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.
Seems like Randolph is a little bummed out :-(
Moderators: Jeff Van Gully, Deeeez Knicks, HerSports85, j4remi, NoLayupRule, dakomish23, GONYK, mpharris36
Seems like Randolph is a little bummed out :-(
-
ctorres
- RealGM
- Posts: 18,021
- And1: 6,269
- Joined: Jun 04, 2005
Seems like Randolph is a little bummed out :-(
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/05/sport ... ref=sports
- randomhero423
- Head Coach
- Posts: 7,013
- And1: 1
- Joined: Jul 09, 2006
- Location: Brooklyn, New York
- Contact:
-
NYK Pharaoh
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 895
- And1: 1
- Joined: Nov 11, 2005
- Location: Bronx
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.
- randomhero423
- Head Coach
- Posts: 7,013
- And1: 1
- Joined: Jul 09, 2006
- Location: Brooklyn, New York
- Contact:
-
Spykes
- Retired Mod

- Posts: 25,738
- And1: 16
- Joined: Mar 15, 2004
- Location: Paddy's Pub
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.
-
Spykes
- Retired Mod

- Posts: 25,738
- And1: 16
- Joined: Mar 15, 2004
- Location: Paddy's Pub
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.
- PDXKnight
- RealGM
- Posts: 26,286
- And1: 3,208
- Joined: May 29, 2007
- Location: Portland
-
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
Re: Seems like Randolph is a little bummed out :-(
- buc003
- Junior
- Posts: 428
- And1: 0
- Joined: Aug 17, 2006
Re: Seems like Randolph is a little bummed out :-(
ctorres wrote:
Someone suggested that the Knicks
- richardhutnik
- Banned User
- Posts: 22,092
- And1: 10
- Joined: Oct 13, 2001
- Location: Linsanity? What is that?
- Contact:
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
- KnicksGadfly
- RealGM
- Posts: 17,834
- And1: 19,395
- Joined: Jul 29, 2007
-
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

- Posts: 22,699
- And1: 4,087
- Joined: Jan 30, 2002
- Location: southside of chicago
-













