which one is better? two bishops or a rook and a knight?

"Should my opponent have accepted the draw offer"? is about the last thing a beginner would ask. He simply wanted to know the state of the endgame such as to increase his endgame knowledge for future occasions.

If you believe they were playing on chess.com with time controls and he didn't know about the drawing rules, of course you could make an extra note on it. But then you would need to explain how that works as well - if only with a link to the proper info page.

Somehow I suspect though that the OP left the building some posts ago and he is not going to confirm anything either way

Well, I was going to find an article: but then I found the chess.com rules on drawing due to timeout are not what I thought they are.

It sees they follow FIDE on drawing by timeouts even though they follow USCF on drawing by insufficient material. This is very confusing. https://support.chess.com/article/268-my-opponent-ran-out-of-time-why-was-it-a-draw

It's actually quite complicated when you place FIDE, USCF and chess.com timeout rules side by side by side. They are all different. I was recently corrected by "jetoba" who is apparently an arbiter in USCF. My estimate is that I will master the last detail in 10 years time

It depends really,if one blunders the other canjust take advantage of that

Two bishops can easily beat a rook, but with the knight...

That has not been my experience. Two bishops versus a rook is almost always a draw. If it's not a draw, it's because someone made a very big mistake.

Bishops together STRONG.

oh

Yes. But against a rook, not very strong. It's very very difficult to prevent the rook from capturing one of the bishops. Draw.

This is about the only bishops win against a rook without a blunder:

.

..