fwk00 wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:Although just a BS rumor from an internet blog, does point to how the NY media, some fans and Kncik incompetent management in the past would back the idea of trading a 25 year old playing and showing the ability to break out over a 32 name who has an inflated contract and his best ball is behind him. This will be a big test to see if the new management will continue to make the same mistakes our previous knee jerk FO's have done.

I know most on here don't like Randle and think he is/was our problem in costing us a chip but I happen to think he can be a good addition to a solid roster. Which btw, we did not have last year. Does he need to improve? Of course. Which 25 year old doesn't? However, the kid showed he is very skilled and a elite scorer. Hope the far fetched rumors are wrong. Also hoping we get Morris back. Probably the one 2 players that showed elite play last year.

If you‘re building round Mitch, Frank and RJ, how can you play Randle? This isn’t about Conley being a name, its about getting rid of Randle so you make space For a PF who doesn’t hog the ball and can shoot and space the floor. Randle can be an effective player, he just doesn’t fit here. Unless you want to build round him, in which case, good luck! Conley gives you an expiring contract and a stopgap PG (which we desperately need) who can mentor a younger PG if we draft one.

I’d be happy having Morris at PF, but I don’t understand how you watched last season and still think Morris at SF and Randle at PF, with Mitch at C and RJ at SG works- genuinely baffling.

You are mostly correct. The problem the Knicks are attempting to solve is to move Randle with the least amount of damage. The 'given' part of the equation is that the Knicks will either have to swallow a poison pill contract OR part with valuable additional assets or some combination of both.

Conley happens to fall into the poison pill contract BUT he still has value as you describe.

Hofstra represents the eternal school of hope whose icons include DSJ, Randle, and probably a few others. After two decades of mediocrity that's hard to subscribe to.

They don't.

Randle has an expiring contract and still puts up 19pts a game. They don't need to treat him like he is Jakeem Noah. They could just let him play next yrs shorten season and let him walk. They don't really have a ton of "pressure" to move him.

But a deal that makes sense that creates more shooting & spacing. Provides more quality high IQ veteran leadership. As well as a mouthpiece and coach on the floor for Thibs among the players. That is more valuable to them.

Conley, RJ, 3&D Forward, 3&D Forward, Mitch. Would be an improvement.

But odds are that these are just rumors anyway.

smackeddog wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:Although just a BS rumor from an internet blog, does point to how the NY media, some fans and Kncik incompetent management in the past would back the idea of trading a 25 year old playing and showing the ability to break out over a 32 name who has an inflated contract and his best ball is behind him. This will be a big test to see if the new management will continue to make the same mistakes our previous knee jerk FO's have done.

I know most on here don't like Randle and think he is/was our problem in costing us a chip but I happen to think he can be a good addition to a solid roster. Which btw, we did not have last year. Does he need to improve? Of course. Which 25 year old doesn't? However, the kid showed he is very skilled and a elite scorer. Hope the far fetched rumors are wrong. Also hoping we get Morris back. Probably the one 2 players that showed elite play last year.

If you‘re building round Mitch, Frank and RJ, how can you play Randle? This isn’t about Conley being a name, its about getting rid of Randle so you make space For a PF who doesn’t hog the ball and can shoot and space the floor. Randle can be an effective player, he just doesn’t fit here. Unless you want to build round him, in which case, good luck! Conley gives you an expiring contract and a stopgap PG (which we desperately need) who can mentor a younger PG if we draft one.

I’d be happy having Morris at PF, but I don’t understand how you watched last season and still think Morris at SF and Randle at PF, with Mitch at C and RJ at SG works- genuinely baffling.

Feel RJ is clearly a long term piece as is Mitch. Frank has yet to be considered as a centerpiece in the Knicks future. In terms of play, it can be argued that Randle had a productive year. However, I do share the sentiment that he forced the issue, looked very bad at times and I definitely hated watching him bring up the ball. But is that solely his fault? Or the lack of coaching? I also saw him play much more efficiently during his last year with the Pelicans. I am really just tired of the disposable rinse and repeat mentality we have had the last 20 years. Any player with defects is quickly disposed regardless of his strengths and potential. Only to get
another replacement who we will do the same with.

In regards to fit, yes Randle needs to be a better 3pt shooter in todays NBA (Stretch). Biut that can be said of any 4 or 5 including Mitch. However, I think he can be a good down low presence. Which Thibs has traditionally liked. And its fair to say that Mitch definitely not able to be that right now. Mitch would benefit from a post up player so he can fly in of the perimeter for offensive put backs and weak side dunks. In terms of fit with RJ I think no matter who is at the 4 RJ will evolve only if he improves his outside shot. If so, then Randle down low strength would benefit RJ getting looks. However, if RJ does not improve his outside shot he will continue to need the middle open as it will be his only offensive strength. As for Morris, think the problem with the Morris/Randle pairing was that the offense had no in/out movement built in to scheme. Something that I think Randle can be taught to do and has done before. Something he clearly was not made to do last year. It was hard watching Randle and Morris fighting to take the first contested three. But again, place more blame more on coaching. Just can see a GM looking at Randle and not being able to say they can use them and develop him to be a strong contributor to their team. But I am open to trading them if we get better value. Don't see how that is a 32 year old with a negative injury trajectory. And definitely not just as a cap saver for an expiring. Which is what i mentioned above I am tired of.

HofstraBBall wrote:Although just a BS rumor from an internet blog, does point to how the NY media, some fans and Kncik incompetent management in the past would back the idea of trading a 25 year old playing and showing the ability to break out over a 32 name who has an inflated contract and his best ball is behind him. This will be a big test to see if the new management will continue to make the same mistakes our previous knee jerk FO's have done.

I know most on here don't like Randle and think he is/was our problem in costing us a chip but I happen to think he can be a good addition to a solid roster. Which btw, we did not have last year. Does he need to improve? Of course. Which 25 year old doesn't? However, the kid showed he is very skilled and a elite scorer. Hope the far fetched rumors are wrong. Also hoping we get Morris back. Probably the one 2 players that showed elite play last year.

You could be right. I'll admit it. I can no longer look at this topic objectively. But understand that I will have a psychotic break if I have to do another season of this.

HofstraBBall wrote:

fwk00 wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:Although just a BS rumor from an internet blog, does point to how the NY media, some fans and Kncik incompetent management in the past would back the idea of trading a 25 year old playing and showing the ability to break out over a 32 name who has an inflated contract and his best ball is behind him. This will be a big test to see if the new management will continue to make the same mistakes our previous knee jerk FO's have done.

I know most on here don't like Randle and think he is/was our problem in costing us a chip but I happen to think he can be a good addition to a solid roster. Which btw, we did not have last year. Does he need to improve? Of course. Which 25 year old doesn't? However, the kid showed he is very skilled and a elite scorer. Hope the far fetched rumors are wrong. Also hoping we get Morris back. Probably the one 2 players that showed elite play last year.

If you‘re building round Mitch, Frank and RJ, how can you play Randle? This isn’t about Conley being a name, its about getting rid of Randle so you make space For a PF who doesn’t hog the ball and can shoot and space the floor. Randle can be an effective player, he just doesn’t fit here. Unless you want to build round him, in which case, good luck! Conley gives you an expiring contract and a stopgap PG (which we desperately need) who can mentor a younger PG if we draft one.

I’d be happy having Morris at PF, but I don’t understand how you watched last season and still think Morris at SF and Randle at PF, with Mitch at C and RJ at SG works- genuinely baffling.

You are mostly correct. The problem the Knicks are attempting to solve is to move Randle with the least amount of damage. The 'given' part of the equation is that the Knicks will either have to swallow a poison pill contract OR part with valuable additional assets or some combination of both.

Conley happens to fall into the poison pill contract BUT he still has value as you describe.

Hofstra represents the eternal school of hope whose icons include DSJ, Randle, and probably a few others. After two decades of mediocrity that's hard to subscribe to.

Agree with most about Conley.

As mentioned in my response to Smackeddog, its not about hope for out players is more about being tired of the "Lets just get rid of him" mentality that NY sports fans seems to have. One which creates a rinse and repeat cycle that is why I feel we have been mediocre for so many years. Just look at how many of our former players have gone on to win chips and excel. While their replacements have come here and done absolutely nothing. I happen to think that NY city is more of a school of "High Expectations" than a school of eternal hope. I have said several times that we are a city that will never build with young players. Not that it cant be done but we just don't have the patience. A trait that extends to the organization and management. I think Randle and Smith are just another example of that. If judged on statistical performance, these two deserve at least more than one year to prove themselves. But as mentioned, we are just not a city made up of that type of patience.

But again, always for making smart trades that catch desperate teams off guard and garnishes better assets. Problem is that we are always the desperate ones giving up decent assets with potential for far worse assets.

I don’t care so much about getting rid of Randle as I do just moving him to 6th man and starting a better fitting stretch 4 in his place. My dream offseason really would be moving Randle for Conley, signing Bertans and drafting Vassell at 8 and maybe Riller at 27.

C Robinson/ Gibson
PF Bertans/ Knox
SF Barrett/ Bullock
SG Vassell/ Ntilikina
PG Conley/ Riller

This would be an incredible 10-man rotation with a good mix of prospects and vets and great balance.

Jmpasq wrote:If there stupid enough to make that trade great but I doubt it. I would give Randle away just to get rid of that ridiculous buyout. Why the Knicks felt they had to give him that buyout I have no idea. Scott Perry is so bad the guy has zero eye for talent I have no idea how he has a job. For 4 million you get a bench player but the Knicks just piss it away like its nothing. We already are down 6 million because of Noah why throw away more

I might actually disagree with every sentence you wrote there. The optionality on the contracts is really solid. Team options vs player options, also solid. Perry has shown a pretty good eye for talent. Giving Randle away is a silly. He has value. And a favorable contract. He may not be the guy NY wanted him to be —- he may struggle as the focal point of an offense. But also note that teams could easily collapse on him without enough shooters on the floor. Kind of like when people were hating ZBo. There should be no reason to exercise a buyout on Randle. There will be takers. We should use caution when “dumping” Randle. The starting lineup needs to be reconfigured for sure. There are trades out there for the imagination where Randle would make a solid small ball center next to a legitimate stretch 4. Lots of things need to be considered. But let’s not hate Randle. Guy has legit skills. Just got a lil spin-crazy

Jmpasq wrote: I would give Randle away just to get rid of that ridiculous buyout.

The buyout exists to pay Randle for two years of his contract where the Knicks wanted to create cap space.

Randle's agent and the Knicks front office determined Randle's market AAV. Then subtracted it by 2 million in unlikely to be earned incentives each year for two years.

Randle is getting his market AAV at the time the contract was signed, just deferred as a buyout. Steve Young and the USFL had to do deferred money because the league's economics left them both with no choice. The Knicks are a cash rich team and limited talent on the roster, so it's going to be seen as an insult to Randle. But the actual insult is how Randle plays for the Knicks.

It's also a hedge on trading a player who doesn't qualify for a NTC.

TripleThreat wrote:

Jmpasq wrote: I would give Randle away just to get rid of that ridiculous buyout.

The buyout exists to pay Randle for two years of his contract where the Knicks wanted to create cap space.

Randle's agent and the Knicks front office determined Randle's market AAV. Then subtracted it by 2 million in unlikely to be earned incentives each year for two years.

Randle is getting his market AAV at the time the contract was signed, just deferred as a buyout. Steve Young and the USFL had to do deferred money because the league's economics left them both with no choice. The Knicks are a cash rich team and limited talent on the roster, so it's going to be seen as an insult to Randle. But the actual insult is how Randle plays for the Knicks.

It's also a hedge on trading a player who doesn't qualify for a NTC.

Who were we bidding against? Do you think there were other teams giving Randle that money?

Jmpasq wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

Jmpasq wrote:If there stupid enough to make that trade great but I doubt it. I would give Randle away just to get rid of that ridiculous buyout. Why the Knicks felt they had to give him that buyout I have no idea. Scott Perry is so bad the guy has zero eye for talent I have no idea how he has a job. For 4 million you get a bench player but the Knicks just piss it away like its nothing. We already are down 6 million because of Noah why throw away more

I might actually disagree with every sentence you wrote there. The optionality on the contracts is really solid. Team options vs player options, also solid. Perry has shown a pretty good eye for talent. Giving Randle away is a silly. He has value. And a favorable contract. He may not be the guy NY wanted him to be —- he may struggle as the focal point of an offense. But also note that teams could easily collapse on him without enough shooters on the floor. Kind of like when people were hating ZBo. There should be no reason to exercise a buyout on Randle. There will be takers. We should use caution when “dumping” Randle. The starting lineup needs to be reconfigured for sure. There are trades out there for the imagination where Randle would make a solid small ball center next to a legitimate stretch 4. Lots of things need to be considered. But let’s not hate Randle. Guy has legit skills. Just got a lil spin-crazy

He is a terrible fit for this Roster. If you believe Mitch is a piece to build around you don't play Randle next to him. It's like they have no concept of what a cohesive team looks like

Being a terrible fit for the roster doesn’t mean he has no value. He posted 19/10 on a bad team. He’s sniffing around the all star label without making the jump. He is 25 years old, a workaholic and tried to do a little too much without a lot of support. Might still be the best player on our roster, though I think that probably is Mitchell Robinson. I don’t think Mitch next to him is a competing issue, but without much perimeter shooting, there isn’t a lot of room on the block. So, spin-arama Randle looks foolish. I could see him being an AllStar on the right team. Even this team. Add 3-D PG and SF and let Barrett take a little growth in his outside shot. Maybe MR keeps working on his shot.

Personally, unless we are making a trade with Randle for an established All Star, I like him and his contract.

TripleThreat wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:Giving Randle away is a silly. He has value.

If the Knicks could trade Randle to another team and into their empty cap space, for the rights to a Euro Stash who would never play in the NBA, they would do it. They would say Yes so fast over the phone it would sound like a grunt you make while taking a big ****. Trust me, trading Randle right now would feel like taking a big **** from the Knicks front office.

When a miserable woman gets divorced, she heads right to the gym. She's gonna get in shape so she can reel in a new sucker. Once she's reeled him in, she's gonna get fat and comfortable again. That's Julius Randle. He'll try when he knows a contract is coming up, once he's got a little security, he plays like a total *******.

He's the worst kind of player. He blocks minutes/a roster spot from you auditioning young longshot hopefuls. He generates just enough wins to ruin your tanking. He's plays like an ******* so he kills morale in your locker room. He ball stops enough to choke the development of your younger players. He's got tanked trade value so you are just stuck with him. Since he won't listen to the coach, he is a tax on the sanity of any coach on your team. I can live with a guy who just isn't all that good but actually pushes effort. But Randle just doesn't give a ****.

If you were lost on a desert island with Julius Randle, he's the kind of low rent nipple hair that would steal your little daughters Hannah Montana lunch box to steal her animal crackers. Then he'd take a **** in it. Then he'd give it back to your daughter and scream at her until she said Thank You King Julius.

Just to keep that ball stopping choad away from the rookies, it's worth it to dump him.

Does Utah go for a swap? What would we need to throw in?

TripleThreat wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:Giving Randle away is a silly. He has value.

If the Knicks could trade Randle to another team and into their empty cap space, for the rights to a Euro Stash who would never play in the NBA, they would do it. They would say Yes so fast over the phone it would sound like a grunt you make while taking a big ****. Trust me, trading Randle right now would feel like taking a big **** from the Knicks front office.

When a miserable woman gets divorced, she heads right to the gym. She's gonna get in shape so she can reel in a new sucker. Once she's reeled him in, she's gonna get fat and comfortable again. That's Julius Randle. He'll try when he knows a contract is coming up, once he's got a little security, he plays like a total *******.

He's the worst kind of player. He blocks minutes/a roster spot from you auditioning young longshot hopefuls. He generates just enough wins to ruin your tanking. He's plays like an ******* so he kills morale in your locker room. He ball stops enough to choke the development of your younger players. He's got tanked trade value so you are just stuck with him. Since he won't listen to the coach, he is a tax on the sanity of any coach on your team. I can live with a guy who just isn't all that good but actually pushes effort. But Randle just doesn't give a ****.

If you were lost on a desert island with Julius Randle, he's the kind of low rent nipple hair that would steal your little daughters Hannah Montana lunch box to steal her animal crackers. Then he'd take a **** in it. Then he'd give it back to your daughter and scream at her until she said Thank You King Julius.

Just to keep that ball stopping choad away from the rookies, it's worth it to dump him.

A authoritarian coach like Thibs cannot control him? Sit him on the bench if he does not move the ball as per his job?
Randle is a bad dude?

Nalod wrote:

TripleThreat wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:Giving Randle away is a silly. He has value.

If the Knicks could trade Randle to another team and into their empty cap space, for the rights to a Euro Stash who would never play in the NBA, they would do it. They would say Yes so fast over the phone it would sound like a grunt you make while taking a big ****. Trust me, trading Randle right now would feel like taking a big **** from the Knicks front office.

When a miserable woman gets divorced, she heads right to the gym. She's gonna get in shape so she can reel in a new sucker. Once she's reeled him in, she's gonna get fat and comfortable again. That's Julius Randle. He'll try when he knows a contract is coming up, once he's got a little security, he plays like a total *******.

He's the worst kind of player. He blocks minutes/a roster spot from you auditioning young longshot hopefuls. He generates just enough wins to ruin your tanking. He's plays like an ******* so he kills morale in your locker room. He ball stops enough to choke the development of your younger players. He's got tanked trade value so you are just stuck with him. Since he won't listen to the coach, he is a tax on the sanity of any coach on your team. I can live with a guy who just isn't all that good but actually pushes effort. But Randle just doesn't give a ****.

If you were lost on a desert island with Julius Randle, he's the kind of low rent nipple hair that would steal your little daughters Hannah Montana lunch box to steal her animal crackers. Then he'd take a **** in it. Then he'd give it back to your daughter and scream at her until she said Thank You King Julius.

Just to keep that ball stopping choad away from the rookies, it's worth it to dump him.

A authoritarian coach like Thibs cannot control him? Sit him on the bench if he does not move the ball as per his job?
Randle is a bad dude?

Nobody hates Randle.

What is hated is the lack of chemistry with the rest of the team. He's a poor man's version of Melo. Fool's gold.

If you watch the playoffs you would see that the Knicks have and could have numerous alternatives like Portis, Gibson, Knox, RJ, Wooten, a draft pick candidate, a trade newbie - ALL of whom aren't the Randle-cough-the-ball-up-yet-again redundancy machine.

We will trade him and he will occasionally embarrass us, good for him.