KnicksGod wrote:Randle is def hot from 3 but didn't take a single one in the second half did he
His turnovers are pretty deadly
Look he's a talented scorer but also a guy whose negatives are perhaps fatal ... not sure any team with him as a primary option is winning big but you could say the same about KAT ... it isn't proven until it is
It's not personal or some war against melo lol ... but I think Randle is an addition by subtraction player ... I may be wrong but I see him as just a guy who can make tough shots and get hot, but who isn't truly good
Let's compare him to Jalen Williams. A guy I am starting to understand now. He is a grinder. Not that talented, but aggressive and wants to win. Defense is great. Not tons of mistakes or doing too much. Plays a role, really, more than an actual second scorer. He doesn't look as good as Randle on most of his offense. But is he a player you can win with? Seems so
Randle has won plenty of regular season games but that's with good teammates. Before the Knicks he didn't win anything, he's got a history of good statlines. Good statlines is not the same as good player.
This is what I’ve been talking about all year. But honestly, I’m not interested in this debate anymore. It’s actually pretty obvious, and those who still claim otherwise don’t seem all in on our success story anyway. I’m not entertaining that anymore, but you’re absolutely right. Randle is a player who (often) looks good on paper. Ultimately, Minnesota goes as far as Ant and Gobert go. But that’s fair, without OG and Bridges, we’re going nowhere either. You need an entire team, and Minnesota does have that. They’re good and so are we.