I’ve long expressed my belief in Julius Randle as a talent. Players — especially PF’s — just don’t often combine his combination of size, strength, and quickness. He’s not a super leaper, but he’s got enough pep — especially as a one footed jumper — to finish above the rim and through contact. Add to this his ability to handle the ball (even if he can be loose with the ball) and that he can be a plus passer, and he has some unique tools with which to build a contributing player.
With that type of uniqueness, however, comes the lack of a template with which to model and offer a path to being the player he could become. I mean, I see shades of Lamar Odom, but Randle has much more of an assertive attitude than Odom and less an outward desire to simply fall into whatever role is slotted for him or to do what is needed rather than what he himself wants to do in order to be a success within the team concept. His physical profile can remind of a LeBron James type, but Randle lacks the shooting confidence, the next level feel and passing ability, and the inherent defensive IQ which LeBron harnessed very early in his career.
So what is Randle and what can he be? A real answer to that question that also I feel confident in escapes me. And maybe it always will.
Randle's not shooting as well as I'd like, but his rebounding is very strong and his assist numbers remain a bright spot for a PF.
— Darius Soriano (@forumbluegold) March 11, 2017
This is, typically, the only type of analysis I can really offer about Randle. Look at these numbers! These are things he does well! But, these other things not so much! But those things he does well really matter!
An accounting of Randle, then, is almost always going to be like one of those lists people make in movies about relationships where they wonder whether or not they want to continue to be with a person. “On the plus side, he’s so thoughtful and caring. Then, on the minus side, he’s really sloppy and doesn’t always pick up his dirty socks.” And on and on it goes. This type of back and forth then leads us to roster construction questions and whether Randle can ever shore up some of his weaknesses to a level where he can be effective within the team construct.
And this is where projecting such a unique player has its limitations.
I mean, I honestly would not be surprised if Randle starts to become a decent enough three point shooter where he can hurt defenses. He hit two 3’s against the Suns, basically stepping into shots that were wide open because the defense doesn’t respect him from out there. Which is fine! I want him shooting that shot exactly because it is wide open. If he’s covered out there, I want him playing more to his strengths as a driver or moving the ball on to an open teammate/initiating a dribble hand-off for the type of play he’s shown can really help the team. But as long as he’s open, I’d rather he pick-and-pop to beyond the arc more than always initiate short rolls into traffic where passing angles are tight and defenses are set and read to contest his shots.
I can also see Randle continuing to develop his finishing in the paint, finding angles to shoot the ball, and figuring out little hooks and push shots which can augment his only average length. Randle oscillates between shooting these weird rocket shots off the backboard and showing truly good touch around the rim currently, but I think these are things which can be refined as he starts to find more of a “go to” game inside which he currently doesn’t possess.
That said, I could also see none of these things happening. Randle’s jumper is still rushed and he still hasn’t figured out that he should shoot when open rather than simply driving into bad positions. Plus, he’s gotten by on his strength and athleticism for so long, the habits he has now may indeed be permanent — or at least so ingrained he’ll fall back on them too often to the frustration of everyone.
Then, of course, there’s Randle’s mindset and his clear belief in himself as a player. I’ve consistently labeled Randle an alpha player, someone who wants the ball because of his utmost confidence. I love that he doesn’t back down from any situation; that he truly wants an outsized role because he believes he’ll not only fill it, but do it well. But that confidence cuts both ways. If he’s not good enough to be a foundational player, he needs to recognize and find other ways to contribute by doing smaller things, not just show (what can be quite) poor body language and disengage.
One of the bigger critiques of Randle can be that as hard as he can go during games, that effort level is not consistently sustained. After a monster game against the Hornets the first piece of praise Luke Walton offered of Randle’s performance was noting that it was the longest period (Walton) had seen where Randle played that hard. That’s a compliment, but also a backhanded one. Almost an asking of “why can’t he do that more?” without really phrasing it in the form of a question.
Then, of course, there’s Randle’s defensive game. Randle has some real tools and there are areas where he’s shown to be a good defender. But he doesn’t show a great feel or acumen defensively, which considerably lowers his ceiling on that end. Great defensive players not only show plus effort, they show plus instincts. They rotate early, they read plays before they happen, they show a natural knowing of where to place their hands/how to turn and trail/how to dip a shoulder and maneuver through tight spaces in order to get where they need to be on time and then get to the next place. And they do this over and over again over the course of entire games, to say nothing of doing it multiple times in a single possession.
Can Randle become even average at these things consistently? Can he show a desire too? He’s only a 3rd year player who’s in his 2nd year of game action so I don’t want to say he can’t. But, the flip side of this is that some players just don’t have this in them. In fact, a lot of them don’t. If Randle never became that, should it be a surprise? I’d argue it wouldn’t.
So, what will Randle be? Again, I don’t know. His talent tantalizes even if it doesn’t materialize in ways that always inspire fawning. In many ways, then, the idea of Randle is currently better than the actualization of him. If that remains to be the case, it’s hard to see how he sticks on a good team without severely altering his approach and mindset into how he’s supposed to operate within the team structure. But, if he can truly make the leap, he’ll be so good even if his deficiencies remain somewhat pronounced, his contributions will matter so much you can more easily live with them.
How this plays out is one of the more fascinating subplots of the next 15 months for these Lakers. And I’m as interested in seeing how it goes as anyone. As a Randle supporter, I still think he can be an excellent pro. But I’d be lying if I said I didn’t have my concerns about it actually happening.
Rick in Seattle says
Darius, I think you’ve made a good case–for NOT keeping Randle. For every positive attribute we try to give to Randle, there is at least one negative attribute. He is by historical standards, an undersized PF. Also, he does not mesh well with either Black or Mozgov. And I see Nance as a much more complementory fit with Zubac. Randle is a good slasher & a good double-double guy. And, he is not the next coming of Dray Green, even though both are about the same size. Dray can shoot the 3, Randle cannot. Dray can play defense, Randle cannot. And Randle does not fit well with the current core. If the Lakers have an opportunity to acquire some all-star talent, I would include him in the trade package. Randle is also nearing the end of his rookie contract, and as mentioned by your own Mr. Reed, he will be looking for a new big dollar contract very soon. He has value, but he is not an ideal fit for the current Lakers core. Again, I would include him in a trade package for a player like Butler, George or Cousins,
Craig W. says
I agree. The one reason to keep Randle is if you believe he will become a true team leader and go-to player and you are willing to build your system around him. The reason I say this is that he is not a complimentary type player – he demands the system fit his skills. Stephen Curry is also a player who you have to construct around, but his game is more flexible than Randle’s and he does play defense within a team concept – Randle does not. Plus, of course, he is a superstar, but my point is that Randle does not have that in his future (IMO). Green is a star who is also a complimentary player – very rare.
The fact that he is closer to the end of his rookie contract than Russell is another key point mentioned by Rick in Seattle.
A team like Indiana could use his skills better than we can – and should be part of any PG package. I also feel PG is not the #1 option on a championship team, so we should be careful about how much we are willing to trade for him this summer.
SamSinister says
Two reasons why his undeveloped right hand makes me nuts:
1. It’s a critical tool to open up his offensive game exponentially wider.
2. It’s worrisome that a professional basketball player who aspires to great things can’t be bothered to perfect the basic skill of using either/both hands. What does this say about his work ethic, sensibleness and commitment to excel? Maybe I’m being picky about this, but, as the saying goes, “how you do anything is how you do everything.”
Combining this glaring flaw with so-so defense and a looming end of rookie contract is concerning.
And, all this said, I actually like the guy quite a bit – a pleasure to watch play!
Vasheed says
Randle’s wingspan makes for some problems that will never go away. He disappears against big long PF’s and he will never be a great rim protector. That said early on this year he looked great. I loved the intense defense he played against Harden to win a game. He was slashing to the rim and scoring with extreme efficiency. Those things tapered off and I found that disappointing. He is a player with unique skills but problematic flaws. The big problem is that the Lakers don’t have much more time left to evaluate him and make a decision due to the lost 1st year.
CJ says
Randle is the next Karl Malone!
Anonymous says
You’re joking right. By Malone’s 2nd year he was a 20 puts 10 reb a game player. In year 3 he was 27/10.
FredP says
Randle is the type of player you need to keep and develop because of his ability to bully his way around the basket. He will wear opponents down when he is engaged. His outside shot will come around, he does not have a weird release or some other fatal flaw. His defense will improve but he will need a lot of practice to make that happen. As Walton has pointed out, there is simply not enough time once the season starts to put in a lot of practice. As a result the games become practices and it is a very good thing that wins do not matter for at least another year. Overall, Randle’s skill set is just too unique to not take advantage of and see what he can do.
Chris J says
I like Julius for many reasons, but a few things concern me when watching his game: he doesn’t jump well from a standing position, and given his lack of height there are many times when he finds himself with the ball right under the hoop yet can’t get a good shot off due to the height of others nearby. His small hands also present some issues when among the trees, or finishing in traffic. Lastly, his defense hasn’t been notable, regardless of what position he’s guarding.
Years ago I wrote here that Randle reminded me of a poor man’s version of Charles Barkley with their similar bulky size, rebounding and ability to go coast-to-coast as a four. But the weakness in that comparison is in hops — Barkley could explode off the floor and dunk, whereas Julius flat-out lacks that ability. Barkley’s outside shooting improved over time, and Julius’ could too. But they’ll never be in the same category as a finisher.
Next season could be interesting because Young will presumably be gone. Does Russell play more of a combo guard role to fill the shooting void left by Young’s exit? If so, could that free Randle to be more of a playmaker in the half-court set? We obviously won’t know until after the draft and whatever moves the front office makes between now and training camp, but if he’s still in L.A. next fall, Randle’s versatility might show us something we’ve not yet seen from him. Either way, he’s running out of time to find his niche as a Laker since that contract decision is looming.
MT87 says
I still like Randle but if he doesn’t bring 100% effort on D and doesn’t shoot 3’s he just doesn’t have the skill set to be a starter. Because of his work ethic and talent I remain optimistic that he develops a three-point-shot eventually but I don’t think he should get his next contract based on that potential. Randle could be a all-star someday but he could also just be Josh Smith 2.0. If it is the latter the Lakers have to be careful not to shell out the big bucks and look around to see if he can be moved for a foundational piece. I’m still rooting for you Julius but if you don’t take The Leap you might end up taking The Plunge.
Reed says
Really good stuff Darius – you’ve always been really in tune with Randle’s game, from even before the draft.
I have lately had a recurring feeling that Randle’s fairly impressive box score stats (which you note are pretty striking lately) are pretty empty when it comes to impact on winning games. At the end of most games recently I’ve been shocked to see how high his PTS+REB+AST line was, after feeling all game long that he just wasn’t helping the team much. And I think there’s some deeper statistical support for this. Most notably, Randle has the lowest NetRtg of anyone who plays more than 20 minutes a night at -9.6. This is markedly lower than for Russell (-6.1), Nance (-3.6), Lou (-1.3), and lower even than Baby Ingram, despite his horrific box score stats (-7.8). Randle also has the single highest NetRtg when he’s off the court of any player on the team (-4.2). The Lakers are both better at offense and defense when he sits, but the lion’s share of the impact is on defense, as we are a whopping 3.5 PTS per 100 poss better when he’s on the bench. In addition, while Randle grabs a ton of rebounds, the team is actually a better rebounding team when he sits than when he plays, which is surprising.
All of this strongly confirms that his impressive rebound and assist numbers just aren’t helping the team outscore the other team, and that’s a real problem. Now, the Lakers are a horrible team, so expecting them to dominate with him on the court isn’t realistic, but the gap between his impact and Russell or Nance’s is significant and telling.
I also am struggling with how to accurately value Randle’s passing. He has very high assist numbers for a PF, which is definitely nice. And he’s one of the best on the team at finding 3 point shooters, particularly in semi transition, and those high efficiency points really matter. But at the same time, he does not seem to be a ball mover in our half court offense at all. He also does not seem adept at advancing the ball towards the basket, instead always looking to pass back out when he’s attacking. Again, those 3s are great, but I’d love to see more of an attempt to use his speed to penetrate, and then dish to the C as the defense helps, or look to the corner 3 point shooter. He has one of the lowest pass and assist %s in the league when he drives, as he seems to take on tunnel vision. This mitigates the impact of his driving potential, and I’m not sure he has the instincts to develop the area sufficiently.
Beyond all of this is the instinctive abilities on defense, which Darius highlighted well, so no need to beat the dead horse…
I love Randle’s moxy and will, and see great talent, but am increasingly skeptical he is the kind of big that can play 30+ minutes on an elite team. He’s the one core piece that I’d be active in testing his trade value this summer, particularly given his extension looming.
cjvangin says
the issues with the stats you are using is randle plays vs starters so he is effecting the game vs other starters. its not shocking the team looks better when randle is on th bench because we have a top 10 bench in the nba and a bottom 5 starting line up
Anonymous says
To me there are three players I compare him to in my mind, to kind of see his development in a well known and established perspective:
David Lee
Draymond Green
Zach Randolph
The biggest thing is developing his defense. It is the only thing that makes Lee a jouney man and a very minor piece on a good team.
Anonymous says
FredP you are the only genius that commented on this post ……Julius randle isn’t draymond green , he is a 6’9 245lb monster …..to give him up in a trade for a degrading Paul George( all respect to Paul, my favorite player) in a couple of years would be idiotic mainly because the theme of this lakers team is stay young and have the inner core grow together….chemistry is built through time , were so quick to rush players into their potential after 2 or 3 years for what??? And why? Because Karl Anthony towns? Kristaps? The process? The league has people spoiled and it’s sad…….that being said, Julius randle will be a better player than draymond green by far, the proof is in the number ls ??
Chris J says
For one to suggest most others’ comments aren’t smart, I’d suggest you come with more game than “Julius Randle will be better than Draymoms Green” while offering up proof in “numbers” that aren’t cited.
Find one GM in the NBA who’d take Randle over Green. Just one. We’ll wait.
I like Julius a lot, but he’s not better than Green by any measure at this point. Championships, All Star nods, wins, stats, etc.
RDC says
Great write-up, Darius. At his best, Randle is a disruptive force that thrives on the chaos he can generate by grabbing a board and slicing through transition D. He was a critical contributor to the team’s early season success. At his worst, he clogs the lane, fails to rotate, and accumulates hollow counting stats.
What stood out to me in the Phoenix game was how critical a stretch four will be to allow space for Ingram and Russel to penetrate. Ingram only needed one dribble to posterize Len.
James Donahue says
Darius, awesome analysis as always. I think Randle will continue to develop, and if his mindset continues to develop as well, he will be an all-star. Those 3s against the Suns were smooth with great rotation–they were not flukes. I would not give him all-star pay but I would pay him just under this to keep him as I think he will continue to improve on what is already an impressive pros over cons.
BTW, I am always impressed with your diction. Your educational level and writing style seem very high to me.
Ben says
I would like to see them hang onto Randle at least until next season, and try him as a super sub/6th man off the bench. He could come in with Clarkson and anchor the bench unit, bring points, energy, assists. Then in turn we could see what Nance could bring to the team as a starter on the defensive end along with Zubac who seem to have good chemistry. If Randle isn’t looking a piece that fits the puzzle by then, we could move him at the deadline next year. I agree with Fred above that his skill set just has too much value to not see if it can work. But I think he feels like a jack of all trades/role player who would work perfectly off the bench as a super sub.
Anonymous says
Randle can’t shoot outside the paint with any real efficiency. Neither can his backup Nance. The Lakers won’t win without range from the OF spot — the current NBA game demands spacing. Randle is fine in transition but is not a real asset in any set offensive framework — his man just sags off him if he’s outside clogging passing and driving lanes.
If the Lakers are shut out of the draft I think they trade Randle to get into the Lottery. In fact I’d flip him in any event for a chance to draft Arizona’s Lauri Markkanen, who’s 3 pt shooting and all around game will translate to the NBA really well.
Anonymous says
So, the reality might be not be that we install Randle into the starting lineup…
But rather :
Its more about when to insert him in and use his talents.
Maybe he should be our 6’th man off of the bench
Mid-Wilshire says
I also like Lauri Markkanen of the University of Arizona, a very smooth 7-0 freshman from Finland who can shoot from distance. Even so, I’m not quite ready to give up on Julius Randle just yet. I still believe he has some significant upside in him.
On a side note, and slightly off-topic, the player from the recently completed Pac-12 Tournament who has really impressed me is Alonzo Trier, a 6-5 wing from Arizona. He scored 23 points in last night’s game against Oregon with 8 rebounds and 3 assists. Also, he shot 10-11 free throws which means he’s not afraid of contact and he knows how to get to the line. The previous night against UCLA he had 20 points, 4 rebounds, and 4 assists. He obviously comes up big in big games and he was voted the MVP of the tournament.
He seems (so far) to be flying under the radar for some reason. NBAdraft.net has him ranked as the #28 prospect while DraftExpress.com doesn’t have him ranked at all. So far this year he’s averaging 17.3 points per game (47.5% from the field, 41.3% from three), 5.0 rebounds, and 2.7 assists. And on Sean Miller’s team, everyone plays defense. Otherwise you sit.
Maybe the Lakers could have a shot at him with their late 2nd round pick. He’s a sophomore so he has a little bit more seasoning than some of the other kids.
Robert says
Many are now questioning Randle, just like they are questioning Clarkson, and DAR (even with his recent upswing). And of course everyone agrees that Ingram is just too raw to judge. My opinions of all have not changed since the debates last Summer. Thankfully the discussion is a long way from people claiming that we “totally nailed the picks”.
Darius Soriano says
LOL.
Rob says
Two observations about Julius Randle: 1) If you are a team player, trying to elevate the play of your teammates, you set hard screens to free them for a shot. If you are playing for yourself, you set a slip-screen so that YOU get the shot. I have watched every game this season, and I honestly can’t remember Randle setting a hard screen for anyone.
2) Randle seems to bring effort only when it serves him, and he goes into a funk if he feels he’s not getting the adulation/respect he feels he deserves. One of my clearest memories of Randle this season is against Detroit, pouting about not getting a foul call and having John Leuer of the Pistons outrun him down the court for a fast-break dunk. Immature and unprofessional. Stu Lantz talks about Randle’s “motor,” but as far as I can see the motor only runs when it benefits Randle.
Pbz06 says
For comparisons sake, I wonder how Odom, Randolph, Green, and Millsap looked/played when they were 22. Fans are the best.
RR says
PER at 22:
Randolph 19.6
Millsap 16.1
Odom 13.7 (but he put up an 18.9 at 21)
Green put up a 7.1 PER as a 22 year-old rookie.
Randle 15.9
Green, as I have noted, has one of the most unusual development arcs in league history. Picked in the 2nd round and putting up a sub-replacement PER at 22, he was by that metric a better bet to be out of the league by now than he was to be an All-Star on one of the greatest teams ever. As noted, Green can do a couple of very key things that Randle can’t, or at least hasn’t.
Looking beyond stats, Odom had more length, range and handle than Randle does. Millsap is similar in some ways, but he has had a better career than most people thought he would so to match him, Randle will need to max out his skillset and longevity. Randolph was probably better at 22 than Randle is, always had the killer post game, and Randle will probably not have as good a career as Randolph has.
One pro-Randle argument that I have heard is that since he was a one-and-done, got hurt, and played for Scott, he has been hamstrung by circumstance and still has explosive development ahead. This is certainly possible, but like pretty much every other optimistic argument during a nearly four-year stretch in which the team has gone 85-226, it relies a lot on hope, conjecture, and speculation.
I see Randle as 4th-6th man on a good team, who will need certain types of players around him to be impactful. I hope that I am wrong and that he exceeds my expectations.
Anonymous says
As always you are so far off on this kid it is become laughable. His game is at best inconsistent. 3 years in the league no counter move or jump shot. To mention his name with LeBron is down right absurd because there is nothing about Randle that reminds me of LeBron. What a hack you are!
Tom Daniels says
Randle needs to work on his footwork in the lane. One of his great strengths is his ability to get II to the lane. But so often when he gets there he stops five feet short of the hoop, spins, throws out his legs awkwardly and throws up a horrible shot.
You can go into the body of a defender and create space, you can jump over a defender, fall away, do an up and under…. Do something to create a shot. Randle stands there, then goes straight up while throwing out his legs, which prevents him from getting any lift or being well balanced. He creates no space or advantage, it is simple to defend.
This offseason he needs to drill on how to create those shots. Once he gets in the lane he needs to have moves that him decent shots with balance. Throwing out his legs is a bad habit that doesn’t him in the air, into the body of the defender, around the defender, falling away from the defender or in good balance to shoot.
It’s easy stuff to learn and could do far more for him than improving with his off hand.
TempleOfJamesWorthy says
I think one thing we have to consider with respect to Randle’s development is he hasn’t had much in the way of top-level talent surrounding him, so his contributions have been somewhat mitigated and his shortcomings emphasized by the Lakers overall poor play.
Please remember that even HOFers often had humble beginnings. Magic Johnson couldn’t shoot when he joined the NBA, but he was surrounded by Kareem, Norm Nixon, and Jamaal Wilkes who could. James Worthy came off the bench his first year with the Lakers and took many years to develop a credible outside shot. I remember watching a Lakers-76ers game during Charles Barkley’s rookie year, and he was schooled by Kurt Rambis over and over again.
I’m not saying Randle will develop into a Magic/Worthy/Barkley-level player, nor do I think the Lakers should necessarily break the bank to keep Randle come contract time. But Randle does have some abilities (size, speed, ball-handling and passing abilities) which are difficult-to-impossible to teach, while most of his shortcomings (poor outside shot, defensive lapses, lack of right hand moves) can be corrected.
Unfortunately, Randle breaking his leg a losing his rookie year means his contract status is a year ahead of his development curve. That mismatch may force the Lakers to gamble (either by keeping Randle or letting him go) before it’s clear what kind of player he can be.
Rick in Seattle says
Our biggest concern with Randle is: How do we determine where his ceiling will be? Opinions are all over the board for Randle–even from other front offices. He clearly has flaws. He is no Karl Malone! Yes, There is a chance he corrects some of them over time.
But with the uncertainty as well as his looming salary escalation, I really think that, the (Lakers) front office would be better off including him in a trade package for a more established player, if a trade is made.
But, If the Lakers were able to add a quality veteran SG and PF, to the young core of Russell, Ingram & Zubac, that team could easily grow into a Western Conference contender for the next 5-6 years.
That is why I feel that IF the Lakers FO can hold tight & talk George & Cousins (both are 2018 free agents), into coming to the Lakers next summer, this team could be one hell of a dynamic contender for years to come.?
Rick in Seattle says
Dear General Manager Pelinka,
In the interest of utilizing your vast familiarity with NBA players and front offices, can we ask you for a big favor?
The Lakers previous regime made mistakes. We all recognize the Deng-Mozgov contracts were really bad!
Therefore, can you use your vast expertise and knowledge of NBA operations, to help the Lakers find a new home for Luel Deng and Timofey Mozgov?
Correcting these ‘mistakes’ and disposing of these excessively cap-burdening contracts would just be a wonderful thing, for those many cost-consious fans who take things like this seriously.
If possible, perhaps we could discuss this over a ‘hot toddy’ of your choice at your favorite watering hole, between now and Easter. I know you and Ervin will be very busy as ee approach the lottery on May 16.
All the best to you and your new front office mates,
Rick in Seattle