Julius Randle eat crow thread

[KnicksGadfly]

I just think it's pretty clear that Randle has the talent and physical gifts to be a 2nd option, but the mentality of a 3rd option. And that's ok, we've seen it before in guys who won like Worthy, Bosh, Manu, Ray, Rasheed etc.

He can be a 3rd option on a winner, IMO, and I no longer am going to hold him to the standard of a 2nd option. The FO needs to realize this (maybe they already have).

Don't look down on 3rd options like that. Seriously, some of these names you're throwing out are so disrespectful. Manu? Bosh? Worthy? Ray? It's not easy to be a 3rd option on a championship winning team, and just because you're a bad second option, doesn't mean you'll be a great third option. They often require entirely different skillsets.

A great third option fills in the gaps. Everything that the 1st or 2nd option cannot do, the 3rd option has to do, while sacrificing his offensive opportunities AND being highly efficient with the shots that he takes AND being ready to step up when needs to. It's basically Jrue Holiday...Giannis and Khris take the shots, while Jrue gets the tough perimeter assignments. Aaron Gordon getting to cover for Jokic on defense while Murray and Jokic do their thing.

The hell? I ain't looking down on anyone my guy. I am just giving examples of some outstanding 3rd options in NBA history specifically to make the point that it's not a bad thing at all to be one. By no means is it "easy" to be a 3rd option, that's exactly what I am saying. Maybe don't assume my intentions here, lol. And I am well aware of what a good 3rd option brings to the table, I've watched pro hoops for decades. Of course, the quality of 3rd options on winning teams has varied a lot historically - from the guys I mentioned to less prominent players.

I don't think Randle is a good 2nd option. I do think he could potentially be a 3rd option and I want to see him get some run as one. He talks a lot about wanting to win a title for NY, that may be the best way to make it happen.

The thing is, the way you put it, you are looking down on them, even if you don't intend to.

Julius is not a third option at all. He's not close to it. I think it is very disrespectful to those players to put Julius in that category because they have various skills that are really valuable. It requires sacrifice and lots of basketball that doesn't show up on the stat sheet, stuff that Julius hasn't really wanted to ever do. And to be fair, it's not a Julius problem either. There are lots of guys in this league that cannot make that transition. I would never make that argument for Obi Toppin either. It's like ... once you stop giving the ball to Julius Randle so much, how is he going to add value? It's not easy to just flip that switch.

Right now, all I'm willing to say is that he can be a 2nd option for this team, or a 6th man on a contender.

[Ursusamericanus]

Don't look down on 3rd options like that. Seriously, some of these names you're throwing out are so disrespectful. Manu? Bosh? Worthy? Ray? It's not easy to be a 3rd option on a championship winning team, and just because you're a bad second option, doesn't mean you'll be a great third option. They often require entirely different skillsets.

A great third option fills in the gaps. Everything that the 1st or 2nd option cannot do, the 3rd option has to do, while sacrificing his offensive opportunities AND being highly efficient with the shots that he takes AND being ready to step up when needs to. It's basically Jrue Holiday...Giannis and Khris take the shots, while Jrue gets the tough perimeter assignments. Aaron Gordon getting to cover for Jokic on defense while Murray and Jokic do their thing.

The hell? I ain't looking down on anyone my guy. I am just giving examples of some outstanding 3rd options in NBA history specifically to make the point that it's not a bad thing at all to be one. By no means is it "easy" to be a 3rd option, that's exactly what I am saying. Maybe don't assume my intentions here, lol. And I am well aware of what a good 3rd option brings to the table, I've watched pro hoops for decades. Of course, the quality of 3rd options on winning teams has varied a lot historically - from the guys I mentioned to less prominent players.

I don't think Randle is a good 2nd option. I do think he could potentially be a 3rd option and I want to see him get some run as one. He talks a lot about wanting to win a title for NY, that may be the best way to make it happen.

The thing is, the way you put it, you are looking down on them, even if you don't intend to.

Julius is not a third option at all. He's not close to it. I think it is very disrespectful to those players to put Julius in that category because they have various skills that are really valuable. It requires sacrifice and lots of basketball that doesn't show up on the stat sheet, stuff that Julius hasn't really wanted to ever do. And to be fair, it's not a Julius problem either. There are lots of guys in this league that cannot make that transition. I would never make that argument for Obi Toppin either. It's like ... once you stop giving the ball to Julius Randle so much, how is he going to add value?

Right now, all I'm willing to say is that he can be a 2nd option for this team, or a 6th man.

Well, firstly, no, not at all... I wasn't looking down on anyone and it wasn't disrespectful. I deeply value 3rd options. I myself am usually a 3rd option when I play (2nd on some days). There's a good reason why Spo always said Bosh was their most important player.

Secondly, the role of the 3rd option on championship teams has varied a LOT over the years. Some have a greater offensive load, others are required to focus more on defense and rebounding. I think he has the skills to fit into a Bosh or Siakam-type role if required to, though maybe with more focus on creating than them since he is a pretty good passer and offensive hub (when not sloppy). Siakam was 2nd on the Raptors championship team in scoring and 3rd in FGA, but it could be argued Lowry was the true 2nd option.

I do think Randle could be an outstanding 6th man as well, yes. I don't see him as a 2nd option on a contender anymore, though I'd love for him to prove me wrong. Maybe a co-2nd option.

[knicks94]

With Randle as our main option we are in the Bulls', Nets' and Hawks' level of dreadfulness.

Had the front office not pulled off that Brunson trade Thibs would have been fired in his third season and Randle would have been dumped by the Knicks along with a couple of second round picks.

When all is said and done, Randle and Thibs owe Brunson a lifetime award for saving their Knicks careers.

[SuperflyKnick]

Growing up in New York we all know what is expected from our sports heros. Never shall I believe in a guy who half asses on defence and worries more about the name on the back of his Jersey then what's on front

[3toheadmelo]

crow being served once again

[moocow007]

crow being served once again

I was expecting this.

[cgf]

Julius has to be the most under-rated player in the nba.

[moocow007]

Randle is what he is and that's one heck of an offensive player. His defense leaves something to be desired but people act like he's the only top tier offensive talent that is weak defensively. And I don't want to hear effort being the difference cause just about every single player in the NBA that is offensively gifted but defensively weak would be classified in the same category and yet folks make it seems like Randle is the only guy of his ilk that "can play defense but doesn't want to". Like the rest of the guys that aren't good defensively somehow is justified in not playing defense cause they can't even if they wanted to or some silliness. Doesn't mean he's crap or because he can't defend well that he should be a bench player or some loser. Carmelo was the same way ("Why can't he be like Lebron??!?!")

[DOT]

I like how we've fully shifted the goalposts from "wah, you just want him to be LeBron or Giannis, and that's so unrealistic, how dare you expect that out of him!" to "wah, you just want him to try, and that's so unrealistic, how dare you expect that out of him!"

Trying to spin it as a positive that he could be better but chooses not to be is some real stan sh*t lol.

[KnicksGadfly]

I like how we've fully shifted the goalposts from "wah, you just want him to be LeBron or Giannis, and that's so unrealistic, how dare you expect that out of him!" to "wah, you just want him to try, and that's so unrealistic, how dare you expect that out of him!"

Trying to spin it as a positive that he could be better but chooses not to be is some real stan sh*t lol.

It’s also very straw man-ish. They’re actually not really addressing that his bad defense is because of effort. They’re just excusing it. They’re also forgetting the fact that all stars with bad defense got called out for it, especially if it comes from bad effort. Better players like Harden have been called out for the same thing. Less athletic players like Jokic who carry a heavier workload have worked hard enough to make themselves average.

I think it’s also very straw man that they’re using exaggerations like “bench players” and “not Lebron.” It sounds good and simple but it’s just weak arguments. It’s a good way to excuse legitimate criticisms that are going to get Randle traded when he should be part of the long-term solution.

[FrozenEnvelope]

That 4th quarter was Randle at his best.

[KnicksGadfly]

I think it’s very telling that this thread gets bumped every once in a while. We never see this for Brunson…why is that?

[robillionaire]

I think it’s very telling that this thread gets bumped every once in a while. We never see this for Brunson…why is that?

There have been several eat crow threads about Brunson bumped like the one about him vs Lonzo

[cgf]

I think it’s very telling that this thread gets bumped every once in a while. We never see this for Brunson…why is that?

A) we do
B) most of us are happy to ignore Brunson's shortcomings, while Randle is judged exclusively for his by his detractors. Since Brunson gets the benefit of being judged for what he is, while Randle is judged for what he isn't, there isn't as much crow for people to eat about Brunson because we're generally a lot more fair when discussing him.

[Stannis]

I think it’s very telling that this thread gets bumped every once in a while. We never see this for Brunson…why is that?

There have been several eat crow threads about Brunson bumped like the one about him vs Lonzo

And the "Step Yo Game Up Brunson" thread. Might not say "eat crow" in the title. But that's what the threads are for lol.

[Buttah304]

I think it’s very telling that this thread gets bumped every once in a while. We never see this for Brunson…why is that?

There have been several eat crow threads about Brunson bumped like the one about him vs Lonzo

Randle has his flaws but last night he really stepped up. Without Jalen for 3.5Q we might have been down 15+ but when he went 0-5 FG down the stretch we needed Randle to lock in. 9 points including 4FT, big 3PT make and then running in transition for the dunk. Not much more you can ask for - you need your stars to pick each-other up. J Hart and OG defense sealed the win in the final 90 seconds. Nice to see everyone chip in.

[KnicksGadfly]

I think it’s very telling that this thread gets bumped every once in a while. We never see this for Brunson…why is that?

A) we do
B) most of us are happy to ignore Brunson's shortcomings, while Randle is judged exclusively for his by his detractors. Since Brunson gets the benefit of being judged for what he is, while Randle is judged for what he isn't, there isn't as much crow for people to eat about Brunson because we're generally a lot more fair when discussing him.

Nope. The real reason is that Randle periodically gives people a reason to redoubt him over and over again. Brunson is a crappy defender but there’s no doubt that he’s trying and sacrificing, especially with his charges. At this point, Brunson has established his dominance.

Randle periodically and regularly gives people material to doubt his abilities. He goes through extreme periods of highs and lows. Then when he gets on a high, people show up to “serve crow.” Then people vomit the crow. Look at this thread. This is the history of Randle. It’s a multi year thread…it’s gross.

The thing is, Randle should have ended this discussion long ago. He has the ability. This thread should have been dead after the pandemic season. Maybe people would have booted it up to gloat every once in a while, which would have been great. But this should not be a live “eat crow” thread. It speaks to Randle’s weaknesses, inconsistency, and lack of effort.

[robillionaire]

I think it’s very telling that this thread gets bumped every once in a while. We never see this for Brunson…why is that?

A) we do
B) most of us are happy to ignore Brunson's shortcomings, while Randle is judged exclusively for his by his detractors. Since Brunson gets the benefit of being judged for what he is, while Randle is judged for what he isn't, there isn't as much crow for people to eat about Brunson because we're generally a lot more fair when discussing him.

stay woke

[cgf]

I think it’s very telling that this thread gets bumped every once in a while. We never see this for Brunson…why is that?

A) we do
B) most of us are happy to ignore Brunson's shortcomings, while Randle is judged exclusively for his by his detractors. Since Brunson gets the benefit of being judged for what he is, while Randle is judged for what he isn't, there isn't as much crow for people to eat about Brunson because we're generally a lot more fair when discussing him.

Nope. The real reason is that Randle periodically gives people a reason to redoubt him over and over again. Brunson is a crappy defender but there’s no doubt that he’s trying and sacrificing, especially with his charges. At this point, Brunson has established his dominance.

Randle periodically and regularly gives people material to doubt his abilities. He goes through extreme periods of highs and lows. Then when he gets on a high, people show up to “serve crow.” Then people vomit the crow. Look at this thread. This is the history of Randle. It’s a multi year thread…it’s gross.

The thing is, Randle should have ended this discussion long ago. He has the ability. This thread should have been dead after the pandemic season. Maybe people would have booted it up to gloat every once in a while, which would have been great. But this should not be a live “eat crow” thread. It speaks to Randle’s weaknesses, inconsistency, and lack of effort.

Sure. People judging them by the same standards is why when Julius jogs back because he's complaining to the refs about a call it gets multiple pages in each GDT, and when Jalen does it nobody even mentions it. Right....

[j4remi]

I think it’s very telling that this thread gets bumped every once in a while. We never see this for Brunson…why is that?

A) we do
B) most of us are happy to ignore Brunson's shortcomings, while Randle is judged exclusively for his by his detractors. Since Brunson gets the benefit of being judged for what he is, while Randle is judged for what he isn't, there isn't as much crow for people to eat about Brunson because we're generally a lot more fair when discussing him.

I think this is pretty weak. Randle is judged for his effort. His shortcomings on defense are effort-based, not due to physical limitations. Brunson closes out hard and players shoot over him. Randle closes out soft and players shoot over him. It's not the same shortcoming, which is why they're not treated the same.