Knicks Raps PG: No really, goodbye Randle

[BKlutch]

I’ve been guilty of this sin for decades.

To be clear, there’s nothing wrong with being a fan who roots for “meaningless wins.” But there is something tragically absurd (to the point of franchise malpractice) that the Knicks choose to draft 8-12 almost every year for an entire generation because they can’t resist winning late-season games after the Playoffs are out of reach.

At least this year it was behind RJ, Obi and IQ. Whereas the braintrust of years past would have seen us beating non-playoff teams behind such future stars as Alec Burks, Nerlens Noel, Derrick Rose, Evan Fournier, and Taj Gibson.

I’m like 99% sure that one of the teams just above us will get lucky and land in the top 3 this year. But we’ll draft 12th because we really needed those extra 5 wins in April.

Yeah, it's kind of upsetting to win so many games at the end, but let's say we made certain to lose all those games. The effect on our up and coming players would have been horrible (Obi, Quick, even RJ). So it's not the best to play poorly all season, and then win at the end, but there would have also been a downside if we squandered the chance to see the young guys play out.

Clearly, we'll have a lot more fun if we start winning at the beginning of next season and continue throughout. Having seen my first game on TV as a kid when we won the championship, I'm not a fan of mediocrity, either. Our team has been very mishandled by multiple front offices over the years. When we talk about how to win, however, we all need to keep in mind that there are very few ways to win (often, they aren't the ways we'd have expected) and many ways to totally screw things up. Just because any given one of us has a different approach than the current FO doesn't mean it's actually going to be better.

I wish there were some stats on championship teams showing how they were created (having great draft picks, have poor draft picks but making good choices, free agency, trades, etc.) to show which approach is statistically most likely to work. Of course, even with the best plan, a lousy FO can muck it all up (poor draft choices, poor trades, poor FA signings, etc.)

Yeah, I really disagree and don’t think it’s so complicated. It’s extremely simple logic that the Knicks have punted on drafting a franchise-level talent for 20 years now because they want to chase a playoff appearance each and every year no matter what.

RJ, IQ and Obi’s development is nice to see but none of them project to be a Ewing-level franchise changer. If we can’t sign one in FA because of Dolan. If we can’t trade for one on the trade market, again, because of Dolan. Then the only way to get one is by drafting one. The best chance of that would be multiple shots at a top 3 pick over multiple years like we see in just about every other bottom-dwelling NBA city.

It is absolute inexcusable franchise malpractice to field teams year after year designed to simply make the playoffs (with no hope whatsoever at a championship). No matter how much we develop RJ, Obi, IQ, Mitch and Grimes none of them can ever be the franchise talent we need. Our FO is getting paid big bucks to perpetuate the ego-myth that top talent will eventually accept Dolan as cool again, which they won’t. It’s a lie. Just like going for the playoffs every year is a lie.

But hey, I love nothing more in life than a $30 Carnegie Deli pastrami from a $200 lower-bowl seat to scream on my Knicks a couple times a year.

I realize Dolan should be the object of scorn by all Knicks fans, and it seems to have played out by selecting horrible front office people. But there are other, truly disgusting owners in the NBA, and most of them do better than Dolan does. At the end of the day, it could be we're just cursed.

[AusKnicksTape]

I’ve been guilty of this sin for decades.

To be clear, there’s nothing wrong with being a fan who roots for “meaningless wins.” But there is something tragically absurd (to the point of franchise malpractice) that the Knicks choose to draft 8-12 almost every year for an entire generation because they can’t resist winning late-season games after the Playoffs are out of reach.

At least this year it was behind RJ, Obi and IQ. Whereas the braintrust of years past would have seen us beating non-playoff teams behind such future stars as Alec Burks, Nerlens Noel, Derrick Rose, Evan Fournier, and Taj Gibson.

I’m like 99% sure that one of the teams just above us will get lucky and land in the top 3 this year. But we’ll draft 12th because we really needed those extra 5 wins in April.

Yeah, it's kind of upsetting to win so many games at the end, but let's say we made certain to lose all those games. The effect on our up and coming players would have been horrible (Obi, Quick, even RJ). So it's not the best to play poorly all season, and then win at the end, but there would have also been a downside if we squandered the chance to see the young guys play out.

Clearly, we'll have a lot more fun if we start winning at the beginning of next season and continue throughout. Having seen my first game on TV as a kid when we won the championship, I'm not a fan of mediocrity, either. Our team has been very mishandled by multiple front offices over the years. When we talk about how to win, however, we all need to keep in mind that there are very few ways to win (often, they aren't the ways we'd have expected) and many ways to totally screw things up. Just because any given one of us has a different approach than the current FO doesn't mean it's actually going to be better.

I wish there were some stats on championship teams showing how they were created (having great draft picks, have poor draft picks but making good choices, free agency, trades, etc.) to show which approach is statistically most likely to work. Of course, even with the best plan, a lousy FO can muck it all up (poor draft choices, poor trades, poor FA signings, etc.)

Yeah, I really disagree and don’t think it’s so complicated. It’s extremely simple logic that the Knicks have punted on drafting a franchise-level talent for 20 years now because they want to chase a playoff appearance each and every year no matter what.

RJ, IQ and Obi’s development is nice to see but none of them project to be a Ewing-level franchise changer. If we can’t sign one in FA because of Dolan. If we can’t trade for one on the trade market, again, because of Dolan. Then the only way to get one is by drafting one. The best chance of that would be multiple shots at a top 3 pick over multiple years like we see in just about every other bottom-dwelling NBA city.

It is absolute inexcusable franchise malpractice to field teams year after year designed to simply make the playoffs (with no hope whatsoever at a championship). No matter how much we develop RJ, Obi, IQ, Mitch and Grimes none of them can ever be the franchise talent we need. Our FO is getting paid big bucks to perpetuate the ego-myth that top talent will eventually accept Dolan as cool again, which they won’t. It’s a lie. Just like going for the playoffs every year is a lie.

But hey, I love nothing more in life than a $30 Carnegie Deli pastrami from a $200 lower-bowl seat to scream on my Knicks a couple times a year.

I think both sides have merit.

Have a look at the GSW dynasty. They hit the jackpot at number 7 which I know is not picks 8-12 but it still shows that sometimes you need a bit of luck. They added a Pick 11, then a Pick 35 and managed to bring in their star.

I agree that the approach in the past has been horribly inexcuasble. That does not mean there can't be merit to the approach if applied correctly in the future.

Winning culture really does mean so much.

[TheGreenArrow]

Read on Twitter

Obi Toppin’s late emergence as a scorer, 3-point shooter and energizer has opened the eyes of coach Tom Thibodeau, who went as far as comparing him to his all-time favorite player Taj Gibson in regards to the intangibles and the bounce he brings to his teammates.

Trading Randle, if they can get equal value, would open up the starting spot for Toppin next season and perhaps create stronger team morale.

Those things matter to Thibodeau.

However, Thibodeau liked how the Knicks passed the ball when Randle wasn’t on the court in the final five games. Randle shut it down late with a sore quad.

There will be teams interested in the rugged Randle, whose four-year, $117 million contract extension begins next season at $23.7 million. That’s not an exorbitant number at all. Randle is at the top of all opponent scouting reports and is sensational steamrolling to the hoop when in the right frame of mind.



Welp bye bye Julius!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thibs mouthpiece berman says Thibs prefers Obi to Randle!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[cgmw]

Yeah, it's kind of upsetting to win so many games at the end, but let's say we made certain to lose all those games. The effect on our up and coming players would have been horrible (Obi, Quick, even RJ). So it's not the best to play poorly all season, and then win at the end, but there would have also been a downside if we squandered the chance to see the young guys play out.

Clearly, we'll have a lot more fun if we start winning at the beginning of next season and continue throughout. Having seen my first game on TV as a kid when we won the championship, I'm not a fan of mediocrity, either. Our team has been very mishandled by multiple front offices over the years. When we talk about how to win, however, we all need to keep in mind that there are very few ways to win (often, they aren't the ways we'd have expected) and many ways to totally screw things up. Just because any given one of us has a different approach than the current FO doesn't mean it's actually going to be better.

I wish there were some stats on championship teams showing how they were created (having great draft picks, have poor draft picks but making good choices, free agency, trades, etc.) to show which approach is statistically most likely to work. Of course, even with the best plan, a lousy FO can muck it all up (poor draft choices, poor trades, poor FA signings, etc.)

Yeah, I really disagree and don’t think it’s so complicated. It’s extremely simple logic that the Knicks have punted on drafting a franchise-level talent for 20 years now because they want to chase a playoff appearance each and every year no matter what.

RJ, IQ and Obi’s development is nice to see but none of them project to be a Ewing-level franchise changer. If we can’t sign one in FA because of Dolan. If we can’t trade for one on the trade market, again, because of Dolan. Then the only way to get one is by drafting one. The best chance of that would be multiple shots at a top 3 pick over multiple years like we see in just about every other bottom-dwelling NBA city.

It is absolute inexcusable franchise malpractice to field teams year after year designed to simply make the playoffs (with no hope whatsoever at a championship). No matter how much we develop RJ, Obi, IQ, Mitch and Grimes none of them can ever be the franchise talent we need. Our FO is getting paid big bucks to perpetuate the ego-myth that top talent will eventually accept Dolan as cool again, which they won’t. It’s a lie. Just like going for the playoffs every year is a lie.

But hey, I love nothing more in life than a $30 Carnegie Deli pastrami from a $200 lower-bowl seat to scream on my Knicks a couple times a year.

I think both sides have merit.

Have a look at the GSW dynasty. They hit the jackpot at number 7 which I know is not picks 8-12 but it still shows that sometimes you need a bit of luck. They added a Pick 11, then a Pick 35 and managed to bring in their star.

I agree that the approach in the past has been horribly inexcuasble. That does not mean there can't be merit to the approach if applied correctly in the future.

Winning culture really does mean so much.

You can also pencil in the Ben Wallace Pistons as outliers in the traditional recipe for Championships, but it doesn’t change the fact that there’s nothing “winning” about the Knicks culture of pretending to be an 8-seed playoff contender year after year. If anything it’s the very definition of a losing culture that moves the goalposts closer (yet still fails to score).

They failed to emulate the Celtics “Big 3” trade. Failed to emulate the Heatles Big 3 free-agent haul. And they straight-up just DGAF about drafting the next Duncan, Doncic, etc. etc. etc.

While I’m at it, you realize the Knicks would have botched Steph Curry’s development right? They would have been so busy trying to look respectable in the hopes of attracting a FA that they would have benched him through his early ankle issues. And if he ever showed out, they would have traded him in a heartbeat for the first disgruntled veteran on the market.

Anyway, if you’re ever at the Garden, try the pastrami!

[AusKnicksTape]

Yeah, I really disagree and don’t think it’s so complicated. It’s extremely simple logic that the Knicks have punted on drafting a franchise-level talent for 20 years now because they want to chase a playoff appearance each and every year no matter what.

RJ, IQ and Obi’s development is nice to see but none of them project to be a Ewing-level franchise changer. If we can’t sign one in FA because of Dolan. If we can’t trade for one on the trade market, again, because of Dolan. Then the only way to get one is by drafting one. The best chance of that would be multiple shots at a top 3 pick over multiple years like we see in just about every other bottom-dwelling NBA city.

It is absolute inexcusable franchise malpractice to field teams year after year designed to simply make the playoffs (with no hope whatsoever at a championship). No matter how much we develop RJ, Obi, IQ, Mitch and Grimes none of them can ever be the franchise talent we need. Our FO is getting paid big bucks to perpetuate the ego-myth that top talent will eventually accept Dolan as cool again, which they won’t. It’s a lie. Just like going for the playoffs every year is a lie.

But hey, I love nothing more in life than a $30 Carnegie Deli pastrami from a $200 lower-bowl seat to scream on my Knicks a couple times a year.

I think both sides have merit.

Have a look at the GSW dynasty. They hit the jackpot at number 7 which I know is not picks 8-12 but it still shows that sometimes you need a bit of luck. They added a Pick 11, then a Pick 35 and managed to bring in their star.

I agree that the approach in the past has been horribly inexcuasble. That does not mean there can't be merit to the approach if applied correctly in the future.

Winning culture really does mean so much.

While I’m at it, you realize the Knicks would have botched Steph Curry’s development right? They would have been so busy trying to look respectable in the hopes of attracting a FA that they would have benched him through his early ankle issues. And if he ever showed out, they would have traded him in a heartbeat for the first disgruntled veteran on the market.

So if they'll botch the development of any big franchise player draftee it really makes no difference at all to the overall success of the team so we really should just enjoy the mediocrity and wins when we can get them? Like I get the cynicism but at some point if you're not going to let either side of the argument win what's the point in even debating.

[thebuzzardman]

I'm not a Randle fan, but disingenuous tweet.

Portis average 14.5. He didn't play the minutes needed to get to Randles. Why? If he was that awesome why would the Bucks do that to themselves? Because he's good, but not that good. It's why I hate per 36 etc. You just can't project stuff. There's also this Giannis guy on the Bucks as a center of offensive gravity, while Randle, for better or worse, IS that guy for the Knicks.

I’m not a Randle fan either but most of these muse tweets overall is garbage if you ask me. The “categories” and “firsts” have become annoying.

You said Giannis, **** they got Middleton and Holiday as well to create gravity.

The comparison is dumb.

In fairness, the guy’s name is literally Hater Muse. At least he’s transparent with his negative clickbait.

I realize we’re still typing on a turn-of-the-century message board, but it’s a weird post-post post-modern world out there. The OP knows perfectly well his stats are garbage, and I think he knows that we know that he knows. And yet we still can’t help clicking on it and posting dumbass uninformed line-in-the-sand replies.

3toheadmelo has been dividing the world into GIF factions for as long as I’ve been posting here — 20 years now. Humanity will always enjoy a good Hater Muse, no matter how nonsensical his per-48 comparisons.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/05/social-media-democracy-trust-babel/629369/

WHY THE PAST 10 YEARS OF AMERICAN LIFE HAVE BEEN UNIQUELY STUPID
It’s not just a phase.

[thebuzzardman]

Form the article:


Hmmmm, wonder who that was about.

Randle, as I know you know.

It's interesting. There seemed to be a rift. I've speculated that it's because Randle isn't happy how Thibs coached the team or maybe he didn't have input on some stuff. That would speak to Randle not really having a grasp of who he is in the org, an inflated sense of self. I get stars dictate stuff, but if my take here is true, then Randle thinks more of himself as a player than what is reality.

On the other hand, if Randle doesn't like Thibs, that can happen. Now the FO has to choose. Or decide it doesn't like either of them. Of course, it could decide it likes both of them and needs to work it out. I'd assume they'll try the last one for another year before deciding to move on from one or the other or both.

If there is a rift, then from the quote (and if your speculation about a Thibs/Randle rift is correct - and I would certainly believe it) it sounds like a multi-directional rift. If people in the front office are pointing to Randle's attitude and huddle-meandering as Thib's "losing the team" they may have an agenda. It seems like a stretch given what all the other players have said - he may have lost Randle but the team? I don't know, maybe. But it sounds like some front office people using any evidence against Thibs (and I'm not suggesting this is a bad thing).

Now if the front office had to choose between Thibs or Randle, seems like it would be on easy one - Thibs. Can't help but think Thibs would get another year. If he didn't have Randle and could somehow be convinced to start/significantly play the kids, then he might be successful here. Otherwise, he needs to move on after Randle.

Excellent point to see it as intramural infighting, which seems to be a feature of this Knicks FO.

WWW/Aller leaking to undermine Thibs/Randle?

I feel like WWW and Aller are loosely allied.
Yet WWW and Rose are allied
And Rose and Thibs are allied
Perry? Who knows.
Thibs main guy is Rose. Probably finds common cause with Perry for "Vets!", but I'm biased because I dislike Perry.

[cgmw]

I think both sides have merit.

Have a look at the GSW dynasty. They hit the jackpot at number 7 which I know is not picks 8-12 but it still shows that sometimes you need a bit of luck. They added a Pick 11, then a Pick 35 and managed to bring in their star.

I agree that the approach in the past has been horribly inexcuasble. That does not mean there can't be merit to the approach if applied correctly in the future.

Winning culture really does mean so much.

While I’m at it, you realize the Knicks would have botched Steph Curry’s development right? They would have been so busy trying to look respectable in the hopes of attracting a FA that they would have benched him through his early ankle issues. And if he ever showed out, they would have traded him in a heartbeat for the first disgruntled veteran on the market.

So if they'll botch the development of any big franchise player draftee it really makes no difference at all to the overall success of the team so we really should just enjoy the mediocrity and wins when we can get them? Like I get the cynicism but at some point if you're not going to let either side of the argument win what's the point in even debating.

Dolan’s Knicks need a no-brainer blue-chip draftee like Ewing or Embiid who’s too big to fail. Or an immediate sensation like Doncic.

Steph was an underdog for a while before he blossomed. The Knicks toxic garden would have killed him before he sprouted.

[thebuzzardman]

Read on Twitter

Look who’s missing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

No Mitch or Burks either!
Or Cam!
Or Grimes!
Or McBride!
Or Sims!
Or Taj!
Or Rose!

Big trades upcoming!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Jimmit79]

NY media has no news so they're hell bent on destroying Randles life and this will go on for 4 more years.

[thebuzzardman]

NY media has no news so they're hell bent on destroying Randles life and this will go on for 4 more years.

That kind of single minded hatred of one player is terrible.

[Jimmit79]

NY media has no news so they're hell bent on destroying Randles life and this will go on for 4 more years.

That kind of single minded hatred of one player is terrible.

Yea it's poisonous to ones mind

[AusKnicksTape]

While I’m at it, you realize the Knicks would have botched Steph Curry’s development right? They would have been so busy trying to look respectable in the hopes of attracting a FA that they would have benched him through his early ankle issues. And if he ever showed out, they would have traded him in a heartbeat for the first disgruntled veteran on the market.

So if they'll botch the development of any big franchise player draftee it really makes no difference at all to the overall success of the team so we really should just enjoy the mediocrity and wins when we can get them? Like I get the cynicism but at some point if you're not going to let either side of the argument win what's the point in even debating.

Dolan’s Knicks need a no-brainer blue-chip draftee like Ewing or Embiid who’s too big to fail. Or an immediate sensation like Doncic.

Steph was an underdog for a while before he blossomed. The Knicks toxic garden would have killed him before he sprouted.

Agree but in a way that also supports the idea of building culture to block out the toxicity and one of the easier ways to build culture is through winning - but more specifically, winning the right way - which I believe to a degree we did in the last few games of the season.

[Dubious Handles]

The season begins with a nice short win streak, 80 page post game threads and fans feeling it.
Next comes a miserable 90 % rest of the season where the team makes you question liking basketball .
But right at the end.. in typical Knick fashion

[Iron Mantis]

NY media has no news so they're hell bent on destroying Randles life and this will go on for 4 more years.

Why would they still be talking about Randle while he's playing for Dallas or the Pacers?

[KnickMan]

Nothing against obi but I gotta see what Obi looks like when the games matter to truly evaluate. I get he plays behind Randle but that shouldn’t stop him from playing the way he is playing now even if the minutes are lowered.

This is coming from somebody who wanted obi at pick 8.

[quote]Yeah Obi has to do a better job dropping 40 and 10 in 16 minutes per game.[/quote}

LOL, He has shown enough already to get at least 30-35 minutes game next season. No way he should play behind Randle anymore.

[KnickMan]

Looked at box score, Raps had a g league team going. Stats inflated

And the 35 he scored the game before, or the multiple 20 point efforts?

[Jimmit79]

Read on Twitter

?t=nd1FI-j2LsicgxL8XLbAmA&s=19

IQ and Obi shatter all records of JRRJ duo in one night. Both IQ and Obi are Leon's pick and JRRJ are Scott Perry boys if Perry gets fired expect JRRJ to be shipped out of here soon.

[Iron Mantis]

Read on Twitter

Obi Toppin’s late emergence as a scorer, 3-point shooter and energizer has opened the eyes of coach Tom Thibodeau, who went as far as comparing him to his all-time favorite player Taj Gibson in regards to the intangibles and the bounce he brings to his teammates.

Trading Randle, if they can get equal value, would open up the starting spot for Toppin next season and perhaps create stronger team morale.

Those things matter to Thibodeau.

However, Thibodeau liked how the Knicks passed the ball when Randle wasn’t on the court in the final five games. Randle shut it down late with a sore quad.

There will be teams interested in the rugged Randle, whose four-year, $117 million contract extension begins next season at $23.7 million. That’s not an exorbitant number at all. Randle is at the top of all opponent scouting reports and is sensational steamrolling to the hoop when in the right frame of mind.



Welp bye bye Julius!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thibs mouthpiece berman says Thibs prefers Obi to Randle!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I wouldn't be shocked if Leon rushed into signing Randle to a "discounted" contract for the purpose of locking him up, letting him "mentor" Obi, then trading him for assets when Obi is ready to take the reins.

It would make sense. Obi is Leon's baby and legacy. I remember chatter that he was so enamored with Obi, he was willing to trade up to get him. No way he isn't hell-bent on making Obi the face of the Knicks PF position.

Maybe I'm giving him too much credit...cuz the Fournier deal is super suspect.

[B8RcDeMktfxC]

Read on Twitter

Leon Rose is the devil reincarnated!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Form the article:

Front-office members thought Thibodeau had, as one source put it, “lost the team.” They didn’t like some of the body language and attentiveness during timeout huddles.

Hmmmm, wonder who that was about.

Randle, as I know you know.

It's interesting. There seemed to be a rift. I've speculated that it's because Randle isn't happy how Thibs coached the team or maybe he didn't have input on some stuff. That would speak to Randle not really having a grasp of who he is in the org, an inflated sense of self. I get stars dictate stuff, but if my take here is true, then Randle thinks more of himself as a player than what is reality.

On the other hand, if Randle doesn't like Thibs, that can happen. Now the FO has to choose. Or decide it doesn't like either of them. Of course, it could decide it likes both of them and needs to work it out. I'd assume they'll try the last one for another year before deciding to move on from one or the other or both.

Its possible this feeds from Randle's contract negotiations over the summer. Remember the (Cohen advanced) idea that the Knicks persuaded Randle to take less money in order to strengthen the salary sheet position of the Knicks and thus be able to build a better team of which Randle would be the leader. Maybe the FO did want Randle to have more power in the organization - or convinced Randle that they did.