Knicks · For those that feel Randle is a bad fit, how about........ (page 1)
A couple of PF's I have been open to are Jackson, Ingram, Pascal and Grant. Ingram and Pascal will be too expensive. However, Grant should be available and seems to be a good fit. He will average $33M for next 3 years. So decent value. He fits with JB and would work well if another star at the 2 was added. Maybe Blazers flip Randle for extra picks if they continue to rebuild, shed salary with expiring EF or add pieces around Randle to be competitive? Randle, Fournier, Arcidiacono, two seconds for Grant, Brogdon.
The dream would be Jackson. Probably not something that the Grizzlies are close to doing but worth hoping. Would obviously take a lot of picks but maybe if they do not do anything this year they try to save some salary being a smaller market team? So, Jackson, Kennard (gives us another shooter), Williams for Randle, Fournier, Sims and three firsts.
Feelings?
HofstraBBall wrote:Some on here knows how much I defend Julius. Seems like since he started here. Mainly because of his consistent double double production but mostly because of the value.A couple of PF's I have been open to are Jackson, Ingram, Pascal and Grant. Ingram and Pascal will be too expensive. However, Grant should be available and seems to be a good fit. He will average $33M for next 3 years. So decent value. He fits with JB and would work well if another star at the 2 was added. Maybe Blazers flip Randle for extra picks if they continue to rebuild, shed salary with expiring EF or add pieces around Randle to be competitive? Randle, Fournier, Arcidiacono, two seconds for Grant, Brogdon.
The dream would be Jackson. Probably not something that the Grizzlies are close to doing but worth hoping. Would obviously take a lot of picks but maybe if they do not do anything this year they try to save some salary being a smaller market team? So, Jackson, Kennard (gives us another shooter), Williams for Randle, Fournier, Sims and three firsts.
Feelings?
I’m hard on Randle mostly cause I’ve always expected a little more from him. 24/10/5 and I am still giving him shit. I think he is “good” and a lot of players would do “good” with this usage and the faith of the coach.
But he puts his head down too much. He dribbles the ball a bit too much. And he basically telegraphs when he is gonna shoot putting himself into some tougher situations than he needs.
I don’t think we can easily replace him on this contract and am not “rushing” to get rid of him. But if he wants a heliocentric offense that revolves around him, he needs to make sure he is handing out the ball. Even with 5 assists per game, I think he can do more.
Your proposed trade for Grant and Brogdon works. I think Randle is a little more “healthy” than Grant. Grant is a bit more of a super-role player. He and OG would be pretty solid point of defense. I don’t know that Grant is my #2 guy of my dreams. If I knew a Mitchell-type scorer was coming, I’d
I’m kind of waiting to see how this team does with the two day break in between games. I also am comfortable finding a simpler trade for Fournier and waiting to see if Mikal Bridges ever gets his freedom.
Maybe after a a couple good playoff runs and Randle's value is solidified as that type of guy. We can do what Toronto did with Derozan and parlay him with some picks for a Kwahi. Even if not just continue to have a winning org and develop draft picks and make smart moves adapting to the times.
But the key is regardless of is we view him as a championship star or not. Putting him and Brunson in a position a succeed. Then and see if that elevates their games at all. Some more spacing in the frontcourt would be the next step in doing so.
ToddTT wrote:
Forgot we were speaking Todd...
EwingsGlass wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:Some on here knows how much I defend Julius. Seems like since he started here. Mainly because of his consistent double double production but mostly because of the value.A couple of PF's I have been open to are Jackson, Ingram, Pascal and Grant. Ingram and Pascal will be too expensive. However, Grant should be available and seems to be a good fit. He will average $33M for next 3 years. So decent value. He fits with JB and would work well if another star at the 2 was added. Maybe Blazers flip Randle for extra picks if they continue to rebuild, shed salary with expiring EF or add pieces around Randle to be competitive? Randle, Fournier, Arcidiacono, two seconds for Grant, Brogdon.
The dream would be Jackson. Probably not something that the Grizzlies are close to doing but worth hoping. Would obviously take a lot of picks but maybe if they do not do anything this year they try to save some salary being a smaller market team? So, Jackson, Kennard (gives us another shooter), Williams for Randle, Fournier, Sims and three firsts.
Feelings?
I’m hard on Randle mostly cause I’ve always expected a little more from him. 24/10/5 and I am still giving him shit. I think he is “good” and a lot of players would do “good” with this usage and the faith of the coach.
But he puts his head down too much. He dribbles the ball a bit too much. And he basically telegraphs when he is gonna shoot putting himself into some tougher situations than he needs.
I don’t think we can easily replace him on this contract and am not “rushing” to get rid of him. But if he wants a heliocentric offense that revolves around him, he needs to make sure he is handing out the ball. Even with 5 assists per game, I think he can do more.
Your proposed trade for Grant and Brogdon works. I think Randle is a little more “healthy” than Grant. Grant is a bit more of a super-role player. He and OG would be pretty solid point of defense. I don’t know that Grant is my #2 guy of my dreams. If I knew a Mitchell-type scorer was coming, I’d
I’m kind of waiting to see how this team does with the two day break in between games. I also am comfortable finding a simpler trade for Fournier and waiting to see if Mikal Bridges ever gets his freedom.
Good points. We can both agree there are a lot of things Randle does wrong. One of the biggest reasons I have defended him is that I always feel it is easy to gauge a players value by going through the motions of seeing what would be some possible options. My typical conclusion is that most PFs we get in return, are ever much better or offer the same value.
With EVERY player added in return ALSO having defects. Feel too many just say Randle can't do this and can't do that but offer no options or assume we will get someone who is perfect for similar money.
Agree that Grant would be a good alternative. Question would be does it translate to more wins. Like we are seeing with OG, no one really knows until they play together.
newyorknewyork wrote:Love him or hate him we are stuck with Randle. Leon Rose can only look to actually build a team with Brunson & Randle as the featured scorers and a deep overall team with high end rotational players like OG, Hart, Hartenstein, DDV, etc etc..Maybe after a a couple good playoff runs and Randle's value is solidified as that type of guy. We can do what Toronto did with Derozan and parlay him with some picks for a Kwahi. Even if not just continue to have a winning org and develop draft picks and make smart moves adapting to the times.
But the key is regardless of is we view him as a championship star or not. Putting him and Brunson in a position a succeed. Then and see if that elevates their games at all. Some more spacing in the frontcourt would be the next step in doing so.
Think your point about adding spacing is spot on. Feel we did that with OG and Devo. We were missing that with RJ and Grimes struggling.
Not sure if you can say we are "stuck" with Randle. His value is better than Knicks fans think and like RJ, feel there are teams that would be happy to have him.
You look at Toronto trading OG, yeah money was going to be an issue, but maybe they under appreciated his defense and were looking for a more aggressive player like RJ.
Many teams may want the offensive physicality Randle consistently shows.
Ie. Portland wishing Grant was more physical.
Clean wrote:The dynamics of the team has changed. JB, Randle and RJ did not fit at all and one of RJ or Randle needed to go. I said so many times. Now after RJ is gone for a much better fitting OG we have to evaluate on the new set of info presented to us. So right now I am not beating on the trade Randle drum as hard as I have in the past. Lets see how this new team does and give him another chance in the playoffs. One more league history like worse playoff run and we are back on that drum again.
Agreed. Was on the same track regarding RJ. Although, also hoped he would change and become more team oriented. Since he was such a high pick. Preferred Randle staying because felt he had something superior to other players at his position. Where RJ was average in comparison to his peers. Will be curious to see how RJ fits in Toronto. Feel they are doing better moreso because of IQ.
Observations.
1. Brogdon and Grant came up big. Scored 12 out of 15 points in OT. Grant, big block to seal it.
Brogdon with ice in veins. Two big threes and solid drive.
2. Bridges likes to shoot. Blinders are always on. Can't see anyone wanting to play with that.
Maybe Nova boys? JB would not like him taking his shots.
EwingsGlass wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:Some on here knows how much I defend Julius. Seems like since he started here. Mainly because of his consistent double double production but mostly because of the value.A couple of PF's I have been open to are Jackson, Ingram, Pascal and Grant. Ingram and Pascal will be too expensive. However, Grant should be available and seems to be a good fit. He will average $33M for next 3 years. So decent value. He fits with JB and would work well if another star at the 2 was added. Maybe Blazers flip Randle for extra picks if they continue to rebuild, shed salary with expiring EF or add pieces around Randle to be competitive? Randle, Fournier, Arcidiacono, two seconds for Grant, Brogdon.
The dream would be Jackson. Probably not something that the Grizzlies are close to doing but worth hoping. Would obviously take a lot of picks but maybe if they do not do anything this year they try to save some salary being a smaller market team? So, Jackson, Kennard (gives us another shooter), Williams for Randle, Fournier, Sims and three firsts.
Feelings?
I’m hard on Randle mostly cause I’ve always expected a little more from him. 24/10/5 and I am still giving him shit. I think he is “good” and a lot of players would do “good” with this usage and the faith of the coach.
But he puts his head down too much. He dribbles the ball a bit too much. And he basically telegraphs when he is gonna shoot putting himself into some tougher situations than he needs.
I don’t think we can easily replace him on this contract and am not “rushing” to get rid of him. But if he wants a heliocentric offense that revolves around him, he needs to make sure he is handing out the ball. Even with 5 assists per game, I think he can do more.
Your proposed trade for Grant and Brogdon works. I think Randle is a little more “healthy” than Grant. Grant is a bit more of a super-role player. He and OG would be pretty solid point of defense. I don’t know that Grant is my #2 guy of my dreams. If I knew a Mitchell-type scorer was coming, I’d
I’m kind of waiting to see how this team does with the two day break in between games. I also am comfortable finding a simpler trade for Fournier and waiting to see if Mikal Bridges ever gets his freedom.
I think the highlighted statement is wrong in a number of ways.
First of all, Randle is better than "good". He has been the most dominant front court player we have had since 2000 when Ewing was traded except arguably Carmelo. Me, personally, I think Randle gives more all around game, makes his teammates better, than Melo did, but it doesn't matter which way you go on that. Amare could have been in that conversation if he was able to do it for more than 1/2 a year, but he was finished quickly and became an albatross. So since 1985, (FORTY YEARS) you're talking Ewing, Melo, Randle. End of conversation. You can probably go back 50 years, but I'm not as familiar with the teams before Ewing.
So please name for me a single PF/C that was on the Knicks roster in all that time, that all they needed was more usage and the coach's faith, and could have been as dominant as Randle. Sorry, I don't buy it. Not Tyson Candler, not Oakley, not Mason, not Nazar Mohammed, not Mitchell Robinson, not Enes Kantor, not Kyle O'Quinn, not Darko Millicic, not Andrea Bargnani. So please tell me. Aside from Patrick and Melo, Name one other PF/C from the Knicks from the past 40+ years that could fill Randles shoes.
Panos wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:Some on here knows how much I defend Julius. Seems like since he started here. Mainly because of his consistent double double production but mostly because of the value.A couple of PF's I have been open to are Jackson, Ingram, Pascal and Grant. Ingram and Pascal will be too expensive. However, Grant should be available and seems to be a good fit. He will average $33M for next 3 years. So decent value. He fits with JB and would work well if another star at the 2 was added. Maybe Blazers flip Randle for extra picks if they continue to rebuild, shed salary with expiring EF or add pieces around Randle to be competitive? Randle, Fournier, Arcidiacono, two seconds for Grant, Brogdon.
The dream would be Jackson. Probably not something that the Grizzlies are close to doing but worth hoping. Would obviously take a lot of picks but maybe if they do not do anything this year they try to save some salary being a smaller market team? So, Jackson, Kennard (gives us another shooter), Williams for Randle, Fournier, Sims and three firsts.
Feelings?
I’m hard on Randle mostly cause I’ve always expected a little more from him. 24/10/5 and I am still giving him shit. I think he is “good” and a lot of players would do “good” with this usage and the faith of the coach.
But he puts his head down too much. He dribbles the ball a bit too much. And he basically telegraphs when he is gonna shoot putting himself into some tougher situations than he needs.
I don’t think we can easily replace him on this contract and am not “rushing” to get rid of him. But if he wants a heliocentric offense that revolves around him, he needs to make sure he is handing out the ball. Even with 5 assists per game, I think he can do more.
Your proposed trade for Grant and Brogdon works. I think Randle is a little more “healthy” than Grant. Grant is a bit more of a super-role player. He and OG would be pretty solid point of defense. I don’t know that Grant is my #2 guy of my dreams. If I knew a Mitchell-type scorer was coming, I’d
I’m kind of waiting to see how this team does with the two day break in between games. I also am comfortable finding a simpler trade for Fournier and waiting to see if Mikal Bridges ever gets his freedom.
I think the highlighted statement is wrong in a number of ways.
First of all, Randle is better than "good". He has been the most dominant front court player we have had since 2000 when Ewing was traded except arguably Carmelo. Me, personally, I think Randle gives more all around game, makes his teammates better, than Melo did, but it doesn't matter which way you go on that. Amare could have been in that conversation if he was able to do it for more than 1/2 a year, but he was finished quickly and became an albatross. So since 1985, (FORTY YEARS) you're talking Ewing, Melo, Randle. End of conversation. You can probably go back 50 years, but I'm not as familiar with the teams before Ewing.
So please name for me a single PF/C that was on the Knicks roster in all that time, that all they needed was more usage and the coach's faith, and could have been as dominant as Randle. Sorry, I don't buy it. Not Tyson Candler, not Oakley, not Mason, not Nazar Mohammed, not Mitchell Robinson, not Enes Kantor, not Kyle O'Quinn, not Darko Millicic, not Andrea Bargnani. So please tell me. Aside from Patrick and Melo, Name one other PF/C from the Knicks from the past 40+ years that could fill Randles shoes.
Panos wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:Some on here knows how much I defend Julius. Seems like since he started here. Mainly because of his consistent double double production but mostly because of the value.A couple of PF's I have been open to are Jackson, Ingram, Pascal and Grant. Ingram and Pascal will be too expensive. However, Grant should be available and seems to be a good fit. He will average $33M for next 3 years. So decent value. He fits with JB and would work well if another star at the 2 was added. Maybe Blazers flip Randle for extra picks if they continue to rebuild, shed salary with expiring EF or add pieces around Randle to be competitive? Randle, Fournier, Arcidiacono, two seconds for Grant, Brogdon.
The dream would be Jackson. Probably not something that the Grizzlies are close to doing but worth hoping. Would obviously take a lot of picks but maybe if they do not do anything this year they try to save some salary being a smaller market team? So, Jackson, Kennard (gives us another shooter), Williams for Randle, Fournier, Sims and three firsts.
Feelings?
I’m hard on Randle mostly cause I’ve always expected a little more from him. 24/10/5 and I am still giving him shit. I think he is “good” and a lot of players would do “good” with this usage and the faith of the coach.
But he puts his head down too much. He dribbles the ball a bit too much. And he basically telegraphs when he is gonna shoot putting himself into some tougher situations than he needs.
I don’t think we can easily replace him on this contract and am not “rushing” to get rid of him. But if he wants a heliocentric offense that revolves around him, he needs to make sure he is handing out the ball. Even with 5 assists per game, I think he can do more.
Your proposed trade for Grant and Brogdon works. I think Randle is a little more “healthy” than Grant. Grant is a bit more of a super-role player. He and OG would be pretty solid point of defense. I don’t know that Grant is my #2 guy of my dreams. If I knew a Mitchell-type scorer was coming, I’d
I’m kind of waiting to see how this team does with the two day break in between games. I also am comfortable finding a simpler trade for Fournier and waiting to see if Mikal Bridges ever gets his freedom.
I think the highlighted statement is wrong in a number of ways.
First of all, Randle is better than "good". He has been the most dominant front court player we have had since 2000 when Ewing was traded except arguably Carmelo. Me, personally, I think Randle gives more all around game, makes his teammates better, than Melo did, but it doesn't matter which way you go on that. Amare could have been in that conversation if he was able to do it for more than 1/2 a year, but he was finished quickly and became an albatross. So since 1985, (FORTY YEARS) you're talking Ewing, Melo, Randle. End of conversation. You can probably go back 50 years, but I'm not as familiar with the teams before Ewing.
So please name for me a single PF/C that was on the Knicks roster in all that time, that all they needed was more usage and the coach's faith, and could have been as dominant as Randle. Sorry, I don't buy it. Not Tyson Candler, not Oakley, not Mason, not Nazar Mohammed, not Mitchell Robinson, not Enes Kantor, not Kyle O'Quinn, not Darko Millicic, not Andrea Bargnani. So please tell me. Aside from Patrick and Melo, Name one other PF/C from the Knicks from the past 40+ years that could fill Randles shoes.
Your test is flawed. Just because he is the best we have had doesn’t make my “good” comment wrong. Melo led the league in scoring with us and I would argue his efficiency stats were mediocre at best. I note that you left out Porzingis in your analysis. I thought KP was too reliant in his 18 foot jumper. Still your point stands.
But your argument only proves the Knicks haven’t had a better PF, not that Randle is “great” or better than “good”.
I’m not marking Randle down for the HoF, doesn’t mean we have (or have had) a better option available.
The second part of my sentence is basically - if you replace Randle with Jerami Grant, Lauri Markannen, KAT, Kyle Kuzma (?!?), JJJ (BlockPanther), how much worse are we? Objectively, I think Randle brings slightly better defense than all but JJJ. I think Randle’s efficiency is worse than all but Kuzma. But if you ask me if he is “great”, no. I don’t think he is “great”. Giannis is great. Tatum is great. Randle is good.
I think he could average a triple double if he modified his game to have a little more faith in his team and figure out how to get them good looks instead of passing it when he has few other options.
HofstraBBall wrote:newyorknewyork wrote:Love him or hate him we are stuck with Randle. Leon Rose can only look to actually build a team with Brunson & Randle as the featured scorers and a deep overall team with high end rotational players like OG, Hart, Hartenstein, DDV, etc etc..Maybe after a a couple good playoff runs and Randle's value is solidified as that type of guy. We can do what Toronto did with Derozan and parlay him with some picks for a Kwahi. Even if not just continue to have a winning org and develop draft picks and make smart moves adapting to the times.
But the key is regardless of is we view him as a championship star or not. Putting him and Brunson in a position a succeed. Then and see if that elevates their games at all. Some more spacing in the frontcourt would be the next step in doing so.
Think your point about adding spacing is spot on. Feel we did that with OG and Devo. We were missing that with RJ and Grimes struggling.
Not sure if you can say we are "stuck" with Randle. His value is better than Knicks fans think and like RJ, feel there are teams that would be happy to have him.
You look at Toronto trading OG, yeah money was going to be an issue, but maybe they under appreciated his defense and were looking for a more aggressive player like RJ.
Many teams may want the offensive physicality Randle consistently shows.
Ie. Portland wishing Grant was more physical.
We are stuck with Randle as trades for superstar upgrades don't seem realistic right now. And trades for lesser or similar players won't do it for us. He is essentially what we have to rely on. He has still yet to deliver for us in the playoffs over this 4 year time frame. Hopefully that changes this year. He likes to attack and bully in the paint so let's continue to build complimentary rotation that allows for less crowded paints for him to operate and do his thing.
Not that he is the player that Greek Freak is. But when Bucks transitioned from Greg Monroe & John Henson & Jabari Parker and ppl knocking his ability to shoot. To floor spacers Brook Lopez & Bobby Portis. Freak then went from 40 win seasons and early playoff exits to NBA MVP & Champion.
RJ had to be packaged with IQ. Wasn't like it was an OG for RJ straight up. So this wasn't a good showing of his value.
This is first and foremost Brunson's team. So whatever works for Brunson.
Knixkik wrote:If Randle was on another team we would say how do we get him before the deadline. That tells us all we need to know.
Bingo.
EwingsGlass wrote:Panos wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:Some on here knows how much I defend Julius. Seems like since he started here. Mainly because of his consistent double double production but mostly because of the value.A couple of PF's I have been open to are Jackson, Ingram, Pascal and Grant. Ingram and Pascal will be too expensive. However, Grant should be available and seems to be a good fit. He will average $33M for next 3 years. So decent value. He fits with JB and would work well if another star at the 2 was added. Maybe Blazers flip Randle for extra picks if they continue to rebuild, shed salary with expiring EF or add pieces around Randle to be competitive? Randle, Fournier, Arcidiacono, two seconds for Grant, Brogdon.
The dream would be Jackson. Probably not something that the Grizzlies are close to doing but worth hoping. Would obviously take a lot of picks but maybe if they do not do anything this year they try to save some salary being a smaller market team? So, Jackson, Kennard (gives us another shooter), Williams for Randle, Fournier, Sims and three firsts.
Feelings?
I’m hard on Randle mostly cause I’ve always expected a little more from him. 24/10/5 and I am still giving him shit. I think he is “good” and a lot of players would do “good” with this usage and the faith of the coach.
But he puts his head down too much. He dribbles the ball a bit too much. And he basically telegraphs when he is gonna shoot putting himself into some tougher situations than he needs.
I don’t think we can easily replace him on this contract and am not “rushing” to get rid of him. But if he wants a heliocentric offense that revolves around him, he needs to make sure he is handing out the ball. Even with 5 assists per game, I think he can do more.
Your proposed trade for Grant and Brogdon works. I think Randle is a little more “healthy” than Grant. Grant is a bit more of a super-role player. He and OG would be pretty solid point of defense. I don’t know that Grant is my #2 guy of my dreams. If I knew a Mitchell-type scorer was coming, I’d
I’m kind of waiting to see how this team does with the two day break in between games. I also am comfortable finding a simpler trade for Fournier and waiting to see if Mikal Bridges ever gets his freedom.
I think the highlighted statement is wrong in a number of ways.
First of all, Randle is better than "good". He has been the most dominant front court player we have had since 2000 when Ewing was traded except arguably Carmelo. Me, personally, I think Randle gives more all around game, makes his teammates better, than Melo did, but it doesn't matter which way you go on that. Amare could have been in that conversation if he was able to do it for more than 1/2 a year, but he was finished quickly and became an albatross. So since 1985, (FORTY YEARS) you're talking Ewing, Melo, Randle. End of conversation. You can probably go back 50 years, but I'm not as familiar with the teams before Ewing.
So please name for me a single PF/C that was on the Knicks roster in all that time, that all they needed was more usage and the coach's faith, and could have been as dominant as Randle. Sorry, I don't buy it. Not Tyson Candler, not Oakley, not Mason, not Nazar Mohammed, not Mitchell Robinson, not Enes Kantor, not Kyle O'Quinn, not Darko Millicic, not Andrea Bargnani. So please tell me. Aside from Patrick and Melo, Name one other PF/C from the Knicks from the past 40+ years that could fill Randles shoes.Your test is flawed. Just because he is the best we have had doesn’t make my “good” comment wrong. Melo led the league in scoring with us and I would argue his efficiency stats were mediocre at best. I note that you left out Porzingis in your analysis. I thought KP was too reliant in his 18 foot jumper. Still your point stands.
But your argument only proves the Knicks haven’t had a better PF, not that Randle is “great” or better than “good”.
I’m not marking Randle down for the HoF, doesn’t mean we have (or have had) a better option available.
The second part of my sentence is basically - if you replace Randle with Jerami Grant, Lauri Markannen, KAT, Kyle Kuzma (?!?), JJJ (BlockPanther), how much worse are we? Objectively, I think Randle brings slightly better defense than all but JJJ. I think Randle’s efficiency is worse than all but Kuzma. But if you ask me if he is “great”, no. I don’t think he is “great”. Giannis is great. Tatum is great. Randle is good.
I think he could average a triple double if he modified his game to have a little more faith in his team and figure out how to get them good looks instead of passing it when he has few other options.
We'll have to agree to disagree. I don't think my argument is flawed at all. Top 3 front court player in 40 years show how difficult it is to get a player better than him. Pretty much the definition of great. He's not MVP caliber, no. He's still an all-NBA level quality player, and those are, by definition, rare.
Knixkik wrote:If Randle was on another team we would say how do we get him before the deadline. That tells us all we need to know.
Probably for a 2nd rounder. Lol I remember arguing against that valuation with some. Ah, the memories. It seemed like so many never watched other teams players play.
You look at how the media is pushing Towns. I mean $60milliin better get us the freak or reincarnated MJ.
HofstraBBall wrote:Knixkik wrote:If Randle was on another team we would say how do we get him before the deadline. That tells us all we need to know.Probably for a 2nd rounder. Lol I remember arguing against that valuation with some. Ah, the memories. It seemed like so many never watched other teams players play.
You look at how the media is pushing Towns. I mean $60milliin better get us the freak or reincarnated MJ.
KAT is not better than Randle. And certainly not worth his contract.
Panos wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:Knixkik wrote:If Randle was on another team we would say how do we get him before the deadline. That tells us all we need to know.Probably for a 2nd rounder. Lol I remember arguing against that valuation with some. Ah, the memories. It seemed like so many never watched other teams players play.
You look at how the media is pushing Towns. I mean $60milliin better get us the freak or reincarnated MJ.
KAT is not better than Randle. And certainly not worth his contract.
Yet so many pushing how that will be so much better for us.
My push has been spots that are obvious upgrade needs. AKA, PG not Frank, starting SG better than Grimes, more versatile SF than RJ .
Right now, seems like we are rolling. However, feel we need a third option to close games.
Demar costs little. Maybe a good option. Brogdon would be nice. Specially if it costs EF and some seconds. More than okay with staying put, aside from those type of moves.