dregs enough for one nightcap)

  115. alsep, yeah the rushed off-season is crazy. Exciting as a Knicks fan, though, we might see preseason games in like 6 weeks!

  116. I think Z-Man is making excellent points. The one reason I hesitate to agree with him completely is because Frank is clearly timid on offense, and it’s possible that has nothing to do with the NBA level of competition. He has the skill set to have dominated the NCAA last season, but the mindset?

  117. Hubert: He has the skill set to have dominated the NCAA last season, but the mindset?

    When he played against his age peers in the FIBA U18 tournament, he was aggressive enough to win tournament MVP. In fact, his supporters at draft time cited that accomplishment incessantly as evidence that he would be a great pick at #8.

  118. The bottom line is that most super-young draftees would have been better served by staying at a lower level for another year or two. Most get physically exposed in their first year or two, and some get demoralized or injured. That’s why I would be reluctant to trade our #27 and #38 picks…that’s where you can pick up upperclassmen who are more NBA ready but are passed over for freshmen and 19yo euros.

  119. Z-Man this ridiculous argument seems to boil down to Frank’s .037 2019-2020 WS48. It ignores some pretty crucial things:

    1) The improvement in his WS48 boiled down to him lowering his already comically low usage and shooting .453 from 16<3, something that is not going to happen again. He didn't make any underlying improvements. He is basically the same Frank we saw as a rookie.

    2) Ironically enough, you’re becoming the shining example of the kind of poster Strat pretends exists: someone who takes one look at a box score aggregator and makes a bold proclamation. Forget his -3.2 BPM (something a lot of god awful NCAA players could muster), forget a more nuanced look at his skillset, nope, his .037 WS48 means he would’ve been one of the best players in the NBA and would’ve been drafted in the lottery.

    It’s such a ridiculous argument it’s hard to even know where to begin. I mean, would he have been better than Fred VanVleet in the NCAA? When FVV was Frank’s age in college, he posted a 16.8 PTS/40, 4.4 TRB/40, 7.6 AST/40, 2.4 STL/40 with a 10.2 BPM. He proceeded to go undrafted because teams (foolishly) held his age against him, yet Frank fuckin’ Ntilikina would go in the damn lottery?

    Would he be better than Desmond Bane, who is Frank’s age and projected to go in the late first/early second?

    If Frank were in the NCAA this year he’d be a low usage role player type who would probably go in the second round if he got drafted at all.

    If I’m wrong feel free to throw it on my face, I’ll be here. I do not think Frank will ever be more than back of the rotation filler for bad teams, and very well may decide to go back to Europe sooner rather than later.

  120. And you continue to compare apples to oranges. FVV played 4 years of NCAA ball. He didn’t play more than 300 minutes in the NBA until he was 23. At 22 he sucked in limited minutes with a BPM of -2.1. What do you think he would have done at age 19 and 20 in the NBA? At age 21? It’s ridiculous that you even brought him up…he actually makes the case for Frank, who as I said, dominated his peers in Europe.

  121. i think there is a meaningful weakness to the sliding doors approach. even if we assume arguendo frank would have been an ncaa stud prospect, we do have important additional information. if we offered scouts the chance to see how hali or toppin would have performed had they played in the nba for the last two years, they would drool like giuliani at a gymboree. this is bc development isn’t solely about aging, but also translation. dsj would probably still be taking souls in college but his nba career to date surely contains marginal information.

    but i disagree with tnfh about frank’s path to productivity. i think if he was let us pray together able to shoot 37-38pct from three he’d be a productive nba player who could be in the rotation of a good team. if he stays in the low 30s he’s probably a goner.

  122. who as I said, dominated his peers in Europe.

    No, he didn’t. He had 3 good games in a god damn U18 tournament. Other than that his European stats were very, very bad. Kevin Pelton’s model had him ranked 23rd, and even that was probably higher than it should’ve been because the model gave him a youth based boost.

  123. but i disagree with tnfh about frank’s path to productivity. i think if he was let us pray together able to shoot 37-38pct from three he’d be a productive nba player who could be in the rotation of a good team.

    At high enough volume I would agree, but my skepticism is rooted in the fact that he has to significantly increase his percentage and his volume.

    His 3PA volume isn’t wildly low in a vacuum, but it’s definitely low for a player who in this scenario is relying on 3PT shots as his sole offensive skill.

  124. thenoblefacehumper: He didn’t make any underlying improvements. He is basically the same Frank we saw as a rookie.

    He shot better, got to the line more, had more steals, and turned the ball over less. Marginal improvements but improvements none the less. And once again, he’s a very good defensive guard. The team was 5 pts better with him on the floor than off (not true for Knox).

    Do you really think he won’t have a more productive 22yo season than Fred VanVleet? Or that a Kelly Oubre Jr.-like 22yo season is out of reach?

  125. thenoblefacehumper: At high enough volume I would agree, but my skepticism is rooted in the fact that he has to significantly increase his percentage and his volume.

    Measured skepticism is one thing and is certainly warranted…in fact, I too am reasonably skeptical. I certainly not suggesting that he should be signed an Oubre-like deal or anything like that. Your take goes well beyond that, closer to abject hopelessness.

  126. ptmilo: development isn’t solely about aging, but also translation.

    It can be either-or, or both.

    ptmilo: i think if he was let us pray together able to shoot 37-38pct from three he’d be a productive nba player who could be in the rotation of a good team. if he stays in the low 30s he’s probably a goner.

    I’ve been saying this since draft day. He’s much more of a 3-and-D small wing than a PG. He is certainly a plus defensive player who is particularly adept at blowing up the most common offensive scheme in the NBA today…the high PnR. He needs to fix one and only one thing for that role…his 3-pt shooting. And his strong FT% (improved every year and now well above average) suggests that his 3pt shooting will follow. Anything else he improves (rebounding, FTr, ast%, finishing at the rim, etc.) will be a bonus.

  127. I think Frank’s comp in this draft probably ranges from a Devin Vassell to a Cassius Stanley, which is a pretty wide range (#8 to mid-2nd round).

    In 2019, he rates similarly to Culver and Mikeil-Walker — 2 guys who played really well in college and even summer league but have stunk so far in the nba.

    If nothing else, Frank has proven to be a very high level defender in the nba, which is something that can’t be said about most recent draftees. In a redraft, he probably goes in say, the early twenties instead of eight, but I think he can still be a solid contributor.

  128. Knox is another story. Even if he improves offensively, he is such a defensive liability that it’s hard to visualize him being a plus player any time soon. He’d have to be like Enes Kanter-level efficient…

  129. ***(DW Lagavulan 8, but sadly only dregs enough for one nightcap)***

    I think someone may have spiked it.

  130. Do you really think he won’t have a more productive 22yo season than Fred VanVleet? Or that a Kelly Oubre Jr.-like 22yo season is out of reach?

    I have no idea what the theory behind these particular comparisons is, and for all intents and purposes VanVleet did not have an age 22 year old season (294 minutes is not a “season”).

    I do not think he will be particularly close to Oubre’s 22 year old season. Oubre was close to league average that season, which would be a colossal, probably unrealistic leap for Frank.

  131. It remains a bit of a head-scratcher that a guy who was one of the best defensive guards in the association at 20 and 21 is somehow a hopeless case with no chance. Never really computed, still doesn’t.

  132. It remains a bit of a head-scratcher that a guy who was one of the best defensive guards in the association at 20 and 21 is somehow denominated a hopeless case with no chance. Never really computed, still doesn’t.

  133. It remains a bit of a head-scratcher that a guy who was one of the best defensive guards

    [citation needed]

  134. If only we had found someone willing to trade for Frank years ago when he still had value.

    Looking forward to headlines of the 2024 as his second contract runs out: “young Knicks prospect Ntilikina on verge of turning corner, coaches say.”

  135. ***It remains a bit of a head-scratcher that a guy who was one of the best defensive guards in the association at 20 and 21 is somehow a hopeless case with no chance. Never really computed, still doesn’t.***

    Are you still scratching your head about Stanley Johnson? Still perplexed by Michael Kidd-Gilchrist? Maybe this will help: defensive specialists that are useless on offense have no place in this league.

  136. thenoblefacehumper: I do not think he will be particularly close to Oubre’s 22 year old season. Oubre was close to league average that season, which would be a colossal, probably unrealistic leap for Frank.

    Oubre was drafted #15 in what was thought to be a deep draft at the time. He was totally an upside pick (very good but nothing special in 700 college minutes) and proceeded to post BPMs of -5.1 at age 20 and -3.2 at age 21. You said the following in trashing Frank earlier in the thread.

    thenoblefacehumper: Forget his -3.2 BPM (something a lot of god awful NCAA players could muster)

    Not only is it an incredibly disingenuous (and unprovable) statement (god-awful NCAA players would be absolutely obliterated in the NBA, but we’ll never know because they will never have the opportunity) but you can’t have it both ways. When you say Oubre was near league average after being Frank-level bad the year before, it makes no sense that you are nearly certain that Frank can’t make that same leap, unless you think that Oubre is some kind of crazy outlier (he isn’t.)

    And what was the statistical improvement Oubre made to go from “as bad as Frank” at 21 to “near league average” at 22?
    -a .018 improvement in TS% (his FG% actually went down, he improved his 3pt% to 34% on 1.8 more attempts per 36.)
    -a 5pt uptick in usage% to 19.4%
    -aaaaaand, that’s pretty much it!

    Yeah, that’s way too steep of a mountain for Frank to climb, he’s a hopeless case. Right.

  137. There’s another problem with Frank: his theoretical best position is 3-and-D small forward, but then there’s this:

    Frank Ntilikina, career TRB%: 5.4

    Not really ideal.

    I get that we’re in the positionless era and the difference between small forward and shooting guard is becoming blurred, but still. That’s some shittay rebounding for a guy you’re expecting to play the 3 a lot of the time. He can’t play point guard as he has repeatedly demonstrated, so he’s… a shooting guard that doesn’t really shoot so great, never dunks, doesn’t get to the line and can’t finish at the rim?

    This is why the comparison with Oubre really doesn’t work. Oubre gets a respectable amount of rebounds, can actually dunk the ball from time to time, always had at least some ability to get to the FT line and can play small forward credibly in the NBA. If Frank turns out to be a good comp for Oubre in a few years, I’ll be surprised.

  138. When you say Oubre was near league average after being Frank-level bad the year before, it makes no sense that you are nearly certain that Frank can’t make that same leap, unless you think that Oubre is some kind of crazy outlier (he isn’t.)

    I truly have no idea what you’re talking about at this point. Oubre was very good in college, had a bad 671 minute “rookie year,” and has been out of Frank’s league ever since. It was incredibly easy to see him improving, he demonstrated skills in college and, what do you know, those skills became the foundation for his NBA success. There is nothing instructive here for Frank Ntilikina.

    Again, your argument seems to lean bizarrely heavily on Frank’s 2019-2020 WS48 not being outlier level bad. I guess I just don’t value that as highly as you do?

  139. It remains a bit of a head-scratcher that a guy who was one of the best defensive guards in the association at 20 and 21 is somehow a hopeless case with no chance. Never really computed, still doesn’t.

    it’s pretty dumbfounding that people think that frank is one of the best defensive guards in the league….

    this is fairy tale that people keep telling themselves about frank to justify playing time…. the evidence isn’t there….

  140. Oubre had 41 dunks in 1600 minutes as a 21 year old
    Frank has 13 dunks in 3800 career minutes

    Oubre had a .224 FTr, and that spiked when he turned 22, to .295
    Frank had a .177 FTr. Somehow I doubt he’s getting that FTr up to .295 as a 22 year old

    Oubre had a 9.2 TRB%
    Frank had a 5.4 TRB%

    Oubre had a .482 eFG%
    Frank had a .459 eFG%

    Oubre is starting at a higher baseline in just about every important statistical category. You look at those two guys, which one projects as a better offensive player? Oubre clearly had a better path.

  141. Donnie Walsh:
    ***It remains a bit of a head-scratcher that a guy who was one of the best defensive guards in the association at 20 and 21 is somehow a hopeless case with no chance. Never really computed, still doesn’t.***

    Are you still scratching your head about Stanley Johnson? Still perplexed by Michael Kidd-Gilchrist? Maybe this will help: defensive specialists that are useless on offense have no place in this league.

    MKG has been injured during the last 2 seasons, and missed nearly the entire 2015-16 season due to multiple shoulder injuries, but beyond that he’s been a reasonably useful rotation player, despite one of the most comically broken J’s in the NBA. Terrible example.

    Stanley Johnson has not improved a lick since coming into the NBA. Can that be the road that Frank is on? Sure,if Frank continues to post a sub-.500TS% and a sub-.300 3pt%, and his team is 8 points worse per 100 possessions with him on the floor vs. off, then yeah, write him off. But Stanley Johnson is only one possible outcome. Oubre is another. Caldwell-Pope is another. Rozier is another. There are lots of defensive guards/small wings who didn’t top out at age 21. We have no idea which way Frank will go next year, but surely Thibs will give him all the support he needs to improve.

  142. Oubre and Frank are very different offensive players. Frank had a 20% assist rate last season and a 16% turnover rate. Oubre’s at age 22? 6% and 9%.

    I know everyone here thinks that they are smarter than nba coaches, but Frank is a point guard and maybe a “combo” guard. He’s much closer to Kris Dunn than Oubre.

  143. ess-dog:
    Oubre and Frank are very different offensive players. Frank had a 20% assist rate last season and a 16% turnover rate. Oubre’s at age 22? 6% and 9%.

    I know everyone here thinks that they are smarter than nba coaches, but Frank is a point guard and maybe a “combo” guard. He’s much closer to Kris Dunn than Oubre.

    Agreed. Frank is a point guard who can’t really play point guard. That alone puts a pretty hard ceiling on him.

  144. JK47: Oubre had 41 dunks in 1600 minutes as a 21 year old
    Frank has 13 dunks in 3800 career minutes

    Who cares?

    JK47: Oubre had a .224 FTr, and that spiked when he turned 22, to .295
    Frank had a .177 FTr. Somehow I doubt he’s getting that FTr up to .295 as a 22 year old

    .177 vs. .224 is a very marginal difference. If he makes the same improvement, he needs to get to .248. Is that attainable? We’ll see.

    JK47: Oubre had a 9.2 TRB%
    Frank had a 5.4 TRB%

    Both are bad rebounders.

    JK47: Oubre had a .482 eFG%
    Frank had a .459 eFG%

    Both are bad.

    Frank is also the better passer and better defensive player which is hard to do without being a better defensive rebounder.

    You can cherry-pick all you want, but they were essentially equally bad players if you compare PER, WS48, BPM and VORP. There is no reason whatsoever to have written either one off at 21.

  145. JK47: Agreed. Frank is a point guard who can’t really play point guard. That alone puts a pretty hard ceiling on him.

    Frank has been playing mainly PG but he is a 3-position defender and possibly 4 when he gets stronger. He is not going to get shorter or weaker. His future is most likely as a small wing with some guard skills who can rotate between the 1-2-3. That said, his ast/tov ratio (2.36:1) is actually very PG-like.

  146. Ultimately, as ptmilo said, Frank’s future path in the NBA depends mostly on one thing: raising his 3-pt% on good volume. Since he’s a career 78% FT shooter (86% last year on limited attempts), why not withhold judgment to see if his 3-pt% improves? That’s pretty much all I’m saying.

  147. Three years in and Frank still basically stops in his tracks at even token ball pressure. And his low TS% isn’t exactly because of poor shot selection- he’s just a bad shooter who isn’t athletic or skilled enough to get better shots for himself. He wouldn’t have dominated in the NCAA because teams actually game plan for dominant players and his complete lack of ball skills would get exposed.

    Right now Frank is a situational defensive player off of the bench- not a rotation player on a decent team. He’s a low motor point who gives you zero penetration, a two who can’t shoot, or a three who doesn’t rebound or run the wing on the break. And he’s been hurt for a decent chunk of all three years. He’s barely a league minimum guy.

  148. There is no reason whatsoever to have written either one off at 21.

    Oubre was a stud in college and showed plenty of promising signs even during his unproductive first two NBA years (.520 2PT% in his second year). Frank was bad in Europe and has continued to be bad in the NBA.

    Since he’s a career 78% FT shooter (86% last year on limited attempts), why not withhold judgment to see if his 3-pt% improves?

    I’m not sure what “withhold judgment” means in this context. I’ve said all along I would give Frank playing time as long as he’s under contract. That’s not the relevant question. The question is should we extend him/re-sign him, and if so, for how much?

    For the reasons nicos articulated well, I don’t think you can justify any amount that could potentially hurt your flexibility going forward to any degree. I would offer, like, 4/$6-$8M or something and not match anything above that.

  149. And his low TS% isn’t exactly because of poor shot selection- he’s just a bad shooter who isn’t athletic or skilled enough to get better shots for himself.

    This is why I brought up Oubre’s dunks and Frank’s lack thereof. Oubre had other ways to score other than perimeter shooting, he had offensive skills on which to build. It takes some talent to be able to consistently dunk a ball in the NBA. Talent that Frank does not possess.

    “Dunks” is a proxy for “easy baskets.” Frank has no means of getting easy baskets.

  150. Dang, I can’t wait til next season when Frank breaks both of Porzingis’ radius bones on a monster dunk because he’s so swole from working out with Jowles all summer.

    He will serve all y’all a hot, steaming platter of crow.

  151. I could read me some Frankie litigation all day (and in fact I have), but I’m struggling with the Oubre angle. He’s a nice example of a player who’s gotten better each year (to the point of being somewhat useful), but he’s not a very good Frank comp.

    I’m sure it’s been pointed out a million times in the three-year battle for Frankiness, but since Covid has altered my brainpan and I am too lazy to search I just wandered over and damn if there’s a not guy who’s a near-perfect comp, Year three comparison right down the line, or even lifetime vs. Frankie’s year three.

    Shump-Shump.

    You can argue age and college experience and all that stuff, but if it looks like a Shump and acts like a Shump…?

  152. ***MKG has been injured during the last 2 seasons, and missed nearly the entire 2015-16 season due to multiple shoulder injuries, but beyond that he’s been a reasonably useful rotation player, despite one of the most comically broken J’s in the NBA. Terrible example.***

    I think this is your scotch hangover talking. MKG’s contract coming off his rookie deal was terrible from day one, and it had nothing to do with his injuries. It had everything to do with his limitations on the offensive side of the court. Ntilikina getting an MKG like extension would be as bad for the Knicks as it was for the hornets. If you are advocating otherwise, you too are in your decline phase.

  153. It’s a comparison I considered. I was very oprimistic about Shump developing into a better player as well…alas…

    But Shump was unquestionably a decent rotation player based almost solely on his defensive prowess. In that sense, he’s a pretty decent floor for Frank going forward. I think Frank will ultimately be the better player in the long run. Shump turned out to be a bit of a diva without the game to justify it.

  154. Donnie Walsh:
    ***MKG has been injured during the last 2 seasons, and missed nearly the entire 2015-16 season due to multiple shoulder injuries, but beyond that he’s been a reasonably useful rotation player, despite one of the most comically broken J’s in the NBA. Terrible example.***

    I think this is your scotch hangover talking. MKG’s contract coming off his rookie deal was terrible from day one, and it had nothing to do with his injuries. It had everything to do with his limitations on the offensive side of the court. Ntilikina getting an MKG like extension would be as bad for the Knicks as it was for the hornets. If you are advocating otherwise, you too are in your decline phase.

    I agree that giving Frank an extension based on what he has done thus far would be ludicrous. I don’t think that it’s a bad idea to wait and see, though. But MKG is a definite NBA rotation player by any reasonable standard. He’s not a minimum salary guy. Just not worth anywhere near $13 million AAV. And if you can find where I even hinted that we should offer Frank an extension, I’ll buy you a bottle of Lagavulin. Otherwise lighten up, dickhead.

  155. Can we trade Frank for literally anything please, so this can stop? We quit talking about Galloway when he got traded, we can do this!

  156. So Chad Ford has Hali and Hayes ranked 4 and 5 on his big board after the big three. It would be nice if either of them fell to us at 8. If they don’t, that probably means either Okoro or Obi would be the guy. Maybe Okongwu as the wild card.

    8 actually seems like a nice place to sit for this draft. If you disregard position and just take the best player, I think you can get one of the last sure-fire starters at that spot.

  157. ***if you can find where I even hinted that we should offer Frank an extension, I’ll buy you a bottle of Lagavulin. Otherwise lighten up, dickhead.***

    Normally I’d be defensive and take offense to such an agressive personal attack, but since you’re Z-Man, and I love you, and you’ve had a rough 24 hours here, I’ll let it slide.

  158. I love you too Donnie and was just thinking about apologizing. Now I feel even more badly. Although dickhead is one of my wife’s favorite terms of endearment for me.

  159. i’ll tell ya, one big phallicy point all you frank sucks folks keeping missing out on is that – we’re the freaking knicks man…frank is more than fine for our roster, no doubt he’s one of the top five assets we have at the moment…

    we’re at least a few years away from being a competitive playoff team…that’s if everything goes right for the front office and coaching staff…

    the draft is a crap shoot, frank’s about as known a commodity as there can be…

    if you’re unable to envision any way to use frank’s current skillset in a winning team setting – that’s 100% on you…frank’s future is just a question of roster construction, cost and health…

    i stand with the z-man :)

  160. so when the mlb season starts up next year, it’ll be the first time in a while that when i think of the best player in baseball – the name mike trout won’t come to mind…

    can’t remember the last time a player snatched so many souls and had such a pleasant smile while competing at that high a level…mookie!!!

    the margin of error for the rays is just so tiny…and yet, they’re still in this thing…

  161. oh man, the dodgers are hitting like .500 with men in scoring position, 2 outs and 2 strikes…that’s just not fair…

  162. Strange discussion.

    Notorious Frank hater who had said a year ago he’d be out of the league writes:

    I would offer, like, 4/$6-$8M or something and not match anything above that.

    And the Frank booster writes:

    if you can find where I even hinted that we should offer Frank an extension, I’ll buy you a bottle of Lagavulin.

    And then there’s the bizarre Oubre angle. This season per RPM he ranked 449 out of 520 NBA players. The previous season he ranked 432 out of 513. Frank ranked 221 out of 520 players.

    Cronin, I want a poll:
    Would you offer Frank a 3-year extension at 5m/yr before the start of the season?

    Presume the medical staff has told you that his groin injury will not be a chronic problem. If it were an issue, I think most (including me) would not offer Frank an extension.

  163. Notorious Frank hater who had said a year ago he’d be out of the league writes:

    Yeah paying someone $1.5-$2M AAV isn’t inconsistent with not thinking they’re good

    And then there’s the bizarre Oubre angle. This season per RPM he ranked 449 out of 520 NBA players. The previous season he ranked 432 out of 513. Frank ranked 221 out of 520 players.

    Oh well that settles it then

  164. From the Knicksian stat vault:

    Knox ranked 512 out of 513 on RPM in 2018-19. He somehow managed to finish even worse in 2019-20 ranking 520 out of 520. So he went from the 2nd worst player in the league to the worst player in the league! Knicksian!!

    Cronin, I want another poll:
    Should the Knicks pick up Knox’s 4th year option?

  165. I’ll tell ya, one big phallicy point all you frank sucks folks keeping missing out on is that – we’re the freaking knicks man…frank is more than fine for our roster, no doubt he’s one of the top five assets we have at the moment…

    I can add one other thing. They don’t know much about the complexities of basketball or building a winning team.

    We could teach a bunch of 5 year olds to look at BPM, WS48 and other similar metrics and in 30 minutes and they’d have the same opinions as some adults that have been watching the game for decades and still can’t get past the idiocy of those metrics.

  166. Why is anyone discussing extending Frank (or Knox for that matter) when we haven’t seen what he’ll do with a competent coach that will use him correctly in a season when he’s healthy and had almost a year to get physically stronger and work on weaknesses?

    I’d like to see him get and stay healthy for a season under Thibs before deciding what he’s worth and whether we want to move forward with him.

  167. Z-man: Frank has been playing mainly PG but he is a 3-position defender and possibly 4 when he gets stronger. He is not going to get shorter or weaker. His future is most likely as a small wing with some guard skills who can rotate between the 1-2-3. That said, his ast/tov ratio (2.36:1) is actually very PG-like.

      

    Exactly.

    Frank is a not a pure PG. He’s a “basketball player” that incompetent nitwits in our previous management have been trying to turn into a scoring and penetrating PG and that other nitwits have been judging based on his PG skills.

    His role should be a switchable defensive stopper that can be a secondary ball handler and secondary playmaker that is unselfish, will make the extra pass, and occasionally make a great play.

    There is an important role for players like that on a championship caliber team if they already have their #1 and #2 options. However, they have to give you “something” scoring wise. The typical or best skill to add is a 3 point shot that helps provide space. You don’t care much about the volume of his scoring because you already have that covered. You care about the quality of his defense and that he generates some space for your major scoring options to work with. In Frank’s case it would also make it easier for himself to penetrate on occasion when the defense is forced to guard him outside.

    Frank is a consistent 3 point shot and some more experience defensively and under pressure from being a player that could start on a championship caliber team that already has it’s #1 and #2. Give him a better 3 point shot and stick him on the Mavericks and he’d have enormous value to them. In fact, that’s where he belongs.

  168. I voted yes. It’s essentially a trade of Barrett for Edwards . We control Edwards for an extra year. It’s close. Both aren’t good shooters. How are you a shooting guard if you can’t shoot?

  169. Why is anyone discussing extending Frank (or Knox for that matter) when we haven’t seen what he’ll do with a competent coach that will use him correctly in a season when he’s healthy and had almost a year to get physically stronger and work on weaknesses?

    Regarding Knox, the Knicks have to make a decision on his 4th year option at the start of his 3rd season. The question is then if you want his salary on the books in the summer of 2021. You’re a new poster ;) so you weren’t here last summer when we had a discussion of whether to pick up Frank’s 4th year option.

    Regarding Frank, if you have to ask why anyone would have a discussion about an extension of a rookie who will be a RFA at the end of the season, then you must have worked in the mail room when you said you’ve been a businessman. FWIW Knicks should be having the same discussion about Dennis Smith.

  170. His role should be a switchable defensive stopper that can be a secondary ball handler and secondary playmaker that is unselfish, will make the extra pass, and occasionally make a great play.

    Frank’s a good on ball defender, kinda. He’s pesky and his man frequently just gives the ball up. But you’re overrating him. He doesn’t generate that many turnovers, whether via steals or stops. He’s a mediocre help defender and he frequently blows his assignments after fighting through a screen because he’s too stubborn to switch even when it’s been called for. His handle is still trash. He passes when he’s got a wide open shot, which is his best playmaking skill. Has anyone ever seen a professional basketball player so timid on the court?
    If we could get the fiftieth pick for him that be a coup.

  171. I remember the neon nights
    I remember the wonderful flights
    I remember how free we were
    I remember our incredible love

    I remember your TV screen
    I remember the red light dream
    I remember how free we were
    I remember incredible love

    I remember your X-ray eyes
    I remember your moonlight cries
    I remember how free we were
    I remember incredible love

    I remember our incredible love
    I remember incredible love
    Hmm

    Written by Martin Rev and Alan Vega
    Suicide – I remember (1978)

  172. a competent coach that will use him correctly in a season when he’s healthy and had almost a year to get physically stronger and work on weaknesses

    Here’s Andrew Wiggins’ BPM by season, starting before Thibs’ joining MIN

    BPM
    -1.3
    -1.7
    -2.4
    -3.0
    (Thibs is fired)

    TS%
    .543
    .534
    .505
    .493

    Towns
    2.2
    4.7
    5.1
    6.0 (fired)
    7.8

    .590
    .618
    .646
    .622
    .642

    So does he know how to coach some players, but not others? Or is a plummeting TS% an indication of growth? Asking for a friend.

  173. How many people here are going to be really upset if we draft Okoro? I’m still mulling whether I like him or not, mostly coming down on the side of not liking him. But he is a very imposing physical specimen on both ends. Obviously the shooting is a huge red flag, but I am wondering whether Thibs is going to try to convince mgmt that Okoro is the next Jimmy Butler.

    More generally, I think the Lakers are on to something. If you have guys who can defend small-ball lineups with length and who can dominate the boards, you don’t need as much 3-pt shooting.

  174. Also, everyone is calling this a weak draft, but I think that’s more of a star potential thing. I see a lot of good rotation players coming out of this draft all the way into the second round.

  175. How many people here are going to be really upset if we draft Okoro? I’m still mulling whether I like him or not, mostly coming down on the side of not liking him. But he is a very imposing physical specimen on both ends. Obviously the shooting is a huge red flag, but I am wondering whether Thibs is going to try to convince mgmt that Okoro is the next Jimmy Butler.

    There will almost definitely be players left on the board I would prefer, but I am coming around ever so slightly. His 2PT% and FTr really are monstrous. I tend to think this kind of thing is overrated, but he feels like the kind of prospect that might hinge on a solid development process, however you define that.

    I wouldn’t be Cole Anthony level upset because there’s legitimate intrigue, but at the end of the day I don’t think I’d be happy if for no other reason because I am pretty damn sick of hearing “if he ever learns to shoot…”.

    Also, everyone is calling this a weak draft, but I think that’s more of a star potential thing. I see a lot of good rotation players coming out of this draft all the way into the second round.

    Agreed, which is why I’m against most trade-up scenarios using our later picks barring the availability my man crush Pokuševski.

  176. I think it’s just a very bad draft to have a top 3 pick in. Those guys are going to be slotted in at salaries way above their likely impact.

    Okoro is weird. I wouldnt draft him bc I don’t buy into “if he ever learns to shoot” cases. But if we did draft him, I would be incredibly excited about him. Because if he ever learns to shoot…

  177. Yeah I’m intrigued by okoro too even though we need PG play and shooting. But I like the idea of drafting more players who are good at defense. We’ve got Mitch and Frank and I think RJ could be solid on D too. We draft another plus defender and suddenly Thibs has a handful of guys that can defend. Schemes are great and all but you need the players to execute it. It might be fun to watch a young team that at least can be a handful on defense every night. While the league is more offense oriented these days, if you can defend you give yourself a chance every game. Then develop the offensive game of them.

    I think my choices in no particular order are Okoro, Vassrll, Halliburton and Lewis Jr.

  178. If Frank is just a pesky defender then it really is a ridiculous conversation.

    I think he is better than that but the steals aren’t really there.

    Maybe he fills out and ends up a Bruce Bowen, i.e. someone who doesn’t show up in the boxscore but gets a ton of credit for his defensive mojo.

  179. If Frank is just a pesky defender then it really is a ridiculous conversation.

    I think he is better than that but the steals aren’t really there.

    I agree that sells him short, but I’m not sure people realize just how high the standard for competency on offense is these days.

    Andre Roberson, who checks out as a legitimately elite defender, was often deemed unplayable against strong competition despite posting a TS% north of .560 (fueled by a .600+ 2PT%) and being a great rebounder for his position.

    Kris Dunn, another legitimately great defender, is probably going to sign for $6M AAV or so despite being much better than Frank on offense. It’s not necessarily clear he has a place on a good team. I’m a bit confused as to why the Frankophiles don’t want us to just target him instead of re-signing Frank, actually, since he’s basically everything they pretend Frank is.

    I could go on but the point is I don’t think Frank getting his 3PT% above league average, which is far from a sure thing, necessarily gets him to rotation level. His usage will still be comically low due to his complete lack of an ability to get easy baskets (something I don’t ever see him “fixing” because it boils down to his lack of athleticism and poor handle), he still won’t be contributing anything on the boards, and his playmaking ability will still be underwhelming.

  180. I also continue to be confused as to what people mean when they say we shouldn’t “give up” on Frank. No one is advocating cutting him or glueing him to the bench, so it seems like they just…want people to say nicer things about his basketball abilities on the internet?

    The fact of the matter is in a year we’re going to have decide how much Frank Ntilikina is worth in a league with a salary cap and finite roster spots. I’m not sure what the Frankophiles want us to do about that if he’s coming off 4 years of objectively very bad play, because “don’t give up on him” is not an answer to that question.

  181. Owen:
    If Frank is just a pesky defender then it really is a ridiculous conversation.

    I think he is better than that but the steals aren’t really there.

    Maybe he fills out and ends up a Bruce Bowen, i.e. someone who doesn’t show up in the boxscore but gets a ton of credit for his defensive mojo.

    I’ve moved on from Frank because everyone has clearly articulated their position (I think, although maybe not because it seems some think I was advocating for an extension when I clearly wasn’t) and now it’s about moving forward and seeing how it turns out.

    You raise a larger issue which comes up in many contexts on this board: how do we accurately account for defensive impact in valuing a defensive-oriented player? It’s hard to argue that Frank is a plus player based on box-score-based metrics, and on/off metrics are noisy and diffuse. It’s even more curious now because defensive schemes are more team-defense oriented than ever. It’s kinda like the hockey assist and Kobe assist on offense not crediting (or even penalizing) the individual that is actually responsible for creating points in an individual possession.

    Strat’s take on spacing is maligned here and I have no interest in defending him, nor do I think it’s useful to dismiss everything he says or has said because, well, he’s strat. But I do think that more than ever, basketball is a game where spacing matters more nowadays than ever. PnR depends on creating spacing by forcing defenses to make decisions to go over vs. under, or switch vs. stay home, or double vs. single-team. Shooters are so good that a being a split-second late for contesting a shot, or being too short or slow to defend a given player on a switch or in space, should be picked up in some kind of advanced stat if a pattern develops.

    Frank and Mitch seem to add defensive value well beyond their counting stats, and it seems that both have excellent on/off numbers. In Mitch’s case, you can give some credit to his uber-efficiency on offense, but not for Frank. I’m not reaching a conclusion here, just musing.

  182. I think the answer on Frank is pretty easy. If he develops a consistent 40% 3 pt shot then he becomes a valuable player. Last year he saw his 2pt% increase to a serviceable level which really raised the floor for him as a player. With his defensive skill, if he has a good to great 3pt shot he is a legit rotation player/starter in the NBA. If he doesn’t develop his 3pt shot then he is a fringe/situational player that is ultimately replaceable. I think it is really that simple. Fortunately, Frank is a very good FT shooter, is good at long 2 pt shots, and has shown the ability to make 3pt shots playing internationally so developing a consistent shot from outside seems doable. However, I do need to see real improvement this year at the 3, 35-36% at least, before I’d feel good resigning him to anything more than the minimum.

  183. Kris Dunn came into the league at the age Frank is now, put up 3 years of terrible offense between age 22-25 (all wors than Frank’s last year). He took four years to get “slightly” better than Frank on offense (TS%, FTr, 3pt%, BPM, are all in the same general area as Frank, am I missing something?) and is about to turn 27.

    Andre Roberson also came into the league at age 22. He turned into basically the defensive equivalent of Enes Kanter, except that you can hide a guy on offense easier than on defense. Very good situationally, pretty much invisible on offense (single digit usg%, might have been lowest in the league). He played 26mpg in the playoffs for a team that went to the WCFs, so I don’t understand the statement that he was deemed unplayable against strong competition….at least before his injury.

    If your argument is that Frank does not deserve an extension of more than the $6 mill AAV that 27yo Dunn will probably get, sure. That’s a long way from saying he’s pretty much toast as an NBA player. The point is that at 27, Dunn is who he is, which is better than he was at age 22. Most GMs would probably think that Frank, who hasn’t played a minute of NBA basketball at age 22, still has a decent chance to develop into a better 2-way player than either of those guys.

  184. He took four years to get “slightly” better than Frank on offense (TS%, FTr, 3pt%, BPM, are all in the same general area as Frank, am I missing something?) and is about to turn 27.

    AST% is kind of an important offensive thing if you’re a point guard

  185. Dunn’s ast% last year was 19.4. Frank’s was 20.2.

    Why are you now comparing one year after going through Dunn’s career stats before? I’m guessing they moved Dunn off the ball to accommodate White to some extent, but Dunn’s AST/36 was over in the two prior years. It’s a legitimate offensive strength of his. Defenses have to respect his drive to some degree.

  186. thenoblefacehumper: Why are you now comparing one year after going through Dunn’s career stats before? I’m guessing they moved Dunn off the ball to accommodate White to some extent, but Dunn’s AST/36 was over in the two prior years. It’s a legitimate offensive strength of his. Defenses have to respect his drive to some degree.

    You can pick whatever year you want, In Dunn’s best offensive year he had a OBPM of -2.4. You are looking for some silver lining to say that he’s a “much better” offensive player than Frank…when he just isn’t and never has been. You bring up his AST% and ignore his abysmal offensive stats in virtually every other category. You bring up that he was maybe moved off the ball (where he was equally terrible) ignoring that he was displaced at the position you based the AST% comment on by a rookie who had an AST% of 16.5. And most importantly, you ignore that Frank hasn’t even reached the age that Dunn entered the league and put up a .432 TS%.
    I

  187. Idk how Okoro and RJ would work together. They both need the lane to work in on offense. Okoro would be good on Phoenix with all their shooters.

    I think Hali and Toppin are probably the best fits at 8, maybe Vassell. Not sure about Hayes, but he’s still so damn young.

  188. If you have to pass over a potentially good player because “he doesn’t work with RJ” that’s not a good sign. Statements like ess-dog’s support the idea of trading RJ for the #1 pick. You could then just pick the two BPAs at 1 and 8 and not worry about fit. But that’s not going to happen, so whatever.

    The truth is that we just need good players and can worry about fit later. As tnfh pointed out, there are legit reasons for one (not me!) to think that Okoro will be the BPA if he falls to #8, no matter who is or isn’t picked above him.

    It is highly likely that if we pick at #8 we wind up with one of Hali, Hayes, Okoro or Avdija. LaMelo, Wiseman, Toppin and Edwards are almost certainly gone by then, and I can’t see anyone jumping any of these top 8. We will likely draft whoever falls to us. If it’s Okoro, that’s not a terrible outcome. Every one of these 8 is a crap shoot of some kind.

  189. Okoro’s advances numbers are also much worse than the rest, even worse than RJ’s. And you have to wonder if he’ll shoot so well 2 feet from the basket at 6’6” against much taller, stronger NBA bigs.

  190. Unofficial poll:

    Would you trade Mitchell Robinson to Golden State for this year’s #2 pick and the Minnesota 2021 mildly protected pick?

    (Would Golden State likely reject that offer?)

  191. Ben R: If he develops a consistent 40% 3 pt shot then he becomes a valuable playe

    Pretty much anyone who shoots 40% from 3 is a valuable player in the NBA. Saying that Frank would be valuable if he does is tautological. But Frank is still so bad at everything else he still might not be valuable shooting 40%.

    Frank needs to improve on multiple fronts to become an NBA player, let alone a valuable player.

  192. You are missing my point. If nothing improves except his 3pt shot I think he is a valuable player. Most likely other things will improve as well but Frank with a consistent 3 is a rotation player on every team in the NBA.

    The fact that other things are trending up as well give a lot of hope. The problem is without the 3 pt shot he is marginal no matter how he improves in other areas unless he completely transforms.

  193. You make this deal as soon as they agree to it. This is a no-brainer. Edward is a much better player than RJ will become. The only other question is how to get Wiseman? This would make us a very good team in 2-3 years. A lineup of : Cousin – C
    Wiseman/PF
    Knox – SF
    Dotson or Edwards -SG
    Frank – PG

Comments are closed.