“Lipstick on a pig” I love that analogy from CP or that Knicks video. That’s equivalent to adding more players to the junk we already have.

I think it’s like working on rev C of your document and you realized the document is getting worse. So what we do try to find rev B and start from there.

Try to go back to what worked and start from there. Trading Randle or lipstick on a pig shouldn’t be the first moves. Everything points to the starting 5. That’s a bad mix. I believe lack of offensive creativity points to the coaching staff. Those are 2 areas we have not tried to fix yet or fully commit to it. Haven’t heard the knicks hire any new coaches on thibs staff. And our starting 5 is one of the top mins played together compared to other nba starting 5s.

Everything else is fine or better. Case in point second unit looks great even without rose. That’s a plus and improvement. RJ is developing into a star caliber player, under bing bong pressure. Blowing up the team is risking to reverse those positives.

This is a great time to see what we have against nba caliber talent and not against gleague retreads. See if IQ can turn into an nba PG. see how grimes look with starter minutes playing with the starters. See how EF looks on the second unit. I’m just throwing stuff on the wall. See what cam brings us. He will be looking for a new contract soon. Mitch wants a new contract. RJ as well. See how RJ plays when coach runs plays through RJ instead of Randle. It worked in duke next to Zion. So why can’t Randle play zions role, back in duke days when RJ was the playmaker. And fully commit to these ideas from the players to coach thibs. Lots of different things to try before cutting bait with Randle or Thibs.

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.

There's that "struggle" word again.

A player who struggles is hustling - running as hard as he can with the pack. He's taking his shots but they just aren't falling. He's in the coaches timeout huddles listening and suggesting changes that might benefit the team. If he doesn't have it in the fourth quarter with the game on the line he tells the coach to play next man up.

He doesn't wander around on court examining the rafters while the ball is in play. He does everything he can do to contribute to a win.

And so on.

THAT is someone struggling.

OTOH, someone who blows off all responsibility is NOT struggling, they are more accurately called unprofessional for that behavior. The issue isn't money at all.

To argue that now that an athlete has signed a long-term, high-visibility, guaranteed contract is the time to promote all the day-to-day chores to the forefront at the expense of the job is a bit much.

ALL employees have a complex life to live, full of difficulties. Do employers just accept doctors and nurses having a bad time and excuse dead patients? Or maybe accountants making mistakes on your tax returns is okay because they had a headache?

Am I a bad fan for expecting a team to play up to even minimal expectations? Or would that further upset Randall's fragile psyche?

fwk00 wrote:
Am I a bad fan for expecting a team to play up to even minimal expectations? Or would that further upset Randall's fragile psyche?

Your are not a bad fan, but you are making far reaching calls based on incomplete information. The struggles could be due to a physical or psychological ailment, for all we know, maybe he should not be playing, but still stepping on the court so as to help his team. Maybe not, and he is indeed bagging it. Maybe it is something fixable, maybe not. At some point the full picture will come out, but right now we do not know enough about what is going on to clamor for shipping him out.

Nalod wrote:

blkexec wrote:

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.

Good job. Im reading many assumptions about players from fans that are offended by Randles salary and offended by this play. Many don’t understand his contract.
I don’t understand his fall. He avgs 18pg not 24. His shooting % is down. We pretend he is Fat and lazy now and hates us. He passes more and seems “content” to let the game come to him. We pile on the garbage and another runs with it.
Most Bing Bongers suck at investing in stocks. Short term gratifications, no thoughts to future caps, infations of salaries, and potential of players.
There is trading. Thats one thing. Then there is Investing. Thats different. Am I getting a dividend for being patient or it a growth company. Whats its P/E ratio and potential.

Randle was let go by LA so his cap allows Lebron to sign on.
He did ok with Nola next to Davis, but they draft Zion.
He sucked year one, but so did Knicks with Fiz.
Year two we thought we died and went to heaven. He signed for a reasonable contract.

Tell me what is happening with him on the court and then Ill decide. If he don’t want to be here I can deal with that truth. Rift with coach? Rift with Kemba/EF? I can deal with that. Im not buying the making **** up by fans thing.

The problem I see with some Knicks fans is that they think they are social workers.

Thibs chronically uses the term "we gotta fix that" as if its a leaky pipe in the garden. You can't fix stupid and you can't fix player indifference.

Kemba is a classic Thibs security blanket player. WHO in their right mind thought signing Kemba was a good idea? The Bobs? "Hey let's give him a few years! Thibs can 'fix' him".

In Minny the ownership had to learn to say no to this crap. In NY Thibs and the FO are seamless. It bodes poorly.

Unlike many NBA head-cases who are unfixable, Randall doesn't act like one but he has chaecked out and the evidence is empirical, its not fans making stuff up.

The problem in the NBA is that if a player or coach is incompetent, they get promoted.

For me it was always about his style of play (iso ball, no movement, limited court vision), and I think Thibs holds some accountability in that you only run a ball dominant offense if that player is a top level player. Randle is not that and (I believe) will never be. I do think it's worth finding out what's causing the recent decrease in effort, poor body language and apparent disconnect.

That said, I still think moving him makes more sense because we've had almost 3 full seasons to evaluate him and when he was at his best - we couldn't overcome an average defensive team past the first round. I realize there are numerous other roster issues - but exceptional players feast on a team like the Hawks and continue to display consistent effort even when they're shot is struggling. Yes, we still need a PG - but if Randle is not on the roster - maybe it will be easier to find one as we don't have to keep searching for other players to fit around a square peg.

wargames wrote:

KnickDanger wrote:I am pleased to see reasoned even wise voices amongst the reactive yelps. Let's not do what we've always done, yet that is what many are yelping for the FO to do. Personally I see the onslaught of negativity as counterproductive at best -- and at worst creating an environment where slumps become apocalypses and no player in their right mind would want to play here. I get some fans cannot help themselves. Media largely are vultures in search of carrion. So far the current regime seems to not give in to all that nonsense as in the past which is what really matters. Having stated that yeah I too am frustrated with Randle's performance (and the team's) and wonder what is going on with him. But I am trusting the FO to stay reasoned and not trade him for the bag of chips or toss him away like the bag after you've sucked it down.

It depends on what is being offered though. If the FO knows what they want and a team offers it they can pull the trigger. The main issue is deciding they want to trade Randle. Begley has said other teams thought the right package could get it done, then he said the FO has to decide if they want to trade Randle or not. To me that indicates somebody or multiple somebodies made that right offer. Now they got to decide if they want to risk it over risking that Randle gets his mind right.

Absolutely -- that's what I mean by "reasoned." Lots of questions to address before pulling any trigger. Would you prefer last season's Randle over what you might be getting? If so how do you support him in getting back to that level? Are you ready to say to hell with the play in this season? And so on.

The current regime has shown they are capable of great to solid moves to go with a few questionable ones. The percentage seems good to me, especially compared o what when on prior. I will trust them over the mob to make the right decision.

wargames wrote:

KnickDanger wrote:

wargames wrote:

KnickDanger wrote:I am pleased to see reasoned even wise voices amongst the reactive yelps. Let's not do what we've always done, yet that is what many are yelping for the FO to do. Personally I see the onslaught of negativity as counterproductive at best -- and at worst creating an environment where slumps become apocalypses and no player in their right mind would want to play here. I get some fans cannot help themselves. Media largely are vultures in search of carrion. So far the current regime seems to not give in to all that nonsense as in the past which is what really matters. Having stated that yeah I too am frustrated with Randle's performance (and the team's) and wonder what is going on with him. But I am trusting the FO to stay reasoned and not trade him for the bag of chips or toss him away like the bag after you've sucked it down.

It depends on what is being offered though. If the FO knows what they want and a team offers it they can pull the trigger. The main issue is deciding they want to trade Randle. Begley has said other teams thought the right package could get it done, then he said the FO has to decide if they want to trade Randle or not. To me that indicates somebody or multiple somebodies made that right offer. Now they got to decide if they want to risk it over risking that Randle gets his mind right.

Absolutely -- that's what I mean by "reasoned." Lots of questions to address before pulling any trigger. Would you prefer last season's Randle over what you might be getting? If so how do you support him in getting back to that level? Are you ready to say to hell with the play in this season? And so on.

The current regime has shown they are capable of great to solid moves to go with a few questionable ones. The percentage seems good to me, especially compared o what when on prior. I will trust them over the mob to make the right decision.

I think the more accurate set of questions are: Can Randle return to last season’s Randle? Is there anyway they can support him to get back there? Is he worth this contract as it scheduled to grow? Is this toxicity temporary or something that could happen again later in this contract?

Even beyond Randle this current season is likely done. That’s a whole other conversation though. They would definitely prefer last season’s Randle to anything they can get for a trade. However, was that a contract year fluke or did the Hawks expose his weakness? These are the realities the FO has to contend with.

Was last year an aberration is an honest question that needs honest answers from the front office. Randle's career numbers compared to last year's suggests that it was. Add the unusual circumstances of last years regular season and also consider Randle's performance here during his first year.

Sticking with Randle not only warrants physical reparations in terms of fixing his game on the court, but it also calls for mental reparations. Not only do we have to ask is it worth the attempt to fix this player, but is it futile? Or better yet, is it possible especially in this environment? What if we keep him and it only gets worse next year? The asset depreciates and some of the teams and or prospects that are available right now, maybe off the market next year.

In the end, we need to do what's best for this franchise. Moving on from Randle is what's best, in my opinion. I would not give him away for a deflated bag of basketballs, but I wouldn't ask for the moon either. If we can move some unwanted salary off the books and secure a young prospect or a 1st round pick, I think that's a victory.

martin wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/JCMacriNBA/status/1488160080688304132

Funny, find every innocuous stat to support Randles demise.
Me? The eye test works. Its not pretty.

HofstraBBall wrote:

Uptown wrote:

wargames wrote:

KnickDanger wrote:

wargames wrote:

KnickDanger wrote:I am pleased to see reasoned even wise voices amongst the reactive yelps. Let's not do what we've always done, yet that is what many are yelping for the FO to do. Personally I see the onslaught of negativity as counterproductive at best -- and at worst creating an environment where slumps become apocalypses and no player in their right mind would want to play here. I get some fans cannot help themselves. Media largely are vultures in search of carrion. So far the current regime seems to not give in to all that nonsense as in the past which is what really matters. Having stated that yeah I too am frustrated with Randle's performance (and the team's) and wonder what is going on with him. But I am trusting the FO to stay reasoned and not trade him for the bag of chips or toss him away like the bag after you've sucked it down.

It depends on what is being offered though. If the FO knows what they want and a team offers it they can pull the trigger. The main issue is deciding they want to trade Randle. Begley has said other teams thought the right package could get it done, then he said the FO has to decide if they want to trade Randle or not. To me that indicates somebody or multiple somebodies made that right offer. Now they got to decide if they want to risk it over risking that Randle gets his mind right.

Absolutely -- that's what I mean by "reasoned." Lots of questions to address before pulling any trigger. Would you prefer last season's Randle over what you might be getting? If so how do you support him in getting back to that level? Are you ready to say to hell with the play in this season? And so on.

The current regime has shown they are capable of great to solid moves to go with a few questionable ones. The percentage seems good to me, especially compared o what when on prior. I will trust them over the mob to make the right decision.

I think the more accurate set of questions are: Can Randle return to last season’s Randle? Is there anyway they can support him to get back there? Is he worth this contract as it scheduled to grow? Is this toxicity temporary or something that could happen again later in this contract?

Even beyond Randle this current season is likely done. That’s a whole other conversation though. They would definitely prefer last season’s Randle to anything they can get for a trade. However, was that a contract year fluke or did the Hawks expose his weakness? These are the realities the FO has to contend with.

Was last year an aberration is an honest question that needs honest answers from the front office. Randle's career numbers compared to last year's suggests that it was. Add the unusual circumstances of last years regular season and also consider Randle's performance here during his first year.

Sticking with Randle not only warrants physical reparations in terms of fixing his game on the court, but it also calls for mental reparations. Not only do we have to ask is it worth the attempt to fix this player, but is it futile? Or better yet, is it possible especially in this environment? What if we keep him and it only gets worse next year? The asset depreciates and some of the teams and or prospects that are available right now, maybe off the market next year.

In the end, we need to do what's best for this franchise. Moving on from Randle is what's best, in my opinion. I would not give him away for a deflated bag of basketballs, but I wouldn't ask for the moon either. If we can move some unwanted salary off the books and secure a young prospect or a 1st round pick, I think that's a victory.

Huh??

In 5 years of play (1st year hurt) prior to last year he averaged over 21ppg in all but first two seasons. Which he had a reduced role. His best (25 per 36) was in 18/19 with Pels. He has averaged averaged over 10 rebounds per 36 EVERY year EXCEPT last year. His FG% was the WORST last year since 2015. His TO per were the same as the last 4 years. The ONLY things that were BETTER last year were his 3pt% and FT%. So maybe ask yourself which year might actually be the aberration?

Per 36 is one of the many tools in a tool box that you would use to evaluate a player. It’s an assumption that the player's, in this case Randle, numbers will remain consistent with increased playing time. In some instances, its not the case. Case and point, Randle’s best per 36 years are the 17-18 and 18-19 seasons when he was coming off the bench. He did start a bunch of games those 2 years due to injuries and Anthony Davis removing himself from the lineup to escape to LA. But Randle racked up a lot of minutes vs the oppositions 2nd unit. Based on his per 36, can we assume that Randle is better coming off the bench? According to his per 36, in the 19-20 season, his first year in NY, his minutes increased but his pts per game, assists, 3pt fg% and 2pt fg% all decreased. Why didn't his numbers increase like per 36 said it would?

And just to give you an idea of how per 36 can be unreliable, take a look at Anthony Randolph's per 36. He should have been a perennial allstar, yet he only had a 6 year NBA career. Did the coaches ignore his per 36?

Aberration: Randle made 2nd team all NBA
Aberration 41% from 3
Aberration: all star team selection
Aberration: lead a team to the 4th seed in the playoffs
Aberration: the 20-21 season....teams ravaged by covid, bubble teams dealing with injuries, the Raptors were displaced, 65 games vs the normal 82, Knicks and a few other teams had 6-8 months to prepare for the upcoming season...