Randle has quickly established himself as our best outside shooting pg, and he has a solid feel for running the offense. He needs to step up his defense as he looks a bit like Rose on defense, but I hope he can improve on d. This kid definitely should have been on the roster from the start of the season.
TheGame wrote:Randle has quickly established himself as our best outside shooting pg, and he has a solid feel for running the offense. He needs to step up his defense as he looks a bit like Rose on defense, but I hope he can improve on d. This kid definitely should have been on the roster from the start of the season.
Yeah. I think the loyalty to certain guys went too far. You would think the Knicks would highly value a Triangle proven PG who can actually SHOOT and run the team. He's a good player to have on the roster and IMO he fits INFINITELY better than any other PG we had this year!!!
Just glad they got him back. Now they can let Rose keep playing us into a Lottery spot while getting Randle some experience.
nixluva wrote:TheGame wrote:Randle has quickly established himself as our best outside shooting pg, and he has a solid feel for running the offense. He needs to step up his defense as he looks a bit like Rose on defense, but I hope he can improve on d. This kid definitely should have been on the roster from the start of the season.
Yeah. I think the loyalty to certain guys went too far. You would think the Knicks would highly value a Triangle proven PG who can actually SHOOT and run the team. He's a good player to have on the roster and IMO he fits INFINITELY better than any other PG we had this year!!!
Just glad they got him back. Now they can let Rose keep playing us into a Lottery spot while getting Randle some experience.
That's the ticket. Let Rose play himself outta here and just park us high In the lottery.
As far as defense, Randle has good fundamentals. That's all I fucking ask!!! Stay square and lead your man into the teeth of the defense where KP is lurking. We don't need a freak that's constantly busy and active. Those guys don't grow on trees.... but you can have good technique. That can be translated into the team concept.
nixluva wrote:TheGame wrote:Randle has quickly established himself as our best outside shooting pg, and he has a solid feel for running the offense. He needs to step up his defense as he looks a bit like Rose on defense, but I hope he can improve on d. This kid definitely should have been on the roster from the start of the season.
Yeah. I think the loyalty to certain guys went too far. You would think the Knicks would highly value a Triangle proven PG who can actually SHOOT and run the team. He's a good player to have on the roster and IMO he fits INFINITELY better than any other PG we had this year!!!
Just glad they got him back. Now they can let Rose keep playing us into a Lottery spot while getting Randle some experience.
Rose has reverted. The 2 weeks was a fluke it seems. He's gone back to himself - poor connection on passes. Poor effort on D. Looking to shoot almost every time down.
However I think the game showed Randle's weaknesses as well. In the 4th quarter, the 2nd unit played horribly. It's what sealed the game for Detroit. We had brought it down to 5 or 3 points. The 2nd unit wasn't effective. Even when KP came back in, he got I think 1 shot off. That's poor offense. I don't blame Randle, I just think he isn't a starter or big minute player either.
What we need to find is a system point guard who likes to pass and has good connection on passes. I don't know who that is, but if we stay where we are in the draft, we will get some looks at yong point guards or guards. If we draft no lower than 8th, we may have a chnace to get one of Monk/Smith/Ntilikina. Totally different players, but 2 of them (Smith or Monk) could probably start for us next year right away. Monk is a point guard size wise but a scoring guard. We'd need to look at finding a 2 in free agency who can handle the ball and make passes. Maybe if we dealt Melo to the Clips, Austin Rivers/Malik Monk backcourt???? The other two are more natural point guards. There is no easy quick solution, though. I just want to start fresh with some young, up and coming players with starter level talent next year.
Randle is in his first year in the league, having suffered some back luck (face injury), inconsistent minutes and different teams. With some more consistent playing time in the NBA, he may well mature into a solid backup PG, if not a starter. Certainly, not more of a risk than a rookie PG who had never played a minute in the NBA.
I am a bit worried about Ntilikina. Before anointing him as the next Tony Parker, let's remember that TP averaged almost 15 pts and 6 assts for his French team. What are Frank's stats in Stasbourg?
And I am worried about Smith as way undersized for today's NBA.
For me Monk is the lowest-risk option. I see his floor as an effective scoring third guard off the bench, a la Vinnie Johnson.
Do you think trading Melo for Rivers is a lower-risk option vs trying to sign someone like Jrue Holiday or George Hill? How good is Rivers vs these two guys?
P.S. Just looked up Smith's height, and he is actually 6-3, so not undersized at all. Really surprised, optically looks a lot smaller, must the be unusual speed for his size that has me fooled.
why do we all assume players are "held back" and their performance of late would have been there earlier?
First off we have former MVP Rose, signed CLee, and signed Jennings. Where does he get the minutes? Baker didn't sniff much until Jennings started to faulter. Given Baker beat out Randle for the last spot, due mostly to his size and Randles injury, Im not sure where the "We shoulda" comes from?
Randle got to develop in the Dleague and with Philly.
Its all good, but lets not kid ourselves. And if baker lights up deleague or gets called up by another team then we complain "We let him go....."
ESOMKnicks wrote:Randle is in his first year in the league, having suffered some back luck (face injury), inconsistent minutes and different teams. With some more consistent playing time in the NBA, he may well mature into a solid backup PG, if not a starter. Certainly, not more of a risk than a rookie PG who had never played a minute in the NBA.I am a bit worried about Ntilikina. Before anointing him as the next Tony Parker, let's remember that TP averaged almost 15 pts and 6 assts for his French team. What are Frank's stats in Stasbourg?
And I am worried about Smith as way undersized for today's NBA.
For me Monk is the lowest-risk option. I see his floor as an effective scoring third guard off the bench, a la Vinnie Johnson.
Do you think trading Melo for Rivers is a lower-risk option vs trying to sign someone like Jrue Holiday or George Hill? How good is Rivers vs these two guys?
P.S. Just looked up Smith's height, and he is actually 6-3, so not undersized at all. Really surprised, optically looks a lot smaller, must the be unusual speed for his size that has me fooled.
Smith is about the same size as Lilliard and he is more explosive. I'm more worried about him as NBA level playmaker. Can he got in the traingle? I like Monk too, but he's a Gilbert Arenas type playmaker at best. Is that good enough or is that expecting too much?
Nalod wrote:why do we all assume players are "held back" and their performance of late would have been there earlier?
First off we have former MVP Rose, signed CLee, and signed Jennings. Where does he get the minutes? Baker didn't sniff much until Jennings started to faulter. Given Baker beat out Randle for the last spot, due mostly to his size and Randles injury, Im not sure where the "We shoulda" comes from?
Randle got to develop in the Dleague and with Philly. Its all good, but lets not kid ourselves. And if baker lights up deleague or gets called up by another team then we complain "We let him go....."
"I'll take who is Sasha for 500 Alex."
It should not have been about Baker or Randle. They both could've been on the team if Sasha was not on the team.
I'm not looking back at this point. Not if the losing leads to another Blue Chip player for our core!!! Just ecstatic that we were able to get Randle back! Rose did us a favor in that he helped us hit the Lottery. I know that's twisted logic but I felt the same way when we got KP. Sometimes you don't realize how lucky you are when something bad happens to your original plan!!!
Not getting Monroe was a BLESSING and the same can be said with other plans that didn't work out. If this draft goes well it could be better for this team's future than if we squeeze into the 8th spot in the Playoffs! So with Randle I say better late than never! Also Rose helped to show just how much of a difference it makes having a real PG versus a guard that just happens to play the PG position.
yellowboy90 wrote:Nalod wrote:why do we all assume players are "held back" and their performance of late would have been there earlier?
First off we have former MVP Rose, signed CLee, and signed Jennings. Where does he get the minutes? Baker didn't sniff much until Jennings started to faulter. Given Baker beat out Randle for the last spot, due mostly to his size and Randles injury, Im not sure where the "We shoulda" comes from?
Randle got to develop in the Dleague and with Philly. Its all good, but lets not kid ourselves. And if baker lights up deleague or gets called up by another team then we complain "We let him go....."
"I'll take who is Sasha for 500 Alex."
It should not have been about Baker or Randle. They both could've been on the team if Sasha was not on the team.
We need examples of how to be a pro on the roster. Sasha is that guy. Regardless of what you think, Randle is back where he should be. That's all that matters
BigDaddyG wrote:
I like Monk too, but he's a Gilbert Arenas type playmaker at best. Is that good enough or is that expecting too much?
If it comes along with Arenas-type scoring, it would be pretty awesome in my book.
nixluva wrote:Yeah. I think the loyalty to certain guys went too far. You would think the Knicks would highly value a Triangle proven PG who can actually SHOOT and run the team. He's a good player to have on the roster and IMO he fits INFINITELY better than any other PG we had this year!!!Just glad they got him back. Now they can let Rose keep playing us into a Lottery spot while getting Randle some experience.
"Loyalty to certain guys"? You mean the $20m PG they traded for just last off season, or the PG they just signed in the off season to be the primary backup?
Unless you're talking about Sasha, I don't know what you're talking about. Do you normally condone making moves for players and then cutting them in half a season in favor of undrafted rookies. Great way to run a franchise. And I use the term "franchise" lightly.
Panos wrote:nixluva wrote:Yeah. I think the loyalty to certain guys went too far. You would think the Knicks would highly value a Triangle proven PG who can actually SHOOT and run the team. He's a good player to have on the roster and IMO he fits INFINITELY better than any other PG we had this year!!!Just glad they got him back. Now they can let Rose keep playing us into a Lottery spot while getting Randle some experience.
"Loyalty to certain guys"? You mean the $20m PG they traded for just last off season, or the PG they just signed in the off season to be the primary backup?
Unless you're talking about Sasha, I don't know what you're talking about. Do you normally condone making moves for players and then cutting them in half a season in favor of undrafted rookies. Great way to run a franchise. And I use the term "franchise" lightly.
We carried Sasha, Ndour and Plumlee all year and I would place Randle ahead of all 3. I doubt anyone would've picked up Ndour if he was on the DL team. Plumlee I can understand cuz they feel he is worth it long term but Sasha got paid and he's a vet that knows how this goes. We don't owe him anything past that. Now that is where the loyalty thing got in the way IMO.
