Posted by King1:

Rasheed was a great defensive player and Zach is well below average. Why did we give up nothing for such a great player?

No one's denying that.

But Zach is a "great scorer".

Both have been troublemakers and distractions to their teams.

So you're FOS.

Dude no one's disagreeing with you, so wtf?


Zach, Artest, Sheed, Stephen Jackson.

It's all the same crap. None of them are paid franchise money though, and all of them are better individual players than David Lee is.


NEXT...

Zach isnt a great scorer give a lot of guys 20 shots they will score more than Zach he is a selfish scorer. He shoots 45% percent from the field for a big man is gross

Posted by King1:

Bob do you think Zach is a good addition to the knicks and do you think they can win with him.

Would I have thought adding Sheed to the big man-stricken Pistons would've turned out well?


You're looking at the acquisition through ****-colored glasses. Take Zach off, and put him on the Bulls.

Sounds good, right? REAL good...and for cheap.


Talent is talent is talent. It's finding the right place for him. Once Isiah's fired, I look forward to Zach possibly finding a home with the Knicks...


END

[Edited by - bobs3304 on 16-11-2007 12:00 AM]

I think getting Zach was a good move. The problem is all our frontcourt players have the same problem. Average to no defense and no shot-blocking. We can rebound and we can score, but we cannot stop other teams from scoring and we cannot wipe out the mistakes of our guards. That being said, I am fine with our frontcourt. I think Zach, Curry, and Lee could beat out most frontcourts. It is our guards who need to be replaced. You get two better guards than Marbury and Crawford, who play defense and don't turn the ball over as much and can make better post passes, and this team will become a 45+ win team.

Posted by TMS:

Posted by bitty41:

Posted by TMS:

Posted by King1:

You didnt have to give up anything for Zach dont you think that was a clue. Portland saved about 20 million and got rid of a cancer.

hey, but look what we gained King... we got a guy who's gonna help us win 38 games this year... u can't find those growing on trees these days.

Im sorry but even KG's couldn't get his team to .500 with no real supporting cast. Zach never proclaimed himself as the "franchise player" but yet everyone wants to hang that rope around his neck. He's not a franchise player okay we all get that!

well yeah, no kidding... that's sorta the entire point i'm trying to make here... we traded for a non franchise player who's making franchise level dollars once again... when are we finally going to learn our lesson & stop throwing bad money after good for these reclamation projects that never do anything for our team but prolong the salary cap hell this team has been in for the past decade?

Blame the market for Zach's contract because thats the growing rate these days for a 20 and 10 guy. I've said this like a million times on this thread but I'll say it again if godwilling we get a GM with a half a brain along with the removal of Marbury; than you start trying to bring in other pieces to this puzzle. Looking at teams like the Nets and Bulls one major reason why they will never be in serious contention for the EC title is because they lack low post scoring. I much rather see the Knicks keep this one major piece and work from that rather than having no complete pieces.

I think Artest is a village idiot also but I put Zach in the same breath and Artest will play defense.

The last death in Zach family he was at the strip bar on game night skipping out on bills. I dont think Artest or Zach are great for any tema but if I had to pick I take Artest.

I can deal with that but at least pay your bill.