http://njmg.typepad.com/knickknacks/2008/09/do-it.html

http://www.thememphisedge.com/2008/09/04/griz-lose-bennett-to-knicks/

" Any potential Memphis deal involving New York forward Zach Randolph
is now in the Knicks’ court from what I’m told. The Griz will agree to
a package that includes Darko Milicic and Marko Jaric going to the
Knicks for Randolph. But Griz brass apparently wants the Knicks to
pick up more of the deferred payments owed Randolph in the latter year
of his contract.

New York executives supposedly are deliberating. Randolph is owed
$14.6 million, $16 million and $17.3 million over the next three
seasons.

In short, this seems to be a 50/50 proposition – a scenario that bears
watching until the start of the regular season."

On Sep 5, 4:13 pm, Noah <dontsendmeyers...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://njmg.typepad.com/knickknacks/2008/09/do-it.html
>
> http://www.thememphisedge.com/2008/09/04/griz-lose-bennett-to-knicks/
>
> " Any potential Memphis deal involving New York forward Zach Randolph
> is now in the Knicks’ court from what I’m told. The Griz will agree to
> a package that includes Darko Milicic and Marko Jaric going to the
> Knicks for Randolph. But Griz brass apparently wants the Knicks to
> pick up more of the deferred payments owed Randolph in the latter year
> of his contract.
>
> New York executives supposedly are deliberating. Randolph is owed
> $14.6 million, $16 million and $17.3 million over the next three
> seasons.
>
> In short, this seems to be a 50/50 proposition – a scenario that bears
> watching until the start of the regular season."

This is an interesting proposition... Milicic rebounds and blocks at
the 5 which D's system needs. If this trade happens it subjugates
Eddy's minutes and allows him to become more of a role player - an
inside scoring specialist - while we go small at the 4 with Lee/Gallo/
Rose. That could be a fun team to watch... not very good... but fun.

Jaric is horrible and his contract is horrible but it is much less
than Randolph's so we save considerable salary in 2010.

I'm getting the vibe from the papers that Walsh isn't going to pull
the trigger on this particular deal though... that he wants a better
one.

On Sep 6, 10:40 am, "Capn'O" <dan.zin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm getting the vibe from the papers that Walsh isn't going to pull
> the trigger on this particular deal though... that he wants a better
> one.

More...

http://weblogs.newsday.com/sports/basketball/nba/blog/2008/09/darko_would_welcome_deal_to_kn.html

Time for Walsh to step up and put his money where his mouth is. If
this does happen, it'll be the first concrete evidence that Walsh
really does mean business about rebuilding. So far, all the moves
that have happened in that direction (Duhon, etc) have come without
"sacrifice". Making $10M of cap space for 2010 is a no brainer. And
the idea that the Knicks' sticking point is deferred payments (that
don't affect the cap) is total bullshit -- they'd easily make those
payments back by the savings on the Milicic contract expiring a year
earlier, and even if they didn't, do we really believe the Knicks and
Jim Dolan, after all that's happened, are suddenly stalling progress
because they're really worried about $3-4M per season in deferred
payments?

Please. History gives me the idea that what's really happening is
that Walsh is telling Dolan what we already all have known for a long
time about what must happen with this team, and Dolan's refusing to
take his medicine.

Capn'O:

> Jaric is horrible

Mr. or Mrs. ?

DG

On Sep 6, 5:54 pm, Dan Gaters <dan.gat...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Capn'O:
>
> > Jaric is horrible
>
> Mr. or Mrs. ?
>
> DG

For the benefit of Mrs. 'O I suspend all commentary about Mrs. (not
yet!) Jaric

....plus, you can't post pics on these boards...

On Sep 6, 7:38 am, "Capn'O" <dan.zin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 5, 4:13 pm, Noah <dontsendmeyers...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >http://njmg.typepad.com/knickknacks/2008/09/do-it.html
>
> >http://www.thememphisedge.com/2008/09/04/griz-lose-bennett-to-knicks/
>
> > " Any potential Memphis deal involving New York forward Zach Randolph
> > is now in the Knicks’ court from what I’m told. The Griz will agreeto
> > a package that includes Darko Milicic and Marko Jaric going to the
> > Knicks for Randolph. But Griz brass apparently wants the Knicks to
> > pick up more of the deferred payments owed Randolph in the latter year
> > of his contract.
>
> > New York executives supposedly are deliberating. Randolph is owed
> > $14.6 million, $16 million and $17.3 million over the next three
> > seasons.
>
> > In short, this seems to be a 50/50 proposition – a scenario that bears
> > watching until the start of the regular season."
>
> This is an interesting proposition... Milicic rebounds and blocks at
> the 5 which D's system needs. If this trade happens it subjugates
> Eddy's minutes and allows him to become more of a role player - an
> inside scoring specialist - while we go small at the 4 with Lee/Gallo/
> Rose. That could be a fun team to watch... not very good... but fun.
>
> Jaric is horrible and his contract is horrible but it is much less
> than Randolph's so we save considerable salary in 2010.

FUN is ok. It's the grind it out teams that lose as well that screw
up the fan base. Imagine going to a game and having fun watching a
35-40 win team that averages 105-110 pts a night...

On Sep 6, 10:35 pm, "Capn'O" <dan.zin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 6, 5:54 pm, Dan Gaters <dan.gat...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > Capn'O:
>
> > > Jaric is horrible
>
> > Mr. or Mrs. ?
>
> > DG
>
> For the benefit of Mrs. 'O I suspend all commentary about Mrs. (not
> yet!) Jaric
>
> ...plus, you can't post pics on these boards...

how about a link. Marko Jaric is a decent player, but a huge
overachiever off the court.


http://tinyurl.com/6arw6d

Enjoy.

Rizzo

"Noah" <dontsendmeyerspam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7b9e434f-dc4b-4074-86f2-703ce188c40e@m44g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 6, 10:40 am, "Capn'O" <dan.zin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I'm getting the vibe from the papers that Walsh isn't going to pull
>> the trigger on this particular deal though... that he wants a better
>> one.
>
> More...
>
> http://weblogs.newsday.com/sports/basketball/nba/blog/2008/09/darko_would_welcome_deal_to_kn.html
>
> Time for Walsh to step up and put his money where his mouth is. If
> this does happen, it'll be the first concrete evidence that Walsh
> really does mean business about rebuilding. So far, all the moves
> that have happened in that direction (Duhon, etc) have come without
> "sacrifice". Making $10M of cap space for 2010 is a no brainer. And
> the idea that the Knicks' sticking point is deferred payments (that
> don't affect the cap) is total bullshit -- they'd easily make those
> payments back by the savings on the Milicic contract expiring a year
> earlier, and even if they didn't, do we really believe the Knicks and
> Jim Dolan, after all that's happened, are suddenly stalling progress
> because they're really worried about $3-4M per season in deferred
> payments?
>
> Please. History gives me the idea that what's really happening is
> that Walsh is telling Dolan what we already all have known for a long
> time about what must happen with this team, and Dolan's refusing to
> take his medicine.

Actually, I think this is Walsh trying to make a silk purse out of a pigs
ear. He believes Randolph will have value either now or during the season
when a PF goes down on a contender.
This kind of deal in not something we need to jump at. There seems to be a
bit of a market for Zach. Other offers will come along. It's not like the
2010 FA season starts next week.
As for myself, I would have been happy with this deal, deferred payments or
not. I think Milicic still can be a good role player. Jaric on the other
hand would probably have to be cut.

>
> how about a link. Marko Jaric is a decent player, but a huge
> overachiever off the court.
>

Always has been... Ask in Italy (Bologna) for comments :)

>
> http://tinyurl.com/6arw6d
>

Horrible :)

> Rizzo

ASC

On Sep 8, 7:10 am, "Glenn Greenstein" <glen.jack...@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:
> "Noah" <dontsendmeyers...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:7b9e434f-dc4b-4074-86f2-703ce188c40e@m44g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Sep 6, 10:40 am, "Capn'O" <dan.zin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I'm getting the vibe from the papers that Walsh isn't going to pull
> >> the trigger on this particular deal though... that he wants a better
> >> one.
>
> > More...
>
> >http://weblogs.newsday.com/sports/basketball/nba/blog/2008/09/darko_w...
>
> > Time for Walsh to step up and put his money where his mouth is. If
> > this does happen, it'll be the first concrete evidence that Walsh
> > really does mean business about rebuilding. So far, all the moves
> > that have happened in that direction (Duhon, etc) have come without
> > "sacrifice". Making $10M of cap space for 2010 is a no brainer. And
> > the idea that the Knicks' sticking point is deferred payments (that
> > don't affect the cap) is total bullshit -- they'd easily make those
> > payments back by the savings on the Milicic contract expiring a year
> > earlier, and even if they didn't, do we really believe the Knicks and
> > Jim Dolan, after all that's happened, are suddenly stalling progress
> > because they're really worried about $3-4M per season in deferred
> > payments?
>
> > Please. History gives me the idea that what's really happening is
> > that Walsh is telling Dolan what we already all have known for a long
> > time about what must happen with this team, and Dolan's refusing to
> > take his medicine.
>
> Actually, I think this is Walsh trying to make a silk purse out of a pigs
> ear. He believes Randolph will have value either now or during the season
> when a PF goes down on a contender.
> This kind of deal in not something we need to jump at. There seems to be a
> bit of a market for Zach. Other offers will come along. It's not like the
> 2010 FA season starts next week.
> As for myself, I would have been happy with this deal, deferred payments or
> not. I think Milicic still can be a good role player. Jaric on the other
> hand would probably have to be cut.

I agree with Glenn. Despite all his faults, there are still plenty of
teams who could use a guy who can put up 20/10 regularly (even if he
can't guard anyone). Hell the Wizards (Bullets) made the playoffs last
year with Jamison playing no defense at all but getting his 20 and
10. But whoever takes Fat Randolph had better have a defensive Center
to make up for his mistakes. There aren't many teams that have a
defensive stopper and a need for a PF who is offense only AND plays a
slower tempo game.

Rizzo

Glenn Greenstein:

> think Milicic still can be a good role player.

You're not back to "potential" are you?

DG

On Sep 8, 10:10 am, "Glenn Greenstein" <glen.jack...@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:

> Actually, I think this is Walsh trying to make a silk purse out of a pigs
> ear. He believes Randolph will have value either now or during the season
> when a PF goes down on a contender.
> This kind of deal in not something we need to jump at. There seems to be a
> bit of a market for Zach.

What a market. So far we've been offered A) terrible contracts from
the bucks, B) nothing whatsoever from the Clippers except cap space
that would benefit us and not hurt them, so long as we sent them a
lottery pick or two, until they thought better of it and went
elsewhere for a better deal; and C) now two complete career failures
on terrible contracts in Jaric and Milicic. Same old Knicks, and same
old story here. Nobody's willing to give up anything but garbage for
garbage, and here you are as usual arguing about how much value such
players have and how somehow we'll be able to get more for them and
it's a good idea to turn down deals that will take their horrible
contracts off our books. Next you'll tell us about how many millions
a fantasy basketball player and repeated NBA failure is worth, based
on what the "market" dictates. Right? Take a look at the salary
situation around the league and you'll realize that the Knicks are
about LAST in line for space for 2010. This is not the time to be
prissying around with "can I do better".

No real contender is likely to take Zach because he can't defend
anyone and he can't play team ball, and at $17M per season by 2011 he
strangles everyone's cap without bringing winning. Period. There is
a reason the kinds of teams that are asking about them are other
desperate teams like the Bucks, Grizzlies, and Clippers and not real
"contenders" like the Celtics, Lakers, and Spurs.

> Other offers will come along.

Yes, perhaps the Bucks, after yet another losing season, will call
again to see if we want Andrew Bogut at $12-14M per until 2014 for
Zach. Or maybe the Bobcats, in their contention, will need him for
Gerald Wallace until 2013 for $11-13M per season. Who knows, maybe
we'll luck out and end up with Rashard Lewis after all from Orlando --
at up to $23M per season until 2014. What a steal!

This is his value. One bad idea and foolish act of overspending for
another, that dooms the franchise even further into the future.

Have you learned nothing in the past seven years?

Noah wrote:
> On Sep 8, 10:10 am, "Glenn Greenstein" <glen.jack...@worldnet.att.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Actually, I think this is Walsh trying to make a silk purse out of a
>> pigs ear. He believes Randolph will have value either now or during
>> the season when a PF goes down on a contender.
>> This kind of deal in not something we need to jump at. There seems
>> to be a bit of a market for Zach.
>
> What a market. So far we've been offered A) terrible contracts from
> the bucks, B) nothing whatsoever from the Clippers except cap space
> that would benefit us and not hurt them, so long as we sent them a
> lottery pick or two, until they thought better of it and went
> elsewhere for a better deal; and C) now two complete career failures
> on terrible contracts in Jaric and Milicic.

Plus they want the Knicks to pay Zach's deferred salary
I think they are paying Portland's share in exchange for the Blazers taking
Francis' contract. So that would have them paying his 24 million starting in
12 over 6 years.

On Sep 8, 7:00 pm, Noah <dontsendmeyers...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Sep 8, 10:10 am, "Glenn Greenstein" <glen.jack...@worldnet.att.net>
> wrote:
>
> > Actually, I think this is Walsh trying to make a silk purse out of a pigs
> > ear. He believes Randolph will have value either now or during the season
> > when a PF goes down on a contender.
> > This kind of deal in not something we need to jump at. There seems to be a
> > bit of a market for Zach.
>
> What a market. So far we've been offered A) terrible contracts from
> the bucks, B) nothing whatsoever from the Clippers except cap space
> that would benefit us and not hurt them, so long as we sent them a
> lottery pick or two, until they thought better of it and went
> elsewhere for a better deal; and C) now two complete career failures
> on terrible contracts in Jaric and Milicic. Same old Knicks, and same
> old story here. Nobody's willing to give up anything but garbage for
> garbage, and here you are as usual arguing about how much value such
> players have and how somehow we'll be able to get more for them and
> it's a good idea to turn down deals that will take their horrible
> contracts off our books. Next you'll tell us about how many millions
> a fantasy basketball player and repeated NBA failure is worth, based
> on what the "market" dictates. Right? Take a look at the salary
> situation around the league and you'll realize that the Knicks are
> about LAST in line for space for 2010. This is not the time to be
> prissying around with "can I do better".
>
> No real contender is likely to take Zach because he can't defend
> anyone and he can't play team ball, and at $17M per season by 2011 he
> strangles everyone's cap without bringing winning. Period. There is
> a reason the kinds of teams that are asking about them are other
> desperate teams like the Bucks, Grizzlies, and Clippers and not real
> "contenders" like the Celtics, Lakers, and Spurs.
>
> > Other offers will come along.
>
> Yes, perhaps the Bucks, after yet another losing season, will call
> again to see if we want Andrew Bogut at $12-14M per until 2014 for
> Zach. Or maybe the Bobcats, in their contention, will need him for
> Gerald Wallace until 2013 for $11-13M per season. Who knows, maybe
> we'll luck out and end up with Rashard Lewis after all from Orlando --
> at up to $23M per season until 2014. What a steal!
>
> This is his value. One bad idea and foolish act of overspending for
> another, that dooms the franchise even further into the future.
>
> Have you learned nothing in the past seven years?

I'd take Bogut or Lewis over Randolph.

On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 21:32:28 -0700 (PDT), Frank Rizzo
<champ91917@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Sep 8, 7:00 pm, Noah <dontsendmeyers...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Sep 8, 10:10 am, "Glenn Greenstein" <glen.jack...@worldnet.att.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Actually, I think this is Walsh trying to make a silk purse out of a pigs
>> > ear. He believes Randolph will have value either now or during the season
>> > when a PF goes down on a contender.
>> > This kind of deal in not something we need to jump at. There seems to be a
>> > bit of a market for Zach.
>>
>> What a market. So far we've been offered A) terrible contracts from
>> the bucks, B) nothing whatsoever from the Clippers except cap space
>> that would benefit us and not hurt them, so long as we sent them a
>> lottery pick or two, until they thought better of it and went
>> elsewhere for a better deal; and C) now two complete career failures
>> on terrible contracts in Jaric and Milicic. Same old Knicks, and same
>> old story here. Nobody's willing to give up anything but garbage for
>> garbage, and here you are as usual arguing about how much value such
>> players have and how somehow we'll be able to get more for them and
>> it's a good idea to turn down deals that will take their horrible
>> contracts off our books. Next you'll tell us about how many millions
>> a fantasy basketball player and repeated NBA failure is worth, based
>> on what the "market" dictates. Right? Take a look at the salary
>> situation around the league and you'll realize that the Knicks are
>> about LAST in line for space for 2010. This is not the time to be
>> prissying around with "can I do better".
>>
>> No real contender is likely to take Zach because he can't defend
>> anyone and he can't play team ball, and at $17M per season by 2011 he
>> strangles everyone's cap without bringing winning. Period. There is
>> a reason the kinds of teams that are asking about them are other
>> desperate teams like the Bucks, Grizzlies, and Clippers and not real
>> "contenders" like the Celtics, Lakers, and Spurs.
>>
>> > Other offers will come along.
>>
>> Yes, perhaps the Bucks, after yet another losing season, will call
>> again to see if we want Andrew Bogut at $12-14M per until 2014 for
>> Zach. Or maybe the Bobcats, in their contention, will need him for
>> Gerald Wallace until 2013 for $11-13M per season. Who knows, maybe
>> we'll luck out and end up with Rashard Lewis after all from Orlando --
>> at up to $23M per season until 2014. What a steal!
>>
>> This is his value. One bad idea and foolish act of overspending for
>> another, that dooms the franchise even further into the future.
>>
>> Have you learned nothing in the past seven years?
>
>I'd take Bogut or Lewis over Randolph.

Really??? On your team or the Knicks???
Dont get me wrong I think Lewis is a good player but damn not at that
money...

"Dan Gaters" <dan.gaters@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:C4EAF333.30C39%dan.gaters@earthlink.net...
> Glenn Greenstein:
>
>> think Milicic still can be a good role player.
>
> You're not back to "potential" are you?
>
> DG
>
Does it really matter? I'm just saying what I think.
>

"Noah" <dontsendmeyerspam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:f88acae2-4fd8-497c-bfd6-dea7b5d24cda@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 8, 10:10 am, "Glenn Greenstein" <glen.jack...@worldnet.att.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Actually, I think this is Walsh trying to make a silk purse out of a pigs
>> ear. He believes Randolph will have value either now or during the season
>> when a PF goes down on a contender.
>> This kind of deal in not something we need to jump at. There seems to be
>> a
>> bit of a market for Zach.
>
> What a market. So far we've been offered A) terrible contracts from
> the bucks, B) nothing whatsoever from the Clippers except cap space
> that would benefit us and not hurt them, so long as we sent them a
> lottery pick or two, until they thought better of it and went
> elsewhere for a better deal; and C) now two complete career failures
> on terrible contracts in Jaric and Milicic. Same old Knicks, and same
> old story here. Nobody's willing to give up anything but garbage for
> garbage, and here you are as usual arguing about how much value such
> players have and how somehow we'll be able to get more for them and
> it's a good idea to turn down deals that will take their horrible
> contracts off our books. Next you'll tell us about how many millions
> a fantasy basketball player and repeated NBA failure is worth, based
> on what the "market" dictates. Right? Take a look at the salary
> situation around the league and you'll realize that the Knicks are
> about LAST in line for space for 2010. This is not the time to be
> prissying around with "can I do better".
>
> No real contender is likely to take Zach because he can't defend
> anyone and he can't play team ball, and at $17M per season by 2011 he
> strangles everyone's cap without bringing winning. Period. There is
> a reason the kinds of teams that are asking about them are other
> desperate teams like the Bucks, Grizzlies, and Clippers and not real
> "contenders" like the Celtics, Lakers, and Spurs.
>
>> Other offers will come along.
>
> Yes, perhaps the Bucks, after yet another losing season, will call
> again to see if we want Andrew Bogut at $12-14M per until 2014 for
> Zach. Or maybe the Bobcats, in their contention, will need him for
> Gerald Wallace until 2013 for $11-13M per season. Who knows, maybe
> we'll luck out and end up with Rashard Lewis after all from Orlando --
> at up to $23M per season until 2014. What a steal!
>
> This is his value. One bad idea and foolish act of overspending for
> another, that dooms the franchise even further into the future.
>
> Have you learned nothing in the past seven years?

What you just wrote is the point of not jumping at these deals since they
all suck equally. Why rush to take them? I'm currently trying to figure out
if you are pissed Walsh is dicking around with the Randolph situation or if
you just want to scream at me again for writing what you think is me trying
to gauge value out of a turd like Zach. Actually I'm not even thinking about
it in players except Darko still can improve because he's young.
This is my point. Randolph is somewhat desirable due to his O game. 20/10
guys are not falling out of trees for GM's to sign. Also, there is an
entire year to take a deal like this. We are not looking at a situation like
a guy that just put a down payment on a new home without selling the old one
and he needs the money from the old one to close on the new one since he
can't carry both mortgages. That guy has to take whatever deal that even
looks like it's workable due to time constraints. We are not at that point
yet. We will get bad deals like these all next summer as we are now.
I agree with what Walsh is doing. He is not jumping at the average offer, he
is using the time he has in hopes that he will get something that helps the
team. These offers only help marginally and some of them not at all. There
is no reason we need to take them now. Why buy a car at the sticker price? I
can walk into any dealership in the country for that? I want to deal with
someone who is equally motivated to deal with me. Right now IMO, the rest of
the NBA is trying to figure out if Walsh is a sucker or desperate. So far he
has shown he is neither, and for this you are upset.
You said many times it doesn't matter who we get since the team is going
nowhere this season, so why take someone's garbage if you are not dropping
the entire salary off the books.
When I said I would do this deal deferred payments or not, it was looking at
the cap which will get a little better, but that was about it.

On Sep 9, 2:48 am, Syfo-Dyas <Syfo-D...@nomail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 21:32:28 -0700 (PDT), Frank Rizzo
>
>
>
> <champ91...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Sep 8, 7:00 pm, Noah <dontsendmeyers...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> On Sep 8, 10:10 am, "Glenn Greenstein" <glen.jack...@worldnet.att.net>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> > Actually, I think this is Walsh trying to make a silk purse out of a pigs
> >> > ear. He believes Randolph will have value either now or during the season
> >> > when a PF goes down on a contender.
> >> > This kind of deal in not something we need to jump at. There seems to be a
> >> > bit of a market for Zach.
>
> >> What a market. So far we've been offered A) terrible contracts from
> >> the bucks, B) nothing whatsoever from the Clippers except cap space
> >> that would benefit us and not hurt them, so long as we sent them a
> >> lottery pick or two, until they thought better of it and went
> >> elsewhere for a better deal; and C) now two complete career failures
> >> on terrible contracts in Jaric and Milicic. Same old Knicks, and same
> >> old story here. Nobody's willing to give up anything but garbage for
> >> garbage, and here you are as usual arguing about how much value such
> >> players have and how somehow we'll be able to get more for them and
> >> it's a good idea to turn down deals that will take their horrible
> >> contracts off our books. Next you'll tell us about how many millions
> >> a fantasy basketball player and repeated NBA failure is worth, based
> >> on what the "market" dictates. Right? Take a look at the salary
> >> situation around the league and you'll realize that the Knicks are
> >> about LAST in line for space for 2010. This is not the time to be
> >> prissying around with "can I do better".
>
> >> No real contender is likely to take Zach because he can't defend
> >> anyone and he can't play team ball, and at $17M per season by 2011 he
> >> strangles everyone's cap without bringing winning. Period. There is
> >> a reason the kinds of teams that are asking about them are other
> >> desperate teams like the Bucks, Grizzlies, and Clippers and not real
> >> "contenders" like the Celtics, Lakers, and Spurs.
>
> >> > Other offers will come along.
>
> >> Yes, perhaps the Bucks, after yet another losing season, will call
> >> again to see if we want Andrew Bogut at $12-14M per until 2014 for
> >> Zach. Or maybe the Bobcats, in their contention, will need him for
> >> Gerald Wallace until 2013 for $11-13M per season. Who knows, maybe
> >> we'll luck out and end up with Rashard Lewis after all from Orlando --
> >> at up to $23M per season until 2014. What a steal!
>
> >> This is his value. One bad idea and foolish act of overspending for
> >> another, that dooms the franchise even further into the future.
>
> >> Have you learned nothing in the past seven years?
>
> >I'd take Bogut or Lewis over Randolph.
>
> Really??? On your team or the Knicks???
> Dont get me wrong I think Lewis is a good player but damn not at that
> money...

Lewis is not really a good fit for my team OR the Knicks. I'm just
saying in general, I'd rather have Lewis because he at least plays
SOME defense. I agree with you that Lewis is overpaid.

Rizzo

Noah wrote:
> http://njmg.typepad.com/knickknacks/2008/09/do-it.html
>
> http://www.thememphisedge.com/2008/09/04/griz-lose-bennett-to-knicks/
>
> " Any potential Memphis deal involving New York forward Zach Randolph
> is now in the Knicks’ court from what I’m told. The Griz will agree to
> a package that includes Darko Milicic and Marko Jaric going to the
> Knicks for Randolph. But Griz brass apparently wants the Knicks to
> pick up more of the deferred payments owed Randolph in the latter year
> of his contract.
>
> New York executives supposedly are deliberating. Randolph is owed
> $14.6 million, $16 million and $17.3 million over the next three
> seasons.
>
> In short, this seems to be a 50/50 proposition – a scenario that bears
> watching until the start of the regular season."

looks like all the players involved think its a done deal

http://www.recordonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080909/SPORTS/809090322/-1/rss02

By Alan Hahn
Newsday
September 09, 2008

NEW YORK — The opportunity is there for Donnie Walsh to jettison Zach
Randolph's unwanted hefty contract from the Knicks' payroll for some
coveted salary-cap relief for 2010, but once again, according to a
person with knowledge of the situation, the cost appears to be a
precious first-round pick.

And once again, Walsh doesn't appear to be desperate enough to jump at a
deal in which the Memphis Grizzlies would take on Randolph's three years
and $48 million remaining on his contract while giving up a future
first-rounder.

The Grizzlies, according to sources, have agreed to send young 7-1
center Darko Milicic — the shot-blocking presence Walsh was looking to
get — and versatile 6-7 swingman Marko Jaric to the Knicks in the deal.
They are now playing the waiting game with Walsh, who has made it clear
he has no plans to make a knee-jerk decision.

Still, Milicic is quite confident that a trade will take place sooner
rather than later. He was quoted Monday by a Serbian Web site as saying
it was "99 percent" that he would be a Knick by the end of the week.

Jaric, 29, is in New York, where he spent his off-season with his
fiancée, Victoria's Secret model Adriana Lima. Jaric has actually been
working out with Knicks players such as Nate Robinson and David Lee.

Randolph, meanwhile, has been telling friends he expects to wind up in
Memphis before training camp opens Sept. 30.

Lee could benefit the most from the trade because he would likely slide
into Randolph's position as the starting power forward. It is also
expected that with Randolph gone, the Knicks would begin negotiating a
contract extension with Lee, who will be a restricted free agent after
this season.

Milicic's arrival would likely signal the end for oft-injured backup
center Jerome James, who still has three years and $12.8 million left on
his contract.

Glenn Greenstein:

> Darko still can improve because he's young

Did you actually write that?

DG

On Sep 9, 12:32 am, Frank Rizzo <champ91...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I'd take Bogut or Lewis over Randolph.

Forest. Trees.

On Sep 9, 10:26 am, "Glenn Greenstein" <glen.jack...@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:

> What you just wrote is the point of not jumping at these deals since they
> all suck equally. Why rush to take them?

Because there's an opportunity to seriously improve the team situation
right now in regard to cap space and future flexiblility that won't
necessarily be around later. Another year of Randolph failing to make
a difference in his team's losing fortunes -- which is a pretty likely
possibility -- will only reduce his trade value even further. If you
think these offers suck, wait until you see what comes after a couple
more losing seasons. (See: Marbury, Stephon, and look at his trade
value between 2003 and now.)

> I'm currently trying to figure out
> if you are pissed Walsh is dicking around with the Randolph situation

Yes.

> you just want to scream at me again for writing what you think is me trying
> to gauge value out of a turd like Zach.

Yes, although nobody's screaming.

> Actually I'm not even thinking about
> it in players except Darko still can improve because he's young.
> This is my point. Randolph is somewhat desirable due to his O game.

They are both repeated losers that won't take anyone anywhere. What
you see is what you get, more or less. Milicic is an overhyped bust
who had "potential" in 2004 and Randolph is a selfish, defenseless,
non-team-playing, post-microfracture salary nightmare.

> 20/10
> guys are not  falling out of trees for GM's to sign.

Right, this is your usual ludicrous, Isiah-like, fantasy-basketball
inspired argument. The slate of people lining up to sign him and what
they're offering certainly proves your point.

Nobody wants a selfish, cap-strangling career loser who has basically
failed to get a team out of the lottery for over a decade. It doesn't
matter what his individual numbers are. Again, see: Marbury, Stephon.

> Also, there is an
> entire year to take a deal like this.

What isn't falling from trees are GMs willing to pay $48M and tie up
their cap with Zach. So no, there isn't.

> yet. We will get bad deals like these all next summer as we are now.

Not necessarily.

> I agree with what Walsh is doing.

Newsday said today that the sticking point is that Memphis got greedy
and demanded a first round pick out of it. That's what the holdup is,
apparently. Better be a pretty good pick if it's going to mean paying
$10-20M a year for a loser until 2011.

> He is not jumping at the average offer, he
> is using the time he has in hopes that he will get something that helps the
> team.

What the team needs is cap space and salary structure, and to stop the
bleeding. Continuing the status quo is unequivocally NOT what will
help the team.

> These offers only help marginally and some of them not at all.

Reducing the cap by $10M for 2010 is NOT a marginal move of help.
It's a lifeline, obviously combined with other steps. Without doing
anything about Randolph, Jeffries, and Crawford we're dead in the
water.

> There
> is no reason we need to take them now. Why buy a car at the sticker price? I
> can walk into any dealership in the country for that? I want to deal with
> someone who is equally motivated to deal with me.

Except that you, in this case, made a huge mistake and bought a total
lemon that is costing you a lot of money to keep it. Think of it not
like a car but, in your favorite scenario of "potential", like a
stock. You bought a stock with "potential" at a high price and it
turned out to be a bust. Now, its value is crashing. You can wait
for a miracle that it'll magically recover, even though there's zero
evidence dating back for a decade that this will happen. You can sell
it now at a major loss and cut your losses where they are, or you can
wait until it's worth absolutely nothing on the gamble that it will go
up, and let it plummet to a penny a share and then you're stuck,
having lost everything.

What's the smart play? Sometimes you have to suck it up when you've
royally blew it, as Isiah did last summer when he traded for Randolph
(and which we all noted at the time).

> You said many times it doesn't matter who we get since the team is going
> nowhere this season, so why take someone's garbage if you are not dropping
> the entire salary off the books.

You really can't figure this out? What makes you think anyone will
allow you to take $48M off the books for three years for nothing?

> When I said I would do this deal deferred payments or not, it was lookingat
> the cap which will get a little better, but that was about it.

That's the only goal at this point. It's going to happen step by
step. It's NOT going to happen overnight. The Knicks have a $99M
payroll. Cutting $10M in one step is a pretty good move. Might even
be worth a draft pick. Desperate times call for desperate measures.

On Tue, 9 Sep 2008 09:17:02 -0700 (PDT), Frank Rizzo
<champ91917@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Sep 9, 2:48 am, Syfo-Dyas <Syfo-D...@nomail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 21:32:28 -0700 (PDT), Frank Rizzo
>>
>>
>>
>> <champ91...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >On Sep 8, 7:00 pm, Noah <dontsendmeyers...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> On Sep 8, 10:10 am, "Glenn Greenstein" <glen.jack...@worldnet.att.net>
>> >> wrote:
>>
>> >> > Actually, I think this is Walsh trying to make a silk purse out of a pigs
>> >> > ear. He believes Randolph will have value either now or during the season
>> >> > when a PF goes down on a contender.
>> >> > This kind of deal in not something we need to jump at. There seems to be a
>> >> > bit of a market for Zach.
>>
>> >> What a market. So far we've been offered A) terrible contracts from
>> >> the bucks, B) nothing whatsoever from the Clippers except cap space
>> >> that would benefit us and not hurt them, so long as we sent them a
>> >> lottery pick or two, until they thought better of it and went
>> >> elsewhere for a better deal; and C) now two complete career failures
>> >> on terrible contracts in Jaric and Milicic. Same old Knicks, and same
>> >> old story here. Nobody's willing to give up anything but garbage for
>> >> garbage, and here you are as usual arguing about how much value such
>> >> players have and how somehow we'll be able to get more for them and
>> >> it's a good idea to turn down deals that will take their horrible
>> >> contracts off our books. Next you'll tell us about how many millions
>> >> a fantasy basketball player and repeated NBA failure is worth, based
>> >> on what the "market" dictates. Right? Take a look at the salary
>> >> situation around the league and you'll realize that the Knicks are
>> >> about LAST in line for space for 2010. This is not the time to be
>> >> prissying around with "can I do better".
>>
>> >> No real contender is likely to take Zach because he can't defend
>> >> anyone and he can't play team ball, and at $17M per season by 2011 he
>> >> strangles everyone's cap without bringing winning. Period. There is
>> >> a reason the kinds of teams that are asking about them are other
>> >> desperate teams like the Bucks, Grizzlies, and Clippers and not real
>> >> "contenders" like the Celtics, Lakers, and Spurs.
>>
>> >> > Other offers will come along.
>>
>> >> Yes, perhaps the Bucks, after yet another losing season, will call
>> >> again to see if we want Andrew Bogut at $12-14M per until 2014 for
>> >> Zach. Or maybe the Bobcats, in their contention, will need him for
>> >> Gerald Wallace until 2013 for $11-13M per season. Who knows, maybe
>> >> we'll luck out and end up with Rashard Lewis after all from Orlando --
>> >> at up to $23M per season until 2014. What a steal!
>>
>> >> This is his value. One bad idea and foolish act of overspending for
>> >> another, that dooms the franchise even further into the future.
>>
>> >> Have you learned nothing in the past seven years?
>>
>> >I'd take Bogut or Lewis over Randolph.
>>
>> Really??? On your team or the Knicks???
>> Dont get me wrong I think Lewis is a good player but damn not at that
>> money...
>
>Lewis is not really a good fit for my team OR the Knicks. I'm just
>saying in general, I'd rather have Lewis because he at least plays
>SOME defense. I agree with you that Lewis is overpaid.
>
>Rizzo

I could agree with that! I mean is he overpaid or what??? I dont know
if he is the most over paid but he has got to be in the top 3. To me
he does not really play any real defense but I guess he is ok. Where
he excels is his shooting. Now what makes him good to me is that at
his size he should be able to create so many mismatches at SF. Now he
might be good if on a team with a PG who plays great defense and is a
penetrator distributor first and then he would need a SG that is a
great defender and also a cutter and slasher. Then the PF and Center
would have to be defensive minded and rebounders, because even at
6'10" he does not rebound that well. Did he capitalize on being a free
agent or what?? Who has a better contract than him. I mean at best he
is a complimentary player to another superstar and he isnt even in
Pippen's class IMHO. That guy either got lucky or just had the right
timing....

On Sep 9, 9:42 pm, Syfo-Dyas <Syfo-D...@nomail.com> wrote:

> Now what makes him good to me is that at
> his size he should be able to create so many mismatches at SF. Now he
> might be good if on a team with a PG who plays great defense and is a
> penetrator distributor first and then he would need a SG that is a
> great defender and also a cutter and slasher. Then the PF and Center
> would have to be defensive minded and rebounders, because even at
> 6'10" he does not rebound that well.

To me, if you're going to pay $10M+ a year for a player, the
suggestion that you should have to completely restructure half your
starting lineup in order to make up for that player's deficiencies and
have a chance to be good with that player is beyond ludicrous. (See:
Curry, Eddy).

And, historically, it's never worked. Not even with Kobe when there
wasn't a prime Shaq and Phil Jackson and a slew of really good role
players. Lewis ain't Kobe and neither is Zach Randolph or Rashard
Lewis or any of these other jokers, and their surrounding cast is far
worse.

So let's stop arguing that these are acceptable deals that we should
sit on and wait for something better (how good is it going to get?),
and that someone is gonna come along and give something really good
for them. Cut your losses and get out.

> how good is it going to get?

Let's ask Isiah Lord Thomas III. You think he's sitting idly in retirement!
He has a plan.

You losers are going to be shocked by the new Knicks this seasons.

DG

On Sep 9, 6:42 pm, Syfo-Dyas <Syfo-D...@nomail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Sep 2008 09:17:02 -0700 (PDT), Frank Rizzo
>
>
>
> <champ91...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Sep 9, 2:48 am, Syfo-Dyas <Syfo-D...@nomail.com> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 21:32:28 -0700 (PDT), Frank Rizzo
>
> >> <champ91...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >On Sep 8, 7:00 pm, Noah <dontsendmeyers...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >> On Sep 8, 10:10 am, "Glenn Greenstein" <glen.jack...@worldnet.att.net>
> >> >> wrote:
>
> >> >> > Actually, I think this is Walsh trying to make a silk purse out of a pigs
> >> >> > ear. He believes Randolph will have value either now or during the season
> >> >> > when a PF goes down on a contender.
> >> >> > This kind of deal in not something we need to jump at. There seems to be a
> >> >> > bit of a market for Zach.
>
> >> >> What a market. So far we've been offered A) terrible contracts from
> >> >> the bucks, B) nothing whatsoever from the Clippers except cap space
> >> >> that would benefit us and not hurt them, so long as we sent them a
> >> >> lottery pick or two, until they thought better of it and went
> >> >> elsewhere for a better deal; and C) now two complete career failures
> >> >> on terrible contracts in Jaric and Milicic. Same old Knicks, and same
> >> >> old story here. Nobody's willing to give up anything but garbage for
> >> >> garbage, and here you are as usual arguing about how much value such
> >> >> players have and how somehow we'll be able to get more for them and
> >> >> it's a good idea to turn down deals that will take their horrible
> >> >> contracts off our books. Next you'll tell us about how many millions
> >> >> a fantasy basketball player and repeated NBA failure is worth, based
> >> >> on what the "market" dictates. Right? Take a look at the salary
> >> >> situation around the league and you'll realize that the Knicks are
> >> >> about LAST in line for space for 2010. This is not the time to be
> >> >> prissying around with "can I do better".
>
> >> >> No real contender is likely to take Zach because he can't defend
> >> >> anyone and he can't play team ball, and at $17M per season by 2011 he
> >> >> strangles everyone's cap without bringing winning. Period. There is
> >> >> a reason the kinds of teams that are asking about them are other
> >> >> desperate teams like the Bucks, Grizzlies, and Clippers and not real
> >> >> "contenders" like the Celtics, Lakers, and Spurs.
>
> >> >> > Other offers will come along.
>
> >> >> Yes, perhaps the Bucks, after yet another losing season, will call
> >> >> again to see if we want Andrew Bogut at $12-14M per until 2014 for
> >> >> Zach. Or maybe the Bobcats, in their contention, will need him for
> >> >> Gerald Wallace until 2013 for $11-13M per season. Who knows, maybe
> >> >> we'll luck out and end up with Rashard Lewis after all from Orlando --
> >> >> at up to $23M per season until 2014. What a steal!
>
> >> >> This is his value. One bad idea and foolish act of overspending for
> >> >> another, that dooms the franchise even further into the future.
>
> >> >> Have you learned nothing in the past seven years?
>
> >> >I'd take Bogut or Lewis over Randolph.
>
> >> Really??? On your team or the Knicks???
> >> Dont get me wrong I think Lewis is a good player but damn not at that
> >> money...
>
> >Lewis is not really a good fit for my team OR the Knicks. I'm just
> >saying in general, I'd rather have Lewis because he at least plays
> >SOME defense. I agree with you that Lewis is overpaid.
>
> >Rizzo
>
> I could agree with that! I mean is he overpaid or what??? I dont know
> if he is the most over paid but he has got to be in the top 3. To me
> he does not really play any real defense but I guess he is ok. Where
> he excels is his shooting. Now what makes him good to me is that at
> his size he should be able to create so many mismatches at SF. Now he
> might be good if on a team with a PG who plays great defense and is a
> penetrator distributor first and then he would need a SG that is a
> great defender and also a cutter and slasher. Then the PF and Center
> would have to be defensive minded and rebounders, because even at
> 6'10" he does not rebound that well. Did he capitalize on being a free
> agent or what?? Who has a better contract than him. I mean at best he
> is a complimentary player to another superstar and he isnt even in
> Pippen's class IMHO. That guy either got lucky or just had the right
> timing....

You're right. He got lucky. He's a good SF who can rebound and
defend a little better than average. He's not an all-star SF like RJ,
Paul Pierce, LBJ, Melo, or even Butler, and he's playing 4 out of
position. He's better than Zach though because he can play in a
halfcourt OR full court offense and he defends better. Both contracts
are horrible.

On Sep 9, 9:22 pm, Noah <dontsendmeyers...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>  Better be a pretty good pick if it's going to mean paying
> $10-20M a year for a loser until 2011.

You think it won't be? :)

Noah: I doubt we get much _better_ offers for Zach alone. Perhaps
something that fits our needs better. But I agree with that.

However, packaging Zach and someone else (Lee, Chandler) may get us
something we actually want in return. More cap space, a better player.
Now, Jaric and Darko I could take or leave, really. Darko's not
_horrible_ and prolly fits our team better but he's clearly a limited
offensive player though a decent defender. In the end, I'd do the
Marko-Darko deal and I suspect we'll still get the chance to.

We don't really know what the offer was but if a #1 was involved I
want no part in it. Next year's draft is projected to be a stellar PG
class... and we don't get a pick the next year (unless we're one of
the top teams this year, lol) due to the Stiffbury trade.

Capn'O:

> You think it won't be? :)

This afternoon, out of nowhere, I saw Carlos Boozer and his family at a
downtown park. Shook hands, etc.

So the new news is Boozer for Zach.
Chew on it.

DG

On Sep 10, 9:54 pm, Dan Gaters <dan.gat...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Capn'O:
>
> > You think it won't be? :)
>
> This afternoon, out of nowhere, I saw Carlos Boozer and his family at a
> downtown park. Shook hands, etc.
>
> So the new news is Boozer for Zach.
> Chew on it.
>
> DG

Random response or did you miss my meaning?

I like that deal :) I will write a blog about it. With "sources".

Capn'O:

> Random response or did you miss my meaning?
>
> I like that deal :) I will write a blog about it. With "sources".

I swear I saw Boozer downtown. Today. With his family.
I mean what else would he be in downtown NYC besides talking to Walshy? And
perhaps apartment hunting, right?

DG

On Sep 10, 6:54 pm, Dan Gaters <dan.gat...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Capn'O:
>
> > You think it won't be? :)
>
> This afternoon, out of nowhere, I saw Carlos Boozer and his family at a
> downtown park. Shook hands, etc.
>
> So the new news is Boozer for Zach.
> Chew on it.
>
> DG

hahahaha.....That is an ANTI ZEKE proposal.

On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 20:33:34 -0700 (PDT), Frank Rizzo
<champ91917@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Sep 10, 6:54 pm, Dan Gaters <dan.gat...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> Capn'O:
>>
>> > You think it won't be? :)
>>
>> This afternoon, out of nowhere, I saw Carlos Boozer and his family at a
>> downtown park. Shook hands, etc.
>>
>> So the new news is Boozer for Zach.
>> Chew on it.
>>
>> DG
>
>hahahaha.....That is an ANTI ZEKE proposal.

I agree with frank. I mean what would Isiah want with boozer??? How in
the hell does he make us better??? LOL!!!!!!
We should be so lucky. So let me get this straight.. Boozer for Zach
straight up right???

"Noah" <dontsendmeyerspam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2bdecb7a-2bd7-4c7a-b792-4c45a15a6097@m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 9, 12:32 am, Frank Rizzo <champ91...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I'd take Bogut or Lewis over Randolph.

Forest. Trees.

Welcome to the club Frank :)

On Sep 11, 5:24 am, Syfo-Dyas <Syfo-D...@nomail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 20:33:34 -0700 (PDT), Frank Rizzo
>
> <champ91...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Sep 10, 6:54 pm, Dan Gaters <dan.gat...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >> Capn'O:
>
> >> > You think it won't be? :)
>
> >> This afternoon, out of nowhere, I saw Carlos Boozer and his family at a
> >> downtown park. Shook hands, etc.
>
> >> So the new news is Boozer for Zach.
> >> Chew on it.
>
> >> DG
>
> >hahahaha.....That is an ANTI ZEKE proposal.
>
> I agree with frank. I mean what would Isiah want with boozer??? How in
> the hell does he make us better??? LOL!!!!!!
> We should be so lucky. So let me get this straight.. Boozer for Zach
> straight up right???

Hell, why would Isiah or Walsh do that. It ruins the master plan.

On Sep 11, 9:47 am, "Glenn Greenstein" <glen.jack...@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:
> "Noah" <dontsendmeyers...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:2bdecb7a-2bd7-4c7a-b792-4c45a15a6097@m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 9, 12:32 am, Frank Rizzo <champ91...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > I'd take Bogut or Lewis over Randolph.
>
> Forest. Trees.
>
> Welcome to the club Frank :)

Well, in trading one bad contract for another bad contract (more
expensive and longer, but a MUCH better player) you may be helping
yourself. Of course at this point, if I were Walsh, all draft picks
would be off the table in negotiations. The young players are
cheaper.

RIzzo