Knicks · Still not sold on Julius Randle as our workhorse long-term... (page 1)
He still doesn't really have a great outside shot and you really need that in today's game (especially on the Knicks with such limited outside shooting).
While he has improved - he doesn't seem to have that clutch ability - last season I remember all the spinovers and missed free throws in the tight games...
His defense was atrocious last season and is now just adequate to decent
While the team success is not his fault (as others have struggled - especially RJ) - I think the recent losses have shown us our style of play isn't fast enough and doesn't possess enough shooting to keep up with the firepower of many of the better teams.
Easier to move him for a shooting forward than it is to surround him with multiple shooters when we need to prioritize Mitch and RJ
Is he the guy we want to resign and use up a good chunk of our cap space for long-term?
If Toppin is our future 4 and we want to keep Mitch - why wait until Randle can't sustain these numbers?
Those are my thoughts/reasons - appreciate the feedback!
Allanfan20 wrote:His ugly shooting is becoming just as glaring as RJs but we talk about RJ because JR got off to the hotter start so he has been given a pass.
Randle, like Barrett, isn't a good outside shooter. But with teams playing zone against them they won't shoot well anyways. That's the whole point of a zone. RJ and Randle may get open shoots on the weak side, but they aren't rhythm shots. Nothing will change until Burks is back and Payton is removed as starting PG. Obviously both are independent of one another. In the short-term Rivers and Burks should be the starting backcourt once Burks is back, but I doubt it happens.
jskinny35 wrote:So I have to give him credit that he's been our brightest spot so far and has improved his overall play and effort. That said, I think we should sell high on him for a few reasons.He still doesn't really have a great outside shot and you really need that in today's game (especially on the Knicks with such limited outside shooting).
While he has improved - he doesn't seem to have that clutch ability - last season I remember all the spinovers and missed free throws in the tight games...
His defense was atrocious last season and is now just adequate to decent
While the team success is not his fault (as others have struggled - especially RJ) - I think the recent losses have shown us our style of play isn't fast enough and doesn't possess enough shooting to keep up with the firepower of many of the better teams.
Easier to move him for a shooting forward than it is to surround him with multiple shooters when we need to prioritize Mitch and RJ
Is he the guy we want to resign and use up a good chunk of our cap space for long-term?
If Toppin is our future 4 and we want to keep Mitch - why wait until Randle can't sustain these numbers?
Those are my thoughts/reasons - appreciate the feedback!
So you ok with giving Mitch a boat load of money with being nothing more than a shot blocker and dunker that has never taken an outside shot
The knicks can't get anyone to take their cap $$, and Randle may not want to even resign with the knicks, so let's not act like this franchise is the sht with a 100 players line up to sign up
Allanfan20 wrote:His ugly shooting is becoming just as glaring as RJs but we talk about RJ because JR got off to the hotter start so he has been given a pass.
I think that’s a little unfair in Randle’s case. Yes he takes a few bad shots, like many others, but in general he is moving the ball around and looking to keep everyone moving on offense in search of a better shot. But lately nobody wants to shoot. He has taken a few bad shots as a result of many others passing up shots.
This is why this Randle situation is really intriguing: his start is legit and special, but his numbers will start to look worse as a result of the rest of the team playing like crap and him having to push himself to do more.
knicks1248 wrote:jskinny35 wrote:So I have to give him credit that he's been our brightest spot so far and has improved his overall play and effort. That said, I think we should sell high on him for a few reasons.He still doesn't really have a great outside shot and you really need that in today's game (especially on the Knicks with such limited outside shooting).
While he has improved - he doesn't seem to have that clutch ability - last season I remember all the spinovers and missed free throws in the tight games...
His defense was atrocious last season and is now just adequate to decent
While the team success is not his fault (as others have struggled - especially RJ) - I think the recent losses have shown us our style of play isn't fast enough and doesn't possess enough shooting to keep up with the firepower of many of the better teams.
Easier to move him for a shooting forward than it is to surround him with multiple shooters when we need to prioritize Mitch and RJ
Is he the guy we want to resign and use up a good chunk of our cap space for long-term?
If Toppin is our future 4 and we want to keep Mitch - why wait until Randle can't sustain these numbers?
Those are my thoughts/reasons - appreciate the feedback!So you ok with giving Mitch a boat load of money with being nothing more than a shot blocker and dunker that has never taken an outside shot
The knicks can't get anyone to take their cap $$, and Randle may not want to even resign with the knicks, so let's not act like this franchise is the sht with a 100 players line up to sign up
While I'm somewhat disappointed Mitch still hasn't even tried to take an outside shot (to become an offensive threat) - I'd still pay him more because it's easier to get away with a shot blocking/dunking 5 man than it is vs a limited shooting 4 who commands a lot more cap space and offensive touches. There's no argument that we have a lot of needs - just can't envision Randle being our "main guy" and leading us to anything significant. While RJ is struggling and can't hit the side of a barn currently - he is younger, seems to possess a strong work ethic and doesn't seem to get rattled as easily. The fact is Randle necessitates Mitch to play to cover for his weaknesses. And yes Mitch doesn't score enough but it's easier to start with defense when you can't field a team of two-way players.
Sambakick wrote:What are you getting back for him? He's underpaid for his production.
I agree his production is terrific and he is underpaid at the moment. Just wondering if we would be a better balanced team if we moved him for another player/players. I'm not a Harden fan at all but what about some kind of deal involving Zach Lavine and Lauri? Lavine would give us another scoring wing that can shoot outside (move RJ to 3) and Lauri would actually be that stretch 4 we've talked about trying to sign? A frontcourt of Lauri, Obi, Mitch, Taj does open up the court for RJ and Lavine. Teams wouldn't be as able to play a zone against us - that should say something right there. If we can retain Burks and Bullock we suddenly have shooting at almost every position. Yes we still need a point guard but Lavine and RJ can probably help offset some of the ball handling duties for the time being.
Periodically read that Lavine may be moveable and Lauri had a falling out last season as he recovered from his injury. Not ideal - but less lane clogging and more spacing may bring out the best in RJ and some of the others.
Didn't check trade checker but something like Randle, Knox, DSJr and Dallas 1st for Lavine, Lauri and filler?
We were playing on a back to back and don’t have a single player that can really shot the ball right now.
It’s hard to operate without any space especially when the coach is driving two guys into the ground. We are down 15 other night with 4 minutes to go and he’s got the starting unit out there.
Guys need to hit shots in order for him to be successful.
jskinny35 wrote:It's not about him struggling a bit lately - the whole team has. You can see that he's good enough to beat some teams when RJ and Burks are hitting from outside - he then has the spacing. I'm saying that's always an uphill battle and it's not Randle's fault - I think he's an overachiever so far this year. The offense seems setup for him to go 1 on 5 and kick out to these below average outside shooters we have - when we're hitting we win and when we're struggling we don't. I think Thibs set it up this way because Randle is our most productive player, but I think it comes somewhat at a cost to RJ as he's not a spot up shooter. He needs to improve his outside shooting regardless but Randle can't shoot well enough from outside when RJ has the ball. So it's Randle vs RJ and they both have flaws. I'm going with the 20 year old with solid work ethic. I truly believe RJ as the focal point with better outside shooters will improve the flow compared to Randle's plodding style. So I don't see Randle as a resign guy and he does have value as he's improved - can we flip him for 1-2 players that shoot from outside better? The league is dominated mostly by wings handling the ball - not undersized fours that can't shoot outside very well. 10 years ago Randle would be the guy - but don't think his style of play is easy to build around and successful against better teams that can pack the paint.
It's like you have pitted Randle against RJ and one needs to go; that starting point seems weird to me. Both have flaws and only one of them is producing right now.
Randle is plodding? Dude's defense is very suspect but I wouldn't call him plodding. No more than RJ for what it's worth
What has RJ done to make him any more qualified than Randle to build around outside of his age?
Randle's biggest flaw is that his outside shooting is not good. OTHER THAN THAT HE IS PUTTING UP HISTORIC PRODUCTION. Without proper shooting around HIM.
I think there will be some long term deliberation if Randle/Obbi can co-exist IF both players turn out to be high level and what can be done in a trade scenario.
There is something to be said about if you think Randle is peaking and trading him now would be a good thing but get ready for the team to have ZERO focal point, it'll be like Fiz took over from a production standpoint.
jskinny35 wrote:So I have to give him credit that he's been our brightest spot so far and has improved his overall play and effort. That said, I think we should sell high on him for a few reasons.He still doesn't really have a great outside shot and you really need that in today's game (especially on the Knicks with such limited outside shooting).
While he has improved - he doesn't seem to have that clutch ability - last season I remember all the spinovers and missed free throws in the tight games...
His defense was atrocious last season and is now just adequate to decent
While the team success is not his fault (as others have struggled - especially RJ) - I think the recent losses have shown us our style of play isn't fast enough and doesn't possess enough shooting to keep up with the firepower of many of the better teams.
Easier to move him for a shooting forward than it is to surround him with multiple shooters when we need to prioritize Mitch and RJ
Is he the guy we want to resign and use up a good chunk of our cap space for long-term?
If Toppin is our future 4 and we want to keep Mitch - why wait until Randle can't sustain these numbers?
Those are my thoughts/reasons - appreciate the feedback!
Disagree with most. Except for the fact he has been our best player and most improved. Which is hard to say of someone who almost averaged a double double last year. This to me is typical NY fan mentality. Trash and over analyze guys that we have and are doing well for the "Dream" of picking up some long shot unknown possibility in the hope they will be this magical character. For me, building a chip team is about keeping GOOD PRO players and adding a star to that. Randle is a good pro player. He is also one of the variables "other good teams have". Which is someone that draws attention and is hard to contend with. Which allows good shooters to get open looks. THE PROBLEM, as you mentioned, is that we do not have ANYONE who can hit an outside shot. (Most noticeably RJ) So do not understand why not conclude that what we need is guys that can hit those shots as oppose to trading the guy that is getting it done. And for the most part while being double teamed. But okay, who would you trade him for? That is ACTUALY available and remotely a real possibility?
As for building around MR and RJ. Think that is still to be concluded. So far MR has not taken a shot outside of a dunk this year. Which goes against you claim that we need more "Firepower" in todays NBA. RJ has also yet to show he can consistently provide that outside "firepower" to excel in today's NBA. Despite the fact that Thibs has showin all the confidence in the world in him by giving him almost 40 min. per game. I hope they both continue to improve but just don't see much logic behind trading a guy that is producing like Ranlde is and is only 26 and not address real issues first.
Allanfan20 wrote:His ugly shooting is becoming just as glaring as RJs but we talk about RJ because JR got off to the hotter start so he has been given a pass.
Randles'? Agree if your talking about his 3pt numbers. Which I think he should cut down on. (Should average bout 2 a game) Despite that he is shooting over 40% in every game but three. He shot 22% Monday but only on 9 shots. Which should be more of a question. How is our best player only taking 9 shots in a game? Compared to RJ's 18 and Knox with 17? Think our wings 3pt. shooting has been the problem during the losing streak. (RJ, Payton, Quicks) Things will turn around when Burks comes back and if Rivers, Bullock and Quicks get it going.
jskinny35 wrote:Martin - yes, I do feel that way. They both have a similar style which I don't think works well enough (unless they both learn to shoot better from outside). Randle is clearly producing better now - just don't think his ceiling is much higher and on this roster - Randle will not be able to sustain. One way of trying to fix is to trade others to build around Randle - but I really think that is short sighted because of Randle's development, age and style of play in the paint. RJ clearly needs to improve his shooting, free throws, etc - but he is much younger, seems to possess more poise and focus on improving. While Randle has certainly improved, I think RJ's a safer bet between the two. When I first wrote the post - I didn't have replacement players in mind but when I threw out the Lavine and Lauri hypothetical - it does really make sense (to me at least :) Lavine is another shooting wing and is producing at a similar load/level to Randle and he plays more outside - which would complement/open up space for RJ's driving/slashing game. If we could snag Lauri as well it would give another shooting option which would only help. Basically I'm saying if you can fix the problem by trading one player that may have peaked - it's better/easier than trying to replace 3 other positions to accomodate Randle and offset his flaws. I don't suggest to dump him and agree that production would drop to Fiz-like standards if we didn't receive similar production back in a deal. Randle goes 1 on 5 and then tries to kick out to an outside shooter. As a 4 man driving this offense you either sacrifice shooting or rebounding as a result. If you replace the same offense style/sets with a 2 or 3 man driving it the same way - you don't have to sacrifice as much rebounding and possibly shooting. It's what we have so you use what you have - but outside of phenomenal 4 men like Giannis and Lebron I don't see many successful examples of this working effectively and consistently against quality teams. Milw has enough outside shooting so they can't pack the paint - Lebron also have great shooting and AD.
I am laughing at that statement.
How are you judging RJ's possession of poise and focus on improving versus, say, anyone else's?
Randle was kaka last year. This year he is beasting and is poised. I would say 1 of RJ/Randle used his poise and focus on improving and one did not since last season?
Right now you don't have to draw a line in the sand and say the Knicks have to build around either guy; neither is a #1 guy and Randle seems like a competent #3 guy and if he improves more maybe a shallow #2 on a playoff team. RJ to date seems like a guy who can't shoot.
Knicks have a long way to go and neither Randle/RJ are problems that necessitate trading at this point unless the right deal comes along.
What is funny in a way is he is doing in part (Easy now JROD) what we wanted Melo to do which is penetrate but pass it out.
Now, to be fair what is now #14 alltime scorer is not logically of the mindset to pass it out when your a max elite player yourself.
Granted, he did verbally tell us he would “sacrifice his game”. Since Melo is not really a dick and very likable he gets all kinds of passes with knick fans. No I don’t blame him for our troubles.........
This is about Randle who improved his passing and is playing at an allstar level.
Randle is a beast and while I’d like to dream of a starphuch concept the fact is we should extend him and keep building with RJ, Mitch and Quick. We have a slew of picks to also build on.
A trade opportunity will arise and while he might not be our savior he can be used. Just hypothetically speaking, Randle is not close to Giannis but MIlwaukee won’t get full value back. They get a high volume scorer and what ever we back the truck up to bring.
Am I advocating for that? Not yet. We are not close to making a big trade for a star and have left over talent to contend.
jskinny35 wrote:My argument back is not really against Randle - we're playing 1 on 5 offensively the way the Bucks do with Giannis (Lakers to lesser extent with Lebron) - but we don't have the shooters for this to be effective. And despite the progress - Randle is not as good as those others... The games we won early on our guys were hitting a high % (remember RJ had that one lights out game), but we've come back down to earth and it's less about Randle and more about the style and fit. If we decide to extend Randle we may as well trade RJ and probably Toppin as well. RJ and Randle seem to take turns which creates stagnancy. Rubio would make a big difference but we don't have anything like that in a PG. Regardless we need PG help so much that I think it's Frank's turn (and likely last stand) as the others have shown enough. I do think IQ may become something worthwhile - but he's a perfect reserve guard at this point.
For me this boils down to: we have one good player and lots of not good players so let’s trade the good player.
We are playing 1 on 5 cause 4 suck on offense. That’s it, there’s nothing more to take away from it