I agree except replace Zbo with Curry, since Zbo is clearly the better player of the two.

Curry isn't more conducive to winning that Zach. The Knicks having a chance to win more than 33 games last season isn't exactly a strong testament to Curry's worth.

Posted by Queeniepop:

Paying homage to Enyspree, "correct as usual King Friday."

Ah ha! you liked that one huh

Posted by SlimPack:

Posted by crzymdups:

it used to be the line in the sand that separated knicks fans was larry or isiah. now it's curry or zbo.

zbo does so much more damage to the team than curry. zbo must go. anyone who thinks zbo is a good player, please look at portland for the last two years.

I don't see your point. The Last two seasons Portland won around the same number of games we did with Curry on the team. The number of games a team wins isn't always a good indicator of how good any one player on that team is anyway. If it was, than guys like Paul Pierce would be considered awful since the Celtics were so horrible the last couple of years.

The best argument against Zach Randolph, I think, is to point out how the Trailblazers won only 32 games last year but this year they're on course to win 41. I don't know if it's as simple as saying they're a better team without Randolph though.

Everything should be judged by comparison.
Can you name any starting PF in NBA who is less valuable then Z-Bo an get money even remotely close to this disaster?

...LOL, Enyspree...that was awesome! Here is Queen Saturday (King Friday's better HO):



[Edited by - queeniepop on 04-15-2008 3:44 PM]

Posted by bitty41:

I chuckle at people who still believe that one or two players are the only problems. Also I love how King make Randolph the anti-Christ yet you want the Knick's management to treat David Lee as some kind of franchise player. Umm yea okay. Like I said I could care less whose gone and whose here next year because they all have contributed to this mess.

And yet you don't deny that ZBo is your boyfriend....interesting. King is onto something here.

Posted by Queeniepop:

"GET IN THE TROLLEY, beyotch"

LMAO

Posted by SlimPack:

Posted by crzymdups:

it used to be the line in the sand that separated knicks fans was larry or isiah. now it's curry or zbo.

zbo does so much more damage to the team than curry. zbo must go. anyone who thinks zbo is a good player, please look at portland for the last two years.

I don't see your point. The Last two seasons Portland won around the same number of games we did with Curry on the team. The number of games a team wins isn't always a good indicator of how good any one player on that team is anyway. If it was, than guys like Paul Pierce would be considered awful since the Celtics were so horrible the last couple of years.

The best argument against Zach Randolph, I think, is to point out how the Trailblazers won only 32 games last year but this year they're on course to win 41. I don't know if it's as simple as saying they're a better team without Randolph though.

it's more than just saying a player is bad because the team is bad - it's watching and seeing how they completely disrupt the offense by dribling to death, turn the ball over, force shots, it takes everyone out of the game. add in the fact that zach didn't play any defense... i mean, i'm shocked people are even arguing this.

portland didn't add anyone and subtracted zach and they went from being a stagnant also ran to being extremely respectable - they'd be the 5 seed in the East, instead they miss the playoffs in the brutal West. They won 41 games, but they were playing in a conference that has 8 teams winning 50 and a team winning 48 games missing the playoffs. how many wins would the knicks have if they played 66% of their games out West? 8? 10?

Zach is Whack. Curry is bad, too, but he's doesn't have quite the same negative impact on the entire team becomes he just disappears rather than demand the ball constantly and score inefficiently. Zach is a post player shooting 44% and dribbling the clock out and launching 30ft 3pters when he feels like it. that alone should tell you things are bad with him.

Posted by crzymdups:

[quote]Posted by SlimPack:



it's more than just saying a player is bad because the team is bad - it's watching and seeing how they completely disrupt the offense by dribling to death, turn the ball over, force shots, it takes everyone out of the game. add in the fact that zach didn't play any defense... i mean, i'm shocked people are even arguing this.

portland didn't add anyone and subtracted zach and they went from being a stagnant also ran to being extremely respectable - they'd be the 5 seed in the East, instead they miss the playoffs in the brutal West. They won 41 games, but they were playing in a conference that has 8 teams winning 50 and a team winning 48 games missing the playoffs. how many wins would the knicks have if they played 66% of their games out West? 8? 10?

Zach is Whack. Curry is bad, too, but he's doesn't have quite the same negative impact on the entire team becomes he just disappears rather than demand the ball constantly and score inefficiently. Zach is a post player shooting 44% and dribbling the clock out and launching 30ft 3pters when he feels like it. that alone should tell you things are bad with him.

I see what you're saying, it's just that I think it' easier to teach a player better shot selection, and to pass the ball more than it is to teach a player hard work and dedication.

I honestly would rather keep Curry than Zach, but, Curry will be easier to move.

If we let Marbury, then James, Rose & Jefferies expire, and somehow trade both Crawford AND Curry or Zach, we will be under the cap. If by some minor miracle we move BOTH Curry and Zach then we will have enough to offer a significant deal to one of those big free agents in 2010.

Its a HUGE job, but that has to be Walsh's focus. This year proved that you CAN rebuild in NY. This was the worst team in Knicks history and they still sold out the last 10 games. So if losses dont keep Knick fans away, imagine the box office if the Knick are losing with a purpose.

As it is most Knick fans get excited at the mediocre young talent we have. Imagine if there were some real young stars like Rose or Beasley types.

I know Walsh talked about getting competitive immediately, but, that's insane. Stockpile young players and draft picks. Choose a style and keep your eyes on the prize of 2010. Any deviation would delay the Knicks getting better by years.