RealGM

curious about what the board think this polarizing player's value is.

Pros
Helped turn knicks franchise around
made all star team multiple times in recent years

Cons
no playoff success to date
coming back from a serious injury (46GP last year)

Contract status:
1 yr (30M + trade kicker) + PO remaining

Recent year stats:
24/9/5
shot 47/31/78 for a TS of 56.9.

Feel.free to defend your take

Depends for what team. Are we going by the team each poster represents?

I think he is some level of positive value--if he were to be traded I would expect a positive return. If we are doing the whole expiring and pick(s) valuation thing I would go with expiring plus one solid first or two meh ones.

He's really productive and even before Brunson he had helped to lift the floor of the Knicks. I think there may be a cap on your team's ceiling with him in a primary role, but there are teams looking to go from bad to decent and I think there would be a market there.

Texas Chuck wrote:I think he is some level of positive value--if he were to be traded I would expect a positive return. If we are doing the whole expiring and pick(s) valuation thing I would go with expiring plus one solid first or two meh ones.

He's really productive and even before Brunson he had helped to lift the floor of the Knicks. I think there may be a cap on your team's ceiling with him in a primary role, but there are teams looking to go from bad to decent and I think there would be a market there.

I think thats where i'm at. I'm more curious to hear from the people who thinks he's worth only fillers + 2nd(s) or even negative value

Definitely positive, but not all NBA level 25/10 on average-minus efficiency.
Depending on the 1st quality, it's one or 2.

I'd flip him for Collins, but wouldn't add value. Is that negative or expiring filler?

eminence wrote:I'd flip him for Collins, but wouldn't add value. Is that negative or expiring filler?

collins is negative imo. why wouldn't you add value though? you dont think Randle is better than collins?

Godaddycurse wrote:

eminence wrote:I'd flip him for Collins, but wouldn't add value. Is that negative or expiring filler?

collins is negative imo. why wouldn't you add value though? you dont think Randle is better than collins?

He is/was slightly better (fringe starter Collins vs below average starter Randle), but paid more and coming off a non-trivial injury/surgery.

eminence wrote:I'd flip him for Collins, but wouldn't add value. Is that negative or expiring filler?

That's negative considering Randle is objectively the better and more productive player. But I appreciate your willingness to pay a couple extra million for the far better player.

He is/was slightly better (fringe starter Collins vs below average starter Randle), but paid more and coming off a non-trivial injury/surgery.

And once again for the people in the back...Randle has made the all star team 3 out of the last 4 seasons. How does that make him a below average starter?

Knickfan1982 wrote:

eminence wrote:I'd flip him for Collins, but wouldn't add value. Is that negative or expiring filler?

That's negative considering Randle is objectively the better and more productive player.

He is/was slightly better (fringe starter Collins vs below average starter Randle), but paid more and coming off a non-trivial injury/surgery.

And once again for the people in the back...Randle has made the all star team 3 out of the last 4 seasons. How does that make him a below average starter?

Ya know, looking through all the guys in the league I think you're right. I'd upgrade him to average starter and would do a 1 late 1st or a couple of 2nds with Collins.

I think he has some value to a team like Dallas that desperately needs an interior scorer. Don't know what would work though...something around THJ, Green, a FRP, and maybe another pick?

Texas Chuck wrote:I think he is some level of positive value--if he were to be traded I would expect a positive return. If we are doing the whole expiring and pick(s) valuation thing I would go with expiring plus one solid first or two meh ones.

He's really productive and even before Brunson he had helped to lift the floor of the Knicks. I think there may be a cap on your team's ceiling with him in a primary role, but there are teams looking to go from bad to decent and I think there would be a market there.

This is where I am at with Randle as well.

eminence wrote:

Knickfan1982 wrote:

eminence wrote:I'd flip him for Collins, but wouldn't add value. Is that negative or expiring filler?

That's negative considering Randle is objectively the better and more productive player.

He is/was slightly better (fringe starter Collins vs below average starter Randle), but paid more and coming off a non-trivial injury/surgery.

And once again for the people in the back...Randle has made the all star team 3 out of the last 4 seasons. How does that make him a below average starter?

Ya know, looking through all the guys in the league I think you're right. I'd upgrade him to average starter and would do a 1 late 1st or a couple of 2nds with Collins.

If Collins is coming back we'd need at least 2 decent firsts.

I'd expect an expiring, a non-premium first, and another better first. e.g., if looking at this draft and just putting numbers to it,
expiring + pick 9-14 + pick 19-30.

Knickfan1982 wrote:

eminence wrote:

Knickfan1982 wrote:
That's negative considering Randle is objectively the better and more productive player.




And once again for the people in the back...Randle has made the all star team 3 out of the last 4 seasons. How does that make him a below average starter?

Ya know, looking through all the guys in the league I think you're right. I'd upgrade him to average starter and would do a 1 late 1st or a couple of 2nds with Collins.

If Collins is coming back we'd need at least 2 decent firsts.

Yah, I'm not a huge Randle fan, but there is a massive difference in on-court value between he and Collins that isn't going to be covered by a late first.

Knickfan1982 wrote:

eminence wrote:

Knickfan1982 wrote:
That's negative considering Randle is objectively the better and more productive player.




And once again for the people in the back...Randle has made the all star team 3 out of the last 4 seasons. How does that make him a below average starter?

Ya know, looking through all the guys in the league I think you're right. I'd upgrade him to average starter and would do a 1 late 1st or a couple of 2nds with Collins.

If Collins is coming back we'd need at least 2 decent firsts.

No deal to be had then.

On the comment of helping a team go from bad to decent…

Pistons would be better w him. Scoring threat for sure. But if he got traded to Detroit, would he be happy? And after a year, he would opt out of his PO and go elsewhere, or at least threaten to so the Pistons would overpay. Neither situation would be good for Detroit, so I’d just pass.

I’d rather just pay Miles Bridges 4x$25M and not give up any assets. Or 2x$20M to Tobias Harris.

Clippers could offer Zubac, Mann and Tucker (Exp) for Randle.

Godaddycurse wrote:

Texas Chuck wrote:I think he is some level of positive value--if he were to be traded I would expect a positive return. If we are doing the whole expiring and pick(s) valuation thing I would go with expiring plus one solid first or two meh ones.

He's really productive and even before Brunson he had helped to lift the floor of the Knicks. I think there may be a cap on your team's ceiling with him in a primary role, but there are teams looking to go from bad to decent and I think there would be a market there.

I think thats where i'm at. I'm more curious to hear from the people who thinks he's worth only fillers + 2nd(s) or even negative value

I’m on the same page. He is a good basketball player on a reasonable contract. My biggest issue with Randle is his fit on the court. How does my roster work with him on it? I think in a vacuum, like who can go out and just hoop, Randle is underrated. On an NBA court it’s just more complicated with him. But yeah, and expiring and a good first feels right.

theBigLip wrote:On the comment of helping a team go from bad to decent…

Pistons would be better w him. Scoring threat for sure. But if he got traded to Detroit, would he be happy? And after a year, he would opt out of his PO and go elsewhere, or at least threaten to so the Pistons would overpay. Neither situation would be good for Detroit, so I’d just pass.

I’d rather just pay Miles Bridges 4x$25M and not give up any assets. Or 2x$20M to Tobias Harris.

Pistons can offer cap relief though. The Knicks will have problems if they wanna re-sign OG and Hartenstein.

Pistons could go after Randle and Lavine for cheap if they want to upgrade talent and offer the Knicks/Bulls cap relief.