Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

61

Basketball / 5. We need to see what the kids - especially Obi - can do.

« on: September 07, 2022, 11:36:58 AM »

5. We need to see what the kids - especially Obi - can do.

Right now, even after the Mitchell saga, there is a lot to feel good about with this team. Whether the front office is truly behind him or not, every fan is excited for RJ Barrett to solidify himself as the face of the franchise. Brunson is immediately going to be a hit. I am already trying to trademark I ❤️ Hartenstein. And the kids, well... the kids have a slightly higher Q rating than the Beatles walking off Ed Sullivan's stage in 1964.

And Obi Toppin is Paul McCartney.

When I had Zach Lowe on the pod a few months ago, I asked him what his 'biggest thing' was for the Knicks this season (yes, I left it intentionally vague so he could take it any way he wanted to). His answer was that New York needed to see what it had in RJ Barrett and Obi Toppin. As in, we've already seen enough to be very intrigued, but now we have to see more.

I don't know what Obi can do with a starting role. Neither do you. Nobody does. But if there's a player on the Knicks who stands to benefit the most from playing with a guard like Jalen Brunson, it is Toppin. Obi's frenetic energy will finally be rewarded by a guard who has gone from first round afterthought to one hundred million dollar man in large part because he exploits every crevice of weakness a defense gives him. Toppin has been yearning to play with a guard like Brunson. They deserve each other.

62

Basketball / 4. Things could get ugly if Randle stays

« on: September 07, 2022, 11:34:20 AM »

4. The ugly factor

I give it, oh, I don't know... six minutes and three missed long twos before the boos start reigning down as Randle goes into his jab-jab-fake-jab-dribble-dribble-fake-shoot routine. And with it, the chants of O-Bi Top-pin! will start at the next stoppage in play.

Not in Game 10. Not in Game 5.

Game One.

Well, Game Two, as the Knicks start the season on the road in Memphis. Either way, it won't take long. And if they start losing amidst his struggles, what then? Every team in the league will know that New York's front office is desperate to save itself from the mess they've made, especially after the failed Mitchell pursuit. Firing Thibodeau will get them a temporary reprieve, but that won't last unless his replacement leans into the kids... and thus, further away from Julius. Reducing Randle's minutes at that point would solidify him as the worst contract in basketball, and thus, the toughest to move.

It doesn't have to be this way, of course, which takes us to...

63

Basketball / Re: Why Randle Must Go - by Knicks Film School

« on: September 07, 2022, 11:31:44 AM »

The idea is that Brunson's play can change and elevate Randle's game.

I think that's an intriguing prospect and would like to see it played out.

See above..  Juice may not be worth the squeeze even if all the IFs work out.

All credit to Jonathan Macri

64

Basketball / 3. Too risky to keep

« on: September 07, 2022, 11:29:52 AM »

3. The opportunity cost of seeing if he can recap his value isn't worth the risk

Maybe all the above numbers aren't the be all, end all. Maybe, against all basketball logic and common sense, the stars will align and Randle will find success as one third of triumvirate with RJ and Brunson. Maybe his jumper comes back around. Maybe he took all the barbs and arrows from assholes like me personally, and boy oh boy, is he going to show us.

If all that happens, then what? Would the Knicks:

-be a contender? Hell to the no.

-be closer to contention? Nope, try again!

-be on a path to someday contending with Randle as a core piece? Unless he completely and totally changes what type of player he is, and what he's willing and able to do when he doesn't have the ball, then no.

The Finals between Golden State and Boston were the latest reminder of where basketball is and where it's going. Randle, a player whose most effective half season came by playing a style that doesn't fit with the pace & space of the modern game. That's why, of all the comps we threw around during his All-NBA campaign, we missed the most obvious one: the post-KD but still in his prime version of Russell Westbrook. That version of Russ was perfect if you wanted to win a bunch of regular season games, but was largely neutered in the playoffs. The Hawks really brought this comp home last May.

Finally, if Randle started hot, would the Knicks...

-have an easier time trading him?

This, more than anything, is the reason I've heard argued most for keeping him into the year. I've even argued it myself at times. Theoretically, if he looked good to start the season, his value would go up, and he would be easier to trade.

But how much would his value really go up? Is a team giving up a high ceiling young player to get him? Fat chance. Is a quasi-contender giving up a juicy future unprotected first? Never say never, but I don't see it. More than likely, someone takes a chance on him as a neutral asset, and is willing to give the Knicks their meh contract or contracts to do a swap. And that's the best case scenario.

Is that possibility valuable and/or likely enough to bypass whatever it would take to unload him right now? If we assume New York can unload his money by giving some team one or two of their protected first rounders, would that really be too high a cost? That gets us to...

65

Basketball / 2. Better without

« on: September 07, 2022, 11:23:40 AM »

2. The team is better without him

Let's put aside the fact that according to Cleaning the Glass, Obi Toppin had the 20th highest on/off differential among 255 players to see at least 1000 minutes of court time last season, whereas Julius Randle had the 6th lowest among that same group. To some, that stat by itself is enough justification for trying everything possible to move off of Randle and insert Obi Toppin into the starting five.

But on/off differential isn't everything. If it was, Isaiah Hartenstein would have gotten the max instead of a two-year, $15 million deal. What's undeniable, however, is that other than a half-season stretch playing in front of empty gyms, New York's offense has consistently been better with Randle off the floor:

2019-20 season: New York had a higher offensive rating (107.1) with Randle on the floor than off (105.3), but those numbers are a bit deceiving. For one, the Knicks bench was dreadful that season. More importantly, according to Cleaning the Glass, when Julius played without Marcus Morris, the Knicks scored just 105.7 points per 100 possessions, whereas Morris lineups without Randle scored 110.4 per 100. Randle's on-court offensive rating would have ranked in between the 29th ranked Bulls and the 30th ranked Warriors.

2020-21 season: Julius started the season off on the tear of all tears, with a 53.7 effective field goal percentage before the All-Star break, spurred largely by some ridiculous shooting on long twos. They needed every bit of that productivity, as New York scored just 101.9 points per 100 without Randle on the floor. At the same time, the on-court offensive rating of 109.4 with Julius shooting flames out of his butt was still a bottom-ten number. After the break, Randle's eFG% dropped to 49.7. Not coincidentally, the Knicks offensive rating increased from 110.7 when he played - still bottom 10! - to 113.5 when he sat.

2021-22 season: The Knicks offense plummeted to 108.0 points per 100 possessions when Randle was on the court, a number that would have slotted them between the 26th ranked Rockets and the 27th ranked Blazers. With Julius off the court, the number increased to 110.5.

I'm only citing offensive numbers here a) because that is supposed to be his strong suit and b) because anyone with working eyes doesn't need data to support their critique of Randle on the defensive end. When he tries, he is more than passable and occasionally downright effective. When he doesn't, it is a team-wide soul-suck that would make Shang Tsung blush. That brings us to ...

66

Basketball / 1. Usage Rate

« on: September 07, 2022, 11:18:43 AM »

1. There is no room for his usage or play style

Even without Donovan Mitchell, the reality of the sport of basketball - that there's only one ball - remains the most glaring issue on New York's hands.

I've already done deep dives on the usage conundrum for the Knicks, first back in April and then early in July. Without rehashing every detail of those analyses, the major takeaways were as follows:

Absent extenuating circumstances, the player with the third highest usage on an NBA team has a usage rate hovering somewhere between 21 and 23. Julius Randle's usage in New York has never been below 27.

Successful high usage trios have, at the very least, ample shooting, and especially efficient scoring from the big man. Randle's shooting regression needs no further exploration, but beyond that, he has never been a willing screen and roll big, and isn't very efficient when he does.

In games that Randle took a backseat to Kemba Walker last season, he struggled even more than normal, which is saying something. We saw similar results in games RJ took the lead as well.

While both have shown evidence to varying degrees that they can be successful 3-point shooters, both RJ Barrett and Jalen Brunson prefer to operate inside the arc. The Knicks are also set on playing a traditional five. A basketball court is only 50 feet wide.

We've heard a lot about how Julius will thrive playing alongside better talent, like during his year in New Orleans when he played just over 30 minutes a night and sported a usage rate topping 27. However according to Cleaning the Glass, 70 percent of his minutes there came at center, and he played almost exclusively with Anthony Davis or a true stretch big. That is in no way comparable to the case here.

Given all of the above, there is really only one world where it makes sense for Randle to remain on this team and I'm not sure how deep into the multiverse we have to travel before we find it. He'd need to embrace a Draymond Green-ish role, with constant motion and well-timed screening and re-screening. He'd also have to be comfortable spending a high number of possessions camped in the corner, because unlike Draymond, he doesn't have anywhere near the smarts or savvy to play the point forward on every or even most possessions. His version of that - to grind the offense to a halt - is no longer an option with Brunson here and Barrett extended. They must operate with the ball in their hands more than him for a plethora of reasons I don't need to explain here.

Finally: if such a Bizarro-world version of Randle did exist, is that version of Randle worth the $26.5 million in guaranteed annual money he's owed over the next four seasons?

67

Basketball / Why Randle Must Go - by Knicks Film School

« on: September 07, 2022, 11:13:54 AM »

1. There is no room for his usage or play style
2. The team is better without him
3. The opportunity cost of seeing if he can recap his value isn't worth the risk
4. Things could get ugly if Randle stays
5. We need to see what the kids - especially Obi - can do.

68

Basketball / Re: Knicks

« on: September 06, 2022, 12:34:05 PM »

With all due respect, we have a small three.  Not a BIG three.

RJ - still unproven
JB - small sample size
JR - one good year

69

Basketball / Re: Knicks

« on: September 02, 2022, 04:00:15 PM »

Kid does not watch basketball.

I hope Randle puts his focus on sprinting to D and nailing his rotations, while moving off the ball and setting screens on O, and having plan A and B before the catch. I hope he takes any role presented to him as an opportunity not a insult.

If this happens he could be really good for us.

If I am gameplanning against the Knicks a point of emphasis will be getting into Randles head. If that never works, Jules will put himself back on top. Once the head gets exposed, I worry about it as much as knees and feet.

Fournier is our Hubert Davis, fine for what he his. We are overpaying him and last year we overplayed him.

You have to be a black belt optimist to this Randle will be good.

I'll have what you're smoking.

70

Basketball / Re: Knicks

« on: September 02, 2022, 03:59:16 PM »

It would be one or two Lakers picks coming in with Randle/Fournier maybe Cam going out.


You want scoring Elephant?  We got this OBI kid....

You want to be a player in free agency? Just wait one year.

That is why.

71

Basketball / Re: Knicks

« on: September 02, 2022, 12:56:42 AM »

Why would I want Russ in a suit? or Why would we make this trade?

72

Basketball / Re: EXACTLY

« on: September 02, 2022, 12:18:38 AM »

Knicks also still have RJ and Grimes and Obi and IQ.

Hell, at the risk orf reporting myself, we also have both KAM and Cam. 

Well, at least you'll have Kam.

We both have yet to reach our potential in NY.   

73

Basketball / Re: Knicks

« on: September 02, 2022, 12:15:22 AM »

Let us see what our play looks like before we start planning the next deal.

the next deal everyone will be discussing:

Julius Randle ----------------------------------------------> CHA
Gordon Hayward and Evan Fournier ---------------------> LAL
Russel Westbrook and two 1st round picks (from LA) --> NYK

In some variations Cam will be going to LA as well.  Or no Cam but only one pick coming to NY.

I would hope the Knicks would keep Russ in a suit all year.

74

Basketball / Re: Knicks

« on: September 01, 2022, 05:11:44 PM »

I'll sleep well knowing we still have ALL OUR PICKS, Four extra picks, a wild card in Cam, and some light-blue chip prospects on rookie deals.

Leon has all the clay he needs to make the trade he wants to make.

JUMP BALL!

75

Basketball / Re: Knicks

« on: September 01, 2022, 04:16:37 PM »

YES!!!!!