The point I have been trumpeting for a while is that the trade management made was a bad one. Zach Randolph is >>>>> than Tim Thomas. With a player like Zach Randolph and teams out there who get desperate down towards the trade deadline or even in the summer we would have been able to get cap space and get young talent. Whether that young talent be a 1st, 2nd year or even a draft pick. Even if you dont trade Zach right away, its ok because in DAntoni's system he would have looked like a stud and we would have won some more games to make this team atleast look like a somewhat forward moving franchise. Then you move him, in a sign and trade or something. But this was absolutely the worst move management could have done. They traded a 20-10 PF for nothing, ruined the development of our young small forwards, and made this team look unattractive to players we could have otherwise pryed away from their teams. That is why the Knick fans that are thinking two steps ahead never liked that deal. The end result will be us picking up the left over free agents and we start the continuous treadmill once more, of being a annual playoff losers. It will be the 90's all over again except without Ewing.

I don't think I could disagree more. First, the expectation around the league is that most trades are going to be cap clearing trades and that a lot of star power will be available for cheap because of the economy and the mounting losses to owners. To the extent that we pulled the trigger on a trade 10 games into the season, we merely locked in our trade. It would have been much riskier to wait and move Randolph. Guys like Vince Carter, Amare Stoudemire, Jermaine O'Neal, Shawn Marion are all being made available at the trade deadline. I don't think that many teams would be lining up for Randolph. Maybe we get more, but we definitely got rid of him, at that's worth something. Second, besides Stephon 'They Scared Now' Marbury, what stars would line up to play next to Zach... I am a Zach proponent and think he got a bad rap, but honestly, he is not a superstar and the team doesn't look more marketable (or have cap space) with him on the team.

As for "ruining the development of our small forwards"-- Tim Thomas is getting like 18 minutes a game, mostly as PF and C... how is that affecting our SFs? Lastly, I for one enjoyed the 90s... we were competitive, went to the Finals twice and were exciting. Nothing in the world is guaranteed, but I would take the 90s over the 80s or 00s any day.

I don't think this team is made of championship caliber players, nor do I think that Zachs 20-10 wins many games. He wasn't worth the money and now he is somebody elses financial concern, and thats fine with me. TT isn't bringing much to the party but thats fine...