Panos wrote:0k, now that we've moved past the ridiculous proposition of dumping Randle's contract or trading him for a second rounder. Here's a comp:
Randle for D. Sabonis
Who says no and why?

What’s your source, that says D.Sabonis is his comp?

blkexec wrote:

Panos wrote:0k, now that we've moved past the ridiculous proposition of dumping Randle's contract or trading him for a second rounder. Here's a comp:
Randle for D. Sabonis
Who says no and why?

Whats your source, that says D.Sabonis is his comp?

What do you mean, my source?
It's a hypothetical.
Two dominant well rounded PFs.
Who you got and why?

jskinny35 wrote:

blkexec wrote:

Panos wrote:0k, now that we've moved past the ridiculous proposition of dumping Randle's contract or trading him for a second rounder. Here's a comp:
Randle for D. Sabonis
Who says no and why?

What’s your source, that says D.Sabonis is his comp?

I haven't moved past it yet btw... I would take Sabonis as he can give you some minutes at the C spot. Do you think the King's would give up Sabonis for Randle? I doubt it and that is somewhat telling IMO.

If you compare them statistically this season, you can make a strong case that Sabonis is having a better season. I think Sabonis fits them better due to his passing and his fit next to other players on the roster. I don't think the Kings do that trade.

Remember last year it was about getting him back to having easier looks? He is getting some. At 6-9 he is a handful. Come up on him he can blow by now.
I think last year the shots were not as easy which added to his frustrations (what ever they were….)

martin wrote:

Panos wrote:0k, now that we've moved past the ridiculous proposition of dumping Randle's contract or trading him for a second rounder. Here's a comp:
Randle for D. Sabonis
Who says no and why?

Both teams

Can we agree that its not a hang-up-the-phone type scenario? They are comparable impact players?

Panos wrote:

martin wrote:

Panos wrote:0k, now that we've moved past the ridiculous proposition of dumping Randle's contract or trading him for a second rounder. Here's a comp:
Randle for D. Sabonis
Who says no and why?

Both teams

Can we agree that its not a hang-up-the-phone type scenario? They are comparable impact players?

Neither team would even pick up the phone in the first place. Neither is a good fit on the other team.

The reason I think this would be worth exploring is we win when Randle shoots well (and a lot) but because of his ball dominant style we often seem to struggle when he has those off nights. Sabonis takes higher % shots (closer to basket) and would offer some inside play. Randle does this sometimes but is still streaky and loves to shoot outside more. To his credit he has reduced his bad shot taking from last season. Maybe Sabonis's point forward style would help open up things more for RJ, more kickouts for Grimes as playing more on the block would likely command more spacing? I feel like our offense is still pretty stagnant and iso-driven between Randle and Brunson (and RJ when he was playing). Yes it's better as we have more offensive options but the ball still sticks at times when it seems to move. Sabonis seems more pass-focused but can score when needed to. And (until now :) I haven't mentioned there could be minutes for Toppin to offer some minutes. So the offense would have to shift which I think is more of what I perceive as the problem when we play better quality teams.

I don't think Sacramento would move him because they are playing better this season btw... but the comp is fair IMO.

(I would prefer Lauri M from Utah if there were a desire to find a better fit PF anyway)

Nalod wrote:Pano's, you playing Sabonis an Mitch at the same time?
If knicks feel that the ceiling is limited with our two, then you package Mitch/JUles in a big deal for Sabonis and yoot or pick(s).
This changes the complexation of both teams now and going forward.
Is the goal to have a stretch 5 then and let Saboinis do the dirty work? What about rim protection? Not all teams care, but Thibs likely does.

WE just hypothesizing so no right or wrongs. My point is Knicks swapping Saboinis/Randle is unlikely without other moves.

I would try it, yes. I agree with a lot of jskinny's post, and I think it could work. Sabonis' efficiency is higher than Randle's both inside and out, and I think if he can D up the PF, he and Mitch would be FORMIDABLE.

martin wrote:Shot profiles tell you a lot:

 		2P 	0-3 	3-10 	10-16 	16-3P 	3P
Randle 		.560	.242	.152	.107	.060	.440
Sabonis 	.892	.475	.305	.053	.060	.108	

It tells me that Sabonis finishes at the rim better (0-3), shoots more mid-range shots and less 3pt shots - except it says his 3pt % is 40% so not sure why it says 10.8%. Randle shoots better from 10-23 feet clearly. Randle is a high volume shooter (Sabonis is not) and when he's on it's great... but when he's off we're in trouble since he shoots a lot. I believe we need our offense to run less reliant on any one player - especially if that one player is streaky. That's why I made the point about thinking the offense needs to adjust.

Our team's streakiness this season has mostly been about defensive effort but I would think Randle's up and down shooting at a high clip probably doesn't help when things are not going well. You could say the same about RJ btw...

So if Randle is here for the long haul we still need to adjust the offensive scheme and shift more responsibility to other players IMO. Brunson has done great and RJ began to show signs before the injury... but not sure we don't need to change one of RJ or Randle to really improve in any way. I also don't think adding a Lavine-level player will help much as Thibs seems unlikely to play a new defensively challenged player with this existing roster. He gives Randle a pass, and RJ too. Mitch, Grimes and Brunson have to play so it's eventually going to circle back to needing more from either/both Randle and RJ.

martin wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:

martin wrote:Shot profiles tell you a lot:

 		2P 	0-3 	3-10 	10-16 	16-3P 	3P
Randle 		.560	.242	.152	.107	.060	.440
Sabonis 	.892	.475	.305	.053	.060	.108	

It tells me that Sabonis finishes at the rim better (0-3), shoots more mid-range shots and less 3pt shots - except it says his 3pt % is 40% so not sure why it says 10.8%. Randle shoots better from 10-23 feet clearly. Randle is a high volume shooter (Sabonis is not) and when he's on it's great... but when he's off we're in trouble since he shoots a lot. I believe we need our offense to run less reliant on any one player - especially if that one player is streaky. That's why I made the point about thinking the offense needs to adjust.

Our team's streakiness this season has mostly been about defensive effort but I would think Randle's up and down shooting at a high clip probably doesn't help when things are not going well. You could say the same about RJ btw...

So if Randle is here for the long haul we still need to adjust the offensive scheme and shift more responsibility to other players IMO. Brunson has done great and RJ began to show signs before the injury... but not sure we don't need to change one of RJ or Randle to really improve in any way. I also don't think adding a Lavine-level player will help much as Thibs seems unlikely to play a new defensively challenged player with this existing roster. He gives Randle a pass, and RJ too. Mitch, Grimes and Brunson have to play so it's eventually going to circle back to needing more from either/both Randle and RJ.

This is what % of shots each players takes for a particular range, not the shooting % from a particular range. I think you are mistaken in what you are seeing?

ie., Randle takes 40% of his shots from 3pt distance, while Sabonis really is not a distance shooter at all, all his shot are mostly from 10 feet and in.

Ahh - okay that makes a lot of sense - my mistake. Looks like Sabonis just pops out occasionally (10%) for a 3 but he does shoot it relatively well. Randle is shooting 44% of his total shots from behind 3. Maybe somewhere in between is the ideal amount (eg 30%)...especially if the player is not shooting above league average from 3.

EwingsGlass wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:

martin wrote:Shot profiles tell you a lot:

 		2P 	0-3 	3-10 	10-16 	16-3P 	3P
Randle 		.560	.242	.152	.107	.060	.440
Sabonis 	.892	.475	.305	.053	.060	.108	

It tells me that Sabonis finishes at the rim better (0-3), shoots more mid-range shots and less 3pt shots - except it says his 3pt % is 40% so not sure why it says 10.8%. Randle shoots better from 10-23 feet clearly. Randle is a high volume shooter (Sabonis is not) and when he's on it's great... but when he's off we're in trouble since he shoots a lot. I believe we need our offense to run less reliant on any one player - especially if that one player is streaky. That's why I made the point about thinking the offense needs to adjust.

Our team's streakiness this season has mostly been about defensive effort but I would think Randle's up and down shooting at a high clip probably doesn't help when things are not going well. You could say the same about RJ btw...

So if Randle is here for the long haul we still need to adjust the offensive scheme and shift more responsibility to other players IMO. Brunson has done great and RJ began to show signs before the injury... but not sure we don't need to change one of RJ or Randle to really improve in any way. I also don't think adding a Lavine-level player will help much as Thibs seems unlikely to play a new defensively challenged player with this existing roster. He gives Randle a pass, and RJ too. Mitch, Grimes and Brunson have to play so it's eventually going to circle back to needing more from either/both Randle and RJ.

I think the shot chart comment is intended to point out that you are replacing an outside shooter with and inside shooter. But we already have a bit of inside shooters in the starting lineup.

Brunson (48% of shots 0-10 ft)
Barrett (60% of shots 0-10 ft)
Sabonis (78% of shots 0-10 ft)
Robinson (99% of shots 0-10 ft)

All of these guys would be vying for the same small patch of the floor.

Randle works a bit better for us, only taking 39% of shots in the 0-10 ft category. Now, I'd still like him to increase that. 56 from 0-3 and 44 from 3 works for me in an ideal world. But in the Sabonis discussion, you can visualize Sabonis collapsing the floor even further with his inside play. I don't think he works next to Robinson.

That makes sense and it's definitely a solid point. We certainly would want to increase spacing and our roster makes it challenging enough as it is already. Wish we could land a Lauri type of stretch four ideally.