franco12 wrote:

martin wrote:Not sound reasoning IMHO, baseline assumption is that Randle needs to be the #1 on your team and I don’t think too many people share that idea.

franco12 wrote:Brock Aller seems to want to trade Randle!

I know it's a fake, but reasoning is sound, even if I don't necessarily agree.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/brock_aller/status/1610325195981754368

does Randle and this roster get us to the finals? I think the blunt answer is no. Hinkie the roster, trade Randle.

Lets say we got a Kawhi caliber wing. Does having a PF who draws doubles and lives off a post/dish game seem useful? Elite rebounder? + defensive player?

NOBODY has EVER said Julius is or should be a #1. He's shown to be a most willing passer and take accountability at the same time.

If got a true #1 Randle would be getting said player better looks, not taking touches. Has he had issues integrating with Brunson?

Randle's also one of the most physical guys in the league. Splash brothers dont win **** without Draymond so yeah, Randle is 100% the kind of guy we need to get to the finals. That doesnt mean I want him taking the gamewinner

BigDaddyG wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Panos wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Panos wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Panos wrote:

Panos wrote:Ok. Trade proposal:
Chicago trades peak Scottie Pippen for Randle.
Who says no? Why?

LA Trades still dangerous LeBron to NY, making Randle being clutch less necessary with the GOAT as the number one option.

Pippen+GOAT(Jordan)= Championship

Randle+GOAT(LBJ)= ????

Ive said that if we can keep Randle and add James, and leave a roster good enough to contend, I hope the FO goes for it. Otherwise, I'd like to see the FO try that formula with another player.

To answer your question about a 4th option. Im mostly talking about crunch time, not touches. A team could have a very clutch 6th man ahead of Randle in those situations. Not necessarily putting up better numbers.

Please answer the essence of the question.
Is there any reason why championship Jordan teams would do worse with Randle as #2?

You cant handle the truth!

You need Pippen on that wall!!

OK, maybe not. But you need the greatest basketball player, playoff performer, in NBA history, in this hypothetical, to make your argument. Which was what I was getting at.

Those championship Bulls teams were a well oiled machine. Everyone knew their role and performed them at a high level, consistently. I honestly dont know if Randle could do the consistency part.

In fairness, Ron Harper took some time to become that player in Chicago. But I honestly cant venture a guess. that franchise really had its act together. Even when they were fighting lol. They found a way to make things work.

Forget Jordan.
Why are you going to such lengths NOT to answer the question.
Why is Pippen a better #2 than Randle? Which facet of the game?

What a buzzkill..

This is some fantasy sports/time travel scenario, Im supposed to solve??

You are upset that Im not answering the question exactly the way you want me to. For me to do that, I would have to accept the premise of a current player whose game is the result (in part) of 25+ years of BBall evolution. Going back in time, and then comparing individual stats.

Not factor at all in how Randle would respond to a completely different team, situation, as a human being. Not to mention your premise involves the best player of all time, which will skew the results, to say the least.

My answer is I dont know if Pippen is a better fit. There are too many variables. Not just about stats, or a player's game. Or you could plug in any 20/10 player next to Jordan.

The Pippen led Bulls took us to the limit in 93-94, as the number one option. Could Randle have done the same? Since we're going off on a tangent..

Here's some history: Julius has a higher efg% (.544/.529p) rebs (09.9/8.9) and assts (3.8/3.4) than Dirk Nowitzki in his MVP year (both age 28/9th season). Dirk averaged more points (24.6 vs. 24.2). If Dirk can win a championship, I'm sure it's possible for Randle as well. It's all about team building.

As far as wanting a "no. 1", who are the guys that fit your criteria?

KD
LBJ
Curry
Giannis
Jokic
Kawhi
Tatum
Morant
Butler
Booker
Paul George

anyone else?

Why cherry pick seasons. Anyone who sees this will naturally want to see how both players compare for their careers. Once they do they'll see that one is a HOFer and the other is a guy who's had a couple of good seasons intermingled with a bunch of underwhelming ones.

Still just focussed on proving Randle is not that good. Lmao.
Thought it was about the Knicks not your hate for JR?
Answer the question, who do you think we can add instead of Randle?
Why would you get rid of a player with his salary and production level?
Why not keep the players that produce and add more good players?
Including a true number one?

BigDaddyG wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Panos wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Panos wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Panos wrote:

Panos wrote:Ok. Trade proposal:
Chicago trades peak Scottie Pippen for Randle.
Who says no? Why?

LA Trades still dangerous LeBron to NY, making Randle being clutch less necessary with the GOAT as the number one option.

Pippen+GOAT(Jordan)= Championship

Randle+GOAT(LBJ)= ????

Ive said that if we can keep Randle and add James, and leave a roster good enough to contend, I hope the FO goes for it. Otherwise, I'd like to see the FO try that formula with another player.

To answer your question about a 4th option. Im mostly talking about crunch time, not touches. A team could have a very clutch 6th man ahead of Randle in those situations. Not necessarily putting up better numbers.

Please answer the essence of the question.
Is there any reason why championship Jordan teams would do worse with Randle as #2?

You cant handle the truth!

You need Pippen on that wall!!

OK, maybe not. But you need the greatest basketball player, playoff performer, in NBA history, in this hypothetical, to make your argument. Which was what I was getting at.

Those championship Bulls teams were a well oiled machine. Everyone knew their role and performed them at a high level, consistently. I honestly dont know if Randle could do the consistency part.

In fairness, Ron Harper took some time to become that player in Chicago. But I honestly cant venture a guess. that franchise really had its act together. Even when they were fighting lol. They found a way to make things work.

Forget Jordan.
Why are you going to such lengths NOT to answer the question.
Why is Pippen a better #2 than Randle? Which facet of the game?

What a buzzkill..

This is some fantasy sports/time travel scenario, Im supposed to solve??

You are upset that Im not answering the question exactly the way you want me to. For me to do that, I would have to accept the premise of a current player whose game is the result (in part) of 25+ years of BBall evolution. Going back in time, and then comparing individual stats.

Not factor at all in how Randle would respond to a completely different team, situation, as a human being. Not to mention your premise involves the best player of all time, which will skew the results, to say the least.

My answer is I dont know if Pippen is a better fit. There are too many variables. Not just about stats, or a player's game. Or you could plug in any 20/10 player next to Jordan.

The Pippen led Bulls took us to the limit in 93-94, as the number one option. Could Randle have done the same? Since we're going off on a tangent..

Here's some history: Julius has a higher efg% (.544/.529p) rebs (09.9/8.9) and assts (3.8/3.4) than Dirk Nowitzki in his MVP year (both age 28/9th season). Dirk averaged more points (24.6 vs. 24.2). If Dirk can win a championship, I'm sure it's possible for Randle as well. It's all about team building.

As far as wanting a "no. 1", who are the guys that fit your criteria?

KD
LBJ
Curry
Giannis
Jokic
Kawhi
Tatum
Morant
Butler
Booker
Paul George

anyone else?

Why cherry pick seasons. Anyone who sees this will naturally want to see how both players compare for their careers. Once they do they'll see that one is a HOFer and the other is a guy who's had a couple of good seasons intermingled with a bunch of underwhelming ones.

Still just focussed on proving Randle is not that good. Lmao.
Thought it was about the Knicks not your hate for JR?
Answer the question, who do you think we can add instead of Randle?
Why would you get rid of a player with his salary and production level?
Why not keep the players that produce and add more good players?
Including a true number one?

So you're also saying Randle is on the same level as Dirk? That was my point. And the fact that you would have to go to such lengths to prove Randle's value shows how unsure you are. That stat was almost as bad as Mark Jackson's "Kobe told him to be great" rants about Booker in the playoffs a few years back. Booker and Randle are good players and if they ever become great, I'm sure their games will have spoken for themselves. But they are not close to the level of Dirk or Kobe. No need to cherry pick stats or make up narratives to come to conclusions that everyone knows are false.

Randle has not played as good as Dirk. Nor has he accomplished anything close to what he did. Your out here talking bout Dirk vs Randle? For what?

My point is what does that have to do with Randle playing well? The premise that Randle can be a piece on a chip team and the main thing you keep avoiding, why the 2023 Knicks need to trade him? Guess your point is he is not as good as Dirk so lets trade him? Lmao

BigDaddyG wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Panos wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Panos wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Panos wrote:

Panos wrote:Ok. Trade proposal:
Chicago trades peak Scottie Pippen for Randle.
Who says no? Why?

LA Trades still dangerous LeBron to NY, making Randle being clutch less necessary with the GOAT as the number one option.

Pippen+GOAT(Jordan)= Championship

Randle+GOAT(LBJ)= ????

Ive said that if we can keep Randle and add James, and leave a roster good enough to contend, I hope the FO goes for it. Otherwise, I'd like to see the FO try that formula with another player.

To answer your question about a 4th option. Im mostly talking about crunch time, not touches. A team could have a very clutch 6th man ahead of Randle in those situations. Not necessarily putting up better numbers.

Please answer the essence of the question.
Is there any reason why championship Jordan teams would do worse with Randle as #2?

You cant handle the truth!

You need Pippen on that wall!!

OK, maybe not. But you need the greatest basketball player, playoff performer, in NBA history, in this hypothetical, to make your argument. Which was what I was getting at.

Those championship Bulls teams were a well oiled machine. Everyone knew their role and performed them at a high level, consistently. I honestly dont know if Randle could do the consistency part.

In fairness, Ron Harper took some time to become that player in Chicago. But I honestly cant venture a guess. that franchise really had its act together. Even when they were fighting lol. They found a way to make things work.

Forget Jordan.
Why are you going to such lengths NOT to answer the question.
Why is Pippen a better #2 than Randle? Which facet of the game?

What a buzzkill..

This is some fantasy sports/time travel scenario, Im supposed to solve??

You are upset that Im not answering the question exactly the way you want me to. For me to do that, I would have to accept the premise of a current player whose game is the result (in part) of 25+ years of BBall evolution. Going back in time, and then comparing individual stats.

Not factor at all in how Randle would respond to a completely different team, situation, as a human being. Not to mention your premise involves the best player of all time, which will skew the results, to say the least.

My answer is I dont know if Pippen is a better fit. There are too many variables. Not just about stats, or a player's game. Or you could plug in any 20/10 player next to Jordan.

The Pippen led Bulls took us to the limit in 93-94, as the number one option. Could Randle have done the same? Since we're going off on a tangent..

Here's some history: Julius has a higher efg% (.544/.529p) rebs (09.9/8.9) and assts (3.8/3.4) than Dirk Nowitzki in his MVP year (both age 28/9th season). Dirk averaged more points (24.6 vs. 24.2). If Dirk can win a championship, I'm sure it's possible for Randle as well. It's all about team building.

As far as wanting a "no. 1", who are the guys that fit your criteria?

KD
LBJ
Curry
Giannis
Jokic
Kawhi
Tatum
Morant
Butler
Booker
Paul George

anyone else?

Why cherry pick seasons. Anyone who sees this will naturally want to see how both players compare for their careers. Once they do they'll see that one is a HOFer and the other is a guy who's had a couple of good seasons intermingled with a bunch of underwhelming ones.

Good point. They ask why I would be OK with a Randle trade now. Because I didnt want to trade him when he was playing poorly, and we would have received little in return. Because you dont know which player we will be getting from season to season. Because Randle hasnt shown an ability to be clutch, after so many years in the league. Im not expecting that to change at this point in his career.

They talk about going back in time 25 years and comparing him to a player with 6 rings, just on stats. Its crazy, no one is untouchable.

BigDaddyG wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Panos wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Panos wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Panos wrote:

Panos wrote:Ok. Trade proposal:
Chicago trades peak Scottie Pippen for Randle.
Who says no? Why?

LA Trades still dangerous LeBron to NY, making Randle being clutch less necessary with the GOAT as the number one option.

Pippen+GOAT(Jordan)= Championship

Randle+GOAT(LBJ)= ????

Ive said that if we can keep Randle and add James, and leave a roster good enough to contend, I hope the FO goes for it. Otherwise, I'd like to see the FO try that formula with another player.

To answer your question about a 4th option. Im mostly talking about crunch time, not touches. A team could have a very clutch 6th man ahead of Randle in those situations. Not necessarily putting up better numbers.

Please answer the essence of the question.
Is there any reason why championship Jordan teams would do worse with Randle as #2?

You cant handle the truth!

You need Pippen on that wall!!

OK, maybe not. But you need the greatest basketball player, playoff performer, in NBA history, in this hypothetical, to make your argument. Which was what I was getting at.

Those championship Bulls teams were a well oiled machine. Everyone knew their role and performed them at a high level, consistently. I honestly dont know if Randle could do the consistency part.

In fairness, Ron Harper took some time to become that player in Chicago. But I honestly cant venture a guess. that franchise really had its act together. Even when they were fighting lol. They found a way to make things work.

Forget Jordan.
Why are you going to such lengths NOT to answer the question.
Why is Pippen a better #2 than Randle? Which facet of the game?

What a buzzkill..

This is some fantasy sports/time travel scenario, Im supposed to solve??

You are upset that Im not answering the question exactly the way you want me to. For me to do that, I would have to accept the premise of a current player whose game is the result (in part) of 25+ years of BBall evolution. Going back in time, and then comparing individual stats.

Not factor at all in how Randle would respond to a completely different team, situation, as a human being. Not to mention your premise involves the best player of all time, which will skew the results, to say the least.

My answer is I dont know if Pippen is a better fit. There are too many variables. Not just about stats, or a player's game. Or you could plug in any 20/10 player next to Jordan.

The Pippen led Bulls took us to the limit in 93-94, as the number one option. Could Randle have done the same? Since we're going off on a tangent..

Here's some history: Julius has a higher efg% (.544/.529p) rebs (09.9/8.9) and assts (3.8/3.4) than Dirk Nowitzki in his MVP year (both age 28/9th season). Dirk averaged more points (24.6 vs. 24.2). If Dirk can win a championship, I'm sure it's possible for Randle as well. It's all about team building.

As far as wanting a "no. 1", who are the guys that fit your criteria?

KD
LBJ
Curry
Giannis
Jokic
Kawhi
Tatum
Morant
Butler
Booker
Paul George

anyone else?

Why cherry pick seasons. Anyone who sees this will naturally want to see how both players compare for their careers. Once they do they'll see that one is a HOFer and the other is a guy who's had a couple of good seasons intermingled with a bunch of underwhelming ones.

I think the point was Randle near half season is quite good and at a level to appreciate.
He came as a free agent with space created from the KP deal. He has played more and better than KP. He was an upgrade.
As long as he plays to his contract, and he is, we don't lose if he stays or gets traded.

Nalod wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Panos wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Panos wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Panos wrote:

Panos wrote:Ok. Trade proposal:
Chicago trades peak Scottie Pippen for Randle.
Who says no? Why?

LA Trades still dangerous LeBron to NY, making Randle being clutch less necessary with the GOAT as the number one option.

Pippen+GOAT(Jordan)= Championship

Randle+GOAT(LBJ)= ????

Ive said that if we can keep Randle and add James, and leave a roster good enough to contend, I hope the FO goes for it. Otherwise, I'd like to see the FO try that formula with another player.

To answer your question about a 4th option. Im mostly talking about crunch time, not touches. A team could have a very clutch 6th man ahead of Randle in those situations. Not necessarily putting up better numbers.

Please answer the essence of the question.
Is there any reason why championship Jordan teams would do worse with Randle as #2?

You cant handle the truth!

You need Pippen on that wall!!

OK, maybe not. But you need the greatest basketball player, playoff performer, in NBA history, in this hypothetical, to make your argument. Which was what I was getting at.

Those championship Bulls teams were a well oiled machine. Everyone knew their role and performed them at a high level, consistently. I honestly dont know if Randle could do the consistency part.

In fairness, Ron Harper took some time to become that player in Chicago. But I honestly cant venture a guess. that franchise really had its act together. Even when they were fighting lol. They found a way to make things work.

Forget Jordan.
Why are you going to such lengths NOT to answer the question.
Why is Pippen a better #2 than Randle? Which facet of the game?

What a buzzkill..

This is some fantasy sports/time travel scenario, Im supposed to solve??

You are upset that Im not answering the question exactly the way you want me to. For me to do that, I would have to accept the premise of a current player whose game is the result (in part) of 25+ years of BBall evolution. Going back in time, and then comparing individual stats.

Not factor at all in how Randle would respond to a completely different team, situation, as a human being. Not to mention your premise involves the best player of all time, which will skew the results, to say the least.

My answer is I dont know if Pippen is a better fit. There are too many variables. Not just about stats, or a player's game. Or you could plug in any 20/10 player next to Jordan.

The Pippen led Bulls took us to the limit in 93-94, as the number one option. Could Randle have done the same? Since we're going off on a tangent..

Here's some history: Julius has a higher efg% (.544/.529p) rebs (09.9/8.9) and assts (3.8/3.4) than Dirk Nowitzki in his MVP year (both age 28/9th season). Dirk averaged more points (24.6 vs. 24.2). If Dirk can win a championship, I'm sure it's possible for Randle as well. It's all about team building.

As far as wanting a "no. 1", who are the guys that fit your criteria?

KD
LBJ
Curry
Giannis
Jokic
Kawhi
Tatum
Morant
Butler
Booker
Paul George

anyone else?

Why cherry pick seasons. Anyone who sees this will naturally want to see how both players compare for their careers. Once they do they'll see that one is a HOFer and the other is a guy who's had a couple of good seasons intermingled with a bunch of underwhelming ones.

I think the point was Randle near half season is quite good and at a level to appreciate.
He came as a free agent with space created from the KP deal. He has played more and better than KP. He was an upgrade.
As long as he plays to his contract, and he is, we don't lose if he stays or gets traded.

So, the question is, should we try to move him while he has peak value, or should we trust that this version of Randle is the Randle we will see from here on out? If I posed this question during the pandemic season, most on this board would have chose the latter, believing that Randle had arrived after winning the most improved award. Last year's version of Randle seemed to be more mental than anything which makes me wonder if we can trust him in adverse situations. We will see how this year plays out....From the outside looking in, is looks like the front office all in on Randle....

GustavBahler wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Panos wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Panos wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Panos wrote:

Panos wrote:Ok. Trade proposal:
Chicago trades peak Scottie Pippen for Randle.
Who says no? Why?

LA Trades still dangerous LeBron to NY, making Randle being clutch less necessary with the GOAT as the number one option.

Pippen+GOAT(Jordan)= Championship

Randle+GOAT(LBJ)= ????

Ive said that if we can keep Randle and add James, and leave a roster good enough to contend, I hope the FO goes for it. Otherwise, I'd like to see the FO try that formula with another player.

To answer your question about a 4th option. Im mostly talking about crunch time, not touches. A team could have a very clutch 6th man ahead of Randle in those situations. Not necessarily putting up better numbers.

Please answer the essence of the question.
Is there any reason why championship Jordan teams would do worse with Randle as #2?

You cant handle the truth!

You need Pippen on that wall!!

OK, maybe not. But you need the greatest basketball player, playoff performer, in NBA history, in this hypothetical, to make your argument. Which was what I was getting at.

Those championship Bulls teams were a well oiled machine. Everyone knew their role and performed them at a high level, consistently. I honestly dont know if Randle could do the consistency part.

In fairness, Ron Harper took some time to become that player in Chicago. But I honestly cant venture a guess. that franchise really had its act together. Even when they were fighting lol. They found a way to make things work.

Forget Jordan.
Why are you going to such lengths NOT to answer the question.
Why is Pippen a better #2 than Randle? Which facet of the game?

What a buzzkill..

This is some fantasy sports/time travel scenario, Im supposed to solve??

You are upset that Im not answering the question exactly the way you want me to. For me to do that, I would have to accept the premise of a current player whose game is the result (in part) of 25+ years of BBall evolution. Going back in time, and then comparing individual stats.

Not factor at all in how Randle would respond to a completely different team, situation, as a human being. Not to mention your premise involves the best player of all time, which will skew the results, to say the least.

My answer is I dont know if Pippen is a better fit. There are too many variables. Not just about stats, or a player's game. Or you could plug in any 20/10 player next to Jordan.

The Pippen led Bulls took us to the limit in 93-94, as the number one option. Could Randle have done the same? Since we're going off on a tangent..

Here's some history: Julius has a higher efg% (.544/.529p) rebs (09.9/8.9) and assts (3.8/3.4) than Dirk Nowitzki in his MVP year (both age 28/9th season). Dirk averaged more points (24.6 vs. 24.2). If Dirk can win a championship, I'm sure it's possible for Randle as well. It's all about team building.

As far as wanting a "no. 1", who are the guys that fit your criteria?

KD
LBJ
Curry
Giannis
Jokic
Kawhi
Tatum
Morant
Butler
Booker
Paul George

anyone else?

Why cherry pick seasons. Anyone who sees this will naturally want to see how both players compare for their careers. Once they do they'll see that one is a HOFer and the other is a guy who's had a couple of good seasons intermingled with a bunch of underwhelming ones.

Good point. They ask why I would be OK with a Randle trade now. Because I didnt want to trade him when he was playing poorly, and we would have received little in return. Because you dont know which player we will be getting from season to season. Because Randle hasnt shown an ability to be clutch, after so many years in the league. Im not expecting that to change at this point in his career.

They talk about going back in time 25 years and comparing him to a player with 6 rings, just on stats. Its crazy, no one is untouchable.

⁴
Quote "Lmao.
The new go to Randle hate. "He is not clutch"
First it was:
20/10s are meaningless.
He was not in the team huddle.
He doesn't play defense.
He has too many spin TO's
He does not pass.
He does not handle double teams well.
He is not liked by teammates.
He loses control of emotions.
Told fans to **** off."

Edit.
He is not as good as Dirk.
Trade him because he is better than last year and playing like an All Star again.

Randle per 36 for entire career 21/10.7/4.1

Thank you Ron DeSantis. Just substitute "hate" with "woke". Same style, or lack thereof.

I dont know what makes you believe that even the suggestion of trading Randle merits this passionate a response, and frankly I dont care. You're not defending Randle like this when he's playing poorly are you? Only someone who believes Randle is untradeable would be reacting this obnoxiously.

Thats it, you believe Randle is untradeable.

TBH posts and analogies bringing politics into the discussion pretty much suck the life out of this forum. You must be reading a different thread because no one here is saying Randle is untradeable. What they are reacting to is the relative lack of logical rational used by posters like you for wanting to "dump"(sorry - trade) Randle. It really makes no sense without understanding the return or the roadmap towards success. As I posted previously - just dumping Randle in order to tank does not equate to success. As such - just seems like you have a visceral negativity about Randle that is driving the desire to move him really without logical reasoning. If not that, why would you not also want to move on from Brunson and RJ who both are taking up similar cap space ranges and have no long term resume of success?

fishmike wrote:how do you evaluate a roster and players based on the above bold? Keep in mind his absolute worst still produced 20/10/5 on what was his 2nd career low EFG% (after his rookie season). That's not defending last year... he was neither good or clearly "there." I think the fact that NOBODY talked about it tells me it was personal stuff.

I am 100% there with you on that. It's why Thibs and FO never waived with Randle. Kept repeating the same things, let him do his thumbs down thing without much repercussions, and maybe even overplayed him just so that he had an outlet. Maybe.

martin wrote:

fishmike wrote:how do you evaluate a roster and players based on the above bold? Keep in mind his absolute worst still produced 20/10/5 on what was his 2nd career low EFG% (after his rookie season). That's not defending last year... he was neither good or clearly "there." I think the fact that NOBODY talked about it tells me it was personal stuff.

I am 100% there with you on that. It's why Thibs and FO never waived with Randle. Kept repeating the same things, let him do his thumbs down thing without much repercussions, and maybe even overplayed him just so that he had an outlet. Maybe.

Again.. not making excuses for last year but it appears the FO is right in being patient because the guy's playing and acting really well (again)

fishmike wrote:

Uptown wrote:I was one of the loudest one's on the board with disdain for Randle's game last year....Hated his inconsistent effort; hated his lethargic play on most nights, and hated his inefficiency. I will give him props for cleaning up those areas this year.

So, the question is, should we try to move him while he has peak value, or should we trust that this version of Randle is the Randle we will see from here on out? If I posed this question during the pandemic season, most on this board would have chose the latter, believing that Randle had arrived after winning the most improved award. Last year's version of Randle seemed to be more mental than anything which makes me wonder if we can trust him in adverse situations. We will see how this year plays out....From the outside looking in, is looks like the front office all in on Randle....

how do you evaluate a roster and players based on the above bold? Keep in mind his absolute worst still produced 20/10/5 on what was his 2nd career low EFG% (after his rookie season). That's not defending last year... he was neither good or clearly "there." I think the fact that NOBODY talked about it tells me it was personal stuff.

I dont have an attachment to anyone on this roster. I am however seeing the value of continuity and chemistry. Randle's on a collision course with another all star game and while his game is not easy on the eyes he does a ton of important things. There's a reason Thibs acts like a withdrawing crack head every time Randle sits.

I just think he passes the eye test. He's not perfect but he's a good leader. He started the year by giving up the ball to Brunson and RJ. Obviously Brunson was fantastic and RJ bricked everything but we seem to have a good balance now. He seems to be playing harder and smarter on both ends and is focused on complaining less.

$25mm (well below max) a year for a 20/10/5 2-way guy who gives up the ball. 28 years old. Has shown he can adapt his shot selecting. Looks great kicking to Grimes, like he used to look kicking to Reggie.

Eye test aside lets look at the league's top PFs:

RK	     PLAYER     	GP	MPG	TS%	AST	TO	USG	ORR	DRR	REBR	PER	VA	EWA
1	Anthony Davis, LAL	25	33.4	.662	10.5	7.5	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	31.71	0.0	0.0
2	Giannis Anteto, MIL	31	33.8	.593	14.2	10.5	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	29.52	0.0	0.0
3	Kevin Durant, BKN	36	36.0	.674	17.7	11.3	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	27.00	0.0	0.0
4	Zion Williamson, NO	29	33.0	.652	16.4	12.2	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	25.60	0.0	0.0
5	Domantas Sabonis, SAC	35	33.9	.687	29.3	10.9	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	24.51	0.0	0.0
6	Pascal Siakam, TOR	27	37.0	.581	20.9	7.6	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	24.05	0.0	0.0
7	Lauri Markkanen, UTAH	37	34.1	.670	8.8	8.8	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	22.74	0.0	0.0
8	Jaren Jackson Jr., MEM	20	25.8	.600	5.4	9.9	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	22.24	0.0	0.0
9	Julius Randle, NY	38	34.9	.594	14.4	9.5	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	21.19	0.0	0.0
10	Aaron Gordon, DEN	32	30.4	.644	13.9	9.4	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	21.00	0.0	0.0

Nobody here is going to argue Randle vs. the top 4. Those guys are all pretty special. Sabonis plays more C but Randle eats him up every time they play. The rest of the guys are all different players in a similar tier. I would say Lauri and Gordon are a notch below and 9/10 on this list.

So we have the 6th "ish" best player at his position at a sub max player price and he fits into what we do, shares the ball etc...

Like how do we trade this? Isnt this what we want more of?

Randle doesnt help us tank...

If you look JJs defensive #s analytics you can make a case JJJ is on the same tier or even better than Randle. I might give the edge to Randle, but it's not open and shut.Pascal is clearly better than Randle. You can make a case Domantas is too, based on stats. The only ones I'd say Randle has a defensive edge over are Gordon and Lauri. Even then, it's statistically close. What do those tier of players share in common? They've all been up and down throughout their careers and have not shown they can be counted on to produce consistently from year to year.