RealGM

I compare New York trading for Zach Randolph to when Boston traded for Vin Baker. In other words, I was very wary of Boston getting Baker and I was wary of New York getting Zach Randolph. So, I'm not at all surprised that Zach Randolph and Eddy Curry playing together hasn't worked out. I mean everyone and their mother should had been wary of Vin Baker coming to Boston and Zach Randolph coming to New York. I do recall some of those of the national media outspoken against making these trades. And I concurred.

And I remember seeing how excited Spike Lee was on draft night.

bonsaiflipflops wrote:I compare New York trading for Zach Randolph to when Boston traded for Vin Baker. In other words, I was very wary of Boston getting Baker and I was wary of New York getting Zach Randolph. So, I'm not at all surprised that Zach Randolph and Eddy Curry playing together hasn't worked out. I mean everyone and their mother should had been wary of Vin Baker coming to Boston and Zach Randolph coming to New York. I do recall some of those of the national media outspoken against making these trades. And I concurred.

And I remember seeing how excited Spike Lee was on draft night.

That was nothing compared to how excited Marbury was in that youtube clip. Whenever I'm feeling down, I just watch that clip about Marbury saying they got a "youthier" "southpaw" and about how "they scared now!!".

But seriously, I don't see the comparison. The Knicks are in salary cap hell for..well forever. They were a mess before the trade and they're still a mess. For the Celtics, however, they could have either let Kenny Anderson's contract expire, or gotten a better deal at the trade deadline. But instead, they made a trade that not only hurt the team on the court, but also killed the teams salary cap for years.

Knicks are a mess. They are trying to trade players that nobody wants on their team at any cost. They have about 3-4 decent players and the rest are garbage with big contracts. Isiah has detroyed the Knicks. I feel bad for their fans.

To be fair, no one expected Baker to give us 2 and 1. The guy's worst season before coming to Boston was around 14 and 10. If he just duplicated his worst season, it wouldn't have been such a horrid deal.

SuperDeluxe wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYY338_JgvI

Ahh, I'm at a client site that blocks youtube. I really wish I could watch the video. It would be a nice pick-me-up.

CelticsWhat! wrote:Ahh, I'm at a client site that blocks youtube. I really wish I could watch the video. It would be a nice pick-me-up.

That clip is only second to Starbury on Mic'd Up. How no one noticed he was high as a kite before going on air is beyond me.

To be clear, what I mean by bringing up Baker with the latest news that Randolph and/or Curry are on the trading block. Is that the media in general were warning you, the readers or listeners, that getting Baker and Randolph can prove costly. A mistake that could backfire, if you will. Honestly, I wasn't a fan of acquiring Baker for the simple fact that he was regressing with Seattle after that first season. I was a fan of his during his Milwaukee days. But, I didn't feel comfortable taking that risk of bringing him aboard and so close to home. He'd played at Hartford and perhaps grew up somewhere in CT as well. Still, supporters of this trade felt if he came back to New England he could turn around his career or what have you. As for Randolph, my feeling was alike to the national criticism of the trade. How would two post players function together in New York? Anyways, I'm not a fan of Randolph or I'm indifferent about him or most players in the league in general outside of those players who I'm a fan of. But, in my opinion, I would keep Randolph over Curry. Randolph is productive but has character issues and has had off the court issues. Still, you don't just get rid of a potential double-double player like that. Wait. Chicago did with Brand. Never mind.

If Randolph doesn't want to play for New York anymore and he's creating a distraction. Then maybe he and franchise need to part ways. Curry is more of their mistake. That's why I would try to convince Randolph that things could change in New York and work hard to move Curry and other players deem expendable.

But, in both cases, the idea of good things to come from trading for Baker and Randolph hasn't met the initial expectations.

The Knicks are a joke but at least Randolph produces and is not drunk at practice. Look at what Steve Francis is doing now. I think the deal was still a good one for the Knicks.

Randolph could be a force with the right team and with the right attitude.

Lol at Spike Lee's generalization at 1:40

http://youtube.com/watch?v=6wD7CItk8H0

Lol at Spike Lee at 0:22

http://youtube.com/watch?v=iSVwXRZ-4AQ

I still think that the Baker trade was worse. At least Randolph can still play. Baker was on the decline when the Celtics traded for him. Knicks are going to be hard pressed to trade Randolph to anybody with his contract. Sam with Curry. To this day I still do not understand how Thomas still has a job. What more can he do to screw up the team?

Luxurytaxlotterybust wrote:The Knicks are a joke but at least Randolph produces and is not drunk at practice. Look at what Steve Francis is doing now. I think the deal was still a good one for the Knicks.

Randolph could be a force with the right team and with the right attitude.

I agree. In fact even without the right attitude, as long as its a respectable attitude, he's still better than a lot of alternatives. People look at his weaknesses and forget about his strengths.

He's not a very good fit for the Knicks current roster - he needs to be alongside a strong defensive center ideally - but the Knicks gave up very little to get him. Is Channing Frye a better defender than Randolph? Was Steve Francis going to put them over the top by providing a meaningful locker room presence? I don't see how the trade makes the Knicks positioned worse than they were previously positioned.

Vin Baker was 4 years into a precipitous decline, and I believe he had already signed a ludicrous extension, and it was hoped he could be rejuvenated by coming home to New England.

Zach Randolph was coming off a career season and went to a team that just wasn't a good fit.

Both came relatively cheaply...but it's absurd to think the Randolph traded was anywhere near as bad as the Baker deal.

Randolph is a post player that works best down low in a half court offense. So, he should be paired with a center in the starting lineup that can work away from the basket and be effective shooting the ball as not to crowd the inside. Centers who can play on the perimeter include Andrea Bargnani, Zydrunas Ilgauskas, Mehmet Okur or Brad Miller. I can see him playing for Cleveland (if Gooden is traded) or Sacramento (he's better than Abdur-Rahim), if they can afford him, since they really could use his post presence. Toronto and Utah already have Bosh and Boozer, so it's unlikely he'll draw their interest.

The Knicks truly are a train wreck.

As others have said it's really a shame too. Just like the C's, the league is better when the Knicks are good.

The scary part is that if someone more competent than Isaiah took over they could turn it around fairly quickly. Next year they will have two expiring contracts in Marbury and Rose. Plus there are a number of players with options who could in theory bolt.

Plus they could easily land the top pick in the upcoming draft.

It's just too bad that they traded for so many players with questionable attitudes. You can have one bad apple on a team but when you have a bunch...it's trouble.

Wow. Baker was a terrible trade but the C's unloaded an absolute anchor of a contract with Kenny Anderson in Vitaly Potapenko. With the buyout that trade only cost Boston 10 mil in salary and kept them under the lux tax that season. For all the crying what did Boston give up in that deal?

Randolph isn't drunk, this is who he is and they have 4 years left on a deal that is just shy of the max. That said Zach frankly isn't the problem.

The problem is Eddy Curry who is a fat Mark Blount.

Randolph could possibly be traded to Miami for Blount and RD. Losers for more losers.

1) New York gave up nothing to get Randolph. Boston gave up their starting point guard (who was not working out). I believe both were expiring contracts.

2) Baker's skills were on the clear decline while Randolph is still improving.

3) Although Randolph came with baggage it was a carry on compared to the steamer chest Vin Baker brought. Baker had a well documented issue with alcohol.

4) Whether or not it turned out that way, the Randolph trade was made with the idea the team would get better with him. The Baker trade was made to save the owner money.

5) Boston did (does) not have the resources to take on an albatros of a contract and get nothing in return. The Knick can afford to spend money like a drunken sailor.