The opportunity was there, though it was through a small window. The Clippers needed to quickly recover from the loss of Elton Brand and Mike Dunleavy had a little chat with his old friend Donnie Walsh.
The details get a little blurry from here. Originally the whispers were that Walsh wanted a second-round pick for Randolph; essentially a salary dump, which the Clippers, with plenty of cap space, could do. But the Clips wanted a little more in the deal, perhaps a first-round pick and the Knicks had to take Brevin Knight's guaranteed contract. 
This is usually a starting point in negotiations. But Walsh and the Clippers never got to Stage 2. The Denver Nuggets dangled Marcus Camby, a defensive player and cheaper contract, and gladly gave up the second-rounder.
It was back to the phones for Donnie, who is finding fewer and fewer teams with reasonable interest in Randolph, which is to say, willing to take him without sending an albatross of a contract, or two, back to New York.
Those days are over, Fixers. There was a time Isiah Thomas felt this was a necessary practice to get the type of players you wanted. The Garden money tree could handle bad contracts. Teams still believe if Walsh was desperate enough, he would eventually crack and do the same: My unwanted player for your unwanted contract.
Don't bet on it.
Randolph's value right now is very low for several reasons, mainly because he has three years and $48 million left on a max contract he should have never gotten from Paul Allen. The guy does put up consistent numbers that would make any fantasy basketball geek drool. But in the real world, Zach Randolph is not considered a building block. He's a risk. Milwaukee considered it and so did Denver, but neither pulled the trigger. The Clippers situation will hang over Donnie until Randolph is finally moved. With Utah getting the 2010 pick, you can't give up the 2009 choice or the 2011 choice. So where does that leave you? The 2012 pick?
There are very few reasonable destinations for Randolph at this point -- Memphis has cap space and a need for a low-post scorer, Detroit is looking to make changes and a ZBo-for-Sheed deal would work for both sides and who's to say the Clippers won't reconsider the younger, less injury-prone and better offensive choice in Randolph for Camby, once the trade moratorium lifts?
Admittedly, these are merely suggestions. Reality is that Walsh may have to pass on taking on contracts just to move Randolph and instead take him into the season, get him playing well and hope by the trade deadline there is interest once again in him.
I blogged this back in the spring that I heard the Knicks were close to moving Randolph to the Denver Nuggets right before the deadline. It wasn't a done deal, but it was very, very close. But a source with knowledge of the talks said while Glen Grunwald had handled most of the work, Isiah Thomas jumped in at the 11th hour and started tinkering with the deal. The Nuggets were already on the verge of civil war about the trade so Isiah's last-minute meddling caused the whole thing to shut down. The way it was told to me, Grunwald was frustrated.
But let's not even dare to assume the Knicks would have won that deal. In fact, I was told Isiah was tinkering because he was concerned with the public perception of the trade being a major loss for the Knicks, who almost certainly would have had to take Nene's contract as part of the deal. Linus Kleiza was the player the Knicks wanted, but I'm told he was off the table.
So you could see Zach and Eddy Curry once again as the frontcourt tandem at least in the first half of the season. As bad as that may sound, what you have to hope this season is that the head coach will put some time and effort into figuring out how to make it work with those two together. Isiah made that trade for Zach but then seemingly put no effort into strategy to get the most out of Zach and Eddy together. Randolph has a better-than-average mid-range game and he can rebound. He doesn't need to battle with Eddy for low-post time. He can be an effective pick-and-pop guy and high-post guy.
This isn't to say there's no way Randolph gets traded before or during training camp, but I think Fixer Nation needs to be prepared for the potential that Z-Bo goes through another season as a Knick. If he can put up his numbers and look good, his value will go up as his contract (at least the length of it) goes down.
The Clipper talks were a missed opportunity. But you don't want to make a bad decision just to cover up for it.
Stay tuned . . .
Comments (34)
Alan, in reading all of the papers and blogs this morning, no one seems to be answering the key question from yesterday's Balkman deal. Why?
--Why deal Balkman for nothing when all this deal does is pick up $1.3m in cap room. That's nothing on a $90m cap.
--Why not hold on to him and see if they could at least get a first round pick later in the season when teams have injured players, and other reasons to deal?
--If the answer is to get to the roster limit of 15, why the heck is Marbury and James still on this team? Marbury will get his $20m whether its a buy out or the pay it out and he does nothing but deflate his teammates and fans.
Not one writer has made a clear statement as to why this deal was made now.
Not that I really care that much or wanted him, but another Center bites the dust:
Kwame Brown's search for another fresh start is taking him back to the Eastern Conference.
The center and the Detroit Pistons agreed to a two-year, $8 million contract Monday night. Pistons president of basketball operations Joe Dumars confirmed the deal to The Associated Press late Monday.
Does this leave room for a Sheed move?
I want Chauncey, any chance?
Marbury is a weed head.
It would appear to me that Balkman has no place on this team. He keeps dropping on the depth chart.
Looks like a favor to him. At least he can compete for playing time in Detroit.
David, I was with you till I saw this quote from D'Antoni in the AP (And WTF, Alan? NYC beat writers don't get to go to Macau?):
"Renaldo really had no role after we drafted Gallinari, and with the emergence of Wilson Chandler his minutes would be nonexistent," Knicks coach Mike D'Antoni said in Macau, where is on the U.S. Olympic team staff. "So it really wasn't fair to him to keep him in a spot that he wouldn't play and also gives us an opportunity to clear up a roster spot and move on."
So there you have it - the "why" is that D'Antoni plans to play Chandler (who is kind of like a Balkman with offensive skills), Q, and Gallinari (even Jeffries) before Balkman.
While it's not much of a salary saver, it does make sense to let go a player that is never going to get off the bench. You know the old saying, "If you love something, set it free..."
If you still don't get it, check this link...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mn1riDh8cyQ
The question is how much of a change can a real coach make in the way the Knicks' more frustrating players play. Zach would seem to have the skills to play pick and roll/pick and pop, but he's never really been a pick and roll guy. He's always been basically a chucker. If its just that he has tended to play for undisciplined teams (Isiah's Knicks qualify, don't know enough about his Portland teams to say) then he may well look better and bump his value next season. If it's because he's not inclined or unwilling to play within an offense, then D'Antoni has a problem and may have to sit him. I'm not so worried about hurting his value though - the Clippers wanted an extra incentive to take him for nothing when they had a huge hole at his position. You can't really get less desirable then that. Taking on bad contracts to get rid of him is pointless - Zach's problem is that he is a bad contract. Maybe for a shorter or expiring deal.
Trading first rounders, especially when the Knicks are rebuilding, can't happen. The draft is the source for young affordable players, who are necessary if the plan is to have a solid foundation in place with enough salary flexibility to bid for a major free agent in 2010. Of all the blunders of the last few years, dealing so many picks away was one of the worst.
re. Balkman - maybe the Knicks really wanted to get a look at Taurean Green...
Charles, I saw that quote too . . but it doesn't tell me WHY they had to trade him now, and for absolutely nothing.
There are other players who won't get to play next year either - -
Rose, Collins, etc., and the Knicks haven't set them free.
And I don't have an issue with trading Balkman, I have an issue trading him for nothing particularly while roster space is still taken up by the likes of Marbury and James.
The only hope the Knicks have is that Randolph prospers in D'Antoni's system, puts up big numbers, keeps his nose clean, and draws interest from some clubs. I don't know which one is more/less likely to happen.
I'm pretty sure this is my first time posting, although I've been at other forums.
I don't see Balkman squeezing into the depth chart. Here's my perspective: certainly not the starter or first sub at SF or at PF (those roles belong to Randolph, Lee, Chandler, and Gallinari). That puts him at LEAST as your 3rd option, although Jared Jeffries is competing for the same role. In the long term, Jeffries can play all 3 frontcourt positions and doesn't have a questionable work ethic. So now Balkman's at #4 (at least) at both forward positions. SG/PG are out of the question due to his lack of offense, which leaves the Knicks trying him at C in a verysmallball type of offense, which is what we saw in Vegas (and, thankfully, will stay in Vegas).
So there's two options:
A. You like him so much that you keep him as an ace in the hole. While he provides security in case of an emergency, he also rapidly drops in value from inactivity.
B. Or you resign to trade him while you can still get two prospects and a 2nd rounder in exchange.
What we can take from this is that management is VERY confident in the long-term viability of Chandler and Gallinari in D'Antoni's system.
...
Oh, that's cute, you guys have a security code.
@ dfz - it's more irritating than cute, but welcome aboard
What I don't like about the Balkman trade is that it is that he was by far the best defensive player on the team. I know D'Antoni is about offense, but the Knicks were horrible on the defensive end last year, and adding Gallo and Roberson won't change that. D'Antoni's Suns teams were actually pretty good on defense (the pace they played at meant they gave up a lot of points, but their differential and opponent's shooting % were good) - the '08-'09 Knicks probably won't be. Unless Jones sticks and becomes a stopper, this trade doesn't seem to have netted much for a guy who could play an important role. Running when you can't stop anyone is a recipe for frequent blow-outs.
Thanks, Pete.
I agree with all of your points, which are all valid. But D'Antoni won't have ANY of the parts he needs to run that kind of offense, which makes me think he's got something a little different in mind. Maybe he and Walsh are having wet dreams of The Perfect Offense, where you score 60% despite your foes' best efforts.
But seriously, certainly you agree that Balkman was the 3rd option at F. And Randolph will get a lot of minutes because he'll be showcased, meaning even less time to go around. I like an underdog as much as the next guy, but I also recognize concerns that he's getting lazy (or perhaps distracted by success beyond any of his reasonable expectations), so that's where his appeal ends. Defense is nice, but undervalued in the NBA. D'Andre Jordan went in the 2nd round this year - we'll find a replacement eventually, might as well move Balkman before he destroys his own value.
Hopefully he'll remain the underdog and we'll see him have a happy ending, but with AI and Melo already in the fold in Denver, I wouldn't bet on it. With AI, Birdman, and now Balkman, Denver is rapidly becoming a place where you go after you betray your fans' trust.
I STILL THINK WALSH SHOULD HAVE
TRADED Z-BO TO THE CLIPPERS!
i think that was a missed oppurtunity to dump his
salary without taking back any bad contracts.
i don't see how the knicks can go into the season
with a lazy frontline of Zach and Curry
walsh effed up that chance to get rid of
that horrible contract.
and now we are stuck with him.
thanks walsh
@David
if D'antoni said that he no plans to play Balkman
why Keep him?
his trade value was low already.
going into next season he might have become
a malcontent and frustrated...no playing time
and his trade value would have dropped even lower
i am glad to hear that Chandler will be picking up
major playing time.
if isiah had shut Q down and played Chandler
last year he might been further along in his development
to me trading "no shoot" Balkman
was a nonstory
@ Pete. Good point about the Knicks defense vs. the Suns. But remember Balkman wasn't going to play anyway so I don't think it makes a difference how good a defender he is/was (I still think he was not a good team defensive player because he cheats way too much on defense and gets beaten back door on simple cuts, although he is a very good shotblocker).
Either way, it looks like we will be using Q-Rich and Jeffries for defensive purposes at the 3. Unlike many here I actually think Q-Rich is a good defender when healthy and def is a better shooter than Balkman, Chandler and Jeffires if Curry or Zach ever decide to pass out of a double team. Q-Rich is also a pretty smart player so I hope he returns to form and has a big year. I know I'm the pessimist of this blog but I'm actually surprised Balkman's value was this high right now. I mean how many bench players (and I'm talking 10th man) on a 23 win team will yield you a 2nd round draft pick.
Some free agents left that can fill-in at center (figuring Big Snacks is next to go) and are affordable:
- Alonzo Mourning
- Theo Ratliff
- Jamaal Maglorie
I think everyone misses the point when they argue that balkman wasn't going to play anyway.
1. He is young
2. He plays hard
3. We got nothing at all back
4. We have other worthless players if we need a roster spot.
5. We need to have a bench
The bottom line is that he was a potential asset. If he doesn't want to sit on the bench he can learn to shoot...or the offense.
He should have been kept until he was worth something or his contract expired.
UNless we really have an interest in one of the aquired players this was a stupid trade.
Thank you Emac2, that was exactly my point.
problem with balkman is that while us knicks fans might've appreciated his hustle (dude even tattooed the mantra on his legs), other teams see a 2nd round talent.
it's a shame that the knicks player development was so terrible, cause like others here, i think that balkman could be a real contributor.
if the deal included a knicks first round pick, im glad they didnt trade zbo. give him some a lot of touches early in the season, let some more time on his contract peel away, then trade him and get more out of the deal.
next season's going to be a rebuilding year anyway.
If he doesn't play (EVER)...how does he raise his stock past being worth a 2nd round pick??
That is everyone else's point...
@E-mac and David
how could Balkman increase his trade value
if he does not play?
wouldn't his trade value go down?
people talking about balkman like
he is dennis rodman or something
he is a limited player
that if used correctly on a
good team would have value
but the key word is on a "good team"
the knicks only won 23 games last year
so if chandler could give you the defense
of balkman and shoot the ball
it is a no brainer who D'antoni
is going to play
i was actually surprised we got a 2nd rounder
he only averaged 2.3 points a game
....on the bright side, another year of z-bo, curry and lee-
that's a *formidible* front line.
you hear that boston? formidible. you even know what that word means?
ugh...
@E-mac and David:
Who are these "other players" the Knicks could have dumped?
Rose? Rose is the 3rd PF on the depth chart for PF, 2nd for center, and the ONLY Knick who can defend bigs, so I think we'll be seeing more of Rose than you think. In addition, he is a veteran with championship experience and strong locker room leadership, so he has value beyond his playing time. He also has a 7.6 million dollar contract. How are you going to find non-guaranteed contracts worth 7.6 mil?
Collins? If the Knicks do shed Marbury, Collins is your 1st or 2nd backup PG. But sure, if you can find someone who's willing to give up a second round draft pick and two non-guaranteed contracts for Collins, then go ahead and make that deal.
James? Marbury? You can buy 'em out, but that's not going to save you money or cap space. Remember, Lee is a restricted FA next year.
I like Balkman, I think he has upside, and I will miss his dreads, but I can't say I have a problem with this deal.
@Matt B - love the reference. Remember that really cute blonde from those promos who would make the other team miss by shouting "Brick" on a break? One of the few bright spots from last season. I can still hear her promising, "It's going to be a great year..."
YES! We swindled one team into taking one of these dead beats...If we can only trick someone into taking zach and q and we might get things turned around..
Thanks Nuggets
keeping 2010 alive
with some Bulljive
The point is, WHY trade him now? If its to create a roster spot, buy out Marbury. Or buy out James. Balkman's value cannot fall further than a second round pick AND his the Knicks have an option on 2010 so could cut him before the important "under the cap year" anyway.
There is absolutely no upside to this Knicks deal, unless the Knicks did it to create roster space for another deal . . . .
i wanted to know if anyone thinks randolph can play for d'antoni. am i the only one that thinks there is no way it can work at all? i don't blame donnie walsh for not trading zbo for nothing but the way i see it is he is the biggest obstruction in the knicks' future. he can't play in the system and there isn't room for him anywhere in the system. zbo is the opposite of run and gun. zbo holds the ball in hands at a minimum of 7 seconds.
http://www.kellie.de/fm1/fm_darius5.jpg
http://cache.viewimages.com/xc/1598378.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF1939057D9939C83F1063EF8E2C5A3A028BD5A5397277B4DC33E
oh yea and brandon tierney is mad cool. i met him when i was buying a sandwich. the wheelhouse is a great show. sports commentary on sny beats espn any day.
I liked Balkman, and quite frankly like most of our players. Unfortunately our nice players don't add up to much, we are not going to win anytime soon with them. So I don't see anything wrong in picking up a second rounder for Balkman. He never should have be a first rounder anyway.
It's time to stock up on draft picks, instead of trading them away.
balkman was a turd...pukberry needs to go.....zbag is a load of sh!t
curry is a fat lazy money grubin f#ck head....and isiah was the biggest goon and useless punk and those are his good qualities....lee is the man... and walsh is past his prime....bernard king, oak, mason, x-man, larry johnson, charlie ward are pros where have they gone????????????
Is anyone angry at Balkman regarding his inability to improve his shooting / foul shooting and ability to create his own shot?
Did he take his time in the league for granted...what did he do in the offseason or at practice?
If I get on the court 4 or 5 times consecutively I see improvement in my game, especially if I concentrate on improving a move or two.
Balkman has such unique skills (including a good handle) imagine if his offensive game improved incrementally year to year how valuable he could be in the rotation.
Same could be said for Jared Jefferies.
Dam the already waived Green and Jones. That takes care of that ... next!
Leon Powe poward forward Boston, Paul Milsap power forward Utah, Rajon Rondo pg Boston, Kyle Lowery pg Memphis, Jordon Farmor pg Lakers, Josh Boone C/pf Nets, these players were all drafted after Balkman, I left off the PG williams from the nets since he has already been discarded. The point is the kid was never a 1st round pick, I live in Columbia SC, we all laughed at he selection of a guy who was nothing at a school that had no talent. He played a lot of pickup at the local Y downtown, he was average at best, great leaper, no range over 15 feet, I'm not at all surprised at that decision, I wish him well, and hoped he saved some money.
If they wanted to do Balkman a favor, why not wave him? then he can sign with whatever team he can, likely making 1.3 from the Knicks, and whatever he gets. I know.. they get a #2 in 2010, and it might be a low #2 since they have the choice between a clipper # 2 and a nugget #2.
I still think it is a mistake.. I'd rather See Balkman on the court than Jefferies, Malik Rose, and to be honest, Q-Rich, who was so dissapointing last year.Q is 28, RB is 24.
Bottom line, Denver gets a nice deal, and a much needed energy defense guy who my friends in CO will love. Might RB turn into Rodman if he evolves into Melo's Compliment at the forward spot in Denver in the future??
As far as Zach R. He starts at Center this year, and Curry has to come off the bench. No way they play both of those guys together.. If they do.. then i have no faith in the new regeim.. I'm gonna watch the sixers!!
Z-Bo was born to hang.
At a strip club in Gary, Indiana.