Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by GKFv2:

Randolph got traded for peanuts 3 times in 2 years. That tells you how much anyone views his talent.

That's my point. Baron doesn't compare to Zach in terms of how far away from him teams try to stay. He's a very good two-way player whose only problem has been injuries.

Posted by McK1:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by GKFv2:

Randolph got traded for peanuts 3 times in 2 years. That tells you how much anyone views his talent.

That's my point. Baron doesn't compare to Zach in terms of how far away from him teams try to stay. He's a very good two-way player whose only problem has been injuries.

this has nothing to do with the fact talented players with huge contracts get moved in salary dumps and teams don't always ask for young players or picks in return.

just say you were wrong and move on.

[Edited by - McK1 on 07-12-2009 12:47 PM]

Posted by McK1:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by bitty41:

Any GM can dump contracts especially if the guys are relatively young and put up decent numbers.

Perhaps you can give some other examples of GMs trading one-way (offense only) players with bad reputations and bad contracts for shorter contracts without having to throw in prospects and/or draft picks. That would lend a lot of credibility to your (and McK1's) argument.

I'm highlighting the bold part because I'm convinced you missed it the first time. Teams will always gamble on outstanding two way players. That's a different story than someone who's a stat whore that just does one or two things well. Baron Davis gives you two steals a game and has gotten his share of defensive player of the year votes.

Just like teams will always gamble on a 20-10 pf still in his prime.

As a teammate Zach has never been reported as a bad guy. He had the one incident where he punched Randolph in the face but it was in defense of Travis Outlaw.

If LAC doesn't get the first pick do they still trade Zach?

Come on, just one example meeting the criteria I identified (bad reputation, one-way player)--after all, those criteria are what Donnie had to work with.

Posted by CrushAlot:

This article doesn't mention his dui, his sexual assualt lawsuit, dog figthing or his being investigated for not providing information in a criminal case but it does cover alot of Zach's 'transgressions'.

Character only question on Randolph

BY FRANK ISOLA
DAILY NEWS SPORTS WRITER

Monday, July 2nd 2007, 9:48 AM

Read Frank Isola's Knicks Knation Blog


When James Dolan finally had rid himself of Latrell Sprewell and began pushing his family values platform back in 2003, the Knicks suddenly turned vanilla. And we're not just talking about Keith Van Horn's legs.

The Knicks were bland and boring and it all started when Dolan wouldn't embrace Sprewell's carefree ways and couldn't forgive him and Marcus Camby for blowing off Dolan's beloved media training sessions. Within the span of 14 months, Camby and Sprewell were sent packing and the Knicks haven't been the same since.

Whether Dolan overreacted is debatable, but at least the Garden boss was taking a public stance on something. His goal was to build a winning team with good character players that would make the city proud. There's nothing wrong with that.

The mandate, though, has changed and it probably has something to do with the Knicks not winning a playoff series since Sprewell was in town. That's why Dolan can reconcile acquiring Zach Randolph, a true character all right, with a rap sheet that would make Pacman Jones blush.

There is no question that Randolph is a big-time talent who is an even better low post scoring option than Eddy Curry. And considering that Isiah Thomas only had to trade Channing Frye and has-been Steve Francis, the deal was a no-brainer from a basketball standpoint.

But a no-brainer is something that Randolph has been accused of being more than once. He is said to be a good-hearted person who runs with the wrong crowd or, as they are affectionately known, "Hoops Family."

Think Sopranos in high-tops.

Guns, shootings, assaults, strip clubs, marijuana, prison. Randolph has been linked to them all. Now he's coming to the city that doesn't sleep.

"Everyone should be concerned," said one league official. "He's been a problem. A great player. But a problem."

The Trail Blazers drafted Greg Oden and couldn't wait to show Randolph, a walking 20-and-10 power forward, the door. What does that tell you? And yet, Thomas couldn't resist pairing him with Eddy Curry.

Everyone deserves a second chance, although Randolph may be on chance No.151 by now. Still, former Garden president Dave Checketts once said he would never take a player like Sprewell, and less than one year later Checketts was beaming after Sprewell helped lead the Knicks to the 1999 NBA Finals.

Maybe Randolph can have the same impact. He and Curry both want the ball in the low post, so there's an inherent problem right there. Neither is a strong defensive player and their presence on the floor not only clogs the lane, but it makes the Knicks' front line painfully slow at a time when the trend is to find quick big men.

Randolph can score and rebound. But can he keep himself out of trouble? This is new territory for the Knicks. They have mostly avoided the bizarre world of player entourages, especially ones with a criminal past.

It's a long way from Charlie Ward bringing his preacher to games and Stephon Marbury getting strong support from his family at the Garden. This is a new era. Hoops Family has entered the building.

Thomas first had to convince Dolan that he can handle Randolph and his buddies. And to be fair, Thomas is a first-rate charmer. Just ask Dolan. Thomas could probably convince Dolan to switch his cable service from Cablevision to Comcast over lunch. Getting Dolan to sign off on Randolph was a cinch.

So Thomas is putting himself on the line, just like he did by trading for Curry and his history of heart concerns. With Randolph, the concerns are with his head, or more precisely his poor life choices.

The Knicks need him to grow up now. For Thomas' sake, the next time Randolph gets a police escort, it better be a victory parade.



Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/basketball/knicks/2007/06/30/2007-06-30_plays_not_the_thing.html#ixzz0L4q6ru48&C

Posted by McK1:

your criteria is faulty.

Zach has value. Not enough to give up prospects and picks for but enough to give a team financial relief, same as davis in 05, same as RJ this past summer.

Bottom line is salary dumps happen. It doesn't matter if its for 1 way 2 way or 8 way players. You lost this one bonnie. TAKE IT LIKE A MAN!

It is weak when you have to tell someone they lost the argument. It usually means you lost and are trying to save face. Are you playing the role of attorney, judge, or jury or do you have such a weak case that you need to play the role of all 3?

Posted by McK1:

Posted by TMS:

i actually think dumping our bad contracts was the hard part... Donnie still needs to dump Fishlips & Curry's deals but u have to be pleased w/our cap flexibility going forward after the Layden & Isiah dark years of fiscal irresponsibility.

2 things IT said about the NBA I believe to be true:

anybody can be traded, it just depends on what you're willing to take back

Because IT said it I think we automatically assumed that strictly meant bad contracts. However, Walsh turned down LA's first deal for Zach which was a 2nd rounder and instead dealt Zach to them for players he felt could contribute in Thomas and Mobley.

noone comes to see the cap play

using Nate to dump Jeffries at the trade deadline equals one less source of big time revenue. Knicks were able to replace Steph's merchandise sale numbers with Nate's. You trade Nate for capspace who is left?

[Edited by - McK1 on 07-11-2009 5:43 PM]

who the heck cares about revenues? this is about building a team that can contend in the future... having capspace to sign free agents in 2010 could be a major key towards achieving that goal.

Posted by McK1:

Posted by TMS:



who the heck cares about revenues? this is about building a team that can contend in the future... having capspace to sign free agents in 2010 could be a major key towards achieving that goal.

my guess would be the people who've invested millions of dollars into the organization. And perhaps Dolan sees Nate as someone who can help NY get back to prominence and didn't want to just give him away.

You can re-sign Nate and Lee and add another mid-tier player or 2 whose star is on the rise/prime to break out and still have room to sign high caliber FA in 010.

Posted by newyorknewyork:

I agree with the fact that Randolph would be able to be had because he produced and the fact that after this past season he would only have 2yrs left. Which is why I didn't think it was smart to have to give up our #6 pick as well to trade him.