Randle Trade Talk

[WargamesX]

please let the Kings be stupid

For draft picks!

[dakomish23]

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

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

Both players are better than Bullock this season.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Are you under the impression that a role player, who played the most minutes with our two guys last year & who’s game was a pretty seamless fit with those two guys, wouldn’t make a difference this year?

Chemistry matters. Fit matters.

Sad try at trying to prove Bullock doesn’t matter by mentioning Elf, as if I wasn’t a huge Elf hater.

[G_K_F]

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

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

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

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

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

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

Are you under the impression that a role player, who played the most minutes with our two guys last year & who’s game was a pretty seamless fit with those two guys, wouldn’t make a difference this year?

Chemistry matters. Fit matters.

Sad try at trying to prove Bullock doesn’t matter by mentioning Elf, as if I wasn’t a huge Elf hater.

The fact that you even have to bring up random journeyman veteran role player as something that this team ‘misses’ is what’s wrong with the team in the first place.

[Jalen Bluntson]

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

Are you under the impression that a role player, who played the most minutes with our two guys last year & who’s game was a pretty seamless fit with those two guys, wouldn’t make a difference this year?

Chemistry matters. Fit matters.

Sad try at trying to prove Bullock doesn’t matter by mentioning Elf, as if I wasn’t a huge Elf hater.

The fact that you even have to bring up random journeyman veteran role player as something that this team ‘misses’ is what’s wrong with the team in the first place.

Most of the rotation is made up random journeyman role players! Make it stop!

[dakomish23]

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

Are you under the impression that a role player, who played the most minutes with our two guys last year & who’s game was a pretty seamless fit with those two guys, wouldn’t make a difference this year?

Chemistry matters. Fit matters.

Sad try at trying to prove Bullock doesn’t matter by mentioning Elf, as if I wasn’t a huge Elf hater.

The fact that you even have to bring up random journeyman veteran role player as something that this team ‘misses’ is what’s wrong with the team in the first place.

They brought back a bunch of journeymen from last year anyway they’re just too dumb to realize if you’re going to do that, then pick the best proven fit.

I wanted to go big. If you’re going to battle, go get some real players not bench vets.

[dakomish23]

Are you under the impression that a role player, who played the most minutes with our two guys last year & who’s game was a pretty seamless fit with those two guys, wouldn’t make a difference this year?

Chemistry matters. Fit matters.

Sad try at trying to prove Bullock doesn’t matter by mentioning Elf, as if I wasn’t a huge Elf hater.

The fact that you even have to bring up random journeyman veteran role player as something that this team ‘misses’ is what’s wrong with the team in the first place.

Most of the rotation is made up random journeyman role players! Make it stop!

We loveeeee journeymen players and more importantly paying them.

[Galvationknicks]

Sportsvibe tv just put up Randle has unfollowed nyknicks

Uh oh.....

[F N 11]

Sportsvibe tv just put up Randle has unfollowed nyknicks

Uh oh.....

Lmaoooooooo

[offense]

yall traitors and haters, keep randle.

[F N 11]

https://youtube.com/shorts/-1mUv2BUnUI?feature=share

It’s funny but I’ll run with it.

[GnarlsOakley]

What about:

Randle, Fournier, Burks, Nerlens, Kemba, Deuce McBride

to Sacramento, for

De’Aaron Fox, Harrison Barnes, Davion Mitchell

The trade would balance out each teams roster really, really nicely. Clears a huge glut from the NYK roster and allows younger players (RJ, Grimes, Obi, Cam, Sims) to step into their roles, while the Kings get an infusion of talent that meshes well with some of their core pieces (Halliburton, Hield, Holmes)

PG De’Aaron Fox - D.Rose - Davion Mitchell
SG Quentin Grimes - Immanuel Quickley
SF RJ Barrett - Cam Reddish
PF Obi Toppin - Harrison Barnes
C Mitchell Robinson - Jericho Sims - Taj Gibson


PG Tyrese Halliburton - Kemba Walker - Deuce
SG Buddy Hield - Alec Burks
SF Evan Fournier - Mo Harkless
PF Julius Randle - Marvin Bagley
C Richaun Holmes - Nerlens - Tristan Thompson

[thebuzzardman]

The fact that you even have to bring up random journeyman veteran role player as something that this team ‘misses’ is what’s wrong with the team in the first place.

Most of the rotation is made up random journeyman role players! Make it stop!

We loveeeee journeymen players and more importantly paying them.

The Knicks replaced Bullocks with Fournier. It was a good idea, conceptually, since they needed some more offense at the 3 and 1, with Kemba also theoretically giving more offense than Elf.
The Knicks had to know that it would take a hit on defense; there wasn't a person anywhere who didn't think otherwise.

After that, they had a money and role/ability decision to make between Burks and Bullocks.
Bullocks would provide the better overall outside shooting and defense, Burks would provide decent outside shooting, but critically, some ability to create scoring chances for himself off the dribble. And a little for others.
Knicks choose Burks with that money.

I don't think it's a big deal either way who they kept, but I totally understand keeping Burks.

It ignores the real problems around the decision.

Knicks had a need to retain a player who could create over Bullocks because RJ isn't good enough at it. If RJ had true above average ability to put the ball on the floor and win his scoring matchup that way, the Knicks may have been less inclined to make the decision.
Otherwise, the team would be going into the season with 3 guys TOTAL with the ability: Randle, Rose and Fournier (or another choice here). RJ is just "ok" this way, right now.

That Randle and Fournier are a poor fit, but this seems to be on Randle - on offense. Randle either isn't comfortable playing with players who need the ball occasionally (Fournier/Kemba), is limited talentwise in doing it, or is that much of a headcase sharing the offense. Pick one. Any of these is a scouting fail on the Knicks part around Randle.

IF Randle is such a player that NEEDS 3&D and do nothing PG's around him to unlock Randle, then extending Randle and even trying to fit players around him is a giant mistake.

Moving along, the money spent on Fournier and Burks or Bullocks might, at around 27 million (31 million if you add Taj!) might have located a better player. Like overpay for Trent Jr to make the Raptors not pony up. Who knows. The Raptors burned an asset in Powell to get the rights to Trent Jr, so they may have been willing to go pretty high.

Lastly, Thibs has a somewhat similar player to Bullocks (yeah, a little shorter/smaller) in a good defensive 3&D guy, who even has a bit of Burks in him in a good way, and it took half the year for him to get minutes, and if, stylistically, this is the kind of player that Randle "needs", this player is STILL not in the starting lineup. Of course, Bullocks would have started, but where is the shot creation from?

Or the Knicks could have gotten a PG who is still able to get into the paint and score and pass (Not Ball), who should reasonably remain healthy - spent $ there, and then used Burks money on Bullocks. Hell, they could have gone:
Schroeder
Bullocks
Burks (off the bench)

And been better off.

I just see the decision not to retain Bullocks, in and of itself, as pretty low in the order of Knick issues, both with the ability of players they had and have, and the FO's lack of ability to recognize and reorder the team.

[rayraypico]

https://youtube.com/shorts/-1mUv2BUnUI?feature=share

It’s funny but I’ll run with it.

For what its worth, I checked about 8 Knicks IGs and they were all following the club. Which would be normal to follow your employer. JR is not...i guess the question is has he ever?

[Tron Carter]

yall traitors and haters, keep randle.

you can leave with him then

my loyalty is with the New York Knicks, not an overpaid mental midget.

[Deeeez Knicks]

We do miss someone like Bullocks, especially someone that can defend. But it was the right move to let him go. Also the wrong move to pay big for Fournier. We really should avoid paying so many guys like that. Could have just found someone cheaper and then let Grimes take over in that spot.

[thebuzzardman]

I'm going to share this twice.
@14:30, discussion of Randle's issues, but it very nicely highlights how the problem is Randle, but also Thibs and also the FO, for constructing a lineup counter to the way that benefits Randle

Watch on YouTube

[rayraypico]

https://www.facebook.com/groups/318245794884878/permalink/4972791516096926/

Is this true..if so update the thread Randle Informally requests trade!!!!

[F N 11]

https://www.facebook.com/groups/318245794884878/permalink/4972791516096926/

Is this true..if so update the thread Randle Informally requests trade!!!!

What does it say?

[seren]

I didn't watch Fox much but can't be worse than having Randle out there slowing the team down. Walker/Randle for Fox work under checker. Get it done Donnie

[dakomish23]

Most of the rotation is made up random journeyman role players! Make it stop!

We loveeeee journeymen players and more importantly paying them.

The Knicks replaced Bullocks with Fournier. It was a good idea, conceptually, since they needed some more offense at the 3 and 1, with Kemba also theoretically giving more offense than Elf.
The Knicks had to know that it would take a hit on defense; there wasn't a person anywhere who didn't think otherwise.

After that, they had a money and role/ability decision to make between Burks and Bullocks.
Bullocks would provide the better overall outside shooting and defense, Burks would provide decent outside shooting, but critically, some ability to create scoring chances for himself off the dribble. And a little for others.
Knicks choose Burks with that money.

I don't think it's a big deal either way who they kept, but I totally understand keeping Burks.

It ignores the real problems around the decision.

Knicks had a need to retain a player who could create over Bullocks because RJ isn't good enough at it. If RJ had true above average ability to put the ball on the floor and win his scoring matchup that way, the Knicks may have been less inclined to make the decision.
Otherwise, the team would be going into the season with 3 guys TOTAL with the ability: Randle, Rose and Fournier (or another choice here). RJ is just "ok" this way, right now.

That Randle and Fournier are a poor fit, but this seems to be on Randle - on offense. Randle either isn't comfortable playing with players who need the ball occasionally (Fournier/Kemba), is limited talentwise in doing it, or is that much of a headcase sharing the offense. Pick one. Any of these is a scouting fail on the Knicks part around Randle.

IF Randle is such a player that NEEDS 3&D and do nothing PG's around him to unlock Randle, then extending Randle and even trying to fit players around him is a giant mistake.

Moving along, the money spent on Fournier and Burks or Bullocks might, at around 27 million (31 million if you add Taj!) might have located a better player. Like overpay for Trent Jr to make the Raptors not pony up. Who knows. The Raptors burned an asset in Powell to get the rights to Trent Jr, so they may have been willing to go pretty high.

Lastly, Thibs has a somewhat similar player to Bullocks (yeah, a little shorter/smaller) in a good defensive 3&D guy, who even has a bit of Burks in him in a good way, and it took half the year for him to get minutes, and if, stylistically, this is the kind of player that Randle "needs", this player is STILL not in the starting lineup. Of course, Bullocks would have started, but where is the shot creation from?

Or the Knicks could have gotten a PG who is still able to get into the paint and score and pass (Not Ball), who should reasonably remain healthy - spent $ there, and then used Burks money on Bullocks. Hell, they could have gone:
Schroeder
Bullocks
Burks (off the bench)

And been better off.

I just see the decision not to retain Bullocks, in and of itself, as pretty low in the order of Knick issues, both with the ability of players they had and have, and the FO's lack of ability to recognize and reorder the team.

Here’s where I disagree. You keep Bullocks b/c his sole role on offense is to be an outlet since RJ and Randle both need the ball in their hand to be effective. Kind of a very very VERY poor man’s version of building around Lebron you load up on shooters.

For where we were (supposedly), my money would have been spent going hard after legitimate starters in the backcourt & then bringing back Bullocks. I wanted Lowry & Ball.

I really liked the Kemba move b/c it was cheap & I had hope he had something left to give his hometown. I was way wrong. He’s given up. Idc about the stats but his effort out there is mediocre at best.