Chanel Bomber wrote:snadler wrote:Chanel Bomber wrote:This FA plan never made any sense for us. We’re not good enough to attract any major free agents. We can only sell hope, upside, potential, talent... Hypotheticals and question marks basically. We were simply not ready to make a splash.
Why would KD sign here instead of Brooklyn? People will set him up to fail if he comes to New York. Brooklyn has a competitive team and Kyrie, and he won’t have to handle the pressure and media attention that comes with being a Knick. He’s gonna play it safe, especially with his injury.
So we’re going to strike out. And people will make fun of us, because that’s the easy thing to do. I just hope we keep building wisely and James Dolan doesn’t react emotionally and do something stupid when he sees the « little brother » surpassing us in FA. Let’s keep building patiently and cross our fingers that RJ is the one.
Do you consider Julius Randle striking out?
I’m not a huge fan of Randle so I’d say yes. I’m not sure he’s a winning player.
Just to jump in - I like Randle, but he's a "it depends" kind of player. I think it's fair to say he's good (minus defensive questions) and that he's gotten better over his career and that there is probably some more room for growth as a player - but not a lot, which is fine, because he's gotten pretty good. Most positive growth would be in defensive effort - if it happens.
Anyway, it depends, as Randle feels like a lot of the bigger $ signings of guys who aren't TRUE superstars - Anyone from Tobias Harris to Middleton to DLo to Russell - when a team signs them matters. Ideally, teams maybe finish off their cap space on a competing team. Russell and DLo have the conundrum of being 2nd contract guys who've arrived, but the question is to what level, and is it worth it being tied to them for the next 4 years. Could be anywhere on the spectrum from great to not so good. Not so good doesn't mean they'd be bad players, just that ultimately a team with them didn't do that great either, at expense of one of the two or three max slots used up.
Long story short, to make it about Randle - it's probably not the time for him and the Knicks, BUT he's a PF/C, which is exactly what they need and maybe their scouting and analytics thinks it's a good move.
I'd prefer the contract short for Randle. 1 year would be ideal, if there is a way to have his rights. 2 years seems ok, with the higher chance he takes it. Knicks will probably offer 3 years, and then some random team with part of that 475 million in cap space to spend offers 4 years and he takes it.
RIP mags
