ImageImageImageImageImage

Seems like Randolph is a little bummed out :-(

Moderators: Jeff Van Gully, Deeeez Knicks, HerSports85, j4remi, NoLayupRule, dakomish23, GONYK, mpharris36

ctorres
RealGM
Posts: 18,016
And1: 6,247
Joined: Jun 04, 2005

Seems like Randolph is a little bummed out :-( 

Post#1 » by ctorres » Sat Jan 5, 2008 5:08 am

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/05/sport ... ref=sports

Randolph has struggled to mesh with center Eddy Curry in the frontcourt. He has been benched for long stretches when the Knicks have fallen behind. He was recently pulled from the lineup for a game. And he has been left positively dizzy by an endless string of defeats.

This was hardly what Randolph expected when the Knicks acquired him from the Portland Trail Blazers in June, handing him a fresh start and the promise of better days. Hours before the N.B.A. announced his suspension Friday, Randolph acknowledged he occasionally wondered why the Knicks brought him to New York.

fimslim3
Banned User
Posts: 9,277
And1: 1
Joined: Nov 30, 2004

 

Post#2 » by fimslim3 » Sat Jan 5, 2008 5:12 am

Blazers are better without Randolph.
Magic are better without Francis.
Suns are better without Marbury.
Wizards are better without Jeffries.
Bulls are better without Curry.
NYK Pharaoh
Pro Prospect
Posts: 895
And1: 1
Joined: Nov 11, 2005
Location: Bronx

 

Post#3 » by NYK Pharaoh » Sat Jan 5, 2008 5:18 am

fimslim3 wrote:Blazers are better without Randolph.
Magic are better without Francis.
Suns are better without Marbury.
Wizards are better without Jeffries.
Bulls are better without Curry.


And Crawford
User avatar
randomhero423
Head Coach
Posts: 7,013
And1: 1
Joined: Jul 09, 2006
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Contact:

 

Post#4 » by randomhero423 » Sat Jan 5, 2008 5:18 am

Suns are better without Quentin Richardson
Bulls are better without Jamal Crawford
My High School Basketball Articles:
www.nyhoops.com

My Sports Blog
myrandomsportsblog.blogspot.com
NYK Pharaoh
Pro Prospect
Posts: 895
And1: 1
Joined: Nov 11, 2005
Location: Bronx

 

Post#5 » by NYK Pharaoh » Sat Jan 5, 2008 5:20 am

randomhero423 wrote:Suns are better without Quentin Richardson
Bulls are better without Jamal Crawford


The Suns aren't necessarily better without Q; I would say that they're about the same(at least playoff wise). However, we would definitely be better off without him; unfortunately that probably goes for the entire roster as well.
newskoolbulls
Banned User
Posts: 19,624
And1: 0
Joined: Jun 12, 2003
Location: NY

 

Post#6 » by newskoolbulls » Sat Jan 5, 2008 5:21 am

Its Zachs fault. The dude has to go 1on1 everytime he gets the ball, sometimes I am watching and the Knicks just stop moving because they know they werent going to touch the ball. IT knows how to bring in the wrong pieces.
User avatar
randomhero423
Head Coach
Posts: 7,013
And1: 1
Joined: Jul 09, 2006
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Contact:

 

Post#7 » by randomhero423 » Sat Jan 5, 2008 5:22 am

honestly. he seems like a ok person. but he is a cancer.
My High School Basketball Articles:
www.nyhoops.com

My Sports Blog
myrandomsportsblog.blogspot.com
NYK Pharaoh
Pro Prospect
Posts: 895
And1: 1
Joined: Nov 11, 2005
Location: Bronx

 

Post#8 » by NYK Pharaoh » Sat Jan 5, 2008 5:24 am

Remember a few seasons ago when Mo Taylor would do the same thing once he received the ball?
NYK Fan 4 Life
Spykes
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 25,738
And1: 16
Joined: Mar 15, 2004
Location: Paddy's Pub

 

Post#9 » by Spykes » Sat Jan 5, 2008 5:27 am

fimslim3 wrote:Blazers are better without Randolph.
Magic are better without Francis.
Suns are better without Marbury.
Wizards are better without Jeffries.
Bulls are better without Curry.


I don't really think Jeffries really made a difference one way or another for the Wizards.

newskoolbulls wrote:Its Zachs fault. The dude has to go 1on1 everytime he gets the ball, sometimes I am watching and the Knicks just stop moving because they know they werent going to touch the ball. IT knows how to bring in the wrong pieces.


That's typical of a Zach Randolph team. It happened countless times while he was with Portland.
User avatar
GONYK
Forum Mod - Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Posts: 67,034
And1: 45,905
Joined: Jun 27, 2003
Location: Brunson Gang
   

 

Post#10 » by GONYK » Sat Jan 5, 2008 5:27 am

fimslim3 wrote:Blazers are better without Randolph.
Magic are better without Francis.
Suns are better without Marbury.
Wizards are better without Jeffries.
Bulls are better without Curry.
...and Arenas
fimslim3
Banned User
Posts: 9,277
And1: 1
Joined: Nov 30, 2004

 

Post#11 » by fimslim3 » Sat Jan 5, 2008 5:30 am

Spykes wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



That's typical of a Zach Randolph team. It happened countless times while he was with Portland.


The way the Wizards played last season, it looked like they didn't miss a beat.
newskoolbulls
Banned User
Posts: 19,624
And1: 0
Joined: Jun 12, 2003
Location: NY

 

Post#12 » by newskoolbulls » Sat Jan 5, 2008 5:30 am

Wizards are better without Jeffries because Jared signed for 33 mil with the Knicks and the Wizs replaced him with Stevetson last season for like less than 2 mil and than this past offseason 13 mil for 3 yrs i believe.
Spykes
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 25,738
And1: 16
Joined: Mar 15, 2004
Location: Paddy's Pub

 

Post#13 » by Spykes » Sat Jan 5, 2008 5:36 am

fimslim3 wrote:The way the Wizards played last season, it looked like they didn't miss a beat.


Like I said, I don't think he really mattered one way or another to them. So they weren't really better without him, but they certainly weren't worse either. He was pretty much inconsequential to the Wizard's successes and failures.

That's why they didn't want to spend any serious money to keep him. He's the kind of player that's easily replaceable.
User avatar
PDXKnight
RealGM
Posts: 26,282
And1: 3,205
Joined: May 29, 2007
Location: Portland
   

 

Post#14 » by PDXKnight » Sat Jan 5, 2008 6:52 am

newskoolbulls wrote:Its Zachs fault. The dude has to go 1on1 everytime he gets the ball, sometimes I am watching and the Knicks just stop moving because they know they werent going to touch the ball. IT knows how to bring in the wrong pieces.


It's not just his decisions on offense, his defense makes almost ANY other player look like Tim Duncan. Zach has plenty of offensive talent but 1) needs to learn to take on more of a team mentality and 2) needs to be next to an extremely talented defensive center to compensate for his lack of defense. He hasn't shown much of a team mentality and definitely can't take much of the defensive load but if he can get it through his head that winning=team, then I still believe he can still do something special on the Knicks. That is a big "IF" of course but only time will tell if things can work out with Randolph.
DoubtingThomas
Junior
Posts: 326
And1: 0
Joined: Dec 15, 2007

 

Post#15 » by DoubtingThomas » Sat Jan 5, 2008 9:45 am

He is playing for a sociopath who runs the worst run organization in professional sports.
duetta
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 31,437
And1: 12,886
Joined: Aug 28, 2002
Location: Patrolling the middle....

 

Post#16 » by duetta » Sat Jan 5, 2008 10:33 am

I think the best thing for all parties is to move Steve Francis, I mean Zack Randolph, and admit the experiment has failed.
User avatar
buc003
Junior
Posts: 428
And1: 0
Joined: Aug 17, 2006

Re: Seems like Randolph is a little bummed out :-( 

Post#17 » by buc003 » Sat Jan 5, 2008 2:17 pm

ctorres wrote:
Someone suggested that the Knicks
User avatar
richardhutnik
Banned User
Posts: 22,092
And1: 10
Joined: Oct 13, 2001
Location: Linsanity? What is that?
Contact:

 

Post#18 » by richardhutnik » Sat Jan 5, 2008 3:18 pm

newskoolbulls wrote:Wizards are better without Jeffries because Jared signed for 33 mil with the Knicks and the Wizs replaced him with Stevetson last season for like less than 2 mil and than this past offseason 13 mil for 3 yrs i believe.


Jared was offered 6 years/$30 million from the Wizards.

Also, I am finding this argument marginally absurd. Doesn't a team do trades in order to get better? When you get under the cap, add a needed piece, etc... you are supposed to get better.

Would Isiah be considered better if EVERY team he traded with got worse? How about he be evaluated by how the Knicks do? This means a failure, by the way.

- Rich
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - G. Marx
User avatar
KnicksGadfly
RealGM
Posts: 17,831
And1: 19,393
Joined: Jul 29, 2007
   

 

Post#19 » by KnicksGadfly » Sat Jan 5, 2008 3:26 pm

richardhutnik wrote:Would Isiah be considered better if EVERY team he traded with got worse? How about he be evaluated by how the Knicks do? This means a failure, by the way.

- Rich


Yea. Take the case of Zach Randolph for example. If Portland were a lottery team right now, Zach would have a lot more value and could be traded. At the very least, we would know that he did contribute to winning there since their roster is pretty similar to last year's roster without Zach. However, Portland is winning, which makes a case that Zach, however, good he may be at padding his stats, is not contributing to winning, or is trying too hard to contribute to winning, and ends up ultimately failing.
chitownsports4ever
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 22,699
And1: 4,087
Joined: Jan 30, 2002
Location: southside of chicago
       

 

Post#20 » by chitownsports4ever » Sat Jan 5, 2008 4:17 pm

tonyheat wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



And Crawford


and Ron Artest

and Elton Brand

and Brad Miller

and Tyson Chandler

get a clue .
Got a Gold Name Plate that says "I wish you would"

Return to New York Knicks