It’s an easy sell for the front office. Randle isn’t “their guy”. He was here before they got here. He was extended but they had no choice after the season he had. They had protected firsts to be easily packaged to move him. It clears way for Toppin who will provide more spacing and allow the faster pace that Barrett and Brunson need. Thibs gets an opportunity without Randle, as Randle may not be able to co-exist with other ball dominate players. Thibs can’t bench Randle so trade is the only option. Thibs can start Brunson, Barrett Toppin, Mitch and either IQ or Grimes at the 2 and the fan base will get behind the team for the time being. If they are better, great, if they aren’t they will be a high lottery pick team. Running the offense through Brunson and Barrett (allowing Barrett more opportunities and less settling for threes) is the logical next steps, with them being complimented by the activity level and spacing of Toppin, grimes and Quickley. I see this happened after Dec 15 if things still aren’t going well. Randle needs to shoot the ball better. He can’t play down low because of the presence of Mitch. Toppin seems to be becoming a good corner three point shooter which is what Thibs wants, and obviously he moves well without the ball.
Basically roll with
C Mitch
F Toppin
F Barrett
G Grimes
G Brunson
Hart, Quickley, Fournier, Cam and rose off the bench. And next season Cam or Fournier get replaced with a rookie wing. Or move Fournier and open up cap space to offer a guy like Gary Trent Jr or Josh Hart.
its early, I said all along to be patient with Randle. I also said there is no phucking way Thibs/Leon are banking their NY/Knick legacy on Randle. I give it 20 games at which point they pull the trigger. He's a good player and brings a lot. His poor shooting has derailed him here and its making that MIP season look more and more like an outlier.
7 games in RJ/Randle/Fournier/IQ are shooting for shit and I think that's the #1 simple reason we are 3-4. Those 4 guys take a ton of shots and all have been subpar
fishmike wrote:its early, I said all along to be patient with Randle. I also said there is no phucking way Thibs/Leon are banking their NY/Knick legacy on Randle. I give it 20 games at which point they pull the trigger. He's a good player and brings a lot. His poor shooting has derailed him here and its making that MIP season look more and more like an outlier.7 games in RJ/Randle/Fournier/IQ are shooting for shit and I think that's the #1 simple reason we are 3-4. Those 4 guys take a ton of shots and all have been subpar
100%
No one wants Randle or his contract
Philc1 wrote:No one wants Randle or his contract
Maybe Lakers. They are more desperate than us.
BigDaddyG wrote:Philc1 wrote:No one wants Randle or his contract
Maybe Lakers. They are more desperate than us.
I'd like to think we can move Randle easily enough- it's a question of what comes back.
I thought Dallas really could have used a player like Randle last playoffs.
fishmike wrote:its early, I said all along to be patient with Randle. I also said there is no phucking way Thibs/Leon are banking their NY/Knick legacy on Randle. I give it 20 games at which point they pull the trigger. He's a good player and brings a lot. His poor shooting has derailed him here and its making that MIP season look more and more like an outlier.7 games in RJ/Randle/Fournier/IQ are shooting for shit and I think that's the #1 simple reason we are 3-4. Those 4 guys take a ton of shots and all have been subpar
Agreed. We should definitely be patient still. I just think Randle will be the scapegoat if they don’t pick things up.
As far as “their guys” , Brunson is in a tier of his own and then it’s RJ, Toppin, IQ and grimes. No one else matters.
Pretty sure we aren't getting a pick back in a hypothetical trade for Randle - unless it's in a deal for Westbrook.
Realistically think we would be looking at either a lateral trade (talent) or a salary clearing move...unless we attach a pick or package him with one of our younger players. Crazy what we would have likely gotten for Randle if we sold high (after the MIP season) or even early on last season vs now.
I think they do all the following before trading Randle
Make Grimes a starter and bench Fourner
Trade Fournier
Bench RJ
FIRE Thibs
Then trade Randle
If Randle cont a bad path--Id go for a mismatch position as sixth man.
BRIGGS wrote:If Randle cont a bad path--Id go for a mismatch position as sixth man.
In theory that sounds good but this isn’t 2k. He’s not going to be happy with a demotion and the locker room dynamic gets damaged. Very rarely does that transition work out favorably. That role would likely have to take place going to a new team. You can do it with a guy like Fournier, but not someone like Randle. There’s a big difference.
Agree that we are a .500% team so there will be lumps and letdowms all season. Knowing this realistically - what do we really gain from playing this scenario out? Our hopes for improving the team are a)rehabbing Randle's game and image so we can trade him, b) hoping RJ takes another step and can slide into Randle's ball dominant role, c) praying at least 1 of Grimes, IQ, Toppin takes a step from the bench to become a starting quality player, d) getting lucky that we score a decent draft pick.
While I'm not big on tanking - why not give Toppin more minutes to see what he can offer in actual game minutes vs starters? That way we will know if he's a keeper, bench guy or we shouldn't resign him when his rookie deal is up. Same with IQ so I would look to sell D. Rose to the highest bidder. He deserves better anyway and I could see a playoff team wanting his veteran leadership and experience. If we have to give up a 1st to rid ourselves of Fournier and Randle - it may be worth getting flexibility for the next 3-4 years.
Yes we probably take a step back record-wise - but we gain the experience for the young players and worst case we improve to land a lottery pick. We should have done this last year but if we are still middle of the road in another 5-10 games - why not? Only player I'd feel bad for is Brunson because he thought he was coming into a better situation here.
Understand people may not like this direction but if you disagree - please share why playing middle of the road is a better path and how we really can upgrade our roster/talent.
jskinny35 wrote:Agree that we are a .500% team so there will be lumps and letdowms all season. Knowing this realistically - what do we really gain from playing this scenario out? Our hopes for improving the team are a)rehabbing Randle's game and image so we can trade him, b) hoping RJ takes another step and can slide into Randle's ball dominant role, c) praying at least 1 of Grimes, IQ, Toppin takes a step from the bench to become a starting quality player, d) getting lucky that we score a decent draft pick. While I'm not big on tanking - why not give Toppin more minutes to see what he can offer in actual game minutes vs starters? That way we will know if he's a keeper, bench guy or we shouldn't resign him when his rookie deal is up. Same with IQ so I would look to sell D. Rose to the highest bidder. He deserves better anyway and I could see a playoff team wanting his veteran leadership and experience. If we have to give up a 1st to rid ourselves of Fournier and Randle - it may be worth getting flexibility for the next 3-4 years.
Yes we probably take a step back record-wise - but we gain the experience for the young players and worst case we improve to land a lottery pick. We should have done this last year but if we are still middle of the road in another 5-10 games - why not? Only player I'd feel bad for is Brunson because he thought he was coming into a better situation here.
Understand people may not like this direction but if you disagree - please share why playing middle of the road is a better path and how we really can upgrade our roster/talent.
Knicks have to decide on Toppin and Quickley this season. They are due for extensions in the summer. Our highest upside with this group includes Randle, but if there’s no breakout 20-25 games in, moving him is a requirement because Toppin needs the opportunity to earn his extension. IQ is clearly getting an opportunity playing 2 positions off the bench and a lot of time with the starters. Toppin deserves the same if the wins aren’t piling up as currently constructed.
Knixkik wrote:jskinny35 wrote:Agree that we are a .500% team so there will be lumps and letdowms all season. Knowing this realistically - what do we really gain from playing this scenario out? Our hopes for improving the team are a)rehabbing Randle's game and image so we can trade him, b) hoping RJ takes another step and can slide into Randle's ball dominant role, c) praying at least 1 of Grimes, IQ, Toppin takes a step from the bench to become a starting quality player, d) getting lucky that we score a decent draft pick. While I'm not big on tanking - why not give Toppin more minutes to see what he can offer in actual game minutes vs starters? That way we will know if he's a keeper, bench guy or we shouldn't resign him when his rookie deal is up. Same with IQ so I would look to sell D. Rose to the highest bidder. He deserves better anyway and I could see a playoff team wanting his veteran leadership and experience. If we have to give up a 1st to rid ourselves of Fournier and Randle - it may be worth getting flexibility for the next 3-4 years.
Yes we probably take a step back record-wise - but we gain the experience for the young players and worst case we improve to land a lottery pick. We should have done this last year but if we are still middle of the road in another 5-10 games - why not? Only player I'd feel bad for is Brunson because he thought he was coming into a better situation here.
Understand people may not like this direction but if you disagree - please share why playing middle of the road is a better path and how we really can upgrade our roster/talent.
Knicks have to decide on Toppin and Quickley this season. They are due for extensions in the summer. Our highest upside with this group includes Randle, but if there’s no breakout 20-25 games in, moving him is a requirement because Toppin needs the opportunity to earn his extension. IQ is clearly getting an opportunity playing 2 positions off the bench and a lot of time with the starters. Toppin deserves the same if the wins aren’t piling up as currently constructed.
They got renewed and have until end of next season to resign them.
Guys, we are a .500 team. Is this team really underperforming to its on paper expectations?
Randle had a few good games and two bad ones vs really good teams. We not over reacting just a bit?
At some point, they need to figure out how to play Obi and Randle together. We can't have a situation where Obi tops out at 15 mins- thats a waste of a talented player/roster asset. IF you don't wanna use Obi as a small ball 5, then you use him as a big ball 3. Ultimately if he only will ever play behind Randle here, one of them has to get moved before both of their values dip too far. I already think we're likely to have to sell low on either guy.
VDesai wrote:At some point, they need to figure out how to play Obi and Randle together. We can't have a situation where Obi tops out at 15 mins- thats a waste of a talented player/roster asset. IF you don't wanna use Obi as a small ball 5, then you use him as a big ball 3. Ultimately if he only will ever play behind Randle here, one of them has to get moved before both of their values dip too far. I already think we're likely to have to sell low on either guy.
Preaching to the choir. Some of us been saying this for a while now. But what do us fans know.
VDesai wrote:At some point, they need to figure out how to play Obi and Randle together. We can't have a situation where Obi tops out at 15 mins- thats a waste of a talented player/roster asset. IF you don't wanna use Obi as a small ball 5, then you use him as a big ball 3. Ultimately if he only will ever play behind Randle here, one of them has to get moved before both of their values dip too far. I already think we're likely to have to sell low on either guy.
It's never ever going to happen with Thibs. 
SergioNYK wrote:VDesai wrote:At some point, they need to figure out how to play Obi and Randle together. We can't have a situation where Obi tops out at 15 mins- thats a waste of a talented player/roster asset. IF you don't wanna use Obi as a small ball 5, then you use him as a big ball 3. Ultimately if he only will ever play behind Randle here, one of them has to get moved before both of their values dip too far. I already think we're likely to have to sell low on either guy.
It's never ever going to happen with Thibs.
it 100% would if either of them were reliable shooters. No reason you couldnt plug Obi in at the 3 for a big line up. If he's on the wing he can release every time Randle or Mitch/Hart grab a board. Problem is its brick city. Jules is shooting 20% from 3 and Obi's currently bloated average looks good but its inflated from 2 really good games where he shot 3/4 and 3/5
Milw plays Portis/Giannis/Bropez together all the time.
VDesai wrote:At some point, they need to figure out how to play Obi and Randle together. We can't have a situation where Obi tops out at 15 mins- thats a waste of a talented player/roster asset. IF you don't wanna use Obi as a small ball 5, then you use him as a big ball 3. Ultimately if he only will ever play behind Randle here, one of them has to get moved before both of their values dip too far. I already think we're likely to have to sell low on either guy.
Playing them together isn’t the best use of their skill sets though. It’s essentially just trying to cover the issue. The main issue is both are PFs who aren’t rim protectors and the Knicks have to eventually choose between them. Finding 10 mins for them together and saying “problem solved” might help them individually but I don’t see how it helps the team win games.
Knixkik wrote:VDesai wrote:At some point, they need to figure out how to play Obi and Randle together. We can't have a situation where Obi tops out at 15 mins- thats a waste of a talented player/roster asset. IF you don't wanna use Obi as a small ball 5, then you use him as a big ball 3. Ultimately if he only will ever play behind Randle here, one of them has to get moved before both of their values dip too far. I already think we're likely to have to sell low on either guy.
Playing them together isn’t the best use of their skill sets though. It’s essentially just trying to cover the issue. The main issue is both are PFs who aren’t rim protectors and the Knicks have to eventually choose between them. Finding 10 mins for them together and saying “problem solved” might help them individually but I don’t see how it helps the team win games.
well said
