RealGM

He works hard 6'9 and works his but off on the board even around good rebounders * Lee and Q *


Can score on anyone

He works hard even though he is a Chuck He works hard and show emotion.

I think we should retain Him, Lee, Wilson and Frock everyone else

I rather keep Zach than keep Curry. I think we can build a better team around Zach than we can Curry.

King,

Weren't you an Eddy Curry supporter a couple of weeks ago?

I like Zach because

I enjoy it when Hoop Family makes it rain...

Starksfor3 wrote:King,

Weren't you an Eddy Curry supporter a couple of weeks ago?

Me and king have talked about this topic on AIM some time back. I think him and me both take Zach over Curry.

Too bad he doesnt work hard on defense. He is very lazy there. Ship him out.

Brad Lohaus wrote:Too bad he doesnt work hard on defense. He is very lazy there. Ship him out.

i wouldnt call him lazy on defense. i think he tries on defense but he just isnt athletic or big enough to be a good defender.

if you want to win a championship, you do NOT build around zach randolph. plain simple.

guy plays NO DEFENSE (worse pf in the entire nba), does NOT have the ability to make his teammates better, rarely passes the ball (as i say "if you give the ball to zach, don't expect it back"), and shoots WAY too much. he is a high volume scorer and is simply a stat padder on a bad team...

i'd rather build around curry then zach. and i'd rather have none then one of them. but atleast curry is young and has the potential to dominate inside. i feel he's better offensively then zach because he's a lot more efficent and atleast tries to pass out of a double team... the only way i can see curry becoming a good center is if we get a old nba player (Ewing, Pat) to mentor him and really get him focused on defense/rebounding. maybe, JUST MAYBE, we have a player on our hands.

Curry > Zach. but none is better then one.

i like him to but his salary is too huge and his contract is long. I would just trade him for exp or shorter contract and maybe a first. We need to rebuild the way portland did through the draft. If we only did that from the start and not got curry, our team could have been portlands.

hahahaha curry > zach. thats why curry gets outrebounded by the guards and Z-Bo gets at least 8 every night.

Curry *weighs more* > Zach... that's about it...

knicks210 wrote:hahahaha curry > zach. thats why curry gets outrebounded by the guards and Z-Bo gets at least 8 every night.

in terms of building around someone yes. curry's younger and can dominate in the post. and has the potential to be a very good center, although he probably won't reach it. zach's contract is way too much.

When I say build around Zach, it doesn't mean giving him the keys to the team and making him the leader. If you have talents like Randolph and Lee, you get players who are also skilled that can play alongside of them. Randolph and Lee are two good parts two a puzzle, not main focal points.

I prefer Randolph also. People say he's selfish but I don't see Curry passing the ball very often either and he refuses to rebound which is the ultimate act of selfishness in basketball. A good offensive player like Randolph taking a lot of shots on a bad offensive team is fine -- someone's gotta step up.

ctorres wrote:When I say build around Zach, it doesn't mean giving him the keys to the team and making him the leader. If you have talents like Randolph and Lee, you get players who are also skilled that can play alongside of them. Randolph and Lee are two good parts two a puzzle, not main focal points.

lee defintely. but do you really think zach can handle playing second or third fiddle? randolph averages 15 FG attempts a game (32nd in the NBA, craw is in the top 20 btw) randolph is also tied with 23rd most shot attempts for 2 pt tries (if he had consistent playing time he'd be top 20 easy). randolph is a complete black hole on offense and will never pass the ball. he'll play hard, but just cannot play in a offense unless he's the main focus. (curry's like that. but i believe if he actually wants to improve, he can be a suitable top 2 option on a offense)

Zach Randolph = PF version of Stephon Marbury

The guy gets good stats, plays zero defense, and fails to make his team better. I feel like the knicks have become the trash pail of the entire league. If a team has a player that has great stats, and is around 27, but the team still sucks send him to the knicks. They'll take him.

randomhero423 wrote:if you want to win a championship, you do NOT build around zach randolph. plain simple.

guy plays NO DEFENSE (worse pf in the entire nba), does NOT have the ability to make his teammates better, rarely passes the ball (as i say "if you give the ball to zach, don't expect it back"), and shoots WAY too much. he is a high volume scorer and is simply a stat padder on a bad team...

i'd rather build around curry then zach. and i'd rather have none then one of them. but atleast curry is young and has the potential to dominate inside. i feel he's better offensively then zach because he's a lot more efficent and atleast tries to pass out of a double team... the only way i can see curry becoming a good center is if we get a old nba player (Ewing, Pat) to mentor him and really get him focused on defense/rebounding. maybe, JUST MAYBE, we have a player on our hands.

Curry > Zach. but none is better then one.

Does everything in NY have to Be WORST or Best


Zach gets Steals he works hard he is just not athletic he plays better D than lee and Curry

And I agree do not BUILD around him

We need a Team of players that fit


Derrick Rose/ Artest/Lee and Zach is a good foundation.

Derrick Rose/Artest/Lee looks way better without the Zach there.

king_k4life wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Does everything in NY have to Be WORST or Best


Zach gets Steals he works hard he is just not athletic he plays better D than lee and Curry

And I agree do not BUILD around him

We need a Team of players that fit


Derrick Rose/ Artest/Lee and Zach is a good foundation.

Zach does not play better defense than Lee. Why do you continue to say stupid things like that? Last year you said Curry is one of the best paint defenders in the game, using the "points in the paint" stat to prove your point. Do you ever get tired of the false crap you spew? Do you even watch the games? What exactly is your definition of good defense? I mean, for christsakes you think Stephon Marbury plays good defense.

i look at it like this. curry is a bad passer, zach is unwilling to pass. a bad passer might improve but if you have no desire to pass what can done about that.