Now were stuck with Randolph

Post #41 » by **vinnie_vegas69** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 3:51 am

Uh... One question that has yet to be asked...

Why does this rule out the trade for Randolph? The Clippers STILL have enough cap space to absorb most of Randolph's contract after signing Baron and trading for Camby.

They were $30 million under the cap without those two moves, which means that with Baron's starting salary of $11.5 million, and Camby's $8 million, they only have to trade us a small amount of salary to fit Randolph's contract in as well - Tim Thomas' contract would work well.

And before anyone suggests that Tim Thomas wouldn't be wanted back, remember that he played under D'Antoni in Phoenix, and Donnie Walsh would have nothing against him. Plus, his contract expires in 2010.

Also, I'd doubt that Donnie has been shopping Randolph, had absolutely no takers except for the Clippers, and yet he turned down their deal anyway. I'm sure there have been other teams willing to trade for him, or Walsh wouldn't have turned down the only offer he had.

Clincher · Post #42 » by **Clincher** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 3:52 am

god shammgod wrote:
Clincher wrote:We are stuck with a 26 year old double-double machine.........

How's that a bad thing?

did you miss all of last season ?

Considering he was arguably our best player sometimes in games, then yeah I must have missed the games where he was so bad that he deserved to be traded for a 2nd round pick.

DocZaius · Post #43 » by **DocZaius** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 3:53 am

Walsh....**** you..

Hardaway 10 · Post #44 » by **Hardaway 10** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 3:55 am

This isn't even about Zach's talent. If it was about talent alone, Zach could fetch a lot.

This is about dumping Zach's off-court stuff. What happens if/when he gets into another off court problem? Few teams are willing to touch him now as it is. If the reports were accurate, Walsh had the opportunity to subtract him outright, get a 2nd rounder and the trade exception, which in itself would've given way more flexibility in signings or trades than Zach can probably ever play himself into with his bloated contract. This was a chance to trade him without having to match dollars coming back. Donnie better have a better deal in the works. :banghead:

Isn't Zach hosting a party soon at a nightclub? :nonono:

GuyverADL · Post #45 » by **GuyverADL** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 3:56 am

NYKnicksfan11 wrote:
PistoL_D-iX wrote:
NYKnicksfan11 wrote:Maybe we would rather see our young guys get minutes over Randolph who is not in our plans for the future?

Id rather see Chandler/Gallo/Lee getting Those minutes that zach will be getting.

So you want Gallo getting thrown into the fire from the get go? Got damn...let Gallo atleast get accustomed to the NBA ....

Thats usually what teams do with high draft picks... What better way to get accustemed to the NBA...THEN ACUALLY PLAYING MINUTES IN THE NBA...?

Checkmate

DocZaius · Post #46 » by **DocZaius** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 3:57 am

Clippers got Camby for nothing but a trade exception and a 2nd rounder.

Same offer was made to us for Zach.

Anyone wanna start with Zach vs Camby arguments?

StutterStep · Post #47 » by **StutterStep** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 3:59 am

Paeds wrote:
god shammgod wrote:a lot of us said that walsh was **** up and the so called geniuses around here said that you don't give up zach for just a second round pick. but i guess you give up camby for that, now what smart guys ?

Yeah and Denver played themselves

Terrible use of a asset

Horrible in fact

Denver didn't get a 2nd rounder. They got the right to swap 2nd round picks with the Clippers. :lol:

XcalibuR · Post #48 » by **XcalibuR** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 4:12 am

GONYK wrote:
SMAC-K wrote:Ok we are aiming for the summer of 2010, so we have two years to remove Randolph. Isiah traded our lottery pick for this guy, so now we are just suppose to take a 2nd round pick for him? I understand why Walsh wants more for him, he thinks DAntoni can boost up the value of these guys so hes in no hurry to dump them, unless a good deal came our way this year.

Shh...don't try and distract people with your petty logic and reason! Hate is the only thing that makes sense in this situation. People on messageboards ALWAYS know better than someone who has been a top 5 GM in this league for over 15 years

Top 5? I thought you needed to win a few championships or executives of the year to get ranked that high?

GuyverADL · Post #49 » by **GuyverADL** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 4:13 am

StutterStep wrote:
Paeds wrote:
god shammgod wrote:a lot of us said that walsh was **** up and the so called geniuses around here said that you don't give up zach for just a second round pick. but i guess you give up camby for that, now what smart guys ?

Yeah and Denver played themselves

Terrible use of a asset

Horrible in fact

Denver didn't get a 2nd rounder. They got the right to swap 2nd round picks with the Clippers.

I bet that trade exception is used to try to acquire Artest. Lets see you laugh is Denver gets Artest.

Grinditout · Post #50 » by **Grinditout** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 4:15 am

What position would Artest play if he goes there? SF and SG are taken up by Melo and AI.

GuyverADL · Post #51 » by **GuyverADL** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 4:21 am

Artest is built like a tank. I can see him playing PF next to Melo.

Remember Denver was pursuing Artest at the deadline.

TheBluest · Post #52 » by **TheBluest** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 4:23 am

Artest doesn't want to play for Denver where have you all been today?

Post #53 » by **GONYK** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 4:29 am

XcalibuR wrote:
GONYK wrote:
SMAC-K wrote:Ok we are aiming for the summer of 2010, so we have two years to remove Randolph. Isiah traded our lottery pick for this guy, so now we are just suppose to take a 2nd round pick for him? I understand why Walsh wants more for him, he thinks DAntoni can boost up the value of these guys so hes in no hurry to dump them, unless a good deal came our way this year.

Shh...don't try and distract people with your petty logic and reason! Hate is the only thing that makes sense in this situation. People on messageboards ALWAYS know better than someone who has been a top 5 GM in this league for over 15 years

Top 5? I thought you needed to win a few championships or executives of the year to get ranked that high?

Name me 5 better. Ill give you West and Colangelo.

Fire BK · Post #54 » by **Fire BK** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 4:41 am

I'm literally shocked there are so many folks here supporting Walsh's decision to hang onto Z-Bo... There's always a few contrarians on every board, but.... this is downright bizarre. It's almost 50-50. I'm not sure what's more frustrating for the fiscally responsible, logical Knick fans out there.... dealing with this nightmarish era in Knicks' history, or being forced to argue with your fellow Knicks fans about the virtues of Z-Bo and his bloated $14.6 / $16 / $17.3 mil contract over the next 3 years.... This is arguably the worst contract in the NBA.

I'm just baffled by the reasoning here.... If you're broke, and you find a $100 bill on the ground, why wouldn't you just pick it up? It seems folks are satisfied with Walsh's decision to bypass the trade, with hopes that there will be another $100 bill sitting on the ground in a few months or so.... or even better.... there will be $200 or $500 sitting on the ground for the taking.

I'm going to say this very clearly. NOBODY wants Z-Bo and his $50 mil over the next 3 years. Nobody. The Clippers had a momentary lapse of judgment in the wake of losing Elton Brand, and Donnie Walsh failed to pounce on Dunleavy's vulnerability. Good luck finding another taker on Z-Bo's deal. It aint happening.

StutterStep · Post #55 » by **StutterStep** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 4:45 am

optimusADL wrote:
I bet that trade exception is used to try to acquire Artest. Lets see you laugh is Denver gets Artest.

Artest? Did you not read the Wiretap with Artest's comments about Denver? :lol:

And, if they do get Artest then it means they just ate Kenny Thomas (18million over 2 years).

You really think Artest fits on Denver? That would be a disaster, with Karl as the coach. :lol:

Th3TrueDynesty · Post #56 » by **Th3TrueDynesty** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 4:47 am

For everyone in denial, just admit it Donnie made a mistake by not taking the deal and hoping for more in return.
Hopefully he redeems himself.

Paeds · Post #57 » by **Paeds** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 4:47 am

DocZaius wrote:Clippers got Camby for nothing but a trade exception and a 2nd rounder.

Same offer was made to us for Zach.

Anyone wanna start with Zach vs Camby arguments?

except no trade exemption was traded.

NOBODY wants Z-Bo and his $50 mil over the next 3 years

Maybe, maybe not

maybe they want 2 yrs and 33?

1 yr 17?

Production will always be traded in the NBA

ORANGEandBLUE · Post #58 » by **ORANGEandBLUE** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 5:00 am

In Walsh's defense, this move was out of left field. It makes no sense for either team involved. Camby was perfect for Denver because his defense compliments the scoring abilities of Melo and AI. If they use the trade exception to sign somebody else than they aren't going to find a better fit than Camby. Artest would have been a good fit but like somebody has pointed out there seems to be bad blood there. If they don't use the trade exception and try to save it for cap space down the line, what's the point then? Because they'd be wasting Iverson's prime which coincides perfectly with Camby's.

And the Clippers...I just don't get it. Weren't they looking for another scoring option? Doesn't Camby just duplicate what they already have in Kaman? Isn't this going to force Baron to carry all the load on offense and deteriorate like he did last season?

So while I see all arguments along the lines of "you don't trade 20 and 10 for a 2nd rounder, you JUST DONT" as shameless wordplay, I can give Walsh a pardon for not predicting a move that nobody could have predicted.

cgf · Post #59 » by **cgf** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 5:04 am

I would've liked to have seen zach moved to the clippers, but it didn't happen, I'm disappointed but we've got time to strip this roster down, if we can move McCurry and Craw we wouldn't even have to trade zbo and could let him just expire. I hated watching ZBo play last season, but I think he's got a better chance of buying into the SSOL mentality than does Eddy Curry of giving a **** about basketball, and we really only need to move one of them.

And if Zach bought into the SSOL mentality he'd be almost worth 2/3rds of his contract which would then make him more tradeable.

Kobe>Jordan>God · Post #60 » by **Kobe>Jordan>God** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 5:15 am

vinnie_vegas69 wrote:Uh... One question that has yet to be asked...

Why does this rule out the trade for Randolph? The Clippers STILL have enough cap space to absorb most of Randolph's contract after signing Baron and trading for Camby.

They were $30 million under the cap without those two moves, which means that with Baron's starting salary of $11.5 million, and Camby's $8 million, they only have to trade us a small amount of salary to fit Randolph's contract in as well - Tim Thomas' contract would work well.

And before anyone suggests that Tim Thomas wouldn't be wanted back, remember that he played under D'Antoni in Phoenix, and Donnie Walsh would have nothing against him. Plus, his contract expires in 2010.

Also, I'd doubt that Donnie has been shopping Randolph, had absolutely no takers except for the Clippers, and yet he turned down their deal anyway. I'm sure there have been other teams willing to trade for him, or Walsh wouldn't have turned down the only offer he had.

With a front line of Camby/Thornton/Kaman why would the Clips want Zack Randolph?

Now the Clips can offer a package of Mobley, Tim Thomas, Gordan or draft picks for Vince Carter or Redd.