Do you really believe that Zach would have accepted a backup role, playing less than 20 minutes per night, without causing trouble?
I don't think he'd have tanked his own career by refusing to perform. He might have griped, but I think he'd perform, whether he liked it or not.
I actually thought that Pritachard should've won GM of the year, I think a year or two ago when he made all those trades. Each one was carefully calculated and intelligent. Smart man.
Here's the bottom line for me: Absolute, rock-bottom, worst case scenario, it was a way to get rid of an atrocious contract, and in return I've gotten to read Channing Frye's blog for a year. Win for the team, win for me.
Haha. I just don't like Win Shares for the NBA, and since your whole post was based on that, there wasn't much for me to comment on. Talking about things outside of WS, Zach still commands double teams, and no Blazer did that last year on a regular basis... sure, Aldridge did occasionally, but if Zach were on the blocks and Aldridge was floating to the perimeter at the 5 spot, I think that the offense would have been potentially much better than it was. I feel like I have kinda said the same things over and over since the trade, so I'm a bit fatigued talking about it. It's only when new data emerges (such as reported trade value, recently) that I feel compelled to reassess and post my thoughts. Ed O.
I don't think you really reassessed in this instance. You throw away Zach's listed 2.0 Defensive Win Shares (and by mirror his pathetic less than 1 Offensive Win Share) as if that is proof in itself that these numbers mean worse than nothing. I agree that these numbers can be funky and are not any sort of definitive single answer. I do think they can point you in a direction and are valid enough that you have to argue against them instead of the other way around. Just because Zach sucked at defense with our team doesn't mean he sucked just as bad this past season or compared to the other players on the Knicks. Sub out Eddie Curry and put in Zach. If Zach tries even a teeny bit to play some defense, the team defense improves by a TON. If Zach is a bad defender, I don't know what we are supposed to call Curry - Superbad? Also, aside from David Lee, there isn't anybody on that Knicks team that can get defensive rebounds. That is part of defense, right? If you limit the shots of your opponents, that helps your defense unless they are hot shooters. Zach put career best numbers for Defensive Rebound Percentage, good enough for 6th best in the NBA. Damn. That is some fine rebounding. Rebounding that good helps defense. I doubt those 2 Defensive Win Shares for Zach is off the mark. I bet he (at times) tried real hard to help the team any way he could. Where Zach killed the team was his inefficient scoring. He was worse than the Knick guards. And despite being the least efficient of the team's main scorers, he kept launching shots - and hurting the team. That is nuts. That's our Zach.
I think the trade of ZBo made sense, since they decided to draft Oden. The rational other choice was to keep ZBo and draft Durant. C LMA PF ZBo SF Durant SG Roy PG committee
