He seems to think that people have been saying that we don't want Randle back at all, rather than the reality which is that we would be okay with having him back, but it would depend on the price.
Printable View
2/40-3/60 either one sounds good.
Not really.
2/40 works because the second year would be a TO, which means if he is showing the signs of defensive improvement, we have him locked in for another year and we get his bird rights after that, which gives us long term leverage. If he doesn't show those signs of improvement, we can either just drop the option, or we can trade him off as a big expiring.
3/40 doesn't, because then even if he isn't showing those signs of improvement, we're locked into him for another year on big money at the minimum. No team will take him with $40m on the contract still as an expiring because it's over multiple years, so it's not as immediately attractive, and keeping him for another year until we can get to the option is really undesirable.
I would have no problem paying him $20 million if it was over 2 years. The longer the deal the less I would offer. Everything this guy said makes complete sense and 2 years $40 million is looking like a great deal for Randle. If anything we have a great trade chip after next season. I don’t see an extra few million per year over the next 2 years in anyway would hurt our team with the $ we will soon be freeing up and the youth this team will have.
Aren't higher dollar /shorter term deals the new trend for all veteran contacts now anyway? Teams and players both seem contractually averse to being stuck these days.
I like Randle, but if it's 2 for 20 or 3 for 17 who is better and available for that same money?
With Randle being just 24 y/o I could definitely see Randle taking a 2 year deal to continue raising his value and enter FA right in the prime of his career at 26 y/o.. Would make much more sense and set himself up for a big long term deal. I would be fine giving him a player option for year 2. The more I watch Randle the more I think we need to resign him.
Do you struggle to understand what a 2nd year team option means? Where the team can dump the contract after one year if they want to with no loss to them.
Do you struggle to understand how 20m guaranteed over 1 year with a 2nd year team option is different than 60m guaranteed over 3 years?
Julius played with Kobe https://t.co/PlbLentxJy
— Kevin Barrios (@kevinbforbounce) March 7, 2019
Let that sink in. Don’t ruin a good thing. Extend the contract.
Irrelevant to my point. You said I was hating on the biggest contributor to our team. Our biggest contributor is Jrue, and I love him, so you're wrong.
The above post is just a tweet that claims that Julius thinks Jrue is the hardest worker he's ever played with. How you think that means we should give Julius more money, I don't know.
Randle, over the last 5 games, has averaged 27 points a game. That's not a problem for me, because I have said multiple times that Randle is an ELITE inside scorer. I've said it time and time again. He can put the ball in the hoop. I have never denied that.
My issues have been that he is not a reliable floor stretcher: which is true, he's shot 33% over the 5 games you specifically wanted to use as a good example, and his defense, which is inconsistent at best. For proof of that, I refer to you him getting absolutely scored on AT WILL in the Lakers game, and him being given the business by Favors against Utah with Randle as his primary defender: Favors averages 11.7 points a game, and he dropped 25 on Randle on 9/11 shooting.
Again: for you, who apparently hasn't got this by now: I have never said we should not try to resign Randle. My point is that he is a one way player (which, at this point in his career, he IS) and that I am not very interested in paying $20m a season, long term (3 years, for example) to a player who has shown no signs of caring about 50% of the game. That is why I'm only willing to give him $13-15m per, if it's a long term contract. If it's a 2 year contract with a team option, then I am more open to $20m, for the reasons I described earlier, but that you apparently didn't read.
Odds he accepts his player option are what a billion to one? He is the 151th best paid player this year and ranks as high as 58th best player. We can all easily assume he declines and becomes a free agent.
For arguments sake let's say 2/40 or 3/55, somewhere in that range is what the market rate could be.(Personally I think it could be more, look at Harrison Barnes) What other forwards are available in that price range and are they better assuming Gentry is the coach still?
Tobias Harris- Unrestricted
Khris Middleton- Player Option
Paul Millsap - Team Option- assuming Den declines his 30 mill
Nikola Mirotic - Unrestricted
Thaddeus Young - Unrestricted
Markieff Morris - Unrestricted
Kelly Oubre - Restricted
Michael Kidd-Gilchrist - Player Option
Marcus Morris - Unrestricted
Rudy Gay - Unrestricted
Bojan Bogdanovic - Unrestricted
Just wanted to come back and add some facts to my claim that Randle is a poor defender:
https://abc13.com/sports/ten-things-...agger/5176536/
Zach Lowe's new article contains some analysis of Randle's defense. He says basically what I've been saying. ''Randle's ascension on offense has come at the expense of his work on the other end.''. More specifically, ''He is 451st among 494 players in the defense-only version of ESPN's real plus-minus [...] He is dead last among centers.''
And then some info from Shamit Dua. He starts by saying that AD and Jrue are 1st and 2nd in the league in defending isolations, giving up only 0.59PPP to iso plays, which is amazing. He follows up with this:
On the other side, Julius Randle ranks 3rd worst in the league in defending the roll man (min 40 possessions). Giving up a massive 1.18 PPP.
— Shamit Dua (@FearTheBrown) March 8, 2019
Randle is also 2nd to last in defending spot ups (min 100 possessions), giving up 1.23 PPP. He would be dead last if you raise the filter to 151 possessions.
— Shamit Dua (@FearTheBrown) March 8, 2019
Okay this keeps getting worse and worse. Randle is dead last in defending post ups (min 70 possessions). Post ups are inherently one of the most inefficient play types yet Randle still surrenders 1.10 PPP.
— Shamit Dua (@FearTheBrown) March 8, 2019
I'll repeat just to be clear: I am not saying we shouldn't sign Randle. I'm saying we shouldn't sign Randle to a long term high price contract. If we can get Randle back for $13-15m per, I'd be fine for a three year deal. The reason for this price cap is his defense, which goes beyond it not being his strength, to the point of being a disgraceful weakness. Just a huge, glaring hole in his game.
I don't see why we have to give out a huge contract. Obviously there's a salary floor we have to meet, but outside of that I don't see why we need to give SOMEONE $20m. I'd offer $20m to Khris Middleton, maybe. Be tempted to offer it to Harris also. I don't think it would be enough to get either of them, but I don't think we should go into the off-season determined to spend big, long term money.
Well, given that Randle is the 451st best defender in the league, statistically speaking almost anyone would be better than him at defense.
If we offer $20m to Middleton and Harris, and they both say no, then I don't offer $20m to anyone, really. We don't need to spend big, long term money. Give Randle $20m on a 2 year with a team option or something. There is no obligation for us to give our a big contract each summer. If we don't find the right guy for the right price, we are not required to spend.
We had to overpay people 90% of the time during-AD. That only changed in the last two seasons, after five years of having to pay Omer Asik and Solomon Hill double digits to get them to come over. I don't see why that would change now.
I don't think either of them leave, to be honest. But things are pretty sad when you're throwing big money after massively flawed players just out of desperation. This is why we should have free agency as a secondary priority after the draft. Pretty much nobody willingly goes to Denver either, but they're about to be finishing up as the second best team in the west. Why? They didn't waste money and time chasing FAs who didn't want to be there, and just drafted.
Look I get it. Hindsight being 20/20 it was a huge mistake not drafting around AD (other than trading for Jrue). Overpaying FAs cost us picks to eventually dump the bad contracts. I think the team has been correcting that the last few years like you said, evident by loading up 2nd rounders and buying a G League team for development.
Is it June yet?