ImageImageImageImageImage

Randle Trade Talk

Moderators: HerSports85, NoLayupRule, GONYK, Jeff Van Gully, dakomish23, Deeeez Knicks, mpharris36, j4remi

User avatar
Ma10
Pro Prospect
Posts: 949
And1: 817
Joined: Feb 11, 2021
Location: Lübeck
 

Re: Randle Trade Talk 

Post#821 » by Ma10 » Wed Feb 2, 2022 8:20 pm

Marty McFly wrote:
Ma10 wrote:I could only imagine two teams trading for Julius right now and that would be Portland and Sacramento.

Portland Trade: something of Covington and Nance jr. + a Pick for Randle and fillers

Sacramento: Fox and fillers for Randle and Kemba

Every other teams ar either not stupid enough or desperate!


if there aren't more than two teams interested in him, there are a lot of stupid teams. He can be the 3rd piece in a championship team.

There is a **** load of stupid teams. But the kings must be one of them. So are the trailblazers who just got lucky drafting Dame and cj. They gave stupid contracts to the likes of Meyer Leonard, Evan Turner, Allen crabbe. And don't get me started on the kings.
Image
rayraypico
Sophomore
Posts: 108
And1: 121
Joined: Nov 13, 2019
     

Re: Randle Trade Talk 

Post#822 » by rayraypico » Thu Feb 3, 2022 1:35 pm

Ok its Feb 3rd...why is No Handle Randle still here?
snadler
General Manager
Posts: 7,527
And1: 8,362
Joined: Feb 16, 2009

Re: Randle Trade Talk 

Post#823 » by snadler » Thu Feb 3, 2022 3:06 pm

Marty McFly wrote:
Ma10 wrote:I could only imagine two teams trading for Julius right now and that would be Portland and Sacramento.

Portland Trade: something of Covington and Nance jr. + a Pick for Randle and fillers

Sacramento: Fox and fillers for Randle and Kemba

Every other teams ar either not stupid enough or desperate!


if there aren't more than two teams interested in him, there are a lot of stupid teams. He can be the 3rd piece in a championship team.



Here’s the issue with this comment..championship level teams don’t have players making 113 million over the next 4 seasons that they are willing to dump for Randle to make their contracts work..Randle has value but not at the expense of 113 million for the next 4 seasons. If he was an expiring contract as he should have been there would be several teams lining up to trade for him but Not with that extension. If Randle never signed last summer, and was a free agent this summer not 1 team in the league would give him the contract extension he signed. That’s why there is very little trade market for him
User avatar
Tracymcgoaty
RealGM
Posts: 22,479
And1: 20,474
Joined: Dec 21, 2015
   

Re: Randle Trade Talk 

Post#824 » by Tracymcgoaty » Thu Feb 3, 2022 3:11 pm

Trade proposal - Both the Lakers and Knicks package Westbrook and Randle to the Shanghai Sharks. And in return both teams get peace.
Raul
“The other day I saw one of his games. He was running with the ball at a hundred per cent full speed, I don’t know how many touches he took, maybe five or six, but the ball was glued to his foot. It’s practically impossible.”
User avatar
F N 11
RealGM
Posts: 94,926
And1: 67,663
Joined: Jun 27, 2006
Location: Getting over screens with Gusto.
Contact:
 

Re: Randle Trade Talk 

Post#825 » by F N 11 » Thu Feb 3, 2022 3:22 pm

Came for Randle rumors left with disappointment.
CEO of the not trading RJ Club
User avatar
APE
Junior
Posts: 431
And1: 579
Joined: May 25, 2015
         

Re: Randle Trade Talk 

Post#826 » by APE » Thu Feb 3, 2022 3:44 pm

please let the Kings be stupid
User avatar
sol537
RealGM
Posts: 15,322
And1: 7,868
Joined: Nov 07, 2001

Re: Randle Trade Talk 

Post#827 » by sol537 » Thu Feb 3, 2022 3:58 pm

Randle, Fournier, Walker for Westbrook, scraps, 2027 1st unprotected, 2nd rounder, future pick swap.

Lakers get back into serious contention... we clean cap and grab assets. Win-win.
VirginiaKnickFan
RealGM
Posts: 12,604
And1: 3,537
Joined: Aug 15, 2005
Location: Virginia

Re: Randle Trade Talk 

Post#828 » by VirginiaKnickFan » Thu Feb 3, 2022 5:36 pm

sol537 wrote:Randle, Fournier, Walker for Westbrook, scraps, 2027 1st unprotected, 2nd rounder, future pick swap.

Lakers get back into serious contention... we clean cap and grab assets. Win-win.


Lakers FO wouldn't consider that.
User avatar
dakomish23
Forum Mod - Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Posts: 58,764
And1: 48,736
Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Location: Empire State
     

Re: Randle Trade Talk 

Post#829 » by dakomish23 » Thu Feb 3, 2022 9:14 pm

GONYK wrote:
dakomish23 wrote:
GONYK wrote:
Bullock has been terrible for Dallas and $10M isn't cheap for what he's been giving them.

Just play Grimes.


R. Bullock, .J. Randle, .R. Barrett
1594 mins - the largest 3 man combo we had last year
110.4 ORTG
106.5 DRTG
3.9 NRTG

R. Bullock, .J. Randle
1811 mins - the 2nd largest 2 man combo we had last year
109.5 ORTG
106.3 DRTG
3.2 NRTG

R. Bullock, .R. Barrett
1652 mins - the 3rd largest 2 man combo we had last year
110.2 ORTG
106.7 DRTG
3.5 NRTG

But hey, I’m sure his more expensive replacement is doing well with our two main players, right?

E. Fournier, .J. Randle, .R. Barrett
910 mins - highest mins for a 3 man combo this year
108.8 ORTG
114.3 DRTG
-5.5 NRTG

E. Fournier, .J. Randle
1243 mins - highest mins for a 2 man combo this year
107.3 ORTG
111.7 DRTG
-4.4 NRTG

E. Fournier, .R. Barrett
959 mins - 3rd highest mins for a 2 man combo this year
108.0 ORTG
114.2 DRTG
-6.2 NRTG

Money well spent b/c the other guy isn’t doing well on a different team in a different system with different PT. Right???

What does what he has done for DAL matter when discussing keeping him in our system when he was good for us and was a good fit with our two franchise players?

Why settle for just one in Grimes when you could have had two of this archetype that clearly fits well with your 2 main guys?

Context has been and forever will be the enemy of arguments trying to defend bad decisions by this FO.


Here's additional context: He was utterly useless in the playoffs and couldn't attack a defender like Trae Young.

That's why they paid Burks instead of him and got his direct replacement is Grimes.

Both players are better than Bullock this season.

That has nothing to do with defending the FO and everything to do with Bullock not being good this season. Point blank.

We have Grimes in our system and he's better. That's really all that matters. We have the archetype available and it didn't cost us $10M/yr.

Why have 2 of the exact same archetype when Burks' archetype adds another dimension and is more valuable?

This notion that Bullock, the person, would have fixed Julius or make any difference is just kinda off. Just play Grimes.

The FO did their job and upgraded the role. It's on Thibs for not getting him on the floor.


THJ went down 4 games ago and now Bullock has been given a big bump in mins & opportunity, more similar to the role he had with us. And in those last 4:

53% FG on 11.3 FGA
50% 3PT on 9.0 3PA
17.8 PPG

Why would care if a 3&D guy can ISO when him being a 3&D guy is why he was such a good fit with our two top players?

Why after seeing how well a 3&D perimeter guy fits with these two, would you not want more than one of them?

Your logic is off here. There’s no maximum on the archetype of these players that are coveted around the league.
Jimmit79 wrote:Yea RJ played well he was definitely the x factor


#FreeJimmit
User avatar
Marty McFly
RealGM
Posts: 26,636
And1: 9,348
Joined: Sep 15, 2009
     

Re: Randle Trade Talk 

Post#830 » by Marty McFly » Fri Feb 4, 2022 4:05 am

VirginiaKnickFan wrote:
sol537 wrote:Randle, Fournier, Walker for Westbrook, scraps, 2027 1st unprotected, 2nd rounder, future pick swap.

Lakers get back into serious contention... we clean cap and grab assets. Win-win.


Lakers FO wouldn't consider that.


they traded for Russ.
Guano wrote:Fourni3r forgetting he has Bob cousy handles

Woodsanity wrote:Imagine trusting a team with World B Flat on it without Lebron keeping him in check.
User avatar
Marty McFly
RealGM
Posts: 26,636
And1: 9,348
Joined: Sep 15, 2009
     

Re: Randle Trade Talk 

Post#831 » by Marty McFly » Fri Feb 4, 2022 4:11 am

Dolan has never been pragmatic and the FO is married to Randle. I have a hard time seeing them trading him. they could have sold high last year, and they didn't do it. they extended him like the idiots they are. Burks, Noel might be goners, I wouldn't expect anything more than that.
Guano wrote:Fourni3r forgetting he has Bob cousy handles

Woodsanity wrote:Imagine trusting a team with World B Flat on it without Lebron keeping him in check.
User avatar
god shammgod
RealGM
Posts: 137,848
And1: 136,139
Joined: Feb 18, 2006

Re: Randle Trade Talk 

Post#832 » by god shammgod » Fri Feb 4, 2022 4:22 am

Marty McFly wrote:
VirginiaKnickFan wrote:
sol537 wrote:Randle, Fournier, Walker for Westbrook, scraps, 2027 1st unprotected, 2nd rounder, future pick swap.

Lakers get back into serious contention... we clean cap and grab assets. Win-win.


Lakers FO wouldn't consider that.


they traded for Russ.


they gave some consideration for trading russ for wall and that was gonna cost them a pick. so...it's possible.
BLACKFEET 2010
RealGM
Posts: 10,285
And1: 3,847
Joined: Jun 26, 2009

Re: Randle Trade Talk 

Post#833 » by BLACKFEET 2010 » Fri Feb 4, 2022 4:47 am

Julius has unfollowed the Knicks on IG.
User avatar
ezmoney707
General Manager
Posts: 8,644
And1: 4,020
Joined: Jun 21, 2006
     

Re: Randle Trade Talk 

Post#834 » by ezmoney707 » Fri Feb 4, 2022 4:54 am

BLACKFEET 2010 wrote:Julius has unfollowed the Knicks on IG.

I don’t think we have proof he was ever following them
BLACKFEET 2010
RealGM
Posts: 10,285
And1: 3,847
Joined: Jun 26, 2009

Re: Randle Trade Talk 

Post#835 » by BLACKFEET 2010 » Fri Feb 4, 2022 4:55 am

ezmoney707 wrote:
BLACKFEET 2010 wrote:Julius has unfollowed the Knicks on IG.

I don’t think we have proof he was ever following them

Ahhhh. Got it.
User avatar
evevale
Head Coach
Posts: 6,062
And1: 18,496
Joined: Dec 06, 2010
Location: the internet
 

Re: Randle Trade Talk 

Post#836 » by evevale » Fri Feb 4, 2022 4:57 am

ezmoney707 wrote:
BLACKFEET 2010 wrote:Julius has unfollowed the Knicks on IG.

I don’t think we have proof he was ever following them

and thus did the olive branch wither and die ...

i'll never get that 5 minutes i spent scrolling through his followed back
Image
User avatar
Monk1718
RealGM
Posts: 12,642
And1: 19,841
Joined: Jul 10, 2014
 

Re: Randle Trade Talk 

Post#837 » by Monk1718 » Fri Feb 4, 2022 5:07 am

Few people are saying they do recall him following the Knicks on IG. Not saying he was but still something to note.
Jeffrey
General Manager
Posts: 8,552
And1: 6,244
Joined: Aug 02, 2010
     

Re: Randle Trade Talk 

Post#838 » by Jeffrey » Fri Feb 4, 2022 5:18 am

These are the criteria that I think the following teams will be a match for Randle and GM taking a flyer on him:
1. a team that is ready to take a step up (yes RealGMers, Randle can still contribute in the league)
2. a team that already has option 1 and/or 2
3. a team that is a veteran-led team (not necessary)

Portland
Sacramento
Boston
Lakers
Clippers
Dallas
Wizards (if Beal stays)


Most reports are saying that it has to be the right price for Randle. I don't know what that is but he needs to go. His demeanor is just crap and that's something Knicks fans will not tolerate.
User avatar
thebuzzardman
RealGM
Posts: 81,297
And1: 94,963
Joined: Jun 24, 2006
Location: Villanovknicks

Re: Randle Trade Talk 

Post#839 » by thebuzzardman » Fri Feb 4, 2022 5:21 am

Wassup? Knicks trade Randle yet?
Image
User avatar
thebuzzardman
RealGM
Posts: 81,297
And1: 94,963
Joined: Jun 24, 2006
Location: Villanovknicks

Re: Randle Trade Talk 

Post#840 » by thebuzzardman » Fri Feb 4, 2022 5:23 am

dakomish23 wrote:
GONYK wrote:
dakomish23 wrote:
R. Bullock, .J. Randle, .R. Barrett
1594 mins - the largest 3 man combo we had last year
110.4 ORTG
106.5 DRTG
3.9 NRTG

R. Bullock, .J. Randle
1811 mins - the 2nd largest 2 man combo we had last year
109.5 ORTG
106.3 DRTG
3.2 NRTG

R. Bullock, .R. Barrett
1652 mins - the 3rd largest 2 man combo we had last year
110.2 ORTG
106.7 DRTG
3.5 NRTG

But hey, I’m sure his more expensive replacement is doing well with our two main players, right?

E. Fournier, .J. Randle, .R. Barrett
910 mins - highest mins for a 3 man combo this year
108.8 ORTG
114.3 DRTG
-5.5 NRTG

E. Fournier, .J. Randle
1243 mins - highest mins for a 2 man combo this year
107.3 ORTG
111.7 DRTG
-4.4 NRTG

E. Fournier, .R. Barrett
959 mins - 3rd highest mins for a 2 man combo this year
108.0 ORTG
114.2 DRTG
-6.2 NRTG

Money well spent b/c the other guy isn’t doing well on a different team in a different system with different PT. Right???

What does what he has done for DAL matter when discussing keeping him in our system when he was good for us and was a good fit with our two franchise players?

Why settle for just one in Grimes when you could have had two of this archetype that clearly fits well with your 2 main guys?

Context has been and forever will be the enemy of arguments trying to defend bad decisions by this FO.


Here's additional context: He was utterly useless in the playoffs and couldn't attack a defender like Trae Young.

That's why they paid Burks instead of him and got his direct replacement is Grimes.

Both players are better than Bullock this season.

That has nothing to do with defending the FO and everything to do with Bullock not being good this season. Point blank.

We have Grimes in our system and he's better. That's really all that matters. We have the archetype available and it didn't cost us $10M/yr.

Why have 2 of the exact same archetype when Burks' archetype adds another dimension and is more valuable?

This notion that Bullock, the person, would have fixed Julius or make any difference is just kinda off. Just play Grimes.

The FO did their job and upgraded the role. It's on Thibs for not getting him on the floor.


THJ went down 4 games ago and now Bullock has been given a big bump in mins & opportunity, more similar to the role he had with us. And in those last 4:

53% FG on 11.3 FGA
50% 3PT on 9.0 3PA
17.8 PPG

Why would care if a 3&D guy can ISO when him being a 3&D guy is why he was such a good fit with our two top players?

Why after seeing how well a 3&D perimeter guy fits with these two, would you not want more than one of them?

Your logic is off here. There’s no maximum on the archetype of these players that are coveted around the league.


Really miss that role player Bullocks. Yeah, that's it. The difference maker.
Bring back Elf too.
Image

Return to New York Knicks