[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Trade with Philadelphia making the rounds?
Author Thread
Vmart
Posts: 31800
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 5/23/2002
Member: #247
USA
6/5/2008  6:55 PM
Zack for Evans and 16th pick is sufficient. Knicks don't need to throw the 6th pick around like it doesn't mean anything. Like it or not Zach is a 20/10 player and fits better for the Sixers system. They need the scoring help so the Sixers should be the ones to give not the Knicks.

With the 16th pick I would pick one of the following players: Speights, McGee or Jason Thompson.
6th pick Mayo, Westbrook or Gordon.

[Edited by - Vmart on 06-05-2008 6:59 PM]
AUTOADVERT
TheGame
Posts: 26652
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/15/2006
Member: #1154
USA
6/5/2008  7:24 PM
A straightup trade of Zach for Evans and a 2nd round pick would be more than enough. Philly had no low post scoring last year. They could really use Zach and they have the defensive players to mask some of his limitations. They are not going to get more than that and I might even be willing to let them keep their first round pick if they give us a second round pick. Trading our 6th pick is just retarded. THere are several players who will be available at that pick that can turn into all-star caliber players.
Trust the Process
sebstar
Posts: 25698
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 6/2/2002
Member: #249
USA
6/5/2008  7:31 PM
There is enough of a talent gap between Randolph and Evans to justify the trade from a Philadelphia perspective. No way we hand them a high lottery pick, in addition to handing them the better talent. Plenty of malcontents have been moved, this is nothing new and we shouldnt cave.
My saliva and spit can split thread into fiber and bits/ So trust me I'm as live as it gets. --Royce Da 5'9 + DJ Premier = Hip Hop Utopia
tkf
Posts: 36487
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 8/13/2001
Member: #87
6/5/2008  8:36 PM
Posted by BRIGGS:
Posted by cooch2584:

WOW!! Has it gotten mental in here?? Has anyone read my posts from this morning?? Philly WANTS ZACH!!! I do that trade Zach for Evans and the 16th pick in a NEW YORK heartbeat. The hell with all the other scenerios. We got the Zach, they want the Zach case closed. Id evendo Zach and the 16th straight up.I dont understand why you guys keep giving away our picks. Didnt it get nasty here when we gave up the picks the last 3 yrs?? Why give them now?? Read my posts above from this morning dudes.

No people want to throw in pick 6 AND Zach for Evans and pick 16. To me this is no different than overpaying for Curry. Curry had no where to go and chicago was offering 20mm to retire--so we go ahead and give them unrestriced picks for a player they werent going to use.

No difference here. We want cap space in 2 years but we want to overpay to do it--you dont do that. What if we took Eric Gordon and he was a 24-5-4 player for example?

exactly briggs. we are selling zach low or as you put it , overpaying for cap space in 2 years.. My question is this and someone asked this on realgm, why not wait until 2010 if you have to move zach and offer a future pick then... he will have one year left on his deal and the team still gets a pick... I just don't get the impatience and sense of desperation here..
Anyone who sits around and waits for the lottery to better themselves, either in real life or in sports, Is a Loser............... TKF
tkf
Posts: 36487
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 8/13/2001
Member: #87
6/5/2008  8:38 PM
Posted by BRIGGS:
Posted by cooch2584:

Briggs I agree. DW should call Philly" You guys want Zach? send us evans and the 16th pick and hes yours" But In DW'S mind he should be ready come down and negotiate Zach for the 16 pick and walk away from the table with the 16th pick. Who on this board, in their right mind ,would argue that if he got the 16th pick for Zach would be a bad deal??

I dont even need pick 16[although i would ask for it to see if they would bend] evans for randolph--there u go straight up.


exactly, I would even ask for a pick in 2010 top 2 protected...
Anyone who sits around and waits for the lottery to better themselves, either in real life or in sports, Is a Loser............... TKF
tkf
Posts: 36487
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 8/13/2001
Member: #87
6/5/2008  8:40 PM
Posted by BRIGGS:
Posted by Cosmic:
Posted by joec32033:

Absolutely no ****ing way. I am totally against crap trades like this one. Randolph is a 20/10 player. Evans is a 5/8 player if that.

Philly wants Zach I want Evans and the 16. Our pick os off limits. I don't.know how people get behind something like this! We have 2 ****ing years before we actually have to get rid of his contract. Geezus Christmas!

Please don't fall in love with Randolph's box scores. The guy is enemy #1 to chemistry. He is a horrible TEAM player. HORRIBLE. He is so destructive to anything going on be it on the court or in the locker room.

If you could right now reverse the Randolph trade, bring back Frye and buy out Francis, start Lee and bring Frye off the bench - we'd be an undoubtedly improved team. If we had that and no court drama (which led to Marbury and Isiah feuding) there was a very good chance we made the playoffs last season.

The guy is just terrible. He's got to go. I'd even trade him and the #6 to Cleveland for the #19 and Wally(cap space) or add in Jeffries and bring back the #19 and Wallace(again, cap space).

Thi is the type of panic mentality that has devestated the Knicks. We trade and then we must trade again to correct. Here let me give up pick 6 and two future lottery picks so you can give me reggie evans and pick 48--Zach randolph is the anti christ. I hope these guys have calm heads. If we get FA in 2010 great if not it sitting on a platter in 2011. I don't need to throw away high lottery picks just to remove a player---boy why do I even have to listen to this idiocy--this is why i wish we won the lottery so there would be no thinking about it---but then you would still ahve someone sya beasley scks zach blah blah blah. Make a good pick at 6 lets start there. No trading from a point of weakness. Sck it up son.

again briggs, you are on point.. we need to start dealing from a position of strength, this should be the dawn of a new era, walsh, D'antoni, we need to start acting that way.. this type of move is a Isiah thomas move, all the way!!
Anyone who sits around and waits for the lottery to better themselves, either in real life or in sports, Is a Loser............... TKF
majorleads
Posts: 20536
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/29/2006
Member: #1213

6/5/2008  9:33 PM
Briggs is clueless.

He talks about keeping the sixth pick and then mentions these players... Mayo, Westbrook, Bayless, Gordon, Randolph, Alexander, and Lopez. Huh? There isn't a sure thing in that bunch and most of them are "combo guards" which we DO NOT NEED. Randolph, Alexander, Lopez? Yeah ok, wake me up in 5 years when they are just starting to put up decent numbers.

You need really good to great players if you're going to win in this league and the only way we have an excellent shot at getting one is to be under the cap in 2010 and then in 2011. There are a TON of really good/great players who will be free agents then. And we need to stink it up this season and try to land a top 2 pick next summer.

Not only do we dump Zach in this trade, next up is Curry then Crawful. You don't just move Zach, you have to unload the entire stinking bunch and get way under the cap. Plus Evans is a nice piece to either keep or trade away for a draft pick to get further under the cap.

Now Briggs if you were to tell me there is a DIFFERENCE MAKER at the 6th pick, then yeah I would think twice about this deal, but come on, there is no sure thing and we certainly do not need one of those "combo guards" who can't run the most important position on the court, which is point guard.

And if we wanted to, we could always trade back up a few spots. It seems like there is a lot of talk this season of teams wanted to unload their top picks to move down because they believe the talent difference in the first half of the draft isn't all that much different from the second half.
http://majorleads.blogspot.com
majorleads
Posts: 20536
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/29/2006
Member: #1213

6/5/2008  9:42 PM
And another thing, do you guys realize how difficult it is to unload Zach Randolph? You have to literally bribe some team to take him off our hands. Philly is getting hosed in this deal because Zach will steer their ship right into a big fat iceberg for the next 3 seasons. I can't believe Philly is dumb enough to not only take on Zach but also give us Evans AND the 16th pick!!! Holy shyt!!!! We're RIPPING THEM off!!!!
http://majorleads.blogspot.com
majorleads
Posts: 20536
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/29/2006
Member: #1213

6/5/2008  9:49 PM
Wait, I'm back...if Walsh makes this trade, there is a player or 2 that he and D'Antoni are very high on at 16. That clown from Syracuse might be there at 16. Or what about C.Douglass Roberts, that guy was pretty damn good in the NCAA tournament. McGee, Batum, Jordan could be there too. Just please dear God NO MORE F!UCKING COMBO GUARDS!!!!!!!!!! I HATE them!!!!!!!!!!
http://majorleads.blogspot.com
MaTT4281
Posts: 35185
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #538
USA
6/5/2008  10:16 PM
I don't want that Zach trade to go down, but I can certainly see the benefits of unloading his contract. We're set to rebuild and the man is certainly not an influence I want around any potential picks we can acquire, not to mention he's set to make around $38 over the next 3 years.

I agree though that Zach/#6 for Evans/#16 is severely overpaying for the salary dump. If Philly truly wants Zach, there should be no need to include #6, even if you have to take out Philly's pick, fine. Replace #6 with Balkman and I'd give some consideration to it.
tkf
Posts: 36487
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 8/13/2001
Member: #87
6/5/2008  11:40 PM
Posted by majorleads:

Briggs is clueless.

He talks about keeping the sixth pick and then mentions these players... Mayo, Westbrook, Bayless, Gordon, Randolph, Alexander, and Lopez. Huh? There isn't a sure thing in that bunch and most of them are "combo guards" which we DO NOT NEED. Randolph, Alexander, Lopez? Yeah ok, wake me up in 5 years when they are just starting to put up decent numbers.

You need really good to great players if you're going to win in this league and the only way we have an excellent shot at getting one is to be under the cap in 2010 and then in 2011. There are a TON of really good/great players who will be free agents then. And we need to stink it up this season and try to land a top 2 pick next summer.

Not only do we dump Zach in this trade, next up is Curry then Crawful. You don't just move Zach, you have to unload the entire stinking bunch and get way under the cap. Plus Evans is a nice piece to either keep or trade away for a draft pick to get further under the cap.

Now Briggs if you were to tell me there is a DIFFERENCE MAKER at the 6th pick, then yeah I would think twice about this deal, but come on, there is no sure thing and we certainly do not need one of those "combo guards" who can't run the most important position on the court, which is point guard.

And if we wanted to, we could always trade back up a few spots. It seems like there is a lot of talk this season of teams wanted to unload their top picks to move down because they believe the talent difference in the first half of the draft isn't all that much different from the second half.



major there are no guarantees, just like there is no guarantee that lebron, chris paul or bosh will leave their teams and more money on the table to come to the knicks.... So why not explore other options of getting rid of zach, one that doesn't require us to bend over and give up the #6 pick in the draft....
Anyone who sits around and waits for the lottery to better themselves, either in real life or in sports, Is a Loser............... TKF
TrueBlue
Posts: 29144
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 9/20/2006
Member: #1172

6/6/2008  12:00 AM
Posted by tkf:
Posted by BRIGGS:
Posted by cooch2584:

WOW!! Has it gotten mental in here?? Has anyone read my posts from this morning?? Philly WANTS ZACH!!! I do that trade Zach for Evans and the 16th pick in a NEW YORK heartbeat. The hell with all the other scenerios. We got the Zach, they want the Zach case closed. Id evendo Zach and the 16th straight up.I dont understand why you guys keep giving away our picks. Didnt it get nasty here when we gave up the picks the last 3 yrs?? Why give them now?? Read my posts above from this morning dudes.

No people want to throw in pick 6 AND Zach for Evans and pick 16. To me this is no different than overpaying for Curry. Curry had no where to go and chicago was offering 20mm to retire--so we go ahead and give them unrestriced picks for a player they werent going to use.

No difference here. We want cap space in 2 years but we want to overpay to do it--you dont do that. What if we took Eric Gordon and he was a 24-5-4 player for example?

exactly briggs. we are selling zach low or as you put it , overpaying for cap space in 2 years.. My question is this and someone asked this on realgm, why not wait until 2010 if you have to move zach and offer a future pick then... he will have one year left on his deal and the team still gets a pick... I just don't get the impatience and sense of desperation here..

In 2010 our unprotected pick goes to Utah and you can't trade #1 picks in consecutive yrs. So 2011 would have to be skipped and I doubt a team would do that for Zach Randolph.
LMFAO @ the Bio [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephon_Marbury[/url]
tkf
Posts: 36487
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 8/13/2001
Member: #87
6/6/2008  12:26 AM
Posted by TrueBlue:
Posted by tkf:
Posted by BRIGGS:
Posted by cooch2584:

WOW!! Has it gotten mental in here?? Has anyone read my posts from this morning?? Philly WANTS ZACH!!! I do that trade Zach for Evans and the 16th pick in a NEW YORK heartbeat. The hell with all the other scenerios. We got the Zach, they want the Zach case closed. Id evendo Zach and the 16th straight up.I dont understand why you guys keep giving away our picks. Didnt it get nasty here when we gave up the picks the last 3 yrs?? Why give them now?? Read my posts above from this morning dudes.

No people want to throw in pick 6 AND Zach for Evans and pick 16. To me this is no different than overpaying for Curry. Curry had no where to go and chicago was offering 20mm to retire--so we go ahead and give them unrestriced picks for a player they werent going to use.

No difference here. We want cap space in 2 years but we want to overpay to do it--you dont do that. What if we took Eric Gordon and he was a 24-5-4 player for example?

exactly briggs. we are selling zach low or as you put it , overpaying for cap space in 2 years.. My question is this and someone asked this on realgm, why not wait until 2010 if you have to move zach and offer a future pick then... he will have one year left on his deal and the team still gets a pick... I just don't get the impatience and sense of desperation here..

In 2010 our unprotected pick goes to Utah and you can't trade #1 picks in consecutive yrs. So 2011 would have to be skipped and I doubt a team would do that for Zach Randolph.


well what I mean is you can make the pick for that team and then trade the rights to the pick...
Anyone who sits around and waits for the lottery to better themselves, either in real life or in sports, Is a Loser............... TKF
martin
Posts: 80099
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
6/6/2008  12:35 AM
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by BRIGGS:
Posted by BRIGGS:
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by BRIGGS:
Posted by MS:

I just don't know the logic here. Zach goes 14mil 17mil 18mil that two very good players and one superstar. They wouldn't do the deal when they can get elton brand. Who is going to take zach, who?

We need to get rid of Crawford, Curry, and Zach with anything it doesn't matter

Here it is in simple math


players under contract for 2010

Curry 11.3
jamal C 10 unless he opts out which i doubt
jefferies 7mm
Chandler 2mm
zach 17
----5 players=47mm without resigning Lee Nate and 7 OTHER players

you take out Zach and add Evans

you are at 35mm with 5 players without resigning Lee nate and 7 other players

the ONLY way to stay below the cap is give lee and nate away for nothing or a draft pick

so how enticing will this team be to FA when the roster is blank--we have NO one--NO TOP TIER FA is going to accept a 100% rebuild--name 1 who has? Kobe wanted to quit the Lakers and they were pretty stacked we would have no one in this secnario and that iusnt happening. They have to be real about it
You have to follow this up by getting rid of Jamal and Eddy, which I do think you can do. Then you're at $26 mil.

OK what is your core team that you are selling to the FA?

Yes hard to answer when you stop and think. If we use all of our assets to purge the roster--we have no roster and NO FA is coming to a no talent roster.
I didn't reply within 10 minutes. So you concluded that the question was too hard to answer. Okay, let me try one. How's your plan of building around Eddy as a 24/8 player working?
Hard to answer, isn't it?

SNITTER!
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
TrueBlue
Posts: 29144
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 9/20/2006
Member: #1172

6/6/2008  12:43 AM
Discussion continued I still like the trade but I think we should look to expand it if at all possible.
LMFAO @ the Bio [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephon_Marbury[/url]
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
6/6/2008  12:48 AM
i make this trade in an eyeblink... it helps our franchise in unmeasurable ways, namely getting rid of a poisonous loser that has brought this franchise to even lower heights than before he got here (as if that was even possible)... also gets rid of his cap killing contract, adds a very solid role player off the bench that will bring some much needed toughness down low, & also we still get a mid 1st round pick for Walsh to play with... i don't see any downsides to this whatsoever.

gimme a break w/this talk about what core of players we'll have left to offer a bigname FA... no bigname FA can even come here to begin with as long as Zach's contract is on the books, so that's not even an applicable point in this discussion.

a #6 pick has no guarantees of ever panning out anyway, especially in a 2-3 man deep draft like this year... if Walsh feels there's value at the lower picks enough to make this deal i have a hard time being opposed to it.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
6/6/2008  1:33 AM
if u make this trade & pull of a Marbury for JO & #11 deal u got urself a more balanced team than last year along w/2 mid 1st round picks to rebuild with... that's much better than what we have now.

C - Curry / Evans / Turd
PF - O'Neal / Lee / Malik / Jefferies
SF - Chandler / #11 pick (Alexander or Gallinari) / Balkman
SG - Jamal / Q Rich
PG - Nate / #16 pick (Augustine) / Mardy
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
majorleads
Posts: 20536
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/29/2006
Member: #1213

6/6/2008  2:07 AM
Posted by TMS:

i make this trade in an eyeblink... it helps our franchise in unmeasurable ways, namely getting rid of a poisonous loser that has brought this franchise to even lower heights than before he got here (as if that was even possible)... also gets rid of his cap killing contract, adds a very solid role player off the bench that will bring some much needed toughness down low, & also we still get a mid 1st round pick for Walsh to play with... i don't see any downsides to this whatsoever.

gimme a break w/this talk about what core of players we'll have left to offer a bigname FA... no bigname FA can even come here to begin with as long as Zach's contract is on the books, so that's not even an applicable point in this discussion.

a #6 pick has no guarantees of ever panning out anyway, especially in a 2-3 man deep draft like this year... if Walsh feels there's value at the lower picks enough to make this deal i have a hard time being opposed to it.

Of course you make this trade. I find it unbelievably amazing that people think there is a better Zach Randolph deal out there. The truth is, THIS IS the best trade and one I make in a millisecond. Don't even care about the sixth pick if it's not Derek Rose. We're ripping Philadelphia off with this deal.

This is the kind of trade Isiah should have been making the past 2 seasons. We need to unload before we reload. Any team that trades for Zach Randolph and that contract must be on crack. And I love Evans. Much better teammate, hard worker and he doesn't have a bad contract. In other words, VALUE=CONTRACT. This is how you build an NBA team so when you do need to make trades, you can get comparable value back that better fits the team you are trying to build. Our entire roster needs to be VALUE=CONTRACT.
http://majorleads.blogspot.com
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
6/6/2008  2:26 AM
i can understand the reluctance to give up a #6 pick but to point to that lame FA defense is seriously desperately reaching at straws... to think this trade hurts our longterm chances of luring a bigname FA to NY is ridiculous... if anything it helps our chances bigtime.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
rain
Posts: 20762
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/13/2002
Member: #353
USA
6/6/2008  2:41 AM
Do people here actually think Randolph has ANY value? His contract is really bad, and playing in NY has magnified (by the huge media market) the huge holes in his game. I'd be surprised if Philly was willing to take him, to be honest.

Right now, he has zero value. Under D'Antoni he might resurrect his image.. but I don't count on it. Getting him out, may help pave the way for Lebron.

Trade with Philadelphia making the rounds?

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy