The Knicks’ Case For Keeping Julius Randle

These aren’t your father’s New York Knicks. They’s not your sibling’s New York Knicks either. Heck, assuming you kept track of the team’s exploits as recently as the 2010s, they’re not even your Knicks.

The rise of the modern Knicks can be documented by the fact that they’re now victimized by the first-world problems: sure, the problem in the paint literally looms large but second on the lingering offseason to-do list is deciding whether to keep a three-time All-Star lingering around.

So continues the active Julius Randle dilemma, one that threatens to carry over into the fateful regular season ahead. Randle has been made to go without a contract extension for nearly a month despite such eligibility and it’s feeling easier to lose him in the expanding metropolitan fold: he hasn’t taken the floor since late January and he’s not a former Villanova Wildcat or Phoenix Sun, which is becoming an apparently increasingly glaring sin in the realm of the Knicks.

To that end, amateur and professional observers alike have prepared for life after Randle: time-wasting mock trades and legitimate well-meaning suggestions alike have included his name in hypothetical deals, many naming Randle the Knicks’ most attractive block asset after emptying theiv draft pick cabinet to adopt yet another Wildcat in Mikal Bridges.

But what if the Knicks made the radical move of keeping a three-time All-Star and an on-floor face that has helped build the team’s current infrastructure for the decade?

The past two seasons have put the Knicks into the realm of taking on qualms that only the Association’s rich and elite have to worry about: only a team with a truly legitmate chance of hoisting the Larry O’Brien Trophy would, again, truly ponder whether to keep a player of Randle’s caliber in tow.

It’s even to see and agree with the trade party’s reasoning: if they are willing to trade him, exactly how much longer can a team pass a soon-to-be-30-year-old, one that has had his last two postseason affected by injury, as a legitimate option worthy of a now-and-later haul, especially when he’s seeking a nine-figure contract? What more can the Knicks accomplish with Randle being one of their top options?

But just because the Knicks can think like the Association’s elite doesn’t mean they should act on every move when it’s presented.

From an on-floor perspective, can the Knicks truly afford to let Randle go? A team as star-crossed as the Knicks doesn’t land a couple of players that average at least 24 points a game: Randle and Jalen Brunson became the first Knicks duo to do it in consecutive seasons.

Randle also helps partly solve perhaps the one corner that the Knicks backed themselves up to: players capable of scoring 20 a game while balancing the duties of a traditional center are a rare find these days. Dropping Randle while continuing to neglect the second center’s spot would be an exercise in futility and a roundabout way of adjusting the New York roster.

Those with a story like Randle’s don’t come around often, either. Randle was an unwanted spoil of another Knicks offseason gone wrong in 2019. Dreams of Kevin Durant and Kyrie Irving gave way to a Randle struggling to live up to his high billing as the seventh pick of the draft five years prior. He would go on to build a reputation as a renovator … guiding the post-pandemic Knicks to an unexpected run at the fourth seed … before tearing it down in a futile follow-up.

The last two years have put him back on the Manhattan pedestal but apparently not enough to make him a firm building block in the most hopeful future the Knicks have had in quite some time. Shouldn’t such resilience, such progress be rewarded?

But, of course, comes the question of cost: like many metropolitan moguls before them, the Knicks have navigated this offseason with fine financial restraint, staying above the restrictive second salary apron despite all the new faces.

Perhaps that’s why so many are scared of placing themselves in the camp of keeping Randle: maintaining his services would more than likely require the Knicks to find some of their Wildcats a new home. Brunson obviously isn’t going anywhere and some see Bridges as a lock to get an extension of his own when he’s eligible later this fall. But how much would the soul of the Knicks be lost if Donte DiVincenzo and/or Josh Hart were forced to be dealt? Many Knicks fans don’t feel like answering that question.

In any event, the Knicks must make due with their time together. It’s hardly a guarantee that their deep bench will remain together for the entire season, especially with strugglers looking to pawn off center depth like Walker Kessler and/or Robert Williams. If they’re truly rolling toward first place … or beyond … in the Eastern Conference, it’s highly doubtful they’d trade Randle (who carries a player option for 2025-26) unless a truly undeniable superstar is part of the yield.

Despite the mock deals, the thoughts of change, despite several, if not petty, signs of him being the odd man out, there’s an undeniable place for Randle in New York. Time will tell if that’s in the future, but it’s almost certainly attached for this coming campaign.

Does that make this season more of a must-win for the Knicks? That’s a whole new conversation entirely. Either way, Randle will be present for it.

Make sure you bookmark All Knicks for the latest news, exclusive interviews, film breakdowns and so much more!