Knicks · Randle is beasting (page 4)
BigDaddyG wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:GustavBahler wrote:fishmike wrote:GustavBahler wrote:the bold is literally just saying "I just dont like the guy"BigDaddyG wrote:fishmike wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:for who? That's just "you dont like watching Randle"fishmike wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:Marbury was toxic and Sixers were hardly an upcoming team. Iggy was breaking down and they wanted to move on from him and Elton Brand and go young.fishmike wrote:blkexec wrote:Can anyone name a time in the NBA where a team trying to build up it's program traded it's best player in the prime of their career?franco12 wrote:Trade him now?Well for the fans that wanted to trade him, this is the perfect time. But not happening. Hard to find star players who understand the nyc culture and can thrive in it.
Randle has been beasting. JB is also his savior. Randle looks different with JB on the team.
It NEVER happens... you know why? SPOILER: It's stupid!
Randle is playing great. There's also a real upside to Randle's game that isn't talked about enough. Plain and simple he gives up the ball. While he may pound/hold it he's no black hole and even when he's scoring a ton he's still moving the ball and looking for shooters and cutters.
Randle looks just as happy making the great pass as he does scoring. He's really integrated well with Brunson and the guy he's showing more and more chemistry with is Grimes.
The redemption tour is a hot ticket... keep it up Jules.
Sixers did it with Iggy, the Sun's did it with Marbury and the Mavs did it with Kidd. I won't say it never happens. Every situation is different, but sometimes you need to take a step back to move forward. I'm glad Jules is playing well, but let's not act like he's not capable of reverting. Let's just enjoy the ride and see where it takes the team.
When you say "reverting" to what do you refer? That really bad 20/10/5 season last year?
We signed him at 25 to the Fizdale squad and he wasnt bad. The team sucked, Randle played hard. Then we get MIP and 4th seed Randle. Then we get a grumpy 20/10/5 on a team with a lot of problems. Now are getting all star Randle.Randle's been good here. Hopefully its more of the same "reverting" feels so negative. We all thought he could be better. So did he. Look at how's it's played out.
People were desperate last year to paint the Randle/Thibs combo as bad but it seems to be working ok short and long term
Iggy wasn't breaking down. He was still in his prime when they shipped him. By reverting I mean returning to being sub par. His entire career has seen one good season followed by one bad season. He fooled me once. Let's see him carry forward into future seasons. I hope he does. Still think we should trade him.You have a 25/10/5 two way forward who's 28 and shares the ball. Who are you getting back that helps us? Randle is literally playing his way into being untradeable. The way Randle shares the ball you just need to upgrade the guys around him... Or trade him for Luka/Giannis/Bam
No, it's me not getting overly excited about a team that's one game over .500. This team isn't good enough and needs to be tore down. I've been pretty consistent with the strategy the team needss to take. Rather than asking what we can get for Randle, I'll ask you what the needs could require that would make this team be taken seriously.
A few months ago, some argued that Randle should be traded post haste. That his trade value wasnt getting any higher. I thought Randle was capable of increasing his trade value, before the first deadline. And sure enough he has.
I agree, this is the time to trade him. For some of the reasons you gave, like the up and down seasons. Randle's numbers are great these days, but I still have serious doubts about his ability to be a clutch performer. Thats not including the playoffs.
We've seen All-Star level production at times from Randle, not much in the way of consistent clutch play. The numbers arent there.
From the third or fourth option a lack of clutch play is tolerable. Not from the first or second option. Doubt we can find that player without trading Randle. Dont know who is available, but at the very least I'd like to see the FO test the market.
Why are you worried about "clutch" when you have a guy who draws doubles and gives up the ball? Who's already shown he will defer to a better scorer?
It makes so little sense I assume you just dont want to be honest about not liking the guy.
You arent even disagreeing with me. You're saying in effect "so what" if our go to guy isnt clutch? So what if our star cant hit the winning shot any better than a bench player? This is fanboyism on steroids.
This board used to be a good place for bball talk. Feels more like a cult these days.
Love when guys talk their views into reality.
Who the hell thinks Randle is a number ONE??
He is a good player. Strong PF who can creat mismatches and demand double teams. Makes less than most at same production level. Puts up 20/10 annually and you think we should trade him asap?. Who is in the cult?And that's the issue. If we had a number #1 then this wouldn't be a discussion. Right now, with Randle as the #1, this team looks like a first round out. That's if they make the playoffs. I don't want to single out just Randle. RJ is going to show it too. Right now this looks like a treadmill team and the team is going to have to shake things up to get out of the rut. Wembeyama is out of the question now, but this team really needs to accumulate talent. Grimes and Quick are good starts, but this team needs more.
Is he getting a ONE's salary?
Is he keeping us from adding a ONE?
You make no sense.
With this mentality Bucks would be trading Middleton. Who makes almost double of what Randle makes. Miami has two others beside Butler who make more than Randle.
Basically every other number two and three on Chip contending team makes more than Randle.
This is the type of Knick dumb shit move we all make fun of in the past. Yet you want this FO do the same. SmhWhat does salary have to do with whether he's the team's number one option or not? You're saying Luka Doncic wasn't the Mavs number 1 option last year even because THJ, KP and Dinwiddie made more than him? He still makes money and takes up cap space, am I correct? As far as I can see, this team isn't in a position to sign a true number one outright... So the answer is yes, his presence does prevent the team from signing a real star if one were to become available via free agency. I don't care what what other second and third stars make on other teams. I only care that the Knicks don't have a #1 of their own.
Salary has everything to do with it!!
Unless you think true number ones are available for rookie contracts or $25M?
Luka was Mavs draft pick. But don't mention that.
Us not having a true number one has NOTHING to do with Randle.
How is he keeping us from a true number one?True rookie number ones don't become available when you're doing everything in your power to spin around in a perpetual hamster wheel. Salary has nothing to do with Julius being the team's #1. He is by default, whether he was $20M or $25M, because the team is middling. My point is, and I m sure you agree, is that he's not a true #1. As long as he stays that, the team will stay in a holding pattern of meaningless first round exits and low lottery picks. The Knicks need to spin Randle into more assets so they can have enough chips to trade when a superstar becomes available or they can draft one. The next two years of RJ, Randle and JB isn't getting me excited. I like the growth of IQ, Obi, Sims and Grimes, but they're likely ceilings are mid to high level role players. This team needs more.
Agree with everything you said.
However, I am sure that you know we have several players we can get rid of that make a lot of money and are not that good. The notion that in order to get a true number one is only by trading Randle is just something Randle haters say.
If you remember, we had enough assets to get DM. We chose not to. It wasn't because Randle's contract was keeping us from doing so.
To go back to what Randle is making. FOs absolutely take into account market value/production costs. Ie. "What other players are making" You see, you have to consider what it will cost to replace similar level of production. Unless the goal is not to improve. If we are paying Randle less than other teams number two's, that makes our team better. As it will allow us more cap to add a number one,three four and five. You are also ignoring the basic principle of trading a player. Who are we getting in return? Haters don't care. Some of us recognized the hate, the market, return and the talent Randle has shown on consistent basis. Despite his flaws. He is one of the best values at power forwards in the league. You don't trade that for scraps. You get him a true number one and add better pieces to the puzzle.
GustavBahler wrote:Panos wrote:Panos wrote:Ok. Trade proposal:
Chicago trades peak Scottie Pippen for Randle.
Who says no? Why?LA Trades still dangerous LeBron to NY, making Randle being clutch less necessary with the GOAT as the number one option.
Pippen+GOAT(Jordan)= Championship
Randle+GOAT(LBJ)= ????
Ive said that if we can keep Randle and add James, and leave a roster good enough to contend, I hope the FO goes for it. Otherwise, I'd like to see the FO try that formula with another player.
To answer your question about a 4th option. Im mostly talking about crunch time, not touches. A team could have a very clutch 6th man ahead of Randle in those situations. Not necessarily putting up better numbers.
Lmao.
The new go to Randle hate. "He is not clutch"
First it was:
20/10s are meaningless.
He was not in the team huddle.
He doesn't play defense.
He has too many spin TO's
He does not pass.
He does not handle double teams well.
He is not liked by teammates.
He loses control of emotions.
Told fans to fuck off.
BigDaddyG wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:GustavBahler wrote:fishmike wrote:GustavBahler wrote:the bold is literally just saying "I just dont like the guy"BigDaddyG wrote:fishmike wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:for who? That's just "you dont like watching Randle"fishmike wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:Marbury was toxic and Sixers were hardly an upcoming team. Iggy was breaking down and they wanted to move on from him and Elton Brand and go young.fishmike wrote:blkexec wrote:Can anyone name a time in the NBA where a team trying to build up it's program traded it's best player in the prime of their career?franco12 wrote:Trade him now?Well for the fans that wanted to trade him, this is the perfect time. But not happening. Hard to find star players who understand the nyc culture and can thrive in it.
Randle has been beasting. JB is also his savior. Randle looks different with JB on the team.
It NEVER happens... you know why? SPOILER: It's stupid!
Randle is playing great. There's also a real upside to Randle's game that isn't talked about enough. Plain and simple he gives up the ball. While he may pound/hold it he's no black hole and even when he's scoring a ton he's still moving the ball and looking for shooters and cutters.
Randle looks just as happy making the great pass as he does scoring. He's really integrated well with Brunson and the guy he's showing more and more chemistry with is Grimes.
The redemption tour is a hot ticket... keep it up Jules.
Sixers did it with Iggy, the Sun's did it with Marbury and the Mavs did it with Kidd. I won't say it never happens. Every situation is different, but sometimes you need to take a step back to move forward. I'm glad Jules is playing well, but let's not act like he's not capable of reverting. Let's just enjoy the ride and see where it takes the team.
When you say "reverting" to what do you refer? That really bad 20/10/5 season last year?
We signed him at 25 to the Fizdale squad and he wasnt bad. The team sucked, Randle played hard. Then we get MIP and 4th seed Randle. Then we get a grumpy 20/10/5 on a team with a lot of problems. Now are getting all star Randle.Randle's been good here. Hopefully its more of the same "reverting" feels so negative. We all thought he could be better. So did he. Look at how's it's played out.
People were desperate last year to paint the Randle/Thibs combo as bad but it seems to be working ok short and long term
Iggy wasn't breaking down. He was still in his prime when they shipped him. By reverting I mean returning to being sub par. His entire career has seen one good season followed by one bad season. He fooled me once. Let's see him carry forward into future seasons. I hope he does. Still think we should trade him.You have a 25/10/5 two way forward who's 28 and shares the ball. Who are you getting back that helps us? Randle is literally playing his way into being untradeable. The way Randle shares the ball you just need to upgrade the guys around him... Or trade him for Luka/Giannis/Bam
No, it's me not getting overly excited about a team that's one game over .500. This team isn't good enough and needs to be tore down. I've been pretty consistent with the strategy the team needss to take. Rather than asking what we can get for Randle, I'll ask you what the needs could require that would make this team be taken seriously.
A few months ago, some argued that Randle should be traded post haste. That his trade value wasnt getting any higher. I thought Randle was capable of increasing his trade value, before the first deadline. And sure enough he has.
I agree, this is the time to trade him. For some of the reasons you gave, like the up and down seasons. Randle's numbers are great these days, but I still have serious doubts about his ability to be a clutch performer. Thats not including the playoffs.
We've seen All-Star level production at times from Randle, not much in the way of consistent clutch play. The numbers arent there.
From the third or fourth option a lack of clutch play is tolerable. Not from the first or second option. Doubt we can find that player without trading Randle. Dont know who is available, but at the very least I'd like to see the FO test the market.
Why are you worried about "clutch" when you have a guy who draws doubles and gives up the ball? Who's already shown he will defer to a better scorer?
It makes so little sense I assume you just dont want to be honest about not liking the guy.
You arent even disagreeing with me. You're saying in effect "so what" if our go to guy isnt clutch? So what if our star cant hit the winning shot any better than a bench player? This is fanboyism on steroids.
This board used to be a good place for bball talk. Feels more like a cult these days.
Love when guys talk their views into reality.
Who the hell thinks Randle is a number ONE??
He is a good player. Strong PF who can creat mismatches and demand double teams. Makes less than most at same production level. Puts up 20/10 annually and you think we should trade him asap?. Who is in the cult?And that's the issue. If we had a number #1 then this wouldn't be a discussion. Right now, with Randle as the #1, this team looks like a first round out. That's if they make the playoffs. I don't want to single out just Randle. RJ is going to show it too. Right now this looks like a treadmill team and the team is going to have to shake things up to get out of the rut. Wembeyama is out of the question now, but this team really needs to accumulate talent. Grimes and Quick are good starts, but this team needs more.
Is he getting a ONE's salary?
Is he keeping us from adding a ONE?
You make no sense.
With this mentality Bucks would be trading Middleton. Who makes almost double of what Randle makes. Miami has two others beside Butler who make more than Randle.
Basically every other number two and three on Chip contending team makes more than Randle.
This is the type of Knick dumb shit move we all make fun of in the past. Yet you want this FO do the same. SmhWhat does salary have to do with whether he's the team's number one option or not? You're saying Luka Doncic wasn't the Mavs number 1 option last year even because THJ, KP and Dinwiddie made more than him? He still makes money and takes up cap space, am I correct? As far as I can see, this team isn't in a position to sign a true number one outright... So the answer is yes, his presence does prevent the team from signing a real star if one were to become available via free agency. I don't care what what other second and third stars make on other teams. I only care that the Knicks don't have a #1 of their own.
Salary has everything to do with it!!
Unless you think true number ones are available for rookie contracts or $25M?
Luka was Mavs draft pick. But don't mention that.
Us not having a true number one has NOTHING to do with Randle.
How is he keeping us from a true number one?True rookie number ones don't become available when you're doing everything in your power to spin around in a perpetual hamster wheel. Salary has nothing to do with Julius being the team's #1. He is by default, whether he was $20M or $25M, because the team is middling. My point is, and I m sure you agree, is that he's not a true #1. As long as he stays that, the team will stay in a holding pattern of meaningless first round exits and low lottery picks. The Knicks need to spin Randle into more assets so they can have enough chips to trade when a superstar becomes available or they can draft one. The next two years of RJ, Randle and JB isn't getting me excited. I like the growth of IQ, Obi, Sims and Grimes, but they're likely ceilings are mid to high level role players. This team needs more.
Why don't you just say that you want to trade Randle because you want to tank every year to play the lottery pool...because essentially that is your entire argument. And after Randle is traded then Brunson becomes #1 - so you trade him as well? After all, you need the cap space and tankability. Then after that RJ.....dump him as well....and bring in Fiz to coach.
Regardles of what you think, there are no quick fixes. Even benefitting from a #1 pick tank is a 4 year process that might not lead to anything.
I'm enjoying the ride. Sure it has its ups and downs, but progress is never linear. Team is developing young assets and draft picks for potential growth or trade upgrades. I don't need a starphuck or tankathon to keep me invested.
GustavBahler wrote:Panos wrote:LA Trades still dangerous LeBron to NY, making Randle being clutch less necessary with the GOAT as the number one option.Panos wrote:Ok. Trade proposal:
Chicago trades peak Scottie Pippen for Randle.
Who says no? Why?Pippen+GOAT(Jordan)= Championship
Randle+GOAT(LBJ)= ????
Ive said that if we can keep Randle and add James, and leave a roster good enough to contend, I hope the FO goes for it. Otherwise, I'd like to see the FO try that formula with another player.
To answer your question about a 4th option. Im mostly talking about crunch time, not touches. A team could have a very clutch 6th man ahead of Randle in those situations. Not necessarily putting up better numbers.
Please answer the essence of the question.
Is there any reason why championship Jordan teams would do worse with Randle as #2?
Marv wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Marv wrote:Panos wrote:GustavBahler wrote:
A few months ago, some argued that Randle should be traded post haste. That his trade value wasnt getting any higher. I thought Randle was capable of increasing his trade value, before the first deadline. And sure enough he has.I agree, this is the time to trade him. For some of the reasons you gave, like the up and down seasons. Randle's numbers are great these days, but I still have serious doubts about his ability to be a clutch performer. Thats not including the playoffs.
We've seen All-Star level production at times from Randle, not much in the way of consistent clutch play. The numbers arent there.
From the third or fourth option a lack of clutch play is tolerable. Not from the first or second option. Doubt we can find that player without trading Randle. Dont know who is available, but at the very least I'd like to see the FO test the market.
I'm kind of tired of reading this opinion that Randie would be ok as a "3rd or 4th option".
That's pretty disingenuous.
Show me a team that has a player as dominant as Randle as a FOURTH option. Seriously.
I mean are you talking about teaming him up with Kobe, Shaq and Karl Malone?
Show me a championship team in the last 30 years where Randle is your fourth best player.
I'd argue that Randle is plenty good enough to be a number 2 on a championship squad. He just needs his Jordan/Kobe/Curry/Frazier/Wroten.fixed
You were AWOL for years, trolling the fans who were stickng around to post. Blow it out your geriatric ass.
now gustav. we all have days like this. where do you want to meet for a martini and a couple of laughs?
MARTINI MAN DATE. Do it, Marv makes the best martini's, trust me
foosballnick wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:GustavBahler wrote:fishmike wrote:GustavBahler wrote:the bold is literally just saying "I just dont like the guy"BigDaddyG wrote:fishmike wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:for who? That's just "you dont like watching Randle"fishmike wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:Marbury was toxic and Sixers were hardly an upcoming team. Iggy was breaking down and they wanted to move on from him and Elton Brand and go young.fishmike wrote:blkexec wrote:Can anyone name a time in the NBA where a team trying to build up it's program traded it's best player in the prime of their career?franco12 wrote:Trade him now?Well for the fans that wanted to trade him, this is the perfect time. But not happening. Hard to find star players who understand the nyc culture and can thrive in it.
Randle has been beasting. JB is also his savior. Randle looks different with JB on the team.
It NEVER happens... you know why? SPOILER: It's stupid!
Randle is playing great. There's also a real upside to Randle's game that isn't talked about enough. Plain and simple he gives up the ball. While he may pound/hold it he's no black hole and even when he's scoring a ton he's still moving the ball and looking for shooters and cutters.
Randle looks just as happy making the great pass as he does scoring. He's really integrated well with Brunson and the guy he's showing more and more chemistry with is Grimes.
The redemption tour is a hot ticket... keep it up Jules.
Sixers did it with Iggy, the Sun's did it with Marbury and the Mavs did it with Kidd. I won't say it never happens. Every situation is different, but sometimes you need to take a step back to move forward. I'm glad Jules is playing well, but let's not act like he's not capable of reverting. Let's just enjoy the ride and see where it takes the team.
When you say "reverting" to what do you refer? That really bad 20/10/5 season last year?
We signed him at 25 to the Fizdale squad and he wasnt bad. The team sucked, Randle played hard. Then we get MIP and 4th seed Randle. Then we get a grumpy 20/10/5 on a team with a lot of problems. Now are getting all star Randle.Randle's been good here. Hopefully its more of the same "reverting" feels so negative. We all thought he could be better. So did he. Look at how's it's played out.
People were desperate last year to paint the Randle/Thibs combo as bad but it seems to be working ok short and long term
Iggy wasn't breaking down. He was still in his prime when they shipped him. By reverting I mean returning to being sub par. His entire career has seen one good season followed by one bad season. He fooled me once. Let's see him carry forward into future seasons. I hope he does. Still think we should trade him.You have a 25/10/5 two way forward who's 28 and shares the ball. Who are you getting back that helps us? Randle is literally playing his way into being untradeable. The way Randle shares the ball you just need to upgrade the guys around him... Or trade him for Luka/Giannis/Bam
No, it's me not getting overly excited about a team that's one game over .500. This team isn't good enough and needs to be tore down. I've been pretty consistent with the strategy the team needss to take. Rather than asking what we can get for Randle, I'll ask you what the needs could require that would make this team be taken seriously.
A few months ago, some argued that Randle should be traded post haste. That his trade value wasnt getting any higher. I thought Randle was capable of increasing his trade value, before the first deadline. And sure enough he has.
I agree, this is the time to trade him. For some of the reasons you gave, like the up and down seasons. Randle's numbers are great these days, but I still have serious doubts about his ability to be a clutch performer. Thats not including the playoffs.
We've seen All-Star level production at times from Randle, not much in the way of consistent clutch play. The numbers arent there.
From the third or fourth option a lack of clutch play is tolerable. Not from the first or second option. Doubt we can find that player without trading Randle. Dont know who is available, but at the very least I'd like to see the FO test the market.
Why are you worried about "clutch" when you have a guy who draws doubles and gives up the ball? Who's already shown he will defer to a better scorer?
It makes so little sense I assume you just dont want to be honest about not liking the guy.
You arent even disagreeing with me. You're saying in effect "so what" if our go to guy isnt clutch? So what if our star cant hit the winning shot any better than a bench player? This is fanboyism on steroids.
This board used to be a good place for bball talk. Feels more like a cult these days.
Love when guys talk their views into reality.
Who the hell thinks Randle is a number ONE??
He is a good player. Strong PF who can creat mismatches and demand double teams. Makes less than most at same production level. Puts up 20/10 annually and you think we should trade him asap?. Who is in the cult?And that's the issue. If we had a number #1 then this wouldn't be a discussion. Right now, with Randle as the #1, this team looks like a first round out. That's if they make the playoffs. I don't want to single out just Randle. RJ is going to show it too. Right now this looks like a treadmill team and the team is going to have to shake things up to get out of the rut. Wembeyama is out of the question now, but this team really needs to accumulate talent. Grimes and Quick are good starts, but this team needs more.
Is he getting a ONE's salary?
Is he keeping us from adding a ONE?
You make no sense.
With this mentality Bucks would be trading Middleton. Who makes almost double of what Randle makes. Miami has two others beside Butler who make more than Randle.
Basically every other number two and three on Chip contending team makes more than Randle.
This is the type of Knick dumb shit move we all make fun of in the past. Yet you want this FO do the same. SmhWhat does salary have to do with whether he's the team's number one option or not? You're saying Luka Doncic wasn't the Mavs number 1 option last year even because THJ, KP and Dinwiddie made more than him? He still makes money and takes up cap space, am I correct? As far as I can see, this team isn't in a position to sign a true number one outright... So the answer is yes, his presence does prevent the team from signing a real star if one were to become available via free agency. I don't care what what other second and third stars make on other teams. I only care that the Knicks don't have a #1 of their own.
Salary has everything to do with it!!
Unless you think true number ones are available for rookie contracts or $25M?
Luka was Mavs draft pick. But don't mention that.
Us not having a true number one has NOTHING to do with Randle.
How is he keeping us from a true number one?True rookie number ones don't become available when you're doing everything in your power to spin around in a perpetual hamster wheel. Salary has nothing to do with Julius being the team's #1. He is by default, whether he was $20M or $25M, because the team is middling. My point is, and I m sure you agree, is that he's not a true #1. As long as he stays that, the team will stay in a holding pattern of meaningless first round exits and low lottery picks. The Knicks need to spin Randle into more assets so they can have enough chips to trade when a superstar becomes available or they can draft one. The next two years of RJ, Randle and JB isn't getting me excited. I like the growth of IQ, Obi, Sims and Grimes, but they're likely ceilings are mid to high level role players. This team needs more.
Why don't you just say that you want to trade Randle because you want to tank every year to play the lottery pool...because essentially that is your entire argument. And after Randle is traded then Brunson becomes #1 - so you trade him as well? After all, you need the cap space and tankability. Then after that RJ.....dump him as well....and bring in Fiz to coach.
Regardles of what you think, there are no quick fixes. Even benefitting from a #1 pick tank is a 4 year process that might not lead to anything.
I'm enjoying the ride. Sure it has its ups and downs, but progress is never linear. Team is developing young assets and draft picks for potential growth or trade upgrades. I don't need a starphuck or tankathon to keep me invested.
No to JB because he's an easy piece to incorporate on to most rosters. RJ.... I'm rooting for the kid, but you can make the case that he might be the easiest position to upgrade on the roster. I'm rooting for the kid and I'm not trying to be a d@#k, but RJ has yet to show hes a legit starter on a good team. Not saying he can't start on a good team, but that he would likely be the weakest link. I'd be hard pressed to say that he's even too 25 at his position. The only reason no one is really pushing trade RJ is because his value doesn't make those discussions worthwhile. I'm glad you're enjoying our mid three. I'm enjoying them too. But the bottomline is that they aren't good enough. Our core assets are OK, but there are teams that have better. If this team wants to contend they to need circle around and figure out a way to get premium talent, either through the draft or through a trade. The trade route doesn't seem feasible, so I guess the best route is through the draft.
Panos wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Panos wrote:LA Trades still dangerous LeBron to NY, making Randle being clutch less necessary with the GOAT as the number one option.Panos wrote:Ok. Trade proposal:
Chicago trades peak Scottie Pippen for Randle.
Who says no? Why?Pippen+GOAT(Jordan)= Championship
Randle+GOAT(LBJ)= ????
Ive said that if we can keep Randle and add James, and leave a roster good enough to contend, I hope the FO goes for it. Otherwise, I'd like to see the FO try that formula with another player.
To answer your question about a 4th option. Im mostly talking about crunch time, not touches. A team could have a very clutch 6th man ahead of Randle in those situations. Not necessarily putting up better numbers.
Please answer the essence of the question.
Is there any reason why championship Jordan teams would do worse with Randle as #2?
Yeah, I could definitely see Randle fitting in those team with his drop coverage, non shot blocking @$$. Since we're swapping HOFers for guys who have good seasons every once in a while, maybe you can explain to me championship Duncan would do worse with John Starks as sixth man rather Manu Ginobli? Or why Olajuwon's championship would be worse with Allan Houston as his #2 instead Clyde Drexler?
Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: https://twitter.com/TommyBeer/status/1610433240988356611?t=5b6oLI-Q6tvlJSkojDx6wg&s=19
Click here to view the Tweet
BigDaddyG wrote:he's 22 and started under Fizdale. Is that all on RJ? He was looking like a starter on a winning team before he got hurt. Wasnt he?foosballnick wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:GustavBahler wrote:fishmike wrote:GustavBahler wrote:the bold is literally just saying "I just dont like the guy"BigDaddyG wrote:fishmike wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:for who? That's just "you dont like watching Randle"fishmike wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:Marbury was toxic and Sixers were hardly an upcoming team. Iggy was breaking down and they wanted to move on from him and Elton Brand and go young.fishmike wrote:blkexec wrote:Can anyone name a time in the NBA where a team trying to build up it's program traded it's best player in the prime of their career?franco12 wrote:Trade him now?Well for the fans that wanted to trade him, this is the perfect time. But not happening. Hard to find star players who understand the nyc culture and can thrive in it.
Randle has been beasting. JB is also his savior. Randle looks different with JB on the team.
It NEVER happens... you know why? SPOILER: It's stupid!
Randle is playing great. There's also a real upside to Randle's game that isn't talked about enough. Plain and simple he gives up the ball. While he may pound/hold it he's no black hole and even when he's scoring a ton he's still moving the ball and looking for shooters and cutters.
Randle looks just as happy making the great pass as he does scoring. He's really integrated well with Brunson and the guy he's showing more and more chemistry with is Grimes.
The redemption tour is a hot ticket... keep it up Jules.
Sixers did it with Iggy, the Sun's did it with Marbury and the Mavs did it with Kidd. I won't say it never happens. Every situation is different, but sometimes you need to take a step back to move forward. I'm glad Jules is playing well, but let's not act like he's not capable of reverting. Let's just enjoy the ride and see where it takes the team.
When you say "reverting" to what do you refer? That really bad 20/10/5 season last year?
We signed him at 25 to the Fizdale squad and he wasnt bad. The team sucked, Randle played hard. Then we get MIP and 4th seed Randle. Then we get a grumpy 20/10/5 on a team with a lot of problems. Now are getting all star Randle.Randle's been good here. Hopefully its more of the same "reverting" feels so negative. We all thought he could be better. So did he. Look at how's it's played out.
People were desperate last year to paint the Randle/Thibs combo as bad but it seems to be working ok short and long term
Iggy wasn't breaking down. He was still in his prime when they shipped him. By reverting I mean returning to being sub par. His entire career has seen one good season followed by one bad season. He fooled me once. Let's see him carry forward into future seasons. I hope he does. Still think we should trade him.You have a 25/10/5 two way forward who's 28 and shares the ball. Who are you getting back that helps us? Randle is literally playing his way into being untradeable. The way Randle shares the ball you just need to upgrade the guys around him... Or trade him for Luka/Giannis/Bam
No, it's me not getting overly excited about a team that's one game over .500. This team isn't good enough and needs to be tore down. I've been pretty consistent with the strategy the team needss to take. Rather than asking what we can get for Randle, I'll ask you what the needs could require that would make this team be taken seriously.
A few months ago, some argued that Randle should be traded post haste. That his trade value wasnt getting any higher. I thought Randle was capable of increasing his trade value, before the first deadline. And sure enough he has.
I agree, this is the time to trade him. For some of the reasons you gave, like the up and down seasons. Randle's numbers are great these days, but I still have serious doubts about his ability to be a clutch performer. Thats not including the playoffs.
We've seen All-Star level production at times from Randle, not much in the way of consistent clutch play. The numbers arent there.
From the third or fourth option a lack of clutch play is tolerable. Not from the first or second option. Doubt we can find that player without trading Randle. Dont know who is available, but at the very least I'd like to see the FO test the market.
Why are you worried about "clutch" when you have a guy who draws doubles and gives up the ball? Who's already shown he will defer to a better scorer?
It makes so little sense I assume you just dont want to be honest about not liking the guy.
You arent even disagreeing with me. You're saying in effect "so what" if our go to guy isnt clutch? So what if our star cant hit the winning shot any better than a bench player? This is fanboyism on steroids.
This board used to be a good place for bball talk. Feels more like a cult these days.
Love when guys talk their views into reality.
Who the hell thinks Randle is a number ONE??
He is a good player. Strong PF who can creat mismatches and demand double teams. Makes less than most at same production level. Puts up 20/10 annually and you think we should trade him asap?. Who is in the cult?And that's the issue. If we had a number #1 then this wouldn't be a discussion. Right now, with Randle as the #1, this team looks like a first round out. That's if they make the playoffs. I don't want to single out just Randle. RJ is going to show it too. Right now this looks like a treadmill team and the team is going to have to shake things up to get out of the rut. Wembeyama is out of the question now, but this team really needs to accumulate talent. Grimes and Quick are good starts, but this team needs more.
Is he getting a ONE's salary?
Is he keeping us from adding a ONE?
You make no sense.
With this mentality Bucks would be trading Middleton. Who makes almost double of what Randle makes. Miami has two others beside Butler who make more than Randle.
Basically every other number two and three on Chip contending team makes more than Randle.
This is the type of Knick dumb shit move we all make fun of in the past. Yet you want this FO do the same. SmhWhat does salary have to do with whether he's the team's number one option or not? You're saying Luka Doncic wasn't the Mavs number 1 option last year even because THJ, KP and Dinwiddie made more than him? He still makes money and takes up cap space, am I correct? As far as I can see, this team isn't in a position to sign a true number one outright... So the answer is yes, his presence does prevent the team from signing a real star if one were to become available via free agency. I don't care what what other second and third stars make on other teams. I only care that the Knicks don't have a #1 of their own.
Salary has everything to do with it!!
Unless you think true number ones are available for rookie contracts or $25M?
Luka was Mavs draft pick. But don't mention that.
Us not having a true number one has NOTHING to do with Randle.
How is he keeping us from a true number one?True rookie number ones don't become available when you're doing everything in your power to spin around in a perpetual hamster wheel. Salary has nothing to do with Julius being the team's #1. He is by default, whether he was $20M or $25M, because the team is middling. My point is, and I m sure you agree, is that he's not a true #1. As long as he stays that, the team will stay in a holding pattern of meaningless first round exits and low lottery picks. The Knicks need to spin Randle into more assets so they can have enough chips to trade when a superstar becomes available or they can draft one. The next two years of RJ, Randle and JB isn't getting me excited. I like the growth of IQ, Obi, Sims and Grimes, but they're likely ceilings are mid to high level role players. This team needs more.
Why don't you just say that you want to trade Randle because you want to tank every year to play the lottery pool...because essentially that is your entire argument. And after Randle is traded then Brunson becomes #1 - so you trade him as well? After all, you need the cap space and tankability. Then after that RJ.....dump him as well....and bring in Fiz to coach.
Regardles of what you think, there are no quick fixes. Even benefitting from a #1 pick tank is a 4 year process that might not lead to anything.
I'm enjoying the ride. Sure it has its ups and downs, but progress is never linear. Team is developing young assets and draft picks for potential growth or trade upgrades. I don't need a starphuck or tankathon to keep me invested.
No to JB because he's an easy piece to incorporate on to most rosters. RJ.... I'm rooting for the kid, but you can make the case that he might be the easiest position to upgrade on the roster. I'm rooting for the kid and I'm not trying to be a d@#k, but RJ has yet to show hes a legit starter on a good team. Not saying he can't start on a good team, but that he would likely be the weakest link. I'd be hard pressed to say that he's even too 25 at his position. The only reason no one is really pushing trade RJ is because his value doesn't make those discussions worthwhile. I'm glad you're enjoying our mid three. I'm enjoying them too. But the bottomline is that they aren't good enough. Our core assets are OK, but there are teams that have better. If this team wants to contend they to need circle around and figure out a way to get premium talent, either through the draft or through a trade. The trade route doesn't seem feasible, so I guess the best route is through the draft.
Panos wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Panos wrote:LA Trades still dangerous LeBron to NY, making Randle being clutch less necessary with the GOAT as the number one option.Panos wrote:Ok. Trade proposal:
Chicago trades peak Scottie Pippen for Randle.
Who says no? Why?Pippen+GOAT(Jordan)= Championship
Randle+GOAT(LBJ)= ????
Ive said that if we can keep Randle and add James, and leave a roster good enough to contend, I hope the FO goes for it. Otherwise, I'd like to see the FO try that formula with another player.
To answer your question about a 4th option. Im mostly talking about crunch time, not touches. A team could have a very clutch 6th man ahead of Randle in those situations. Not necessarily putting up better numbers.
Please answer the essence of the question.
Is there any reason why championship Jordan teams would do worse with Randle as #2?
You cant handle the truth!
You need Pippen on that wall!!
OK, maybe not. But you need the greatest basketball player, playoff performer, in NBA history, in this hypothetical, to make your argument. Which was what I was getting at.
Those championship Bulls teams were a well oiled machine. Everyone knew their role and performed them at a high level, consistently. I honestly dont know if Randle could do the consistency part.
In fairness, Ron Harper took some time to become that player in Chicago. But I honestly cant venture a guess. that franchise really had its act together. Even when they were fighting lol. They found a way to make things work.
martin wrote:Marv wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Marv wrote:Panos wrote:GustavBahler wrote:
A few months ago, some argued that Randle should be traded post haste. That his trade value wasnt getting any higher. I thought Randle was capable of increasing his trade value, before the first deadline. And sure enough he has.I agree, this is the time to trade him. For some of the reasons you gave, like the up and down seasons. Randle's numbers are great these days, but I still have serious doubts about his ability to be a clutch performer. Thats not including the playoffs.
We've seen All-Star level production at times from Randle, not much in the way of consistent clutch play. The numbers arent there.
From the third or fourth option a lack of clutch play is tolerable. Not from the first or second option. Doubt we can find that player without trading Randle. Dont know who is available, but at the very least I'd like to see the FO test the market.
I'm kind of tired of reading this opinion that Randie would be ok as a "3rd or 4th option".
That's pretty disingenuous.
Show me a team that has a player as dominant as Randle as a FOURTH option. Seriously.
I mean are you talking about teaming him up with Kobe, Shaq and Karl Malone?
Show me a championship team in the last 30 years where Randle is your fourth best player.
I'd argue that Randle is plenty good enough to be a number 2 on a championship squad. He just needs his Jordan/Kobe/Curry/Frazier/Wroten.fixed
You were AWOL for years, trolling the fans who were stickng around to post. Blow it out your geriatric ass.
now gustav. we all have days like this. where do you want to meet for a martini and a couple of laughs?
MARTINI MAN DATE. Do it, Marv makes the best martini's, trust me
Havent been to NY in a very long time, so a trip is in order.
I know it's a fake, but reasoning is sound, even if I don't necessarily agree.
Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: https://twitter.com/brock_aller/status/1610325195981754368
Click here to view the Tweet
franco12 wrote:Brock Aller seems to want to trade Randle!I know it's a fake, but reasoning is sound, even if I don't necessarily agree.
Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: https://twitter.com/brock_aller/status/1610325195981754368
Click here to view the Tweet
martin wrote:Not sound reasoning IMHO, baseline assumption is that Randle needs to be the #1 on your team and I don’t think too many people share that idea.franco12 wrote:Brock Aller seems to want to trade Randle!I know it's a fake, but reasoning is sound, even if I don't necessarily agree.
Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: https://twitter.com/brock_aller/status/1610325195981754368
Click here to view the Tweet
does Randle and this roster get us to the finals? I think the blunt answer is no. Hinkie the roster, trade Randle.
HofstraBBall wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:GustavBahler wrote:fishmike wrote:GustavBahler wrote:the bold is literally just saying "I just dont like the guy"BigDaddyG wrote:fishmike wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:for who? That's just "you dont like watching Randle"fishmike wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:Marbury was toxic and Sixers were hardly an upcoming team. Iggy was breaking down and they wanted to move on from him and Elton Brand and go young.fishmike wrote:blkexec wrote:Can anyone name a time in the NBA where a team trying to build up it's program traded it's best player in the prime of their career?franco12 wrote:Trade him now?Well for the fans that wanted to trade him, this is the perfect time. But not happening. Hard to find star players who understand the nyc culture and can thrive in it.
Randle has been beasting. JB is also his savior. Randle looks different with JB on the team.
It NEVER happens... you know why? SPOILER: It's stupid!
Randle is playing great. There's also a real upside to Randle's game that isn't talked about enough. Plain and simple he gives up the ball. While he may pound/hold it he's no black hole and even when he's scoring a ton he's still moving the ball and looking for shooters and cutters.
Randle looks just as happy making the great pass as he does scoring. He's really integrated well with Brunson and the guy he's showing more and more chemistry with is Grimes.
The redemption tour is a hot ticket... keep it up Jules.
Sixers did it with Iggy, the Sun's did it with Marbury and the Mavs did it with Kidd. I won't say it never happens. Every situation is different, but sometimes you need to take a step back to move forward. I'm glad Jules is playing well, but let's not act like he's not capable of reverting. Let's just enjoy the ride and see where it takes the team.
When you say "reverting" to what do you refer? That really bad 20/10/5 season last year?
We signed him at 25 to the Fizdale squad and he wasnt bad. The team sucked, Randle played hard. Then we get MIP and 4th seed Randle. Then we get a grumpy 20/10/5 on a team with a lot of problems. Now are getting all star Randle.Randle's been good here. Hopefully its more of the same "reverting" feels so negative. We all thought he could be better. So did he. Look at how's it's played out.
People were desperate last year to paint the Randle/Thibs combo as bad but it seems to be working ok short and long term
Iggy wasn't breaking down. He was still in his prime when they shipped him. By reverting I mean returning to being sub par. His entire career has seen one good season followed by one bad season. He fooled me once. Let's see him carry forward into future seasons. I hope he does. Still think we should trade him.You have a 25/10/5 two way forward who's 28 and shares the ball. Who are you getting back that helps us? Randle is literally playing his way into being untradeable. The way Randle shares the ball you just need to upgrade the guys around him... Or trade him for Luka/Giannis/Bam
No, it's me not getting overly excited about a team that's one game over .500. This team isn't good enough and needs to be tore down. I've been pretty consistent with the strategy the team needss to take. Rather than asking what we can get for Randle, I'll ask you what the needs could require that would make this team be taken seriously.
A few months ago, some argued that Randle should be traded post haste. That his trade value wasnt getting any higher. I thought Randle was capable of increasing his trade value, before the first deadline. And sure enough he has.
I agree, this is the time to trade him. For some of the reasons you gave, like the up and down seasons. Randle's numbers are great these days, but I still have serious doubts about his ability to be a clutch performer. Thats not including the playoffs.
We've seen All-Star level production at times from Randle, not much in the way of consistent clutch play. The numbers arent there.
From the third or fourth option a lack of clutch play is tolerable. Not from the first or second option. Doubt we can find that player without trading Randle. Dont know who is available, but at the very least I'd like to see the FO test the market.
Why are you worried about "clutch" when you have a guy who draws doubles and gives up the ball? Who's already shown he will defer to a better scorer?
It makes so little sense I assume you just dont want to be honest about not liking the guy.
You arent even disagreeing with me. You're saying in effect "so what" if our go to guy isnt clutch? So what if our star cant hit the winning shot any better than a bench player? This is fanboyism on steroids.
This board used to be a good place for bball talk. Feels more like a cult these days.
Love when guys talk their views into reality.
Who the hell thinks Randle is a number ONE??
He is a good player. Strong PF who can creat mismatches and demand double teams. Makes less than most at same production level. Puts up 20/10 annually and you think we should trade him asap?. Who is in the cult?And that's the issue. If we had a number #1 then this wouldn't be a discussion. Right now, with Randle as the #1, this team looks like a first round out. That's if they make the playoffs. I don't want to single out just Randle. RJ is going to show it too. Right now this looks like a treadmill team and the team is going to have to shake things up to get out of the rut. Wembeyama is out of the question now, but this team really needs to accumulate talent. Grimes and Quick are good starts, but this team needs more.
Is he getting a ONE's salary?
Is he keeping us from adding a ONE?
You make no sense.
With this mentality Bucks would be trading Middleton. Who makes almost double of what Randle makes. Miami has two others beside Butler who make more than Randle.
Basically every other number two and three on Chip contending team makes more than Randle.
This is the type of Knick dumb shit move we all make fun of in the past. Yet you want this FO do the same. SmhWhat does salary have to do with whether he's the team's number one option or not? You're saying Luka Doncic wasn't the Mavs number 1 option last year even because THJ, KP and Dinwiddie made more than him? He still makes money and takes up cap space, am I correct? As far as I can see, this team isn't in a position to sign a true number one outright... So the answer is yes, his presence does prevent the team from signing a real star if one were to become available via free agency. I don't care what what other second and third stars make on other teams. I only care that the Knicks don't have a #1 of their own.
Salary has everything to do with it!!
Unless you think true number ones are available for rookie contracts or $25M?
Luka was Mavs draft pick. But don't mention that.
Us not having a true number one has NOTHING to do with Randle.
How is he keeping us from a true number one?True rookie number ones don't become available when you're doing everything in your power to spin around in a perpetual hamster wheel. Salary has nothing to do with Julius being the team's #1. He is by default, whether he was $20M or $25M, because the team is middling. My point is, and I m sure you agree, is that he's not a true #1. As long as he stays that, the team will stay in a holding pattern of meaningless first round exits and low lottery picks. The Knicks need to spin Randle into more assets so they can have enough chips to trade when a superstar becomes available or they can draft one. The next two years of RJ, Randle and JB isn't getting me excited. I like the growth of IQ, Obi, Sims and Grimes, but they're likely ceilings are mid to high level role players. This team needs more.
Agree with everything you said.
However, I am sure that you know we have several players we can get rid of that make a lot of money and are not that good. The notion that in order to get a true number one is only by trading Randle is just something Randle haters say.
If you remember, we had enough assets to get DM. We chose not to. It wasn't because Randle's contract was keeping us from doing so.
To go back to what Randle is making. FOs absolutely take into account market value/production costs. Ie. "What other players are making" You see, you have to consider what it will cost to replace similar level of production. Unless the goal is not to improve. If we are paying Randle less than other teams number two's, that makes our team better. As it will allow us more cap to add a number one,three four and five. You are also ignoring the basic principle of trading a player. Who are we getting in return? Haters don't care. Some of us recognized the hate, the market, return and the talent Randle has shown on consistent basis. Despite his flaws. He is one of the best values at power forwards in the league. You don't trade that for scraps. You get him a true number one and add better pieces to the puzzle.
Randle has played great this season and yet his game warts will likely remain. Whether you like/support Randle or you don't - it's not illogical or wrong to trade a player when he's playing well. When he was struggling and a good portion of this board was more open to trading Randle - the excuses were we couldn't sell so low as his value was little.
No doubt he's played much better but it comes down to if you think he will sustain this level of play or not. My main issue is even if he does sustain this level - are we really significant to teams like Boston, Milwaukee, etc... I believe we are at least a tier beneath (prob 2 tiers). So what is realistic if we ride Randle (our best player this season) and keep him in the star role - despite he's more of a 2nd or 3rd tier star? Can we keep adding good to very good players and try to replicate the 2004 Pistons or do we use Randle (and maybe RJ too) to upgrade to a true star that is clutch, more consistent, plays both sides and leads through example even when things go south? I agree there are very few players worth paying the cost to upgrade.
I have been more supportive of trading Randle and trying to land a top draft pick this offseason (supposedly a great draft) - with the hopes that packaging our pick and a traded 1st could move us into 5-7 area where we could find a top player. Of course it's risky and Randle is 20-10 so that's safer - just don't see how we incrementally move up with mid-teen draft picks (no matter how many we have) and lots of good players that are in limbo with their roles and playing time here (eg IQ, Toppin, Cam). We oould pivot and look to move RJ instead... but who is more likely to develop/progress? A 22 y/o or a 28 y/o? Both can give you a mostly inefficient 20 pts and rebounds and ball domination (save recent Randle) but they don't seem to complement each other so do think a decision needs to be made. Who has more value on the market? Grimes looks better with Randle vs RJ so maybe we need to really look at that and pick one or the other.
Regardless of what happens (or doesn't) - we should be focused on what plan/option gives us the most opportunities to progress without getting stuck in mediocrity - which while enjoyable compared to sucking - can actually be more difficult in terms of team building.
GustavBahler wrote:Panos wrote:You cant handle the truth!GustavBahler wrote:Please answer the essence of the question.Panos wrote:LA Trades still dangerous LeBron to NY, making Randle being clutch less necessary with the GOAT as the number one option.Panos wrote:Ok. Trade proposal:
Chicago trades peak Scottie Pippen for Randle.
Who says no? Why?Pippen+GOAT(Jordan)= Championship
Randle+GOAT(LBJ)= ????
Ive said that if we can keep Randle and add James, and leave a roster good enough to contend, I hope the FO goes for it. Otherwise, I'd like to see the FO try that formula with another player.
To answer your question about a 4th option. Im mostly talking about crunch time, not touches. A team could have a very clutch 6th man ahead of Randle in those situations. Not necessarily putting up better numbers.
Is there any reason why championship Jordan teams would do worse with Randle as #2?You need Pippen on that wall!!
OK, maybe not. But you need the greatest basketball player, playoff performer, in NBA history, in this hypothetical, to make your argument. Which was what I was getting at.
Those championship Bulls teams were a well oiled machine. Everyone knew their role and performed them at a high level, consistently. I honestly dont know if Randle could do the consistency part.
In fairness, Ron Harper took some time to become that player in Chicago. But I honestly cant venture a guess. that franchise really had its act together. Even when they were fighting lol. They found a way to make things work.
Forget Jordan.
Why are you going to such lengths NOT to answer the question.
Why is Pippen a better #2 than Randle? Which facet of the game?
Panos wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Panos wrote:You cant handle the truth!GustavBahler wrote:Please answer the essence of the question.Panos wrote:LA Trades still dangerous LeBron to NY, making Randle being clutch less necessary with the GOAT as the number one option.Panos wrote:Ok. Trade proposal:
Chicago trades peak Scottie Pippen for Randle.
Who says no? Why?Pippen+GOAT(Jordan)= Championship
Randle+GOAT(LBJ)= ????
Ive said that if we can keep Randle and add James, and leave a roster good enough to contend, I hope the FO goes for it. Otherwise, I'd like to see the FO try that formula with another player.
To answer your question about a 4th option. Im mostly talking about crunch time, not touches. A team could have a very clutch 6th man ahead of Randle in those situations. Not necessarily putting up better numbers.
Is there any reason why championship Jordan teams would do worse with Randle as #2?You need Pippen on that wall!!
OK, maybe not. But you need the greatest basketball player, playoff performer, in NBA history, in this hypothetical, to make your argument. Which was what I was getting at.
Those championship Bulls teams were a well oiled machine. Everyone knew their role and performed them at a high level, consistently. I honestly dont know if Randle could do the consistency part.
In fairness, Ron Harper took some time to become that player in Chicago. But I honestly cant venture a guess. that franchise really had its act together. Even when they were fighting lol. They found a way to make things work.
Forget Jordan.
Why are you going to such lengths NOT to answer the question.
Why is Pippen a better #2 than Randle? Which facet of the game?
What a buzzkill..
This is some fantasy sports/time travel scenario, Im supposed to solve??
You are upset that Im not answering the question exactly the way you want me to. For me to do that, I would have to accept the premise of a current player whose game is the result (in part) of 25+ years of BBall evolution. Going back in time, and then comparing individual stats.
Not factor at all in how Randle would respond to a completely different team, situation, as a human being. Not to mention your premise involves the best player of all time, which will skew the results, to say the least.
My answer is I dont know if Pippen is a better fit. There are too many variables. Not just about stats, or a player's game. Or you could plug in any 20/10 player next to Jordan.
The Pippen led Bulls took us to the limit in 93-94, as the number one option. Could Randle have done the same? Since we're going off on a tangent..
GustavBahler wrote:Panos wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Panos wrote:You cant handle the truth!GustavBahler wrote:Please answer the essence of the question.Panos wrote:LA Trades still dangerous LeBron to NY, making Randle being clutch less necessary with the GOAT as the number one option.Panos wrote:Ok. Trade proposal:
Chicago trades peak Scottie Pippen for Randle.
Who says no? Why?Pippen+GOAT(Jordan)= Championship
Randle+GOAT(LBJ)= ????
Ive said that if we can keep Randle and add James, and leave a roster good enough to contend, I hope the FO goes for it. Otherwise, I'd like to see the FO try that formula with another player.
To answer your question about a 4th option. Im mostly talking about crunch time, not touches. A team could have a very clutch 6th man ahead of Randle in those situations. Not necessarily putting up better numbers.
Is there any reason why championship Jordan teams would do worse with Randle as #2?You need Pippen on that wall!!
OK, maybe not. But you need the greatest basketball player, playoff performer, in NBA history, in this hypothetical, to make your argument. Which was what I was getting at.
Those championship Bulls teams were a well oiled machine. Everyone knew their role and performed them at a high level, consistently. I honestly dont know if Randle could do the consistency part.
In fairness, Ron Harper took some time to become that player in Chicago. But I honestly cant venture a guess. that franchise really had its act together. Even when they were fighting lol. They found a way to make things work.
Forget Jordan.
Why are you going to such lengths NOT to answer the question.
Why is Pippen a better #2 than Randle? Which facet of the game?What a buzzkill..
This is some fantasy sports/time travel scenario, Im supposed to solve??
You are upset that Im not answering the question exactly the way you want me to. For me to do that, I would have to accept the premise of a current player whose game is the result (in part) of 25+ years of BBall evolution. Going back in time, and then comparing individual stats.
Not factor at all in how Randle would respond to a completely different team, situation, as a human being. Not to mention your premise involves the best player of all time, which will skew the results, to say the least.
My answer is I dont know if Pippen is a better fit. There are too many variables. Not just about stats, or a player's game. Or you could plug in any 20/10 player next to Jordan.
The Pippen led Bulls took us to the limit in 93-94, as the number one option. Could Randle have done the same? Since we're going off on a tangent..
Here's some history: Julius has a higher efg% (.544/.529p) rebs (09.9/8.9) and assts (3.8/3.4) than Dirk Nowitzki in his MVP year (both age 28/9th season). Dirk averaged more points (24.6 vs. 24.2). If Dirk can win a championship, I'm sure it's possible for Randle as well. It's all about team building.
As far as wanting a "no. 1", who are the guys that fit your criteria?
KD
LBJ
Curry
Giannis
Jokic
Kawhi
Tatum
Morant
Butler
Booker
Paul George
anyone else?
gradyandrew wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Panos wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Panos wrote:You cant handle the truth!GustavBahler wrote:Please answer the essence of the question.Panos wrote:LA Trades still dangerous LeBron to NY, making Randle being clutch less necessary with the GOAT as the number one option.Panos wrote:Ok. Trade proposal:
Chicago trades peak Scottie Pippen for Randle.
Who says no? Why?Pippen+GOAT(Jordan)= Championship
Randle+GOAT(LBJ)= ????
Ive said that if we can keep Randle and add James, and leave a roster good enough to contend, I hope the FO goes for it. Otherwise, I'd like to see the FO try that formula with another player.
To answer your question about a 4th option. Im mostly talking about crunch time, not touches. A team could have a very clutch 6th man ahead of Randle in those situations. Not necessarily putting up better numbers.
Is there any reason why championship Jordan teams would do worse with Randle as #2?You need Pippen on that wall!!
OK, maybe not. But you need the greatest basketball player, playoff performer, in NBA history, in this hypothetical, to make your argument. Which was what I was getting at.
Those championship Bulls teams were a well oiled machine. Everyone knew their role and performed them at a high level, consistently. I honestly dont know if Randle could do the consistency part.
In fairness, Ron Harper took some time to become that player in Chicago. But I honestly cant venture a guess. that franchise really had its act together. Even when they were fighting lol. They found a way to make things work.
Forget Jordan.
Why are you going to such lengths NOT to answer the question.
Why is Pippen a better #2 than Randle? Which facet of the game?What a buzzkill..
This is some fantasy sports/time travel scenario, Im supposed to solve??
You are upset that Im not answering the question exactly the way you want me to. For me to do that, I would have to accept the premise of a current player whose game is the result (in part) of 25+ years of BBall evolution. Going back in time, and then comparing individual stats.
Not factor at all in how Randle would respond to a completely different team, situation, as a human being. Not to mention your premise involves the best player of all time, which will skew the results, to say the least.
My answer is I dont know if Pippen is a better fit. There are too many variables. Not just about stats, or a player's game. Or you could plug in any 20/10 player next to Jordan.
The Pippen led Bulls took us to the limit in 93-94, as the number one option. Could Randle have done the same? Since we're going off on a tangent..
Here's some history: Julius has a higher efg% (.544/.529p) rebs (09.9/8.9) and assts (3.8/3.4) than Dirk Nowitzki in his MVP year (both age 28/9th season). Dirk averaged more points (24.6 vs. 24.2). If Dirk can win a championship, I'm sure it's possible for Randle as well. It's all about team building.
As far as wanting a "no. 1", who are the guys that fit your criteria?KD
LBJ
Curry
Giannis
Jokic
Kawhi
Tatum
Morant
Butler
Booker
Paul Georgeanyone else?
Why cherry pick seasons. Anyone who sees this will naturally want to see how both players compare for their careers. Once they do they'll see that one is a HOFer and the other is a guy who's had a couple of good seasons intermingled with a bunch of underwhelming ones.
franco12 wrote:martin wrote:Not sound reasoning IMHO, baseline assumption is that Randle needs to be the #1 on your team and I don’t think too many people share that idea.franco12 wrote:Brock Aller seems to want to trade Randle!I know it's a fake, but reasoning is sound, even if I don't necessarily agree.
Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: https://twitter.com/brock_aller/status/1610325195981754368
Click here to view the Tweetdoes Randle and this roster get us to the finals? I think the blunt answer is no. Hinkie the roster, trade Randle.
This would be fun. Let's trade our best player for a chance at watching a whole bunch of Frank's, Kevin Knox's, Obi Toppins and RJ Barrett's underachieve? F that. Rinse repeat crowd crazy.
In case the trade Randle to rebuild the right fans have not noticed...The only a two guys that seem ready to be part of a chip team is Randle and JB. Both added through FA. We have RJ who is borderline and may be there in two years. He was a three pick.
Why exactly do we have to trade our best player to rebuild? We have proved that solid pieces can be had with late 1's or 2's. Ie. Grimes, IQ and MR.
Why not just trade the ones that have not shown much instead? I am sure we can get seconds back.
Nah, why keep good players and continue to build. Burn the whole thing down....again.
franco12 wrote:Is that a real arguement? I cant tell... does Brunson get us to the finals? Trade him (and his dad). I mean that makes zero sense..martin wrote:Not sound reasoning IMHO, baseline assumption is that Randle needs to be the #1 on your team and I don’t think too many people share that idea.franco12 wrote:Brock Aller seems to want to trade Randle!I know it's a fake, but reasoning is sound, even if I don't necessarily agree.
Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: https://twitter.com/brock_aller/status/1610325195981754368
Click here to view the Tweetdoes Randle and this roster get us to the finals? I think the blunt answer is no. Hinkie the roster, trade Randle.
Lets say we got a Kawhi caliber wing. Does having a PF who draws doubles and lives off a post/dish game seem useful? Elite rebounder? + defensive player?
NOBODY has EVER said Julius is or should be a #1. He's shown to be a most willing passer and take accountability at the same time.
If got a true #1 Randle would be getting said player better looks, not taking touches. Has he had issues integrating with Brunson?
Randle's also one of the most physical guys in the league. Splash brothers dont win shit without Draymond so yeah, Randle is 100% the kind of guy we need to get to the finals. That doesnt mean I want him taking the gamewinner