Posted by Rookie:

"and was traded for, get this, GARBAGE... TWICE!!!!"

Get this - He was traded from a dysfunctional team that had bad image problems and where he had an incident that lowered his trade value to another dysfunctional team - The Knicks, another team with awful chemistry. This summer when we started shopping Randolf, we were still a dysfunctional franchise with tainted assets coming off of a 23 win season....athough we were a dysfunctional franchise with a new Coach and GM. Similar to the Portland Jail Blazers situation, we traded him while going through a culture/image change.

I fail to understand why waiting until his value as an asset continued to increase (an All Star invite might have helped his trade value) coupled with his being a model citizen as a Knick could not have increased his value. Look how much his trade value increased since the summer after only playing a few games in a new cultural environment. He certainly seemed to get the concept of team basketball under MDA and contributed points rebounds and even demonstrated good ball movement. The only chump who didn't show up was Crawford and we got a decent player in return for him.

"I'll also never understand the love affair with the potential to win 38 games and sneak into the EC playoffs which was exactly where we were heading prior to that whirlwind day of 2010 expiring acquiring Donnie pulled off."

Uh...isn't competitive sport about winning games? If it isn't, then maybe you can explain why all these guys are getting paid millions of dollars to play basketball....Oh, I guess the idea is to spend 70 something million dollars to lose as many games as you can so that your young developing players don't get any playoff experience...thank's for clearing things up.

"Nobody in the modern age of basketball seems to understand what EMPTY STATS means"

Eh, I'll just leave this one alone

A dysfunctional team, that included Randolph, who was rebuilding their image in hard working kids.

Yes, you leave that EMPTY STAT line alone, but you shouldn't because it's the truth.

Blazers took a young rebuilding team, coupled with whatever you view Randolph to be (25/12 superstar!?) and... uh, jettisonned the "superstar" for what? Garbage.

What happened? They became a great team who is still young and somehow in the playoff hunt in the WEST.

STOP BOXSCORE WATCHING and try reading into this thing called team chemistry.

A player could put up 30/20 nightly but if he's a cancer his TEAM (you know, 5 guys playing together, not 1 clown chucking for his stats) will stink.

Why hasn't the great Zach Randolph led the Clippers to a win streak? Well, cause, he sucks, that's why.

You still haven't answered Greek's question: WHAT GREAT PLAYERS AND ASSETS....were we getting for Zach? That we missed out on?

Posted by McK1:

point is he got better b/c he got minutes is an empty statement.

there is, was, and never will be a guarantee anybody gets better because their minutes increase. ex. 2: Tim Thomas.

frye held the same upside value at the time of the trade. he was still on a rookie contract and did suffer a major injury which set back his development. Plus with IT trying to justify the Curry deal, he no longer was catered to here. time was on Portland's side that he'd at least regain his first year form.

Posted by Rookie:

"A player could put up 30/20 nightly but if he's a cancer his TEAM (you know, 5 guys playing together, not 1 clown chucking for his stats) will stink."

If you put up those numbers, you're not called a cancer, you're called a franchise player - ie. Kobe

"You still haven't answered Greek's question: WHAT GREAT PLAYERS AND ASSETS....were we getting for Zach? That we missed out on?"

We will never know the answer to that one now that we dumped him for garbage now will we. Great players, hahahah....uh no, but assets, yes I think we could have gotten some assets.

Posted by McK1:

Zach doesn't impact he W/L column like a guy paid that much money should. doesn't mean he is a total spaz or cancer or zachass or whatever other colorful name you people can come up with.

Posted by Cosmic:

Posted by McK1:

Zach doesn't impact he W/L column like a guy paid that much money should.

Agreed, yet, he does impact the L column.

doesn't mean he is a total spaz or cancer or zachass or whatever other colorful name you people can come up with.

Actually, yes, it does, and it's been proven over the length of his career.

Playing with zach helps some guys, who because of the attention he draws, flourish

Helps them what? Save their energy because they're not involved in any plays and can just stand still and watch him do his jab-step-chuck routive?

exhibit A since Gordon only got better b/c of minutes is Chandler. his shooting numbers took a huge dip after the Zach trade. I know Q told us he hit the rookie wall after 20 games or so and some of you ran wih it but seriously...

Ok, that's a broken sentence. Gordon got better because Gordon actually got minutes. Chandler got better because he got minutes instead of watching from the bench. You can't draw any conclusions from that.

Q? Nobody listens to Q. Chandler had a 6 game slump and he was lazy, chucking deep shots, not playing defense, and acting like a bum. Then he got a fire lit back under him (not by him, coach and teammates I bet) and he fought back and started attacking again and the last game he did not just attack but he limited the mistakes as well.

Again, what's that got to do with ZachAss? Nothing, except, without him here chucking his bum ass to 43% from the 4 position, other players could actually not just see the court BUT THE BALL and maybe do something with it instead of watching it leave Zach's hand en route to a brick more often than not.


...bleh, Zach Randolph, We're talkin' bout Zach Randolph!?

WOW!

...I'm done talkin' about Zach Randolph.

No disrespect to ya's but, ya's nuts, still talkin' bout Zach Randolph! HES A BUM. We're better off without that clown.

Posted by Cosmic:

Posted by Rookie:

"A player could put up 30/20 nightly but if he's a cancer his TEAM (you know, 5 guys playing together, not 1 clown chucking for his stats) will stink."

If you put up those numbers, you're not called a cancer, you're called a franchise player - ie. Kobe

"You still haven't answered Greek's question: WHAT GREAT PLAYERS AND ASSETS....were we getting for Zach? That we missed out on?"

We will never know the answer to that one now that we dumped him for garbage now will we. Great players, hahahah....uh no, but assets, yes I think we could have gotten some assets.

Ugh, why are you so hung up on Zach?
You've been shown numerous facts as to why he's not a good player and how the way he has been traded played into that.
Yet you're still hanging on. Why? Where was he taking us? What was he going to get us?

The answers are already fact:
MAYBE if we were LUCKY a 38 win season (this goes for Crawful too, who has been AWFUL since the trade).
MAYBE if we weren't lucky, back to Jaric and Darko.

How can these things not tell you something? I'm clueless.

I'm not trying to be disrespectful but my god how are you so hung up on either Zach's stats and what you thought they'd bring the Knicks in wins - or what you'd thought they'd bring us in trade - when he's already proven throughout his career that he can't bring you wins and can't bring you anything more than Channing Frye or Tim Thomas!