GustavBahler wrote:

NYKMentality wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

fishmike wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:I know it may seem less logical to not ride Randle's improved play this year and go for the playoffs but still think this could be the last (good) opportunity to sell high on Randle and use the rest of the season to decide on IQ, Obi, Sims and even Cam. While the FO may be content making the playoffs (even if early exit) I still see this path as short-sighted to some degree.

If Randle flames out in the playoffs again - there will be more pressure to move him and yet his trade value will decline again (like the last time).

If I'm wrong and he plays well we are still not realistically strong enough to beat the upper echelon teams in a 7 games series.

I'd even be open to trying to rebuild our roster with Randle but then feel strongly that Thibs has to go for it to work. I get this is an unpopular take and likely not realistic but does anyone agree with the position that something out of Randle, Thibs and RJ has to move or change for us to healthily progress to next level (even if not likely to happen)?

Exs
Trade RJ and/or Randle
Move RJ to the bench and upgrade SF position
New Coach and/or new offensive system implemented

Knicks are 5th in the league in PPS
https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2023.html

Randle has gotten better on BOTH ends AND has shown the ability to effectively defer to better suited finisher (Brunson) and be happy about it. He's also hitting young guys like Grimes for open 3s in crunch time. Yeah lets get rid of THAT guy.

RJ... well there's an argument but he's also 22 so patience is a factor. I would move him for a better fit (OG) but that's just me

Less heroball from Randle, more rebounding. better D. Still some sloppy play in the 4th. Im guessing its nerves more than anything.

Hero ball is when guys take matters into their own hands and ignore team plays. Is it Hero ball when JB runs iso off a spread set? So why is it Hero ball when it's clear Thibs is running a spread set for Randle to post up. Can he make better reads, yes, but stop with the "hero ball" brush to paint a selfish tone.
More rebounds? We not talking about Obi. Randle just had 14 and usually leads the team.
His defensive effort has been there all year. Made some blocks this year that we did not ever see before.
These narratives are old man. Stop trying to rekindle them. We all know you are an Obi lover and can't take that your view on Randle was shortsighted.
Some of us fought you guys all summer with the BS that Randle was garbage because of yet another 20/10 year. Just because the rest of the team was crap.
The knowledgeable fans knew the relevance of not having a true PG, the consistent historical production, the physicality he exhibit every year since being drafted and the reasonable contract he has.
Fact is, Randle is a beast. He is a fighter. Tough sob. He has all the tools that makes him the best player on the court on most games. He was last night. Does he need to improve his bball IQ? Absolutely. But so does every player on the planet.
We need more players like him. Not less.

500 words on heroball? Heroball is when you drive right into your defender and turn the ball over, when there are better options. Randle has done that plenty of times. If you want to spin that into it being part of Thibs plan, be my guest.

Hard to converse with someone with such an acute hypersensitivity to any criticism of a basketball player. Most of my comments in that post were positive. But you freaked out over one criticism, and wrote War and Peace.

If this is how you want to do it. Try converting someone else. Pass

Hero Ball?

Isn't Julius Randle only averaging 2.7 Turnovers per game throughout 50 starts this year while also averaging 25 Points and 11 Rebounds alongside of 4.0 Assists Per Game?

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/4th-quarter-turnover-per-game-knicks-players

Leads the team in 4th quarter turnovers per game. Total turnovers in the 4th as well. Has some games where he tries to do too much, and turns the ball over. Sometimes he doesnt.

As I wrote, there has been less of that. Not suggesting Randle is a turnover machine every 4th quarter. Some good nights, some not so good ones. Sometimes turnovers in the 4th mean the difference between winning and losing.

We're really talking about 0.6 4th quarter Turnovers per game? 0.6? 🤣😭

NYKMentality wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

NYKMentality wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

fishmike wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:I know it may seem less logical to not ride Randle's improved play this year and go for the playoffs but still think this could be the last (good) opportunity to sell high on Randle and use the rest of the season to decide on IQ, Obi, Sims and even Cam. While the FO may be content making the playoffs (even if early exit) I still see this path as short-sighted to some degree.

If Randle flames out in the playoffs again - there will be more pressure to move him and yet his trade value will decline again (like the last time).

If I'm wrong and he plays well we are still not realistically strong enough to beat the upper echelon teams in a 7 games series.

I'd even be open to trying to rebuild our roster with Randle but then feel strongly that Thibs has to go for it to work. I get this is an unpopular take and likely not realistic but does anyone agree with the position that something out of Randle, Thibs and RJ has to move or change for us to healthily progress to next level (even if not likely to happen)?

Trade RJ and/or Randle
Move RJ to the bench and upgrade SF position
New Coach and/or new offensive system implemented

Knicks are 5th in the league in PPS
https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2023.html

Randle has gotten better on BOTH ends AND has shown the ability to effectively defer to better suited finisher (Brunson) and be happy about it. He's also hitting young guys like Grimes for open 3s in crunch time. Yeah lets get rid of THAT guy.

RJ... well there's an argument but he's also 22 so patience is a factor. I would move him for a better fit (OG) but that's just me

Less heroball from Randle, more rebounding. better D. Still some sloppy play in the 4th. Im guessing its nerves more than anything.

Hero ball is when guys take matters into their own hands and ignore team plays. Is it Hero ball when JB runs iso off a spread set? So why is it Hero ball when it's clear Thibs is running a spread set for Randle to post up. Can he make better reads, yes, but stop with the "hero ball" brush to paint a selfish tone.
More rebounds? We not talking about Obi. Randle just had 14 and usually leads the team.
His defensive effort has been there all year. Made some blocks this year that we did not ever see before.
These narratives are old man. Stop trying to rekindle them. We all know you are an Obi lover and can't take that your view on Randle was shortsighted.
Some of us fought you guys all summer with the BS that Randle was garbage because of yet another 20/10 year. Just because the rest of the team was crap.
The knowledgeable fans knew the relevance of not having a true PG, the consistent historical production, the physicality he exhibit every year since being drafted and the reasonable contract he has.
Fact is, Randle is a beast. He is a fighter. Tough sob. He has all the tools that makes him the best player on the court on most games. He was last night. Does he need to improve his bball IQ? Absolutely. But so does every player on the planet.
We need more players like him. Not less.

500 words on heroball? Heroball is when you drive right into your defender and turn the ball over, when there are better options. Randle has done that plenty of times. If you want to spin that into it being part of Thibs plan, be my guest.

Hard to converse with someone with such an acute hypersensitivity to any criticism of a basketball player. Most of my comments in that post were positive. But you freaked out over one criticism, and wrote War and Peace.

If this is how you want to do it. Try converting someone else. Pass

Hero Ball?

Isn't Julius Randle only averaging 2.7 Turnovers per game throughout 50 starts this year while also averaging 25 Points and 11 Rebounds alongside of 4.0 Assists Per Game?

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/4th-quarter-turnover-per-game-knicks-players

Leads the team in 4th quarter turnovers per game. Total turnovers in the 4th as well. Has some games where he tries to do too much, and turns the ball over. Sometimes he doesnt.

As I wrote, there has been less of that. Not suggesting Randle is a turnover machine every 4th quarter. Some good nights, some not so good ones. Sometimes turnovers in the 4th mean the difference between winning and losing.

We're really talking about 0.6 4th quarter Turnovers per game? 0.6? 🤣😭

Actually its .06 spread out over a little more than half a 4th quarter per game. Over 12 minutes its around one 4th quarter turnover per game.

Last try here, its not the average that really concerns me, its the inconsistency. Some nights Randle plays smart, some nights he doesnt. Thats never mentioned in all the numbers thrown out there. Its the inconsistency. Acknowleging that isnt heresy.

GustavBahler wrote:
Actually its .06 spread out over a little more than half a 4th quarter per game. Over 12 minutes its around one 4th quarter turnover per game.

Last try here, its not the average that really concerns me, its the inconsistency. Some nights Randle plays smart, some nights he doesnt. Thats never mentioned in all the numbers thrown out there. Its the inconsistency. Acknowleging that isnt heresy.

The raw numbers aren't really useful here because they don't take usage into account. If Randle turns the ball over 2.7 times a game is it more or less than Hartenstein's .8?

Turnover % is the better stat as it takes usage into account. I'd say 4th qtr turnovers is particularly suspect because defenses tighten up and it's more likely that only the most reliable players are handling the ball.

So a better question would be how does Randle rank in tov% and look and behold, he's not even in the bottom 100 in the league (107). For perspective, rock solid PG get Mike Conley is 50 as well as almost every all-star in the league. So maybe the real story here is yet more evidence of Randle's awesomeness.

BigDaddyG wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:
Actually its .06 spread out over a little more than half a 4th quarter per game. Over 12 minutes its around one 4th quarter turnover per game.

Last try here, its not the average that really concerns me, its the inconsistency. Some nights Randle plays smart, some nights he doesnt. Thats never mentioned in all the numbers thrown out there. Its the inconsistency. Acknowleging that isnt heresy.

The raw numbers aren't really useful here because they don't take usage into account. If Randle turns the ball over 2.7 times a game is it more or less than Hartenstein's .8?

Turnover % is the better stat as it takes usage into account. I'd say 4th qtr turnovers is particularly suspect because defenses tighten up and it's more likely that only the most reliable players are handling the ball.

So a better question would be how does Randle rank in tov% and look and behold, he's not even in the bottom 100 in the league (107). For perspective, rock solid PG get Mike Conley is 50 as well as almost every ALL-STAR in the league. So maybe the real story here is yet more evidence of Randle's awesomeness.

Good point. But is that broken down by quarter or is that overall? The eye test (my eye test anyway) says the team's pace begins to throttle in the fourth and becomes more iso centric. I could be wrong, but I'm too tired to try and dig it up. Again, not singling Randle out on this one. It's an issue with the mid 3 and the team's overall offensive execution.

I think that's how the game is played. I'm thinking specifically of LeBron on the Cavs (the first time) when the 4th quarter would roll around and all of a sudden LBJ was taking all the shots. The pace slows in the 4th and the playoffs and only the stars get the ball. Svi has an efg% of .750 but I don't think anyone would say he should be closing the game for NY.

I remember when 538 came out with their RAPTOR ratings and Luke Kornet was the highest rated player in the league.

I think a genuine gripe with Jules are the stupid fouls he seems to make every game. Whether it's fouling Hauser at the end of the 3rd or touching Mitchell's back in the 4th.

GustavBahler wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:
Actually its .06 spread out over a little more than half a 4th quarter per game. Over 12 minutes its around one 4th quarter turnover per game.

Last try here, its not the average that really concerns me, its the inconsistency. Some nights Randle plays smart, some nights he doesnt. Thats never mentioned in all the numbers thrown out there. Its the inconsistency. Acknowleging that isnt heresy.

The raw numbers aren't really useful here because they don't take usage into account. If Randle turns the ball over 2.7 times a game is it more or less than Hartenstein's .8?

Turnover % is the better stat as it takes usage into account. I'd say 4th qtr turnovers is particularly suspect because defenses tighten up and it's more likely that only the most reliable players are handling the ball.

So a better question would be how does Randle rank in tov% and look and behold, he's not even in the bottom 100 in the league (107). For perspective, rock solid PG get Mike Conley is 50 as well as almost every ALL-STAR in the league. So maybe the real story here is yet more evidence of Randle's awesomeness.

Good point. But is that broken down by quarter or is that overall? The eye test (my eye test anyway) says the team's pace begins to throttle in the fourth and becomes more iso centric. I could be wrong, but I'm too tired to try and dig it up. Again, not singling Randle out on this one. It's an issue with the mid 3 and the team's overall offensive execution.

I think that's how the game is played. I'm thinking specifically of LeBron on the Cavs (the first time) when the 4th quarter would roll around and all of a sudden LBJ was taking all the shots. The pace slows in the 4th and the playoffs and only the stars get the ball. Svi has an efg% of .750 but I don't think anyone would say he should be closing the game for NY.

I remember when 538 came out with their RAPTOR ratings and Luke Kornet was the highest rated player in the league.

I think a genuine gripe with Jules are the stupid fouls he seems to make every game. Whether it's fouling Hauser at the end of the 3rd or touching Mitchell's back in the 4th.

As I wrote (twice) its not the average that's the issue for me, its the inconsistency. Some 4th quarters Randle plays smart, no turnovers. Some games he doesnt, and makes multiple turnovers. Or, as you mentioned bad fouls. Randle has almost twice as many in the 4th than RJ who is the next highest on the list.

However you want to measure it, careerwise Randle hasnt been known as a closer, a strong 4th quarter player. I believe we need to build a roster which factors that in, if Randle is here for the long haul. Or trade him if the FO believes its the only way to add another star.

The problem is we are humans. The turnovers certainly stick out more when they occur vs. when they don't. That's why stats are handy- you can't argue with math.

Surprise, surprise Brunson, Randle, and RJ all make the list shooting 28, 50, 56% respectively on clutch shots.

https://stats.inpredictab The shieldle.com/nba/ssnPlayerSplit.php

Brunson was brought in here for this problem. Again, I'm not going to read too into those numbers but the math says that Brunson should be letting Randle and RJ shoot more in the clutch.

gradyandrew wrote:The fact that Randle has twice as many fouls in the 4th quarter than RJ is also tough to read into too much. Generally RJ plays the entire 3rd quarter and then has a longer rest than Randle to begin the 4th. Randle probably defends more at the rim as well, which increases the chance of fouls. For example, RJs man blows by him and Randle steps up to defend and sometimes gets the foul shot.

Anyway, I'll stop here before getting pissy.

You just wrote about the stupid fouls Randle makes every game in the 3rd and 4th. Some times he makes too many as well. Or loses his cool, not necessarily the same thing every night. Thats been his MO his entire career. He's never been known as a closer.

If his clutch numbers have improved this season, my guess is Randle has been taking better shots, but still dribbling into defenders at times. Not the tough off balance attempts he's tried late in the game. He isnt trying to do too much, which I pointed out at the beginning. It shouldnt be contoversial to say that Randle's shot selection has been suspect at times. Beyond being human.

After a rocky start, Randle has come on strong overall. After a long stretch of poor play going back to last season. Everyone is happy about the present, some of us are wondering if this will last. Its a fair question to ask a player who hasnt been known for consistency, in a good way.

We're talking about half a season. I hope Randle keeps playing well, in the ways I pointed out upthread. But Im not going to believe that this is what we're getting going forward, until we see how the rest of the season plays out.

Some of the celebration has an air of finality to it, which I believe is premature. As if any criticism was unwarranted.

jskinny35 wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:I don't think Luka is realistic and actually think we are better served to try to land a higher level star via the draft or overpay for an up and coming young player with high potential (eg Anfernee Simmons). I do think Randle will fall back to somewhere in between this year and last years stats and just don't believe he has what it takes to lead us as a primary guy. Not his fault as he's in a higher role then he should be in...

I don't think we get that higher level player without either gutting our bench and draft picks or selling high on Randle who should be able to command at least 1 first round pick (unprotected) if he's as amazing as many here believe he is. So it comes down to how we each believe we can get there.

I would take our pick, add Dallas pick and a 1st we land from trading Randle - and move up to an 8-9 position as this draft seems loaded. Risk is there either way IMO.

I would rather keep more picks, IQ, Toppin and possibly Grimes vs keeping Randle to upgrade. I believe IQ has developed nicely and could become a starter in time. I'm not as high on Toppin lately but also believe we have done very little to put him in a position to serve his strengths... we play slow, ask him to stand in the corner and shoot 3s like K. Korver, etc... not sure we really know what we have in him. Grimes seems like a perfect plug and play 2/3 - just needs time to develop. RJ doesn't seem to have good chemistry with Randle and I stick with the youth and believe RJ can be similarly productive in a similar role.

I'll admit my bias against Randle is partially Thibs offensive scheme and role he assigned Randle to... but that combined with Randle's iso-ball, slow tempo/pace, overhandling and feast or famine shooting does not make me want to hitch our wagon to his long-term. He deserves a lot of credit for improving his effort and overall play this year - but fear a repeat of 2 seasons ago with less options the more we build around him.

Simmons huh. Guess we would develop him into an All Star and then sell high?
You think Randle will fall back back between 24ppg and 20? 10rpg and 11? What a shame.
The Ole "he is not a primary guy"? He was last night. He has been most of the two out of the last three years. And do you think Randle should win a chip by himself. Yet Nets, with two of the best players on the planet have yet to do so? What a concept. Of course he can't be a primary on a chip team but what does that have to do with needing to trade him? You do know you need good players on a team besides the primary guy right? Who is that going to be? Obi, Deuce, some guy you can't say who? Here is an idea, let's keep the guys like Randle, JB and RJ who can actually play and produce and get another two more that can also produce at similar levels. Trade the one dimensional guys like Obi, who has not done what a 8 pick should do along with other obvious weak links who have many more weaknesses then the ones mentioned for Randle. ie, Rose, Cam, EF, Deuce.
Btw, you think we would only get a first for Randle? And trading him would only move us a few spots in draft? LMAO. You have no concept of current market value.
Smells like the bias you mention is a cover for the actual bias which seems to be preferring a guy who is underachieving and has yet to produce over a proven alpha.

Not if he is more of a building block. His stats are good but only a part of what we as fans should be looking at. He has not been a primary guy as he has not been at the level of primary guys (eg Lebrons, KD)... so an easier path to get an alpha/star is to package one of your best player (with picks) to upgrade. Last season other teams would laugh as they hung up the phone. This season he is playing much better and we have lots of picks - so not sure why that is so unreasonable...especially if you think he is worth multiple first round picks right?

I will admit I don't know his actual value. I tried to get the forum perspective on here awhile back and there was no consensus. I heard everything from maybe a protected first to a similar player and a heavily protected pick. When his value was lower in the past offseason it was suggested by many that we would have had to attach a pick just to trade him. Obviously it's much better now - so what do you think it is? My bias was stated and I think (to his credit) he has overachieved. If we had this same conversation last season or two seasons before would you be this adamant that he is untouchable? Simply because he's our best player does not mean that to me. I side with RJ vs Randle most of the time but he's not untouchable either - nobody is if it's about the team IMO. So we can agree to disagree...

Are you saying there was anyone pragmatic on this planet that expected to get LBJ or KD type production when we signed JR to his extension? Several unrealistic fans with little knowledge may have and were the ones whining that he was not that last year.
Untouchable? Don't think anyone here would say he is untouchable.
Have always been adamant (4 years)that he is a solid producer, necessary physical PF, excellent rebounder and reasonably contracted.
Trading him for a top 10? Sure. Which one of the many available do you suggest?
Trading him for a first seemed to be your suggestion. Pretty bad one imo
One that not one GM would consider giving up Randle for.
When you say you don't know his value but claim his value,in the off-season was low, is that first hand knowledge? Or blog/forum information from the many expert Randle haters on UK? ?

Not sure where this comment in bold above comes from? I have no issue/problem with JR's production/stats - they are very good this year. Can you at least try to stick to the debate and what points are made?

His value was lower this previous offseason because he didn't play very well last year. I don't think that's really an opinion - as he clearly is playing better this season.

I don't have to suggest and identify the exact player (in the top 10) to trade him for to say I think we should sell high... you can't play both sides of the coin. And you never answered the question - what do you perceive his value to be currently? If it is 2 1st rounders how come there are no rumors abound? Last season I'm assuming there were no rumors because nobody else wanted to touch him.

Btw, I would love to get 2 first rounders or more - I said only 1 because I didn't believe any team would give us more. I'd be happy to be wrong on that. Last season I heard back from many on this forum that interest was low unless we attached a pick or traded him as a straight salary dump. Those that love Randle say we shouldn't trade him last season because his value was too low (understood and could agree). Now the same people say he's playing too unbelievably well and we can't seriously consider trading him now. When things finally level off and he finds a middle ground - will there be an option to trade him at that point?

It's sure sounding like when you love a player there is too much bias/emotions to consider alternative positions. Prove me wrong - what's his value and when would you be open to moving him? We've had 4 seasons of the entire spectrum of JR - he's basically played either very well or very poorly. I don't want to hear about last season's numbers being so great and irreplaceable. You give most players 34-36 minutes with a decent work ethic (which he has) and they will produce. Difference is this year he is much more efficient (Brunson has helped for sure). I acknowledged my bias against Randle and his play style... but would trade any player on the Knicks if it seemed that it would improve our team.

I think you are creating a straw man argument. You are making the debate about Randle "love" when it really should be about Roster and situational "logic". If Randle was producing at his current level on a team projected at 25 wins...then it becomes much more applicable to discuss trading him. However, in what world is it logical to seek a trade of an all star level player for a single first round pick on a team that is projecting at ~45 wins and a 5-7 playoff seeding? Randle would most likely have to be traded to a contender so the FRP you seek would likely suck as well. How is that good business or roster management in any way?

foosballnick wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:I don't think Luka is realistic and actually think we are better served to try to land a higher level star via the draft or overpay for an up and coming young player with high potential (eg Anfernee Simmons). I do think Randle will fall back to somewhere in between this year and last years stats and just don't believe he has what it takes to lead us as a primary guy. Not his fault as he's in a higher role then he should be in...

I don't think we get that higher level player without either gutting our bench and draft picks or selling high on Randle who should be able to command at least 1 first round pick (unprotected) if he's as amazing as many here believe he is. So it comes down to how we each believe we can get there.

I would take our pick, add Dallas pick and a 1st we land from trading Randle - and move up to an 8-9 position as this draft seems loaded. Risk is there either way IMO.

I would rather keep more picks, IQ, Toppin and possibly Grimes vs keeping Randle to upgrade. I believe IQ has developed nicely and could become a starter in time. I'm not as high on Toppin lately but also believe we have done very little to put him in a position to serve his strengths... we play slow, ask him to stand in the corner and shoot 3s like K. Korver, etc... not sure we really know what we have in him. Grimes seems like a perfect plug and play 2/3 - just needs time to develop. RJ doesn't seem to have good chemistry with Randle and I stick with the youth and believe RJ can be similarly productive in a similar role.

I'll admit my bias against Randle is partially Thibs offensive scheme and role he assigned Randle to... but that combined with Randle's iso-ball, slow tempo/pace, overhandling and feast or famine shooting does not make me want to hitch our wagon to his long-term. He deserves a lot of credit for improving his effort and overall play this year - but fear a repeat of 2 seasons ago with less options the more we build around him.

Simmons huh. Guess we would develop him into an All Star and then sell high?
You think Randle will fall back back between 24ppg and 20? 10rpg and 11? What a shame.
The Ole "he is not a primary guy"? He was last night. He has been most of the two out of the last three years. And do you think Randle should win a chip by himself. Yet Nets, with two of the best players on the planet have yet to do so? What a concept. Of course he can't be a primary on a chip team but what does that have to do with needing to trade him? You do know you need good players on a team besides the primary guy right? Who is that going to be? Obi, Deuce, some guy you can't say who? Here is an idea, let's keep the guys like Randle, JB and RJ who can actually play and produce and get another two more that can also produce at similar levels. Trade the one dimensional guys like Obi, who has not done what a 8 pick should do along with other obvious weak links who have many more weaknesses then the ones mentioned for Randle. ie, Rose, Cam, EF, Deuce.
Btw, you think we would only get a first for Randle? And trading him would only move us a few spots in draft? LMAO. You have no concept of current market value.
Smells like the bias you mention is a cover for the actual bias which seems to be preferring a guy who is underachieving and has yet to produce over a proven alpha.

Not if he is more of a building block. His stats are good but only a part of what we as fans should be looking at. He has not been a primary guy as he has not been at the level of primary guys (eg Lebrons, KD)... so an easier path to get an alpha/star is to package one of your best player (with picks) to upgrade. Last season other teams would laugh as they hung up the phone. This season he is playing much better and we have lots of picks - so not sure why that is so unreasonable...especially if you think he is worth multiple first round picks right?

I will admit I don't know his actual value. I tried to get the forum perspective on here awhile back and there was no consensus. I heard everything from maybe a protected first to a similar player and a heavily protected pick. When his value was lower in the past offseason it was suggested by many that we would have had to attach a pick just to trade him. Obviously it's much better now - so what do you think it is? My bias was stated and I think (to his credit) he has overachieved. If we had this same conversation last season or two seasons before would you be this adamant that he is untouchable? Simply because he's our best player does not mean that to me. I side with RJ vs Randle most of the time but he's not untouchable either - nobody is if it's about the team IMO. So we can agree to disagree...

Are you saying there was anyone pragmatic on this planet that expected to get LBJ or KD type production when we signed JR to his extension? Several unrealistic fans with little knowledge may have and were the ones whining that he was not that last year.
Untouchable? Don't think anyone here would say he is untouchable.
Have always been adamant (4 years)that he is a solid producer, necessary physical PF, excellent rebounder and reasonably contracted.
Trading him for a top 10? Sure. Which one of the many available do you suggest?
Trading him for a first seemed to be your suggestion. Pretty bad one imo
One that not one GM would consider giving up Randle for.
When you say you don't know his value but claim his value,in the off-season was low, is that first hand knowledge? Or blog/forum information from the many expert Randle haters on UK? ?

Not sure where this comment in bold above comes from? I have no issue/problem with JR's production/stats - they are very good this year. Can you at least try to stick to the debate and what points are made?

His value was lower this previous offseason because he didn't play very well last year. I don't think that's really an opinion - as he clearly is playing better this season.

I don't have to suggest and identify the exact player (in the top 10) to trade him for to say I think we should sell high... you can't play both sides of the coin. And you never answered the question - what do you perceive his value to be currently? If it is 2 1st rounders how come there are no rumors abound? Last season I'm assuming there were no rumors because nobody else wanted to touch him.

Btw, I would love to get 2 first rounders or more - I said only 1 because I didn't believe any team would give us more. I'd be happy to be wrong on that. Last season I heard back from many on this forum that interest was low unless we attached a pick or traded him as a straight salary dump. Those that love Randle say we shouldn't trade him last season because his value was too low (understood and could agree). Now the same people say he's playing too unbelievably well and we can't seriously consider trading him now. When things finally level off and he finds a middle ground - will there be an option to trade him at that point?

It's sure sounding like when you love a player there is too much bias/emotions to consider alternative positions. Prove me wrong - what's his value and when would you be open to moving him? We've had 4 seasons of the entire spectrum of JR - he's basically played either very well or very poorly. I don't want to hear about last season's numbers being so great and irreplaceable. You give most players 34-36 minutes with a decent work ethic (which he has) and they will produce. Difference is this year he is much more efficient (Brunson has helped for sure). I acknowledged my bias against Randle and his play style... but would trade any player on the Knicks if it seemed that it would improve our team.

I think you are creating a straw man argument. You are making the debate about Randle "love" when it really should be about Roster and situational "logic". If Randle was producing at his current level on a team projected at 25 wins...then it becomes much more applicable to discuss trading him. However, in what world is it logical to seek a trade of an all star level player for a single first round pick on a team that is projecting at ~45 wins and a 5-7 playoff seeding? Randle would most likely have to be traded to a contender so the FRP you seek would likely suck as well. How is that good business or roster management in any way?

I don't see it that way. Clearly it's not the likely way we will go and definitely not the mainstream path. But I do believe an alternative path should be strongly considered.

I only said first round pick to be conservative since I could not get a clear pulse on what most here think his value is. It is logical to consider if you don't believe he will maintain this high level of play - I don't and I base that on watching him up and down the past four seasons. I don't think he possesses the court vision, decision making or elite athleticism needed to dominate the ball this much. I get that most here suggest he will slide back into the 2nd tier slot when we upgrade... I'm suggesting trading him at his high is the best opportunity to upgrade and/or find a higher level of talent. You can disagree but sometimes doing what doesn't feel right in the moment (since he is playing very well) can work out better in the long-term. And I never said he has to go to a contender (although I think that would serve him best) - there are things like 3 team trades, packaging with picks, draft swaps etc...

It is only good business if it works and I see the risk just as high to believe that his recent play is more indicative of his long-term projection. This is based on him being in his 9th year, struggling for 2 out of the 4 seasons here and watching his play on the court.

It's not his fault as he is playing in a top role when he should be in more of a 2nd tier role. And no argument that he is the best player we currently have. That doesn't mean he can't and shouldn't be dealt. We could have had this same debate at the end of last season but Randle supporters all acknowledged we would be selling low and he had little value (agreed).

And for the record I haven't flip/flopped much as I've held this position (and posted) since I watched him in his first All-Star season with NY. A month ago you guys are silent - then we go on a winning streak... this is likely to continue.

We are a good to possibly very good team at best right now - overachieving IMO. Look at our record and streaks for the facts/evidence. If you truly believe we beat the Nets (w/KD), Bucks, Celtics, etc in a 7 game series then I understand why you believe we should keep going with Randle as focal point. Otherwise, we're just disagreeing about how we go about upgrading our talent level. I don't wish to deplete our entire youth/bench and future picks when I see another path.

As for roster management and timing - didn't Ainge just trade DM and Gobert? Riley would trade his mother if he thought it was the best way to go. So just because he's played better this year (and in 2021) we shouldn't use him to upgrade if we can? Especially if he's possibly worth 2 1st round picks or more (as some have suggested here)? You take 1 or 2 acquired picks, package with our 2 1st rounders and you could possibly land a generational talent if you get in the top 7-9 picks. Is Randle at 28 anything close to that? Do you not think taking 3 #1's to move up is possible? Maybe you don't believe in the prospects for 2023? Ok - can understand that.

It's up to the scouts to decide the prospective players assessment so will defer to them (and Briggs). If we asked this same question at the end of last season most of would have taken the deal (Randle for 2 1sts). Now that we are playing better so far this season - that is all forgotten? It's a risk as is anything we choose to do but it doesn't sound illogical to me if he has enough value in a trade. It's just a different way.

I'm of the mindset that when you can sell high it usually affords you more opportunities and covers you long-term. It's like selling your home when it appreciates in value. It's emotionally tough as you love your home but that is one way you can build wealth. In b-ball terms it would give us more options with our roster, future development, etc.. And I would not make that move if I truly believed that this years Randle is the future Randle... but that would make me have to ignore the past 3+ seasons of watching him.

We are at least 2 significant steps away from being a serious contender - so is that really that risky?

GustavBahler wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

fishmike wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:I know it may seem less logical to not ride Randle's improved play this year and go for the playoffs but still think this could be the last (good) opportunity to sell high on Randle and use the rest of the season to decide on IQ, Obi, Sims and even Cam. While the FO may be content making the playoffs (even if early exit) I still see this path as short-sighted to some degree.

If Randle flames out in the playoffs again - there will be more pressure to move him and yet his trade value will decline again (like the last time).

If I'm wrong and he plays well we are still not realistically strong enough to beat the upper echelon teams in a 7 games series.

I'd even be open to trying to rebuild our roster with Randle but then feel strongly that Thibs has to go for it to work. I get this is an unpopular take and likely not realistic but does anyone agree with the position that something out of Randle, Thibs and RJ has to move or change for us to healthily progress to next level (even if not likely to happen)?

Exs
Trade RJ and/or Randle
Move RJ to the bench and upgrade SF position
New Coach and/or new offensive system implemented

Knicks are 5th in the league in PPS
https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2023.html

Randle has gotten better on BOTH ends AND has shown the ability to effectively defer to better suited finisher (Brunson) and be happy about it. He's also hitting young guys like Grimes for open 3s in crunch time. Yeah lets get rid of THAT guy.

RJ... well there's an argument but he's also 22 so patience is a factor. I would move him for a better fit (OG) but that's just me

Less heroball from Randle, more rebounding. better D. Still some sloppy play in the 4th. Im guessing its nerves more than anything.

Hero ball is when guys take matters into their own hands and ignore team plays. Is it Hero ball when JB runs iso off a spread set? So why is it Hero ball when it's clear Thibs is running a spread set for Randle to post up. Can he make better reads, yes, but stop with the "hero ball" brush to paint a selfish tone.
More rebounds? We not talking about Obi. Randle just had 14 and usually leads the team.
His defensive effort has been there all year. Made some blocks this year that we did not ever see before.
These narratives are old man. Stop trying to rekindle them. We all know you are an Obi lover and can't take that your view on Randle was shortsighted.
Some of us fought you guys all summer with the BS that Randle was garbage because of yet another 20/10 year. Just because the rest of the team was crap.
The knowledgeable fans knew the relevance of not having a true PG, the consistent historical production, the physicality he exhibit every year since being drafted and the reasonable contract he has.
Fact is, Randle is a beast. He is a fighter. Tough sob. He has all the tools that makes him the best player on the court on most games. He was last night. Does he need to improve his bball IQ? Absolutely. But so does every player on the planet.
We need more players like him. Not less.

500 words on heroball? Heroball is when you drive right into your defender and turn the ball over, when there are better options. Randle has done that plenty of times. If you want to spin that into it being part of Thibs plan, be my guest.

Hard to converse with someone with such an acute hypersensitivity to any criticism of a basketball player. Most of my comments in that post were positive. But you freaked out over one criticism, and wrote War and Peace.

If this is how you want to do it. Try converting someone else. Pass

Don't know if you notice but the only one that is hyper sensitive and freaks out about convos is you. Open to any point and typically post my disagreement and counterpoint. I responded to each point you made and gave my reason why I disagree with them. Also gave my OPINION that I feel you are just biased when it comes to Randle and look for any weakness to warp the narrative.
You pointing out fouls and fourth quarter TO's are just two more instances where I feel guys that don't like Randle are trying to spin Randles good year with obscure tangents. I am sure you have been reading Martin's posts showing many categories where Randle is close to the top in NBA?
It's just funny to me as a Knick fan that guys look to find the negative in their best players. Funny how some engage in a forensic breakdown to find any negative of their best player.
I mean we love the Knicks and have OBVIOUS areas that need improvement. Yet you spend all this effort trying to proof that the player having his second All Star season has weaknesses? Why?
Sure seems like you would be happier if he failed.