Knicks · Want Randle back soon. And/But... (page 6)
martin wrote:KnickDanger wrote:Not saying he'd be Oakley, but I suspect Julius in this last series would have had a helpful response to Embiid's antics.Right, but youre also not not saying he shouldn't *pull* an Oakly every once in a while
I think I got that right
Neither endorse nor reject, confirm or deny that notion....
martin wrote:DLeethal wrote:Panos wrote:I think we can see from Philly series, we really could have used Randle as a second dominant scoring option. There is no doubt.
I do reiterate, though, that as the ball has been moving so well, I hope that he can adjust to continue that trend.
While we're on the topic, and since jHart is prob Thibs favorite player, how's this for a small ball line up in spots next year:
Randle
OG
jHart
DVD
JBI think this series showed we need him back too. Watching Philly have the ability to toggle back and forth with Embiid and Maxey. And all we had was Brunson. He is superhuman but it's not a championship formula. He needs his robin and Randle is a damn good Robin.
I think our priority should be resigning our key guys and replenishing the depth we lost with the trades. We are in a great spot to do that with two 1st round picks and the MLE. This team can be loaded next year without any "major" moves and just a couple picks and a savvy MLE signing.
I would only consider a major trade for Giannis or mayyyyybe Booker but I would be very hesitant to take away from Brunson's greatness with a scoring 2-man.
And not for nothing but Knicks have room to upgrade for another Robin.
Yea, I just don't know that the 3 headed monster scorer approach is the right formula anymore. I think Brunson + robin + our insane role players is the best formula. Once you add 3 scorers you start to cannabilize each's greatness a little bit and you lose ground on the defense/intangibles. Either Randle is the Robin or we trade Randle for Robin. I don't see the value in say Brunson/Booker/Randle outweighing Brunson/Randle with all of our elite role players surrounding them.
jskinny35 wrote:Panos wrote:I think we can see from Philly series, we really could have used Randle as a second dominant scoring option. There is no doubt.
I do reiterate, though, that as the ball has been moving so well, I hope that he can adjust to continue that trend.
While we're on the topic, and since jHart is prob Thibs favorite player, how's this for a small ball line up in spots next year:
Randle
OG
jHart
DVD
JBWe definitely could have used Randle's scoring, bully ball and rebounding but we don't always get that from Randle within the team flow or without it also including defensive lapses, ball holding, etc. The ball moves more now (despite Brunson holding it too much at times) and others have stepped up. When Randle makes quick decisions, hustles back on defense and plays unselfishly - we may be as good or better than the Celtics. When he reverts back to his play from 2 seasons ago - we are better off withouth him IMO.
Randle has improved the past few seasons but if the Knicks decide to add "one more star type player" I'd move Randle to try to get Lauri Markannen or maybe even KD if the cost isn't too great. I'd pass on Booker with this lineup unless I really though Thibs could turn Booker into a consistent defensive player. He holds the ball and we already have Brunson we have to cover for at times defensively.
Upgrading the 4 position would be more valuable vs upgrading the 2 position due to the current chemistry, reasonable salaries and defensive effort we already possess.
I think the stint with Randle and OG was too short because people forget how good it was. It was utterly dominant on both ends of the floor. Best Knicks basketball played in decades. It's a shame it was only 10-12 games or whatever it was. But we were annihilating everybody including first-rate contenders like Denver and Minnesota.
I also think we need to change our thinking about the "old way" the Knicks played being not only Randle but Randle, RJ, and IQ who were all ball pounders. When IQ and RJ left, it changed dramatically.
DLeethal wrote:jskinny35 wrote:Panos wrote:I think we can see from Philly series, we really could have used Randle as a second dominant scoring option. There is no doubt.
I do reiterate, though, that as the ball has been moving so well, I hope that he can adjust to continue that trend.
While we're on the topic, and since jHart is prob Thibs favorite player, how's this for a small ball line up in spots next year:
Randle
OG
jHart
DVD
JBWe definitely could have used Randle's scoring, bully ball and rebounding but we don't always get that from Randle within the team flow or without it also including defensive lapses, ball holding, etc. The ball moves more now (despite Brunson holding it too much at times) and others have stepped up. When Randle makes quick decisions, hustles back on defense and plays unselfishly - we may be as good or better than the Celtics. When he reverts back to his play from 2 seasons ago - we are better off withouth him IMO.
Randle has improved the past few seasons but if the Knicks decide to add "one more star type player" I'd move Randle to try to get Lauri Markannen or maybe even KD if the cost isn't too great. I'd pass on Booker with this lineup unless I really though Thibs could turn Booker into a consistent defensive player. He holds the ball and we already have Brunson we have to cover for at times defensively.
Upgrading the 4 position would be more valuable vs upgrading the 2 position due to the current chemistry, reasonable salaries and defensive effort we already possess.
I think the stint with Randle and OG was too short because people forget how good it was. It was utterly dominant on both ends of the floor. Best Knicks basketball played in decades. It's a shame it was only 10-12 games or whatever it was. But we were annihilating everybody including first-rate contenders like Denver and Minnesota.
I also think we need to change our thinking about the "old way" the Knicks played being not only Randle but Randle, RJ, and IQ who were all ball pounders. When IQ and RJ left, it changed dramatically.
You are right. Let's focus on "OMG" January for all the Knicks. This is an aggregation of the January stats for each Knick. PS. Recall that we were without Mitch Robinson.
https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/knicks-...
Everyone's plus minus look pretty good, but OG and Brunson are off the charts at 250+.
Hard to argue that Randle was anything other than spectacular. A 25/8/5 guy that shoots 37% from 3 is a legit #2 threat. His biggest weakness in January was turnovers. He averaged 3+ turnovers per game. Nearly double Brunson's. If he dropped the "my turn" attitude where everyone on the court knows he is gonna shoot, it would reduce that number. I don't want to trade him for Paul George, I just want him to make decisions with the ball a little bit more like Paul George. Get the ball and go and keep your head up. If it isn't there, find the more efficient shot. I'd prefer a 15/10/10 from Randle to 25/8/5. I kind of think he would end up at 20/10/10 without too much trouble.
EwingsGlass wrote:DLeethal wrote:jskinny35 wrote:Panos wrote:I think we can see from Philly series, we really could have used Randle as a second dominant scoring option. There is no doubt.
I do reiterate, though, that as the ball has been moving so well, I hope that he can adjust to continue that trend.
While we're on the topic, and since jHart is prob Thibs favorite player, how's this for a small ball line up in spots next year:
Randle
OG
jHart
DVD
JBWe definitely could have used Randle's scoring, bully ball and rebounding but we don't always get that from Randle within the team flow or without it also including defensive lapses, ball holding, etc. The ball moves more now (despite Brunson holding it too much at times) and others have stepped up. When Randle makes quick decisions, hustles back on defense and plays unselfishly - we may be as good or better than the Celtics. When he reverts back to his play from 2 seasons ago - we are better off withouth him IMO.
Randle has improved the past few seasons but if the Knicks decide to add "one more star type player" I'd move Randle to try to get Lauri Markannen or maybe even KD if the cost isn't too great. I'd pass on Booker with this lineup unless I really though Thibs could turn Booker into a consistent defensive player. He holds the ball and we already have Brunson we have to cover for at times defensively.
Upgrading the 4 position would be more valuable vs upgrading the 2 position due to the current chemistry, reasonable salaries and defensive effort we already possess.
I think the stint with Randle and OG was too short because people forget how good it was. It was utterly dominant on both ends of the floor. Best Knicks basketball played in decades. It's a shame it was only 10-12 games or whatever it was. But we were annihilating everybody including first-rate contenders like Denver and Minnesota.
I also think we need to change our thinking about the "old way" the Knicks played being not only Randle but Randle, RJ, and IQ who were all ball pounders. When IQ and RJ left, it changed dramatically.
You are right. Let's focus on "OMG" January for all the Knicks. This is an aggregation of the January stats for each Knick. PS. Recall that we were without Mitch Robinson.
https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/knicks-...
Everyone's plus minus look pretty good, but OG and Brunson are off the charts at 250+.
Hard to argue that Randle was anything other than spectacular. A 25/8/5 guy that shoots 37% from 3 is a legit #2 threat. His biggest weakness in January was turnovers. He averaged 3+ turnovers per game. Nearly double Brunson's. If he dropped the "my turn" attitude where everyone on the court knows he is gonna shoot, it would reduce that number. I don't want to trade him for Paul George, I just want him to make decisions with the ball a little bit more like Paul George. Get the ball and go and keep your head up. If it isn't there, find the more efficient shot. I'd prefer a 15/10/10 from Randle to 25/8/5. I kind of think he would end up at 20/10/10 without too much trouble.
Wow, great post. My hope is that with the success Hart and OG have had at the 4, that Randle becomes a 30mpg guy and not a 38mpg workhorse. 22-8-5 with fewer TOs. That would be ideal IMO.
The biggest takeaway from the stat muse link? Ryan Arcidiacono played in 9 games during that stretch. That shows you how badly we were blowing teams out.
I love Jules, but he too would be complaining about every non call as well.
Make no bones about it, Jules offense was really missed.
if we talking all healthy and at their best we are top 4 contenders and I'd say got toe to toe with Celtics.
But we are not.
Despite it all the hate, Philly was better than I expected. Embiid was uneven but he was a handful. Maxey was awesome.
Nalod wrote:Randle is Oak now?
I love Jules, but he too would be complaining about every non call as well.
Make no bones about it, Jules offense was really missed.
if we talking all healthy and at their best we are top 4 contenders and I'd say got toe to toe with Celtics.
But we are not.Despite it all the hate, Philly was better than I expected. Embiid was uneven but he was a handful. Maxey was awesome.
A team is more then the sum of its parts. Knicks fully healthy next season will include Julius and I'm sure a newly acquired back up 2-3, two way guy, for depth, a player that we hoped we would have gotten in Burks. The way this team battles and adjusts why can't we beat Boston. I can see the team looking to add a key player to the rotation if a player becomes available, but more the likely keeping I-Heart, and making a trade of picks or adding a vet free agent to add to the depth at the wing. Maybe even drafting two first rounders and using them. Boston is the regular season Colossus but really are they invincible ? If they lose this year in the East bracket what would that tell you about Tatum and Brown ? Stay tuned but Julius next season with Brunson as the 1 maybe be fantastic. I can see Julius accepting a role as a defender and willing passer and scoring in the flow of the offense and not isolating as he once did. Ball will flow with OG, I Heart, and Dante around Julius and Brunson. Then Mitch, Deuce, Hart off the bench with more situational depth that will be acquired or retained in Bogs Precious and some more guards. Team is going to be even better next year !!
Alpha1971 wrote:Nalod wrote:Randle is Oak now?
I love Jules, but he too would be complaining about every non call as well.
Make no bones about it, Jules offense was really missed.
if we talking all healthy and at their best we are top 4 contenders and I'd say got toe to toe with Celtics.
But we are not.Despite it all the hate, Philly was better than I expected. Embiid was uneven but he was a handful. Maxey was awesome.
A team is more then the sum of its parts. Knicks fully healthy next season will include Julius and I'm sure a newly acquired back up 2-3, two way guy, for depth, a player that we hoped we would have gotten in Burks. The way this team battles and adjusts why can't we beat Boston. I can see the team looking to add a key player to the rotation if a player becomes available, but more the likely keeping I-Heart, and making a trade of picks or adding a vet free agent to add to the depth at the wing. Maybe even drafting two first rounders and using them. Boston is the regular season Colossus but really are they invincible ? If they lose this year in the East bracket what would that tell you about Tatum and Brown ? Stay tuned but Julius next season with Brunson as the 1 maybe be fantastic. I can see Julius accepting a role as a defender and willing passer and scoring in the flow of the offense and not isolating as he once did. Ball will flow with OG, I Heart, and Dante around Julius and Brunson. Then Mitch, Deuce, Hart off the bench with more situational depth that will be acquired or retained in Bogs Precious and some more guards. Team is going to be even better next year !!
We are not healthy this year. that was my point vs. Celtics. Next year? Im not there yet. Im having too much fun in the present.
As for Celtics, I agree its about 1+1=3. Chemistry matters. Brown and Tatum are a bit isocentric and the organic flow is not there. What's crazy is how good they are beyond this two with White and Holiday. That KP is a 3rd or 4th option and has buy in is impressive.
they are not invincible but if we make it past Indy and KP is back then we'd be underdogs for sure.
Curious if Mazzula does not hoist a chip if they fire him and bring JVG who is a paid consultant. He has been out of the game a while but Im sure he'd adapt to the modern game. Thibs has. I don't know all of Mazzulas deficits but lets see how he does this year.
Next year? Im not done with 2024! Your not wrong.
Nalod wrote:Alpha1971 wrote:Nalod wrote:Randle is Oak now?
I love Jules, but he too would be complaining about every non call as well.
Make no bones about it, Jules offense was really missed.
if we talking all healthy and at their best we are top 4 contenders and I'd say got toe to toe with Celtics.
But we are not.Despite it all the hate, Philly was better than I expected. Embiid was uneven but he was a handful. Maxey was awesome.
A team is more then the sum of its parts. Knicks fully healthy next season will include Julius and I'm sure a newly acquired back up 2-3, two way guy, for depth, a player that we hoped we would have gotten in Burks. The way this team battles and adjusts why can't we beat Boston. I can see the team looking to add a key player to the rotation if a player becomes available, but more the likely keeping I-Heart, and making a trade of picks or adding a vet free agent to add to the depth at the wing. Maybe even drafting two first rounders and using them. Boston is the regular season Colossus but really are they invincible ? If they lose this year in the East bracket what would that tell you about Tatum and Brown ? Stay tuned but Julius next season with Brunson as the 1 maybe be fantastic. I can see Julius accepting a role as a defender and willing passer and scoring in the flow of the offense and not isolating as he once did. Ball will flow with OG, I Heart, and Dante around Julius and Brunson. Then Mitch, Deuce, Hart off the bench with more situational depth that will be acquired or retained in Bogs Precious and some more guards. Team is going to be even better next year !!
We are not healthy this year. that was my point vs. Celtics. Next year? Im not there yet. Im having too much fun in the present.
As for Celtics, I agree its about 1+1=3. Chemistry matters. Brown and Tatum are a bit isocentric and the organic flow is not there. What's crazy is how good they are beyond this two with White and Holiday. That KP is a 3rd or 4th option and has buy in is impressive.
they are not invincible but if we make it past Indy and KP is back then we'd be underdogs for sure.
Curious if Mazzula does not hoist a chip if they fire him and bring JVG who is a paid consultant. He has been out of the game a while but Im sure he'd adapt to the modern game. Thibs has. I don't know all of Mazzulas deficits but lets see how he does this year.Next year? Im not done with 2024! Your not wrong.
For me whatever we do this season without Julius is gravy. I'm enjoying this team with great anticipation for the next season
NYKBocker wrote:We winning the whole damn thing!
Team has surprises me all year. Maybe we in for a few more surprises. Heck, Shake Milton gets a few minutes and then plays like Jeremy Lin during Insanity for a few play off series. And Mitch goes all Defense against everyone from here on out
DLeethal wrote:martin wrote:DLeethal wrote:Panos wrote:I think we can see from Philly series, we really could have used Randle as a second dominant scoring option. There is no doubt.
I do reiterate, though, that as the ball has been moving so well, I hope that he can adjust to continue that trend.
While we're on the topic, and since jHart is prob Thibs favorite player, how's this for a small ball line up in spots next year:
Randle
OG
jHart
DVD
JBI think this series showed we need him back too. Watching Philly have the ability to toggle back and forth with Embiid and Maxey. And all we had was Brunson. He is superhuman but it's not a championship formula. He needs his robin and Randle is a damn good Robin.
I think our priority should be resigning our key guys and replenishing the depth we lost with the trades. We are in a great spot to do that with two 1st round picks and the MLE. This team can be loaded next year without any "major" moves and just a couple picks and a savvy MLE signing.
I would only consider a major trade for Giannis or mayyyyybe Booker but I would be very hesitant to take away from Brunson's greatness with a scoring 2-man.
And not for nothing but Knicks have room to upgrade for another Robin.
Yea, I just don't know that the 3 headed monster scorer approach is the right formula anymore. I think Brunson + robin + our insane role players is the best formula. Once you add 3 scorers you start to cannabilize each's greatness a little bit and you lose ground on the defense/intangibles. Either Randle is the Robin or we trade Randle for Robin. I don't see the value in say Brunson/Booker/Randle outweighing Brunson/Randle with all of our elite role players surrounding them.
Don't think of it in terms of 3 headed monster, think of it in terms of Mikal is probably a better starter than DDV and DDV would also flourish off the bench.
Like that type of upgrade.
ccch wrote:If we had Randle do you think we'd be where we are now? Brunson has been the guy with the ball in key situations and for the most part has come through. Double teams on Randle for the most part seem to bother him causing him to make costly turnovers. On balance I think Brunson has been more efficient in pressure situations.
Are you saying they would be double teaming both Randle and Brunson? That would be good for the other three guys. If you mean they would double team Randle and not Brunson that would be good for guess who?
So the reality is they couldn’t focus so much on both of them. It’s not about whom you like or don’t like (let me guess). It’s that having both of them both on the floor helps the team offensively. Duh.
Clearly Randle would alleviate a lot of pressure given his ability to create offense for himself and others. Additionally Randle creates a physical dimension that teams arent always equipped to handle. His brand of bully ball can wear down defenses and open things up even more for shooters.
On defense everyone hustles - this is where I think NOT having Randle has been a net benefit. But its been a marginal make up for what we have lost offensively. We have been winning games at very slow pace.
The Bogs acquisition was meant to alleviate some of the Randle loss offensively. He could get his own shot and score with the bench. Now without him its a bit of a conundrum. Think we have to try Shake or Burks with the bench. Otherwise the next best guy to call his own number is.... Deuce?