HofstraBBall 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

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.

You did freak out, absolutely. I made my post about a player, you made it about a poster. You do it all the time. You're awful quiet though when said player is playing poorly. Crickets.

Its childish, only way to describe it Hofstra. You make these talks about hoops way too personal. You arent defending yourself from personal attacks, you're just making it personal.

GustavBahler wrote:

HofstraBBall 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

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.

You did freak out, absolutely. I made my post about a player, you made it about a poster. You do it all the time. You're awful quiet though when said player is playing poorly. Crickets.

Its childish, only way to describe it Hofstra. You make these talks about hoops way too personal. You arent defending yourself from personal attacks, you're just making it personal.

Please point out the "making it personal" part of the "500 words" post?
Other than, what I admitted to, which was stating my opinion that you are biased and have a personal motive to put down Randle.
If I made it personal, I apologize.
Interested to find out what was?

Yet to call anyone "childish" or any other disparaging name.

It's obvious we will never agree about Randle. But. not oppose to you chiming in when I post an opinion about him. It seems to me that you do not like the same.
Have no issues keeping our convos just about hoops though. That's why we are all here.

Fyi, no crickets from me. Biggest opposer of the Randle hate this summer when everyone was regurgitating the "he had a horrible year" and "trade him for scraps" hysteria.

blkexec wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

HofstraBBall 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

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.

You did freak out, absolutely. I made my post about a player, you made it about a poster. You do it all the time. You're awful quiet though when said player is playing poorly. Crickets.

Its childish, only way to describe it Hofstra. You make these talks about hoops way too personal. You arent defending yourself from personal attacks, you're just making it personal.

It’s hard to disagree here. And others tend to follow. Which is why u see posters getting blasted by others because of the personal over reactions. It quickly switch from basketball to personal attacks.

Have seen you claim this a few other times. Yet to see what specifically you call personal attacks?
More often the not, I just see some fiercely disagree with your points and calling out possible bias.

If you don’t like me calling out the dump/fire/I hate the pick crowd then fine. I don’t like your opinion either. But let’s keep an eye on our blood pressure.

And that goes for me as well.

jskinny35 wrote:

Well I asked you what you perceive his value to be since you made all these comments about 1 pick even after I explained that I was being conservative after previously polling the UK board awhile back.

A FO would trade a consistent producing player because he's only been producing consistently well this season - and they are unsure he will continue to do so. They would have doubt based on last season's and his first season's poor play. They would consider a trade if they are unsure if a 9 year veteran would be likely to adapt and adjust his play style enough (eg sharing the ball more). They would consider if this veteran player has finally matured (eg no outbursts like last season) or if he's just managing better because he's playing well so far this season. A good FO would see his entire body of work and not focus solely on the current play - as best predictor of future behavior is often the past behavior. And at the end of all this they would say regardless of numbers and improved play - do we think JR can either a) lead us to become a top tier team or b) if not and we need to upgrade - would JR's trade value be higher and easier to move in an effort to upgrade to a higher level of player.

I did not insinuate what you would do - but was trying to get you to declare what you think his worth is since it seems like many supporters play both sides of the fence in regards to his value. You responded critically about 1 #1 draft pick which I stated - can you at least state what you think it is? Your responses come across as pretty intense at times - so it leads me to believe you can't fathom my idea of trading him (which is fine). So if JR is worth 3 first rounders vs 1 first rounder that would make a potential trade situation very different. That is why I am asking you for your take.

My bias is centered around him playing iso-ball and not having the court vision or any exceptional skill to justify handling the ball as much as he does. Thibs shares much of this critique/opinion since he put JR in this role and rarely holds him accountable to to the level needed to help him reduce his defaults (to iso and hold the ball).

I admire and respect his effort, rebounding and believe he has overachieved. He has raised his ceiling higher then I thought it could go to his credit. I do not trust his decision-making, see him as feast or famine much of the time offensively - and too easy/predictable to guard due to his play style. He's good enough to make you respectable and can beat lesser teams most of the time. He is exposed when we face better teams (eg Nets, Bucks) with team-oriented defenses and requires a perfect roster fit to negate his shortcummings. My bias includes sharing the ball so really not a fan of Randle and RJ's play this season - that is more of a Thibs issue though.

So there are my known biases. I would be open to not moving Randle but believe strongly that him or Thibs needs a change as our offense is middle of the road with a low ceiling. If we parted with Thibs and played semi up tempo I'd be open to seeing how Randle responds... but after watching him for 4 seasons we have a situation where Randle's default is to play slow, hold the ball, struggle when doubled and act out periodically when things get tough. Yes he's shooting better and making better decisions overall this year. I do think a coach holding him accountable could do wonders but see JR and Thibs sticking (or going down) together.

I think you are looking for improvement in the wrong way. The biggest issue I had going into the season was the long term fit between Robinson and Randle. Those two have led the Knicks in win shares the past 4 seasons yet they're 2 man net ratings were always low or negative.

Season Minutes Net Rating/ 100 possessions (from basketball-reference.com)
19-20 703 +.4
20-21 742 - 1.2
21-22 1403 -3.6
22-23 942 + 9

I think looking at individual numbers only gets you so far. The real key is how players complement each other. The Nets game broadcast mentioned that Randle and Robinson worked out together for a week over the summer. It seems really dangerous to trade either of them now when they have shown such improved chemistry this season. Randle and Hart or Sims have really strong negative ratings so this isn't about Randle playing better this year as much as Randle and Robinson playing better together.

This passes the eye test as well. It seems like Randle has gotten a lot closer to the hoop this season, likely because of the attention that Robinson draws and also Randle can play tighter perimeter defense knowing Mitch Rob has his back.

Regarding 'consistency' theringer.com had a good article comparing NBA stars best and worst games. There's a very, very small group of players who basically never have bad games- Steph Dominican Embiid KD and Jokic. Every other top player has pretty significant splits. What I'm saying is, don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

HofstraBBall wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:

Well I asked you what you perceive his value to be since you made all these comments about 1 pick even after I explained that I was being conservative after previously polling the UK board awhile back.

A FO would trade a consistent producing player because he's only been producing consistently well this season - and they are unsure he will continue to do so. They would have doubt based on last season's and his first season's poor play. They would consider a trade if they are unsure if a 9 year veteran would be likely to adapt and adjust his play style enough (eg sharing the ball more). They would consider if this veteran player has finally matured (eg no outbursts like last season) or if he's just managing better because he's playing well so far this season. A good FO would see his entire body of work and not focus solely on the current play - as best predictor of future behavior is often the past behavior. And at the end of all this they would say regardless of numbers and improved play - do we think JR can either a) lead us to become a top tier team or b) if not and we need to upgrade - would JR's trade value be higher and easier to move in an effort to upgrade to a higher level of player.

I did not insinuate what you would do - but was trying to get you to declare what you think his worth is since it seems like many supporters play both sides of the fence in regards to his value. You responded critically about 1 #1 draft pick which I stated - can you at least state what you think it is? Your responses come across as pretty intense at times - so it leads me to believe you can't fathom my idea of trading him (which is fine). So if JR is worth 3 first rounders vs 1 first rounder that would make a potential trade situation very different. That is why I am asking you for your take.

My bias is centered around him playing iso-ball and not having the court vision or any exceptional skill to justify handling the ball as much as he does. Thibs shares much of this critique/opinion since he put JR in this role and rarely holds him accountable to to the level needed to help him reduce his defaults (to iso and hold the ball).

I admire and respect his effort, rebounding and believe he has overachieved. He has raised his ceiling higher then I thought it could go to his credit. I do not trust his decision-making, see him as feast or famine much of the time offensively - and too easy/predictable to guard due to his play style. He's good enough to make you respectable and can beat lesser teams most of the time. He is exposed when we face better teams (eg Nets, Bucks) with team-oriented defenses and requires a perfect roster fit to negate his shortcummings. My bias includes sharing the ball so really not a fan of Randle and RJ's play this season - that is more of a Thibs issue though.

So there are my known biases. I would be open to not moving Randle but believe strongly that him or Thibs needs a change as our offense is middle of the road with a low ceiling. If we parted with Thibs and played semi up tempo I'd be open to seeing how Randle responds... but after watching him for 4 seasons we have a situation where Randle's default is to play slow, hold the ball, struggle when doubled and act out periodically when things get tough. Yes he's shooting better and making better decisions overall this year. I do think a coach holding him accountable could do wonders but see JR and Thibs sticking (or going down) together.

"Let's try to stay on subject" lmao
The subject is the same as every fourth thread and every other thread where Randle detractors need to take over and mention their personal biases vs our best player. But I'll play. Again.

You said his value was 1 first. I mentioned you had no concept of current market conditions or acknowledged how how well he is playing. Judging by OG rumored to be in the ball park of 3 picks, that would be a good comp.

Everything you feel a front office would do in terms of Randle is based on your bias. Which was my point. Just take a look at most of your reasoning and explanations above.
A true professional FO, which we have, will not consider a player who plays at an All Star level 2 out of 4 contract years as "inconsistent". Nor will they consider a career per 36 20/10 player inconsistent. which he did those years you and other detractors as "bad". They also don't factor in how JSkinny and other fans prefers Randle to play like. You also keep dodging my questions. Mainly, who are we trading him for? Are you trading an All Star just for picks? Why? We rebuilding? If so, why trade just Randle? Also disagree with you that we should trade Randle just because he will not be the next LBJ? That rational points to trading everyone as well. But again, I am all for getting an LBJ type for Randle. Who is he?

Look, this is the same convo as every other Randle convo in the last year. Admire you for having the same gusto despite Randle proving you completely wrong. Respect "a couple" guys on here, who wanted Randle traded for scraps, this summer. and admitted they were wrong. Many others egos can't let them do the same.
My points with you on Randle were:
1. Not worth just one first.
2. People that mention trades never have an actual scenario. Luka is not that.
3. Randle detractors focus on their own personal reasons and ignore production when it comes to Randle. And yes, this includes wanting him to be their idea of perfect.

So I write my reasons why a good FO would consider moving a productive player and you come back with "how JSkinny and other fans prefers Randle to play like"? You really don't have to make things personal when they don't need to be. As for your other reasons I mostly see them differently. I do believe at least some in the FO organization weren't so keen on JR at the end of last season but prob couldn't argue much because his value was pretty low (vs now). If you truly believe we could get 3 1st rounders for Randle and still seem so incensed that I present an alternative view/argument on how to upgrade (if he actually has anywhere near that value)...not sure what to think about that?

I believe his value is likely somewhere in between our two views. I also wonder if other teams really see his value the same way as nobody seems to be calling now (when he's super productive) or even after his All-Star season before. I think more posters here would at least consider obtaining 3 first rounders if poss without acting like that would be pointless when we are an average team. I think the truth on Randle is likely in the middle and that's why there are so many polarizing perspectives.

I did present actual scenarios for the better part of the last 3 seasons - they included Lauri M (when on Bulls), to GS for young players and picks 2 seasons ago, lateral move for J. Collins (when Randle's value was low/attitude poor at end of last season), etc... it's fine if you didn't agree or like any of them.

Rebuilding? Depends on the move/players but if you believe you're good but not good enough - then all options should be on the table to get us down the right path IMO. When I see how easily an injury-riddled Nets team handles us it just reaffirms that no one on our team is good enough to not consider any available option to improve. If there is a move to retool I would do it but just don't think adding a G. Allen or Bullock or supporting defensive shooter will do that much in the big picture.

Eventually Randle or RJ (or both) will be moved IMO.

Time will tell

HofstraBBall wrote:@Jskinny

So I write my reasons why a good FO would consider moving a productive player and you come back with "how JSkinny and other fans prefers Randle to play like"? You really don't have to make things personal when they don't need to be.
How is it personal by saying that a professional FO does not care about what YOU or any fan thinks a player should play like? They only care about a players production, contract, fit and how they contribute to winning.

I do believe at least some in the FO organization weren't so keen on JR at the end of last season but prob couldn't argue much because his value was pretty low (vs now). Disagree. That is what YOU believe. A professional FO is not going to trade a recent All Star who still had close to 20/10 despite not having a true PG and who they recently extended. They did what they did and added Brunson. They were smart. Can you confirm the FO was looking to trade him?

If you truly believe we could get 3 1st rounders for Randle and still seem so incensed that I present an alternative view/argument on how to upgrade (if he actually has anywhere near that value)...not sure what to think about that? Think that not everyone thinks like you. One who is biased about Randle's true value. So we trade Randle for 3 firsts then what? Get someone like OG? who is due a pay raise and is not as good as a player? Trade for Luka with those picks? We have a crap load of picks. Who besides DM did we have a chance to get?

I believe his value is likely somewhere in between our two views. I also wonder if other teams really see his value the same way as nobody seems to be calling now (when he's super productive) or even after his All-Star season before. I think more posters here would at least consider obtaining 3 first rounders if poss without acting like that would be pointless when we are an average team. I think the truth on Randle is likely in the middle and that's why there are so many polarizing perspectives. Why would I argue true value with someone who has an admitted bias to Randle? Of course you can't comprehend that he may have more value to us.

I did present actual scenarios for the better part of the last 3 seasons - they included Lauri M (when on Bulls), to GS for young players and picks 2 seasons ago, lateral move for J. Collins (when Randle's value was low/attitude poor at end of last season), etc... it's fine if you didn't agree or like any of them. Bulls gave up on Lauri. Claimed he was soft and one dimensional. Cavs gave up on him to get a true superstar. But you are claiming Knicks should have traded their best player for him. One who was having an All Start season? You saying we could have traded Randle for him is typical retrospective management. https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/bulls/grading-bulls-lauri-markkanen-sign-and-trade-cavs-blazers#:~:text=Bulls%20make%20out%20like%20bandits%20in%20Markkanen%20sign%2Dand%2Dtrade&text=Friday%20morning%2C%20the%20Bulls%2C%20Cavaliers,Larry%20Nance%20Jr.%20to%20Portland. You wanting Collins for Randle further proves my point.

Rebuilding? Depends on the move/players but if you believe you're good but not good enough - then all options should be on the table to get us down the right path IMO. When I see how easily an injury-riddled Nets team handles us it just reaffirms that no one on our team is good enough to not consider any available option to improve. If there is a move to retool I would do it but just don't think adding a G. Allen or Bullock or supporting defensive shooter will do that much in the big picture. You keep saying the same thing despite what I am writing. I am open to anything that makes us better. NO ONE is untradeable. What is frustrating is guys not taking into account the obvious parts of a trade. It's not just trade this guy because I don't like the way he plays. There are many aspects. First and foremost, what do we get in return. No move makes sense if it puts us in a worse position financially, restricts future moves or we do not replace the traded production.

Eventually Randle or RJ (or both) will be moved IMO.
Probably. Hopefully its for better assets.

HofstraBBall wrote:@Jskinny

So I write my reasons why a good FO would consider moving a productive player and you come back with "how JSkinny and other fans prefers Randle to play like"? You really don't have to make things personal when they don't need to be.
How is it personal by saying that a professional FO does not care about what YOU or any fan thinks a player should play like? They only care about a players production, contract, fit and how they contribute to winning.

You asked why would our FO consider trading Randle. I write back why I think they would - listing my reasons - "A FO would trade a consistent producing player because he's only been producing consistently well this season - and they are unsure he will continue to do so. They would have doubt based on last season's and his first season's poor play. They would consider a trade if they are unsure if a 9 year veteran would be likely to adapt and adjust his play style enough (eg sharing the ball more). They would consider if this veteran player has finally matured (eg no outbursts like last season) or if he's just managing better because he's playing well so far this season. A good FO would see his entire body of work and not focus solely on the current play - as best predictor of future behavior is often the past behavior. And at the end of all this they would say regardless of numbers and improved play - do we think JR can either a) lead us to become a top tier team or b) if not and we need to upgrade - would JR's trade value be higher and easier to move in an effort to upgrade to a higher level of player."

You write back about the FO not caring about fans and use my handle. Where does this come from instead of responding to what I wrote? You could have simply refuted what I wrote about why I think the FO would consider it. You chose not to.

I do believe at least some in the FO organization weren't so keen on JR at the end of last season but prob couldn't argue much because his value was pretty low (vs now). Disagree. That is what YOU believe. A professional FO is not going to trade a recent All Star who still had close to 20/10 despite not having a true PG and who they recently extended. They did what they did and added Brunson. They were smart. Can you confirm the FO was looking to trade him?

This is what I believe based on what I read and heard - per Ian Begley. There are many cooks in the FO at NY and there were reports that some (not all or a consensus) in the FO were doubting Randle and his future at the end of last season. Begley also said it was doubtful they would trade him then because it would be selling at a low point.

If you truly believe we could get 3 1st rounders for Randle and still seem so incensed that I present an alternative view/argument on how to upgrade (if he actually has anywhere near that value)...not sure what to think about that? Think that not everyone thinks like you. One who is biased about Randle's true value. So we trade Randle for 3 firsts then what? Get someone like OG? who is due a pay raise and is not as good as a player? Trade for Luka with those picks? We have a crap load of picks. Who besides DM did we have a chance to get?

Sure - don't think everyone thinks like me. This is a board to express our views. I am biased... as are you it seems. Pretty sure bias is everywhere if you really think about it. So does having a bias mean I shouldn't express my perspectives? Pretty sure that would eliminate most of the board. You fast forward by saying for OG as an example - as if I have to present the entire plan. I don't and never said anything about OG so it's confusing when you keep adding things that were not said. So to be clear - if Randle could net us 3 1st round picks I would do it in a heartbeat. What comes next could be a retooling by using that pick for another player deemed better for us. It could be a rebuild of sorts by using it on draft night to upgrade. Either way I think it gives us more opportunity. You don't have to agree with this but please stop with adding your hypotheticals (see bolded above).

I believe his value is likely somewhere in between our two views. I also wonder if other teams really see his value the same way as nobody seems to be calling now (when he's super productive) or even after his All-Star season before. I think more posters here would at least consider obtaining 3 first rounders if poss without acting like that would be pointless when we are an average team. I think the truth on Randle is likely in the middle and that's why there are so many polarizing perspectives. Why would I argue true value with someone who has an admitted bias to Randle? Of course you can't comprehend that he may have more value to us.

Umm.. because everyone has a bias and it doesn't mean having bias = ideas won't work.

I did present actual scenarios for the better part of the last 3 seasons - they included Lauri M (when on Bulls), to GS for young players and picks 2 seasons ago, lateral move for J. Collins (when Randle's value was low/attitude poor at end of last season), etc... it's fine if you didn't agree or like any of them. Bulls gave up on Lauri. Claimed he was soft and one dimensional. Cavs gave up on him to get a true superstar. But you are claiming Knicks should have traded their best player for him. One who was having an All Start season? You saying we could have traded Randle for him is typical retrospective management. https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/bulls/grading-bulls-lauri-markkanen-sign-and-trade-cavs-blazers#:~:text=Bulls%20make%20out%20like%20bandits%20in%20Markkanen%20sign%2Dand%2Dtrade&text=Friday%20morning%2C%20the%20Bulls%2C%20Cavaliers,Larry%20Nance%20Jr.%20to%20Portland. You wanting Collins for Randle further proves my point.

Yes the Bulls have up on him because he was injured a lot and didn't get along with the coach. I liked him due to the talent, potential and thought pairing him with RJ would fit better and open up the court more (posted two seasons ago). Not sure how that looks bad right now but you can disagree. Cavs giving up on him was more about already having Mobley, Allen, Love and really wanting DM IMO. Funny that now we probably couldn't even get him but it was not worthwhile prior...

Rebuilding? Depends on the move/players but if you believe you're good but not good enough - then all options should be on the table to get us down the right path IMO. When I see how easily an injury-riddled Nets team handles us it just reaffirms that no one on our team is good enough to not consider any available option to improve. If there is a move to retool I would do it but just don't think adding a G. Allen or Bullock or supporting defensive shooter will do that much in the big picture. You keep saying the same thing despite what I am writing. I am open to anything that makes us better. NO ONE is untradeable. What is frustrating is guys not taking into account the obvious parts of a trade. It's not just trade this guy because I don't like the way he plays. There are many aspects. First and foremost, what do we get in return. No move makes sense if it puts us in a worse position financially, restricts future moves or we do not replace the traded production.

I agree with this, except that this is not coming primarily from a way that he plays. True I don't like it but you can't really argue that we will beat elite teams without upgrading our talent - so it's kind of a moot point whether I like it or not. If we win 65% of our games and do well in the playoffs then it doesn't matter if he holds the ball 23 seconds and takes a hook shot. The reality is in between where his play has taken us to a respectable level and he deserves credit for that. I just don't see relying on him in a vital role as the means to get to the next level. And to his credit he has pumped up his value to a good level that I think he could possibly be our best asset to upgrade. I really expected this conversation with those who disagreed to say things like "we should try to move RJ instead" or "premature thinking - Randle's value may get higher - let's wait until after the playoffs to see how well we do"...

Eventually Randle or RJ (or both) will be moved IMO.
Probably. Hopefully its for better assets.

We agree on this!