Is Al better than Zach Randolph?

[4ho5ive]

OT, but why is Randolph's nickname Z-Bo?

I asked that on this board sometime last year and nobody had an answer. Its just what they call him for some reason.

[MVP4LIFE]

I much rather have Al. A funny thing: Randolph just made his first dunk of the year.

[shrink]

Zero Box Outs?

[drza]

OT, but why is Randolph's nickname Z-Bo?

I'd guess a "Friday" reference. There was a character in Friday named D-Bo, who was just bigger and stronger than everyone else and bullied them. Since his name starts with a Z, Z-Bo could be a play on that.

[Devilzsidewalk]

I'd guess a "Friday" reference. There was a character in Friday named D-Bo, who was just bigger and stronger than everyone else and bullied them. Since his name starts with a Z, Z-Bo could be a play on that.

good call,

Rani. Ron (Canada): Who gave you the nick name Z-bo?

Zach Randolph: I had that nickname since I was youngster in 7th and 8th grade. I had a buddy who gave everyone nicknames one day, and mine just stuck.

so assuming Z-bo was 14 or so in 8th grade and he's 26 now, 12 years ago he was in 8th grade, or 1996, and Friday came out in '95 so that was during the incline of its popularity

Case Closed.

[drza]

On-topic, I think that Randolph is a good base-comparison to Al, better than Brand. Brand's defense is arguably one of the strongest parts of his game, and it is based largely on his athleticism. Jefferson is big and strong, but not nearly as quick or vertical and doesn't have the defensive mindset that Brand does so I think stylistically they are a poor comp.

Randolph pre-knee injury, on the other hand, is a very good comp IMO. Al is slightly taller, but they shared a similar scoring style (bevy of post-moves, reliance on footwork and girth moreso than athleticism), similar weakness as a passer, and similar weakness on defense. At age 22, Randolph was posting very similar numbers to Jefferson here at age 23 (20.5 points, 10.5 rebounds, 49% FG) in his first real chance as the focal point on a better team.

The difference is that a) Randolph hurt his knee and needed microfracture surgery and b) Randolph hasa negative off-court impact. Before he hurt his knee, Randolph was almost exclusively a low-post player (like Al). Since then, he has relied much more on his mid-range jumper and his field goal percentage has dipped. So with those two negatives (mainly the knee) working against Randolph, Big Al certainly has a higher ceiling than where Randolph is currently...but as a base comparison, I think they make a very good comp.

[revprodeji]

Considering most of Randolph's negative value is based on character and the knee injury I do not think it is an issue. Jefferson has shown to be a great character and desires to attack the basket.

[TheFranchise21]

Yeah but he doesn't look very much like DeeBo. In fact he doesn't have many resemblances to the fictitious character.

[andyhop]

On-topic, I think that Randolph is a good base-comparison to Al, better than Brand. Brand's defense is arguably one of the strongest parts of his game, and it is based largely on his athleticism. Jefferson is big and strong, but not nearly as quick or vertical and doesn't have the defensive mindset that Brand does so I think stylistically they are a poor comp.

Randolph pre-knee injury, on the other hand, is a very good comp IMO. Al is slightly taller, but they shared a similar scoring style (bevy of post-moves, reliance on footwork and girth moreso than athleticism), similar weakness as a passer, and similar weakness on defense. At age 22, Randolph was posting very similar numbers to Jefferson here at age 23 (20.5 points, 10.5 rebounds, 49% FG) in his first real chance as the focal point on a better team.

The difference is that a) Randolph hurt his knee and needed microfracture surgery and b) Randolph hasa negative off-court impact. Before he hurt his knee, Randolph was almost exclusively a low-post player (like Al). Since then, he has relied much more on his mid-range jumper and his field goal percentage has dipped. So with those two negatives (mainly the knee) working against Randolph, Big Al certainly has a higher ceiling than where Randolph is currently...but as a base comparison, I think they make a very good comp.

Randolph either pre or post injury is a bad comparison because Al is already better than either so making it pointless to use him as a base comparison as he would have to regress to reach that base.

[P2]

Big Al is just amazing. I really love him. And comparing him to Randolph is just demeaning. Big Al is a Top 10 big man in the league!

[HotelVitale]

Have the last few posters ever seen Randolph play? He's very good, very aggressive, a great rebounder, posts up well, has a good spin move, often gets his own miss and puts it back. I don't know why people don't respect him--and why comparing him to Al is 'demeaning.' He helps his team win games all the time and when he's on, he can carry a team (I saw him beat the Pistons last year almost by himself).

That being said, I'm still wondering if i was missing something specific about Al's skills that didn't show in the last three games. He seems like a better on the ball defender than ZBo, but that's only because Z is pretty bad on that end. Both are poor help defenders and really need to improve their pick and roll defense.

I understand why you wouldn't want to compare him to Randolph who hasn't been on winning teams and who just got traded for peanuts and Kool-Aid. But what do you guys realistically hope Al can get better at so that he can impact the game more and make your team better than Randolph does?

[deeney0]

Watch Al's moves around the basket. They're much better than Zach's. And Al has the will to improve himself.

[drza]

I agree with HotelVitale. People always treat the Randolph comp like it's an insult, when in fact it's nothing of the kind. Especially before the knee injury, for all intents and purposes Randolph WAS what Jefferson is now. Not just the numbers (which are almost identical), but stylistically and respect-wise as well. The same things that people say about Jefferson now with regards to him being the best low-post offensive player in the NBA, people were saying about Randolph 3 years ago. I remember hearing years ago that both Kevin Garnett AND Tim Duncan said that Randolph was their most difficult low-post matchup. The man was a flat-out handful on the blocks, in a VERY similar way to how Al is now.

I think Al has a higher ceiling now due to the injury and the attitude issues. But to treat it as an insult to compare Jefferson to Randolph at the same age...I don't think that's really a non-biased viewpoint.

[horaceworthy]

He wasn't quite the rebounder Al was, a much poorer defender, and he got his numbers in different ways (he's always been more of a face up guy than Al is, and while he has a better jump shot, he's never had the same level of footwork). Randolph's 48% FG was also an outlier compared to the other seasons in his career. There are some similarities between Al and pre surgery Z-Bo (both relentless on the offensive boards and attacking the basket), but Al's better. I agree that it isn't the insult some are making it out to be in terms of a comparison, though.

[drza]

I don't know if you can really call the 48.5% an outlier, though, as the lowered field goal percentage corresponded almost exactly with the knee injury. In the two years before the knee injury, Randolph was a 51.3% FG shooter in more limited action then a 48.5% shooter as the man. The next year was when he was playing on the hurt knee before he shut it down, and that was the time period when he started shooting a lower percentage. Randolph always had a better jump shot, but I disagree that he shot it nearly as much before the knee injury. I also disagree that he was a much poorer defender than Al, but at this point we're debating degree.

My point is that he had similar strengths, weaknesses, and impact at age 22 as what Jefferson has now. I would have taken Jefferson then due to attitude considerations, and I would definitely take him now due to the knee. But I still think it's a valid comp.

[horaceworthy]

And before those two seasons he was 45% from the field, and he shot 45% again in the season that he suffered the knee injury. He's mostly been in the 44-46% range since, which is why I consider that one season and the season before more outliers than anything. He didn't shoot the jumper as much, but he also didn't spend as much time with his back to the basket as Al. Randolph was always been a speed bump on defense, going back to the days he and Marcus Taylor were supposed to take the Big Ten by storm at Michigan State.

It's a valid comp, but I still don't think it's a great one. Even without the attitude and the knee, Al's a better and different player.

[drza]

Lol. Before those seasons he was a rookie that played 5.8 minutes per game. That's not indicative of anything. And the year that he hurt his knee he hurt it in December and just played on it until March, when he shut it down to have microfracture (it was still a relatively new procedure back then, so it was just called a "sore knee" for most of the year as opposed to being diagnosed as requiring surgery).

In the 3 years pre-knee injury (including his rookie year) Randolph shot 49.0% from the field. In the 2 years when his knee was either injured or he just had microfracture he shot 44.1%, and in the 2 years after the surgery he's shot 46.3%. To me, that seems to track fairly well with when his jumper was a tool but he spent more time down low (early), when he had to rely almost completely on the jumper (when injured) and when he mixes up the jumper with the low-post (now).

As for the defense, qualitatively I don't see a big difference between Al now and Randolph then, as I think both are really poor. If I try to make it remotely quantitative, according to 82games.com Randolph at age 22 allowed a lower field goal percentage and fewer points to his opponents than Al does now. So qualitatively in my opinion I'd say their defense was similar, while quantitatively the numbers suggest Jefferson's defense is worse.

I think speaking in absolute's that Al now is better than Randolph was at a similar age comes either from knowledge of how Randolph's last few seasons have gone or fan loyalty, as I don't think it's nearly that definite in either direction.

[horaceworthy]

That's fine, but there's no guarantee that Randolph would have continued shooting 48%, and the drop in % could also indicate that he has a hand in his face more often since he's lost some explosion, or that he drove to the basket more. Either way, 48%, towards the high end for Randolph, and 49%'s been the low end for Jefferson. He's a better rebounder than Randolph was, and in fewer minutes, while possessing an oh so slightly better scoring average, again in fewer minutes. Defensively, neither's good, but Al's more towards average when matched up against opposing PF's or allowed to take the lesser of the opponent's interior options like Randolph often was.

Think whatever you want, but I don't believe it's coming from knowledge of Randolph or fan loyalty. It comes because Jefferson's a btter rebounder, a little more prolific and effective a scorer, and, from what I saw then and see now, a better defender (while that bit doesn't come too heavily into play as much, since it's something both need to work on). I've also always seen Randolph as a little more of a face up guy than a back to the basket guy, and I don't think he ever had Al's footwork.

Take it as an absolute if you want, it's just my opinion. I don't see the margin as all that wide, but I do view Al now as better than a pre surgery Z-Bo.

[HotelVitale]

One small little thing to add, and then I'm done with devil's advocate. I noticed during the last few games that no one even tries to go after boards on the Wolves, so Al is left with a few more per game than what he would probably get on a team with another good rebounder. In all honesty and in complete objectivity--I'm a Pistons fan by loyalty--ZBo and Al are very very similar rebounders.

And, in conclusion, you guys shouldn't be turned off by 'Z-Bo with a good attitude' comparisons. I was just giving my impression of Al after having seen him play several good games. He was great in the 4th quarter against the Warriors--they definitely wouldn't have won without him--and it was great to see him fighting against the Suns after everyone else had all but given up. He seems like a great low post player and a very determined rebounder, but so is (or better, was) Zach Randolph.