Before trading for Zach (and after for that matter) some of our weak that needed major upgrades were:

Peremiter shooting (SF or SG)
Interior defense (PF or back up center)
another scoring option on the front line (PF)
Perimeter defender (guarding the 3-point line)


Looking at our team last year, most on this board talked about a need for a perimeter shooter and another defender in the paint. But one position that was very inconsistant for us last year was the PF position. Not only did that position struggle defensively, but it struggled offensively. It was so bad, Malik Rose was getting major minutes down the stretch of the season. The addition of Zach upgrades a major weak position for us. And with Lee backing him up, its that much stronger.

In terms of the perimeter defender, I agree its still lacking. But who/where is this defender that we missed out on? Sean Williams was off the board by the time we picked. I know Camby is out there now, but he's a center foremost, and second, Dolan already shipped him out. Doubt he wants him back. And at what price can we get him?

As far as perimter shooting is concerned, who exactly did we miss out on? Morris Almond? It can be argued that Nichols is just as good a shooter and he did it against better competition. Kapono? Carroll? These guys can shoot, but are one dimensional. Don't we have too many one dimensional players as is?

I have my own reservations about the Zach trade. But to get him for what was thought to be an unmovable contract in Francis, and Frye, a player whose trade value dwindled after a lackluster Soph season and could have risked having no value at all if his game continued to decline is notr a bad move by any stretch.

4 years & $61 million dollars & taking ourselves out of any possible run at bigname FA's in 2009 for Zach Randolph... was it worth it? not in my eyes, but judging the trade by itself i understand why you like it... the Knicks definitely got the better end of the deal talent wise... the problem i have & others have is how this trade effects the overall big picture of putting together a championship contender.

We were also short of sex offenders. Don't forget that.

Posted by BasketballJones:

We were also short of sex offenders. Don't forget that.

This is an excellent point and the main reason why Isiah made the trade. We are no longer short in this area.

I think our emerging young players will eventually fill the voids defensively and for perimeter shooting. As for the starting PF, we at least solved that issue. Help at Interior defense is still up in the air. i hope we can get something out of Morris down the line. Very few teams have it all covered. I'm not gonna panic cuz we couldn't get everything we wanted just yet.

With so many players on the roster it would seem that Isiah will be looking to make some kind of move to trim this down and consolidate the roster thru a trade. We'll see what happens. We still have time to address our other issues. In the meantime tho we can see what we already have with some of the young players. Give them a shot and see what they can do. If we still can't fill our needs then we know what to do.

I agree they are better, but I think we still have the same holes and strengthened where we were already pretty good.

Posted by Anji:

You swap out Marbury with about 15 other starting point guards in the league and the knicks are Fine. That's a area of need, and until we drop the loser or add a player to another spot that brings leadership, running a halfcourt, being a go to scorer, being a two way player..... the knicks will lose.


Zach isn't that player. And I would go as far to say he is the "Marbury" of Power Forwards in the league.

"I thought I took one step, I took two back
I'm not even close this time and that's a fact"




[Edited by - anji on 07-01-2007 11:30 PM]

I don't think Marbury was the issue last season.