RealGM

Posted: **Wed Apr 2, 2008 9:52 am**

Found this Journal Sentinel article amusing.

Embattled New York Knicks coach Isiah Thomas defended forward Zach Randolph before tonight's game against the Bucks, and Thomas responded to recent comments made by Bucks owner Herb Kohl.

"I think he's a great player," Thomas said of Randolph, the power forward acquired by the Knicks in a trade last summer. "I don't think we've really seen how this team can work. For a lot of the season we played with some missing parts.

"Point guard play definitely affects how the big men play. I thought for (Eddy) Curry and Randolph's part, they did the best they could, but none of us had a good year."

Randolph was the subject of a trade that nearly was completed in February, one that would have sent Randolph and guard Fred Jones to the Bucks for Bobby Simmons, Charlie Bell and Dan Gadzuric. Former Bucks general manager Larry Harris wanted to make the deal, but Kohl intervened.

At the news conference on March 19 to announce Harris' firing, Kohl said character issues played a part in his decision, and the senator pointed to off-court problems Randolph experienced in Portland. Kohl also said he did not want to commit nearly $50 million over the next three years to Randolph, the former Michigan State star.

"I liked everything he did for us this year; I liked the attitude he brought to the team," Thomas said. "He never was a problem for us. He wears a suit and tie now.

"I've said this before, I have great respect for the senator, and maybe there were some internal discussions that took place that we as a Knicks organization were not privvy to . I think if he (Kohl) had a chance to meet Zach and talk to Zach, he probably would come away with a different impression, just as we have."

Randolph returned to the Knicks lineup tonight after missing the previous two games with flu-like symptoms. Bucks center Andrew Bogut also returned after missing two games with a broken nose.

Yeah I think Herb and his Ron Walters were privvy to his criminal record, just a thought Isiah.

Good old Zeke.

-------------------

Oh by the way MBBOT, or whatever you call yourself these days, none of us want to hear you reply with a rant about why the bucks need Randolph. Seriously, save it.

Wait a second........... are you Isiah???

Posted: **Wed Apr 2, 2008 9:58 am**

Watch Kohl go ahead and hire Isiah as GM after he gets fired in New York.

I wish that had no shot of happening.

Posted: **Wed Apr 2, 2008 12:42 pm**

In hindsight, Kohl should have never said anything publicly like he did.....but that trade incident was exhibit 2,345 in the meddling files, and the most recent, so Kohl felt he needed to defend it.

Posted: **Wed Apr 2, 2008 12:44 pm**

Exactly. Kohl brought it up and said it was the only time he has meddled. Which of course everyone knows is b.s.

Posted: **Wed Apr 2, 2008 12:53 pm**

MickeyDavis wrote:Exactly. Kohl brought it up and said it was the only time he has meddled. Which of course everyone knows is b.s.

Exactly....and of course I'm sure Herb thought is was a great example to use of how his meddling is beneficial.....

"You know, occasionally, on really big, big giant deals, our front office management might make a mistake.....like trying to acquire a player who has the Ebola virus and might transmit it to the good people of Wisconsin.....aren't you glad I step in to save us?"

I just wish one of the reporters at that news conference would have used that response as an opportunity to follow up and ask Kohl if he vetoed any deals whatsoever that involved Carlos Boozer coming to Milwaukee.

Posted: **Wed Apr 2, 2008 12:54 pm**

I'm sure Enlund was asleep during the press conference and Gardner was on the phone with Tozer getting the latest Wave tidbits.

Posted: **Wed Apr 2, 2008 1:05 pm**

Gary Howard wrote his annual column on the Bucks today.....It was so crappy it didn't deserve a thread.....

About 1,000 words as to how it is sad to see such proud franchises like NY and Milwaukee fall on hard times.....then one weak line at the end about how both owners need to hire good leaders and get out of the way.....

I think was about the best he could muster up without jeopardizing his free courtside seats from Kohl.......tie in the Bucks with the Knicks, so it looks like the situation we are in could happen to anyone. Don't mention Herb Kohl anywhere by name in the article......

To me it seemed like an excuse for Howard to interview Frazier and Monroe, who probably were boyhood heroes to him......

Posted: **Wed Apr 2, 2008 2:27 pm**

Can somebody remind me of that Randolph trade again?

At the time, I remember thinking we were sending 3 scrubs for an everynight 17/10 player.

Posted: **Wed Apr 2, 2008 3:01 pm**

jeremyd236 wrote:Can somebody remind me of that Randolph trade again?

At the time, I remember thinking we were sending 3 scrubs for an everynight 17/10 player.

That everynight player gets 17/10 on crappy teams nowhere close to .500. What part of team cancer doesn't make sense to you people.

To refresh your memory for you it was Simmons, Bell, and Gadzuric. It's not like those guys are essential to the Bucks, but they are our depth, besides PF is our most stacked position.

Posted: **Wed Apr 2, 2008 3:02 pm**

I can't think of anyone's opinion I would value more when it comes to character than Isiah Thomas.

Posted: **Wed Apr 2, 2008 3:20 pm**

europa wrote:I can't think of anyone's opinion I would value more when it comes to character than Isiah Thomas.

His secretary agrees.

Posted: **Thu Apr 3, 2008 7:13 am**

ReddManBogieMan wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

That everynight player gets 17/10 on crappy teams nowhere close to .500. What part of team cancer doesn't make sense to you people.

To refresh your memory for you it was Simmons, Bell, and Gadzuric. It's not like those guys are essential to the Bucks, but they are our depth, besides PF is our most stacked position.

Oh ok so your arguement is that its because he gets those numbers on crappy teams?
Really?

At least those bucks we kept get their numbers on great teams.

Posted: **Thu Apr 3, 2008 7:29 am**

At least they have shown in the past they can put up good numbers on fairly good teams (2005). Right after Randloplh leaves Portland they are immediatly better, and it basically is the same team. How would that happen? He goes to the knicks and they have one of their worst seasons in franchise history. Now what would you expect when he comes to Milwaukee? Zach Randolph wouldn't fit in here, it's pretty easy to understand I think. I would take Gadz, Bell, and Simmons' depth over Randolph when we already got 2 worthy starting Pf's.

My argument is it is easy to get 17/10 when you are the feature weapon on a team that let's you do whatever. If Charlie Bell or Bobby Simmons was given that role I'm sure they could put up respectable numbers.

D O Y O U U N D E R S T A N D , O R D O I N E E D T O T Y P E S L O W E R ? ? ? ?

Posted: **Thu Apr 3, 2008 7:37 am**

jeremyd236 wrote:Can somebody remind me of that Randolph trade again?

At the time, I remember thinking we were sending 3 scrubs for an everynight 17/10 player.

Something like that.

Instead, watching the development of Yi and his 8/5 has been a delight to watch.

Posted: **Thu Apr 3, 2008 7:53 am**

ReddManBogieMan wrote:At least they have shown in the past they can put up good numbers on fairly good teams (2005). Right after Randloplh leaves Portland they are immediatly better, and it basically is the same team. How would that happen? He goes to the knicks and they have one of their worst seasons in franchise history. Now what would you expect when he comes to Milwaukee? Zach Randolph wouldn't fit in here, it's pretty easy to understand I think. I would take Gadz, Bell, and Simmons' depth over Randolph when we already got 2 worthy starting Pf's.

My argument is it is easy to get 17/10 when you are the feature weapon on a team that let's you do whatever. If Charlie Bell or Bobby Simmons was given that role I'm sure they could put up respectable numbers.

D O Y O U U N D E R S T A N D , O R D O I N E E D T O T Y P E S L O W E R ? ? ? ?

Oh good god. You just called the 2005 team good? That was one of the worst playoff teams ever.
Its not even worth explaining any further, because clearly you dont get it.

I never said i was for or against the trade, I can see either side, but at least use the reasons that make sense.

Posted: **Thu Apr 3, 2008 10:03 am**

I see both sides. I get it. I am against it.

Posted: **Thu Apr 3, 2008 11:41 am**

ReddManBogieMan wrote:I see both sides. I get it. I am against it.

I see both sides, as well. And I see that the pro Randolph side is clueless.

Posted: **Thu Apr 3, 2008 2:18 pm**

you cal l Simmons, bell and gadz as having depth? the Bucks could have traded all three players and then added other guys like barry and sessions for depth. Dumping bell would have cleared a path for Sessions to get more playing time. it would also have allowed Yi and CV to try their skills at SF.

The problem wit h randolph is not randolph. it's the coach's who don't know how to control him or utilize his talents. it's bee n proven that bad boys when placed on good teams with proper coaching can become useful. Even Larry Walker was useful for a year in Miami.

Posted: **Thu Apr 3, 2008 5:26 pm**

A savvy GM looks at a player like Randolph, and has some interest because the bad rep has reduced his sticker price. Then he takes a close look. Decides if the bad behavior has or has not been dealt with by the individual. Evaluates how likely it is to reoccur. Then he looks not at the personal stats but at the skills, and how useful they would be on his team. Then he makes a very smart decision to acquire or not to acquire.

A GM who never takes a risk is a mediocre GM. The Bucks have seen their share. A GM who takes losing-percentage risk is a bad GM. The gift is knowing human nature well enough to take winning-percentage risks. Presumptive GM Herb K should not be making those calls. (Though, to be fair, lame duck out-on-the-plank-looking-down-on-the-ocean Larry H shouldn't either.)

As an outsider, I have no idea of whether we should have made the Randolph trade. Don't think anyone else here does either. But I believe the Bucks have no one in management qualified to evaluate it. Am hoping the to-be-named GM will be qualified.

The kinda interesting part of Thomas' comments was where he said that the Knicks lack of a good PG made it hard for the bigs to show well. Our lack of a good PG has done the same. Not just for the bigs - but basically the whole team, especially those players with skills for playing team ball.

Posted: **Thu Apr 3, 2008 7:25 pm**

Isaiah is such a con man it is ridiculous.

If Randolph and Eddy Curry's brainless and uninspired play can be blamed on a lack of a capable point guard... than Isaiah needs to take the blame there (as acting GM) for not bringing in a guy that fills that role. He acts like this is some new discovery that no one say coming... when the majority of league circles laughed as he brought in Marbury, Crawford, Francis, Robinson, Jones, etc... all shoot first combo guards who can score if given high volume shot opportunities but have never shown savvy, court management, defense, clock and situational understanding, etc...

Also... am I the only one that finds it funny that Isaiah is sticking up for Randolph (and against Kohl for having the audacity to veto the trade) when THOMAS WAS THE GUY THAT OBVIOUSLY PROPOSED THE TRADE! What a riot. Isaiah tries to pawn the cancerous and criminal Randolph on us for bench guys, then is critical of Kohl for not "getting to know" the very guy he is trying to trade for (talent wise) 5 cents on the dollar....

This is why Isaiah made it so long in New York... he is a master con man, and has some kind of weird way of operating outside of reality, without letting the spotlight or blame or accountability ever fall on him.

RealGM

Isiah: Kohl wrong about Randolph

Isiah: Kohl wrong about Randolph