I used my "search feature" to see what people thought around the time the trade went down. The trade happened in November 2008. If you go to:
http://www.ultimateknicks.com/forum/forum.asp?f=2&page=161

(and/or the pages immediately surrounding it) you can find posts contemporaneous with this event. This was also around the time that D'Antoni and Walsh were busy discrediting Marbury, and Islefan made a brief return to UK.

I didn't find a lot of immediate oohah quotes, but I did find this one regarding the trade:

http://www.ultimateknicks.com/forum/topic.asp?t=28977&page=3

oohah wrote:
Randolph is a machine, he should be fine.

On the record: I don't want any part of Tim Thomas and Mobley trade. Randolph is playing his ass off. We can get a good player for him. For me it is not just about dumping salary it is about obtaining assets that have value which will in turn contribute to the team and/or provide us with options and flexibility for future trades etc.

Patience is a virtue.

oohah

Incidentally, a google search works if you do something like : site:ultimateknicks.com zach randolph trade but the results don't go back very far at all. I guess google only indexes the most recent stuff.

Cosmic wrote:
Don't worry guys. We can sign them all to the max in 2011 and let the 28 win seasons roll in. Then just fire coach after coach when they do so.

It just never ends with this pathetic franchise...

Papabear wrote:

Childs2Dudley wrote:Why? Why are people longing for the days of Zach Randolph and Jamal Crawford? I don't car what they're doing now. They sucked here and this team was going nowhere with these guys as the main pieces. David Lee and Zach Randolph would also be the worst defensive front line in the league.

No, we wouldn't be better then where we are now. We haven't had cap space in 14 years. Sometimes you have to come to grips with your situation and change the status quo. The Knicks are changing the starphuck status quo.

Papabear Says
What makes you think the team will be better. Do you really think that James or Bosh would come to this mess?

That's what we're waiting to find out.

BasketballJones wrote:Ah, Zach Randolph and Crawford! Those were the days!

Papabear Says
No! now is the good ol days and we have nothing and we are day dreaming about 2010 in which we get nothing and probably not even David Lee.

Cosmic wrote:It simply amazes me the number of people who are pining for the return of Zach, Crawford, Hill, Nate, and Jeffries.

May I remind those people: These players led us nowhere but to 23 and 33 win seasons.

They were never leading us anywhere different.

It's good Zach plays well for Memphis and Crawford for Atlanta but they didn't put up wins here as our top 2 players. With their contracts we couldn't build a team around either. So they had to go. They also aren't as good as everyone is now salivating over.

You didn't see enough to understand those five guys weren't winners?

I guess not.

Don't worry guys. We can sign them all to the max in 2011 and let the 28 win seasons roll in. Then just fire coach after coach when they do so.

You're still lumping Randolph and Crawford trades together.

The Crawford trade was fine. The Knicks dumped salary and got a player who was as good or better.

Randolph trade was not good. A team needs to maintain respectability to attract top talent.

Cosmic you seem so sure that the Knicks did the right thing with all these moves. what happens if it all blows up in their face? What if this all results in a bad or mediocre team that is capped out and has traded most of its first rounders? What is your take then?

oohah

oohah wrote:

Cosmic wrote:It simply amazes me the number of people who are pining for the return of Zach, Crawford, Hill, Nate, and Jeffries.

May I remind those people: These players led us nowhere but to 23 and 33 win seasons.

They were never leading us anywhere different.

It's good Zach plays well for Memphis and Crawford for Atlanta but they didn't put up wins here as our top 2 players. With their contracts we couldn't build a team around either. So they had to go. They also aren't as good as everyone is now salivating over.

You didn't see enough to understand those five guys weren't winners?

I guess not.

Don't worry guys. We can sign them all to the max in 2011 and let the 28 win seasons roll in. Then just fire coach after coach when they do so.

You're still lumping Randolph and Crawford trades together.

The Crawford trade was fine. The Knicks dumped salary and got a player who was as good or better.

Randolph trade was not good. A team needs to maintain respectability to attract top talent.

Cosmic you seem so sure that the Knicks did the right thing with all these moves. what happens if it all blows up in their face? What if this all results in a mediocre team? What is your take then?

oohah

I doubt he'll admit that these were the wrong moves no matter the outcomes he just strikes me as the type that is always right

nixluva wrote:Funny thing is we're the team that gave Zach his mojo back!

Randolph never lost his Mojo. He has always been the same player. He simply put up slightly lower numbers because of Isiah Thomas' fascination with Eddie Curry. As soon as Randolph was the low-post presence, he was back to putting up huge games just like he always did.

Funny thing was how last season all the dudes on this board were whining about how Randolph was stealing the great David Lee's stats. Basketball Jones: Use your search feature and back me up.

oohah

oohah wrote:

Cosmic wrote:It simply amazes me the number of people who are pining for the return of Zach, Crawford, Hill, Nate, and Jeffries.

May I remind those people: These players led us nowhere but to 23 and 33 win seasons.

They were never leading us anywhere different.

It's good Zach plays well for Memphis and Crawford for Atlanta but they didn't put up wins here as our top 2 players. With their contracts we couldn't build a team around either. So they had to go. They also aren't as good as everyone is now salivating over.

You didn't see enough to understand those five guys weren't winners?

I guess not.

Don't worry guys. We can sign them all to the max in 2011 and let the 28 win seasons roll in. Then just fire coach after coach when they do so.

You're still lumping Randolph and Crawford trades together.

The Crawford trade was fine. The Knicks dumped salary and got a player who was as good or better.

Randolph trade was not good. A team needs to maintain respectability to attract top talent.

Cosmic you seem so sure that the Knicks did the right thing with all these moves. what happens if it all blows up in their face? What if this all results in a bad or mediocre team that is capped out and has traded most of its first rounders? What is your take then?

oohah

Here is my thinking. What we had already blew up in our faces and had to be dumped. What we had was going nowhere good. What we had could not be fixed by a trade or an addition. So what we had was already a certified failure and it was time to try something new.

If that something new doesn't work then so be it but you don't pine for the days of the certified failure we dumped even if the new tactic failed.

One other thing, we know Isiah's roster failed. We have facts. We don't know what the new plan is going to do. It hasn't happened yet.

bitty41 wrote:

TMS wrote:trading Zach & Jamal for cap flexibility was not a mistake... we didn't have to dump future assets to get rid of their contracts... we got expiring deals to clear $28 million dollars off our cap in 2010, a pure salary dump maneuver that plenty of NBA teams do to clear payroll... this was a good maneuver by Donnie Walsh... the concerning trade is giving up future draft picks & a young player we put a lot of faith in as a lottery pick just to clear $10 million off the cap this summer... when you compare the tradeoffs in terms of cap space cleared, u got much more value in the Zach & Jamal trades than you did with the Fishlips trade simply because you did not have to unload any future assets in the process.

How can you say it's not a mistake? The Knicks haven't signed anyone yet and we don't know what will happen this summer. Because if the Knicks are left with Joe Johnson/Amare Stoudamire paying them roughly 17 to 15 million dollars for the next 5 years Walsh will have major egg on his face and it will be a mistake.

Yup, if we don't get LeBron, all bets are off. He is what everything was about. However, I agree with TMS because those were the right trades to do. We weren't a serious team with Jamal and Zach and we weren't going to become one, so dumping them to have at least a shot at LeBron is a no brainer. You still have plan B and C, which are to sign other players and still have picks AND have capspace for the next year. B and C doesn't work now that we gave up those picks.

Allanfan20 wrote:

bitty41 wrote:

TMS wrote:trading Zach & Jamal for cap flexibility was not a mistake... we didn't have to dump future assets to get rid of their contracts... we got expiring deals to clear $28 million dollars off our cap in 2010, a pure salary dump maneuver that plenty of NBA teams do to clear payroll... this was a good maneuver by Donnie Walsh... the concerning trade is giving up future draft picks & a young player we put a lot of faith in as a lottery pick just to clear $10 million off the cap this summer... when you compare the tradeoffs in terms of cap space cleared, u got much more value in the Zach & Jamal trades than you did with the Fishlips trade simply because you did not have to unload any future assets in the process.

How can you say it's not a mistake? The Knicks haven't signed anyone yet and we don't know what will happen this summer. Because if the Knicks are left with Joe Johnson/Amare Stoudamire paying them roughly 17 to 15 million dollars for the next 5 years Walsh will have major egg on his face and it will be a mistake.

Yup, if we don't get LeBron, all bets are off. He is what everything was about. However, I agree with TMS because those were the right trades to do. We weren't a serious team with Jamal and Zach and we weren't going to become one, so dumping them to have at least a shot at LeBron is a no brainer. You still have plan B and C, which are to sign other players and still have picks AND have capspace for the next year. B and C doesn't work now that we gave up those picks.

But why not trade one of them and clear space for one free-agent? But this has become overkill and Walsh has really backed this organization into a corner with these moves. If this thing doesn't work out this summer it could become Isiah all over again with no first round draft picks.

bitty41 wrote:

Allanfan20 wrote:

bitty41 wrote:

TMS wrote:trading Zach & Jamal for cap flexibility was not a mistake... we didn't have to dump future assets to get rid of their contracts... we got expiring deals to clear $28 million dollars off our cap in 2010, a pure salary dump maneuver that plenty of NBA teams do to clear payroll... this was a good maneuver by Donnie Walsh... the concerning trade is giving up future draft picks & a young player we put a lot of faith in as a lottery pick just to clear $10 million off the cap this summer... when you compare the tradeoffs in terms of cap space cleared, u got much more value in the Zach & Jamal trades than you did with the Fishlips trade simply because you did not have to unload any future assets in the process.

How can you say it's not a mistake? The Knicks haven't signed anyone yet and we don't know what will happen this summer. Because if the Knicks are left with Joe Johnson/Amare Stoudamire paying them roughly 17 to 15 million dollars for the next 5 years Walsh will have major egg on his face and it will be a mistake.

Yup, if we don't get LeBron, all bets are off. He is what everything was about. However, I agree with TMS because those were the right trades to do. We weren't a serious team with Jamal and Zach and we weren't going to become one, so dumping them to have at least a shot at LeBron is a no brainer. You still have plan B and C, which are to sign other players and still have picks AND have capspace for the next year. B and C doesn't work now that we gave up those picks.

But why not trade one of them and clear space for one free-agent? But this has become overkill and Walsh has really backed this organization into a corner with these moves. If this thing doesn't work out this summer it could become Isiah all over again with no first round draft picks.

it's not a mistake because we didn't give up any future assets to get those contracts off our books... neither of them were taking us anywhere, it was proven already... we had to move in a different direction... trading a rookie prospect we drafted in the lottery along w/a future 1st round pick & swap rights to another is the move that can be questioned, because you're investing future assets into a plan you don't even know has a chance to succeed or not... if u fail on landing the big names this offseason you can't justify giving up future assets to dump cap, but u can easily justify unloading 2 players that weren't helping us get anywhere & had no future here because those players can easily be replaced by secondary & third tier FA signings this summer.