Knixkik wrote:I get the body language and effort issues. We had the same qualms about Melo. But in the midst of last season’s success, we all sort of forgot about what Randle does best. He was never supposed to be viewed as a perimeter oriented big man like he thrived in last year. He is ultimately a bully ball big who’s added outside shooting and playmaking provides more versatility for him on offense. Bottom line is, this starting lineup is poorly assembled for Randle (and Barrett) to be at their best. Knicks badly need to fix the center and PG positions to get the best out of both of them. Knicks need an outside shooting threat at center that can still anchor a defense. Randle should be making plays more in the post, but he can’t because mitch and Noels defender is always hedging, and willing to give up the occasional offensive rebound or putback to prevent Randle from attacking the basket. Same goes for Barrett, who gets his shot blocked more often than not due to a big man always hanging out in the lane. If we land Myles Turner or Mo Bamba, suddenly a defending center has a tough decision to make. Hang out in the lane and give up an open three, or allow Randle the space to go one on one.
As for the PG position, sure Kemba gives more spacing than most. But what good is that when teams no longer respect his ability to drive to the basket, and he’s not particularly comfortable as a catch and shoot player. Knicks need a PG who can get into the teeth of the defense but also provide just enough of an outside shooting threat. Brunson, Schroder and Dinwiddie are probably the closest to fits there that are realistic. Drose definitely is when healthy. But we simply can’t rely on that, or the Knicks other options to fill that gap when he’s out. At shooting guard we are fine with Fournier or Grimes sharing the floor in a Randle/ Barrett, as they are high efficiency catch and shoot players
So really what this comes down to is putting our best players in the best possible position to succeed. Randle in particular is really forced into playing a role he simply isn’t at his best other than some sort stretches or the ideal environmental circumstances last last year. Get a real stretch 5 and a real PG who can take on some playmaking duties and see what Randle can really do.
If Randle was a higher level player I would agree with all of this - but he's not and has a lot of warts that are unlikely to improve. Yes he can improve his decision-making and iso-ball somewhat - but he's still slow and hasn't improved his ability to handle pressure.
Mitch would be a fine fit in most teams - see Atlanta and how they use Capella. That's easily attainable and realistic if he doesn't have to fit around Randle. Same with Barrett and other players on the roster. Why change all of them to fit around a very good player? That's where I keep getting stuck w/Randle - even with the ideal players around him (and who are they whether attainable or not) we would still be below that higher level. Much easier to move him if you believe the ceiling height is lower due to your best player's limitations.
Agree 1000% about the impact of a quality PG and it would help Randle no question. It would help quite a lot!
Just think it's easier to move Randle (most value) vs trading Mitch for a stretch 5, Fournier for a Bullock, acquiring a PG that fits around Randle, etc..
Should be some drama the next week for sure!
