Why Zach Randolph Could Be A Sixer

[SouthJersey]

No way on Odom. He's a B version of Jamison, and if we wanted and undersized PF, just play Thad there. I'll take Randolph over him. Wasnt there a point when he was the best player on a 50 win team?

[bebopdeluxe]

TGP:

Again, it comes down to your definition of "need". While Odom is unquestionably a skilled player, I think of him more as a facilitator and secondary offensive player...not a #1 option at crunch-time.

In the half-court (in the guts of the game), with somebody like Randolph, guys like the Andre's can be the facilitators - taking what the defense gives them, putting others in positions to score the ball...and I would think that guys like Iguodala and Thad would really benefit from the space that Randolph will reate on the offensive end. I don't see how Odom creates that space.

So...from a standpoint of defense and rebounding, I don't know if there is a lot to choose between Randolph and Odom. In terms of versatility, Odom clearly gets the nod, but I think that guys like Iggy and Thad will provide some of that versatility, while Randolph provides that #1 low-post scoring option that we lack.

I can't believe that I am saying this stuff...

Again - I am only on board with this if 1) other options like Brand, Okafor, etc...are off the table, and 2) the Knicks take SIGNIFICANT salary back in the deal.

[The Guilty Party]

It's funny you bring up Jamison because I was about to ask if our lineup with Odom is all that much better than Washington's lineup.

Randolph at least brings a low post scorer who draws a double team. Odom is more of a jack of all trades, master of none.

[Sixerlover]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=3j1q6osDAEc&feature=related

[ExplosionsInDaSky]

Odom would be my first choice but i'm really for trying to trade for Mike Dunleavy from Indiana.

[sec-106]

Today, I'd rather have Odom at 1 year/$14.6, than Randolph at 3 years/$48.

[corwin]

We got rid of Chris Webber (you know a 20-10 guy) because he was a team cancer. Someone who became a negative influence on a young team. Also, a guy who didn't want to (or was unable to) play defense. A guy who was more concerned about how many touches he got on offense than he was about the team success.

Having said that, why in the world would we want to add a guy who is like a mirror image to the old version of Chris Webber? Especially one who has a contract that will put us in salary cap hell for the next 3-4 years. This guy is more concerned with his social "lifestyle" than he is about being commited to an organization paying him an enormous amount of money. It's just a matter of time before Randolph winds up in prison over his off the court "activities".

If Randolph is our starting PF next year, I think I will need to go find a new team.

Thanks for putting this in perspective. Randolph's statistics are as empty as the ones CWebb put up in 05-06. We all saw where that got us. Ed will use the cap space wisely. If there isn't anyone there worth the money go with what you have. I'd much rather have Evans, Shav & Young again rather than Randolph.

[The Guilty Party]

Again - I am only on board with this if 1) other options like Brand, Okafor, etc...are off the table, and 2) the Knicks take SIGNIFICANT salary back in the deal.

Solid post, bebop. Would you define "significant salary" as Evans and Green? If so, we really need to hope Billy King becomes the GM of the Knicks since those are his boys.

[is1531]

Alright... I know that Zach Randolph isn't the first name (or the second or the third or the seventeenth) we want to see the Sixers acquire this summer. That said, his name has been all over the Trade Board recently and a lot of posters seem to feel as though Philly is the best spot for him.

Well... I wasn't all that sure about how Mo and Zach got along in Portland (Did they like each other? Did they have issues? Was Zach a part of the Miles Fiasco?) so I went ahead and created a thread on the Portland Board to have them clear this up.

To my surprise, the Portland Posters all said that Zach and Mo got along extremely well and that Zach apparently credited Mo as the reason he became a 20/10 player in this league. Also, Zach apparently had issues with Nate McMillian because of the fact that Zach was so used to Mo's style of coaching. For some reason, I always thought that they had a contentious relationship which sort of turned me off to the idea of Randolph. Well, that and his off-court stuff.

Anywho, if Mo and Zach did get along as well as the Portland Board states they did, I could see Mo and Stefanski making a move for Zach should the cost be relatively low (cap space and Reggie Evans/Willie Green). I also agree with the Portland folk in that the Sixers are a much better fit for Randolph than most other places because of the fact that the team has a need for his inside scoring and can pair him with a defensive center in Dalembert.

Would you be satisfied if Stefanski ended up with Randolph from the cap space? If upset, would you go as far as to say that the team will somehow lose more games with Randolph than without him??

It's a nice job from your end. Randolph would not cost us very much in a trade. However, I still think the 76ers will make a push for Elton Brand and also draft Jason Thompson. I could see the 76ers buying a pick to acquire a 2 guard. I do not want to go another season with Willie Green starting.

[psykosacul]

Alright... I know that Zach Randolph isn't the first name (or the second or the third or the seventeenth) we want to see the Sixers acquire this summer.

he has no number on my list. he is actually one of the players i would never acquire because he could make the team regress IMO.

Also, Zach apparently had issues with Nate McMillian because of the fact that Zach was so used to Mo's style of coaching.

i would attribute this to macmillian being more of a task master and making guys work hard due to him being in charge, where as mo seems to buddy up to guys and be a "players coach". i wouldnt go so far as to say we would lose more games with him... but i wouldnt doubt it.

He may have his defensive deficiencies, but I think of us as a pretty good team on D.

yeah... and thats because we dont have to make up for a crappy defensive player on this team. noone is really "shut down" but they all try and have decent ability. add randalph and suddenly everyone will be making up for a weak point. thats where bad defense starts.

Randolph at the price of his current contract till 2011? I'll pass.

bingo. it took us this long to get rid of big long contracts that players dont deserve and that everyone killed billy king for... no way would i want to get one like this

[The Guilty Party]

Thanks for putting this in perspective. Randolph's statistics are as empty as the ones CWebb put up in 05-06. We all saw where that got us. Ed will use the cap space wisely. If there isn't anyone there worth the money go with what you have. I'd much rather have Evans, Shav & Young again rather than Randolph.

Wait.... I'm not a big fan of Randolph but I call BS on this. Was Webber a bad thing here... pretty much but I won't say that he was the main problem. The team as a whole had problems which also included #3.

When we acquired Webber, we weren't a very good team and went for broke by obtaining a 32 year old PF who we knew was on the downslide on his career with a bad leg. How does this correspond with Randolph who is 26 and playing with two legs under him???

How does obtaining Webber on a bad team relate to obtaining Randolph on a promising team? Webber never got along with Mo Cheeks and yet it's well documented that Randolph loved playing for Mo... where's the connection there?

Some of you may claim to see "hollow numbers" with Randolph's 20/10 but I believe those hollow numbers would be a plus on this team with the leaders and coach it has.

Also, the more I think about Randolph's salary, the less freaked out I get. I mean, I'm prepared to standby and watch Stefanski try and lure Okafor here for 5 years/$80 MIL and I'm not so sure that 5 years of Okafor at that price is better than Randolph at his.

[tk76]

In half court offense and defense Zach would be a good fit. We could use his strengths and cover his weaknesses. However, I'm still not sold. I think Zach would undermine what makes this team good- being an aggressive, trapping, high motor team.

Think of how we use Evans and Thad on our traps. They are running all over the place double teaming and disrupting things. The generate extra possessions though hustle.

For some reason the only thing I could see Zach trapping is a cookie.

Asked to trap and hustle all I can see him just getting sweaty and tired looking. Sort of like when our PF's ran him off the floor in the games we played the knicks. Poor fit.

[ProcessDoctor]

Randolph is the exact opposite of Evans really (except for the rebounding). I wouldn't mind him, but his defense and attitude are terrible. Just terrible. His inside game is very good though. He gets selfish at times, but he's a nice scorer inside which is what we are missing. If he comes cheap then I wouldn't mind him. But if I notice a dip in the team's production after a little bit, you have no choice but to get rid of him right away.

[freshie2]

That was a good point at the beginning of the page...Mo has experience with him, so I think he'd be a good judge of his true character and the decision be made based largely on that experience. If he's truly a bum, Mo should know.

[bebopdeluxe]

TGP:

Agree with your call-out of corwin...and while I understand the concerns about Randolph getting with the program here, I simply do not buy the comparisons with Webber from a basketball perspective (which you articulated well, and I feel no need to elaborate on). Zach has a positive past with the head coach and one of the assistants here, and I think that this team's personality is MUCH stronger (and much more able to deal with somebody who may have to be persuaded to get in line) than the Sixers team of a couple of years ago - where Iverson and Webber had "carte blanche" to do/say whatever they wanted, and the rest of the team was too young and not established enough to deal with it.

And - yes - I mean "Green and Evans".

Nobody answered this question from before - can we trade, say, Green, Evans and part of our cap room this summer for Zach? The way I see it, Randolph makes $13m next season (edit - $14.6m), but don't Green and Evans make $8 million? If my math is correct, we are not taking on 3 years and $48 million...we are taking on more like 3 years and $22 million net (if we trade Green and Evans)...right?

And - if we are able to split up the roughly $11 million in half to do the Randolph trade (sending them, say, a $5m exemption), that would still leave us $5-6 million under the cap to either replace Evans' ruggedness off the bench (Turiaf?), upgrade Booth, bring in a shooter or add a pure PG prospect....yes?

Again - I do not view Randolph as option #1. I would love to get Brand. But if all of the other doors that we are looking at are closed, it is an option that I might be down with. The Knicks want to move on. Green and Evans are certainly character guys who would help reinstill a positive work ethic on that team...and - like the Kings when they traded Webber - it might be easier to move smaller pieces than one big piece.

[tk76]

I believe you can trade any or all of your capspace as a "trade exemption" to the other team. I'm sure someone more knowledgeable will correct me if I am wrong.

[psykosacul]

also... as a second option to brand i think i would prefer overpaying josh smith a little as opposed to overpaying z.randolph because smith has a little potential left and has some intriguing defensive production

[bebopdeluxe]

psyko:

I'm fine with considering JSmith, but 1) I think he's gonna want more than what we will have available under the cap, and 2) I expect that Atlanta will resign him.

If they don't resign him, and Smith would take $10-11 mil to come here, then I would consider it for sure....I just don't think that is going to happen - especially if the Hawks make the playoffs.

[The Sixer Fixer]

If a rookie has to step up and call you out, you must be doing something wrong...

http://espn.go.com/mag/articles/NEXT_st ... n_roy.html

Randolph's career highlights...

[psykosacul]

1. i also expect the hawks to keep him, but he would still be my preference. (especially considering i dont want randolph at all )

2. if smith wants more money than we will have available then why do people think we can sign brand? either you are suggesting that smith will make more than brand, or people dont realize that we dont have money to sign brand. which one is true? (im not clear on the exact amount of room we will have)