DLeethal wrote:

martin wrote:

EwingPSD wrote:

martin wrote:

EwingPSD wrote:

martin wrote:

EwingPSD wrote:

martin wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

LivingLegend wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

Clean wrote:At least I am not getting a lot of pushback on my Randle hate this year. People are not getting mesmerized by big regular season numbers to the point they ignore the laundry list of negatives he brings. The part I hate is we have no one to takeover for him when he plays bad now. Obi might be playing like trash so far this season but when he had to play big minutes for Randle he played well for us. I am going to give it more time but I might be eating crow on Obi. I thought he would be better with the Pacers.

I always thought Obi meant more to our team then he would on a lot of other teams. He had a niche that aided the team uniquely to win when he was clicking in the second unit. Obi wanted out because Thibs didn't respect his contribution. When Randall played like he is Obi wouldn't get more time to shine but if Obi made a mistake he would be benched. Can't blame him for wanting to go. But once they gave up on Obi he should have been replaced or a more versatile 3/4. But they didn't add a forward at all. Even to be a 10th man respecting the 9 man rotation. The nine man rotation we have is good but man an injury, foul trouble, back to backs, slumps, or a suspension and we are in trouble.

Watching Obi first few games with Indy and he is still doing the exact EXACT same actions he was with the Knicks - he is doing the 3-point hand offs with occasional fake handoff where he tries to get to basket and he’s still afraid to put the ball down in traffic—- absolutely no advancement of the skill/play set.

If Obi has the exact same role with Indy, I would expect the same results. If Obi is stuck in the corner again.

The main reason why Obi has such good numbers as a starter, is because Thibs allows him to attack from the area near the top of the key as a starter. Not as a sub.

If you gave Randle Obi's role, I would expect similar results.

At some point, it’s just the player.

He had mostly good results in NY.

I think you have a very different definition of Good Results than most.

I look at more then just counting stats

Same.

Doesn't seem like. Obi's efficiency and volume scoring were pretty good over his 3 years. In year 2 his efficiency and volume plus advanced stats were excellent. His plus/minus was positive. Despite the hoopla, the team had a near identical def rebounding % with him on and off all 3 years and team's defensive rating was always better with him on than off. I don't think he deserves credit for the last 2 being the being the case but he wasn't a liability and the team performed well with him. Last year he was disappointing but still worked out to about average efficiency due to shooting tons of 3s and an average connect rate.

It's a hard sell and seems a little surface level to me.

Obi was not a good 3point shooter. In his last year, he shot 34%. He dunked a lot, so his efficiency was very good thru that lens. But that's all he did.

Obi was not a good rebounder, defender, and he was the last person an opponent needed to guard if they even paid attention to him outside of baseline cuts for a lob or rebound.

He could not guard guys on perimeter and you could easily out-strength him in the same way Mitch/Randle does on Mobley.

Also, a majority of Obi's starts were in April last year, and you can't get around that fact, which is not more than half of them. Would you agree with that statement? Delving into deep stats with you doesn't seem like the prudent thing for me.

It's the Frank effect. Everyone thinks when they see these short minute players have good efficiency or advanced stats that they are a diamond that just needs opportunity to blossom. But I think it's just easier to be efficient in limited mins, limited min players are all supposed to be efficient. That short minute impact doesn't always translate to more mins or a larger role.

yup, I was very guilty of doing that with Frank, learned my lesson.

Alpha1971 wrote:

LivingLegend wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

Clean wrote:At least I am not getting a lot of pushback on my Randle hate this year. People are not getting mesmerized by big regular season numbers to the point they ignore the laundry list of negatives he brings. The part I hate is we have no one to takeover for him when he plays bad now. Obi might be playing like trash so far this season but when he had to play big minutes for Randle he played well for us. I am going to give it more time but I might be eating crow on Obi. I thought he would be better with the Pacers.

I always thought Obi meant more to our team then he would on a lot of other teams. He had a niche that aided the team uniquely to win when he was clicking in the second unit. Obi wanted out because Thibs didn't respect his contribution. When Randall played like he is Obi wouldn't get more time to shine but if Obi made a mistake he would be benched. Can't blame him for wanting to go. But once they gave up on Obi he should have been replaced or a more versatile 3/4. But they didn't add a forward at all. Even to be a 10th man respecting the 9 man rotation. The nine man rotation we have is good but man an injury, foul trouble, back to backs, slumps, or a suspension and we are in trouble.

Watching Obi first few games with Indy and he is still doing the exact EXACT same actions he was with the Knicks - he is doing the 3-point hand offs with occasional fake handoff where he tries to get to basket and he’s still afraid to put the ball down in traffic—- absolutely no advancement of the skill/play set.

That's fine. Not saying I care if we let him go. Point is if you let go of Obi, you needed to replace him or improve on him. This 9 man rotation being so set in stone is ridiculous. If Hart was going to be used as a back up 4 at times fine. Depending on match ups sure but primary back up, hell nah. Team showed sero creativity this off season. DDV at the mle was fine but make a trade and get a versatile forward for the bench if your serious about winning. I've been getting grief about this opinion all preseason. Team better fix this sooner then later

I don’t disagree with you - we need a longer wing 3/4 that will defend and a minimum we need to bench Randle the second he dogs it or has head up a**.

nycericanguy wrote:

DLeethal wrote:

martin wrote:

EwingPSD wrote:

martin wrote:

EwingPSD wrote:

martin wrote:

EwingPSD wrote:

martin wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

LivingLegend wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

Clean wrote:At least I am not getting a lot of pushback on my Randle hate this year. People are not getting mesmerized by big regular season numbers to the point they ignore the laundry list of negatives he brings. The part I hate is we have no one to takeover for him when he plays bad now. Obi might be playing like trash so far this season but when he had to play big minutes for Randle he played well for us. I am going to give it more time but I might be eating crow on Obi. I thought he would be better with the Pacers.

I always thought Obi meant more to our team then he would on a lot of other teams. He had a niche that aided the team uniquely to win when he was clicking in the second unit. Obi wanted out because Thibs didn't respect his contribution. When Randall played like he is Obi wouldn't get more time to shine but if Obi made a mistake he would be benched. Can't blame him for wanting to go. But once they gave up on Obi he should have been replaced or a more versatile 3/4. But they didn't add a forward at all. Even to be a 10th man respecting the 9 man rotation. The nine man rotation we have is good but man an injury, foul trouble, back to backs, slumps, or a suspension and we are in trouble.

Watching Obi first few games with Indy and he is still doing the exact EXACT same actions he was with the Knicks - he is doing the 3-point hand offs with occasional fake handoff where he tries to get to basket and he’s still afraid to put the ball down in traffic—- absolutely no advancement of the skill/play set.

If Obi has the exact same role with Indy, I would expect the same results. If Obi is stuck in the corner again.

The main reason why Obi has such good numbers as a starter, is because Thibs allows him to attack from the area near the top of the key as a starter. Not as a sub.

If you gave Randle Obi's role, I would expect similar results.

At some point, it’s just the player.

He had mostly good results in NY.

I think you have a very different definition of Good Results than most.

I look at more then just counting stats

Same.

Doesn't seem like. Obi's efficiency and volume scoring were pretty good over his 3 years. In year 2 his efficiency and volume plus advanced stats were excellent. His plus/minus was positive. Despite the hoopla, the team had a near identical def rebounding % with him on and off all 3 years and team's defensive rating was always better with him on than off. I don't think he deserves credit for the last 2 being the being the case but he wasn't a liability and the team performed well with him. Last year he was disappointing but still worked out to about average efficiency due to shooting tons of 3s and an average connect rate.

It's a hard sell and seems a little surface level to me.

Obi was not a good 3point shooter. In his last year, he shot 34%. He dunked a lot, so his efficiency was very good thru that lens. But that's all he did.

Obi was not a good rebounder, defender, and he was the last person an opponent needed to guard if they even paid attention to him outside of baseline cuts for a lob or rebound.

He could not guard guys on perimeter and you could easily out-strength him in the same way Mitch/Randle does on Mobley.

Also, a majority of Obi's starts were in April last year, and you can't get around that fact, which is not more than half of them. Would you agree with that statement? Delving into deep stats with you doesn't seem like the prudent thing for me.

It's the Frank effect. Everyone thinks when they see these short minute players have good efficiency or advanced stats that they are a diamond that just needs opportunity to blossom. But I think it's just easier to be efficient in limited mins, limited min players are all supposed to be efficient. That short minute impact doesn't always translate to more mins or a larger role.

yup, I was very guilty of doing that with Frank, learned my lesson.

I'm actually surprised to see Obi look like the same old Obi in Indiana. I thought he would be a 25-30 min player putting up like 15ppg.

Alpha1971 wrote:

LivingLegend wrote:Holy Mackerel Obi was a -41 +/- tonight

Don't get it twisted the point is not Obi being let go. It's not replacing him with another forward for the bench. Someone who could contribute when RJ is out of Randall is not playing well. That's the point. Sticking emphatically to a argument that the team has it's 9 man rotation so why waste assets to have a forward who won't play much. These preconceived fixed rotations is preposterous.

Again I don’t disagree with you.

But again it comes down to our 2 big horses, and we aren't winning much with Randle shooting 25%.

Also very hard to sweep a B2B against same team.

Clean wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/KnicksMuse/status/1719920100520681859

There were many plays like these during his "All NBA" season.

This is just piss poor PARENTING and again the Knicks fail to sell high on Randle.

I don’t care if he makes an all-star team again this year - he’s a loser player from a team perspective - in fact you could go across the entire NBA for the last 5 years and be challenged to find 1 NBA player that showed that kind of effort on 1/2 those plays. If there was 1 they would be benched —- not rewarded.

And post game he says - everything is just so tough right now and I’ve got so many guys guarding me - what a ****

nycericanguy wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

LivingLegend wrote:Holy Mackerel Obi was a -41 +/- tonight

Don't get it twisted the point is not Obi being let go. It's not replacing him with another forward for the bench. Someone who could contribute when RJ is out of Randall is not playing well. That's the point. Sticking emphatically to a argument that the team has it's 9 man rotation so why waste assets to have a forward who won't play much. These preconceived fixed rotations is preposterous.

how is it a preconceived fixed rotation? Last years rotation was completely different at the end of the season vs how it started.

Fixating on a 10mpg backup PF position is just odd, our issue hasn't been rebounding or size, it's been Randle shooting historically bad and lets face it we've had the most difficult schedule to start.

We just need to hover around .500 til the schedule eases up and Randle and Brunson get going.

Truth is Randle has always struggled against good defensive teams and we've played some of the best so far.

Head in sand

martin wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

LivingLegend wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

Clean wrote:At least I am not getting a lot of pushback on my Randle hate this year. People are not getting mesmerized by big regular season numbers to the point they ignore the laundry list of negatives he brings. The part I hate is we have no one to takeover for him when he plays bad now. Obi might be playing like trash so far this season but when he had to play big minutes for Randle he played well for us. I am going to give it more time but I might be eating crow on Obi. I thought he would be better with the Pacers.

I always thought Obi meant more to our team then he would on a lot of other teams. He had a niche that aided the team uniquely to win when he was clicking in the second unit. Obi wanted out because Thibs didn't respect his contribution. When Randall played like he is Obi wouldn't get more time to shine but if Obi made a mistake he would be benched. Can't blame him for wanting to go. But once they gave up on Obi he should have been replaced or a more versatile 3/4. But they didn't add a forward at all. Even to be a 10th man respecting the 9 man rotation. The nine man rotation we have is good but man an injury, foul trouble, back to backs, slumps, or a suspension and we are in trouble.

Watching Obi first few games with Indy and he is still doing the exact EXACT same actions he was with the Knicks - he is doing the 3-point hand offs with occasional fake handoff where he tries to get to basket and he’s still afraid to put the ball down in traffic—- absolutely no advancement of the skill/play set.

If Obi has the exact same role with Indy, I would expect the same results. If Obi is stuck in the corner again.

The main reason why Obi has such good numbers as a starter, is because Thibs allows him to attack from the area near the top of the key as a starter. Not as a sub.

If you gave Randle Obi's role, I would expect similar results.

At some point, it’s just the player.

YEP

He is last among ALL NBA forwards in Fg %.

He is also dead last in EFFORT

DLeethal wrote:

martin wrote:

EwingPSD wrote:

martin wrote:

EwingPSD wrote:

martin wrote:

EwingPSD wrote:

martin wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

LivingLegend wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

Clean wrote:At least I am not getting a lot of pushback on my Randle hate this year. People are not getting mesmerized by big regular season numbers to the point they ignore the laundry list of negatives he brings. The part I hate is we have no one to takeover for him when he plays bad now. Obi might be playing like trash so far this season but when he had to play big minutes for Randle he played well for us. I am going to give it more time but I might be eating crow on Obi. I thought he would be better with the Pacers.

I always thought Obi meant more to our team then he would on a lot of other teams. He had a niche that aided the team uniquely to win when he was clicking in the second unit. Obi wanted out because Thibs didn't respect his contribution. When Randall played like he is Obi wouldn't get more time to shine but if Obi made a mistake he would be benched. Can't blame him for wanting to go. But once they gave up on Obi he should have been replaced or a more versatile 3/4. But they didn't add a forward at all. Even to be a 10th man respecting the 9 man rotation. The nine man rotation we have is good but man an injury, foul trouble, back to backs, slumps, or a suspension and we are in trouble.

Watching Obi first few games with Indy and he is still doing the exact EXACT same actions he was with the Knicks - he is doing the 3-point hand offs with occasional fake handoff where he tries to get to basket and he’s still afraid to put the ball down in traffic—- absolutely no advancement of the skill/play set.

If Obi has the exact same role with Indy, I would expect the same results. If Obi is stuck in the corner again.

The main reason why Obi has such good numbers as a starter, is because Thibs allows him to attack from the area near the top of the key as a starter. Not as a sub.

If you gave Randle Obi's role, I would expect similar results.

At some point, it’s just the player.

He had mostly good results in NY.

I think you have a very different definition of Good Results than most.

I look at more then just counting stats

Same.

Doesn't seem like. Obi's efficiency and volume scoring were pretty good over his 3 years. In year 2 his efficiency and volume plus advanced stats were excellent. His plus/minus was positive. Despite the hoopla, the team had a near identical def rebounding % with him on and off all 3 years and team's defensive rating was always better with him on than off. I don't think he deserves credit for the last 2 being the being the case but he wasn't a liability and the team performed well with him. Last year he was disappointing but still worked out to about average efficiency due to shooting tons of 3s and an average connect rate.

It's a hard sell and seems a little surface level to me.

Obi was not a good 3point shooter. In his last year, he shot 34%. He dunked a lot, so his efficiency was very good thru that lens. But that's all he did.

Obi was not a good rebounder, defender, and he was the last person an opponent needed to guard if they even paid attention to him outside of baseline cuts for a lob or rebound.

He could not guard guys on perimeter and you could easily out-strength him in the same way Mitch/Randle does on Mobley.

Also, a majority of Obi's starts were in April last year, and you can't get around that fact, which is not more than half of them. Would you agree with that statement? Delving into deep stats with you doesn't seem like the prudent thing for me.

It's the Frank effect. Everyone thinks when they see these short minute players have good efficiency or advanced stats that they are a diamond that just needs opportunity to blossom. But I think it's just easier to be efficient in limited mins, limited min players are all supposed to be efficient. That short minute impact doesn't always translate to more mins or a larger role.

It took Frank 3 years and a lot more opportunity to have a 20 point game. Frank shot sub 40% from the floor for 3 straight years. He shot around 30% from 3 all 3 years. He scored very low volume. His efficiency, advanced, and every day #s were bad

EwingPSD wrote:

martin wrote:

EwingPSD wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

LivingLegend wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

Clean wrote:At least I am not getting a lot of pushback on my Randle hate this year. People are not getting mesmerized by big regular season numbers to the point they ignore the laundry list of negatives he brings. The part I hate is we have no one to takeover for him when he plays bad now. Obi might be playing like trash so far this season but when he had to play big minutes for Randle he played well for us. I am going to give it more time but I might be eating crow on Obi. I thought he would be better with the Pacers.

I always thought Obi meant more to our team then he would on a lot of other teams. He had a niche that aided the team uniquely to win when he was clicking in the second unit. Obi wanted out because Thibs didn't respect his contribution. When Randall played like he is Obi wouldn't get more time to shine but if Obi made a mistake he would be benched. Can't blame him for wanting to go. But once they gave up on Obi he should have been replaced or a more versatile 3/4. But they didn't add a forward at all. Even to be a 10th man respecting the 9 man rotation. The nine man rotation we have is good but man an injury, foul trouble, back to backs, slumps, or a suspension and we are in trouble.

Watching Obi first few games with Indy and he is still doing the exact EXACT same actions he was with the Knicks - he is doing the 3-point hand offs with occasional fake handoff where he tries to get to basket and he’s still afraid to put the ball down in traffic—- absolutely no advancement of the skill/play set.

If Obi has the exact same role with Indy, I would expect the same results. If Obi is stuck in the corner again.

The main reason why Obi has such good numbers as a starter, is because Thibs allows him to attack from the area near the top of the key as a starter. Not as a sub.

If you gave Randle Obi's role, I would expect similar results.

if we're being honest it's because most of his starts came in meaningless April games where Grimes, IQ and Obi were going nut dropping 30 with ease.

Most is more than half which isn't and he put up #s games that mattered, ones that didn't, and in the postseason which you know. It's a very small sample size but you're "not being honest"

Last year, all of Obi's starts came from 3/31 and after. Randle has played and started in > 70 games while Obi was on roster.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/t/toppiob01/gamelog/2023#all_pgl_basic_playoffs

So? Some late season games matter to the team you are playing some don’t. Some teams are out of it, some are fighting for the playin or positioning. The majority of the games where he got mins here were not garbage games. Some where and he had some really big games in them. Saying they all or the majority of them were is not accurate

So just to be clear, you are talking about something entirely different than what was referenced and maybe that's what the confusion is.

The above responses were about Obi starting. And then you changed what we were talking about.