Bob Ross wrote:NoDopeOnSundays wrote:Bob Ross wrote:What does Randle on a nice cost controlled contract have to do with resigning OG? Unless it's apron stuff that I don't understand well. Seems nonsensical
The reason you're hearing about Randle being moved is because he's going to be an UFA at the end of next season, they have to decide if they want to extend him or not, his max would be 4 years $190 million so he's no longer cost controlled. He'll be much harder to move once he gets that new contract too. They will be making similar money, and we just saw OG play the 4, the rationale being that they could upgrade the SG or C by trading Randle and using OG as the new PF.
Ok that makes some sense, but overall I think Randle is being extremely under rated overall. Keep them both, OG is not a play maker or a guaranteed bucket. Given how Randle is talked about by most media, who else is gonna max him so who's to say we need to. Media folks would have us believe he's a negative asset
It's not that simple anymore, it sounds like we're going to need to max out OG to keep him, then you have Hartenstein who will be a FA, after that Randle and Brunson are due extensions. The new CBA makes team building more difficult and locking into the team we have now may not make as much sense, somebody is most likely getting traded this offseason, whether it's Mitch + Bog or Randle, they wont be able to give all these guys extensions without something changing.




























