You can really tell a person’s IQ if they think we’re better off without Randle.
Even after we switched to a more uptempo offense after he went down last season we STILL had a better performing offense when he was playing
No_Performer_9845
Good to see these threads are dying off. Ju is going to have a monster season this year. And a playoffs that dispels all the bad history people love to harp on. He Back!
beanie_mac
Someone pointed this out yesterday, but I also found it hilarious that the ESPN folk in the segment were trying to make the argument that the Knicks were more successful without Randle…..while simultaneously showing stats that contradicted their own stance lol.
But OP I agree with you, it’s such a tired and asinine take. I find it weird how so many ppl *want* to believe we’re better without Randle….regardless of virtually every statistic and metric shows we aren’t. Just shows how far ppl will go to push certain agendas and narratives…no matter how nonsensical it is.
icebucket22
This is the same stat of the Knicks being without OG. Context matters.
rmccarthy10
Good news is we weren’t awful without him…
cesarjulius
i appreciate and agree with the spirit of this post, but i’m honestly surprised it is this close. this almost makes it look like replacing randle with any starting-caliber PF, it would be a wash, as opposed to randle being injured without an actual replacement. again, that’s not my opinion. randle was playing his best basketball last season, but these stats are underwhelming.
SerCharles
these stats are a bit misleading and still don’t show the greatest impact from him, if we are being fair.
Diligent-Cookie-1695
Don’t you dare to go against the eye test of the body language readers
OldJewNewAccount
JFC I am so tired of this conversation lol.
TheSwarm212
Only reason people say this is for clicks.
mrsunshine1
You can spot the clowns that slept through January and didn’t start watching until the playoffs.
lilleff512
Randle is necessary to create easy catch+shoot opportunities for Brunson. It’s that simple.
dBlock845
The media has been trying to stir up Randle drama all off-season. It is annoying as hell. Randle is still underrated and disrespected.
Saucy_Totchie
These are terrible unreliable stats because the with/without Randle stats also coincide with/without OG as well. ESPN needs a story and the Knicks have been that whether they’re prepared for it or not.
solemnbiscuit
The people that think Knicks are better without him are wrongly equating pace and an admittedly aesthetically more enjoyable brand of basketball with actually being better.
Mental-Doughnuts
Mikal: So, where y’all want to go out to eat?
Jalen: I’d like to go to the steakhouse.
Josh: Ok, as long as they have breastmilk.
nazrmo78
You know what it really comes down to? Fans believe an offense that looks pretty is always better than an offense that grits and grinds. Now, I do believe in easy offense. I think it’s gets others involved, it’s creates a greater sense of teamwork with the ball zipping around, and with more spacing, you do get up a lot of shots and transition. But it isn’t for everybody, and it isn’t necessarily always the best basketball you can play. It just looks more fun to watch. When Julius is out, we play small ball. Small ball is fun, not necessarily sustainable, or your best look.
RJIsJustABetterDwade
We went 11-1 in games where Brunson, Randle, and OG played
18 Comments
You can really tell a person’s IQ if they think we’re better off without Randle.
Even after we switched to a more uptempo offense after he went down last season we STILL had a better performing offense when he was playing
Good to see these threads are dying off. Ju is going to have a monster season this year. And a playoffs that dispels all the bad history people love to harp on. He Back!
Someone pointed this out yesterday, but I also found it hilarious that the ESPN folk in the segment were trying to make the argument that the Knicks were more successful without Randle…..while simultaneously showing stats that contradicted their own stance lol.
But OP I agree with you, it’s such a tired and asinine take. I find it weird how so many ppl *want* to believe we’re better without Randle….regardless of virtually every statistic and metric shows we aren’t. Just shows how far ppl will go to push certain agendas and narratives…no matter how nonsensical it is.
This is the same stat of the Knicks being without OG. Context matters.
Good news is we weren’t awful without him…
i appreciate and agree with the spirit of this post, but i’m honestly surprised it is this close. this almost makes it look like replacing randle with any starting-caliber PF, it would be a wash, as opposed to randle being injured without an actual replacement. again, that’s not my opinion. randle was playing his best basketball last season, but these stats are underwhelming.
these stats are a bit misleading and still don’t show the greatest impact from him, if we are being fair.
Don’t you dare to go against the eye test of the body language readers
JFC I am so tired of this conversation lol.
Only reason people say this is for clicks.
You can spot the clowns that slept through January and didn’t start watching until the playoffs.
Randle is necessary to create easy catch+shoot opportunities for Brunson. It’s that simple.
The media has been trying to stir up Randle drama all off-season. It is annoying as hell. Randle is still underrated and disrespected.
These are terrible unreliable stats because the with/without Randle stats also coincide with/without OG as well. ESPN needs a story and the Knicks have been that whether they’re prepared for it or not.
The people that think Knicks are better without him are wrongly equating pace and an admittedly aesthetically more enjoyable brand of basketball with actually being better.
Mikal: So, where y’all want to go out to eat?
Jalen: I’d like to go to the steakhouse.
Josh: Ok, as long as they have breastmilk.
You know what it really comes down to? Fans believe an offense that looks pretty is always better than an offense that grits and grinds. Now, I do believe in easy offense. I think it’s gets others involved, it’s creates a greater sense of teamwork with the ball zipping around, and with more spacing, you do get up a lot of shots and transition. But it isn’t for everybody, and it isn’t necessarily always the best basketball you can play. It just looks more fun to watch. When Julius is out, we play small ball. Small ball is fun, not necessarily sustainable, or your best look.
We went 11-1 in games where Brunson, Randle, and OG played