I reckon he's Lou Williams in forward form.
Very good bench piece, definitely not worth over 12 mil per
Printable View
In defense of Randle not many are playing defense in the NBA right now. The Van Gundy brothers were right.
He's a 20/10 guy who has never done 20/10.
I get that per 36 and per 100 can be important, and they tell you a lot about what players could do, given certain circumstances. But you can't just use them as a fallback when you make an error. If you go by per 36, Boban Marjonovic is a 20/10 player too!
I'm exaggerating a little, of course, Randle is definitely better than Boban. And I'm sure that if you played Randle 38 minutes a game, he would put up 20/10. But that also costs shots from other players, because he has a one track mind and is score first over anything else.
I am sure that he will get offered 15m. I never denied it. I just don't think we should be the ones making that offer. If he wants to go get 20m a year from Brooklyn, or Miami or whoever, cool, good for him.
In only 30 minutes a game, he is currently averaging 20.4/9 and only takes less than 14 shots a game (shooting over 53% with 34.4% from 3pt). It is not like he is chucking shots. He has a PER of 21.47. He also just turned 24. I would love him back at the right price. Even though he is not a good defender, he still has a positive net rating.
He has a positive net rating, because his offensive rating is very very good. His defensive rating is 111, which is pretty damn bad. There are some circumstances where a defensive rating like that makes sense even if someone is a good defender (say, if they play a bunch of minutes with awful defensive lineups and always draw the toughest assignment: like Jrue does) but usually that's pretty bad.
If you look at Randle's individual defensive stats, they show that. Julius, who almost never draws the toughest assignments, lets opponents shoot 6.4% better than their averages in the midrange, and 5.2% better than their averages from deep. Again, maybe there would be something understandable about that if he was always guarding superstars, but he is not.
I have not said, anywhere, that I wouldn't want him back at all. You even say it yourself: you would love him back. At the right price. The question is, what's the right price for a one way player, who is a decent but not impressive three point shooter, and thrives pretty much only in the paint? For me, I say that's somewhere like $12-$14m per season. I have repeatedly stated that Randle does have an elite skill: he can put the ball in the hoop within 10 feet at an elite rate. He really is fantastic at that, and I'm not trying to downplay that skill. The question is, how much is that skill, and that skill only, worth?
No need for one. My point was never that he couldn't be a 20/10 guy if given a shedload of minutes, my point is that calling him a 20/10 right now is inaccurate because it doesn't represent something he's ever done.
I'll just include a quote from one of my own posts that, had you read it, would already have answered this point: ''And I'm sure that if you played Randle 38 minutes a game, he would put up 20/10. But that also costs shots from other players, because he has a one track mind and is score first over anything else.''
Weird that you didn't read that, given that you did post a response to it. Strange.
No comment about any of the actual points I made?
He’s already averaging 20 on only 14 shots per game AND he is doing it very efficiently so isn’t he the exact type of player that you want because he doesn’t take shots from others because he is so efficient? And by the way you said he has never been a 20-10 guy implies that you think he couldn’t when he is literally doing it right now. I never commented on his defense though so no comment. Also to compare a guy who averages 30 minutes a game to boban who gets like 8 is a terrible comparison. That’s like comparing Embiid and boban by that logic. If your gonna use a comparison for per 36 the actual game minutes should be the same, not 300% different
Comprende?
That's fair. Somewhere in that range or maybe slightly higher makes sense. I would not pay Jrue-type money for him.
His defensive rating is pretty bad, but they whole team's rating is bad, so hard to carve out one player and criticize too harshly. He deserves criticism per the eye test, but could he perform better on a better coached (defensively) team that is not so fast paced?
Let me explain it in excruciating clarity, so there can be no confusion.
If I say that someone has never been a 20/10 guy, that does not mean I am saying he never COULD be a 20/10 guy. It just means that he has not done it yet.
You say ''when he is literally doing it right now.''. No he isn't. He is not averaging 20/10 right now. He's averaging pretty close to 20/10, and maybe he would average 20/10 if he got more minutes (which I have literally agreed with, about four times now), but he isn't actually averaging 20/10. So no, he really, REALLY, is not ''literally'' doing it right now.
In the very post you are talking about, I admitted that the Boban comparison was an exaggeration, and kind of silly. It was there to demonstrate a point, not serve as an actual argument in itself.
That said, no, that's not how per 36 works. The entire point of per 36 is to compare players who DON'T play the same ''actual game minutes''. If two players play the same actual game minutes, you don't need to use per 36 because you can just .... compare what they put up, in the same minutes. Per 36 serves to level out the difference between players who vary significantly in their minutes per game. That's its entire point. That's what it's for.
Listen, if you're not gonna read my posts then that's totally fine. Nobody is forcing you to. But don't bother responding to them if you're not even going to read them.
There's a chance he could. People, including you, have pointed out he's only 24, so there's always a chance there, and he's an athletic and speedy guy so the physical potential is definitely there. I'd like to see him actually show signs of that in-game before committing a ton of money to him on the off-chance, though.
He is happy playing with Holiday. This opposite of Davis! Pay the man!
Julius Randle just said that he's never played with a player who plays as hard as Jrue Holiday.
— Oleh Kosel (@OlehKosel) March 7, 2019
Randle is part of the future core. He gets to the FT line a hell of a lot. That’s really valuable. Putting teams in foul trouble is a great thing. He’s damn good at it. He shows above average bbiq and can do it all. You gotta pay him. He’s got to improve on defense but he can and he will. He’s got the lateral quickness and the athleticism and the fact that he is still very young gives me confidence that he will develop into a better defender.
I would offer him 3 year deal for 52 million. First two years pay higher and last year pays lower. This gives us flexibility if we can do something like that. I’d consider 4 years at 60 million with team option on the fourth year. It’s a risk but who else do you have in mind??? He’s awesome and plays hard and if he develops a little more he’s going to be a really good player.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What some on this forum fail to understand about Randle is that if you sign him long term, you would then need to sign a C who is a floor spacing defender.
Someone like Dwayne Dedmon comes to mind.
Dedmon would command something like 8-12M in 2019/20.
Then say Randle commands 20M (I doubt he gets that much but I’ll play along).
So for 28-32M you get Dedmon and Randle.
However say you can get Mirotic (someone who actually plays defence) for 20M and then you can add Okafor next to Mirotic for 21.7M total.
Which team is better long term?
How ever I do like Randle and would be willing to pay him in the 16-17M per year if the coaches think he can improve to average on defence.
Remember all those video's which surfaced at the beginning of the year when they just signed Randle and ppl were saying he was a good defender in LA?
What happened to that guy?
I think it's more effort IMO.
I don't believe that.
Our pace is 5th in the league, at 102.8. Our defense is 22nd, at 111.8 (and that's improved dramatically, it's been as low as 27th). Look at some other teams and their paces:
Milwaukee Bucks: Pace of 102.8, exactly tied with ours. Defensive rating is 1st, at 104.8.
Utah Jazz: Pace of 100.4, 12th in the league. Defensive rating 3rd, at 106.0.
OKC Thunder: Pace of 103.5, 3rd in the league. 4th in Defensive rating, at 106.6
It's perfectly possible to play an uptempo game and still play defense. It's just effort and schemes, and we don't really have either most of the time.
B.S.S. Agrees with me
Why the Pelicans should pay Julius Randle, and pay him big.https://t.co/zzOZfwFd9M pic.twitter.com/B95qp0a1qJ
— Ryan Hebert (@RyanHebert89) March 4, 2019
But that tweet says 2yr/40m with a team option for the 2nd year. Not 3 years 60m like you said. How is that agreeing with you?