Posted by bitty41:

loweycue

Take a deep breath! But I'll go with your suggestion and take a step back. Correct me if im wrong but do we not have a draft pick this summer? Don't Marbs and Malik's contract come off the books in the next 2 seasons? Do we not have the flexibility to move Curry or Lee whereas before if you moved either one of them this summer for guards you would have a major void down low in either scoring or rebounding. If you disagree or if I am wrong about any of the above please correct me.

What you are saying may be true for a team with a lot of cap space and trade value that's NOT US!!! That's what make this a terrible trade, then as now

Look nothing has changed in terms of whose trade value is what on this team. Meaning that Lee as before the Randolph trade has pretty decent trade value and same goes with Curry. Though you will be a 100% correct if they both continue to play poorly their trade value will go down into the toilet. Marbury has absolutely no trade value same as Q, Jerome James, and Jared Jefferies. But you can’t put that on the Zach trade.

We don't need a mismatched set of cave trolls with identical vacant expressions to lose 105-59 while shelling out over a 30 million a year for them. Curry and Zach are conplete misfits and couldn't work together if their lives depended on it.

Guess what I'll let you in on a little secret they aren't the only ones not meshing on this roster. Even more so this isn’t the first year a Knicks roster that hasn’t been meshing. Yea I know shocking but the line-up of Marbs, Crawford, and Q isn't exactly working out great. So maybe just maybe this whole meshing thing could be blamed on coaching and the overall team as opposed to just the Zach Randolph trade. Call me crazy call me a Zachlover but is everything really the guy's fault?


DJ creates this ridiculous thread (but I guess im ridiculous for posting in it LOL) because the Knicks got their asses handed to them but it was everyone from top to bottom not just Zach not just Curry or not just Marbury but everyone got embarrassed by the Celtics. So next time we create threads calling out the "idiots who liked this trade, draft pick, or signing". Then we need about 10 other threads to go along with it.


Idiots who liked the Q trade manup

Idiots who liked the Jamal Crawford signing manup

Idiots who liked the Nate Robinson draft pick manup

Idiots who thought Eddy Curry was an all-star manup

Idiots who thought David Lee should have been 6th man of the year Manup

Idiots who thought Jared Jefferies was going to be the glue manup

Idiots who thought Balkman was a better draft selection then a point guard manup

Idiots who thought Mardy Collins was the next New York Knicks starting point guard manup

Well you get the point.


But you know what Zach's biggest offense that he ever committed was TAKING DAVID LEE' SPOT that in itself; Zach will have to be a damn near MVP before some fans give even think about saying something positive about him.


[Edited by - bitty41 on 12-01-2007 4:21 PM]

Posted by Killa4luv:

Posted by bitty41:

loweycue

Take a deep breath! But I'll go with your suggestion and take a step back. Correct me if im wrong but do we not have a draft pick this summer? Don't Marbs and Malik's contract come off the books in the next 2 seasons? Do we not have the flexibility to move Curry or Lee whereas before if you moved either one of them this summer for guards you would have a major void down low in either scoring or rebounding. If you disagree or if I am wrong about any of the above please correct me.

What you are saying may be true for a team with a lot of cap space and trade value that's NOT US!!! That's what make this a terrible trade, then as now

Look nothing has changed in terms of whose trade value is what on this team. Meaning that Lee as before the Randolph trade has pretty decent trade value and same goes with Curry. Though you will be a 100% correct if they both continue to play poorly their trade value will go down into the toilet. Marbury has absolutely no trade value same as Q, Jerome James, and Jared Jefferies. But you can’t put that on the Zach trade.

We don't need a mismatched set of cave trolls with identical vacant expressions to lose 105-59 while shelling out over a 30 million a year for them. Curry and Zach are conplete misfits and couldn't work together if their lives depended on it.

Guess what I'll let you in on a little secret they aren't the only ones not meshing on this roster. Even more so this isn’t the first year a Knicks roster that hasn’t been meshing. Yea I know shocking but the line-up of Marbs, Crawford, and Q isn't exactly working out great. So maybe just maybe this whole meshing thing could be blamed on coaching and the overall team as opposed to just the Zach Randolph trade. Call me crazy call me a Zachlover but is everything really the guy's fault?


DJ creates this ridiculous thread (but I guess im ridiculous for posting in it LOL) because the Knicks got their asses handed to them but it was everyone from top to bottom not just Zach not just Curry or not just Marbury but everyone got embarrassed by the Celtics. So next time we create threads calling out the "idiots who liked this trade, draft pick, or signing". Then we need about 10 other threads to go along with it.


Idiots who liked the Q trade manup

Idiots who liked the Jamal Crawford signing manup

Idiots who liked the Nate Robinson draft pick manup

Idiots who thought Eddy Curry was an all-star manup

Idiots who thought David Lee should have been 6th man of the year Manup

Idiots who thought Jared Jefferies was going to be the glue manup

Idiots who thought Balkman was a better draft selection then a point guard manup

Idiots who thought Mardy Collins was the next New York Knicks starting point guard manup

Well you get the point.


But you know what Zach's biggest offense that he ever committed was TAKING DAVID LEE' SPOT that in itself; Zach will have to be a damn near MVP before some fans give even think about saying something positive about him.


[Edited by - bitty41 on 12-01-2007 4:21 PM]

bitty, i like your style. very well said and you ended it with the unspoken truth, a broad section of this site has a man crush on David Lee.

Posted by TMS:

Posted by bitty41:


Basically with Zach your getting all the things Curry and Lee did within one guy. People if you didn't realize it THIS IS A GOOD THING NOT A BAD THING. People are kidding themselves if they don't see the value of having a guy down low who can rebound AND score for you in ONE PERSON. Just ask the NJ Nets or the Chicago Bulls what value a low post scorer/rebounder brings to your team. Assuming you put the other appropriate pieces around him.

right, IF we put the right pieces around Zach, then it's a good trade... but Isiah's shown over his tenure here that every move he makes seems to have no rhyme nor reason... he's just sticking pieces together at random to see if the formula will somehow miraculously turn into gold for him... he's got no plan, otherwise he would have had a secondary move in place to trade Curry & Lee to get us a player who can help to take advantage of Zach's skillset & fill the other glaring holes we currently have on this roster... right now, we have no team balance & getting Zach has not improved the team at all... therefore as of now it's been a bad trade.

Appropriate pieces such as Brandon Roy, Jarrett Jack, Greg Oden, Martell Webster yet the Blazers thought it was imperative to trade him instead of keeping him with such pieces. Even with Aldridge in the fold he wasn't near as polished as Zach no matter what you thought his upside was. It's so funny that we acquire all these players that are multifaceted yet we have to tinker with the utmost precision to get other pieces around them to make it work. And I agree once again Zach is our best player but doesn't mean we should even consider for one second trying to get complementary pieces around him.


I'll ask any of you once again why is it players like Curry, Zach, Marbury can't make players like Nate, Lee, Jeffries, Frye etc etc better instead of getting them traded because they end up not fitting their style of game?

[Edited by - TrueBlue on 12-01-2007 9:30 PM]

Posted by TrueBlue:

Posted by TMS:

Posted by bitty41:


Basically with Zach your getting all the things Curry and Lee did within one guy. People if you didn't realize it THIS IS A GOOD THING NOT A BAD THING. People are kidding themselves if they don't see the value of having a guy down low who can rebound AND score for you in ONE PERSON. Just ask the NJ Nets or the Chicago Bulls what value a low post scorer/rebounder brings to your team. Assuming you put the other appropriate pieces around him.

right, IF we put the right pieces around Zach, then it's a good trade... but Isiah's shown over his tenure here that every move he makes seems to have no rhyme nor reason... he's just sticking pieces together at random to see if the formula will somehow miraculously turn into gold for him... he's got no plan, otherwise he would have had a secondary move in place to trade Curry & Lee to get us a player who can help to take advantage of Zach's skillset & fill the other glaring holes we currently have on this roster... right now, we have no team balance & getting Zach has not improved the team at all... therefore as of now it's been a bad trade.

Appropriate pieces such as Brandon Roy, Jarrett Jack, Greg Oden, Martell Webster yet the Blazers thought it was imperative to trade him instead of keeping him with such pieces. Even with Aldridge in the fold he wasn't near as polished as Zach no matter what you thought his upside was. It's so funny that we acquire all these players that are multifaceted yet we have to tinker with the utmost precision to get other pieces around them to make it work. And I agree once again Zach is our best player but doesn't mean we should even consider for one second trying to get complementary pieces around him.


I'll ask any of you once again why is it players like Curry, Zach, Marbury can't make players like Nate, Lee, Jeffries, Frye etc etc better instead of getting them traded because they end up not fitting their style of game?

[Edited by - TrueBlue on 12-01-2007 9:30 PM]

I don't think we can be so sure that Zach can't make players around him better. I don't think you can judge him in 15 games when he is surrounded by a bunch of players that just want to score themselves.

Zach is down a whole 1 apg from last year, which I think you can best explain by the fact that he doesn't trust his teamates to get him the ball back once he passes it out. Zach gets the ball and he shoots the ball. He is playing like a black hole. This is also part of the reason why his fg% is down from last year. He is taking some bad shots. The other reason his fg% is probably down is that he is probably taking more perimeter shots than he did last year because Curry is on the low block. Once you take Curry out of the offense, and you assure him that he is going to get good touches, I think both his apg and his fg% will go up. He has the decision making ability to make good passes, so I see no reason why he can't be a focal point for an offense on a well-assembled team. Furthermore, I think he can be convinced to pass more once the team starts winning more. He seems to really enjoy the game of basketball, and I think he wants to win, he just has never had the pieces around him to be successful.

I think one of the biggest concerns with Zach right now is his character. You can take players with checkered pasts and put them on good teams, and their problems go away. Players like Rasheed Wallace, Randy Moss, and TO are all real good examples of this. However, when you take a player with a checkered past and put him on a disaster of the team, you might have a problem.

This atmoshpere of this team needs to be cleaned up quick.

Posted by Cash:

Posted by TrueBlue:

Posted by TMS:

Posted by bitty41:


Basically with Zach your getting all the things Curry and Lee did within one guy. People if you didn't realize it THIS IS A GOOD THING NOT A BAD THING. People are kidding themselves if they don't see the value of having a guy down low who can rebound AND score for you in ONE PERSON. Just ask the NJ Nets or the Chicago Bulls what value a low post scorer/rebounder brings to your team. Assuming you put the other appropriate pieces around him.

right, IF we put the right pieces around Zach, then it's a good trade... but Isiah's shown over his tenure here that every move he makes seems to have no rhyme nor reason... he's just sticking pieces together at random to see if the formula will somehow miraculously turn into gold for him... he's got no plan, otherwise he would have had a secondary move in place to trade Curry & Lee to get us a player who can help to take advantage of Zach's skillset & fill the other glaring holes we currently have on this roster... right now, we have no team balance & getting Zach has not improved the team at all... therefore as of now it's been a bad trade.

Appropriate pieces such as Brandon Roy, Jarrett Jack, Greg Oden, Martell Webster yet the Blazers thought it was imperative to trade him instead of keeping him with such pieces. Even with Aldridge in the fold he wasn't near as polished as Zach no matter what you thought his upside was. It's so funny that we acquire all these players that are multifaceted yet we have to tinker with the utmost precision to get other pieces around them to make it work. And I agree once again Zach is our best player but doesn't mean we should even consider for one second trying to get complementary pieces around him.


I'll ask any of you once again why is it players like Curry, Zach, Marbury can't make players like Nate, Lee, Jeffries, Frye etc etc better instead of getting them traded because they end up not fitting their style of game?

[Edited by - TrueBlue on 12-01-2007 9:30 PM]

I don't think we can be so sure that Zach can't make players around him better. I don't think you can judge him in 15 games when he is surrounded by a bunch of players that just want to score themselves.

Zach is down a whole 1 apg from last year, which I think you can best explain by the fact that he doesn't trust his teamates to get him the ball back once he passes it out. Zach gets the ball and he shoots the ball. He is playing like a black hole. This is also part of the reason why his fg% is down from last year. He is taking some bad shots. The other reason his fg% is probably down is that he is probably taking more perimeter shots than he did last year because Curry is on the low block. Once you take Curry out of the offense, and you assure him that he is going to get good touches, I think both his apg and his fg% will go up. He has the decision making ability to make good passes, so I see no reason why he can't be a focal point for an offense on a well-assembled team. Furthermore, I think he can be convinced to pass more once the team starts winning more. He seems to really enjoy the game of basketball, and I think he wants to win, he just has never had the pieces around him to be successful.

I think one of the biggest concerns with Zach right now is his character. You can take players with checkered pasts and put them on good teams, and their problems go away. Players like Rasheed Wallace, Randy Moss, and TO are all real good examples of this. However, when you take a player with a checkered past and put him on a disaster of the team, you might have a problem.

This atmoshpere of this team needs to be cleaned up quick.

I agree with this completely and in general this team will do much better if Eddy and Marbs will magically disappear... Even without any replacements.
But magic is only in the fiction books...
The reality is 5-10