what Cosmic said

Having post partum feelings for Zach Randolph is similar to retrofitting Marbury (who?) back into this newly spirited, united, band of brothers and claiming he would make it a better team.

briggs - a lot of things look good on paper (or on the monitor) or on trade checker or on (cough) "Real GM" ... but I regret to inform you -

the games are not played on paper

Zach Randolph and Al Harrington are the same players to me. Volume shooters/ they both go nut!

Gotta say though Harrington stretches the floor a bit more for us, which allows for better spacing cause he has a natural stroke from the 3. He is definitely alot quicker, and has decent instincts as a help defender.

The problem is, and we'll soon find out is that there isn't a shot on the floor that he won't attempt to make regardless of if he is playing 1 on 5. lol

If he plays under control though, I'd keep him beyond 2010.

***As for the topic of this thread, I doubt that there would be much success. ZBo and Harrington make for Curry/Randolph all over again IMO. We should have pushed LA Clippers harder on acquiring either Eric Gordon or DeAndre Jordan in the trade. I know Donnie was said to have inquired about Gordon's availability.. but nada on DeAndre Jordan, he gets no burn in LA and would certainly play here. He's raw, has limited offense.. but can run up and down, finish on the break and block shots. Sounds like a D'Antoni/Knick fit to me? We should revisit the idea on Monday Dec 15th!

[Edited by - JayNYC on 12-14-2008 10:25 AM]

The Answer Man Can't Tell You Why Fools Fall In Love Either

Q. briggs - why have the Clippers started winning when they were consistently blown out?

A. Dude, the trade is barely 10 games old. If the Clippers want to impress someone, make the second round of the playoffs. Are you really watching the Clippers?

Their unis are ugly.

sure... we could certainly be a 45 win team, possibly even win a playoff series. I thought we wanted to rebuild though and have a shot at a star in a year and a half.

Yeah, I don't know how you don't consider the effects of Zach's contract on our future flexibility. We'd be stagnated at this current level of progress with Zach around. The primary objective of the trade was moving his talent, not the talent coming back. Had Mobley been healthy it might've made a difference in closing that gap, but that wasn't the case.

That being said, not having Zach's presence has really opened things up for both Harrington and Lee and I'm not sure his presence would've made us much better. Clearly he's a better player than Tim Thomas, but the marginal difference on the team I don't think would've been as significant as the difference between those 2 players suggests.

Posted by BRIGGS:

and just got Harrington--we might be one heckuva out to deal with

C-Lee
F Randolph
F Harrington
G Chandler
G Duhon
F Jefferies
G Nate
G Q

I hear you on Zach trade but time to move - the team is playing better and our future is brighter. I doubt either Harrington or Lee would be playing like this with Zach here and TT has done a decent job off the bench.

Also don't forget we just might squeeze a $4.5M disabled player option out of Mobley's situation and potentially pick up a nice combo guard.

Team is playing great - to me that says trade was probably best and from Walsh's perspective he felt he better getter done before something whacko happened.

Briggs I usally agree with you but having Jamal and Zach gone are great for this team. Not with Quentin not playing things are even better. Al stretches the floor so David and Duhon can pick and roll. The team is playing unselfish and they are enjoying each other. If you put Lebron with this team right now they would be better than Cleveland. I say you try and sign one max and get an shooter in the draft and interior defender with the money left over.

why does everyone keep bringing up curry?

Posted by BRIGGS:

Posted by Knicksfansince94:

True, on the surface it might appear appealing, but if ZBo was still here DLee would have still been buried behind him, putting up numbers nowhere near what he is giving us now. Overall, good deal. It was someone on this site, I think, that called ZBo a blackhole.

On that note, getting rid of ZBo maximized DLee's trade potential. So that has to be taken into account as well. I think the benefits of getting rid of ZBo outweigh any benefits from him staying with just the Craw trade.

[Edited by - knicksfansince94 on 12-14-2008 1:05 PM]

There is a win loss scenario here. Great David Lee is playing better--playing to his potential but am I the only one here who fears that Al and Lee are playing to good and pricing themselves out of being a Knick player for the future?

This might not sound popular but I almost say blah to the *possibility* of Lebron James and win now--who knows what will happen in two years--thats kind of why I brought this up. Granted I understand that Lee and Harrington's numbers would not be as good with Zach--but I really think Zach has proven this year with the Knicks and now the Clippers that he can play a nice team game.

Would the addition of Jefferies and maybe in the next two months Galinari and Curry along with one trade with the exemption---maybe we can go for it now? Who knows what happens in the playoffs. If we can win I want to win.

you answered your own question. We are seeing Lee, Duhon and Chandler get better on a nightly basis and thats been made possible by the minutes and shots freed up with Craw/Zach being gone.

I am enjoying watching Lee get better. He's really a good player and his passing is really a big part of this teams success and offense.

And we dont have to just dump these guys... if they really are that good we resign them and then use the remaining cap space to add one guy. Obviously we hope its Lebron or Wade.. a guy that puts you in the next category. Point is be getting rid of Crawford/Zach we at least have the option.

We need to move Eddy and JJ next. Somehow someway.