The sky is no longer falling: Clips wanted a pick

[ponder276]

http://basketball.realgm.com/src_wireta ... _randolph/

As desperate as the Clips were, I still could not believe they would offer a huge trade exception and a 2nd for Z-Bo's terrible contract. Apparently the Clips were as king for a sweetener of $3 mil and a 1st round pick (if it was an unprotected 09 1st, we're probably talking a top 5 pick).

Use this thread to discuss whether Walsh still should have taken the deal, or just to laugh at the few Knicks fans who came out of the woodwork after the first Randolph rumor, claiming Z-Bo had positive value

[Serpo]

Pretty much confirms everybody's opinion ( well besides some Knick homers ) how low Zach Randolphs value is.

[Snakebites]

Zach doesn't help the Knicks, but dealing off picks just to get teams to take Isiah's problems away wouldn't have been a good start to the new regime IMO.

Picks are a crucial part of what the Knicks need to be doing. They shouldn't essentially be selling them off.

[lukeridenour]

that makes A LOT more sense..

[Anticon]

Yeah, you basically have to pay to get rid of Randolph. This redeems both Baylor and Walsh in my eyes.

Don't quite know what the Knicks will do with him. He seems like he could be reformed, but I don't know. If D'Antoni can do that, he deserves all the praise he's received.

[giberish]

http://basketball.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/53653/20080718/clips_also_wanted_pick_&_cash_along_with_randolph/

As desperate as the Clips were, I still could not believe they would offer a huge trade exception and a 2nd for Z-Bo's terrible contract. Apparently the Clips were as king for a sweetener of $3 mil and a 1st round pick (if it was an unprotected 09 1st, we're probably talking a top 5 pick).

Use this thread to discuss whether Walsh still should have taken the deal, or just to laugh at the few Knicks fans who came out of the woodwork after the first Randolph rumor, claiming Z-Bo had positive value

$3M and taking on Knight wouldn't have been a dealbreaker for the Knicks given their financial savings in the deal. The 1st round pick would have though. Although it would have to be 2012 at the earliest due to the pick the Knicks already owe Utah.

[jax98]

Zach doesn't help the Knicks, but dealing off picks just to get teams to take Isiah's problems away wouldn't have been a good start to the new regime IMO.

Picks are a crucial part of what the Knicks need to be doing. They shouldn't essentially be selling them off.

While I agree with you, it doesn't come as a surprise that teams want a first rounder to take on Zach and his contract.

IMO, Zach is not going to improve the Knicks long-term anyway, and he's a thorn in their side. So at some point you will have to raise the question:

'What will it take to get him off the roster'?

If it's a buy-out, then I wonder why this hasn't happened yet.

Zach has 3 years and $48M left on his contract. The Knicks should offer him $35M over three years in a buy-out decision. If he doesn't take it, then do to him what the Bulls did to Tim Thomas; Send him home.

If they continue their search for a trading partner, they will waste time. No one is going to want him. Besides, when you shop a player for a long period of time, the player tends to lose value quick. Seing as the Knicks are actively shopping him, teams become more aware every day on just how big of a cancer he is.

I say cut the losses, and offer him a buy-out.

[ponder276]

http://basketball.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/53653/20080718/clips_also_wanted_pick_&_cash_along_with_randolph/

As desperate as the Clips were, I still could not believe they would offer a huge trade exception and a 2nd for Z-Bo's terrible contract. Apparently the Clips were as king for a sweetener of $3 mil and a 1st round pick (if it was an unprotected 09 1st, we're probably talking a top 5 pick).

Use this thread to discuss whether Walsh still should have taken the deal, or just to laugh at the few Knicks fans who came out of the woodwork after the first Randolph rumor, claiming Z-Bo had positive value

$3M and taking on Knight wouldn't have been a dealbreaker for the Knicks given their financial savings in the deal. The 1st round pick would have though. Although it would have to be 2012 at the earliest due to the pick the Knicks already owe Utah.

Wow, I totally forgot about that. According to this page:
http://www.realgm.com/src_future_draftpicks.php
The pick is top 22 protected in 09 (so it definitely will not be used next year), but is FULLY UNPROTECTED in 2010. The Knicks should still be pretty terrible in 2009/10 (they currently have almost $70 mil in 2009/2010 salary tied up in Z-Bo, Curry, Q-Rich, Crawford, James, Jeffries, Gallinari, and Duhon, which should be roughly the worst team in the league), so it looks like Utah is getting treated to a top 5 pick.

If it was indeed the Knick's 2012 1st that the Clips were asking for, I think Walsh should have taken the deal. The Knicks should be a decent team by 2011/12, so the pick shouldn't be particularly high.

[cgf]

As previously stated we couldn't trade a pick for a long time anyway, but even so It's better to let zach try and pass more and take minutes away from curry as long as those two never even think about being on the court at the same time, than to give picks with our first bad contract, I'd rather walsh sit on the crappy contracts, see what works with the new coach what doesn't, and wait for some playoff team desperate for a secondary scorer to actually give us something for craw, just so teams see that teams have given us something for our crap in the past.