J. Randle

#1
Lets play him @ 5 I've always liked his game. Between him and Bagley/Giles thats a Run and Gun front court with lots of upside.
 
#2
I’ve definitely warmed up to the idea of Randle . Efficient, fundamentally sound and just now entering his prime. I’m guessing will take close to the max, might work if it’s front loaded
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#4
Look, I like Randle, and I think the Lakers made a huge mistake letting him go, basically for nothing except capspace. But Randle is a PF. I think Giles is more of a PF than a center, ditto Bagley. At least right now. And were living in the now, not the future. The Kings need to make the playoffs next season, and I seriously doubt that either Bagley or Giles is going to turn into a 7 foot center between now and then. I haven't even referred to Bjelica who will take some minutes.

If we can't, or won't resign Willie, then the Kings have to sign a legit center that can match up against the Gobert's of the world. We all saw how that went with Bagley trying to guard him. He couldn't! Signing Randle would take most of our available capspace. So logically, it doesn't make any sense, unless you want to trade one of our assets for a starting center.
 
#5
Look, I like Randle, and I think the Lakers made a huge mistake letting him go, basically for nothing except capspace. But Randle is a PF. I think Giles is more of a PF than a center, ditto Bagley. At least right now. And were living in the now, not the future. The Kings need to make the playoffs next season, and I seriously doubt that either Bagley or Giles is going to turn into a 7 foot center between now and then. I haven't even referred to Bjelica who will take some minutes.

If we can't, or won't resign Willie, then the Kings have to sign a legit center that can match up against the Gobert's of the world. We all saw how that went with Bagley trying to guard him. He couldn't! Signing Randle would take most of our available capspace. So logically, it doesn't make any sense, unless you want to trade one of our assets for a starting center.
There you go again bajaden using reason and a measured approach to basketball. In all seriousness I just wanted to throw that out there for fun tbh.
 
#6
Look, I like Randle, and I think the Lakers made a huge mistake letting him go, basically for nothing except capspace. But Randle is a PF. I think Giles is more of a PF than a center, ditto Bagley. At least right now. And were living in the now, not the future. The Kings need to make the playoffs next season, and I seriously doubt that either Bagley or Giles is going to turn into a 7 foot center between now and then. I haven't even referred to Bjelica who will take some minutes.

If we can't, or won't resign Willie, then the Kings have to sign a legit center that can match up against the Gobert's of the world. We all saw how that went with Bagley trying to guard him. He couldn't! Signing Randle would take most of our available capspace. So logically, it doesn't make any sense, unless you want to trade one of our assets for a starting center.
Agree with most of this. I’d just add that, even if you think Bagley should play more center, you’d want to pair him with a power forward that shoots reliably well from long distance. I don’t think that’s Randle.
 
#7
Agree with most of this. I’d just add that, even if you think Bagley should play more center, you’d want to pair him with a power forward that shoots reliably well from long distance. I don’t think that’s Randle.
I just can't shake this feeling where I wonder how Randle would look with our squad. He shot about the league average from 3 this season so it's not like hes some horrible shooter. I'm back on this island!
 
#10
If we can't, or won't resign Willie, then the Kings have to sign a legit center that can match up against the Gobert's of the world. We all saw how that went with Bagley trying to guard him. He couldn't! Signing Randle would take most of our available capspace. So logically, it doesn't make any sense, unless you want to trade one of our assets for a starting center.
I firmly believe that we really need to sign a legit, rim guarding, pick setting center who can legitimately play against the big centers of Utah, Denver, Portland, etc. Like bajaden said: both Bagley and Giles are really PF's, at least for the next few years. I also don't think that Randle would be a good fit on the Kings. Our biggest needs going forward, IMHO, are a legit center (not WCS) and a good 3 and D backup point guard.
GO KINGS !!!
 
#11
Sure we want our unicorn C but they dont just give those away ahem I mean only the Knicks give them away. How many teams really drop the ball to the C anyways? Let's run em and gun em.
 
Last edited:
#12
If we can't, or won't resign Willie, then the Kings have to sign a legit center that can match up against the Gobert's of the world. We all saw how that went with Bagley trying to guard him. He couldn't!
In his 1st season at 19/20 years old, he couldn’t. But who is to say he won’t be able to ever? I get your concern for next season, for sure, but I think Marvin has the potential to grow into the role if needed.
 
#13
Sure we want our unicorn C but they dont just give those away ahem I mean only the Knicks give them away. How many teams really drop the ball to the C anyways? Let's run em and gun em.
They may not drop it to their center, but there is a whole lot of lobbing it to their center, and it just wouldn't work with Randle. I like him as a player, but not on this team.
 
#14
Look, I like Randle, and I think the Lakers made a huge mistake letting him go, basically for nothing except capspace. But Randle is a PF. I think Giles is more of a PF than a center, ditto Bagley. At least right now. And were living in the now, not the future. The Kings need to make the playoffs next season, and I seriously doubt that either Bagley or Giles is going to turn into a 7 foot center between now and then. I haven't even referred to Bjelica who will take some minutes.

If we can't, or won't resign Willie, then the Kings have to sign a legit center that can match up against the Gobert's of the world. We all saw how that went with Bagley trying to guard him. He couldn't! Signing Randle would take most of our available capspace. So logically, it doesn't make any sense, unless you want to trade one of our assets for a starting center.
And WCS doesn't match up with the Adam's or the Harrell's of this league, so WCS is no answer to the problem. The Kings need beef at the center position. We've got the lithe athletic types in Bagley and Giles, and now we need some complementary beef.
 
#15
And WCS doesn't match up with the Adam's or the Harrell's of this league, so WCS is no answer to the problem. The Kings need beef at the center position. We've got the lithe athletic types in Bagley and Giles, and now we need some complementary beef.
I wonder if Caleb Swanigan can take some backup Center minutes. He's a big boy and can definitely carve out space, set screens, rebound and pass. The freak athleticism is not as necessary for the center position. Maybe his future is as a backup center.
 
#16
I wonder if Caleb Swanigan can take some backup Center minutes. He's a big boy and can definitely carve out space, set screens, rebound and pass. The freak athleticism is not as necessary for the center position. Maybe his future is as a backup center.
It's funny you mentioned Swanigan. I'm hoping that Walton (and Divac) talks to him about getting in the best shape of life for training camp. Find him a great personal trainer and commit him to working on lowering his body fat, getting into super shape, and working on certain elements of his game. I don't think we'll know what we really have with Swanigan until he gets into that kind of shape. It looks to me like there could be a good player in there if he works at it. Who knows? Maybe like you say he can be a legit backup we'll be very happy with.
 
#17
In his 1st season at 19/20 years old, he couldn’t. But who is to say he won’t be able to ever? I get your concern for next season, for sure, but I think Marvin has the potential to grow into the role if needed.
Look, I love Bagley, and he may be able to play center in the future, but at some point, after all these years of struggling, we have to pay attention to the now. And I know you realize that. My personal opinion is that I see Bagley becoming something akin to Anthony Davis. I think he's way to athletic and talented to be pigeon holed into the center position.
 
#18
It's funny you mentioned Swanigan. I'm hoping that Walton (and Divac) talks to him about getting in the best shape of life for training camp. Find him a great personal trainer and commit him to working on lowering his body fat, getting into super shape, and working on certain elements of his game. I don't think we'll know what we really have with Swanigan until he gets into that kind of shape. It looks to me like there could be a good player in there if he works at it. Who knows? Maybe like you say he can be a legit backup we'll be very happy with.
Swanigan is much heavier than he was at Purdue. He has always struggled with a weight problem. He weighed well over 300 pounds when he arrived at Purdue, but worked hard to get his weight down to around 255 lbs. But your right about they're being a good player in there. He's very talented, and despite his poor shooting exhibition he displayed in that last game, he shot the ball well from the three in college. It's all a matter of how much he wants it. He's an unmovable object in the post, and a very good passer. He was a double/double machine at Purdue.
 
#19
Swanigan is much heavier than he was at Purdue. He has always struggled with a weight problem. He weighed well over 300 pounds when he arrived at Purdue, but worked hard to get his weight down to around 255 lbs. But your right about they're being a good player in there. He's very talented, and despite his poor shooting exhibition he displayed in that last game, he shot the ball well from the three in college. It's all a matter of how much he wants it. He's an unmovable object in the post, and a very good passer. He was a double/double machine at Purdue.
I agree about his potential. My memory of him was when he was in better shape and a better player. Walton has talked a lot so far about working at the game and establishing a relationship with his players. After listening to Walton, I'd be very suprised if he didn't have a good conversation with Swan working at getting into shape. If I talked to him I'd be telling him that I think there's a very good basketball player in him, but he's got to dedicate himself to the game more than he's ever done. For some reason Swan strikes me as a guy who has lost belief in himself. Hopefully, Walton can instill that belief, and with it, the work ethic for him to be a good addition to the Kings.
 
#20
those of you who wouldn't want Randle on this team because the Kings have Bagley and Giles are passing on talent....the dude can play, he doesn't need to be put at the 5 spot....with Bagley and Giles adding grown man strength and weight over the years, Randle can hold down the glass work along with Bagley.
 
#21
those of you who wouldn't want Randle on this team because the Kings have Bagley and Giles are passing on talent....the dude can play, he doesn't need to be put at the 5 spot....with Bagley and Giles adding grown man strength and weight over the years, Randle can hold down the glass work along with Bagley.
The problem you have is overcrowding the spots and minutes.

As soon as next season, Bagley will be getting some 36mpg. Giles will get closer to that number the season after. The last thing you want is to overspend for a position that you might not need in a couple of years time. If you have 3 studs splitting time at 3 positions, someone will get short changed.

Now signing Randle will take a lot more money and longer term than it did 12 months ago. You are creating a crunch not only in terms of numbers, touches but also minutes.

If we have learnt anything from this season its that Bagley and Giles are our future in the front court. Both have star potential. This are the chips that we should be backing in and should not be stagnating their development by bringing in someone who will need their minutes, touches and might even occupy the same spots on the floor. The fit of Randle, Bagley and Giles is problematic.

I love Randle. I was advocating getting him last year before it became apparent that we were picking Bagley. Had we gone with Doncic in the draft, then Randle is a home run signing for us.

I think we need to do what we did with Fox last year and that is clear away the vets so that Bagley gets majority of the minutes. With Randle, we are creeping into Bagley's minutes and Giles' minutes. If we were in need of a PF, Randle would be at the top of my list.

We need a genuine C who can provide something different to what Bagley and Giles bring. A C who can bang with the bog boys in the league, rebound at a high rate, block shots and rim run.

Maybe I am wrong on this, but this is a critical summer for us. We have young stars who are still on their rookie deals and some $38 million in cap space with potential to create more. The way we spend that money this summer becomes critical for us. We cannot just sign talent and hope it fits and works out. We need to be methodical and very smart (and certain) on what we do here. Make a wrong move and it could set us back years. Make the smart move and it sets up for years of success. It really is that dramatic.
 
#22
With all due respect, Giles hasn’t proven to be part of the core yet

There is a reason why Luke stressed Bagley being able to guard multiple positions at the press conference, and there are solid PF options in this FA
 
#23
With all due respect, Giles hasn’t proven to be part of the core yet

There is a reason why Luke stressed Bagley being able to guard multiple positions at the press conference, and there are solid PF options in this FA
Err. Nice selective hearing. Luke stressed both Marvin AND Harry to be able to guard multiple positions and their ability to do so will depend on the types of defensive schemes we can implement.
 
#24
The problem you have is overcrowding the spots and minutes.

As soon as next season, Bagley will be getting some 36mpg. Giles will get closer to that number the season after. The last thing you want is to overspend for a position that you might not need in a couple of years time. If you have 3 studs splitting time at 3 positions, someone will get short changed.

Now signing Randle will take a lot more money and longer term than it did 12 months ago. You are creating a crunch not only in terms of numbers, touches but also minutes.

If we have learnt anything from this season its that Bagley and Giles are our future in the front court. Both have star potential. This are the chips that we should be backing in and should not be stagnating their development by bringing in someone who will need their minutes, touches and might even occupy the same spots on the floor. The fit of Randle, Bagley and Giles is problematic.

I love Randle. I was advocating getting him last year before it became apparent that we were picking Bagley. Had we gone with Doncic in the draft, then Randle is a home run signing for us.

I think we need to do what we did with Fox last year and that is clear away the vets so that Bagley gets majority of the minutes. With Randle, we are creeping into Bagley's minutes and Giles' minutes. If we were in need of a PF, Randle would be at the top of my list.

We need a genuine C who can provide something different to what Bagley and Giles bring. A C who can bang with the bog boys in the league, rebound at a high rate, block shots and rim run.

Maybe I am wrong on this, but this is a critical summer for us. We have young stars who are still on their rookie deals and some $38 million in cap space with potential to create more. The way we spend that money this summer becomes critical for us. We cannot just sign talent and hope it fits and works out. We need to be methodical and very smart (and certain) on what we do here. Make a wrong move and it could set us back years. Make the smart move and it sets up for years of success. It really is that dramatic.
Randle is 25. He would be a part of the future as much as Bagley & Giles would be. I think you start Randle and Bagley and just run teams to death, like the Kings want to do. Both guys can rebound and Randle has the strength to bang inside. Neither has a consistent jump shot but I think that comes with time. Giles would then come off the bench and still get his minutes. If push comes to shove and Randle doesn't work out, he's a trade chip moving forward. I'm not saying Randle is my number one option, just that if the likes of Vucevic isn't attainable, then Randle would be a quality assurance signing.
 
#25
Err. Nice selective hearing. Luke stressed both Marvin AND Harry to be able to guard multiple positions and their ability to do so will depend on the types of defensive schemes we can implement.

Nice selective reading. Harry was a different sentence

We have a PG, and wings (Buddy/Barnes/Bogdan), and as far as I’m concerned ‘1’ big who has shown enough to count on in Marvin. I’m thinking either way another big will be brought here unless Barnes is fixing to play PF full time
 
#26
Look, I love Bagley, and he may be able to play center in the future, but at some point, after all these years of struggling, we have to pay attention to the now. And I know you realize that. My personal opinion is that I see Bagley becoming something akin to Anthony Davis. I think he's way to athletic and talented to be pigeon holed into the center position.
Bajaden here speaks the truth! As we are so close to 500 this year, we can't stockpile just potential useful pieces for the future anymore. We gotta look at the now and hence I feel like if we look at Bagley and Giles as our future PF/C, we can look into someone like Kyle O'Quinn or JaVale McGee, both are UFAs, as a temporary stopgap option. Or if we want to add real assets to the Bagley/Giles rotation for the near future when they are ready, Jonas Valanciunas or even Jordan Bell aren't bad options either.
 
#27
Randle is 25. He would be a part of the future as much as Bagley & Giles would be. I think you start Randle and Bagley and just run teams to death, like the Kings want to do. Both guys can rebound and Randle has the strength to bang inside. Neither has a consistent jump shot but I think that comes with time. Giles would then come off the bench and still get his minutes. If push comes to shove and Randle doesn't work out, he's a trade chip moving forward. I'm not saying Randle is my number one option, just that if the likes of Vucevic isn't attainable, then Randle would be a quality assurance signing.
Randle becomes a trade chip if he works out. The fit with Bagley is problematic as they both like to occupy the same spots on the floor. Playing them together like you suggest either stunts Bagley's growth which we don't want or makes Randle an overpaid signing which we also don't want. Randle is a talent and if Bagley is not on the roster he would be my #1 guy in FA. Hell, he was last year.

Like I said, Randle will demand big money and years this off-season. If he doesn't work out then you have a bad contract and undervalued asset on your hands. You won't be able to re-coup the talent. His price on the trade market all of asudden is a Harrison Barnes type trade, an expiring and a young unproven player. At that point expiring means nothing to the team because you are due to re-up your actual young talent and you have not added that free agency talent that teams should be adding in our position.
Nice selective reading. Harry was a different sentence

We have a PG, and wings (Buddy/Barnes/Bogdan), and as far as I’m concerned ‘1’ big who has shown enough to count on in Marvin. I’m thinking either way another big will be brought here unless Barnes is fixing to play PF full time
Your vision is obviously very different to team's hence why you don't see Marvin as a PF. Marvin will be played at PF and a genuine C will be brought in. Vlade and Walton obviously see Harry as part of the core even though you don't. I am not the only one that thing Giles has shown enough to suggest that yes he is absolutely part of the core going forward.
 
#28
Nice selective reading. Harry was a different sentence

We have a PG, and wings (Buddy/Barnes/Bogdan), and as far as I’m concerned ‘1’ big who has shown enough to count on in Marvin. I’m thinking either way another big will be brought here unless Barnes is fixing to play PF full time
Might be a different sentences but its the same paragraph answering a single question.

“I told him I think he is going to be a big part of what we do, and we need him to continue to improve, and his versatility, him defending multiple positions will ultimately be a big factor in how much success and how many different defensive schemes we can use. Players like him and Harry (Giles), and some of those bigger versatile guys that we have. I’ll have a clearer picture of those things the more I get to start to working with these guys and see what their strengths and weaknesses are.”
https://clutchpoints.com/kings-news-luke-walton-says-marvin-bagley-iii-will-be-big-part-his-plans/

Pretty clear really!
 
#29
those of you who wouldn't want Randle on this team because the Kings have Bagley and Giles are passing on talent....the dude can play, he doesn't need to be put at the 5 spot....with Bagley and Giles adding grown man strength and weight over the years, Randle can hold down the glass work along with Bagley.
I don't want him on the team because I don't think it would be a good fit. On his own in a vacuum, Randle is a great player. I'm just struggling to see his fit as a major piece of a winning NBA team and struggling even more to see his fit here in Sacramento with Bagley.

It wasn't working with Randle and A.D. at the 4 and 5. A.D. is WCS/Koufos/Bagley and Giles all put together. If it wasn't working with Davis, who can do everything, then why would it work with our squad? The team would take a step forward offensively but a massive step backward defensively. At best I feel like it comes out a wash.