Mike, Penny, Spurs 1st rounder in 2006 for Randolph and Ratliff?

no thanks to Zach Randolph w/his crazy contract that doesn't expire until 2011...hopefully we get lucky & land ourselves a Bogut or Taft in the draft.

Posted by edsonline:

Mike, Penny, Spurs 1st rounder in 2006 for Randolph and Ratliff?

no, no, no, no, no more taking 10mm+ contracts just to get a guy. If they want Zach gone, offer an ending contract. Golden State got Baron Davis for an ending contract[now both young players have had injuries and zach has a longer contract] why do we have to overpay, give picks, take on stupid contracts[ratliff is shot to hll]

you want to say mike sweetney penny and a second rounder, cool.

i don't want Zach period w/that contract of his...i'd rather let Penny's contract simply expire & hope for some cap flexibility in 2008 to sign an available FA, or maybe make a run at Lebron...who knows what will happen w/him in the coming years...NO WAY to Zach at max dollars until 2011, i don't care if they'd give him to us for nothing.

Posted by Bonn1997:

Zach's a 22? year old kid who produces. If you're not trying to get under the cap, then having Zach at $10 mil (or whatever his salary is) is a good gamble. The absolute worse case scenario is that it doesn't work out, you're still over the cap, and he takes up one of your fifteen roster spots. A more likely scenario IMO is that he shines with Marbury on offense, puts up closer to 23/10, and plays average defense.

he plays ZERO defense and he doesn't pass. he's not a team guy and punches teammates in the face (not to mention he looks like eddie winslow). he is only 22 BUT i think he has peaked as a player (20/10 - how much better can he get). and is coming off of knee surgery. i do not want a guy on this team, signed through 2011 making MAX $$$'s and is totally untradeable UNTIL 2010.

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by TMS:

i don't want Zach period w/that contract of his...i'd rather let Penny's contract simply expire & hope for some cap flexibility in 2008 to sign an available FA, or maybe make a run at Lebron...who knows what will happen w/him in the coming years...NO WAY to Zach at max dollars until 2011, i don't care if they'd give him to us for nothing.

Zach's a 22? year old kid who produces. If you're not trying to get under the cap, then having Zach at $10 mil (or whatever his salary is) is a good gamble. The absolute worse case scenario is that it doesn't work out, you're still over the cap, and he takes up one of your fifteen roster spots. A more likely scenario IMO is that he shines with Marbury on offense, puts up closer to 23/10, and plays average defense.

[Edited by - Bonn1997 on 04/06/2005 15:06:18]

He's only $10 million NEXT year. In the final year of his contract he makes $17 million. Every time we trade for a guy like this, it's a great investment for the first two years, not too terrible during the next two and a completely lousy investment during the last two (until we trade for another guy at the beginning of a similar contract).

I agree with Briggs. We can't overpay for guys like this anymore. We're already doing a huge favor to a team like that just being willing to take a bad contract from them. If we can get him and Joe Scrub for Penny Hardaway and a 2nd rounder, fine. But, if we're pulling them under the cap so they can go sign a big free agent, I don't think we should be giving them picks or young players, in addition. That just defeats the point.

Posted by djsunyc:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Zach's a 22? year old kid who produces. If you're not trying to get under the cap, then having Zach at $10 mil (or whatever his salary is) is a good gamble. The absolute worse case scenario is that it doesn't work out, you're still over the cap, and he takes up one of your fifteen roster spots. A more likely scenario IMO is that he shines with Marbury on offense, puts up closer to 23/10, and plays average defense.

he plays ZERO defense and he doesn't pass. he's not a team guy and punches teammates in the face (not to mention he looks like eddie winslow). he is only 22 BUT i think he has peaked as a player (20/10 - how much better can he get). and is coming off of knee surgery. i do not want a guy on this team, signed through 2011 making MAX $$$'s and is totally untradeable UNTIL 2010.

I'll take Zach randolph. He's not a bad defensive player, more like average. Zach is one of the most effecient scorers in the league and he's a tremendous rebounder in the block. He's 23 years old and this is a guy who has played at a high level in the playoffs already. he was the main reason Portland almost beat Dallas when they were down 3-0 and tied it up. If we had Bogut in the high post, Zach in the low box and if we could have Marbury Tim Thomas and another defensive player who can shoot and drive[Bobby Simmons???] You have two passers in Marbury and Bogut, two guys who can score in the high and low block and as long as TT and Simmons were able to move around, thats a pretty good physical basketball team with a lot of size.

Posted by BRIGGS:

I'll take Zach randolph. He's not a bad defensive player, more like average. Zach is one of the most effecient scorers in the league and he's a tremendous rebounder in the block. He's 23 years old and this is a guy who has played at a high level in the playoffs already. he was the main reason Portland almost beat Dallas when they were down 3-0 and tied it up. If we had Bogut in the high post, Zach in the low box and if we could have Marbury Tim Thomas and another defensive player who can shoot and drive[Bobby Simmons???] You have two passers in Marbury and Bogut, two guys who can score in the high and low block and as long as TT and Simmons were able to move around, thats a pretty good physical basketball team with a lot of size.

& for all that we still don't win an NBA title...so what's the damn point? you told me you're not interested in other team's retreads like Al Harrington, yet you're willing to take a chance on Zach at the money he's slated to make?

bad attitude+bad knee injury+unathletic body+Extreme long term contract+super high dollars+has trouble dealing with PORTLAND media+from a Very small town=?

.......that's alot to add up to take over Zacks positives...

good size+good scoring+very young+super high potential=?

Posted by gunsnewing:

if we take on a much worse jamal crawford.whats wrong with taking on Zach.i bet he plays a lot better defense than crawford and might actually impact the wins column more

2 wrongs do not make a right my friend. Zach has a ton of skills but he is a detriment to team chemistry. I'd take that trade if Phil Jackson or Pat Riley were coaching this team though...

Posted by BRIGGS:

Posted by djsunyc:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Zach's a 22? year old kid who produces. If you're not trying to get under the cap, then having Zach at $10 mil (or whatever his salary is) is a good gamble. The absolute worse case scenario is that it doesn't work out, you're still over the cap, and he takes up one of your fifteen roster spots. A more likely scenario IMO is that he shines with Marbury on offense, puts up closer to 23/10, and plays average defense.

he plays ZERO defense and he doesn't pass. he's not a team guy and punches teammates in the face (not to mention he looks like eddie winslow). he is only 22 BUT i think he has peaked as a player (20/10 - how much better can he get). and is coming off of knee surgery. i do not want a guy on this team, signed through 2011 making MAX $$$'s and is totally untradeable UNTIL 2010.

I'll take Zach randolph. He's not a bad defensive player, more like average. Zach is one of the most effecient scorers in the league and he's a tremendous rebounder in the block. He's 23 years old and this is a guy who has played at a high level in the playoffs already. he was the main reason Portland almost beat Dallas when they were down 3-0 and tied it up. If we had Bogut in the high post, Zach in the low box and if we could have Marbury Tim Thomas and another defensive player who can shoot and drive[Bobby Simmons???] You have two passers in Marbury and Bogut, two guys who can score in the high and low block and as long as TT and Simmons were able to move around, thats a pretty good physical basketball team with a lot of size.

OMG! Briggs and I agree and everyone else disagrees with us. What is the world coming to?