NYK / HOU - an overpay worth making?

[taikibansei]

I have been following the Randle saga for awhile now, and one thing is for absolute certain;

There is no "Randle saga." The Knicks are not actively seeking to trade Randle. Most Knicks fans don't want him moved--particularly if we have to pay to get it done. Instead, we want to see how Randle does next season fully healthy and paired with an elite point guard. I personally expect another all-star season combined with a deep playoff run. Fingers crossed.

Knick fans have/are greatly overestimating his value.

Almost all the trade offers posted to this board are from non-Knicks fans. In response, we're just saying that the team is not desperate to move Randle now. Accordingly, we're likely not paying (picks, additional assets) to sweeten any offer to get a deal done. Don't like it? Fine.

Just perusing the Knicks board, trades and transactions thread. Latest post;


Jabari Smith Jr. + Steven Adams + Tari Eason + (draft picks) = Randle

That is what I was referring to. That value is so lopsided in favor of the Knicks, its ridiculous, wading into absurd.

Oh my gosh, some random dude posted some random trade to the Knicks internal board (i.e., not here and not in any legit news source)! Golly, that proves everything!

[MoreyWins]

Lets just put value aside, if we were interested in Randle, and he wanted to be here, we could just sign him in free agency next year.

Funny enough, we probably wouldn't even do that. Randle is a niche player for teams that are desperate for relevancy, like Detroit or the Knicks of old. The Rockets were contending for enough years in the Harden era that the only step up is to actually win it all in this next iteration of the team. Randle on a 5 year max deal puts a ceiling on whoever signs him.

[Tim Lehrbach]

FWIW, I do think if you subtract Randle from the Knicks without bringing in another versatile frontcourt piece, you probably do lose offensive dynamism to the detriment of the team's ceiling. I love the Bridges/OG wing combo but am a little bit skeptical of their top-end offense for a contender. They should be third and fourth options... and with Randle around, they are. Şengün may be Randle's equal and almost certainly would be more coveted by other teams, but it's an open question whether he actually improves the Knicks' offense. The Knicks' time is now, and they need to prioritize complementing their other top talent. Randle is a fit.

It's quite an intriguing mix in New York. Can't wait to see them battle with other top teams.

(Also, yes, I'm embarrassed I tried to swap Ayton for Randle. Let's just pretend that one didn't happen, yeah?)

[Kiss of Death]

Read on Twitter

[MoreyWins]

They absolutely should extend this regular season wins machine

[cgf]

So.. sengun is better at everything but the stat heavily influenced by previous seasons?

Your center almost getting outrebounded by our powerforward isn't a good thing. Robinson's REBr was 19.2%, Hartenstein 18.5%, even Achiuwa was at 16.6%. Sengun's not a very good rebounding center, Randle's a great rebounding forward.

Or if I had just mentioned their 3pt shooting without context, would you have eaten that without pointing out the position difference?

You also seem to have completely skipped the part were Julius is scoring almost 3 more points a game...outproducing Sengun by 13.7%.

individual rebounding numbers are one of the most useless counting stats we have, both guys have the same on/off for team dreb%. Rebounding is a team stat. Yes, he scored 2.9 ppg more on 2.6 more FGAs and 1 more FTA. That's not a good thing, hence the descrepency in efficiency lol. He is a better shooter but 32% his last 3 years isn't exactly creating a ton of spacing out their either way, if you want to do the position thing he's just as bad a shooting 4 as sengun is a shooting 5, despite the 1 year abiration where he was hitting 3s

That’s true. Is there a better stat for measuring an individual player’s impact on his team’s rebounding? Cause again if Julius is helping just as much despite having our centers gobbling up so many of the boards, that feels like a distinct advantage over Sengun who would be playing instead of a Robinson.

And yes it’s harder to produce more than less, that’s why efficiency tends to go down as usage goes up…but after shaking off the rust Randle was producing more and doing it more efficiently.

Are we doing the positional thing or not? I’m happy to have this conversation if it can be fruitful. I have zero interests in just yelling at each other that our guy is better if you frame things in the most favorable light for them. So let’s establish the parameters of our conversation.

[cgf]

FWIW, I do think if you subtract Randle from the Knicks without bringing in another versatile frontcourt piece, you probably do lose offensive dynamism to the detriment of the team's ceiling. I love the Bridges/OG wing combo but am a little bit skeptical of their top-end offense for a contender. They should be third and fourth options... and with Randle around, they are. Şengün may be Randle's equal and almost certainly would be more coveted by other teams, but it's an open question whether he actually improves the Knicks' offense. The Knicks' time is now, and they need to prioritize complementing their other top talent. Randle is a fit.

It's quite an intriguing mix in New York. Can't wait to see them battle with other top teams.

(Also, yes, I'm embarrassed I tried to swap Ayton for Randle. Let's just pretend that one didn't happen, yeah?)

That's the big thing for me. After Randle went down Brunson's minutes & usage shot up, and his efficiency fell notably. The difference was even more pronounced in the previous year's postseason, when Jalen's w/ & w/o #s with Randle were just shocking. So whether other fanbases want Randle or not, we need him.

He's our only non-Brunson creator, the two of them have good on court chemistry, and they have a great synergy...with Randle being a hotstarter, who cools off as teams adjust to him, whereas Brunson typically needs to feel his way into a game before taking off once he's got his rhythm. So first quarter Randle being an MVP level player works perfectly with Brunson who generally doesn't start exploding until the 2nd quarter/half.

[oldncreaky]

FWIW, I do think if you subtract Randle from the Knicks without bringing in another versatile frontcourt piece, you probably do lose offensive dynamism to the detriment of the team's ceiling. I love the Bridges/OG wing combo but am a little bit skeptical of their top-end offense for a contender. They should be third and fourth options... and with Randle around, they are. Şengün may be Randle's equal and almost certainly would be more coveted by other teams, but it's an open question whether he actually improves the Knicks' offense. The Knicks' time is now, and they need to prioritize complementing their other top talent. Randle is a fit.

It's quite an intriguing mix in New York. Can't wait to see them battle with other top teams.

(Also, yes, I'm embarrassed I tried to swap Ayton for Randle. Let's just pretend that one didn't happen, yeah?)

That's the big thing for me. After Randle went down Brunson's minutes & usage shot up, and his efficiency fell notably. The difference was even more pronounced in the previous year's postseason, when Jalen's w/ & w/o #s with Randle were just shocking. So whether other fanbases want Randle or not, we need him.

He's our only non-Brunson creator, the two of them have good on court chemistry, and they have a great synergy...with Randle being a hotstarter, who cools off as teams adjust to him, whereas Brunson typically needs to feel his way into a game before taking off once he's got his rhythm. So first quarter Randle being an MVP level player works perfectly with Brunson who generally doesn't start exploding until the 2nd quarter/half.

Agree, I like the fit, especially given the Knicks' time line: without Randle the Knicks contending odds decline. If he can avoid bad luck with injuries, and he buys into being the second guy on the Knicks, I think Randle is heading into the peaks 2-3 years of his career. The only reason to trade Randle is if he won't extend.

For all this board's obsession with youth and potential, winning teams are mostly composed of guys in their late 20s and early 30s -- like the entire Knicks rotation.

[JayTWill]

FWIW, I do think if you subtract Randle from the Knicks without bringing in another versatile frontcourt piece, you probably do lose offensive dynamism to the detriment of the team's ceiling. I love the Bridges/OG wing combo but am a little bit skeptical of their top-end offense for a contender. They should be third and fourth options... and with Randle around, they are. Şengün may be Randle's equal and almost certainly would be more coveted by other teams, but it's an open question whether he actually improves the Knicks' offense. The Knicks' time is now, and they need to prioritize complementing their other top talent. Randle is a fit.

It's quite an intriguing mix in New York. Can't wait to see them battle with other top teams.

(Also, yes, I'm embarrassed I tried to swap Ayton for Randle. Let's just pretend that one didn't happen, yeah?)

That's the big thing for me. After Randle went down Brunson's minutes & usage shot up, and his efficiency fell notably. The difference was even more pronounced in the previous year's postseason, when Jalen's w/ & w/o #s with Randle were just shocking. So whether other fanbases want Randle or not, we need him.

He's our only non-Brunson creator, the two of them have good on court chemistry, and they have a great synergy...with Randle being a hotstarter, who cools off as teams adjust to him, whereas Brunson typically needs to feel his way into a game before taking off once he's got his rhythm. So first quarter Randle being an MVP level player works perfectly with Brunson who generally doesn't start exploding until the 2nd quarter/half.

That shows the impact on Brunson's individual offensive efficiency if you dumped Randle for nothing but it still doesn't explain why you wouldn't trade a soon to be 30 year old Randle for a player that is 7.5 years younger that essentially gives you much of what Randle does already. Randle is likely to decline over the length of his next contract while Sengun could easily improve.

Yes, Brunson's efficiency declined without Randle this year but the Knicks were dealing with a ton of issues at the same time in the second half of the season. OG went down at the same time as Randle and Mitch was already out due to injury. Brunson and Randle may be the better and more exciting offensive players but OG easily had the biggest overall impact on the team after the trade.

Post trade Brunson/Randle/OG without* Mitch/RJ/IQ out were +26.1 while only allowing 104.7 points per 100 possessions.
Brunson/Randle without OG and Mitch/RJ/IQ were -0.2 allowing 127 points per 100 possessions.
Brunson/OG without Randle and Mitch/RJ/IQ were +28.2 while only allowing 96.3 points per 100 possessions.

The loss of Randle hurt the ceiling of the offense but it also helped the defense while the loss of OG's defense was huge and it also took away some the ability to turn defense into easier looks on offense. At the same time this is occurring with Mitch out Thibs overextended iHart's minutes who had been playing on a soar achilles all year so he was forced into a minutes restriction.

Precious did an admirable job eating up minutes but he wasn't a great fit on the roster especially when forced into the starting lineup. The Hart/Precious/iHart pairing provided no spacing or shooting with limited ballhandling and made Brunson's life incredibly difficult in February. The team and Brunson didn't function better until Thibs was forced to go small and give McBride the starting spot over Precious and a bigger role with OG still out.

Add to that Grimes was underperforming most of the year and was eventually traded for Bogey and Burks, a decision many applauded but they were absolutely terrible for the Knicks on both ends of the court. The Knicks were hammered by injuries including Brunson and many guys were forced into bigger roles and insane minutes at times but somehow they found a way to win. So much was happening at the time that it is hard to even know how much of an impact overall Randle's absence was.

As far as the 2023 playoffs Brunson was more efficient offensively with Randle on the court. He can help to carry some of the offensive load and occupy a tougher defender like Butler and there are other benefits but the team as a whole performed better on both ends of the court with Brunson on and Randle off.

Brunson/Randle was +3.6 115.0 off/ 111.4 def
Brunson without Randle was +10.1 117.4 off/ 107.3 def while being 10 percentage points better on the offensive glass and their opponent being 2% points worse.

It's a small sample size and Randle was banged up so I wouldn't give too much weight to those numbers but they don't show that pairing Randle with Brunson benefited the team. I don't think Randle is a negative player or he should be traded for anything and I too am annoyed by the response he gets from some members of opposing fanbases but I am confused to why it seems some Knicks' fans are so resistant to trading him at all. At this point I wonder which players some fans would trade Randle for straight up.

[cgf]

FWIW, I do think if you subtract Randle from the Knicks without bringing in another versatile frontcourt piece, you probably do lose offensive dynamism to the detriment of the team's ceiling. I love the Bridges/OG wing combo but am a little bit skeptical of their top-end offense for a contender. They should be third and fourth options... and with Randle around, they are. Şengün may be Randle's equal and almost certainly would be more coveted by other teams, but it's an open question whether he actually improves the Knicks' offense. The Knicks' time is now, and they need to prioritize complementing their other top talent. Randle is a fit.

It's quite an intriguing mix in New York. Can't wait to see them battle with other top teams.

(Also, yes, I'm embarrassed I tried to swap Ayton for Randle. Let's just pretend that one didn't happen, yeah?)

That's the big thing for me. After Randle went down Brunson's minutes & usage shot up, and his efficiency fell notably. The difference was even more pronounced in the previous year's postseason, when Jalen's w/ & w/o #s with Randle were just shocking. So whether other fanbases want Randle or not, we need him.

He's our only non-Brunson creator, the two of them have good on court chemistry, and they have a great synergy...with Randle being a hotstarter, who cools off as teams adjust to him, whereas Brunson typically needs to feel his way into a game before taking off once he's got his rhythm. So first quarter Randle being an MVP level player works perfectly with Brunson who generally doesn't start exploding until the 2nd quarter/half.

That shows the impact on Brunson's individual offensive efficiency if you dumped Randle for nothing but it still doesn't explain why you wouldn't trade a soon to be 30 year old Randle for a player that is 7.5 years younger that essentially gives you much of what Randle does already. Randle is likely to decline over the length of his next contract while Sengun could easily improve.

Yes, Brunson's efficiency declined without Randle this year but the Knicks were dealing with a ton of issues at the same time in the second half of the season. OG went down at the same time as Randle and Mitch was already out due to injury. Brunson and Randle may be the better and more exciting offensive players but OG easily had the biggest overall impact on the team after the trade.

Post trade Brunson/Randle/OG without* Mitch/RJ/IQ out were +26.1 while only allowing 104.7 points per 100 possessions.
Brunson/Randle without OG and Mitch/RJ/IQ were -0.2 allowing 127 points per 100 possessions.
Brunson/OG without Randle and Mitch/RJ/IQ were +28.2 while only allowing 96.3 points per 100 possessions.

The loss of Randle hurt the ceiling of the offense but it also helped the defense while the loss of OG's defense was huge and it also took away some the ability to turn defense into easier looks on offense. At the same time this is occurring with Mitch out Thibs overextended iHart's minutes who had been playing on a soar achilles all year so he was forced into a minutes restriction.

Precious did an admirable job eating up minutes but he wasn't a great fit on the roster especially when forced into the starting lineup. The Hart/Precious/iHart pairing provided no spacing or shooting with limited ballhandling and made Brunson's life incredibly difficult in February. The team and Brunson didn't function better until Thibs was forced to go small and give McBride the starting spot over Precious and a bigger role with OG still out.

Add to that Grimes was underperforming most of the year and was eventually traded for Bogey and Burks, a decision many applauded but they were absolutely terrible for the Knicks on both ends of the court. The Knicks were hammered by injuries including Brunson and many guys were forced into bigger roles and insane minutes at times but somehow they found a way to win. So much was happening at the time that it is hard to even know how much of an impact overall Randle's absence was.

As far as the 2023 playoffs Brunson was more efficient offensively with Randle on the court. He can help to carry some of the offensive load and occupy a tougher defender like Butler and there are other benefits but the team as a whole performed better on both ends of the court with Brunson on and Randle off.

Brunson/Randle was +3.6 115.0 off/ 111.4 def
Brunson without Randle was +10.1 117.4 off/ 107.3 def while being 10 percentage points better on the offensive glass and their opponent being 2% points worse.

It's a small sample size and Randle was banged up so I wouldn't give too much weight to those numbers but they don't show that pairing Randle with Brunson benefited the team. I don't think Randle is a negative player or he should be traded for anything and I too am annoyed by the response he gets from some members of opposing fanbases but I am confused to why it seems some Knicks' fans are so resistant to trading him at all. At this point I wonder which players some fans would trade Randle for straight up.

Well like I said. Volume is a thing, and after I do think Julius can sustain the level he was at after those first 6 games last season where he was producing more and doing it more efficiently. And he has forced double teams at an exceptional rate since being paired with Brunson.

But mostly it’s a combo of knowing that Julius fits what we’ve got brewing both on the court & off it; whereas Sengun may not click with the nova boys off the court and may not like playing second fiddle.

And that Sengun is a center. So it’s hard to pair him with an elite rim protector / rebounder like Thibs would want, as you can’t play Robinson-Sengun together.

If we had JJJ instead of Mitch then I’d be much more intrigued by the idea of swapping Julius for someone in that Sengun / Sabonis mold. But with our roster I think having that 2nd All-NBA guy at the 4 is pretty perfect.

[WargamesX]

What would the rockets want for jock Landale?

[lpbman]

What would the rockets want for jock Landale?

Hey, look! A question based in reality!

Answer would be future assets. Roster is full of talent and minutes between quality players will be stretched thin. Problem is we probably want to hold on to him more for being an outstandingly tradable contract in a bigger deal. He's a solid backup big, maybe still some potential to get better... with zero guaranteed money on his deal. Pay him and play him, cut him and don't, dealers choice. I don't know how granular it is though... do you have to guarantee an entire year at a time, or can he be cut any time and he only gets paid for the games he's played?

[JayTWill]

That's the big thing for me. After Randle went down Brunson's minutes & usage shot up, and his efficiency fell notably. The difference was even more pronounced in the previous year's postseason, when Jalen's w/ & w/o #s with Randle were just shocking. So whether other fanbases want Randle or not, we need him.

He's our only non-Brunson creator, the two of them have good on court chemistry, and they have a great synergy...with Randle being a hotstarter, who cools off as teams adjust to him, whereas Brunson typically needs to feel his way into a game before taking off once he's got his rhythm. So first quarter Randle being an MVP level player works perfectly with Brunson who generally doesn't start exploding until the 2nd quarter/half.

That shows the impact on Brunson's individual offensive efficiency if you dumped Randle for nothing but it still doesn't explain why you wouldn't trade a soon to be 30 year old Randle for a player that is 7.5 years younger that essentially gives you much of what Randle does already. Randle is likely to decline over the length of his next contract while Sengun could easily improve.

Yes, Brunson's efficiency declined without Randle this year but the Knicks were dealing with a ton of issues at the same time in the second half of the season. OG went down at the same time as Randle and Mitch was already out due to injury. Brunson and Randle may be the better and more exciting offensive players but OG easily had the biggest overall impact on the team after the trade.

Post trade Brunson/Randle/OG without* Mitch/RJ/IQ out were +26.1 while only allowing 104.7 points per 100 possessions.
Brunson/Randle without OG and Mitch/RJ/IQ were -0.2 allowing 127 points per 100 possessions.
Brunson/OG without Randle and Mitch/RJ/IQ were +28.2 while only allowing 96.3 points per 100 possessions.

The loss of Randle hurt the ceiling of the offense but it also helped the defense while the loss of OG's defense was huge and it also took away some the ability to turn defense into easier looks on offense. At the same time this is occurring with Mitch out Thibs overextended iHart's minutes who had been playing on a soar achilles all year so he was forced into a minutes restriction.

Precious did an admirable job eating up minutes but he wasn't a great fit on the roster especially when forced into the starting lineup. The Hart/Precious/iHart pairing provided no spacing or shooting with limited ballhandling and made Brunson's life incredibly difficult in February. The team and Brunson didn't function better until Thibs was forced to go small and give McBride the starting spot over Precious and a bigger role with OG still out.

Add to that Grimes was underperforming most of the year and was eventually traded for Bogey and Burks, a decision many applauded but they were absolutely terrible for the Knicks on both ends of the court. The Knicks were hammered by injuries including Brunson and many guys were forced into bigger roles and insane minutes at times but somehow they found a way to win. So much was happening at the time that it is hard to even know how much of an impact overall Randle's absence was.

As far as the 2023 playoffs Brunson was more efficient offensively with Randle on the court. He can help to carry some of the offensive load and occupy a tougher defender like Butler and there are other benefits but the team as a whole performed better on both ends of the court with Brunson on and Randle off.

Brunson/Randle was +3.6 115.0 off/ 111.4 def
Brunson without Randle was +10.1 117.4 off/ 107.3 def while being 10 percentage points better on the offensive glass and their opponent being 2% points worse.

It's a small sample size and Randle was banged up so I wouldn't give too much weight to those numbers but they don't show that pairing Randle with Brunson benefited the team. I don't think Randle is a negative player or he should be traded for anything and I too am annoyed by the response he gets from some members of opposing fanbases but I am confused to why it seems some Knicks' fans are so resistant to trading him at all. At this point I wonder which players some fans would trade Randle for straight up.

Well like I said. Volume is a thing, and after I do think Julius can sustain the level he was at after those first 6 games last season where he was producing more and doing it more efficiently. And he has forced double teams at an exceptional rate since being paired with Brunson.

But mostly it’s a combo of knowing that Julius fits what we’ve got brewing both on the court & off it; whereas Sengun may not click with the nova boys off the court and may not like playing second fiddle.

And that Sengun is a center. So it’s hard to pair him with an elite rim protector / rebounder like Thibs would want, as you can’t play Robinson-Sengun together.

If we had JJJ instead of Mitch then I’d be much more intrigued by the idea of swapping Julius for someone in that Sengun / Sabonis mold. But with our roster I think having that 2nd All-NBA guy at the 4 is pretty perfect.

How many guys in the league would you trade Randle for straight up? 20? 10? 5? With the way you describe the need for his volume scoring and his perfect fit at the 4 it is hard to imagine you trading him for anyone. Would you trade him for Bam or does Randle's added volume have more importance to you than all the other advantages Bam would add to the team? Who are the players that would allow you to move on from Randle?

[cgf]

That shows the impact on Brunson's individual offensive efficiency if you dumped Randle for nothing but it still doesn't explain why you wouldn't trade a soon to be 30 year old Randle for a player that is 7.5 years younger that essentially gives you much of what Randle does already. Randle is likely to decline over the length of his next contract while Sengun could easily improve.

Yes, Brunson's efficiency declined without Randle this year but the Knicks were dealing with a ton of issues at the same time in the second half of the season. OG went down at the same time as Randle and Mitch was already out due to injury. Brunson and Randle may be the better and more exciting offensive players but OG easily had the biggest overall impact on the team after the trade.

Post trade Brunson/Randle/OG without* Mitch/RJ/IQ out were +26.1 while only allowing 104.7 points per 100 possessions.
Brunson/Randle without OG and Mitch/RJ/IQ were -0.2 allowing 127 points per 100 possessions.
Brunson/OG without Randle and Mitch/RJ/IQ were +28.2 while only allowing 96.3 points per 100 possessions.

The loss of Randle hurt the ceiling of the offense but it also helped the defense while the loss of OG's defense was huge and it also took away some the ability to turn defense into easier looks on offense. At the same time this is occurring with Mitch out Thibs overextended iHart's minutes who had been playing on a soar achilles all year so he was forced into a minutes restriction.

Precious did an admirable job eating up minutes but he wasn't a great fit on the roster especially when forced into the starting lineup. The Hart/Precious/iHart pairing provided no spacing or shooting with limited ballhandling and made Brunson's life incredibly difficult in February. The team and Brunson didn't function better until Thibs was forced to go small and give McBride the starting spot over Precious and a bigger role with OG still out.

Add to that Grimes was underperforming most of the year and was eventually traded for Bogey and Burks, a decision many applauded but they were absolutely terrible for the Knicks on both ends of the court. The Knicks were hammered by injuries including Brunson and many guys were forced into bigger roles and insane minutes at times but somehow they found a way to win. So much was happening at the time that it is hard to even know how much of an impact overall Randle's absence was.

As far as the 2023 playoffs Brunson was more efficient offensively with Randle on the court. He can help to carry some of the offensive load and occupy a tougher defender like Butler and there are other benefits but the team as a whole performed better on both ends of the court with Brunson on and Randle off.

Brunson/Randle was +3.6 115.0 off/ 111.4 def
Brunson without Randle was +10.1 117.4 off/ 107.3 def while being 10 percentage points better on the offensive glass and their opponent being 2% points worse.

It's a small sample size and Randle was banged up so I wouldn't give too much weight to those numbers but they don't show that pairing Randle with Brunson benefited the team. I don't think Randle is a negative player or he should be traded for anything and I too am annoyed by the response he gets from some members of opposing fanbases but I am confused to why it seems some Knicks' fans are so resistant to trading him at all. At this point I wonder which players some fans would trade Randle for straight up.

Well like I said. Volume is a thing, and after I do think Julius can sustain the level he was at after those first 6 games last season where he was producing more and doing it more efficiently. And he has forced double teams at an exceptional rate since being paired with Brunson.

But mostly it’s a combo of knowing that Julius fits what we’ve got brewing both on the court & off it; whereas Sengun may not click with the nova boys off the court and may not like playing second fiddle.

And that Sengun is a center. So it’s hard to pair him with an elite rim protector / rebounder like Thibs would want, as you can’t play Robinson-Sengun together.

If we had JJJ instead of Mitch then I’d be much more intrigued by the idea of swapping Julius for someone in that Sengun / Sabonis mold. But with our roster I think having that 2nd All-NBA guy at the 4 is pretty perfect.

How many guys in the league would you trade Randle for straight up? 20? 10? 5? With the way you describe the need for his volume scoring and his perfect fit at the 4 it is hard to imagine you trading him for anyone. Would you trade him for Bam or does Randle's added volume have more importance to you than all the other advantages Bam would add to the team? Who are the players that would allow you to move on from Randle?

Depends on what follow up moves we could make to backfill for his self-creation.

EDIT:
Bam's awesome...if reckless...he has a massive advantage defensively, and his playmaking from the center spot is even more valuable, but I'm more worried about our offense than our defense and he is a massive downgrade as a scorer.

So we'd still need someone to distract/punish defenses from/for throwing the kitchen sink at Brunson and to keep the offense from imploding whenever Jalen sat + Deuce/DDV weren't just on fire.

Like if we could've gotten DeMar...and he understood that he was there to help set Jalen up to win games in crunchtime, not try to win them in crunchtime himself...then that's one thing but if bam for randle was the only move we could make? That's a lot trickier.

Unfortunately we don't have much ammo to make that follow up move so it would be tricky. One of the reasons I wanted Caruso even more than Bridges is that we could've brought in AC and still had a ton of ammo...now Mikal being so much more durable is a big part of why he cost so much more, and with this roster having some iron men is important.

But I'd have a much easier time saying yes to a Randle-Bam swap if we still had a bunch of picks to make a follow up move.

E2:
Granted I'm just higher on Randle than many folks. Even on our board. I wasn't a diehard Randle truther like Melo, but I kept an open mind and have come to appreciate his game a lot more than I did when I first started watching him in New Orleans.

I respect how many times he's radically changed his game in attempts to help this team more, and I think he found something recreateable last season. He was just such a force getting to the rim that teams had to double him and he's become too good at beating double teams not to get the ball out for an open 3 once the doubles came.

Not saying I'm expecting 60% TS while scoring >25 a night from here on out. But above average efficiency on the kind of volume he gives us, with his vision, with his locker-room fit, with his on-court chemistry with Brunson and the way their games complement each other, plus his physicality on the glass...makes it hard to find a better fit for a team who's window is now.