fishmike wrote:really liking how the core is shaping up. We have some young guys who can really grow together.

Hold that thought until we make it to training camp.

GustavBahler wrote:Dont know if it was posted yet, very thorough article on RJ..

https://theathletic.com/3548723/2022/08/31/rj-barrett-knicks-polarizing/

Barbarian.

GustavBahler wrote:

ToddTT wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Dont know if it was posted yet, very thorough article on RJ..

https://theathletic.com/3548723/2022/08/31/rj-barrett-knicks-polarizing/

Barbarian.

um....Adrienne Barbeau?

There is something wrong with that site. I can't quite understand what they want. Apparently there is a pop-up that blocks content and they want something from me. I think it's " one dallah, one dallah, get your sports info for only a dallah.." gasp! In this day and age the internet traffic is not enough for them. The revenue from advertisements is not enough. They want an actual dollar. Who does that? They seem to be stuck in last century, like Newsweek. It's a scam

GustavBahler wrote:

ToddTT wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Dont know if it was posted yet, very thorough article on RJ..

https://theathletic.com/3548723/2022/08/31/rj-barrett-knicks-polarizing/

Barbarian.

um....Adrienne Barbeau?

Back in her day...John Carpenter was getting busy.

Nalod wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Dont know if it was posted yet, very thorough article on RJ..

https://theathletic.com/3548723/2022/08/31/rj-barrett-knicks-polarizing/

Great read. Usaually the athletic hits me up for a Dallah. THis time not.
Windhorst podcast this morning really nailed it that knicks are following a plan, had a solid summer, like the Barrett signing,, and think Leon is spot on with many things. Small moves. Discussed tradable contracts as the parameter.
Only one in queastion is Randle but at worst he can be moved laterally. If Hornets have the space, they need him!
I won’t predict how he’ll play. I don’t know if he ignored his coach by bringing up the ball? Was mad all year, or what ever. At thhe same time respect 20-10 is still not easy in the nba.

40 players averaged 20 points a game last year and a few handful more averaged 18-19 with much better efficiency than Jules. That's not even taking into account guys who averaged 20 per 36 minutes. I'd say scoring 20 and 10 is far easier today than it was 5 or 10 years ago given the pace of today's game. It's like 300lb dude bragging that he has 20 inch arms when the majority of it is flab. I give little respect to someone who averages 20 points when they were one of the worst 20 point scorers in the league. Same kinda goes for RJ but he has the excuse of youth.

Nalod wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Nalod wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Dont know if it was posted yet, very thorough article on RJ..

https://theathletic.com/3548723/2022/08/31/rj-barrett-knicks-polarizing/

Great read. Usaually the athletic hits me up for a Dallah. THis time not.
Windhorst podcast this morning really nailed it that knicks are following a plan, had a solid summer, like the Barrett signing,, and think Leon is spot on with many things. Small moves. Discussed tradable contracts as the parameter.
Only one in queastion is Randle but at worst he can be moved laterally. If Hornets have the space, they need him!
I won’t predict how he’ll play. I don’t know if he ignored his coach by bringing up the ball? Was mad all year, or what ever. At thhe same time respect 20-10 is still not easy in the nba.

40 players averaged 20 points a game last year and a few handful more averaged 18-19 with much better efficiency than Jules. That's not even taking into account guys who averaged 20 per 36 minutes. I'd say scoring 20 and 10 is far easier today than it was 5 or 10 years ago given the pace of today's game. It's like 300lb dude bragging that he has 20 inch arms when the majority of it is flab. I give little respect to someone who averages 20 points when they were one of the worst 20 point scorers in the league. Same kinda goes for RJ but he has the excuse of youth.

Ok, your saying 8.8% of NBA players with the effeciency were better than Randle scoring 20 pts. 450 players, 40 were better than him efficency in the 18 pt or better range. He was 25th in scoring. Ok, we all about efficiency. I get that.
whats also on knicks too. They won 37 games. They had issues beyond Jules and it effected his game.
Rebounding. 13th. Is there inefficient rebounds? Do getting offensive rebounds off own misses count? Perhaps. Defensive rebounds- 8.2, good for 10th in league.

Does all this aggregate to a good season? no. Im not saying that. Im just saying we toss around rj and Randle like they are easily replaced. And as much as I like Grimes and OBI, I have no concrete path to say they do better or the team does better. Am I willing to take that chance? Sure, but what comes back to make the team better in return? Im fine with less randle stats if it means more wins and he part of a team concept that wins. Who wouldn't.

I think the point is how they play needs to change. If you gave Grimes 25 shots a game and a 28%+ usage, his stats may also be 22/6/5. Or he may be 32/5/5. The number of shots you take to get to 20 points matters. Its why Melo didn't win in his prime.

There are "inefficient rebounds". You look at the rebounds compare it to the number of box outs. Then look at the other members of his rotation. The guy getting rebounds without boxing out is getting handouts. Team rebounds are being credited to a player.

The fact that Randle has only two man lineups (IQ and Sims) with a positive Plus-Minus means the way he played the game last year was not very effective. It doesn't mean he can't change, it means he has to. By contrast, IQ and Sims didn't really have any negative net ratings. This means that the Knicks nearly always got outscored while Randle was on the floor.

If the point of the game is to outscore your opponent, Randle can't say he did that. He outscored his teammates, but not his opponents.
https://www.nba.com/stats/lineups/advanced/?Season=2021-22&SeasonType=Regular%20Season&CF=TEAM_ABBREVIATION*E*NYK:GP*G*20&GroupQuantity=2

Nalod wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

Nalod wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Nalod wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Dont know if it was posted yet, very thorough article on RJ..

https://theathletic.com/3548723/2022/08/31/rj-barrett-knicks-polarizing/

Great read. Usaually the athletic hits me up for a Dallah. THis time not.
Windhorst podcast this morning really nailed it that knicks are following a plan, had a solid summer, like the Barrett signing,, and think Leon is spot on with many things. Small moves. Discussed tradable contracts as the parameter.
Only one in queastion is Randle but at worst he can be moved laterally. If Hornets have the space, they need him!
I won’t predict how he’ll play. I don’t know if he ignored his coach by bringing up the ball? Was mad all year, or what ever. At thhe same time respect 20-10 is still not easy in the nba.

40 players averaged 20 points a game last year and a few handful more averaged 18-19 with much better efficiency than Jules. That's not even taking into account guys who averaged 20 per 36 minutes. I'd say scoring 20 and 10 is far easier today than it was 5 or 10 years ago given the pace of today's game. It's like 300lb dude bragging that he has 20 inch arms when the majority of it is flab. I give little respect to someone who averages 20 points when they were one of the worst 20 point scorers in the league. Same kinda goes for RJ but he has the excuse of youth.

Ok, your saying 8.8% of NBA players with the effeciency were better than Randle scoring 20 pts. 450 players, 40 were better than him efficency in the 18 pt or better range. He was 25th in scoring. Ok, we all about efficiency. I get that.
whats also on knicks too. They won 37 games. They had issues beyond Jules and it effected his game.
Rebounding. 13th. Is there inefficient rebounds? Do getting offensive rebounds off own misses count? Perhaps. Defensive rebounds- 8.2, good for 10th in league.

Does all this aggregate to a good season? no. Im not saying that. Im just saying we toss around rj and Randle like they are easily replaced. And as much as I like Grimes and OBI, I have no concrete path to say they do better or the team does better. Am I willing to take that chance? Sure, but what comes back to make the team better in return? Im fine with less randle stats if it means more wins and he part of a team concept that wins. Who wouldn't.

I think the point is how they play needs to change. If you gave Grimes 25 shots a game and a 28%+ usage, his stats may also be 22/6/5. Or he may be 32/5/5. The number of shots you take to get to 20 points matters. Its why Melo didn't win in his prime.

There are "inefficient rebounds". You look at the rebounds compare it to the number of box outs. Then look at the other members of his rotation. The guy getting rebounds without boxing out is getting handouts. Team rebounds are being credited to a player.

The fact that Randle has only two man lineups (IQ and Sims) with a positive Plus-Minus means the way he played the game last year was not very effective. It doesn't mean he can't change, it means he has to. By contrast, IQ and Sims didn't really have any negative net ratings. This means that the Knicks nearly always got outscored while Randle was on the floor.

If the point of the game is to outscore your opponent, Randle can't say he did that. He outscored his teammates, but not his opponents.
https://www.nba.com/stats/lineups/advanced/?Season=2021-22&SeasonType=Regular%20Season&CF=TEAM_ABBREVIATION*E*NYK:GP*G*20&GroupQuantity=2

Im sure we can break it down to a positive or negative spins. Im not entirely discounting your points BTW. when you lose more than you win its gonna rarely come out pretty.
perhaps om more aligned with the potential of Randle in a good situation with real PG, valid Barrett now galvanized in a role and contract to prove it, and a world were he and Obi can play together so OBI can get more minutes. The aggregate is more wins. Thats all I care about.
If Randle can be a cap place holder and FO moves that asset along Im cool with that also. Instinct for me is not to sell low. How others value Randle is not as important as you or I (fans). Thus I trust Leon did not totally mess up because resigning him. But all the above has to play out.
We have a chess board with many pieces on it considering were were not a very good team last year. That itself is refreshing and optimistic!

That’s right. I think if Randle accepts not being “the man” and instead being more of a team player, the efficiency will come. My only real issue with him is the idea that an 18 foot fadeaway in double coverage is a good shot. It may have worked for him in 2019-2020, but it was never a good shot.

Once he accepts that role, I think the attitude changes and the wins come. If he were on anyone else’s team, he’s the kind of guy I’d be trying to buy low. Seriously. But that logic is based on the concept of change of scenery. Here, something has to change and maybe Brunson is that catalyst. Maybe it’s training camp without Kenny Payne. Maybe it’s a film session with a math professor. A new motto Maximize Points Per Possession. MPPP. As Bill Walton wisely said, the team that scores more points usually wins. As D’antoni said, the team that scores the most points had the better defense.

But I think he can sort it out.

TPercy wrote:I really don’t like this. Dude has shown nothing that he’s worth the type of money.

Shown nothing? He was the second best player on a Knicks team that got a 4th seed year before last and was a big reason we won 37 games last year when our talent level was probably closer to a 25 win team

RJ has been good so far. Definitely better than Zion who can’t even get on the court. If he wasn’t good Ainge wouldn’t have been demanding him in trade talks.