jskinny35 wrote:My argument back is not really against Randle - we're playing 1 on 5 offensively the way the Bucks do with Giannis (Lakers to lesser extent with Lebron) - but we don't have the shooters for this to be effective. And despite the progress - Randle is not as good as those others... The games we won early on our guys were hitting a high % (remember RJ had that one lights out game), but we've come back down to earth and it's less about Randle and more about the style and fit. If we decide to extend Randle we may as well trade RJ and probably Toppin as well. RJ and Randle seem to take turns which creates stagnancy. Rubio would make a big difference but we don't have anything like that in a PG. Regardless we need PG help so much that I think it's Frank's turn (and likely last stand) as the others have shown enough. I do think IQ may become something worthwhile - but he's a perfect reserve guard at this point.

For me this boils down to: we have one good player and lots of not good players so let’s trade the good player.

We are playing 1 on 5 cause 4 suck on offense. That’s it, there’s nothing more to take away from it

martin wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:My argument back is not really against Randle - we're playing 1 on 5 offensively the way the Bucks do with Giannis (Lakers to lesser extent with Lebron) - but we don't have the shooters for this to be effective. And despite the progress - Randle is not as good as those others... The games we won early on our guys were hitting a high % (remember RJ had that one lights out game), but we've come back down to earth and it's less about Randle and more about the style and fit. If we decide to extend Randle we may as well trade RJ and probably Toppin as well. RJ and Randle seem to take turns which creates stagnancy. Rubio would make a big difference but we don't have anything like that in a PG. Regardless we need PG help so much that I think it's Frank's turn (and likely last stand) as the others have shown enough. I do think IQ may become something worthwhile - but he's a perfect reserve guard at this point.

For me this boils down to: we have one good player and lots of not good players so let’s trade the good player.

We are playing 1 on 5 cause 4 suck on offense. That’s it, there’s nothing more to take away from it

Then Trade RJ and Obi.

Something has got to give

jskinny35 wrote:

martin wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:My argument back is not really against Randle - we're playing 1 on 5 offensively the way the Bucks do with Giannis (Lakers to lesser extent with Lebron) - but we don't have the shooters for this to be effective. And despite the progress - Randle is not as good as those others... The games we won early on our guys were hitting a high % (remember RJ had that one lights out game), but we've come back down to earth and it's less about Randle and more about the style and fit. If we decide to extend Randle we may as well trade RJ and probably Toppin as well. RJ and Randle seem to take turns which creates stagnancy. Rubio would make a big difference but we don't have anything like that in a PG. Regardless we need PG help so much that I think it's Frank's turn (and likely last stand) as the others have shown enough. I do think IQ may become something worthwhile - but he's a perfect reserve guard at this point.

For me this boils down to: we have one good player and lots of not good players so let’s trade the good player.

We are playing 1 on 5 cause 4 suck on offense. That’s it, there’s nothing more to take away from it

I don't disagree and agree Randle is our best player by a mile right now - just think that the ceiling with Randle is less limited and harder to fix than moving Randle. I felt this way when we had Melo as well (good player but would never really win without a lot of help). If we wait 3 years for the other not so good players to develop and try to figure out how to complement our workhorse/Randle - then what could we really be? I think a decent team with no realistic shot at upper tier performance at best. And yes that's definitely better than what we've experienced the last 20 years! And you're also right that betting on RJ and the young players come with risk as well! Just think we've seen enough to know what we have and could be... unless a completely left field move is made :)

What does that even mean? What does any of your post mean?

Nalod wrote:Randle got a hell of a motor. Not sure we appreciate what he is actually doing because we are who we are.
What is funny in a way is he is doing in part (Easy now JROD) what we wanted Melo to do which is penetrate but pass it out.
Now, to be fair what is now #14 alltime scorer is not logically of the mindset to pass it out when your a max elite player yourself.

Nalod wrote:Granted, he did verbally tell us he would “sacrifice his game”. Since Melo is not really a dick and very likable he gets all kinds of passes with knick fans. No I don’t blame him for our troubles.........
This is about Randle who improved his passing and is playing at an allstar level.

Nalod wrote:Randle is a beast and while I’d like to dream of a starphuch concept the fact is we should extend him and keep building with RJ, Mitch and Quick. We have a slew of picks to also build on.
A trade opportunity will arise and while he might not be our savior he can be used. Just hypothetically speaking, Randle is not close to Giannis but MIlwaukee won’t get full value back. They get a high volume scorer and what ever we back the truck up to bring.
Am I advocating for that? Not yet. We are not close to making a big trade for a star and have left over talent to contend.

Great, then we build around Giannis, and spend our time complaining about how he can't shoot the damn ball from 3. Since we're talking hypo-starphucque-a-theticals, if we did manage to get Giannis in the truck, would that finally make us a more FA-attractive destination? I ask because the Bucks don't seem to be attracting a whole hell of alot in the way of FA stars to play with the Freak, acknowledging of course that Milwaukee ain't exactly LA or Brooklyn.

jskinny35 wrote:

martin wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:

martin wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:My argument back is not really against Randle - we're playing 1 on 5 offensively the way the Bucks do with Giannis (Lakers to lesser extent with Lebron) - but we don't have the shooters for this to be effective. And despite the progress - Randle is not as good as those others... The games we won early on our guys were hitting a high % (remember RJ had that one lights out game), but we've come back down to earth and it's less about Randle and more about the style and fit. If we decide to extend Randle we may as well trade RJ and probably Toppin as well. RJ and Randle seem to take turns which creates stagnancy. Rubio would make a big difference but we don't have anything like that in a PG. Regardless we need PG help so much that I think it's Frank's turn (and likely last stand) as the others have shown enough. I do think IQ may become something worthwhile - but he's a perfect reserve guard at this point.

For me this boils down to: we have one good player and lots of not good players so let’s trade the good player.

We are playing 1 on 5 cause 4 suck on offense. That’s it, there’s nothing more to take away from it

I don't disagree and agree Randle is our best player by a mile right now - just think that the ceiling with Randle is less limited and harder to fix than moving Randle. I felt this way when we had Melo as well (good player but would never really win without a lot of help). If we wait 3 years for the other not so good players to develop and try to figure out how to complement our workhorse/Randle - then what could we really be? I think a decent team with no realistic shot at upper tier performance at best. And yes that's definitely better than what we've experienced the last 20 years! And you're also right that betting on RJ and the young players come with risk as well! Just think we've seen enough to know what we have and could be... unless a completely left field move is made :)

What does that even mean? What does any of your post mean?

Maybe a better way to answer is what do you see when you watch the Knicks offensively? I see someone handing Randle the ball when they cross midcourt and he tries to make plays as the focal point of the offense. The offense reminds me of the Bucks (minus Giannis and the outside shooting). I see poor spacing, Randle doing a lot of backing down into the high post and the other teams packing the paint which reduces Randle's options. They give him the mid-range j which he hits at a decent clip - but the stagnation is clear as the others are positioned further from the basket. Aside from Bullock and Burks, there is little perimeter threat. Not Randle's fault and he does pass and try to make plays. The majority of Randle's shots are post fadeaways, mid-range shots and the occasional 3... with everyone else either standing around or so far away. Mitch gets the occasional putback, RJ takes his iso drive when Randle doesn't handle and the other guys take what's left. If this were 1990-2010 Randle would be beasting in the paint but the game has changed and our roster is too far away from what it would take to actually surround Randle with what's needed. If we had gone after Harris, Bogdanovich, Gallinari or other perimeter threats it would have helped.

Last year most of us concluded that he wasn't "the guy" - more of a 2nd or 3rd type of player on a decent team. Because everyone else stinks so far - his usage and production has increased significantly (minutes, pers). It's deceptive as he is playing better yet still fumbles the ball and has a lot of turnovers - but overall much better and the perception that he may be "the guy" simply because the rest of the guys are not playing well is a trap. I still think he's what he was last year - a star anytime before 2010, a solid 2nd or 3rd guy on a winning team, or a 6th man of the year on a championship caliber team. On the Knicks he's the only one producing right now but that doesn't change who he is ultimately. Melo is probably the closest example of what we learned (too late) to explain my opinions on Randle and why we should consider selling high right now.

I don't think his play is sustainable. I also don't think his style of play is conducive to long-term success. I think our roster is very flawed and needs a lot to fix it. I think Randle's play right now is a gift/opportunity. Most of us did not believe he would have any more value this season - but he is producing and has more value right now. This gives us a chance to obtain some talent/picks to keep us moving in the right direction. Kind of how we were able to turn M. Morris last season into an extra pick when we knew it was short-term help. Unless we have a 1 tier star coming to NY - Randle will likely be the best player we have and we will continue to be mediocre at best (if we improve our shooting). If you think he's leading us to anything beyond 1st round playoffs (if we were able to land some more shooting) - than we just have very different views. I appreciate his hard work and respect him - but IMO his style of play and ceiling on this team won't lead us anywhere significant.

Maybe we just see it differently - happy to keep exchanging views but nothing to lose sleep over

Literally what other options are out there on offense?

Take Randle away. What do you run?

Knicks don't have shooters. Knicks don't really have PG play and the PnR is horrible. What else is there left? It's why Randle is getting so many touches.

Randle is just about top 10 IN THE LEAGUE in assists and he has poor ass shooting players around him, some of the worst in the league. And yet he is averaging 20 and 10.

Randle is not the problem. He may not be the long term solution but all of the other players and what they are doing is the problem. Mostly the PGs. And RJ's horrific shooting.

Nalod wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

Nalod wrote:Randle got a hell of a motor. Not sure we appreciate what he is actually doing because we are who we are.
What is funny in a way is he is doing in part (Easy now JROD) what we wanted Melo to do which is penetrate but pass it out.
Now, to be fair what is now #14 alltime scorer is not logically of the mindset to pass it out when your a max elite player yourself.

And when you do pass it, it hits people in the back of their head, or they dribble it off their feet out of bounds. And lets not forget AGAIN that Melo led the team in assists. For an entire season.

Nalod wrote:Granted, he did verbally tell us he would “sacrifice his game”. Since Melo is not really a dick and very likable he gets all kinds of passes with knick fans. No I don’t blame him for our troubles.........
This is about Randle who improved his passing and is playing at an allstar level.

For 11 games. Let's talk Allstar halfway through this shortened season. Let's not forget Amare played like a Clydesdale with jetpacks for a few months and then promptly flamed out into a wine puddle.

Nalod wrote:Randle is a beast and while I’d like to dream of a starphuch concept the fact is we should extend him and keep building with RJ, Mitch and Quick. We have a slew of picks to also build on.
A trade opportunity will arise and while he might not be our savior he can be used. Just hypothetically speaking, Randle is not close to Giannis but MIlwaukee won’t get full value back. They get a high volume scorer and what ever we back the truck up to bring.
Am I advocating for that? Not yet. We are not close to making a big trade for a star and have left over talent to contend.

Great, then we build around Giannis, and spend our time complaining about how he can't shoot the damn ball from 3. Since we're talking hypo-starphucque-a-theticals, if we did manage to get Giannis in the truck, would that finally make us a more FA-attractive destination? I ask because the Bucks don't seem to be attracting a whole hell of alot in the way of FA stars to play with the Freak, acknowledging of course that Milwaukee ain't exactly LA or Brooklyn.

Yes! We get Giannis at his prime. Nowhere to go but down from that very apex. Then Thibs plays him 48 min a game until World Wide Wes gives him a beat down to ease the minutes. We blame everything on him and Thiannis who we pay by giving him a Chris Smith type deal. He demands a trade. Rinse, wash, repeat.

We've both been here wayyyyyyyyyyy too long.

martin wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:

martin wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:

martin wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:My argument back is not really against Randle - we're playing 1 on 5 offensively the way the Bucks do with Giannis (Lakers to lesser extent with Lebron) - but we don't have the shooters for this to be effective. And despite the progress - Randle is not as good as those others... The games we won early on our guys were hitting a high % (remember RJ had that one lights out game), but we've come back down to earth and it's less about Randle and more about the style and fit. If we decide to extend Randle we may as well trade RJ and probably Toppin as well. RJ and Randle seem to take turns which creates stagnancy. Rubio would make a big difference but we don't have anything like that in a PG. Regardless we need PG help so much that I think it's Frank's turn (and likely last stand) as the others have shown enough. I do think IQ may become something worthwhile - but he's a perfect reserve guard at this point.

For me this boils down to: we have one good player and lots of not good players so let’s trade the good player.

We are playing 1 on 5 cause 4 suck on offense. That’s it, there’s nothing more to take away from it

I don't disagree and agree Randle is our best player by a mile right now - just think that the ceiling with Randle is less limited and harder to fix than moving Randle. I felt this way when we had Melo as well (good player but would never really win without a lot of help). If we wait 3 years for the other not so good players to develop and try to figure out how to complement our workhorse/Randle - then what could we really be? I think a decent team with no realistic shot at upper tier performance at best. And yes that's definitely better than what we've experienced the last 20 years! And you're also right that betting on RJ and the young players come with risk as well! Just think we've seen enough to know what we have and could be... unless a completely left field move is made :)

What does that even mean? What does any of your post mean?

Maybe a better way to answer is what do you see when you watch the Knicks offensively? I see someone handing Randle the ball when they cross midcourt and he tries to make plays as the focal point of the offense. The offense reminds me of the Bucks (minus Giannis and the outside shooting). I see poor spacing, Randle doing a lot of backing down into the high post and the other teams packing the paint which reduces Randle's options. They give him the mid-range j which he hits at a decent clip - but the stagnation is clear as the others are positioned further from the basket. Aside from Bullock and Burks, there is little perimeter threat. Not Randle's fault and he does pass and try to make plays. The majority of Randle's shots are post fadeaways, mid-range shots and the occasional 3... with everyone else either standing around or so far away. Mitch gets the occasional putback, RJ takes his iso drive when Randle doesn't handle and the other guys take what's left. If this were 1990-2010 Randle would be beasting in the paint but the game has changed and our roster is too far away from what it would take to actually surround Randle with what's needed. If we had gone after Harris, Bogdanovich, Gallinari or other perimeter threats it would have helped.

Last year most of us concluded that he wasn't "the guy" - more of a 2nd or 3rd type of player on a decent team. Because everyone else stinks so far - his usage and production has increased significantly (minutes, pers). It's deceptive as he is playing better yet still fumbles the ball and has a lot of turnovers - but overall much better and the perception that he may be "the guy" simply because the rest of the guys are not playing well is a trap. I still think he's what he was last year - a star anytime before 2010, a solid 2nd or 3rd guy on a winning team, or a 6th man of the year on a championship caliber team. On the Knicks he's the only one producing right now but that doesn't change who he is ultimately. Melo is probably the closest example of what we learned (too late) to explain my opinions on Randle and why we should consider selling high right now.

I don't think his play is sustainable. I also don't think his style of play is conducive to long-term success. I think our roster is very flawed and needs a lot to fix it. I think Randle's play right now is a gift/opportunity. Most of us did not believe he would have any more value this season - but he is producing and has more value right now. This gives us a chance to obtain some talent/picks to keep us moving in the right direction. Kind of how we were able to turn M. Morris last season into an extra pick when we knew it was short-term help. Unless we have a 1 tier star coming to NY - Randle will likely be the best player we have and we will continue to be mediocre at best (if we improve our shooting). If you think he's leading us to anything beyond 1st round playoffs (if we were able to land some more shooting) - than we just have very different views. I appreciate his hard work and respect him - but IMO his style of play and ceiling on this team won't lead us anywhere significant.

Maybe we just see it differently - happy to keep exchanging views but nothing to lose sleep over

Literally what other options are out there on offense?

Take Randle away. What do you run?

Knicks don't have shooters. Knicks don't really have PG play and the PnR is horrible. What else is there left? It's why Randle is getting so many touches.

Randle is just about top 10 IN THE LEAGUE in assists and he has poor ass shooting players around him, some of the worst in the league. And yet he is averaging 20 and 10.

Randle is not the problem. He may not be the long term solution but all of the other players and what they are doing is the problem. Mostly the PGs. And RJ's horrific shooting.

I'm not suggesting the team would be better without Randle and no replacement - they would be worse clearly. But that doesn't mean we have to accept the current outlook? Take the Lavine and Lauri deal I suggested just as an example- you would almost replicate the production Randle was giving while opening up the paint and giving RJ some room to operate. Adding a stretch 4 shooter would further open up the pain and allow even more spacing. 2 wings with room to operate would have a better impact on this team than 1 undersized 4 with a stifled RJ. And this is all said without the fact that we drafted another defenseless power forward (Obi) that really won't be able to be on the floor for any significant minutes while Randle is also on the floor. So long-term, while Randle is not the problem or his fault - there are simply too many issues with the offense focused around him. Giannis works only because there are 3/4 knock down shooters surrounding him. And because he's so athletically dominant he's almost unguardable... Randle is like Giannis but not dominant and with worse shooting support so you make the same adjustments and there is no counter. Lebron kinda the same but has AD and solid shooting to support.

When it's your 2 or 3 man iso driving instead of your PF - you no longer have the PF/big (guarding him) and accompanying 5 packing the paint as often. When Booker or Lavine or even Harden iso - there's simply better spacing. They bring the defender out further because they're also better outside shooters - this is what is needed IMO. They are guarding the Bookers and Currys 5-10 feet behind the 3pt line. Randle gets defended when he's a few feet inside the line (less space). Now I suppose if we could swap RJ for Booker we'd be having a much different exchange. He did play for Kentucky so maybe they underperform as the season goes on and we get lucky :)

Vmart wrote:I like Randle. The man is playing beyond his contract. Nothing not to like plays hard gets teammates involved. Big fan of Randle. Personally I don’t see the need for Obi, he seems alright but I do see star or even a very good player. A few Kenny Walker dunks here and there but game look weak.

Obi's got the fourth highest three point percentage on the team for what it's worth 😂 Also makes good reads and is good cutter. His game will come around.