I think Randle can still be part of a good team while still playing 28-32 minutes but like Harrell on the Clippers— maybe it’s would be smartest to deploy him off the bench?
Definitely don’t want him as a starter, to be honest I’d rather he wasn’t on the team at all- I’d rather spend the money on some shooters
If he is back that is the right role for him. He also might be a different player if he was playing with CP3.
Against 2nd units he could wreck havoc, so provided he was okay with it and in the spirit of continuity, I'm very fine with that.
Only way that works is if you get an alpha dog type player to put him in his place.
NYKBocker wrote:Only way that works is if you get an alpha dog type player to put him in his place.
More likely a coach with clout.
Last season in Randle's first yr of available free agency he signed a 2 yr 18mil contract with the Pelicans. Ended up coming off the bench for them for the most part until AD held out. He was a 6th man type for majority of his career in LA prior to that.
This will be where his career ends up heading post Knicks based on how the NBA is shaping up. No matter if he wants to accept it or not imo. If he wants to start then he will need to hit 3s at a higher clip and/or improve defensively. If not he will be a PPS type player off the bench. That's pretty much how teams gauge and value players these days.
newyorknewyork wrote:NYKBocker wrote:Only way that works is if you get an alpha dog type player to put him in his place.
More likely a coach with clout.
Last season in Randle's first yr of available free agency he signed a 2 yr 18mil contract with the Pelicans. Ended up coming off the bench for them for the most part until AD held out. He was a 6th man type for majority of his career in LA prior to that.
This will be where his career ends up heading post Knicks based on how the NBA is shaping up. No matter if he wants to accept it or not imo. If he wants to start then he will need to hit 3s at a higher clip and/or improve defensively. If not he will be a PPS type player off the bench. That's pretty much how teams gauge and value players these days.
Not to mention he needs to quit the coast to coast crap as well as quit putting his eyes down when he’s going one on one. His court awareness is awful.
I’d personally rather he be gone.
Another team next year. But as long as he knows and accepts his roll, he can start. He seems coachable. U can see at times he will let the game come to him. If he was surrounded by 2 other stars, hes a nice 3rd wheel. Bully ball style. Like having a big running back to where down the defense in the 4th.
He has been our best player. Reduce his role and up the talent around him and its like Timmy is in Dallas, “Good player”.
Remove him and who is in his place?
Randle is not the answer but he is not the question either.
BRIGGS wrote:I think Randle can still be part of a good team while still playing 28-32 minutes but like Harrell on the Clippers— maybe it’s would be smartest to deploy him off the bench?
On this particular team he'd be best as a 6th man. He should be replaced in the lineup by a stretch 4, like Gallinari or Bertans.
Randle is just about a 20/10/4 guy..
This is the one yr he's been in the League and has not increase his stats, and you can thank this misfit unbalance roster for that..
I remember people wanting to get rid of Gallinari when he was here
this makes no sense IMO. Next year, if the team still sucks big donkey dong, you play him as close to 40mpg as possible and you trade him. If the team is gonna be any good, well, I would imagine Randle would have to be a part of it. I get that Randle has massive holes to his game but I mean I'd rather have him at 18 mil a year than THJ
I do not understand the hate that get's directed towards Julius. Reminds me of the criticism of KT, and how we'd be better once we got rid of him.
Has he had too many turn overs? Yes.
Has he shot poorly from 3pt line? Yes.
Is this his first year, and was he told at the beginning of the year that he was the PG and should heave 3pts every chance he got? YES!
My hope is that you will see an improved Julius Randle next year. Assuming we get a coach like Kenny Atkinson, hopefully the offense will look at where Randle was exposed this year (spinaramas, brining the ball up, bad 3pt shots) and look to create a better role for him.
Unless you are replacing him with AD, there is no upgrade. As Nalod points out, he may not be the answer, but he isn't the question.
Bring me Fred VanVleet, our draft pick and most of this same group, and I think you'll see better numbers from Randle.
Randle is ok. Move him to the bench? Sure... who's starting on this team over him? The answer to Brigg's question is an incredibly simple follow up question and thats it.
Feels like a good place for him. He can score a ton of points and you don't ask too much of his basketball iq by removing him from the focus in starting lineup. Another piece to a championship team in this role
Unless the knicks are getting all star in return for randle there is nobody that can replace randle production of 19 points and 9 rebounds solid numbers. Put randle on bench is a bad idea who is going to score unless you have somebody in waiting then do that but the knicks don't. I think if randle gets point guard like chris paul his production will go up dramatically .
houston20 wrote:Unless the knicks are getting all star in return for randle there is nobody that can replace randle production of 19 points and 9 rebounds solid numbers. Put randle on bench is a bad idea who is going to score unless you have somebody in waiting then do that but the knicks don't. I think if randle gets point guard like chris paul his production will go up dramatically .
The title of the thread says next yr. So that would mean another PF was brought in to start over him, if he wasn't moved.
But the main issue is he may not fit well with Barrett & Robinson. He doesn't shoot well enough to provide them the proper spacing to operate. And they don't shoot well enough to provide him the proper spacing to operate. So having them staggered with better spacing options to line up with would be the goal.
So who will be this better player?
Its the replace the thing you know vs. the thing you'd like.........but no trade to offer or free agent to ponder. And forget the salary thing.
Lets compare........
Randle career is 16 and 9. This year he is near 20,10 and 3 dimes. KP about the same but 1.7 dimes. No doubt KP is the better shooter. Turnovers, Randle this season 3 vs. 1.8 KP. No doubt handling the ball way more, or way too much. Not the same player, but........
https://www.landofbasketball.com/player_...
......Now Lets pretend he was on Dallas and we got him as part of the trade with KP. Keep an open mind now. Forget MIlls, Janis, and what ever.......Objectively, does it help?
Not saying he is the savior of the trade or anything starphuchedly........
Also, who are we plugging into that Starts over Randle? And like with no salary in this finger typing alternative universe? What make believe scenario can we really just say "Oh, I'd move him to the bench because I have Karl Phuching Malone's secret love child and he said he'd play for free? Oh wait, Christian Wood is having a moment, lets pay him instead and we'll be better? Really?
KP is the better player. KP is playing wit 21 year old Larry Bird. Dallas is a better team then knicks. KP looks better for many reasons and Nalod is the first to say he would not have traded KP. But Nalod is not looking at KP walking away as UFA this season, or playing his leverage and I come out with a worse deal than what we got. I'd like to think we can do better, and kick Mills one more time and lay blame on him.
So I have this bad situation where I HAVE to trade my unicorn, Walk away with 2 first rounders, Dennis Smith who at the moment was a prospect, Get rid of Timmy (debatable but nobody was crying when he left), CLee and we we get a guy that is beasting to 20 and 10 but our biggest compalint is he turns over the ball 3x a game on average vs. 1.6 (this season). Precious.
SupremeCommander wrote:this makes no sense IMO. Next year, if the team still sucks big donkey dong, you play him as close to 40mpg as possible and you trade him. If the team is gonna be any good, well, I would imagine Randle would have to be a part of it. I get that Randle has massive holes to his game but I mean I'd rather have him at 18 mil a year than THJ
the bold. Here's how this works. Who is starting over him and why? If there is a guy who benefits from better PG play its Randle
makes no sense
in football they say you can't demote your starting QB to a back-up; words of wisdom based on the psychology and drama to follow. Right now Randle is our top guy 
can't push him to the bench -- just like you couldn't push Melo
If we can't find a better way to use him we should get rid of him.
personally i'd like to see him go. nothing personal. but our experience has been consistent with the reports on him that preceded our signing him; he's got a low BB IQ
Don't love the spacing between Mitch, Randle, RJ. All 3 of them want to attack the rim and aren't strong shooters. Not to mention the PG that plays with them. The spacing would be pretty poor for him. Basically putting a cap on what they all excell at.
Randle would be really strong surrounded by that Bucks cast. Lopez & Middleton providing defensive length and spacing, with Bledsoe to set him up yada yada yada. But Mitch has the higher ceiling than Randle and will eventually be our starting center getting 30 or more mins a night. Surrounding Mitch with 3 & D wings and forawrds will give him ample spacing to be the force he has the potential to be. While making the team elite defensively. RJ will be groomed as the closer unless the future G shows to be superior.
