Who is this Julius Randle playing for the New York Knicks?
A lot can change in a year: Exhibit A) the New York Knicks look like a competent, competitive basketball team, which is nothing short of miraculous compared to last season; Exhibit B) Knicks’ fans, almost universally, have fallen in love with Julius Randle.
This actually didn’t take a year. It took 8 games. The year saw many fans who now shower him with praise and adoration offer nothing but criticism, insults, and potential trades with the Beijing Ducks.
Exhibit C) Randle himself is a new man. That belongs on this list, right? Because it’s the only explanation for the Knicks’ strong play and the fans’ 180. This is a new and unrecognizably improved Julius Randle, worlds apart from the player he was last year. Right? Let’s investigate.
PASSING (per NBA.com Tracking stats)
2019-20
- Passes Made per game – 46.1
- Passes Received per game – 42.8
- MATH ALERT- 1.077 passes made for every one received.
2020-21
- Passes Made per game – 67
- Passes Received per game – 61.9
- MATH ALERT – 1.082 passes made for every one received.
One of Randle’s perceived transformations is from selfish ball-hog to unselfish playmaker, but stats suggest he’s only passing more because he’s receiving more. Passes per touch? About the same. In fact, if he’d made just 13 more total passes last season, his “ball-hog” pass-to-touch ratio and his “unselfish”pass-to-touch ratio would be identical.
2019-20
- FGA off Randle Passes (per game) -12.2 (5.2 3PA)
- Total FGA per pass – 0.26
- FG% off Randle passes – 36.3% (34.3% from 3)
2020-21
- FGA off Randle Passes (per game) -21.3 (9.6 3PA)
- Total FGA per pass – 0.32
- FG% off Randle passes – 46.5% (40.3% from 3)
Randle’s passes are leading to FGA at pretty much the same rate. There are, however, two important differences: 1) a higher percentage of FGA off Randle passes are threes now, and 2) teammates are hitting at a higher clip. Is this the better decision-making I keep hearing about? Or is it the result of scheme/spacing? Teammates cutting/moving more? Are they just shooting better?
Julius Randle: A different player?
Let’s look at Julius Randle’s turnover numbers this season compared to last.
TURNOVERS
2019-20
- Turnovers PG – 3
- Turnovers per TOUCH (estimate based on RPG + Passes Received) – 0.057
- Ast/TO – 1.03/1
2020-21
- Turnovers PG – 4.9
- Turnovers per TOUCH – 0.066
- Ast/TO – 1.51/1
Randle’s actually turning the ball over (slightly) more frequently – per touch – THIS YEAR than last year, but you’d never know it by reading your timeline. Are we more understanding of these turnovers because of his increased responsibility as the primary playmaker? Is assist-to-turnover ratio what matters most to us? Or is it everything else – shooting, defense, the whole new-and-improved package – that keeps us from running back to those lazy, old “Julius Spin” jokes?
SHOOTING (per Basketball-Reference.com)
2019-20
- FGA per game – 15.7 (3.6 3PA)
- FGA per minute played – 0.48
- FG% – 46% (27.7% from 3)
- FT% – 73.3% (on 5.5 FTA per game)
- TS% – 53.8%
2020-21
- FGA per game – 17 (4 3PA)
- FGA per minute played – 0.44
- FG% – 48.5% (34.4% from 3)
- FT% – 77.8% (on 6.8 FTA per game)
- TS% – 57.9%
Accounting for increased playing time, he’s shooting only slightly less often this season, so attempts can’t really be used to support a selfish-to-unselfish narrative, either.
Despite the recent dip in FG% and 3P% (injuries to key teammates and fatigue are surely factors), his efficiency is still up across the board – is this the key influence? Are volume shooters only selfish when they do it inefficiently?
An interesting note – per NBA.com, he’s actually shooting more of what we’d have considered “bad shots” last year (pull-ups, long 2s, bailout attempts with the shot clock winding down) and he’s not shooting from the paint nearly as much.
Julius Randle: A completely different player?
Randle undoubtedly made productive use of the extended off-season. He’s talked about his weight and conditioning as well as developing a relationship with Thibs early on, and his career-high FT% suggests he worked on his shot. All of that plays a role in his improvement.
But transformation? The only transformation I see is in everything around him. Better coaching. Better (performing) teammates. Better/clearer role. In essence, he’s the same player, only now he’s being used right.
I mean, what’s more likely?
A) 7-year veteran spent nine months in deep reflection and self-assessment before deciding, “You know what? Now’s the time to finally develop my IQ, learn about that other side of the ball, and become an assist machine,” or,
B) 7-year-veteran always had talent and ability but struggled with new role and increased responsibility in a non-system and just needed the right coaches/roster to pull it out of him.
If your answer is A (or some less sarcastic version of it), you’re lying to yourself, perhaps because A is the only answer that justifies all of last year’s unreasonable criticism and misguided vitriol.
But he still spins into help. He still struggles with length and well-designed double-teams. He still gets frustrated and lets that frustration affect decision-making. He still has possessions where the ball sticks (though perhaps not as many). He’s shooting only slightly less frequently compared to last year. He’s passing just as frequently. He’s turning it over more frequently.
Yes, he’s playing defense, which we’ve all loved to see. Does that mean metamorphosis?
No. It means guy who missed his entire rookie season due to injury, played his second season for a coach that can’t coach defense, played the next two seasons for a new coach who can’t coach defense, left for New Orleans to play for a coach that can’t coach defense, left again for New York and a coach that can’t coach anything, finally has a coach who knows defense.
If you watched 2019-20 New York Knicks objectively, putting aside the negative feelings that come with your favorite team losing two out of every three and your favorite young players struggling mightily, you would’ve seen this. The ability. The potential. You would’ve focused on all the positives in his monster games instead of harping on turnovers and failures to pass to wide-open RJ Barretts.
The same way we’re focusing on mainly positives now.
Maybe that’s what’s going on here. A “winning cures all” sort-of thing. The Knicks were horrible, and Randle was the main man in role and paycheck, so he must’ve been horrible. But now they’re playing good basketball – despite being wildly shorthanded – and he’s doing the heavy lifting, so he must be good. How did he get from horrible to good in such a short time?
The easy explanation is transformation.
The better explanation is he’s been unlocked, that the talents he had when he signed have been maximized by competent leaders. Knicks players themselves have implied as much about the team’s improvement, Randle included. “We don’t have to second-guess where we’re going to be on the floor. We have great spacing and if the defense is collapsing, I can depend on whoever it is to cut or to be in the right (place). And just make the easy play.”
That’s all he’s doing: making the easy play. He didn’t enlist a life coach to help him become more selfless. He didn’t go from JR Smith to Mensa-level basketball IQ. Fact is, it’s easy to make the right play when it’s coached, when structured offense that everyone buys into puts players in positions they’ve seen and drilled before.
That’s where the transformation lies – not in the player, but in everything else. Julius, to his credit, is simply making the most of a better situation.