FanPost

The Enduring Mystery of Julius Randle



The numbers speak for themselves. A whopping 34 double-doubles, good for second among all rookies (and Julius is a de facto rookie) and 15th among all players. One of only 28 players in NBA history to average a double-double at age 21 or younger. A total rebounding percentage clocking in at a blistering 19.5%, good for 10th in the league. Sixth in the league in total rebounds; tenth in the league for RPG.

Then there are the other numbers. A paltry -0.9 VORP. A below average PER (13.7), a WS/48 that’s barely a third of league average (.035), a TS% that is weak at best (.48), and an EFG% that is truly terrible (.435). This is a player who only makes 53% of his shots from less than five feet in. A player whose shot chart is horrific, even when compared with post players who are merely good-to-above average, like Marcin Gortat, Enes Kanter, or Kenneth Faried. When you compare Randle’s shot chart to a truly elite post player, like DeAndre Jordan, Hassan Whiteside, or even Dwight Howard, it’s enough to make you cry.

However, more worrisome than any specific number is the overall trend. At best, it can be described as stagnant. Randle’s net rating was -8.4 in November and -17.4 in March; a clear regression. However, his TS% increased from 49.3% to 53.1% over the same period (although it was nearly stagnant when October and April are factored in, rising from 42.1% to 44.6%). His DRB% increased by roughly ten points during the November to March span, rising from 25%-35%, which is a clear improvement, while his TRB% increased by roughly four points, rising from 15% to 19%. At the same time, assists and turnovers were basically stagnant.

The "eye test" isn’t likely to shed any more light on Randle’s career trajectory. Randle is drowning in the post just as often as he’s dominating. During games he oftentimes appeared to be flustered, confused, and tangled up in traffic—or in the alternative, wildly overconfident. Randle’s own comparisons aside, his body language was more often DeMarcus Cousins than it was Draymond Green, and without the production of either.

Millions of Laker fans around the world hope this can all be chalked up to Byron Scott’s uninspired coaching and rookie growing pains. And maybe it can. As his record with the Lakers and Cavs indicates, Byron Scott is no longer a good coach (and maybe never was). It’s possible the numbers indicate a lack of proper instruction and the body language is indicative of the effect of Scott’s mind games. Of course, it’s also possible that the Julius Randle just isn’t a good player. Interestingly enough, analytic models were all over the place on Randle; see: https://deanondraft.com/2014/04/25/visibility-bias-and-julius-randles-defense/ and http://www.basketballanalyticsbook.com/2014/06/14/comparing-objective-draft-models/. And the ability to pick and choose numbers to find whatever Randle a person is looking for remains. In context, the positives aren’t as positive—Randle comes in at the bottom end of the list of 21 and below who averaged a double-double—and the negatives aren’t as negative—anybody's WS/48 is going to look bad on a team that lost as much as the 2015-16 Lakers. In the end, only time will tell, but most interesting of all is the fact that his first season has failed to shed any further light on what Julius Randle’s true potential as an NBA player will be.