Randle's Future

[Iron Mantis]

Leon holds the power to deliver a championship to the Knicks.

Git 'er dun Leon!!!!

[3toheadmelo]

Love the Knicks commitment to building around Randle.

Read on Twitter

[JayTWill]

11-1 with Randle,Brunson, OG with the best defense and net rating in the league. Facts are facts. Random clips don't change that. Cope

The team looked incredible in January after the OG trade and before the Detroit trade with Mitch still injured.
The defense and net rating without RJ, IQ, Mitch, Bogey and Burks....

Brunson, OG, Randle +26.1 Great scoring and great defense but
Brunson, OG without Randle +25.7 Still great scoring and defense

Brunson, Randle without OG -0.2 Great scoring and atrocious defense

Randle without Brunson and OG -16.3 Poor scoring and atrocious defense

January clearly showed the value of OG's defense and Brunson has been the offensive engine for the last couple seasons including January but did it really show the positive overall value of Randle? I'm not saying that Randle doesn't bring any value to the team but OG deserves a ton of the credit for the success of that month and it was still only one month.

[JayTWill]

The majority of voters in the poll thought Randle should be extended on Aug. 3rd. What do you think the hold up is?

[3toheadmelo]

11-1 with Randle,Brunson, OG with the best defense and net rating in the league. Facts are facts. Random clips don't change that. Cope

The team looked incredible in January after the OG trade and before the Detroit trade with Mitch still injured.
The defense and net rating without RJ, IQ, Mitch, Bogey and Burks....

Brunson, OG, Randle +26.1 Great scoring and great defense but
Brunson, OG without Randle +25.7 Still great scoring and defense

Brunson, Randle without OG -0.2 Great scoring and atrocious defense

Randle without Brunson and OG -16.3 Poor scoring and atrocious defense

January clearly showed the value of OG's defense and Brunson has been the offensive engine for the last couple seasons including January but did it really show the positive overall value of Randle? I'm not saying that Randle doesn't bring any value to the team but OG deserves a ton of the credit for the success of that month and it was still only one month.

It actually did because once Randle went down, we lost a bunch of more games. The record doesnt lie.
Knicks record without Randle this season: 21-15
Knicks record with Randle this season: 29-17

There's a reason why players were way more efficient when Randle was on the court versus when he wasn't.

Read on Twitter

[JayTWill]

11-1 with Randle,Brunson, OG with the best defense and net rating in the league. Facts are facts. Random clips don't change that. Cope

The team looked incredible in January after the OG trade and before the Detroit trade with Mitch still injured.
The defense and net rating without RJ, IQ, Mitch, Bogey and Burks....

Brunson, OG, Randle +26.1 Great scoring and great defense but
Brunson, OG without Randle +25.7 Still great scoring and defense

Brunson, Randle without OG -0.2 Great scoring and atrocious defense

Randle without Brunson and OG -16.3 Poor scoring and atrocious defense

January clearly showed the value of OG's defense and Brunson has been the offensive engine for the last couple seasons including January but did it really show the positive overall value of Randle? I'm not saying that Randle doesn't bring any value to the team but OG deserves a ton of the credit for the success of that month and it was still only one month.

It actually did because once Randle went down, we lost a bunch of more games. The record doesnt lie.
Knicks record without Randle this season: 21-15
Knicks record with Randle this season: 29-17

There's a reason why players were way more efficient when Randle was on the court versus when he wasn't.

Read on Twitter

Except that when Randle went down OG also went down and iHart was on a minutes restriction leading to 40+ minutes non-shooters like Hart and Precious for an entire month while also being paired with iHart.

The question was not if Randle is a better offensive option than someone like Precious for 40+ minutes. The question was what was the impact of Randle on January based on the numbers of January since we want to put so much weight into the success of that one month.

Edit - Those shooting numbers are from before Randle's injury but it still doesn't explain how the Knicks continued to be effective without Randle on the court in January.

[JayTWill]

11-1 with Randle,Brunson, OG with the best defense and net rating in the league. Facts are facts. Random clips don't change that. Cope

The team looked incredible in January after the OG trade and before the Detroit trade with Mitch still injured.
The defense and net rating without RJ, IQ, Mitch, Bogey and Burks....

Brunson, OG, Randle +26.1 Great scoring and great defense but
Brunson, OG without Randle +25.7 Still great scoring and defense

Brunson, Randle without OG -0.2 Great scoring and atrocious defense

Randle without Brunson and OG -16.3 Poor scoring and atrocious defense

January clearly showed the value of OG's defense and Brunson has been the offensive engine for the last couple seasons including January but did it really show the positive overall value of Randle? I'm not saying that Randle doesn't bring any value to the team but OG deserves a ton of the credit for the success of that month and it was still only one month.

It actually did because once Randle went down, we lost a bunch of more games. The record doesnt lie.
Knicks record without Randle this season: 21-15
Knicks record with Randle this season: 29-17

There's a reason why players were way more efficient when Randle was on the court versus when he wasn't.

Read on Twitter

Randle's gravity in the paint is undeniable but it also comes in the form of a power forward that can be a highly questionable decision maker and a negative defender. You don't just get to have the gravity to open up more looks from 3 without the turnovers and lack of defense and inconsistent shooting. I didn't say he didn't bring any positives. I just questioned his overall impact. We have to look at Randle as a whole and not just what he is good at.

Edit - Question.... what do you think the Knicks' record would have been if Brunson went down with OG instead of Randle? I really want your honest opinion.

[Iron Mantis]

The team looked incredible in January after the OG trade and before the Detroit trade with Mitch still injured.
The defense and net rating without RJ, IQ, Mitch, Bogey and Burks....

Brunson, OG, Randle +26.1 Great scoring and great defense but
Brunson, OG without Randle +25.7 Still great scoring and defense

Brunson, Randle without OG -0.2 Great scoring and atrocious defense

Randle without Brunson and OG -16.3 Poor scoring and atrocious defense

January clearly showed the value of OG's defense and Brunson has been the offensive engine for the last couple seasons including January but did it really show the positive overall value of Randle? I'm not saying that Randle doesn't bring any value to the team but OG deserves a ton of the credit for the success of that month and it was still only one month.

Yep, the OG effect is real.

Knicks trounced Philly with no Randle. With a healthy OG and Mitch, Knicks would have fried Indy and who knows what could have happened in the ECF.

Now they broke the bank to appease Brunson by getting Mikal who will be huge for the team. And yep, they will need to pay that man soon.

It's clear the FO is building around Brunson. And If Randle doesn't take a team-friendly deal, he's outta here. This FO has been careful not to get second apron'd prematurely..and it's looking like Randle wants the whole bag.

Championship or bust.

[spree2kawhi]

The team looked incredible in January after the OG trade and before the Detroit trade with Mitch still injured.
The defense and net rating without RJ, IQ, Mitch, Bogey and Burks....

Brunson, OG, Randle +26.1 Great scoring and great defense but
Brunson, OG without Randle +25.7 Still great scoring and defense

Brunson, Randle without OG -0.2 Great scoring and atrocious defense

Randle without Brunson and OG -16.3 Poor scoring and atrocious defense

January clearly showed the value of OG's defense and Brunson has been the offensive engine for the last couple seasons including January but did it really show the positive overall value of Randle? I'm not saying that Randle doesn't bring any value to the team but OG deserves a ton of the credit for the success of that month and it was still only one month.

It actually did because once Randle went down, we lost a bunch of more games. The record doesnt lie.
Knicks record without Randle this season: 21-15
Knicks record with Randle this season: 29-17

There's a reason why players were way more efficient when Randle was on the court versus when he wasn't.

Read on Twitter

Randle's gravity in the paint is undeniable but it also comes in the form of a power forward that can be a highly questionable decision maker and a negative defender. You don't just get to have the gravity to open up more looks from 3 without the turnovers and lack of defense and inconsistent shooting. I didn't say he didn't bring any positives. I just questioned his overall impact. We have to look at Randle as a whole and not just what he is good at.

Edit - Question.... what do you think the Knicks' record would have been if Brunson went down with OG instead of Randle? I really want your honest opinion.

Spot-on. Everybody will sht on Towns despite the better career numbers, fit and size. Randle gets the pass somehow. He’s a beast down low, but really careless with the ball and that’s just not what you want in the playoffs. For better or worse, KAT won’t put his head down and dribble into triple teams, that much is certain.

Let me add real quick that I don’t see many other better options over Randle than Towns, so to be fair, Randle is most certainly a great problem to have. But he will ultimately be your problem once teams start throwing all sorts of traps at him in the playoffs, blitz and maybe even box-and-one Brunson to force Randle into traffic. It will happen.

[3toheadmelo]

The team looked incredible in January after the OG trade and before the Detroit trade with Mitch still injured.
The defense and net rating without RJ, IQ, Mitch, Bogey and Burks....

Brunson, OG, Randle +26.1 Great scoring and great defense but
Brunson, OG without Randle +25.7 Still great scoring and defense

Brunson, Randle without OG -0.2 Great scoring and atrocious defense

Randle without Brunson and OG -16.3 Poor scoring and atrocious defense

January clearly showed the value of OG's defense and Brunson has been the offensive engine for the last couple seasons including January but did it really show the positive overall value of Randle? I'm not saying that Randle doesn't bring any value to the team but OG deserves a ton of the credit for the success of that month and it was still only one month.

It actually did because once Randle went down, we lost a bunch of more games. The record doesnt lie.
Knicks record without Randle this season: 21-15
Knicks record with Randle this season: 29-17

There's a reason why players were way more efficient when Randle was on the court versus when he wasn't.

Read on Twitter

Except that when Randle went down OG also went down and iHart was on a minutes restriction leading to 40+ minutes non-shooters like Hart and Precious for an entire month while also being paired with iHart.

The question was not if Randle is a better offensive option than someone like Precious for 40+ minutes. The question was what was the impact of Randle on January based on the numbers of January since we want to put so much weight into the success of that one month.

Edit - Those shooting numbers are from before Randle's injury but it still doesn't explain how the Knicks continued to be effective without Randle on the court in January.

The Knicks never went 11-1 following Randle's injury. If they did then we wouldn't be having this conversation That shows how important he is. Those shooting numbers also clearly show how much more inefficient our players are without Randle on the court. It's pretty significant.

Just look at this.

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

If the Knicks were clearly a worse team with Randle, then we wouldn't have went 11-1 and if you added Randle with OG and Brunson the net rating would be negative. But that didn't happen. The net rating with the 3 of them together were extremely high as you posted. How come our players shoot worse with Randle off the court?

[3toheadmelo]

11-1 with Randle,Brunson, OG with the best defense and net rating in the league. Facts are facts. Random clips don't change that. Cope

The team looked incredible in January after the OG trade and before the Detroit trade with Mitch still injured.
The defense and net rating without RJ, IQ, Mitch, Bogey and Burks....

Brunson, OG, Randle +26.1 Great scoring and great defense but
Brunson, OG without Randle +25.7 Still great scoring and defense

Brunson, Randle without OG -0.2 Great scoring and atrocious defense

Randle without Brunson and OG -16.3 Poor scoring and atrocious defense

January clearly showed the value of OG's defense and Brunson has been the offensive engine for the last couple seasons including January but did it really show the positive overall value of Randle? I'm not saying that Randle doesn't bring any value to the team but OG deserves a ton of the credit for the success of that month and it was still only one month.

How come the Knicks never replicated this without Randle?

Read on Twitter

[3toheadmelo]

I'm just glad the Knicks have been very commited to building around Randle for the past 5 years. Got him a stud PG and a bunch of great shooters around him. Thank you so much Leon.

[3toheadmelo]

Facts are facts

Read on Twitter

[TheGreenArrow]

Thibs needs to put randle at the 5!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Putting randle at the 5 puts us up there with the Celtics!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=W09F6FrMDfp5_y1gKYgF1g

[JayTWill]

It actually did because once Randle went down, we lost a bunch of more games. The record doesnt lie.
Knicks record without Randle this season: 21-15
Knicks record with Randle this season: 29-17

There's a reason why players were way more efficient when Randle was on the court versus when he wasn't.

Read on Twitter

Except that when Randle went down OG also went down and iHart was on a minutes restriction leading to 40+ minutes non-shooters like Hart and Precious for an entire month while also being paired with iHart.

The question was not if Randle is a better offensive option than someone like Precious for 40+ minutes. The question was what was the impact of Randle on January based on the numbers of January since we want to put so much weight into the success of that one month.

Edit - Those shooting numbers are from before Randle's injury but it still doesn't explain how the Knicks continued to be effective without Randle on the court in January.

The Knicks never went 11-1 following Randle's injury. If they did then we wouldn't be having this conversation That shows how important he is. Those shooting numbers also clearly show how much more inefficient our players are without Randle on the court. It's pretty significant.

Just look at this.

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

If the Knicks were clearly a worse team with Randle, then we wouldn't have went 11-1 and if you added Randle with OG and Brunson the net rating would be negative. But that didn't happen. The net rating with the 3 of them together were extremely high as you posted. How come our players shoot worse with Randle off the court?

Randle got injured at the same time as OG and at the same time IHart re-aggravated his achilles injury after Thibs pushed his minutes too far. Then Grimes got injured and was traded away for Bogey and Burks who were terrible. All this was happening in a two week period and the team was already missing Mitch. We didn't just lose Randle after going 12 and 2 with him in January. The world collapsed but they still had a ton of success despite that.

The net rating of Brunson and OG was basically unchanged without Randle. I didn't call him a negative player overall. He gives the offense a higher ceiling. He gives the defense a lower floor. He helps to generate open shots for guys like DDV. He helps to carry the offensive load with Brunson while also being a bad defender and a very shaky decision maker. I can see the good and the bad with Randle. Can you?

[3toheadmelo]

Thibs needs to put randle at the 5!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Putting randle at the 5 puts us up there with the Celtics!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=W09F6FrMDfp5_y1gKYgF1g

Now you're speaking my language

Getting a stone footed defender in KAT is the exact way to lose against Boston.

[3toheadmelo]

Except that when Randle went down OG also went down and iHart was on a minutes restriction leading to 40+ minutes non-shooters like Hart and Precious for an entire month while also being paired with iHart.

The question was not if Randle is a better offensive option than someone like Precious for 40+ minutes. The question was what was the impact of Randle on January based on the numbers of January since we want to put so much weight into the success of that one month.

Edit - Those shooting numbers are from before Randle's injury but it still doesn't explain how the Knicks continued to be effective without Randle on the court in January.

The Knicks never went 11-1 following Randle's injury. If they did then we wouldn't be having this conversation That shows how important he is. Those shooting numbers also clearly show how much more inefficient our players are without Randle on the court. It's pretty significant.

Just look at this.

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

If the Knicks were clearly a worse team with Randle, then we wouldn't have went 11-1 and if you added Randle with OG and Brunson the net rating would be negative. But that didn't happen. The net rating with the 3 of them together were extremely high as you posted. How come our players shoot worse with Randle off the court?

Randle got injured at the same time as OG and at the same time IHart re-aggravated his achilles injury after Thibs pushed his minutes too far. Then Grimes got injured and was traded away for Bogey and Burks who were terrible. All this was happening in a two week period and the team was already missing Mitch. We didn't just lose Randle after going 12 and 2 with him in January. The world collapsed but they still had a ton of success despite that.

The net rating of Brunson and OG was basically unchanged without Randle. I didn't call him a negative player overall. He gives the offense a higher ceiling. He gives the defense a lower floor. He helps to generate open shots for guys like DDV. He helps to carry the offensive load with Brunson while also being a bad defender and a very shaky decision maker. I can see the good and the bad with Randle. Can you?

But the net rating did not get worse with Randle, and we were never 1st in the NBA in wins with just Brunson and OG. So while we had some success without Randle, it was not even close to what happened in January with a healthy Randle. That is the point you are missing. Yes Randle has his faults, no one is denying it. But our ceiling and floor is still significantly higher with him. Even with his negatives, it still outweighs his positives. In the Miami series he still had a positive net rating and a better defensive rating than most of our players.

Randle is pretty much an average defender. You can live with his defense. It doesn't hold us back like it did with RJ.

Read on Twitter

[3toheadmelo]

The team looked incredible in January after the OG trade and before the Detroit trade with Mitch still injured.
The defense and net rating without RJ, IQ, Mitch, Bogey and Burks....

Brunson, OG, Randle +26.1 Great scoring and great defense but
Brunson, OG without Randle +25.7 Still great scoring and defense

Brunson, Randle without OG -0.2 Great scoring and atrocious defense

Randle without Brunson and OG -16.3 Poor scoring and atrocious defense

January clearly showed the value of OG's defense and Brunson has been the offensive engine for the last couple seasons including January but did it really show the positive overall value of Randle? I'm not saying that Randle doesn't bring any value to the team but OG deserves a ton of the credit for the success of that month and it was still only one month.

It actually did because once Randle went down, we lost a bunch of more games. The record doesnt lie.
Knicks record without Randle this season: 21-15
Knicks record with Randle this season: 29-17

There's a reason why players were way more efficient when Randle was on the court versus when he wasn't.

Read on Twitter

Randle's gravity in the paint is undeniable but it also comes in the form of a power forward that can be a highly questionable decision maker and a negative defender. You don't just get to have the gravity to open up more looks from 3 without the turnovers and lack of defense and inconsistent shooting. I didn't say he didn't bring any positives. I just questioned his overall impact. We have to look at Randle as a whole and not just what he is good at.

Edit - Question.... what do you think the Knicks' record would have been if Brunson went down with OG instead of Randle? I really want your honest opinion.

If Brunson went down with OG instead of Randle we would probably be around 21-17. We've seen Randle carry a bunch of scrubs to the playoffs like he did in 2020 so he probably can do it again. But we would miss Brunson and OG massively. If you think I'm trying to argue that Randle is more important than Brunson and OG then you have me mistaken. Brunson and OG have a better impact, but we still need Randle to be at our absolute best. The FO recognizes that, since they didn't give up Randle for Mikal like a lot of people were suggesting to do. The Knicks aren't gonna trade Randle unless they get a bonafide star back that commands double teams like Randle does. KAT ain't that. Giannis or Embiid? Yes. But for now, Randle is here to stay unless players of that caliber asks out.

[Iron Mantis]

Thibs needs to put randle at the 5!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Putting randle at the 5 puts us up there with the Celtics!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=W09F6FrMDfp5_y1gKYgF1g

This is the KP/Jokic kryptonite.

[DOT]

The big thing is he needs to get over 34% from 3

You need at least 4 guys on the floor who the defense has to account for. 5 is obviously ideal, but 4 is sufficient. If he's around 31% from 3, that's really not good enough as the PF

In terms of stats, it's gonna be 3pt% and a:to ratio. I think he needs to hit at least 35% from 3 and have a 2:1 a:to ratio to be a good fit at the 4. Also needs to give consistent effort on defense, but that's an eye test thing, not a statistical thing.