View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
greenfrog Retired Number
Joined: 02 Jan 2011 Posts: 36081 Location: 502 Bad Gateway
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 11:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
which ever position he can stay out of foul trouble. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
onthafarm Sixth Man
Joined: 25 Sep 2014 Posts: 60
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 12:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i think he would do fine defensively...the issue, as others pointed out, would be the lack of a long-range jumper. if he developed a three-ball, he could easily play the role of a small-forward. i'd keep him at power-forward until then, though. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Justwar Starting Rotation
Joined: 26 Dec 2002 Posts: 759
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 12:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I see a huge myth on here, that UK used him strictly as a post up 4. He was used as a face up 4 for the most part at UK. He posted a lot of time based on his own iso's, kinda like Charles Barkley would. He commonly would grab a rebound and bring it up. Only one game all year which was Michigan St where he posted up a ton. When he posted up he was seeing doubles and triple teams so they stopped it. I am a UK fan so I seen him all year. Also his jumpshot isn't broke, he just didn't attempt many, when he missed they didn't look bad. We just needed him to do other things when he was getting to the line so much. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
22 Franchise Player
Joined: 05 Apr 2013 Posts: 17063
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 12:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In my opinion, and as others have pointed out, you don't get much value by placing Randle at the 3. Especially if you're going to put Kelly in the same lineup.
The other team will just have their 4 guard Randle and their 3 guard Kelly.
Now if you have Randle at the 3 and Bozzer at the 4 then you can potentially play bully ball. In that case the spacing suffers too much IMO.
Just leave him at the 4 and let him use quickness against bigger 4s and power against smaller ones. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
matigol Starting Rotation
Joined: 18 Oct 2012 Posts: 664
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 1:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
22 wrote: | In my opinion, and as others have pointed out, you don't get much value by placing Randle at the 3. Especially if you're going to put Kelly in the same lineup.
The other team will just have their 4 guard Randle and their 3 guard Kelly.
Now if you have Randle at the 3 and Bozzer at the 4 then you can potentially play bully ball. In that case the spacing suffers too much IMO.
Just leave him at the 4 and let him use quickness against bigger 4s and power against smaller ones. |
I think kelly is too big for a 3 to guard him. Thats why I think kelly will play a lot of 3. defensively,he is clearly to slow but can compete with size |
|
Back to top |
|
|
70sdude Star Player
Joined: 05 Feb 2009 Posts: 4567
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 1:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rivershow wrote: | 70sdude wrote: | In terms of his usefulness in a half court defense, I watched Randle in college, and I didn't see much suggesting that he'd be competent guarding typical NBA wings (SFs). He looked mobile in college for a four, and he guarded fours and fives. His lack of elevation suggests he is bound by enough inertia - if anything - for only PF duty here.
As a transition player, he's no wing.
In terms of playing half court offense, his usefulness seems more versatile and so more likely to be able to play with another forward who likes to play drive at times (Johnson) and shoot from outside at others (Kobe, others.) |
Did you not watch summer league? Randle has great transition skills whether to bring the ball up to score or to facilitate. Those are wing tendencies are they not? He's better at the 4 and should stay at the 4 but recognize Randle's talent in that regard. |
I wouldn't say that at all.
Summer league is not competitive action by any gauge. I did see him very briefly in Summer action, when essentially I also saw most players who weren't centers run the court unimpeded for easy scores and dishes. Let's agree that when there's little defense being played (call it effective individual or team defense), we as observers are best advised to not judge a new player's versatility too strongly. Until proven otherwise, this kid's no wing. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
loslakersss Franchise Player
Joined: 31 Dec 2008 Posts: 11853 Location: LA
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 1:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Kobe_MJ_Fan_No_1 wrote: | loslakersss wrote: | That would make us so weak defensively. |
terrible analysis.
Randle gives us size, and length, if anything it improves us defensively. |
He may be fast for his size but he's not fast enough to guard the best opposing 2/3 to give Kobe a break on defense. And We all know Nash will already be getting beat every possession by the opposing 1. So we count on Boozer and Hill to lockdown the paint when our 2 over the hill guards and an oversized SF constantly get beat? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Cutheon Franchise Player
Joined: 10 Jul 2009 Posts: 12111 Location: Bay Area
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 1:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I read Randle plays like Beasley and I puked. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
loslakersss Franchise Player
Joined: 31 Dec 2008 Posts: 11853 Location: LA
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 2:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Cutheon wrote: | I read Randle plays like Beasley and I puked. | |
|
Back to top |
|
|
NYClakerguy Starting Rotation
Joined: 05 Jul 2014 Posts: 522
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 2:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
this is the worst idea of all time. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
angrypuppy Retired Number
Joined: 13 Apr 2001 Posts: 32730
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I could see Randle as a SF, but that isn't the best development path for him. He needs more range (that won't come this season) and he needs to become a Paul Pierce type player (that will take even longer). The easier path is to capitalize on what he does best, which is using his quickness and motor in the post. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
MJST Retired Number
Joined: 06 Jul 2014 Posts: 26084
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 3:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What you can also see in here is a lot of people that don't understand the Princeton nor the offense Byron runs.
But Julius Randle pretty much said something yesterday that sums it all up. |
Paraphrasing
"(In the Princeton) a Forward's a Forward, a Guard's a Guard, a Centers a Center. It's whatever they need me to do and being versatile."
That's pretty much that. Randle will do whatever his role is in the set they run on a specific play, that means at times he'll do something responsibility wise that someone would consider for a 3, others would consider for a 4, but with Julius it's about being able to do both depending on what play or set we run depending on what the defense gives us.
Two things you should not be surprised at depending on the situation is Randle playing the 3 and Kelly playing the 4, and Randle playing the 4 and Boozer playing the 5. All depends on the situation.
We run a read and react defense, you'll likely see some lineups and set plays that we wouldn't run against other teams against some, depending on what the opening is. That's why the Princeton requires all it's players to be versatile. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001 Posts: 144432 Location: The Gold Coast
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 3:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
yinoma2001 wrote: | Spacing would be terrible. I could see limited lineups where Kelly is the pf and Randle is the sf. |
And Randle would guard the SF while Kelly would guard the PF. _________________ RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001 Posts: 144432 Location: The Gold Coast
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 3:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
22 wrote: | In my opinion, and as others have pointed out, you don't get much value by placing Randle at the 3. Especially if you're going to put Kelly in the same lineup.
The other team will just have their 4 guard Randle and their 3 guard Kelly.
Now if you have Randle at the 3 and Bozzer at the 4 then you can potentially play bully ball. In that case the spacing suffers too much IMO.
Just leave him at the 4 and let him use quickness against bigger 4s and power against smaller ones. |
Kelly would take the PF to the wing leaving Randle to muscle the SF. _________________ RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
22 Franchise Player
Joined: 05 Apr 2013 Posts: 17063
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
venturalakersfan wrote: | 22 wrote: | In my opinion, and as others have pointed out, you don't get much value by placing Randle at the 3. Especially if you're going to put Kelly in the same lineup.
The other team will just have their 4 guard Randle and their 3 guard Kelly.
Now if you have Randle at the 3 and Bozzer at the 4 then you can potentially play bully ball. In that case the spacing suffers too much IMO.
Just leave him at the 4 and let him use quickness against bigger 4s and power against smaller ones. |
Kelly would take the PF to the wing leaving Randle to muscle the SF. |
Only if they had to switch in a pnr because otherwise I'd just crossmatch if I'm the opposing coach |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Rivershow Star Player
Joined: 09 Dec 2011 Posts: 6731
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 3:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
22 wrote: | venturalakersfan wrote: | 22 wrote: | In my opinion, and as others have pointed out, you don't get much value by placing Randle at the 3. Especially if you're going to put Kelly in the same lineup.
The other team will just have their 4 guard Randle and their 3 guard Kelly.
Now if you have Randle at the 3 and Bozzer at the 4 then you can potentially play bully ball. In that case the spacing suffers too much IMO.
Just leave him at the 4 and let him use quickness against bigger 4s and power against smaller ones. |
Kelly would take the PF to the wing leaving Randle to muscle the SF. |
Only if they had to switch in a pnr because otherwise I'd just crossmatch if I'm the opposing coach |
With that option though you are putting a 3 on 6'11 Ryan Kelly. If he has done anything to develop a solid post game, he could be able to abuse that mismatch. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Wilkes52 Star Player
Joined: 02 Jun 2009 Posts: 2415 Location: Far from home
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 5:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
MJST wrote: | What you can also see in here is a lot of people that don't understand the Princeton nor the offense Byron runs.
But Julius Randle pretty much said something yesterday that sums it all up. |
Paraphrasing
"(In the Princeton) a Forward's a Forward, a Guard's a Guard, a Centers a Center. It's whatever they need me to do and being versatile."
That's pretty much that. Randle will do whatever his role is in the set they run on a specific play, that means at times he'll do something responsibility wise that someone would consider for a 3, others would consider for a 4, but with Julius it's about being able to do both depending on what play or set we run depending on what the defense gives us.
Two things you should not be surprised at depending on the situation is Randle playing the 3 and Kelly playing the 4, and Randle playing the 4 and Boozer playing the 5. All depends on the situation.
We run a read and react defense, you'll likely see some lineups and set plays that we wouldn't run against other teams against some, depending on what the opening is. That's why the Princeton requires all it's players to be versatile. |
In this league, I picture most small forwards to be so mobile as to be beyond his ability to track, to influence, to control or or even affect adequately. Yes, night to night we may see Coach Bee use different match-ups to counter each opponent's lineups, but this is not great news. It's preferable to deploy one's team from a position of strength rather than from a one of necessity, to cover some deficits in one's preferred lineup.
It will be fascinating to see how well thought-out Coach Bee's strategy for this year's offense fits to his roster. The Princeton offense is rarely run in this league anymore, as it stumbles into a lot of ill-advised shots when time is running down in the 24 second shot clock. That's when the ball must go to one of the best shooters/creators, but in the Princeton method, he's often a pass or two too far away. Forecast: fail. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Harbor City All Star Rookie
Joined: 30 Apr 2014 Posts: 19
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 7:37 pm Post subject: I've been thinking about that for a minute... |
|
|
I think that Randle could eventually play 3s defensively...He trimmed down..has really good feet... and he's a really bright dude who can pick up on what is necessary to play the position defensively..
but... the issue would be offensively..
for Randle to play the 3.... he would need to play next to a power forward who can shoot from the perimeter... Ideally...there is a certain power forward who was just traded..and will be in the last year of his contract this season....if he doesn't re-sign with his new team.... Kevin Love would be the ideal forward to pair with Randle.. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013 Posts: 29418
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If Randle is a power forward that can play like a small forward, that is every reason to play him at power forward. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001 Posts: 144432 Location: The Gold Coast
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
yinoma2001 wrote: | Taking our best and physical bruiser out 15-20 feet helps the other teams. Odom wasn't a post up banger; he excelled at facilitating and seeing over his defender in that capacity.
I want to see Randle at the FT line 10 times a game by a few years. |
I would guess the plan would be to have him battling other SFs down low. _________________ RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001 Posts: 144432 Location: The Gold Coast
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 7:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
22 wrote: | venturalakersfan wrote: | 22 wrote: | In my opinion, and as others have pointed out, you don't get much value by placing Randle at the 3. Especially if you're going to put Kelly in the same lineup.
The other team will just have their 4 guard Randle and their 3 guard Kelly.
Now if you have Randle at the 3 and Bozzer at the 4 then you can potentially play bully ball. In that case the spacing suffers too much IMO.
Just leave him at the 4 and let him use quickness against bigger 4s and power against smaller ones. |
Kelly would take the PF to the wing leaving Randle to muscle the SF. |
Only if they had to switch in a pnr because otherwise I'd just crossmatch if I'm the opposing coach |
Then we have the advantage with Kelly shooting over the SF. _________________ RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Omar Little Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 90299 Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 7:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Randle has a chance to be a guy you can play with either a sf or a pf, not because hes one or the other, but some of both. He has the footspeed, agility, handles, and length of a sf, with strength and physicality of a four. Your best thing is to find guys that work off of him and allow him to play both down low and off the dribble, and force the other team to adjust. Getting hung up on positions muddies that up. You can play him with wes, or with boozer, or with kelly, all with different matchup quandries for the opponent. In many ways, he has the physical tools to match up best defensively with a lot of threes, so if you can force them to guard him you have an advantage. Similarly, he can use his quickness and physicality against a lot of fours as well.
Bottom line is you find a way to get him on the floor with whomever works best with him, and worry about what to call each kater. _________________ “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel |
|
Back to top |
|
|
fiendishoc Star Player
Joined: 23 Jun 2005 Posts: 8488 Location: The (real) short corner
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 8:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The reality of today's NBA is that if you don't have four shooters, your offense is going to suffer relative to other teams because of the defense schemes that are popular these days.
Given that we have one stretch four buried deep in the rotation and no stretch fives, there's no need to make it even worse by putting in a 3 who can't knock down threes. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
13th Man Star Player
Joined: 10 Sep 2014 Posts: 1009
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 8:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't really see Randle as a slasher, he's more of a bulldozer that needs to pave his way down low. He could try to play as a stretch 4 at times, but at the 3 would bring him out of his comfort zone or sweet spot imo. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
KeepItRealOrElse Retired Number
Joined: 11 Oct 2012 Posts: 32767
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 9:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
13th Man wrote: | I don't really see Randle as a slasher, he's more of a bulldozer that needs to pave his way down low. He could try to play as a stretch 4 at times, but at the 3 would bring him out of his comfort zone or sweet spot imo. |
IMO he is a slasher at the 4. at the 3 he's strictly a post player. Has a big advantage at both positions. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|