Posted by bitty41:

[quote]Posted by BRIGGS:

Posted by Bippity10:

I personally don't like Zach. But in this system he may actually be pretty good statistically.


---Do you think he has any chance to be better than 2006 his last year with Portland?

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/3531

That season yielded the Blazers Steve Francis and aback up PF

Umm didn't he sit out most of the 2nd of that season due to knee surgery?

No. He played one less game that year than last year. It was a standard Zach year as far as injuries go. Excluding his rookie season, he's averaged 69 games/season. And that year he played 68. (Including his rookie season, he's averaged 64 games/season.) I bet his knees and body overall would hold up better if he lost 15 lbs of fat.

Posted by Bippity10:

Posted by fishmike:

it depends on the wins and losses. I dont think this is a 22 win team. Its not a 50 win team either. We won 37 games with an Othella/Kurt front court and Eisley/Ward as PGs. We did so because we were well coached and had a system that put everyone in a place to do what they did best.

I think we will see that kind of turn around. I think we have some firepower on this team and Mike will run the score up enough to keep us close.

So I think this team will win 35-40 games, be competitive most night and Zach will fill out the stat sheet quiet nicely. He's a very very productive player. After that your looking at a guy with 2 years left on his deal which is a short enough commitment for most teams.

It's completely situational. GM's are very forgiving when it comes to talent. If the perception is that Zach was a good soldier and led to a turnaround I could see a bump in the demand for his services. If he's seen as counterproductive of course his value won't change. I personally don't think the perception of Zach will change that dramatically even with wins. I think he is who he is and there will be evidence of that this year even with added wins. He will have value at some point, but we will need to be smart in what we obtain in order to get equal value. I just don't think you can trade him for equal talent, unless that talent also comes with baggage.

I think you bring up a great point. Success in this league for the most part is situational. Very few if any players in this league alone can turn a team around and make them a winner on their own. Kobe Bryant arguably the best player in the league before getting Pau Gasol on his team, was just taking his team to the first round of the playoffs.


But if Zach was playing on Clev, Orlando, Detroit, or Houston, as much as some of you knock him he would make those teams better and all the hate we see now about him would instantly disappear. Winning and success is just as much about a player's ability as it is with him being in the right place at the right time.

Posted by bitty41:

Posted by Bippity10:

[quote]Posted by fishmike:

it depends on the wins and losses. I dont think this is a 22 win team. Its not a 50 win team either. We won 37 games with an Othella/Kurt front court and Eisley/Ward as PGs. We did so because we were well coached and had a system that put everyone in a place to do what they did best.

I think we will see that kind of turn around. I think we have some firepower on this team and Mike will run the score up enough to keep us close.

So I think this team will win 35-40 games, be competitive most night and Zach will fill out the stat sheet quiet nicely. He's a very very productive player. After that your looking at a guy with 2 years left on his deal which is a short enough commitment for most teams.

It's completely situational. GM's are very forgiving when it comes to talent. If the perception is that Zach was a good soldier and led to a turnaround I could see a bump in the demand for his services. If he's seen as counterproductive of course his value won't change. I personally don't think the perception of Zach will change that dramatically even with wins. I think he is who he is and there will be evidence of that this year even with added wins. He will have value at some point, but we will need to be smart in what we obtain in order to get equal value. I just don't think you can trade him for equal talent, unless that talent also comes with baggage.

I think you bring up a great point. Success in this league for the most part is situational. Very few if any players in this league alone can turn a team around and make them a winner on their own. Kobe Bryant arguably the best player in the league before getting Pau Gasol on his team, was just taking his team to the first round of the playoffs.


But if Zach was playing on Clev, Orlando, Detroit, or Houston, as much as some of you knock him he would make those teams better and all the hate we see now about him would instantly disappear. Winning and success is just as much about a player's ability as it is with him being in the right place at the right time.




Trading for Zach Randolph is not easy. He commands 48mm over the next 3 years. In a league where the salary cap rules you would have to except Zach Randolph as roughly 1/3 of your cap. If you do make that move that basically eliminates you from that 2010 FA class. If you add up his selfish type play his charahcter issues and the money--that is one hard guy to trade--can he be traded--obviously but the market imho has to be very thin. There are still clubs out there[i think] but it's a tough deal. If we dont want to trade Zach--why did we bother drafting gallinari? How many 4s can play on 1 team?

Zach is the only player in the league who has bad 20-10 seasons. That's how severe his attitude/work ethic issues are.

Posted by knicks1248:

Zach and Curry will both see inconsistant minutes if there not moving the ball. Im sure thats going to change with the system Mike D runs, I just hope they catch on quick..

Don't bank on it. You're talking about 2 low IQ players who have never had a desire to perform mentally or physically. The only thing they need to catch on quick is they're unwanted.

[Edited by - jrzyhustla on 07-17-2008 11:30 PM]

i can say w/o a doubt that if Zach were to find success playing on another team all my hate for him would disappear in an instant... pretty much any ill will towards Zach would dissipate the moment he put on another team's uniform.

but if he somehow finds success playing in NY, i'll give him his just due just like i was openminded to Steph when he first got here... prove me wrong Zach... please.

Posted by bitty41:

Briggs: This isn't a discussion about dollars and cents just basketball okay. I saying hypothetically if Zach was on those teams imo he would find success.

Why are those teams different from Portland? Portland had a lot of good players and Zach only hurt the team.

This is pretty laughable. With the exception of when Zach was drafted which was the last years of the Rasheed Wallace Trailblazers and you could make somewhat of a case for the Brandon Roy's rookie season those teams were not good. One huge thing that Portland was missing that Houston, Orlando, Clev, and Detroit have is strong leadership and obviously very talented players. You're seriously blinded by your hate of Zach if you think he wouldn't help: Yao, Howard, Detroit's front line, or give Lebron some desperately needed inside scoring next to Illgagus (or however you spell that guy's name).

Zach is the only player in the league who has bad 20-10 seasons. That's how severe his attitude/work ethic issues are.

LOL I guess KG, Pau Gasol, and Elton Brand must all have bad attitudes to seeing that they also put the similar numbers of 20/10 and there teams still poorly.

Portland wasn't good? Why did the exact same roster become good once they got rid of Zach then?

Posted by bitty41:

Briggs: This isn't a discussion about dollars and cents just basketball okay. I saying hypothetically if Zach was on those teams imo he would find success.

Why are those teams different from Portland? Portland had a lot of good players and Zach only hurt the team.

This is pretty laughable. With the exception of when Zach was drafted which was the last years of the Rasheed Wallace Trailblazers and you could make somewhat of a case for the Brandon Roy's rookie season those teams were not good. One huge thing that Portland was missing that Houston, Orlando, Clev, and Detroit have is strong leadership and obviously very talented players. You're seriously blinded by your hate of Zach if you think he wouldn't help: Yao, Howard, Detroit's front line, or give Lebron some desperately needed inside scoring next to Illgagus (or however you spell that guy's name).

Zach is the only player in the league who has bad 20-10 seasons. That's how severe his attitude/work ethic issues are.

LOL I guess KG, Pau Gasol, and Elton Brand must all have bad attitudes to seeing that they also put the similar numbers of 20/10 and there teams still poorly.

You pretty much nailed it... and Briggs had good points as well. KG had back to back 32 and 33 win seasons. Elton Brand had one winning season. Gasol did nothing to elevate Memphis.. there are many examples like this. I would rather just keep Zach rather than sell low. He fills out the stat sheet. This is why DW hired Mike. There are guys on this roster who can play and put up numbers. Mike's job is to find a way to translate that into wins.

I don't think Walsh would have hired D'Antoni if his attitude is just to clear out cap space and tank seasons until after the summer of 2010. They both are looking to make some immediate impact NOT NBA titles but at least a respectable improvement.

Posted by metra:

What does "good season" mean?

I'm sure he'll have good stats. Don't know if that will translate to Ws for the Knicks as a whole though.

Putting up double-doubles regardless of low FG%, boneheaded shots from too deep, a complete lack of defense, a totally ridiculous on-the-court attitude towards teammates and refs.

As long as that box score is shiny apparently he's awesome and a franchise corner stone to some.

If I read he got pancaked by a midtown bus this afternoon I doubt I'd shed a tear.

Posted by Bippity10:

Posted by djsunyc:

Posted by bitty41:

I don't think Walsh would have hired D'Antoni if his attitude is just to clear out cap space and tank seasons until after the summer of 2010. They both are looking to make some immediate impact NOT NBA titles but at least a respectable improvement.

knicks fans better hope that 2010 summer is a good one.

If you are still winning 23 games in 2009 you aren't going to have a good summer in 2010 unless you hit the jackpot in the lottery.

and then give the pick to the utah jazz...knicks don't have their 2010 pick.