Knicks · Knicks must solve OBI-RANDLE situation (page 3)
HofstraBBall wrote:jskinny35 wrote:fishmike wrote:CashMoney wrote:Obi played 17 minutes per game last year up from 11 minutes per game in his rookie season. He positively developed from year 1 to year 2 so why can't he continue to improve his game while coming off the bench next season?because emo Knick fans dont like grumpy pants Randle so he's gotta go so we need to manufacture a narrative to make that make sense. Everything is perfect. It will be really hard for Obi to get more minutes and it is what it is. If he's playing hot he hopefully get longer runs or play some small ball 4/5 with Randle but we have 3 centers and Thibs like's playing one of them.Teams need the talent to win and obviously, Tobi has talent. I don't see anything wrong with him getting increased minutes next season and continuing to improve his game which will improve the team's play.
Obi is the only true PF on the team besides Randle so how is having a developing young PF playing behind Randle a bad thing?
Obi's got 2 more years under his rookie deal for us to see just how good he's gonna be.
Randle manufactured his own narrative by being a douche last season. Most fans will forgive the tantrums and the reduced poor shooting/performance - but not both at the same time. Be a headcase - but be so good that all is forgiven. Last season Randle was a a pain in the ass, behaved entitled and worst - did not hustle and support his teammates positively. So I wouldn't call that perfect and since we have a young PF that in limited minutes has shown decent production - he has earned more minutes which will not come at the expense of creating another problem (playing Randle and Toppin together as opposing forwards lick their chops). Even if Randle matched his prior stellar year - he's too iso-dominant and not good enough efficiency-wise to keep going with him and expect better results. Yes Brunson will help but will Randle in his 7th/8th year adjust and take a back seat and defer? To me, that is the only way I see a future with Randle starting that could work and I honestly don't think his pride/ego will allow him to do that. And I hope I'm wrong because I do think it's more likely he is the starting PF on opening day.
Why is it that Knick fans think that it would be good for Randle to "take a back seat"
How do you know that this approach will actually help the Knicks?
Who should he take a back seat to?
Don't fans really mean "give my hopeful" a chance? Then why not just say that?
Randle has produced EVERY YEAR??!
Why not, as a TRUE Knick fan just hope he shoots as well as he did his All Star year?
Seems like a better path then hoping we move on from him without a solid replacement or to give some hopeful, that has proven nothing, his spot now?
Define produced. You carry an old school mentality to players much like Thibs which is not to say that you must be wrong, but it seems to ignore the deeper metrics that I am staring at. I think we are both watching the same games and I do think Randle has value, but I think his value is primarily defensive. I admit that I hate midrange shots generally for their lack of eFG and specifically fadeaway type shots (and floaters) that have low probability of drawing a foul. When you look at Randle and see that 44% of his shots are midrange 2pt jumpers that he hits at about a 35-36% clip, I cannot get the ball out of his hands fast enough. Its a formula for losing basketball. Like him? Marry him, but him a beer, but don't let him take bad shots. Someone needs to educate him on how ineffective and inefficient his shot selection is. If he had Khris Middleton's shot chart, I'd have to re-consider giving him a pass, but he doesn't.
His 3pt percentage was even worse this year. He took 31% of his shots from 3 last year and his 30% of those 3s. 
Thing is, people think that 20/21's 41% from 3 is his real skill but if you look at him historically, that 41% is the outlier. If you have to throw out the high and the low season, his 22% from 3 season goes and his 41% from 3 season is gone. That leaves him with a career high of 34% from 3 and most seasons are sub-30. Will the real Randle please stand up? Unfortunately, 21-22 Randle is pretty accurate, except that he did worse in the paint that his career averages.
So, am I saying give my "hopeful" a chance? Sure. I'll use your words. Toppin = Hopeful = Give him a chance! Why? He takes nearly no midrange shots. He's behind the 3pt line shooting pretty poorly (needs work!!!) or at the basket dunking. I like this. It makes a pretty shot chart. And puts his eFG of 58%. Toward the end of the season with real minutes, he looked like he was getting comfortable. I can't promise that holds or that other teams don't adjust to him. Here, I am saying, give him a chance. His usage is 20% compared to Randle's 28%. Meaning, he adds value without necessarily having the ball in his hands. He sets up in the corner and tends to make baseline runs in the half court set and the kid loves to run on the fast break. If any player has the potential to benefit from Brunson showing up, its Toppin.
Grimes is a close second. Randle and Barrett will lose touches to Brunson. Both are relegated to the low eFG defense players that they look like, unless they can evolve what we saw last year.
Brunson/Grimes/Barrett/Toppin/Hart spreads a lot of floor and has a lot of eFG (except for Barrett, but I want to give the kid a chance to play with the amount of space this lineup creates vs letting Fournier poke holes in the defense.
So, what's the defense of Randle look like? 20/10 very inefficiently with Robinson boxing out so he can get the rebound?
EwingsGlass wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:jskinny35 wrote:fishmike wrote:CashMoney wrote:Obi played 17 minutes per game last year up from 11 minutes per game in his rookie season. He positively developed from year 1 to year 2 so why can't he continue to improve his game while coming off the bench next season?because emo Knick fans dont like grumpy pants Randle so he's gotta go so we need to manufacture a narrative to make that make sense. Everything is perfect. It will be really hard for Obi to get more minutes and it is what it is. If he's playing hot he hopefully get longer runs or play some small ball 4/5 with Randle but we have 3 centers and Thibs like's playing one of them.Teams need the talent to win and obviously, Tobi has talent. I don't see anything wrong with him getting increased minutes next season and continuing to improve his game which will improve the team's play.
Obi is the only true PF on the team besides Randle so how is having a developing young PF playing behind Randle a bad thing?
Obi's got 2 more years under his rookie deal for us to see just how good he's gonna be.
Randle manufactured his own narrative by being a douche last season. Most fans will forgive the tantrums and the reduced poor shooting/performance - but not both at the same time. Be a headcase - but be so good that all is forgiven. Last season Randle was a a pain in the ass, behaved entitled and worst - did not hustle and support his teammates positively. So I wouldn't call that perfect and since we have a young PF that in limited minutes has shown decent production - he has earned more minutes which will not come at the expense of creating another problem (playing Randle and Toppin together as opposing forwards lick their chops). Even if Randle matched his prior stellar year - he's too iso-dominant and not good enough efficiency-wise to keep going with him and expect better results. Yes Brunson will help but will Randle in his 7th/8th year adjust and take a back seat and defer? To me, that is the only way I see a future with Randle starting that could work and I honestly don't think his pride/ego will allow him to do that. And I hope I'm wrong because I do think it's more likely he is the starting PF on opening day.
Why is it that Knick fans think that it would be good for Randle to "take a back seat"
How do you know that this approach will actually help the Knicks?
Who should he take a back seat to?
Don't fans really mean "give my hopeful" a chance? Then why not just say that?
Randle has produced EVERY YEAR??!
Why not, as a TRUE Knick fan just hope he shoots as well as he did his All Star year?
Seems like a better path then hoping we move on from him without a solid replacement or to give some hopeful, that has proven nothing, his spot now?Define produced. You carry an old school mentality to players much like Thibs which is not to say that you must be wrong, but it seems to ignore the deeper metrics that I am staring at. I think we are both watching the same games and I do think Randle has value, but I think his value is primarily defensive. I admit that I hate midrange shots generally for their lack of eFG and specifically fadeaway type shots (and floaters) that have low probability of drawing a foul. When you look at Randle and see that 44% of his shots are midrange 2pt jumpers that he hits at about a 35-36% clip, I cannot get the ball out of his hands fast enough. Its a formula for losing basketball. Like him? Marry him, but him a beer, but don't let him take bad shots. Someone needs to educate him on how ineffective and inefficient his shot selection is. If he had Khris Middleton's shot chart, I'd have to re-consider giving him a pass, but he doesn't.
His 3pt percentage was even worse this year. He took 31% of his shots from 3 last year and his 30% of those 3s.
So, am I saying give my "hopeful" a chance? Sure. I'll use your words. Toppin = Hopeful = Give him a chance! Why? He takes nearly no midrange shots. He's behind the 3pt line shooting pretty poorly (needs work!!!) or at the basket dunking. I like this. It makes a pretty shot chart. And puts his eFG of 58%. Toward the end of the season with real minutes, he looked like he was getting comfortable. I can't promise that holds or that other teams don't adjust to him. Here, I am saying, give him a chance. His usage is 20% compared to Randle's 28%. Meaning, he adds value without necessarily having the ball in his hands. He sets up in the corner and tends to make baseline runs in the half court set and the kid loves to run on the fast break. If any player has the potential to benefit from Brunson showing up, its Toppin.
Grimes is a close second. Randle and Barrett will lose touches to Brunson. Both are relegated to the low eFG defense players that they look like, unless they can evolve what we saw last year.
Brunson/Grimes/Barrett/Toppin/Hart spreads a lot of floor and has a lot of eFG (except for Barrett, but I want to give the kid a chance to play with the amount of space this lineup creates vs letting Fournier poke holes in the defense.
So, what's the defense of Randle look like? 20/10 very inefficiently with Robinson boxing out so he can get the rebound?
Think the things you do not like about Randle are the same that I do not as well.
You are asking me to define Randle's production yet you think I should accept we should go with Toppin, who lacks any large sample size of ANY type of production? Or just "because you want him to have a chance", "takes no mid range shots", "shoots pretty poor from 3pt" range? And is a player "you can't promise that can play like he did in those few games at the end of the season"? Agree with the importance of how well someone will do when teams make adjustments. Feel other variables should be used to judge Randle's numbers as well. Randle has been our go to guy for the last three years. He has been who opposing teams focus on. Opposing teams have made constant adjustments for him. He draws constant double teams? Despite that, Randle still puts up double doubles.
So many are quick to put down Randle's stats with their own "advanced metrics" yet do not use simple metrics for other hopefuls or ignore variable such as the ones mentioned above to factor in their disapproval. I can respect that you said you want to see Toppin given a chance but just leave it at that instead of finding reasons to ignore Randle's well-known production and Obi's obvious shortcomings. Which also include defensive ability. I do not like Randle's usage. Do not like when he brings the ball up the floor. Think he can elevate his game so much by adding more assists to his game. HOWEVER, the guy is a beast and has been a consistent producer for years. And yes, 20/10 is solid no matter how you slice it. Unless you can point to the many others that are doing it on an annual click. Ones that are available and have all the other traits you claim Randle is lacking. Fans often put down their own and bring up so many things that player can't do. Ignoring that there have been few players in NBA history that have possessed all of the attributes they claim that player should have.
I am a Knick fan. And while I do not think Randle should be our number one or even our number 2. He is our best player right now. Obi is just a prospect who has only proven he can dunk and still can't shoot. No way do I want to see a Knick team without Randle and Obi as our starting PF.
Was also against the Frank and Knox dream and wanted Obi as our pick. If he surprises me that would be great. But like Knox and Frank. I am not blind. Think we are past the keep our fingers crossed for yoots. Think we should look to add solid perennial producers. And yes, Randle is one.
HofstraBBall wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:jskinny35 wrote:fishmike wrote:CashMoney wrote:Obi played 17 minutes per game last year up from 11 minutes per game in his rookie season. He positively developed from year 1 to year 2 so why can't he continue to improve his game while coming off the bench next season?because emo Knick fans dont like grumpy pants Randle so he's gotta go so we need to manufacture a narrative to make that make sense. Everything is perfect. It will be really hard for Obi to get more minutes and it is what it is. If he's playing hot he hopefully get longer runs or play some small ball 4/5 with Randle but we have 3 centers and Thibs like's playing one of them.Teams need the talent to win and obviously, Tobi has talent. I don't see anything wrong with him getting increased minutes next season and continuing to improve his game which will improve the team's play.
Obi is the only true PF on the team besides Randle so how is having a developing young PF playing behind Randle a bad thing?
Obi's got 2 more years under his rookie deal for us to see just how good he's gonna be.
Randle manufactured his own narrative by being a douche last season. Most fans will forgive the tantrums and the reduced poor shooting/performance - but not both at the same time. Be a headcase - but be so good that all is forgiven. Last season Randle was a a pain in the ass, behaved entitled and worst - did not hustle and support his teammates positively. So I wouldn't call that perfect and since we have a young PF that in limited minutes has shown decent production - he has earned more minutes which will not come at the expense of creating another problem (playing Randle and Toppin together as opposing forwards lick their chops). Even if Randle matched his prior stellar year - he's too iso-dominant and not good enough efficiency-wise to keep going with him and expect better results. Yes Brunson will help but will Randle in his 7th/8th year adjust and take a back seat and defer? To me, that is the only way I see a future with Randle starting that could work and I honestly don't think his pride/ego will allow him to do that. And I hope I'm wrong because I do think it's more likely he is the starting PF on opening day.
Why is it that Knick fans think that it would be good for Randle to "take a back seat"
How do you know that this approach will actually help the Knicks?
Who should he take a back seat to?
Don't fans really mean "give my hopeful" a chance? Then why not just say that?
Randle has produced EVERY YEAR??!
Why not, as a TRUE Knick fan just hope he shoots as well as he did his All Star year?
Seems like a better path then hoping we move on from him without a solid replacement or to give some hopeful, that has proven nothing, his spot now?Define produced. You carry an old school mentality to players much like Thibs which is not to say that you must be wrong, but it seems to ignore the deeper metrics that I am staring at. I think we are both watching the same games and I do think Randle has value, but I think his value is primarily defensive. I admit that I hate midrange shots generally for their lack of eFG and specifically fadeaway type shots (and floaters) that have low probability of drawing a foul. When you look at Randle and see that 44% of his shots are midrange 2pt jumpers that he hits at about a 35-36% clip, I cannot get the ball out of his hands fast enough. Its a formula for losing basketball. Like him? Marry him, but him a beer, but don't let him take bad shots. Someone needs to educate him on how ineffective and inefficient his shot selection is. If he had Khris Middleton's shot chart, I'd have to re-consider giving him a pass, but he doesn't.
His 3pt percentage was even worse this year. He took 31% of his shots from 3 last year and his 30% of those 3s.
So, am I saying give my "hopeful" a chance? Sure. I'll use your words. Toppin = Hopeful = Give him a chance! Why? He takes nearly no midrange shots. He's behind the 3pt line shooting pretty poorly (needs work!!!) or at the basket dunking. I like this. It makes a pretty shot chart. And puts his eFG of 58%. Toward the end of the season with real minutes, he looked like he was getting comfortable. I can't promise that holds or that other teams don't adjust to him. Here, I am saying, give him a chance. His usage is 20% compared to Randle's 28%. Meaning, he adds value without necessarily having the ball in his hands. He sets up in the corner and tends to make baseline runs in the half court set and the kid loves to run on the fast break. If any player has the potential to benefit from Brunson showing up, its Toppin.
Grimes is a close second. Randle and Barrett will lose touches to Brunson. Both are relegated to the low eFG defense players that they look like, unless they can evolve what we saw last year.
Brunson/Grimes/Barrett/Toppin/Hart spreads a lot of floor and has a lot of eFG (except for Barrett, but I want to give the kid a chance to play with the amount of space this lineup creates vs letting Fournier poke holes in the defense.
So, what's the defense of Randle look like? 20/10 very inefficiently with Robinson boxing out so he can get the rebound?
Think the things you do not like about Randle are the same that I do not as well.
You are asking me to define Randle's production yet you think I should accept we should go with Toppin, who lacks any large sample size of ANY type of production? Or just "because you want him to have a chance", "takes no mid range shots", "shoots pretty poor from 3pt" range? And is a player "you can't promise that can play like he did in those few games at the end of the season"? Agree with the importance of how well someone will do when teams make adjustments. Feel other variables should be used to judge Randle's numbers as well. Randle has been our go to guy for the last three years. He has been who opposing teams focus on. Opposing teams have made constant adjustments for him. He draws constant double teams? Despite that, Randle still puts up double doubles.
So many are quick to put down Randle's stats with their own "advanced metrics" yet do not use simple metrics for other hopefuls or ignore variable such as the ones mentioned above to factor in their disapproval. I can respect that you said you want to see Toppin given a chance but just leave it at that instead of finding reasons to ignore Randle's well-known production and Obi's obvious shortcomings. Which also include defensive ability. I do not like Randle's usage. Do not like when he brings the ball up the floor. Think he can elevate his game so much by adding more assists to his game. HOWEVER, the guy is a beast and has been a consistent producer for years. And yes, 20/10 is solid no matter how you slice it. Unless you can point to the many others that are doing it on an annual click. Ones that are available and have all the other traits you claim Randle is lacking. Fans often put down their own and bring up so many things that player can't do. Ignoring that there have been few players in NBA history that have possessed all of the attributes they claim that player should have.I am a Knick fan. And while I do not think Randle should be our number one or even our number 2. He is our best player right now. Obi is just a prospect who has only proven he can dunk and still can't shoot. No way do I want to see a Knick team without Randle and Obi as our starting PF.
Was also against the Frank and Knox dream and wanted Obi as our pick. If he surprises me that would be great. But like Knox and Frank. I am not blind. Think we are past the keep our fingers crossed for yoots. Think we should look to add solid perennial producers. And yes, Randle is one.
The double-double argument has no weight with me. Pretty much any player in Randle's place that got upward of 15 shot attempts per game can score 20pts per game. Rebounds I won't discount entirely but continue to point to Mitchell Robinson's box outs as a source of Randle's rebounds. Randle is an inefficient 20 point scorer.
https://www.nba.com/stats/players/advanc...
In the attached link, you can see that out of players taking 15 shots per game, Randle is essentially the worst scorer in the league. He scores less points per shot taken than any other player that gets so many shots. Worse than Westbrick.
So, am I willing to start a young player that has been stuck behind Randle over Randle even though he doesn't have experience (because he was stuck behind Randle)? Yes. That's the only way to get him experience. It would be hard for Toppin to do worse than Randle but the key is that Toppin doesn't need to take those shots Randle was taking, its just that Randle shouldn't take those shots. That said, I think Toppin is better suited to accepting passes from Brunson and getting out of the way and hiding in the corner when he doesn't have the ball. I think he will mesh better with Brunson.
EwingsGlass wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:jskinny35 wrote:fishmike wrote:CashMoney wrote:Obi played 17 minutes per game last year up from 11 minutes per game in his rookie season. He positively developed from year 1 to year 2 so why can't he continue to improve his game while coming off the bench next season?because emo Knick fans dont like grumpy pants Randle so he's gotta go so we need to manufacture a narrative to make that make sense. Everything is perfect. It will be really hard for Obi to get more minutes and it is what it is. If he's playing hot he hopefully get longer runs or play some small ball 4/5 with Randle but we have 3 centers and Thibs like's playing one of them.Teams need the talent to win and obviously, Tobi has talent. I don't see anything wrong with him getting increased minutes next season and continuing to improve his game which will improve the team's play.
Obi is the only true PF on the team besides Randle so how is having a developing young PF playing behind Randle a bad thing?
Obi's got 2 more years under his rookie deal for us to see just how good he's gonna be.
Randle manufactured his own narrative by being a douche last season. Most fans will forgive the tantrums and the reduced poor shooting/performance - but not both at the same time. Be a headcase - but be so good that all is forgiven. Last season Randle was a a pain in the ass, behaved entitled and worst - did not hustle and support his teammates positively. So I wouldn't call that perfect and since we have a young PF that in limited minutes has shown decent production - he has earned more minutes which will not come at the expense of creating another problem (playing Randle and Toppin together as opposing forwards lick their chops). Even if Randle matched his prior stellar year - he's too iso-dominant and not good enough efficiency-wise to keep going with him and expect better results. Yes Brunson will help but will Randle in his 7th/8th year adjust and take a back seat and defer? To me, that is the only way I see a future with Randle starting that could work and I honestly don't think his pride/ego will allow him to do that. And I hope I'm wrong because I do think it's more likely he is the starting PF on opening day.
Why is it that Knick fans think that it would be good for Randle to "take a back seat"
How do you know that this approach will actually help the Knicks?
Who should he take a back seat to?
Don't fans really mean "give my hopeful" a chance? Then why not just say that?
Randle has produced EVERY YEAR??!
Why not, as a TRUE Knick fan just hope he shoots as well as he did his All Star year?
Seems like a better path then hoping we move on from him without a solid replacement or to give some hopeful, that has proven nothing, his spot now?Define produced. You carry an old school mentality to players much like Thibs which is not to say that you must be wrong, but it seems to ignore the deeper metrics that I am staring at. I think we are both watching the same games and I do think Randle has value, but I think his value is primarily defensive. I admit that I hate midrange shots generally for their lack of eFG and specifically fadeaway type shots (and floaters) that have low probability of drawing a foul. When you look at Randle and see that 44% of his shots are midrange 2pt jumpers that he hits at about a 35-36% clip, I cannot get the ball out of his hands fast enough. Its a formula for losing basketball. Like him? Marry him, but him a beer, but don't let him take bad shots. Someone needs to educate him on how ineffective and inefficient his shot selection is. If he had Khris Middleton's shot chart, I'd have to re-consider giving him a pass, but he doesn't.
His 3pt percentage was even worse this year. He took 31% of his shots from 3 last year and his 30% of those 3s.
So, am I saying give my "hopeful" a chance? Sure. I'll use your words. Toppin = Hopeful = Give him a chance! Why? He takes nearly no midrange shots. He's behind the 3pt line shooting pretty poorly (needs work!!!) or at the basket dunking. I like this. It makes a pretty shot chart. And puts his eFG of 58%. Toward the end of the season with real minutes, he looked like he was getting comfortable. I can't promise that holds or that other teams don't adjust to him. Here, I am saying, give him a chance. His usage is 20% compared to Randle's 28%. Meaning, he adds value without necessarily having the ball in his hands. He sets up in the corner and tends to make baseline runs in the half court set and the kid loves to run on the fast break. If any player has the potential to benefit from Brunson showing up, its Toppin.
Grimes is a close second. Randle and Barrett will lose touches to Brunson. Both are relegated to the low eFG defense players that they look like, unless they can evolve what we saw last year.
Brunson/Grimes/Barrett/Toppin/Hart spreads a lot of floor and has a lot of eFG (except for Barrett, but I want to give the kid a chance to play with the amount of space this lineup creates vs letting Fournier poke holes in the defense.
So, what's the defense of Randle look like? 20/10 very inefficiently with Robinson boxing out so he can get the rebound?
Think the things you do not like about Randle are the same that I do not as well.
You are asking me to define Randle's production yet you think I should accept we should go with Toppin, who lacks any large sample size of ANY type of production? Or just "because you want him to have a chance", "takes no mid range shots", "shoots pretty poor from 3pt" range? And is a player "you can't promise that can play like he did in those few games at the end of the season"? Agree with the importance of how well someone will do when teams make adjustments. Feel other variables should be used to judge Randle's numbers as well. Randle has been our go to guy for the last three years. He has been who opposing teams focus on. Opposing teams have made constant adjustments for him. He draws constant double teams? Despite that, Randle still puts up double doubles.
So many are quick to put down Randle's stats with their own "advanced metrics" yet do not use simple metrics for other hopefuls or ignore variable such as the ones mentioned above to factor in their disapproval. I can respect that you said you want to see Toppin given a chance but just leave it at that instead of finding reasons to ignore Randle's well-known production and Obi's obvious shortcomings. Which also include defensive ability. I do not like Randle's usage. Do not like when he brings the ball up the floor. Think he can elevate his game so much by adding more assists to his game. HOWEVER, the guy is a beast and has been a consistent producer for years. And yes, 20/10 is solid no matter how you slice it. Unless you can point to the many others that are doing it on an annual click. Ones that are available and have all the other traits you claim Randle is lacking. Fans often put down their own and bring up so many things that player can't do. Ignoring that there have been few players in NBA history that have possessed all of the attributes they claim that player should have.I am a Knick fan. And while I do not think Randle should be our number one or even our number 2. He is our best player right now. Obi is just a prospect who has only proven he can dunk and still can't shoot. No way do I want to see a Knick team without Randle and Obi as our starting PF.
Was also against the Frank and Knox dream and wanted Obi as our pick. If he surprises me that would be great. But like Knox and Frank. I am not blind. Think we are past the keep our fingers crossed for yoots. Think we should look to add solid perennial producers. And yes, Randle is one.The double-double argument has no weight with me. Pretty much any player in Randle's place that got upward of 15 shot attempts per game can score 20pts per game. Rebounds I won't discount entirely but continue to point to Mitchell Robinson's box outs as a source of Randle's rebounds. Randle is an inefficient 20 point scorer.
https://www.nba.com/stats/players/advanc...
In the attached link, you can see that out of players taking 15 shots per game, Randle is essentially the worst scorer in the league. He scores less points per shot taken than any other player that gets so many shots. Worse than Westbrick.
So, am I willing to start a young player that has been stuck behind Randle over Randle even though he doesn't have experience (because he was stuck behind Randle)? Yes. That's the only way to get him experience. It would be hard for Toppin to do worse than Randle but the key is that Toppin doesn't need to take those shots Randle was taking, its just that Randle shouldn't take those shots. That said, I think Toppin is better suited to accepting passes from Brunson and getting out of the way and hiding in the corner when he doesn't have the ball. I think he will mesh better with Brunson.
Once again, proving my point. Which is how guys are easy to call out Randle with A stats yet ignore basic facts about ones they think should replace him. Don't Remember MR helping Randle with rebounding when he was on the Lakers and NO?
If you are using the above AStat then guess RJ should go as well?
Let's look at the stats you are selectively using to make your point.
Of course let's ignore this stat is hampered if you are the main defensive target. Get double teamed. And only dunk when shooting.
If we look at the same criteria in 2020-21 you would have traded away Ja Morant, Anthony Edwards, Trae Young, Anthony Davis, Pascal Siakam and Demar DeRozan. All for guys that only score on alley oops and are afraid to shoot and live off guys that get double teamed. Maybe Frank is available? Because I know Durant, Irving, Curry Greek Freak are not. Remember when I mentioned how fans love to put down their players without looking at other options or how many others actually have the qualities they are looking for?
Still waiting for the historical stat production for Obi, who you claim is a better option. And btw, still do not see the logic in using advanced stats for Randle but ignoring basic stat production for Obi. So will stick to my opinion that Randle is our best player.
fishmike wrote:martin wrote:one of the funky things about the roster right now and we'll see how it plays out is I see Randle/Hart and Obi/Mitch as the best 4/5 pairings. Hart doesnt have to shoot 3s... he's got a nice jumper to space the floor for Randle and the guards. Good problems to have where minutes can go to the best players/units.blkexec wrote:I prefer to lineup Obi with a stretch 5 but that’s myliepie in the sky scenario.I think there is a chance we see that off the bench this year with Obi and Hart. It's a great combo for a bench crew with Rose/IQ/Grimes as possible guards.
I think the FO - if they had to wishfully project players they'd like to see excel - would love to see Hart win the starting role eventually.
IMHO Knicks resigned Mitch because they like his talent but know that he may never fulfill it; his BBIQ is very questionable and he has major growth to get thru on the offensive side of things. Hart has a lot to prove but I'd guess FO was more hopeful of him than Mitch.
HofstraBBall wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:jskinny35 wrote:fishmike wrote:CashMoney wrote:Obi played 17 minutes per game last year up from 11 minutes per game in his rookie season. He positively developed from year 1 to year 2 so why can't he continue to improve his game while coming off the bench next season?because emo Knick fans dont like grumpy pants Randle so he's gotta go so we need to manufacture a narrative to make that make sense. Everything is perfect. It will be really hard for Obi to get more minutes and it is what it is. If he's playing hot he hopefully get longer runs or play some small ball 4/5 with Randle but we have 3 centers and Thibs like's playing one of them.Teams need the talent to win and obviously, Tobi has talent. I don't see anything wrong with him getting increased minutes next season and continuing to improve his game which will improve the team's play.
Obi is the only true PF on the team besides Randle so how is having a developing young PF playing behind Randle a bad thing?
Obi's got 2 more years under his rookie deal for us to see just how good he's gonna be.
Randle manufactured his own narrative by being a douche last season. Most fans will forgive the tantrums and the reduced poor shooting/performance - but not both at the same time. Be a headcase - but be so good that all is forgiven. Last season Randle was a a pain in the ass, behaved entitled and worst - did not hustle and support his teammates positively. So I wouldn't call that perfect and since we have a young PF that in limited minutes has shown decent production - he has earned more minutes which will not come at the expense of creating another problem (playing Randle and Toppin together as opposing forwards lick their chops). Even if Randle matched his prior stellar year - he's too iso-dominant and not good enough efficiency-wise to keep going with him and expect better results. Yes Brunson will help but will Randle in his 7th/8th year adjust and take a back seat and defer? To me, that is the only way I see a future with Randle starting that could work and I honestly don't think his pride/ego will allow him to do that. And I hope I'm wrong because I do think it's more likely he is the starting PF on opening day.
Why is it that Knick fans think that it would be good for Randle to "take a back seat"
How do you know that this approach will actually help the Knicks?
Who should he take a back seat to?
Don't fans really mean "give my hopeful" a chance? Then why not just say that?
Randle has produced EVERY YEAR??!
Why not, as a TRUE Knick fan just hope he shoots as well as he did his All Star year?
Seems like a better path then hoping we move on from him without a solid replacement or to give some hopeful, that has proven nothing, his spot now?Define produced. You carry an old school mentality to players much like Thibs which is not to say that you must be wrong, but it seems to ignore the deeper metrics that I am staring at. I think we are both watching the same games and I do think Randle has value, but I think his value is primarily defensive. I admit that I hate midrange shots generally for their lack of eFG and specifically fadeaway type shots (and floaters) that have low probability of drawing a foul. When you look at Randle and see that 44% of his shots are midrange 2pt jumpers that he hits at about a 35-36% clip, I cannot get the ball out of his hands fast enough. Its a formula for losing basketball. Like him? Marry him, but him a beer, but don't let him take bad shots. Someone needs to educate him on how ineffective and inefficient his shot selection is. If he had Khris Middleton's shot chart, I'd have to re-consider giving him a pass, but he doesn't.
His 3pt percentage was even worse this year. He took 31% of his shots from 3 last year and his 30% of those 3s.
So, am I saying give my "hopeful" a chance? Sure. I'll use your words. Toppin = Hopeful = Give him a chance! Why? He takes nearly no midrange shots. He's behind the 3pt line shooting pretty poorly (needs work!!!) or at the basket dunking. I like this. It makes a pretty shot chart. And puts his eFG of 58%. Toward the end of the season with real minutes, he looked like he was getting comfortable. I can't promise that holds or that other teams don't adjust to him. Here, I am saying, give him a chance. His usage is 20% compared to Randle's 28%. Meaning, he adds value without necessarily having the ball in his hands. He sets up in the corner and tends to make baseline runs in the half court set and the kid loves to run on the fast break. If any player has the potential to benefit from Brunson showing up, its Toppin.
Grimes is a close second. Randle and Barrett will lose touches to Brunson. Both are relegated to the low eFG defense players that they look like, unless they can evolve what we saw last year.
Brunson/Grimes/Barrett/Toppin/Hart spreads a lot of floor and has a lot of eFG (except for Barrett, but I want to give the kid a chance to play with the amount of space this lineup creates vs letting Fournier poke holes in the defense.
So, what's the defense of Randle look like? 20/10 very inefficiently with Robinson boxing out so he can get the rebound?
Think the things you do not like about Randle are the same that I do not as well.
You are asking me to define Randle's production yet you think I should accept we should go with Toppin, who lacks any large sample size of ANY type of production? Or just "because you want him to have a chance", "takes no mid range shots", "shoots pretty poor from 3pt" range? And is a player "you can't promise that can play like he did in those few games at the end of the season"? Agree with the importance of how well someone will do when teams make adjustments. Feel other variables should be used to judge Randle's numbers as well. Randle has been our go to guy for the last three years. He has been who opposing teams focus on. Opposing teams have made constant adjustments for him. He draws constant double teams? Despite that, Randle still puts up double doubles.
So many are quick to put down Randle's stats with their own "advanced metrics" yet do not use simple metrics for other hopefuls or ignore variable such as the ones mentioned above to factor in their disapproval. I can respect that you said you want to see Toppin given a chance but just leave it at that instead of finding reasons to ignore Randle's well-known production and Obi's obvious shortcomings. Which also include defensive ability. I do not like Randle's usage. Do not like when he brings the ball up the floor. Think he can elevate his game so much by adding more assists to his game. HOWEVER, the guy is a beast and has been a consistent producer for years. And yes, 20/10 is solid no matter how you slice it. Unless you can point to the many others that are doing it on an annual click. Ones that are available and have all the other traits you claim Randle is lacking. Fans often put down their own and bring up so many things that player can't do. Ignoring that there have been few players in NBA history that have possessed all of the attributes they claim that player should have.I am a Knick fan. And while I do not think Randle should be our number one or even our number 2. He is our best player right now. Obi is just a prospect who has only proven he can dunk and still can't shoot. No way do I want to see a Knick team without Randle and Obi as our starting PF.
Was also against the Frank and Knox dream and wanted Obi as our pick. If he surprises me that would be great. But like Knox and Frank. I am not blind. Think we are past the keep our fingers crossed for yoots. Think we should look to add solid perennial producers. And yes, Randle is one.The double-double argument has no weight with me. Pretty much any player in Randle's place that got upward of 15 shot attempts per game can score 20pts per game. Rebounds I won't discount entirely but continue to point to Mitchell Robinson's box outs as a source of Randle's rebounds. Randle is an inefficient 20 point scorer.
https://www.nba.com/stats/players/advanc...
In the attached link, you can see that out of players taking 15 shots per game, Randle is essentially the worst scorer in the league. He scores less points per shot taken than any other player that gets so many shots. Worse than Westbrick.
So, am I willing to start a young player that has been stuck behind Randle over Randle even though he doesn't have experience (because he was stuck behind Randle)? Yes. That's the only way to get him experience. It would be hard for Toppin to do worse than Randle but the key is that Toppin doesn't need to take those shots Randle was taking, its just that Randle shouldn't take those shots. That said, I think Toppin is better suited to accepting passes from Brunson and getting out of the way and hiding in the corner when he doesn't have the ball. I think he will mesh better with Brunson.
Once again, proving my point.
Don't Remember MR helping Randle with rebounding when he was on the Lakers and NO.
If you are using the above AStat then guess RJ should go as well.?
Let's look at the stats you are selectively using to make your point.
Of course let's ignore this stat is hampered if you are the main defensive target. Get double teamed. And only dunk when shooting.
If we look at the same criteria in 2020-21 you would have traded away Ja Morant, Anthony Edwards, Trae Young, Anthony Davis, Pascal Siakam and Demar DeRozan. All for guys that only score on alley oops and are afraid to shoot. Maybe Frank is available? Because I know Durant, Irving, Curry Greek Freak are not. Remember when I mentioned how fans love to put down their players without looking at other options or how many others actually have the qualities they are looking for?Still waiting for the historical stat production of Obi, who you claim is a better option. And btw, still do not see the logic in using advanced stats for Randle but ignoring basic stat production for Obi. So won't just take your word for it that Obi is a better option.
Yeah, I think Barrett should take less bad shots as well. We were talking about Randle/Toppin so I didn't take the opportunity to slam RJ. RJ gets the "youth" and development pass for another season, but I would not pay him a max contract with his current numbers. I've posted on several occasions about Toppin vs Randle. His .581 eFG is solid and he is also "developing". I think with a good PG he is closer to a Shawn Marion type player and could really blossom next to Brunson. Randle has good skills, but settles for playing with his back to the basket 18 feet from the rim and has done a poor job of converting. He can be on this team, he just can't take those shots.
I know you are trying to zing me, but you kind of shot yourself in the foot. Not sure where you got your list from, but all of the folks you suggest are light years ahead of our guys in eFG.
Trae Young .536 eFG is among the best high volume, high eFG shooters in the league.
Ja Morant .530 eFG is also among the best high volume, high eFG shooters in the league.
Anthony Edwards .527 eFG. Not as high volume. No issues.
Anthony Davis .542 (actually, not as impressed as a big man, but still light years ahead of Randle)
Pascal Siakam .529 eFG
Demar Derozan .521 eFG.
Julius Randle .459 eFG.
Among high volume shooters, Randle is the worst in the league.