martin wrote:

TheGame wrote:I have no problem trading Randle if we get solid value. I am not interested in trading him for 60 cent on the dollar. We need to get back something really good for him. Otherwise, we are better off keeping him.

Why?

If he is toxic and brings down the play of everyone around him, why not trade him? Whether it's 60 cents or 80 cents or 90 cents on the dollar, the reality is his value could go even further down.

If you sense your stock portfolio is gonna keep going down, do you hold out or sell?

Do we think Randle is going to suddenly turn it around? IDK.

But what he is doing these days is making team play worse when he is on court.

Stocks are a good analogy to use. However, IMHO the conclusion is not consistent with the analogy.
Given I disagree that he will keep going down. Panic selling is when people sell stocks based on emotion and not by truly analyzing value and potential. Since value is based solely on historical data that shows true production, one would have to look at the lifespan of a stock to see it's worth. That is also what determines potential.
Randle has shown to be a much better player and solid producer for over 95% of his career. He is young and was thought by most, just a few months ago, to have a high ceiling. So it is absolutely panic selling to trade him after a month of uncharacteristic low production. You do not sell a stock that has been producing for years and has not drastically changed in nature(major structural change/injury as it pertains to sports) just because it's down a couple of months during unusual market volitility.(booing, F bomb to fans)

The real question is why the rush to sell so low? Are we looking to salvage a season? Does not sound like it given the moves mentioned? (Salary dumps, other teams disappointments)
Some suggestions actually sound like moves that would make things worse. Ie. Westbrook, Wall, Beal.
For me, the average fan is emotional. As is the average stock holder. Hoping the FO is smarter and less emotional. Think they are..

martin wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

martin wrote:

TheGame wrote:I have no problem trading Randle if we get solid value. I am not interested in trading him for 60 cent on the dollar. We need to get back something really good for him. Otherwise, we are better off keeping him.

Why?

If he is toxic and brings down the play of everyone around him, why not trade him? Whether it's 60 cents or 80 cents or 90 cents on the dollar, the reality is his value could go even further down.

If you sense your stock portfolio is gonna keep going down, do you hold out or sell?

Do we think Randle is going to suddenly turn it around? IDK.

But what he is doing these days is making team play worse when he is on court.

Stocks are a good analogy to use. However, IMHO the conclusion is not consistent with the analogy.
Given I disagree that he will keep going down. Panic selling is when people sell stocks based on emotion and not by truly analyzing value and potential. Since value is based solely on historical data that shows true production, one would have to look at the lifespan of a stock to see it's worth. That is also what determines potential.
Randle has shown to be a much better player and solid producer for over 95% of his career. He is young and was thought by most, just a few months ago, to have a high ceiling. So it is absolutely panic selling to trade him after a month of uncharacteristic low production. You do not sell a stock that has been producing for years and has not drastically changed in nature(major structural change/injury as it pertains to sports) just because it's down a couple of months during unusual market volitility.(booing, F bomb to fans)

The real question is why the rush to sell so low? Are we looking to salvage a season? Does not sound like it given the moves mentioned? (Salary dumps, other teams disappointments)
Some suggestions actually sound like moves that would make things worse. Ie. Westbrook, Wall, Beal.
For me, the average fan is emotional. As is the average stock holder. Hoping the FO is smarter and less emotional. Think they are..

Randle has played 3 years with the Knicks. 2 of the years he has been **** and the year he was good was a contract year that he was lucky have an extended offseason to prep for and performed well in a shortened and odd season.

The 2 previous teams that Randle was on? They gave up on him for zilch. Let him walk.

Take that for data!

I'm being a bit sarcastic of course but that is anything but emotional.

The teams that gave him up for nothing were stupid in retrospect. They would have collected much more in return, if patient. So will the Knicks if they trade him for .60 on the dollar. I am not advocating that he has to stay or that he is the path to a chip. Just that it is shortsighted to trade what was your best asset a few weeks ago when they are playing so poorly.

Btw. All the negatives you claimed above were there this past summer. They did not seem to matter to very experienced FO. Nor did it matter to most. I'd so, this stance should have been mentioned then. It wasn't!

fwk00 wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

martin wrote:

TheGame wrote:I have no problem trading Randle if we get solid value. I am not interested in trading him for 60 cent on the dollar. We need to get back something really good for him. Otherwise, we are better off keeping him.

Why?

If he is toxic and brings down the play of everyone around him, why not trade him? Whether it's 60 cents or 80 cents or 90 cents on the dollar, the reality is his value could go even further down.

If you sense your stock portfolio is gonna keep going down, do you hold out or sell?

Do we think Randle is going to suddenly turn it around? IDK.

But what he is doing these days is making team play worse when he is on court.

Stocks are a good analogy to use. However, IMHO the conclusion is not consistent with the analogy.
Given I disagree that he will keep going down. Panic selling is when people sell stocks based on emotion and not by truly analyzing value and potential. Since value is based solely on historical data that shows true production, one would have to look at the lifespan of a stock to see it's worth. That is also what determines potential.
Randle has shown to be a much better player and solid producer for over 95% of his career. He is young and was thought by most, just a few months ago, to have a high ceiling. So it is absolutely panic selling to trade him after a month of uncharacteristic low production. You do not sell a stock that has been producing for years and has not drastically changed in nature(major structural change/injury as it pertains to sports) just because it's down a couple of months during unusual market volitility.(booing, F bomb to fans)

The real question is why the rush to sell so low? Are we looking to salvage a season? Does not sound like it given the moves mentioned? (Salary dumps, other teams disappointments)
Some suggestions actually sound like moves that would make things worse. Ie. Westbrook, Wall, Beal.
For me, the average fan is emotional. As is the average stock holder. Hoping the FO is smarter and less emotional. Think they are..

Stocks are a lousy analogy to use. One underperforming stock doesn't adversely affect your entire portfolio unless the coupling is so tight that they fall like dominoes.

Randle is a cornerstone starter in a team game. He no longer plays like one. In fact he's bringing down the team, the coach, and casting doubt on the FO. There is nothing irresponsible for quarantining a player that's become toxic.

There is no "holding onto" such a situation. You are suggesting to let a worsening situation fester until it somehow results in a better transactional value in Randle. What of everyone else whose value is adversely affected? And what of the credibility of a coach who will be perceived as daft for continuing to promote a guy who is fundamentally throwing games because there is no accountability not to?

Ignore the nonsensical trade proposals for Wall or Westbrook. Randle can be traded for fair value based on an expected quality of play but his agent better sit his azz down and explain that to him in no uncertain terms. Randle isn't burning monopoly money when he sh@ts the bed every other game. Career trajectories will change in a NY minute by pumping his value at the expense of a team's season. Platitudes don't win games.

Not only that this is a similar situation with KP where we can expect them to move quickly to move him rather than have him poison the well and spread his dissatisfaction to others. Similar to how Melo spread his anger at the front office to KP who eventually wanted to leave as well. This current Knicks regime did the opposite of Mills and traded for RJ’s childhood friend instead of sending him away like the Knicks did to Hernangomez. It’s not just about getting assets for Randle, it’s about limiting the damage the separation does for the players left behind.

Long story short if the knicks have a fair package in their head and a team like Sacramento or the Wizards or the Blazers meet it. Push the trade button. Myself, I think multiple expiring, a unprotected draft pick and maybe a couple of seasons of pick swap options is fair because it’s undercutting what Detroit and Indy are asking and still getting young assets.

One of the things I like about this current Knicks regime and I am including Perry because he did the same in the KP deal. Is that they are good at keeping what they are doing secret. Even down to what they want is kept out of the medias mouth. This allows them to do things like both set the market (agree to send 1 draft pick the Cam deal). As well as then take advantage of that set market by underselling others reacting to it. Indy is asking for more for their guys because they value them more than what the Hawks got for a disgruntled Cam (reportedly they two draft picks for Levert and Sabonis). Now the Knicks can undersell them and get draft capitol from teams that don’t want to overspend on role players. Plus Indy won’t want to budge because they don’t want to lose their guys for below their perceived value.

I am not saying the Knicks are doing all this, but they might be and if they are kudos for being bold. If it wasn’t for the February time limit on Randle I think they would have already moved him.

fwk00 wrote:

wargames wrote:

fwk00 wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

martin wrote:

TheGame wrote:I have no problem trading Randle if we get solid value. I am not interested in trading him for 60 cent on the dollar. We need to get back something really good for him. Otherwise, we are better off keeping him.

Why?

If he is toxic and brings down the play of everyone around him, why not trade him? Whether it's 60 cents or 80 cents or 90 cents on the dollar, the reality is his value could go even further down.

If you sense your stock portfolio is gonna keep going down, do you hold out or sell?

Do we think Randle is going to suddenly turn it around? IDK.

But what he is doing these days is making team play worse when he is on court.

Stocks are a good analogy to use. However, IMHO the conclusion is not consistent with the analogy.
Given I disagree that he will keep going down. Panic selling is when people sell stocks based on emotion and not by truly analyzing value and potential. Since value is based solely on historical data that shows true production, one would have to look at the lifespan of a stock to see it's worth. That is also what determines potential.
Randle has shown to be a much better player and solid producer for over 95% of his career. He is young and was thought by most, just a few months ago, to have a high ceiling. So it is absolutely panic selling to trade him after a month of uncharacteristic low production. You do not sell a stock that has been producing for years and has not drastically changed in nature(major structural change/injury as it pertains to sports) just because it's down a couple of months during unusual market volitility.(booing, F bomb to fans)

The real question is why the rush to sell so low? Are we looking to salvage a season? Does not sound like it given the moves mentioned? (Salary dumps, other teams disappointments)
Some suggestions actually sound like moves that would make things worse. Ie. Westbrook, Wall, Beal.
For me, the average fan is emotional. As is the average stock holder. Hoping the FO is smarter and less emotional. Think they are..

Stocks are a lousy analogy to use. One underperforming stock doesn't adversely affect your entire portfolio unless the coupling is so tight that they fall like dominoes.

Randle is a cornerstone starter in a team game. He no longer plays like one. In fact he's bringing down the team, the coach, and casting doubt on the FO. There is nothing irresponsible for quarantining a player that's become toxic.

There is no "holding onto" such a situation. You are suggesting to let a worsening situation fester until it somehow results in a better transactional value in Randle. What of everyone else whose value is adversely affected? And what of the credibility of a coach who will be perceived as daft for continuing to promote a guy who is fundamentally throwing games because there is no accountability not to?

Ignore the nonsensical trade proposals for Wall or Westbrook. Randle can be traded for fair value based on an expected quality of play but his agent better sit his azz down and explain that to him in no uncertain terms. Randle isn't burning monopoly money when he sh@ts the bed every other game. Career trajectories will change in a NY minute by pumping his value at the expense of a team's season. Platitudes don't win games.

Not only that this is a similar situation with KP where we can expect them to move quickly to move him rather than have him poison the well and spread his dissatisfaction to others. Similar to how Melo spread his anger at the front office to KP who eventually wanted to leave as well. This current Knicks regime did the opposite of Mills and traded for RJ’s childhood friend instead of sending him away like the Knicks did to Hernangomez. It’s not just about getting assets for Randle, it’s about limiting the damage the separation does for the players left behind.

Long story short if the knicks have a fair package in their head and a team like Sacramento or the Wizards or the Blazers meet it. Push the trade button. Myself, I think multiple expiring, a unprotected draft pick and maybe a couple of seasons of pick swap options is fair because it’s undercutting what Detroit and Indy are asking and still getting young assets.

One of the things I like about this current Knicks regime and I am including Perry because he did the same in the KP deal. Is that they are good at keeping what they are doing secret. Even down to what they want is kept out of the medias mouth. This allows them to do things like both set the market (agree to send 1 draft pick the Cam deal). As well as then take advantage of that set market by underselling others reacting to it. Indy is asking for more for their guys because they value them more than what the Hawks got for a disgruntled Cam (reportedly they two draft picks for Levert and Sabonis). Now the Knicks can undersell them and get draft capitol from teams that don’t want to overspend on role players. Plus Indy won’t want to budge because they don’t want to lose their guys for below their perceived value.

I am not saying the Knicks are doing all this, but they might be and if they are kudos for being bold. If it wasn’t for the February time limit on Randle I think they would have already moved him.

Yes. The only thing that makes sense with Randall is that he's already traded with only the Feb. 3 restriction constraining his departure. It just makes no sense at all that he's jogging up and down court unless he KNOWS something the fans don't. It would also explain Thibs playing him as if nothing's wrong.

Otherwise this is a real world Black Mirror episode.

Plus why they are limiting him talking to the media and when he does talk to the media him expressing he wants to be here. Those platitude will undercut any rumors he demanded a trade. Also an unwanted trade is justifiable for why he just seems to have given up spirit wise. His body is still there but his mind really isn’t.

Well, humans are not machines. Money helps motivate performance, but does not alone determine it. Performance at any moment can depend on thousands of other things: anemia because of excessive off season weight loss, family issues, legal troubles, some nagging injury that is not enough to keep him off the court, but enough to slow him down, defenses focusing on him more, thousands of things. Can we all just see what it might be before simply labeling him as a malcontent? Randle has been in the league long enough and proven a hard worker for me to give him the benefit of the doubt before I judge him as a cancer. Which not something I can say of our organization, given its long history of pi$$ing off its best players.

I am all for trading Randle for the right price, either a top lottery pick or a superstar, but the time to do it was exactly one year ago. Instead we all decided that he was as good as LeBron and went on to chase a glorious first round playoff exit. And now that we are most likely to get scraps in return we want to sell. Ridiculous.

ESOMKnicks wrote:Ah, the venerable Knicks fandom tradition of tossing urine-soaked underwear at however happens to be our best player when he struggles. Immediate calls to ship his *** out of NY for a bag of potato chips. Happened with Ewing, happened with Melo, happened with KP. Now we are on to Randle. And no one gives a damn to figure out the reasons for his funk, we just expect him to show up and perform like a machine, after all, he is making all this money, right?

Well, humans are not machines. Money helps motivate performance, but does not alone determine it. Performance at any moment can depend on thousands of other things: anemia because of excessive off season weight loss, family issues, legal troubles, some nagging injury that is not enough to keep him off the court, but enough to slow him down, defenses focusing on him more, thousands of things. Can we all just see what it might be before simply labeling him as a malcontent? Randle has been in the league long enough and proven a hard worker for me to give him the benefit of the doubt before I judge him as a cancer. Which not something I can say of our organization, given its long history of pi$$ing off its best players.

I am all for trading Randle for the right price, either a top lottery pick or a superstar, but the time to do it was exactly one year ago. Instead we all decided that he was as good as LeBron and went on to chase a glorious first round playoff exit. And now that we are most likely to get scraps in return we want to sell. Ridiculous.

Thank you……I need to start pointing out the fans that actually makes since to me and stop trying to convince others. But I agree with you ESO. Knick fans are the definition of insanity. Continue to repeat the same behavior and expect a different result. I also believe that’s part of the reason why it’s been difficult to attract a superstar. Fans will build and destroy. I would never come to the Knicks because these fans don’t deserve someone that is willing to put n the work and represent NY. That’s Randle who already proved his worth. Let’s start by assuming his performance last year was not just motivated because of his contract year.

Then instead of kicking him to the curb, how about we replace what we lost. Elf was a tall down hill 2 way player. His on ball defense was above average. Maybe because I’m one of the few that actually hold more weight on defensive impact than offense. You can struggle with shooting, but a playe who can play defense is consistent. Bullock was a pure catch and shoot player. He was also responsible for guarding the best wing. So our top two wing defenders was our starting pg and starting sg.

We replaced that with two players in EF and Kemba who needs the ball more to score and are the opposite of Payton and bullock, regarding defensive impact. Instead of shipping Randle out how about we ship out the new additions or remove from starting unit and replace what we lost back into the starting lineup? Why isnt this the first strategy to discuss?

Is it the money or jealousy or something deeper that goes back in history? Why can’t people see Randle as human? Why do we expect a 27 yr old human being to now act like a 44 yr old man who lived and learned……… because he’s making millions? We have no grace for human beings that give their all. We upset because of his body language with out fully understanding the symptoms. It’s sickening…it’s disgusting and it’s embarrassing. The true definition of a bing bong fan.

wargames wrote:

fwk00 wrote:

wargames wrote:

fwk00 wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

martin wrote:

TheGame wrote:I have no problem trading Randle if we get solid value. I am not interested in trading him for 60 cent on the dollar. We need to get back something really good for him. Otherwise, we are better off keeping him.

Why?

If he is toxic and brings down the play of everyone around him, why not trade him? Whether it's 60 cents or 80 cents or 90 cents on the dollar, the reality is his value could go even further down.

If you sense your stock portfolio is gonna keep going down, do you hold out or sell?

Do we think Randle is going to suddenly turn it around? IDK.

But what he is doing these days is making team play worse when he is on court.

Stocks are a good analogy to use. However, IMHO the conclusion is not consistent with the analogy.
Given I disagree that he will keep going down. Panic selling is when people sell stocks based on emotion and not by truly analyzing value and potential. Since value is based solely on historical data that shows true production, one would have to look at the lifespan of a stock to see it's worth. That is also what determines potential.
Randle has shown to be a much better player and solid producer for over 95% of his career. He is young and was thought by most, just a few months ago, to have a high ceiling. So it is absolutely panic selling to trade him after a month of uncharacteristic low production. You do not sell a stock that has been producing for years and has not drastically changed in nature(major structural change/injury as it pertains to sports) just because it's down a couple of months during unusual market volitility.(booing, F bomb to fans)

The real question is why the rush to sell so low? Are we looking to salvage a season? Does not sound like it given the moves mentioned? (Salary dumps, other teams disappointments)
Some suggestions actually sound like moves that would make things worse. Ie. Westbrook, Wall, Beal.
For me, the average fan is emotional. As is the average stock holder. Hoping the FO is smarter and less emotional. Think they are..

Stocks are a lousy analogy to use. One underperforming stock doesn't adversely affect your entire portfolio unless the coupling is so tight that they fall like dominoes.

Randle is a cornerstone starter in a team game. He no longer plays like one. In fact he's bringing down the team, the coach, and casting doubt on the FO. There is nothing irresponsible for quarantining a player that's become toxic.

There is no "holding onto" such a situation. You are suggesting to let a worsening situation fester until it somehow results in a better transactional value in Randle. What of everyone else whose value is adversely affected? And what of the credibility of a coach who will be perceived as daft for continuing to promote a guy who is fundamentally throwing games because there is no accountability not to?

Ignore the nonsensical trade proposals for Wall or Westbrook. Randle can be traded for fair value based on an expected quality of play but his agent better sit his azz down and explain that to him in no uncertain terms. Randle isn't burning monopoly money when he sh@ts the bed every other game. Career trajectories will change in a NY minute by pumping his value at the expense of a team's season. Platitudes don't win games.

Not only that this is a similar situation with KP where we can expect them to move quickly to move him rather than have him poison the well and spread his dissatisfaction to others. Similar to how Melo spread his anger at the front office to KP who eventually wanted to leave as well. This current Knicks regime did the opposite of Mills and traded for RJ’s childhood friend instead of sending him away like the Knicks did to Hernangomez. It’s not just about getting assets for Randle, it’s about limiting the damage the separation does for the players left behind.

Long story short if the knicks have a fair package in their head and a team like Sacramento or the Wizards or the Blazers meet it. Push the trade button. Myself, I think multiple expiring, a unprotected draft pick and maybe a couple of seasons of pick swap options is fair because it’s undercutting what Detroit and Indy are asking and still getting young assets.

One of the things I like about this current Knicks regime and I am including Perry because he did the same in the KP deal. Is that they are good at keeping what they are doing secret. Even down to what they want is kept out of the medias mouth. This allows them to do things like both set the market (agree to send 1 draft pick the Cam deal). As well as then take advantage of that set market by underselling others reacting to it. Indy is asking for more for their guys because they value them more than what the Hawks got for a disgruntled Cam (reportedly they two draft picks for Levert and Sabonis). Now the Knicks can undersell them and get draft capitol from teams that don’t want to overspend on role players. Plus Indy won’t want to budge because they don’t want to lose their guys for below their perceived value.

I am not saying the Knicks are doing all this, but they might be and if they are kudos for being bold. If it wasn’t for the February time limit on Randle I think they would have already moved him.

Yes. The only thing that makes sense with Randall is that he's already traded with only the Feb. 3 restriction constraining his departure. It just makes no sense at all that he's jogging up and down court unless he KNOWS something the fans don't. It would also explain Thibs playing him as if nothing's wrong.

Otherwise this is a real world Black Mirror episode.

Plus why they are limiting him talking to the media and when he does talk to the media him expressing he wants to be here. Those platitude will undercut any rumors he demanded a trade. Also an unwanted trade is justifiable for why he just seems to have given up spirit wise. His body is still there but his mind really isn’t.

The bing bing fans have spoken!

Thanks for making my point. Everything mentioned above is based on emotion and speculation.

And how dare you make fun of Martin's excellent analogy!!

Question though, do you think Randle and Thibs are at an end? The one thing I keep thinking is that they may be. And if so, it would be reason for Randle to be traded I may be reading into what the jackals in NY try to stir but I am sure those two have gone at it behind closed doors. Just because they are both frustrated and seem to have explosive personalities.

Not sure I understand your question. Let me repeat ina way I understand. Do I think Randle and Thibs are budding heads off camera? I don’t get that feeling. It looks like they need each other. When 1 succeed, they other succeed. If Randle was playing better, then thibs can justify the heavy minutes he give him. But if Randle is playing worse, thibs will be questioned for his mins distribution. But if they was not on the same page, I’m assuming that’s your question, then typically one of them should be traded. Because eventually their issues become cancerous which spreads to the team.

I believe they are both feeling the same pressure. The pressure of not meeting expectations in a NY minute as you said. And all humans respond differently to pressure. Randle gave the fans a thumbs down. Thibs verbally protects Randle saying it’s not all on him, just because he’s the face of the team, that type of blame comes with the title. You win and Randle is praised and weaknesses are over looked. You lose, then those same weaknesses are now highlighted and his strengths are over looked. That’s typical in all situations even outside of basketball. How Randle and Thibs handles these rough waters is how a man is measured. Thibs is old school so he’s been there done that. Randle is new to this and learning on the job. And so far the losing and negative press is impacting his performance. Doesn’t mean you throw the most improved / all star away or send the coy packing. Those are moves you make when you run out of ideas to fix what’s broken. We still have the same starting lineup so there has been very minimal attempts to fix anything.