The uncomfortable "truth" about this season (Julius and RJ)

[moocow007]

I mentioned during the closing of the NBNF podcast season that I don't see Randle and RJ as a great fit, and especially not so without the presence of an elite shot creator. Nor as I've said all along should anyone be "married" to any player on this team (it's about the team not about the players for me).

That said, the regular season is a LOT easier than the playoffs and it's easier to hide your weaknesses during the regular season. And the bottom line most underlining issue with this team is that it lacks talent and the lack of talent especially in today's NBA is a huge weakness.

The "truth" to me is that this team well over achieved during the regular season (I've said this repeatedly on the podcast) and what they did was come back down to earth in the playoffs against a team that was not only more talented than them but also (like the Pacers did back in the 2012-2013 playoffs) peaking at the perfect time.

The "truth" is that for this team to take that next step it needs a big infusion of talent. Ideally a top tier talent at PG but talent at just about every other position other than the position that Randle plays also could be very much warranted.

Was it Randle? Look, like I've also said a lot lot lot of times in the past 20 or so years...

The Knicks need more than just getting 1 star player and then "call it a day". They tried (and failed) with Marbury. They tried (and failed) with Carmelo Anthony. They tried (and failed) with Porzingis. And if this front office doesn't get another star and some serious infusing of talent to this team they will have tried (and failed) with Randle.

There's a reason why I keep saying that Carmelo Anthony wasn't Lebron James and that Julius Randle now isn't Lebron James. It's because the only way you can possibly try to make a dent in today's NBA with just 1 star and some whatever whatever else on a team is if that one star is a Lebron James caliber player. Clearly, clearly, clearly, none of the guys that the Knicks have tried in the past 20 years or so is anywhere near Lebron. As such, I'm not sure why fans seem so irate at these guys (Marbury, Anthony, Randle, etc.) for not being able to walk on water and part the Red Sea.

The fault has and will always be with the front office. So the ultimate "truth" about why the Knicks are now home isn't because Randle **** the bed or that Barrett isn't as good as some of us like, it's that this front office did not put enough talent on the team to be able to do more than what they did. In fact, this team did more than what they should have done based on the talent they had on the team.

This team, as is, is still bottom 5 in the NBA in talent...especially in the areas that winning teams in today's NBA focus on having. Feel free to try to argue otherwise...you'll realize that you can't.

The "fix" and the path to ultimate "truth" about what this franchise can do rests with the front office. Hopefully this front office is up to the same task that past front offices failed at. Whether it's to keep Randle and/or Barrett or trade Randle and/or Barrett is immaterial.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

The elephant in the room is that the 2nd unit plays a modern brand of basketball on offense, while the first unit doesn't. The 2nd unit uses a lot of high screen action with the guards & C and plays almost exclusively as 4 out 1 in, the first unit is like an offense straight out of 2010, right down to the isolations and late clock kickouts to guys who have to shoot.

[8516knicks]

I was looking at the team's individual net ratings for the regular season and the playoffs and there's a clear, undeniable trend:

The starters were above-average in the regular season and terrible in the playoffs, whereas the bench was really good throughout the season. The starters kept us afloat and even outscored teams on average, but the bench killed teams.

Here are the top 4 net ratings on the team for the regular season and the playoffs:

Regular season: Rose, Gibson, Quickley, Burks (all bench players)
Playoffs: Obi, Burks, Quickley, Gibson (all bench players besides Gibson who started 3 out of 5 games)

Then I also thought, well if Rose had this much of an impact coming off the bench in the regular season, shouldn't the starting unit have been more effective against Atlanta once Rose moved to the starting line-up? Nope. No difference whatsoever. So is the foundation of our starting five an issue ie have a ceiling?

One must ask him/herself the question: did Julius and RJ really carry the Knicks to the #4 seed, or was the bench with IQ, Burks and Obi (and Rose in the regular season) really the biggest difference-maker? I'm aware this is not a black or white thing, and that impact is shared. Obviously, the starters played most of their minutes against the opposing teams' best fives, and the second unit played a lot of minutes against opposing benches (although Thibs staggered the minutes to some extent). The success of our bench doesn't mean that our bench players are better than our starters, or that they could replicate their success against opposing starters.

But I think this puts into perspective the impact that Randle and RJ really had. Where would the Knicks have ended with just an average bench? And are we underestimating IQ's skill set and impact because of the minutes?

The reason I ask these questions is because we're running the risk of building a treadmill team around Julius and RJ. It was glaring in the series against Atlanta how these two could not get easy baskets, and every possession seemed like a struggle, and I am starting to wonder if IQ and Obi don't have a higher upside, simply because they can create or convert more easy baskets. Neither Randle nor RJ even reached league-average in scoring efficiency, regular season or playoffs.

Randle
Regular season: +0.3 per 100 ON/OFF, 3.0 net rating, 56.7 TS% (below league-average)
Playoffs: -19.6 per 100 ON/OFF, -12.1 net rating (8th), 42.5 TS%

Barrett
Regular season: +0.4 per 100 ON/OFF, 2.7 net rating, 53.5 TS% (below league-average)
Playoffs: -14.7 per 100 ON/OFF, -10.2 net rating (7th), 48.9 TS%

So my question is: remember how the Knicks didn't amnesty Amar'e because he revitalized the franchise, and amnestied Billups instead, which took us out of the Chris Paul sweepstakes? The Knicks were emotional, and not ruthless. Amar'e was a feel-good story, so they decided to keep him. It cost them dearly in the long-run. Today I wonder if the Knicks wouldn't be repeating the same mistake by building around Julius and RJ. I'm a big RJ fan, and I've learned to appreciate and root for Julius, but I start to wonder if this might be the offseason where unpopular decisions need to be made. Just thinking out loud.

Totally agree about the 2nd unit. We should keep Rose 2nd unit, and build it even better if possible. For first unit I've seen names like Nunn, Robinson, Rachaun Holmes and others that might bolster the offensive production of the first unit (or 2nd). Our next step is not the ECF or the Finals, it's getting into the 2nd round.

[god shammgod]

Julius/RJ/Mitch (No Payton): +9.0 Net Rating
Julius/RJ/IQ (No Payton): +15.4 Net Rating
Julius/RJ/Rose (No Payton): +13.2 Net Rating
RJ/Obi/Rose (No Payton): +15.3 Net Rating
Obi/Rose/IQ (No Payton): +18.2 Net Rating
IQ/RJ/Julius/Mitch (No Payton); +13.6 Net Rating

Those are really the combinations that matter in the long run and specifically the fact that Elfrid is presumably gone and once we got semi competent guard play from Rose the group took off. I agree that unless RJ and Randle take another leap there is a somewhat capped ceiling on this team but I'm not going to rule that out either given the rapid progression both have already made while in uniform. I'm also not going to read too much into one series where, in hindsight, our personnel was much more limited/inexperience than the opposition and specifically their main guy was an awful matchup for us defensively...

Again Shamm loves to be overly critical and doom and gloom to balance the board out but labeling this team treadmill after 1 year with a mostly young crew and their best defensive player out for the playoffs seems a little comical to me. Yeah we can talk in absolutes about how Julius isn't a number 1 and nothing matters except for that but there are mutliple ways to skin a cat and the Knicks seemed as prime as any other team to snag that ultimate talent if they feel the need to or continue what they're doing until that occurs. Plenty of positive assets on this team. You can build it block by block or swing for the fences this summer and next summer. That's the great part of where we're at. We haven't been this good and also flexible as a franchise in a long time. Really gives you a small position of power within the league.

i stand by my statement. a team built around rj & randle is a treadmill team. they're not talented enough. if you trade for/sign someone better then it's not built around them. could they get someone better ? who knows. it's not always so easy.

[Marty McFly]

Building around both isn’t ideal. They have similar games but neither is a great three point shooter so spacing is always going to be an issue. Julius had a great season, but he’s older and about to get paid. He needs to get traded preferably for someone like McCollum. We need to figure out what RJ can become, since this team spent the 3rd pick on him.

[JXL]

I was looking at the team's individual net ratings for the regular season and the playoffs and there's a clear, undeniable trend:

The starters were above-average in the regular season and terrible in the playoffs, whereas the bench was really good throughout the season. The starters kept us afloat and even outscored teams on average, but the bench killed teams.

Here are the top 4 net ratings on the team for the regular season and the playoffs:

Regular season: Rose, Gibson, Quickley, Burks (all bench players)
Playoffs: Obi, Burks, Quickley, Gibson (all bench players besides Gibson who started 3 out of 5 games)

Then I also thought, well if Rose had this much of an impact coming off the bench in the regular season, shouldn't the starting unit have been more effective against Atlanta once Rose moved to the starting line-up? Nope. No difference whatsoever. So is the foundation of our starting five an issue ie have a ceiling?

One must ask him/herself the question: did Julius and RJ really carry the Knicks to the #4 seed, or was the bench with IQ, Burks and Obi (and Rose in the regular season) really the biggest difference-maker? I'm aware this is not a black or white thing, and that impact is shared. Obviously, the starters played most of their minutes against the opposing teams' best fives, and the second unit played a lot of minutes against opposing benches (although Thibs staggered the minutes to some extent). The success of our bench doesn't mean that our bench players are better than our starters, or that they could replicate their success against opposing starters.

But I think this puts into perspective the impact that Randle and RJ really had. Where would the Knicks have ended with just an average bench? And are we underestimating IQ's skill set and impact because of the minutes?

The reason I ask these questions is because we're running the risk of building a treadmill team around Julius and RJ. It was glaring in the series against Atlanta how these two could not get easy baskets, and every possession seemed like a struggle, and I am starting to wonder if IQ and Obi don't have a higher upside, simply because they can create or convert more easy baskets. Neither Randle nor RJ even reached league-average in scoring efficiency, regular season or playoffs.

Randle
Regular season: +0.3 per 100 ON/OFF, 3.0 net rating, 56.7 TS% (below league-average)
Playoffs: -19.6 per 100 ON/OFF, -12.1 net rating (8th), 42.5 TS%

Barrett
Regular season: +0.4 per 100 ON/OFF, 2.7 net rating, 53.5 TS% (below league-average)
Playoffs: -14.7 per 100 ON/OFF, -10.2 net rating (7th), 48.9 TS%

So my question is: remember how the Knicks didn't amnesty Amar'e because he revitalized the franchise, and amnestied Billups instead, which took us out of the Chris Paul sweepstakes? The Knicks were emotional, and not ruthless. Amar'e was a feel-good story, so they decided to keep him. It cost them dearly in the long-run. Today I wonder if the Knicks wouldn't be repeating the same mistake by building around Julius and RJ. I'm a big RJ fan, and I've learned to appreciate and root for Julius, but I start to wonder if this might be the offseason where unpopular decisions need to be made. Just thinking out loud.

I'm not disagreeing with your opinion, but this all could've been avoided with a better starting PG. Payton dragged down the starting unit, and even with Mitch, they were subpar. A primary playmaker at PG, with Randle as secondary, would've changed the dynamics of those net ratings real fast.

[JXL]

Building around both isn’t ideal. They have similar games but neither is a great three point shooter so spacing is always going to be an issue. Julius had a great season, but he’s older and about to get paid. He needs to get traded preferably for someone like McCollum. We need to figure out what RJ can become, since this team spent the 3rd pick on him.

I'm sorry, but didn't both of them shoot 40% or higher from 3?

[DowNY]

Warriors offer Wiseman, Wiggins and that Wolves pick (assuming it conveys) for Julius , what y’all doing?

[ENYK]

The elephant in the room is that the 2nd unit plays a modern brand of basketball on offense, while the first unit doesn't. The 2nd unit uses a lot of high screen action with the guards & C and plays almost exclusively as 4 out 1 in, the first unit is like an offense straight out of 2010, right down to the isolations and late clock kickouts to guys who have to shoot.

100%. Because the second unit has the personnel (Rose, Quickley) capable of handling the ball and converting in a P&R-heavy offense.

RJ is being miscast if we expect him to develop into an offense creator for himself or others.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

Barrett and Randle are practically the same player. One needs to go

They are similar in that they both want to score inside, but there's a big difference between them, we already know RJ can play off the ball and be fine with it, and even more importantly he can run the PnR with our centers because of size/position. The biggest problem with our Randle centric offense is that you can't run a PnR between him and any of our bigs, because any decent coach would switch it or just drop.

The failure of the playoffs is on coaching, RJ was at .79ppp as the PnR ball handler during the season for reference point Morant was at .81 on the season. The failure is that we had something that worked in the playoffs, yet we didn't run it into the ground for some idiotic reason, RJ's ppp in the playoffs jumped to 1.07ppp as the PnR ball handler, that is an elite number LeBron was .92 in the season, Cp3 was at .99. As a PnR ball handler RJ is above average on the season, during the playoffs he was flat out elite at the play but we don't go to it often.


To me, it's really simple between them, functionally RJ will be able to play off the ball more and could thrive with the 2nd unit because he doesn't need to be the center of the offense. If Randle plays with the 2nd unit, they turn into the same thing as the first unit, which is Randle and shooters as he isos.

[Jeff Van Gully]

thanks for this, chanel. we know we need more high end talent. i don't think RJ and randle alone get us to the promised land. they need help. and, of course, as much as some of us might love them, we should be open to improving the team whether or not they are part of the plan.

i want to see a title before i die. if that means we have to pull a brooklyn nets one day with our beloved scrappy core, so be it. i'm not in a rush for that. i just want to see a championship plan actually executed. for where we are right now, i'm impressed.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

The elephant in the room is that the 2nd unit plays a modern brand of basketball on offense, while the first unit doesn't. The 2nd unit uses a lot of high screen action with the guards & C and plays almost exclusively as 4 out 1 in, the first unit is like an offense straight out of 2010, right down to the isolations and late clock kickouts to guys who have to shoot.

100%. Because the second unit has the personnel (Rose, Quickley) capable of handling the ball and converting in a P&R-heavy offense.

RJ is being miscast if we expect him to develop into an offense creator for himself or others.

RJ scored 1.07ppp as the PnR ball handler during the playoffs, that was good for the 76.3 percentile in the playoffs. Those numbers tell me next season, we should be running more PnR with him and Mitch, asking him to ISO isn't his game, playing him as a secondary ball handler who can get active in the PnR is what he can do.

[ENYK]

The elephant in the room is that the 2nd unit plays a modern brand of basketball on offense, while the first unit doesn't. The 2nd unit uses a lot of high screen action with the guards & C and plays almost exclusively as 4 out 1 in, the first unit is like an offense straight out of 2010, right down to the isolations and late clock kickouts to guys who have to shoot.

100%. Because the second unit has the personnel (Rose, Quickley) capable of handling the ball and converting in a P&R-heavy offense.

RJ is being miscast if we expect him to develop into an offense creator for himself or others.

RJ scored 1.07ppp as the PnR ball handler during the playoffs, that was good for the 76.3 percentile in the playoffs. Those numbers tell me next season, we should be running more PnR with him and Mitch, asking him to ISO isn't his game, playing him as a secondary ball handler who can get active in the PnR is what he can do.

He's certainly better cast as a second ball-handler and facilitator than an ISO scoring threat. But if they do that, his raw numbers most likely go down (albeit efficiency will go up).

Either way, I think if you can package him to get a young guy (or draft pick who can turn into this type of guy) who can reliably create offense off the dribble for HIMSELF as well as others, you have to do that... How valuable, really, is a secondary playmaker in the P&R if he cannot consistently finish off the dribble (weak pull-up game, VERY weak around the basket)?

I think we have an opportunity to sell high on RJ.

[Deeeez Knicks]

thanks for this, chanel. we know we need more high end talent. i don't think RJ and randle alone get us to the promised land. they need help. and, of course, as much as some of us might love them, we should be open to improving the team whether or not they are part of the plan.

i want to see a title before i die. if that means we have to pull a brooklyn nets one day with our beloved scrappy core, so be it. i'm not in a rush for that. i just want to see a championship plan actually executed. for where we are right now, i'm impressed.

Yeah, there really isn't a huge rush to figure this all out. Nobody is untouchable so I would trade either in the right deal, but otherwise we dont have to make this decision immediately. I am perfectly fine with rolling with RJ and Randle for now...they actually did both play surprisingly well together and improved a lot combined with a low cost salary. They still have upside to grow together.

Overall, we all know we need a #1 guy and then some more talent on top of that though. All depends what deals and opportunities are on the table though.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

100%. Because the second unit has the personnel (Rose, Quickley) capable of handling the ball and converting in a P&R-heavy offense.

RJ is being miscast if we expect him to develop into an offense creator for himself or others.

RJ scored 1.07ppp as the PnR ball handler during the playoffs, that was good for the 76.3 percentile in the playoffs. Those numbers tell me next season, we should be running more PnR with him and Mitch, asking him to ISO isn't his game, playing him as a secondary ball handler who can get active in the PnR is what he can do.

He's certainly better cast as a second ball-handler and facilitator than an ISO scoring threat. But if they do that, his raw numbers most likely go down (albeit efficiency will go up).

Either way, I think if you can package him to get a young guy (or draft pick who can turn into this type of guy) who can reliably create offense off the dribble for HIMSELF as well as others, you have to do that... How valuable, really, is a secondary playmaker in the P&R if he cannot consistently finish off the dribble (weak pull-up game, VERY weak around the basket)?

I think we have an opportunity to sell high on RJ.

His numbers went up during the playoffs running it, how would they likely go down if next season instead of stone hands and Methuselah he's throwing lobs to Mitch on any drive where they fail to pick him up? We need to give him reps running it with Mitch, it doesn't need to be the cornerstone of our offense, but we have to use it since Mitch is elite as a rollman. I can't believe how some of you are just ok with not running stuff that plays to our players strengths.


You just want to trade him, the numbers go against what you were trying to say, so now it's conjecture on him not developing that part of his game when he's already solid at it with low reps. So, with more reps and a better rollman, he's going to get worse? A secondary playmaker that can run PnR is extremely valuable, especially one that can function as a catch and shoot player, this is literally how the Celtics developed Brown, he was a stand in the corner guy who they gave more PnR reps to. You can track his PnR ballhandler numbers year by year and see them going up as the frequency of the play went up, and before you say RJ isn't Brown, at this stage in their careers RJ is already a better PnR ball handler by the numbers than Brown was (.73ppp), and Brown is now elite at it (1.02ppp).

[god shammgod]

thanks for this, chanel. we know we need more high end talent. i don't think RJ and randle alone get us to the promised land. they need help. and, of course, as much as some of us might love them, we should be open to improving the team whether or not they are part of the plan.

i want to see a title before i die. if that means we have to pull a brooklyn nets one day with our beloved scrappy core, so be it. i'm not in a rush for that. i just want to see a championship plan actually executed. for where we are right now, i'm impressed.

Yeah, there really isn't a huge rush to figure this all out. Nobody is untouchable so I would trade either in the right deal, but otherwise we dont have to make this decision immediately. I am perfectly fine with rolling with RJ and Randle for now...they actually did both play surprisingly well together and improved a lot combined with a low cost salary. They still have upside to grow together.

Overall, we all know we need a #1 guy and then some more talent on top of that though. All depends what deals and opportunities are on the table though.

i kind of think you do have to figure out what you're doing with randle pretty soon. the latest you can wait is the next trade deadline if you're not gonna commit to him. and it's not always that great to wait until then because he's a free agent a couple months after and that hurts your leverage.

[ENYK]

RJ scored 1.07ppp as the PnR ball handler during the playoffs, that was good for the 76.3 percentile in the playoffs. Those numbers tell me next season, we should be running more PnR with him and Mitch, asking him to ISO isn't his game, playing him as a secondary ball handler who can get active in the PnR is what he can do.

He's certainly better cast as a second ball-handler and facilitator than an ISO scoring threat. But if they do that, his raw numbers most likely go down (albeit efficiency will go up).

Either way, I think if you can package him to get a young guy (or draft pick who can turn into this type of guy) who can reliably create offense off the dribble for HIMSELF as well as others, you have to do that... How valuable, really, is a secondary playmaker in the P&R if he cannot consistently finish off the dribble (weak pull-up game, VERY weak around the basket)?

I think we have an opportunity to sell high on RJ.

His numbers went up during the playoffs running it, how would they likely go down if next season instead of stone hands and Methuselah he's throwing lobs to Mitch on any drive where they fail to pick him up? We need to give him reps running it with Mitch, it doesn't need to be the cornerstone of our offense, but we have to use it since Mitch is elite as a rollman. I can't believe how some of you are just ok with not running stuff that plays to our players strengths.


You just want to trade him, the numbers go against what you were trying to say, so now it's conjecture on him not developing that part of his game when he's already solid at it with low reps. So, with more reps and a better rollman, he's going to get worse? A secondary playmaker that can run PnR is extremely valuable, especially one that can function as a catch and shoot player, this is literally how the Celtics developed Brown, he was a stand in the corner guy who they gave more PnR reps to. You can track his PnR ballhandler numbers year by year and see them going up as the frequency of the play went up, and before you say RJ isn't Brown, at this stage in their careers RJ is already a better PnR ball handler by the numbers than Brown was (.73ppp), and Brown is now elite at it (1.02ppp).

It's just a different philosophy of team building. You want to build around RJ and Mitch (who else?)... You do realize the Knicks will have to pay RJ at some point very soon?

I think it's nice to have a guy like RJ, but if you can package him in a deal to get what you really need (and have always needed)--a young primary ballhandler and creator--you have to do that first. Then you can add an RJ.

If we could trade for De'aaron Fox or the draft rights to Suggs by packaging RJ and picks, you have to do it. And I'm sure there is a franchise out there that takes that deal.

[8516knicks]

"This team, as is, is still bottom 5 in the NBA in talent...especially in the areas that winning teams in today's NBA focus on having. Feel free to try to argue otherwise...you'll realize that you can't."

I don't know they're bottom 5, but agree we lack talent and need more than one star. Reading Doncic is signing a $200M max made me realize that even if we magically could add Doncic to this year's squad, that might not be enough to beat Atlanta, let alone the better playoff teams.

[Knicksfan1992]

Julius/RJ/Mitch (No Payton): +9.0 Net Rating
Julius/RJ/IQ (No Payton): +15.4 Net Rating
Julius/RJ/Rose (No Payton): +13.2 Net Rating
RJ/Obi/Rose (No Payton): +15.3 Net Rating
Obi/Rose/IQ (No Payton): +18.2 Net Rating
IQ/RJ/Julius/Mitch (No Payton); +13.6 Net Rating

Those are really the combinations that matter in the long run and specifically the fact that Elfrid is presumably gone and once we got semi competent guard play from Rose the group took off. I agree that unless RJ and Randle take another leap there is a somewhat capped ceiling on this team but I'm not going to rule that out either given the rapid progression both have already made while in uniform. I'm also not going to read too much into one series where, in hindsight, our personnel was much more limited/inexperience than the opposition and specifically their main guy was an awful matchup for us defensively...

Again Shamm loves to be overly critical and doom and gloom to balance the board out but labeling this team treadmill after 1 year with a mostly young crew and their best defensive player out for the playoffs seems a little comical to me. Yeah we can talk in absolutes about how Julius isn't a number 1 and nothing matters except for that but there are mutliple ways to skin a cat and the Knicks seemed as prime as any other team to snag that ultimate talent if they feel the need to or continue what they're doing until that occurs. Plenty of positive assets on this team. You can build it block by block or swing for the fences this summer and next summer. That's the great part of where we're at. We haven't been this good and also flexible as a franchise in a long time. Really gives you a small position of power within the league.

i stand by my statement. a team built around rj & randle is a treadmill team. they're not talented enough. if you trade for/sign someone better than it's not built around them. could they get someone better ? who knows. it's not always so easy.

The problem with that statement is that you're assuming those 2 guys don't get any better when they have already shown a propensity to improve and when paired with non-negative players have produced a pretty big impact on winning given the numbers I've laid out. Also the term "treadmill" is a lazy term IMO, but that's a different conversation...

Also you can still "build around" Julius and RJ while getting better talent. They aren't mutually exclusive terms or ideas.

[Rasho Brezec]

Julius/RJ/Mitch (No Payton): +9.0 Net Rating
Julius/RJ/IQ (No Payton): +15.4 Net Rating
Julius/RJ/Rose (No Payton): +13.2 Net Rating
RJ/Obi/Rose (No Payton): +15.3 Net Rating
Obi/Rose/IQ (No Payton): +18.2 Net Rating
IQ/RJ/Julius/Mitch (No Payton); +13.6 Net Rating

Those are really the combinations that matter in the long run and specifically the fact that Elfrid is presumably gone and once we got semi competent guard play from Rose the group took off. I agree that unless RJ and Randle take another leap there is a somewhat capped ceiling on this team but I'm not going to rule that out either given the rapid progression both have already made while in uniform. I'm also not going to read too much into one series where, in hindsight, our personnel was much more limited/inexperience than the opposition and specifically their main guy was an awful matchup for us defensively...

Again Shamm loves to be overly critical and doom and gloom to balance the board out but labeling this team treadmill after 1 year with a mostly young crew and their best defensive player out for the playoffs seems a little comical to me. Yeah we can talk in absolutes about how Julius isn't a number 1 and nothing matters except for that but there are mutliple ways to skin a cat and the Knicks seemed as prime as any other team to snag that ultimate talent if they feel the need to or continue what they're doing until that occurs. Plenty of positive assets on this team. You can build it block by block or swing for the fences this summer and next summer. That's the great part of where we're at. We haven't been this good and also flexible as a franchise in a long time. Really gives you a small position of power within the league.

i stand by my statement. a team built around rj & randle is a treadmill team. they're not talented enough. if you trade for/sign someone better than it's not built around them. could they get someone better ? who knows. it's not always so easy.

Offer everyone else under contract + picks and see what you can get in return. Play RJ as 6th man. That's the best we can do.