The uncomfortable "truth" about this season (Julius and RJ)

[Oscirus]

How did I know this thread was going to turn into a rj bashing thread? Never change knicks fans lol

Now to the topic at hand. When you post stats without context, sure it doesnt look great, but when you add in the fact that One of rj/ randle is usually on the floor the majority of the time good or bad and the numbers make sense. Less about individual performances and more about a large sample size. If the backup lineups had net ratings that are similar to individual then that would be something to consider.

No idea why anybody thinks we're building around rj and randle when rjs primary goal this season was to stretch the floor. At this point, this is randle's team through and through with even Rowan himself pretty much verifying this fact.

[TBri1974]

I was looking at the team's individual net ratings for the regular season and the playoffs and there's a clear, undeniable trend:

The starters were above-average in the regular season and terrible in the playoffs, whereas the bench was really good throughout the season. The starters kept us afloat and even outscored teams on average, but the bench killed teams.

Here are the top 4 net ratings on the team for the regular season and the playoffs:

Regular season: Rose, Gibson, Quickley, Burks (all bench players)
Playoffs: Obi, Burks, Quickley, Gibson (all bench players besides Gibson who started 3 out of 5 games)

Then I also thought, well if Rose had this much of an impact coming off the bench in the regular season, shouldn't the starting unit have been more effective against Atlanta once Rose moved to the starting line-up? Nope. No difference whatsoever. So is the foundation of our starting five an issue ie have a ceiling?

One must ask him/herself the question: did Julius and RJ really carry the Knicks to the #4 seed, or was the bench with IQ, Burks and Obi (and Rose in the regular season) really the biggest difference-maker? I'm aware this is not a black or white thing, and that impact is shared. Obviously, the starters played most of their minutes against the opposing teams' best fives, and the second unit played a lot of minutes against opposing benches (although Thibs staggered the minutes to some extent). The success of our bench doesn't mean that our bench players are better than our starters, or that they could replicate their success against opposing starters.

But I think this puts into perspective the impact that Randle and RJ really had. Where would the Knicks have ended with just an average bench? And are we underestimating IQ's skill set and impact because of the minutes?

The reason I ask these questions is because we're running the risk of building a treadmill team around Julius and RJ. It was glaring in the series against Atlanta how these two could not get easy baskets, and every possession seemed like a struggle, and I am starting to wonder if IQ and Obi don't have a higher upside, simply because they can create or convert more easy baskets. Neither Randle nor RJ even reached league-average in scoring efficiency, regular season or playoffs.

Randle
Regular season: +0.3 per 100 ON/OFF, 3.0 net rating, 56.7 TS% (below league-average)
Playoffs: -19.6 per 100 ON/OFF, -12.1 net rating (8th), 42.5 TS%

Barrett
Regular season: +0.4 per 100 ON/OFF, 2.7 net rating, 53.5 TS% (below league-average)
Playoffs: -14.7 per 100 ON/OFF, -10.2 net rating (7th), 48.9 TS%

So my question is: remember how the Knicks didn't amnesty Amar'e because he revitalized the franchise, and amnestied Billups instead, which took us out of the Chris Paul sweepstakes? The Knicks were emotional, and not ruthless. Amar'e was a feel-good story, so they decided to keep him. It cost them dearly in the long-run. Today I wonder if the Knicks wouldn't be repeating the same mistake by building around Julius and RJ. I'm a big RJ fan, and I've learned to appreciate and root for Julius, but I start to wonder if this might be the offseason where unpopular decisions need to be made. Just thinking out loud.

This is a great post - these questions should be asked - but I would take it in another direction.

Firstly: I don't think a reasonably bad playoff series from two young (youngish in Randle's case) players that showed significant improvement all season mean we should write them off. Amare was signed with injuries when nobody else would take him to a max contract. Extending Randle at 25 per pays him what he's worth and keeps that contract tradable. The 'tradability' of each extension is what should dictate our spending. Middleton and Holiday - although both excellent players I would trade for - do not have tradable contracts. Their production is not worth their cost. They are paid like first options to be second or 3rd options. Same for Tobias Harris. All of them have played very well and would be good here, but would be hard to move for positive assets. Randle was one of the best PFs in the league this year. Even if h regresses, someone else will look to find that capacity in him. He does everything, nd dos it reasonably well. Turnovers are his one big flaw, and he regressed on decision making in the playoffs. At 25 per, he can be a core part of this team without stopping us from bringing in a max player, or he can be moved if Toppin becomes our starting PF or we bring in someone else better suited. He would be an asset. Amare was a liability in terms of his contract the day we signed him. Melo - on his extension - the same. This is why I worry about Ball. I get we need to bring in young talent, but it would be a gamble with Ball, and if he ends up being a reasonable defender but without the skill or aggression to be a top 10 PG in the league, a 20-25 million contract over 4 years becomes untradeable. If we bring in Paul at 3 years and 120 million (or even 100 million) it is instantly untradable. Same for Lowry on a big contract. Just a year ago Conley was considered untradeable.

Whats my point? Randle and RJ played great ball this year and regressed in the playoffs. As long as we keep their contracts at value for production levels, we should continue to build around them, and if we see the option to get better at their positions, we take it and can trade them. I am not moving to trade them, I also think they both brought professionalism to this city - something that cannot be overlooked - and helped, with Thibs, create a positive culture that allowed players to thrive. We should always keep every option open, but I would expect us to build around Randle, RJ, and Mitch and continue to invest in Toppin and IQ. Bring in at least two more high quality rookies and sign players that make sense for our timeline. We are still 2-3 years - or a very lucky off season - away from being considered a top 3 team in the East, let alone the league, so we ned to play the long game, but Randle is still in his prime and RJ is just beginning to hit his prime in 2-3 years.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

It's just a different philosophy of team building. You want to build around RJ and Mitch (who else?)... You do realize the Knicks will have to pay RJ at some point very soon?

I think it's nice to have a guy like RJ, but if you can package him in a deal to get what you really need (and have always needed)--a young primary ballhandler and creator--you have to do that first. Then you can add an RJ.

If we could trade for De'aaron Fox or the draft rights to Suggs by packaging RJ and picks, you have to do it. And I'm sure there is a franchise out there that takes that deal.

I want to keep RJ, acquire more young talent and actually develop our players. Yall are missing the step that the Nets took, which was before getting KD & Kyrie, they went about acquiring young talent and actually developing them. They developed Russell, Allen, Harris, and Levert, who have we developed? We spent all that money on getting developmental coaches, so lets see what they can do.

See, this is fantasy world stuff, you think RJ isn't that great but think we'll be able to trade him for Fox or Suggs? I'm talking about reality here, the reality is we could utilize our young players more effectively. Back to the point of the thread, RJ + 2nd unit in place of Burks is more in line with a modern team's offense than Randle + 2nd unit in place of Obi. Any lineup including Julius is going to run into the issue of his ball dominance and what that means for running PnR.

What are his promising stats on shooting off the dribble or finishing inside? The one's I have seen suggest he is one of the worst positionally in the NBA (reflected in his very low PER). Maybe that is explainable partially by misuse on offense, but the shortcomings that scouts described when he entered the NBA are still his obvious downfall now (very ugly in the playoffs). Plays with one hand, isn't explosive, doesn't handle the ball particularly well for his position...

Are your hopes that he corrects all of these holes in his game (or physical shortcomings) any more realistic than mine that we use him to acquire talent that is more impactful in today's NBA? At the end of the day, we're all just fans here, talking s***. We have no idea how the FO views these players and wants to build, that's why they get the big bucks.

Some of us prefer our other youth--particularly IQ--so yes, at the end of the day this is more of a conversation or debate about how to focus the Knicks' energy moving forward. They are unlikely to want to develop 3 rookies next year, especially under Thibs, while hoping RJ takes the next step. Thibs' benching of RJ in critical moments reveals a lot about how Thibs views him at least.

You're letting your dislike of RJ cloud your argument, you have no stats to back up your assumption that he's a terrible finisher, he shot 61% at the rim, for comparison sake Morant shot 64%, Jaylen Brown shot 63% his second year (a year older than RJ), Booker shot 58% his second year. RJ's finishing is well within the range of what you expect from a 2nd year wing, could he improve, yes but saying he's one of the worst just means you have an axe to grind.


My hopes in him are based on simply comparing him to other wing players, I posted a thread about wing players in their first and second years, and it seems most of you think every all-star wing came out the gate like KD, LeBron and Luka when it's quite the opposite. I will keep going back to Jaylen Brown over and over again, it's almost comical how some of you can't see that his numbers and role on the team look eerily similar to Browns first 3 years, for instance Jaylen Brown had a 13.6 PER his second season while being a year older than RJ. So, just going by the stats you're using you would have wanted to trade Jaylen, because his PER, finishing and PnR stats are almost identical to RJs. We're much more likely to turn RJ into a 20-23ppg, 7rpg and 5apg player than we are trading him for Fox or Suggs.

We can focus on all our young players, like the Hawks did with theirs. The only thing that matters is how the front office views RJ, and if they're looking at RJ's numbers or have an analytics department they'll see the same exact things I'm seeing. Which is there's a playmaking slasher in there that can live off PnR but has been mostly utilized as a catch and shoot floor spacer, the day we figure out how to use RJ on the ball more is the day he blossoms.

[nykballa2k4]

I was looking at the team's individual net ratings for the regular season and the playoffs and there's a clear, undeniable trend:

The starters were above-average in the regular season and terrible in the playoffs, whereas the bench was really good throughout the season. The starters kept us afloat and even outscored teams on average, but the bench killed teams.

Here are the top 4 net ratings on the team for the regular season and the playoffs:

Regular season: Rose, Gibson, Quickley, Burks (all bench players)
Playoffs: Obi, Burks, Quickley, Gibson (all bench players besides Gibson who started 3 out of 5 games)

Then I also thought, well if Rose had this much of an impact coming off the bench in the regular season, shouldn't the starting unit have been more effective against Atlanta once Rose moved to the starting line-up? Nope. No difference whatsoever. So is the foundation of our starting five an issue ie have a ceiling?

One must ask him/herself the question: did Julius and RJ really carry the Knicks to the #4 seed, or was the bench with IQ, Burks and Obi (and Rose in the regular season) really the biggest difference-maker? I'm aware this is not a black or white thing, and that impact is shared. Obviously, the starters played most of their minutes against the opposing teams' best fives, and the second unit played a lot of minutes against opposing benches (although Thibs staggered the minutes to some extent). The success of our bench doesn't mean that our bench players are better than our starters, or that they could replicate their success against opposing starters.

But I think this puts into perspective the impact that Randle and RJ really had. Where would the Knicks have ended with just an average bench? And are we underestimating IQ's skill set and impact because of the minutes?

The reason I ask these questions is because we're running the risk of building a treadmill team around Julius and RJ. It was glaring in the series against Atlanta how these two could not get easy baskets, and every possession seemed like a struggle, and I am starting to wonder if IQ and Obi don't have a higher upside, simply because they can create or convert more easy baskets. Neither Randle nor RJ even reached league-average in scoring efficiency, regular season or playoffs.

Randle
Regular season: +0.3 per 100 ON/OFF, 3.0 net rating, 56.7 TS% (below league-average)
Playoffs: -19.6 per 100 ON/OFF, -12.1 net rating (8th), 42.5 TS%

Barrett
Regular season: +0.4 per 100 ON/OFF, 2.7 net rating, 53.5 TS% (below league-average)
Playoffs: -14.7 per 100 ON/OFF, -10.2 net rating (7th), 48.9 TS%

So my question is: remember how the Knicks didn't amnesty Amar'e because he revitalized the franchise, and amnestied Billups instead, which took us out of the Chris Paul sweepstakes? The Knicks were emotional, and not ruthless. Amar'e was a feel-good story, so they decided to keep him. It cost them dearly in the long-run. Today I wonder if the Knicks wouldn't be repeating the same mistake by building around Julius and RJ. I'm a big RJ fan, and I've learned to appreciate and root for Julius, but I start to wonder if this might be the offseason where unpopular decisions need to be made. Just thinking out loud.

There are a few reasons for what you are brining to light.
1
Our starters play mostly against other starters. We may easily have been outmatched or average starter vs starter. However our bench plays against other teams bench, that's where we made our hey. So an argument could be made we won due to depth.
2
We had a solid C rotation in the regular season with Mitch, Noel and then Taj. As soon as the bell rang on the trade deadline, Mitch broke his foot and now we were on our 2nd string C (who played very well tbh), but he is a known quantity in the league and we were the team that gave him the best contract so that says where his talents appeared to be. In the playoffs, he injured his ankle game 1 and was never the same player. This watered down our talent in the starting group EVEN MORE than before.
3
In the regular season, teams may play more guys, not lock in for games, etc. Playoffs rotations tighten, intensity increases. We really didn't have a notch to turn up to and furthermore our team was potentially quite gassed by the end of it.
4
Elf on a shelf. Elfrid reminded me of Ray Felton to some extent in that when he looked good he looked good, but when he looks bad... takes us all down with him. Add to that he was bad more than he was good, particularly at the end. This applies for the regular season, but not the playoffs.

The big takeaway
I don't see much to worry about. Randle is entering his prime, was able to put up great numbers during most of the regular season. RJ isn't supposed to be that good yet as he is a non-top-3 pick who is on year 2 and limited practice, talkin bout practice, due to a year of Covid. Mitch was never a problem. Bullock over achieved for most of the season, he will likely be back possibly in a bench role. That leaves the hole at point guard. We fill that with an above average starter, then our margin against other teams starters tilts in our favor AND we have the electric bench.

To your bigger point about possibly moving Randle or RJ... who we getting? Moving both and 5 firsts for Zion? The return has to be worth the cost. I agree with you completely about wasting the amnesty on Amare when it literally felt like the league made that rule to get us out of that jam.

[Davis18]

We will be comfortable as long as coaching staff & Randle accepts his short comings and not try to be Lebron next season.

[louisorr]

If you look at the Hawks (and who isn't) they were built with a plan. Their GM came over from Golden State and specifically admitted that he was going to try and build a mirror to that team. most people have given them a hard time for passing up Doncic in the trae deal. but the thing is they had a plan and specifically wanted the closest thing to Steph. which was trae and not Doncic. and they targeted huerter because he was the closest thing to Klay. again part of a plan.
so when we drafted obi, you would like to think there was a plan attached. who knew randle would have a cinderella year (including the clock striking midnight). point is that, all star randle is similar to Doncic sitting there at 3 in that he's a temptation and he's right in front of your face, but he diverts you from your plan.
IF there was/is a plan- a design for a team conceived by the Knicks new architects - then it's probably best to stick to it. aka build around Obi at PF.

BUT, having said all that, that's just me theorizing. I actually like randle and think he has a fantastic skillset and his shooting mechanics are pure enough that I think he will look more like this year going forward than years past.
Randle needs to be our champion chris bosh. third fiddle. RJ would have to be a fourth fiddle in this scenario. champion Harrison barnes for example.

[N8isScofield]

RJ makes me uncomfortable for the simple fact that he's far too content to disappear for entire quarters or halves. I really want him to pan out but there's something very disconcerting about a guy who is clearly supposed to be the second option continually deferring like he's the 6th. We see tiny flashes of a dog in him where he's had some big quarters or halves but he very rarely puts together 4 quarters of good, assertive basketball and even at his young age it's concerning from a mentality standpoint.

[BKlutch]

RJ made 1.7 threes on 4.3 shots for a .401 average. Randle made 2.3 on 5.5 attempts for an average of .411. That is not enough volume at those percentages for one season, IMO to be considered a great shooter. Just my opinion. Neither was in the top 30 three point shooters this season, and it was both their best season behind the arc.

id say being near or above 2 made threes a game indicates that your a good reliable shooter.

I think 3P% needs to be put into context. A guy shooting 39% from 3 scoring off-the dribble, on the move coming off screens and in spot-up situations is a better shooter than a guy shooting 41% strictly in spot-up situations.

RJ is an excellent spot-up shooter, which is a remarkable development considering where he was as a rookie. That doesn't make him a "shooter" imo (not saying that's your argument, just saying in general).

I'd conclude from that last paragraph that RJ improved a lot from year 1 to year 2. He's 20, so I'd expect that with his well known work ethic, he'll improve for at least another year or two. We don't know how far he'll go, and while I don't necessarily see him as a 1st or 2nd option, he could be a very good 3rd on a winning team.

Development means letting him have the time to grow as a player before we consign him to the dust bin of Knicks history.

[BKlutch]

I was looking at the team's individual net ratings for the regular season and the playoffs and there's a clear, undeniable trend:

The starters were above-average in the regular season and terrible in the playoffs, whereas the bench was really good throughout the season. The starters kept us afloat and even outscored teams on average, but the bench killed teams.

Here are the top 4 net ratings on the team for the regular season and the playoffs:

Regular season: Rose, Gibson, Quickley, Burks (all bench players)
Playoffs: Obi, Burks, Quickley, Gibson (all bench players besides Gibson who started 3 out of 5 games)

Then I also thought, well if Rose had this much of an impact coming off the bench in the regular season, shouldn't the starting unit have been more effective against Atlanta once Rose moved to the starting line-up? Nope. No difference whatsoever. So is the foundation of our starting five an issue ie have a ceiling?

One must ask him/herself the question: did Julius and RJ really carry the Knicks to the #4 seed, or was the bench with IQ, Burks and Obi (and Rose in the regular season) really the biggest difference-maker? I'm aware this is not a black or white thing, and that impact is shared. Obviously, the starters played most of their minutes against the opposing teams' best fives, and the second unit played a lot of minutes against opposing benches (although Thibs staggered the minutes to some extent). The success of our bench doesn't mean that our bench players are better than our starters, or that they could replicate their success against opposing starters.

But I think this puts into perspective the impact that Randle and RJ really had. Where would the Knicks have ended with just an average bench? And are we underestimating IQ's skill set and impact because of the minutes?

The reason I ask these questions is because we're running the risk of building a treadmill team around Julius and RJ. It was glaring in the series against Atlanta how these two could not get easy baskets, and every possession seemed like a struggle, and I am starting to wonder if IQ and Obi don't have a higher upside, simply because they can create or convert more easy baskets. Neither Randle nor RJ even reached league-average in scoring efficiency, regular season or playoffs.

Randle
Regular season: +0.3 per 100 ON/OFF, 3.0 net rating, 56.7 TS% (below league-average)
Playoffs: -19.6 per 100 ON/OFF, -12.1 net rating (8th), 42.5 TS%

Barrett
Regular season: +0.4 per 100 ON/OFF, 2.7 net rating, 53.5 TS% (below league-average)
Playoffs: -14.7 per 100 ON/OFF, -10.2 net rating (7th), 48.9 TS%

So my question is: remember how the Knicks didn't amnesty Amar'e because he revitalized the franchise, and amnestied Billups instead, which took us out of the Chris Paul sweepstakes? The Knicks were emotional, and not ruthless. Amar'e was a feel-good story, so they decided to keep him. It cost them dearly in the long-run. Today I wonder if the Knicks wouldn't be repeating the same mistake by building around Julius and RJ. I'm a big RJ fan, and I've learned to appreciate and root for Julius, but I start to wonder if this might be the offseason where unpopular decisions need to be made. Just thinking out loud.

This is a great post - these questions should be asked - but I would take it in another direction.

Firstly: I don't think a reasonably bad playoff series from two young (youngish in Randle's case) players that showed significant improvement all season mean we should write them off. Amare was signed with injuries when nobody else would take him to a max contract. Extending Randle at 25 per pays him what he's worth and keeps that contract tradable. The 'tradability' of each extension is what should dictate our spending. Middleton and Holiday - although both excellent players I would trade for - do not have tradable contracts. Their production is not worth their cost. They are paid like first options to be second or 3rd options. Same for Tobias Harris. All of them have played very well and would be good here, but would be hard to move for positive assets. Randle was one of the best PFs in the league this year. Even if h regresses, someone else will look to find that capacity in him. He does everything, nd dos it reasonably well. Turnovers are his one big flaw, and he regressed on decision making in the playoffs. At 25 per, he can be a core part of this team without stopping us from bringing in a max player, or he can be moved if Toppin becomes our starting PF or we bring in someone else better suited. He would be an asset. Amare was a liability in terms of his contract the day we signed him. Melo - on his extension - the same. This is why I worry about Ball. I get we need to bring in young talent, but it would be a gamble with Ball, and if he ends up being a reasonable defender but without the skill or aggression to be a top 10 PG in the league, a 20-25 million contract over 4 years becomes untradeable. If we bring in Paul at 3 years and 120 million (or even 100 million) it is instantly untradable. Same for Lowry on a big contract. Just a year ago Conley was considered untradeable.

Whats my point? Randle and RJ played great ball this year and regressed in the playoffs. As long as we keep their contracts at value for production levels, we should continue to build around them, and if we see the option to get better at their positions, we take it and can trade them. I am not moving to trade them, I also think they both brought professionalism to this city - something that cannot be overlooked - and helped, with Thibs, create a positive culture that allowed players to thrive. We should always keep every option open, but I would expect us to build around Randle, RJ, and Mitch and continue to invest in Toppin and IQ. Bring in at least two more high quality rookies and sign players that make sense for our timeline. We are still 2-3 years - or a very lucky off season - away from being considered a top 3 team in the East, let alone the league, so we ned to play the long game, but Randle is still in his prime and RJ is just beginning to hit his prime in 2-3 years.

I think you're right. If we keep developing the players and improve a bit as a team, we will add draft picks, trades, or FAs along the way. I think our future is not dependent on how badly Dolan/Mills ran the team, but on how well Leon and Wes can run the team. No trades or FAs? Maybe WWW can do things that the GM can't. That's what he's here for. I don't know how, but that's what he does.

It does mean that no one is untouchable. If we need to trade RJ or Ju for the superstar who puts us over the top, are we ok? Sure, if it's done right. Developing the play of everyone makes them more tradable, not less. And of course, you could see a *dramatic* improvement in Ju's play if we had the right PG.

I wish those who are trashing the team and/or panicking would just calm down and see what happens. All your emotions hanging out will not affect how Leon makes his decisions (yes, he'll consult with Thibs, but it will be *Leon* who decides).

[BKlutch]

We will be comfortable as long as coaching staff & Randle accepts his short comings and not try to be Lebron next season.

Key words here are "coaching staff." Do we have a good one? The NBA just said so.

[nykballa2k4]

id say being near or above 2 made threes a game indicates that your a good reliable shooter.

I think 3P% needs to be put into context. A guy shooting 39% from 3 scoring off-the dribble, on the move coming off screens and in spot-up situations is a better shooter than a guy shooting 41% strictly in spot-up situations.

RJ is an excellent spot-up shooter, which is a remarkable development considering where he was as a rookie. That doesn't make him a "shooter" imo (not saying that's your argument, just saying in general).

I'd conclude from that last paragraph that RJ improved a lot from year 1 to year 2. He's 20, so I'd expect that with his well known work ethic, he'll improve for at least another year or two. We don't know how far he'll go, and while I don't necessarily see him as a 1st or 2nd option, he could be a very good 3rd on a winning team.

Development means letting him have the time to grow as a player before we consign him to the dust bin of Knicks history.

Just just cherrypick stats.
PER 36 stats for age 20 seasons RJ vs Kobe
https://stathead.com/tiny/H4BBH
Kobe had the better season for sure, but RJ is in the conversation on that VERY cherry-picked statistical comparison.
RJ is young, could be a bust, poor mans Isiah Rider. Could be a lead-dog.

[Ghetto Gospel]

I want to keep RJ, acquire more young talent and actually develop our players. Yall are missing the step that the Nets took, which was before getting KD & Kyrie, they went about acquiring young talent and actually developing them. They developed Russell, Allen, Harris, and Levert, who have we developed? We spent all that money on getting developmental coaches, so lets see what they can do.

See, this is fantasy world stuff, you think RJ isn't that great but think we'll be able to trade him for Fox or Suggs? I'm talking about reality here, the reality is we could utilize our young players more effectively. Back to the point of the thread, RJ + 2nd unit in place of Burks is more in line with a modern team's offense than Randle + 2nd unit in place of Obi. Any lineup including Julius is going to run into the issue of his ball dominance and what that means for running PnR.

What are his promising stats on shooting off the dribble or finishing inside? The one's I have seen suggest he is one of the worst positionally in the NBA (reflected in his very low PER). Maybe that is explainable partially by misuse on offense, but the shortcomings that scouts described when he entered the NBA are still his obvious downfall now (very ugly in the playoffs). Plays with one hand, isn't explosive, doesn't handle the ball particularly well for his position...

Are your hopes that he corrects all of these holes in his game (or physical shortcomings) any more realistic than mine that we use him to acquire talent that is more impactful in today's NBA? At the end of the day, we're all just fans here, talking s***. We have no idea how the FO views these players and wants to build, that's why they get the big bucks.

Some of us prefer our other youth--particularly IQ--so yes, at the end of the day this is more of a conversation or debate about how to focus the Knicks' energy moving forward. They are unlikely to want to develop 3 rookies next year, especially under Thibs, while hoping RJ takes the next step. Thibs' benching of RJ in critical moments reveals a lot about how Thibs views him at least.

You're letting your dislike of RJ cloud your argument, you have no stats to back up your assumption that he's a terrible finisher, he shot 61% at the rim, for comparison sake Morant shot 64%, Jaylen Brown shot 63% his second year (a year older than RJ), Booker shot 58% his second year. RJ's finishing is well within the range of what you expect from a 2nd year wing, could he improve, yes but saying he's one of the worst just means you have an axe to grind.


My hopes in him are based on simply comparing him to other wing players, I posted a thread about wing players in their first and second years, and it seems most of you think every all-star wing came out the gate like KD, LeBron and Luka when it's quite the opposite. I will keep going back to Jaylen Brown over and over again, it's almost comical how some of you can't see that his numbers and role on the team look eerily similar to Browns first 3 years, for instance Jaylen Brown had a 13.6 PER his second season while being a year older than RJ. So, just going by the stats you're using you would have wanted to trade Jaylen, because his PER, finishing and PnR stats are almost identical to RJs. We're much more likely to turn RJ into a 20-23ppg, 7rpg and 5apg player than we are trading him for Fox or Suggs.

We can focus on all our young players, like the Hawks did with theirs. The only thing that matters is how the front office views RJ, and if they're looking at RJ's numbers or have an analytics department they'll see the same exact things I'm seeing. Which is there's a playmaking slasher in there that can live off PnR but has been mostly utilized as a catch and shoot floor spacer, the day we figure out how to use RJ on the ball more is the day he blossoms.

We can't do what the Hawks did as it's already too late. The Hawks drafted a bunch of young talented guys and right before it was their time to get paid, they paid some vets like bogdonavic so that when the young kids are up they can still sign then while dipping into the luxury cap. Our timeline is much sooner with Mitch coming up to get paid then RJ soon after. We lost this year as we will probably "miss" on this years picks as they are late.

You compare RJ to Jaylen and I don't buy it, but I will entertain it. What does a team led by Randle and Jaylen Brown get you? ultimately, it gets you a team that still needed to tank and a team that still loses in the 1st or 2nd round

[ENYK]

What are his promising stats on shooting off the dribble or finishing inside? The one's I have seen suggest he is one of the worst positionally in the NBA (reflected in his very low PER). Maybe that is explainable partially by misuse on offense, but the shortcomings that scouts described when he entered the NBA are still his obvious downfall now (very ugly in the playoffs). Plays with one hand, isn't explosive, doesn't handle the ball particularly well for his position...

Are your hopes that he corrects all of these holes in his game (or physical shortcomings) any more realistic than mine that we use him to acquire talent that is more impactful in today's NBA? At the end of the day, we're all just fans here, talking s***. We have no idea how the FO views these players and wants to build, that's why they get the big bucks.

Some of us prefer our other youth--particularly IQ--so yes, at the end of the day this is more of a conversation or debate about how to focus the Knicks' energy moving forward. They are unlikely to want to develop 3 rookies next year, especially under Thibs, while hoping RJ takes the next step. Thibs' benching of RJ in critical moments reveals a lot about how Thibs views him at least.

You're letting your dislike of RJ cloud your argument, you have no stats to back up your assumption that he's a terrible finisher, he shot 61% at the rim, for comparison sake Morant shot 64%, Jaylen Brown shot 63% his second year (a year older than RJ), Booker shot 58% his second year. RJ's finishing is well within the range of what you expect from a 2nd year wing, could he improve, yes but saying he's one of the worst just means you have an axe to grind.


My hopes in him are based on simply comparing him to other wing players, I posted a thread about wing players in their first and second years, and it seems most of you think every all-star wing came out the gate like KD, LeBron and Luka when it's quite the opposite. I will keep going back to Jaylen Brown over and over again, it's almost comical how some of you can't see that his numbers and role on the team look eerily similar to Browns first 3 years, for instance Jaylen Brown had a 13.6 PER his second season while being a year older than RJ. So, just going by the stats you're using you would have wanted to trade Jaylen, because his PER, finishing and PnR stats are almost identical to RJs. We're much more likely to turn RJ into a 20-23ppg, 7rpg and 5apg player than we are trading him for Fox or Suggs.

We can focus on all our young players, like the Hawks did with theirs. The only thing that matters is how the front office views RJ, and if they're looking at RJ's numbers or have an analytics department they'll see the same exact things I'm seeing. Which is there's a playmaking slasher in there that can live off PnR but has been mostly utilized as a catch and shoot floor spacer, the day we figure out how to use RJ on the ball more is the day he blossoms.

We can't do what the Hawks did as it's already too late. The Hawks drafted a bunch of young talented guys and right before it was their time to get paid, they paid some vets like bogdonavic so that when the young kids are up they can still sign then while dipping into the luxury cap. Our timeline is much sooner with Mitch coming up to get paid then RJ soon after. We lost this year as we will probably "miss" on this years picks as they are late.

You compare RJ to Jaylen and I don't buy it, but I will entertain it. What does a team led by Randle and Jaylen Brown get you? ultimately, it gets you a team that still needed to tank and a team that still loses in the 1st or 2nd round

The fact that people want us to go all in on a core where one of the two main guys is at best (not there yet) Jaylen Brown, which would give us ZERO shot at drafting a Jayson Tatum is disturbing but entirely in keeping with Knicks fandom and how the FO has historically conducted business.

I won't switch to a Nets fan, but my patience for the endless cycle of Terrible to Mediocre is wearing dangerously thin after 25+ years.

[Meat]

RJ makes me uncomfortable for the simple fact that he's far too content to disappear for entire quarters or halves. I really want him to pan out but there's something very disconcerting about a guy who is clearly supposed to be the second option continually deferring like he's the 6th. We see tiny flashes of a dog in him where he's had some big quarters or halves but he very rarely puts together 4 quarters of good, assertive basketball and even at his young age it's concerning from a mentality standpoint.

He’s a kid, i don’t understand why this is so hard for people to understand. He’s a gd kid that didn’t even have a proper off season this year and still made a huge jump.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

What are his promising stats on shooting off the dribble or finishing inside? The one's I have seen suggest he is one of the worst positionally in the NBA (reflected in his very low PER). Maybe that is explainable partially by misuse on offense, but the shortcomings that scouts described when he entered the NBA are still his obvious downfall now (very ugly in the playoffs). Plays with one hand, isn't explosive, doesn't handle the ball particularly well for his position...

Are your hopes that he corrects all of these holes in his game (or physical shortcomings) any more realistic than mine that we use him to acquire talent that is more impactful in today's NBA? At the end of the day, we're all just fans here, talking s***. We have no idea how the FO views these players and wants to build, that's why they get the big bucks.

Some of us prefer our other youth--particularly IQ--so yes, at the end of the day this is more of a conversation or debate about how to focus the Knicks' energy moving forward. They are unlikely to want to develop 3 rookies next year, especially under Thibs, while hoping RJ takes the next step. Thibs' benching of RJ in critical moments reveals a lot about how Thibs views him at least.

You're letting your dislike of RJ cloud your argument, you have no stats to back up your assumption that he's a terrible finisher, he shot 61% at the rim, for comparison sake Morant shot 64%, Jaylen Brown shot 63% his second year (a year older than RJ), Booker shot 58% his second year. RJ's finishing is well within the range of what you expect from a 2nd year wing, could he improve, yes but saying he's one of the worst just means you have an axe to grind.


My hopes in him are based on simply comparing him to other wing players, I posted a thread about wing players in their first and second years, and it seems most of you think every all-star wing came out the gate like KD, LeBron and Luka when it's quite the opposite. I will keep going back to Jaylen Brown over and over again, it's almost comical how some of you can't see that his numbers and role on the team look eerily similar to Browns first 3 years, for instance Jaylen Brown had a 13.6 PER his second season while being a year older than RJ. So, just going by the stats you're using you would have wanted to trade Jaylen, because his PER, finishing and PnR stats are almost identical to RJs. We're much more likely to turn RJ into a 20-23ppg, 7rpg and 5apg player than we are trading him for Fox or Suggs.

We can focus on all our young players, like the Hawks did with theirs. The only thing that matters is how the front office views RJ, and if they're looking at RJ's numbers or have an analytics department they'll see the same exact things I'm seeing. Which is there's a playmaking slasher in there that can live off PnR but has been mostly utilized as a catch and shoot floor spacer, the day we figure out how to use RJ on the ball more is the day he blossoms.

We can't do what the Hawks did as it's already too late. The Hawks drafted a bunch of young talented guys and right before it was their time to get paid, they paid some vets like bogdonavic so that when the young kids are up they can still sign then while dipping into the luxury cap. Our timeline is much sooner with Mitch coming up to get paid then RJ soon after. We lost this year as we will probably "miss" on this years picks as they are late.

You compare RJ to Jaylen and I don't buy it, but I will entertain it. What does a team led by Randle and Jaylen Brown get you? ultimately, it gets you a team that still needed to tank and a team that still loses in the 1st or 2nd round

All our young players are on the same timeline as far as age goes, which is more important, and we can make decisions on them based around that. I personally hope we have a down year next year and end up in the lottery 1 more time, we need more talent and getting it is going to be difficult if we're making the playoffs.

I don't believe in Randle and wouldn't resign him, but that's just me.

[Meat]

What are his promising stats on shooting off the dribble or finishing inside? The one's I have seen suggest he is one of the worst positionally in the NBA (reflected in his very low PER). Maybe that is explainable partially by misuse on offense, but the shortcomings that scouts described when he entered the NBA are still his obvious downfall now (very ugly in the playoffs). Plays with one hand, isn't explosive, doesn't handle the ball particularly well for his position...

Are your hopes that he corrects all of these holes in his game (or physical shortcomings) any more realistic than mine that we use him to acquire talent that is more impactful in today's NBA? At the end of the day, we're all just fans here, talking s***. We have no idea how the FO views these players and wants to build, that's why they get the big bucks.

Some of us prefer our other youth--particularly IQ--so yes, at the end of the day this is more of a conversation or debate about how to focus the Knicks' energy moving forward. They are unlikely to want to develop 3 rookies next year, especially under Thibs, while hoping RJ takes the next step. Thibs' benching of RJ in critical moments reveals a lot about how Thibs views him at least.

You're letting your dislike of RJ cloud your argument, you have no stats to back up your assumption that he's a terrible finisher, he shot 61% at the rim, for comparison sake Morant shot 64%, Jaylen Brown shot 63% his second year (a year older than RJ), Booker shot 58% his second year. RJ's finishing is well within the range of what you expect from a 2nd year wing, could he improve, yes but saying he's one of the worst just means you have an axe to grind.


My hopes in him are based on simply comparing him to other wing players, I posted a thread about wing players in their first and second years, and it seems most of you think every all-star wing came out the gate like KD, LeBron and Luka when it's quite the opposite. I will keep going back to Jaylen Brown over and over again, it's almost comical how some of you can't see that his numbers and role on the team look eerily similar to Browns first 3 years, for instance Jaylen Brown had a 13.6 PER his second season while being a year older than RJ. So, just going by the stats you're using you would have wanted to trade Jaylen, because his PER, finishing and PnR stats are almost identical to RJs. We're much more likely to turn RJ into a 20-23ppg, 7rpg and 5apg player than we are trading him for Fox or Suggs.

We can focus on all our young players, like the Hawks did with theirs. The only thing that matters is how the front office views RJ, and if they're looking at RJ's numbers or have an analytics department they'll see the same exact things I'm seeing. Which is there's a playmaking slasher in there that can live off PnR but has been mostly utilized as a catch and shoot floor spacer, the day we figure out how to use RJ on the ball more is the day he blossoms.

We can't do what the Hawks did as it's already too late. The Hawks drafted a bunch of young talented guys and right before it was their time to get paid, they paid some vets like bogdonavic so that when the young kids are up they can still sign then while dipping into the luxury cap. Our timeline is much sooner with Mitch coming up to get paid then RJ soon after. We lost this year as we will probably "miss" on this years picks as they are late.

You compare RJ to Jaylen and I don't buy it, but I will entertain it. What does a team led by Randle and Jaylen Brown get you? ultimately, it gets you a team that still needed to tank and a team that still loses in the 1st or 2nd round

In what era? In this one, the way teams are built, a team of randle/brown or randle/rj + cap space +draft capital get you looked at by the next disgruntled superstar looking to leave/form a superteam

[Ghetto Gospel]

You're letting your dislike of RJ cloud your argument, you have no stats to back up your assumption that he's a terrible finisher, he shot 61% at the rim, for comparison sake Morant shot 64%, Jaylen Brown shot 63% his second year (a year older than RJ), Booker shot 58% his second year. RJ's finishing is well within the range of what you expect from a 2nd year wing, could he improve, yes but saying he's one of the worst just means you have an axe to grind.


My hopes in him are based on simply comparing him to other wing players, I posted a thread about wing players in their first and second years, and it seems most of you think every all-star wing came out the gate like KD, LeBron and Luka when it's quite the opposite. I will keep going back to Jaylen Brown over and over again, it's almost comical how some of you can't see that his numbers and role on the team look eerily similar to Browns first 3 years, for instance Jaylen Brown had a 13.6 PER his second season while being a year older than RJ. So, just going by the stats you're using you would have wanted to trade Jaylen, because his PER, finishing and PnR stats are almost identical to RJs. We're much more likely to turn RJ into a 20-23ppg, 7rpg and 5apg player than we are trading him for Fox or Suggs.

We can focus on all our young players, like the Hawks did with theirs. The only thing that matters is how the front office views RJ, and if they're looking at RJ's numbers or have an analytics department they'll see the same exact things I'm seeing. Which is there's a playmaking slasher in there that can live off PnR but has been mostly utilized as a catch and shoot floor spacer, the day we figure out how to use RJ on the ball more is the day he blossoms.

We can't do what the Hawks did as it's already too late. The Hawks drafted a bunch of young talented guys and right before it was their time to get paid, they paid some vets like bogdonavic so that when the young kids are up they can still sign then while dipping into the luxury cap. Our timeline is much sooner with Mitch coming up to get paid then RJ soon after. We lost this year as we will probably "miss" on this years picks as they are late.

You compare RJ to Jaylen and I don't buy it, but I will entertain it. What does a team led by Randle and Jaylen Brown get you? ultimately, it gets you a team that still needed to tank and a team that still loses in the 1st or 2nd round

In what era? In this one, the way teams are built, a team of randle/brown or randle/rj + cap space +draft capital get you looked at by the next disgruntled superstar looking to leave/form a superteam

not happening on the knicks

[Synciere]

In terms of RJ, he has plenty of room to keep getting better too. He took a massive step foward this season. Who's to say he stops getting better? Maybe so, maybe not. Just looking at history, he will get better. Just a matter of how much. Plenty of things he can keep improving.

Read on Twitter

Thats the part that bothers me most about this thread.
RJ is 20.
He made improvements to his game that we did not expect to see this season.
Give him a chance to continue improving his game.

Randle was signed to a 2/40mil contract with a team option for 20mil in the 3rd year.
He was overlooked.
I, and almost every other Knick fan, were looking to cut him this past summer.
Now he played himself in All-NBA territory and is only 26.

This season was complete gravy.
Everyone bitching that we are a treadmil is losing focus that we came into the season with the lowest win total and finished the season with the 4th seed.
We still have the same cap flexibility and future draft picks that we did coming into the season that we do on the way out.

Let this play out. Even if the reality is - that as construed we are just an average team - we are alot further along then we thought we are and are future is extremely bright.

A lot of us are actively looking for things to be unhappy with rather than celebrating the progress. If you look at the negatives all you’ll see are reasons to tank or regress. Looking at it from a positive stance you think we might just be one guy away.

[Ghetto Gospel]

You're letting your dislike of RJ cloud your argument, you have no stats to back up your assumption that he's a terrible finisher, he shot 61% at the rim, for comparison sake Morant shot 64%, Jaylen Brown shot 63% his second year (a year older than RJ), Booker shot 58% his second year. RJ's finishing is well within the range of what you expect from a 2nd year wing, could he improve, yes but saying he's one of the worst just means you have an axe to grind.


My hopes in him are based on simply comparing him to other wing players, I posted a thread about wing players in their first and second years, and it seems most of you think every all-star wing came out the gate like KD, LeBron and Luka when it's quite the opposite. I will keep going back to Jaylen Brown over and over again, it's almost comical how some of you can't see that his numbers and role on the team look eerily similar to Browns first 3 years, for instance Jaylen Brown had a 13.6 PER his second season while being a year older than RJ. So, just going by the stats you're using you would have wanted to trade Jaylen, because his PER, finishing and PnR stats are almost identical to RJs. We're much more likely to turn RJ into a 20-23ppg, 7rpg and 5apg player than we are trading him for Fox or Suggs.

We can focus on all our young players, like the Hawks did with theirs. The only thing that matters is how the front office views RJ, and if they're looking at RJ's numbers or have an analytics department they'll see the same exact things I'm seeing. Which is there's a playmaking slasher in there that can live off PnR but has been mostly utilized as a catch and shoot floor spacer, the day we figure out how to use RJ on the ball more is the day he blossoms.

We can't do what the Hawks did as it's already too late. The Hawks drafted a bunch of young talented guys and right before it was their time to get paid, they paid some vets like bogdonavic so that when the young kids are up they can still sign then while dipping into the luxury cap. Our timeline is much sooner with Mitch coming up to get paid then RJ soon after. We lost this year as we will probably "miss" on this years picks as they are late.

You compare RJ to Jaylen and I don't buy it, but I will entertain it. What does a team led by Randle and Jaylen Brown get you? ultimately, it gets you a team that still needed to tank and a team that still loses in the 1st or 2nd round

All our young players are on the same timeline as far as age goes, which is more important, and we can make decisions on them based around that. I personally hope we have a down year next year and end up in the lottery 1 more time, we need more talent and getting it is going to be difficult if we're making the playoffs.

I don't believe in Randle and wouldn't resign him, but that's just me.

the most important isn't keeping them on the same timeline. it's about keeping cheap labor (rookie deals) for as long as possible, then simultaneously signing vets right when the first rookie deal is set to expire. look at the hawks again, they signed vets the year before any of their young players got off of their rookie deal. now they get to keep all their vets and their young players so long as they're willing to dip into the luxury tax.

we can't exactly duplicate that as mitch is set to expire, we don't have a trae young level star and lost a considerable potential asset in a high end pick this year

[NoDopeOnSundays]

We can't do what the Hawks did as it's already too late. The Hawks drafted a bunch of young talented guys and right before it was their time to get paid, they paid some vets like bogdonavic so that when the young kids are up they can still sign then while dipping into the luxury cap. Our timeline is much sooner with Mitch coming up to get paid then RJ soon after. We lost this year as we will probably "miss" on this years picks as they are late.

You compare RJ to Jaylen and I don't buy it, but I will entertain it. What does a team led by Randle and Jaylen Brown get you? ultimately, it gets you a team that still needed to tank and a team that still loses in the 1st or 2nd round

All our young players are on the same timeline as far as age goes, which is more important, and we can make decisions on them based around that. I personally hope we have a down year next year and end up in the lottery 1 more time, we need more talent and getting it is going to be difficult if we're making the playoffs.

I don't believe in Randle and wouldn't resign him, but that's just me.

the most important isn't keeping them on the same timeline. it's about keeping cheap labor (rookie deals) for as long as possible, then simultaneously signing vets right when the first rookie deal is set to expire. look at the hawks again, they signed vets the year before any of their young players got off of their rookie deal. now they get to keep all their vets and their young players so long as they're willing to dip into the luxury tax.

we can't exactly duplicate that as mitch is set to expire, we don't have a trae young level star and lost a considerable potential asset in a high end pick this year

We still have time to do that though, if we miss the playoffs next year we'll be in a better position than we are right now having made them. We can make a decision on Julius, have caproom, have an additional lottery pick and growth of our young players, the extensions for Mitch and RJ won't kick in until 2023 at the earliest (Mitch). It's Randle's extension that is the most worrisome because that starts next year, that will go on our books in the summer of 2022 if we resign him.