Do the Cavs Want Zach Randolph?

Text Size A A A

Mike D'Antoni's vaunted offense favors fast, athletic big men who can get up and down the court in a hurry and play above the rim (see: Marion, Shawn; and Stoudemire, Amare) -- in other words, players that are the exact opposite of Zach Randolph and Eddy Curry.

Mike Brown's (lamentable) offense is, well, barely existent. Despite featuring the most exciting player in the game (see: James, LeBron), the Cavs play at an absolute snail's pace, and last year failed to score as many points as they gave up over the course of the entire season.

Do you see a potential match? The internet does: one day after Bob Finnan of the Morning Journal cryptically suggested that "the Cavs could be talking to the Knicks about a big man," Bill Ingram of HOOPSWORLD and Alan Hahn of Newsday followed up by brainstorming trades sending Randolph to the Cavs.

On paper, it makes sense: the Cavs could certainly use a scoring big man to pick up the slack from defensive specialists Ben Wallace and Anderson Varejao.There aren't a lot of teams willing to absorb Randolph's salary -- he averages nearly $16 million a season through 2010-11 -- but as Hahn points out, the Cavs could easily do a one-for-one swap for either Wally Szczerbiak (an expiring contract worth $13 million) or Wallace ($28.5 million over the next two years).

The bonus for dealing for Big Ben? His salary expires just in time for the free agent nirvana that will be 2010. Can you imagine the potential irony if the Cavs actively helped the Knicks clear salary to make a run at LeBron two summers from now? Given the city of Cleveland's tortured sporting history, it seems fitting, if not inevitable.

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

8-19-2008 @ 10:25AM

Mr.G said...

Almost $50 mil. for Randolph for the next 3 years? Haaaaaaahahahaaaa - For the leagues biggest whiner and locker room disaster? For a guy who plays whenever he feels like it? Hahaaaaaaaaaaaahaha. Wooohooohaahahahahaaa.That's a good one. Earth to Matt - Now,Danny Ferry might not be the sharpest G.M. on the circuit,but he's not even close to being that stupid.

8-19-2008 @ 11:32AM

philiip laterza said...

The better deal for both teams would be this....Zach and Crawford for Wallace and Szerbiak. The Knicks could throw in some heavy cash as well.They could also make a gentlemans agreement not to pursue LeBron in 2010, as he belongs in CLeveland. This trade is right now for later. The Cavs get a shot to win right now. The Knicks benefit greatly for later.The Knicks could follow up that deal with sending Jeffries, Lee and Collins along with some heavy cash to Golden State for Harrington. This would set the Knicks up for many years to come as the expiring contracts come off the books.The Knicks have a protected pick coming up, they do not want to excel and diminish that pick this year. The stage would be really set for building around Galinari and next seasons number one. TONS of cap room to pusue the lkes of Bosh or Wade or BOTH!

8-19-2008 @ 4:41PM

Jesse said...

Whoa whoa whoa philiip. First off D'Antoni has done nothing but talk good about how Crawford is going to fit into his system and could possibly have All-Star numbers this year playing in it, and he is the player on the Knicks that most fits the system (him and Nate) so he is out the question. But i have come up with something quite interesting. Tell me what you think of this Matt (and anyone who reads) - how about a trade sending Big Ben, Wally, sign and trade West,and a second round pick in '09 (and possibly another pick to sweeten the pot and make New York bite) to the Knicks for Randolph, Q. Richardson, and guss who... Stephon Marbury. Yes i said it. The salaries match (long as West signs for 6 Mill or more a year) and New York gets rid of 2 headaches while getting respectable talent and expiring contracts. And believe it or not i....

8-29-2008 @ 4:39PM

Jacob said...

now i really doubt the Cavaliers are going to do any more trades they got Mo Williams and Danny Ferry makes dumb trades sometimes thats what happens. Now I would love to get someone like David West or Zach Randolph but its not gonna happen to bad for the city of Cleveland say good bye to LeBron in a couple of years

..... feel that Marbury would actually fit well and stand a chance at playing decent ball. I think playing with a guy like Lebron would be about the only thing able to motivate him to WANT to be as good as he can. I know they just traded for Mo but they could work together. And its also the perfect place for Q considering all he does is spot up for 3's (Lebron will get him the open shots). So you end up with backcourt Williams & Gibson, SF- Lebron, PF- Zach, and C- Big Z. with Marbury,Sasha, Q, Varejao, and Hickson coming off the bench. You cant tell me thats not a much improved team then what they have now, and with Lebron that team has a shot. Let me know what you think everyone......

8-19-2008 @ 9:39PM

Well,based on talent alone,and to some extent contracts,you guys have come up with some interesting scenarios.But when you consider Zach and $48 mi. for 3 years,there is just no way in the world anybody in their right mind is going to touch that.Zach's reputation is such,that he is a cancer and every team in the league knows it.Ferry is not in a position to stake his career on a guy like Randolph,and that's exactly what he would be doing.Ferry still has some chips (contracts)to play with,(Wally,Snow,Pavlovic,West) so to go all in on Zach seems ridiculous to me,and trust me on this,it's not gonna happen.

8-20-2008 @ 1:29AM

And one more thing,whats up with this story anyway? A Morning Journal writer "cryptically suggested" that "the Cavs COULD be talking to the Knicks about a big man"????? And then 2 other hacks start dreaming up Randolph trades???? Come on Matt Watson,can't you do better than this in your effort to slam the city of Cleveland and spew that LeBron to the Knicks garbage.

8-20-2008 @ 11:43AM

G i was just trying to come up with a more realistic trade if they were gonna do something like this. And i do have a feeling if the Big Ben continues to decline (remember his entire game was based on athleticism and the older you get the more that goes away, hence his extreme decline the last two years) and Wally's shots dont go down like last year (only thing he brings to the table and his slow legs almost cancel out that) and Lebron says a word or two i dont think its reachin to far that they go for a trade like this. I mean think about it would you rather pay Wallace 14 mill this season for 5 points 8 rebounds (and NO offensive game) or would you rather pay Randolph 14 mill this year for 17 points and 10 rebounds. Plus playing with a player like Lebron is going to inspire the guy to work harder and also will help free him up to score more. When you think it through its almost a no brainer. And ...

with the Marbury part of the trade i really think he can still be a decent player (and again the game becomes ALOT easier playing with a guy like LBJ) and at the worst its trading Wally for Marbury and at the end of year Starburied contract is up so if it doesnt work he is gone and if he is inspired to try harder from having the opportunity to play with Lebron you can sign him for cheap after this season. So when you really look at it i really think the players you would get in the trade i proposed would be better then the players they are giving up. And my main point was i can definetly see Ferry getting backed into a hard spot if that offense continues how it ended last year and they start off bad the first couple months. Any other team involved with a trade for Randolph i would say they are stupid but you have to remember how much Lebron changes the game and can make a little above average player like Randolph a lot better and make him look good. And if your trading an old Ben for him your getting more back in return....

8-20-2008 @ 12:29PM

Jesse: I completely understand where you're coming from,and that would most definitely make the Cavs a better team THIS year.But taking on Zach's contract for 3 years is kinda like taking a bottle of blood thinners and then cutting your own throat.The other thing is,I don't see the Cavs employing Wally this year at all,with that contract,he is just trade bait for the right deal.Fery made that big deal last year to rid the team of guaranteed contracts like Gooden,Hughes and Marshall and also to set the team up for 2010.(LeBrons year)-(Wallace"s exit).With the players and contracts that Ferry has to work with now,the general thinking is that Ferry is looking to add a Superstar to play alongside James instead of a pair of headaches like Zach and Starbury.That's why I don't agree with this so-called rumor in the first place.

8-20-2008 @ 7:37PM

Im not seeing your point Zach's contract is only one year longer then Wallace's. Plus you have Marbury's 22 mill that would come off the books after this year compared to Wally's 13. Then Q's would come off after the next season. So right now with Wally and Ben they would have a combined 27 mill less on the books after 09/10 and if they made the trade would have 30 mill less with Marbury and Q off the book. Zach will only be 30 when his contract is up so its the perfect time to let him go. Point is is that they already have a horrible contract in Wallace and Zach's only runs a year more but your getting a WHOLE lot more production and actually having more money come off the books with the other 2 players your getting in the trade then 2 of the players your giving up. If you gonna say they wouldnt go for the trade it has to be a for a different reason then Zach's contract because its only a year longer then Wallace's. (To your comment about Wally, they will not be able to get anything for just him, he will have to be packaged and this is the best option i see).The trade i proposed works out for the better for Cleveland in every category, and it would probably actually be a tougher sell to New York believe it or not (but i think they would go for it just cause it gets rid of Marbury).

8-21-2008 @ 4:32AM

Yes,Zach's contract is 1 year longer than Wallace's,and that 1 year is the year after LeBron becomes a Free Agent.I think you know what a mess that 1 year could create in terms of re-signing James,which is priority #1 for the Cavs.Now add in the fact that Zach is a psychobaby.Right now the Cavs already have the 2nd highest payroll in the league.Your proposed trade would add about $13 mil. to their payroll this year.There's no way to afford it all.Then what do they do after this year,just let Marbury walk away?Then what have they gained?Zach,thats what,plus they've lost a pair of draft picks.Sure Wally would have to be packaged in any deal right now,but it's Wally's expiring contract that makes him so attractive and the Cavs could offer any number of players with him to make something work and get something better than Zach Randolph.Zach is not a bad player,but he is no superstar, and he is a horrible teammate and employee with a horrible 3 year contract.

8-23-2008 @ 5:12AM

Jess or Phil:I guess just about everybody wants to shed as much salary as possible by the 2010 season due to all the potential Superstars who may become available.The Cavs are in pretty good shape in that regard,as long as they don't do anything to screw that up.(Such as signing Zach)- Mo Williams may not sound like a huge deal to most,but he was truly a Godsend for this team,and will make them 1 of the top teams in the East again.The Cavs kinda flew under the radar on draft day,but they may have struck gold across the board with bigs like JJ Hickson,Darnell Jackson and Sasha Khan,and that's another reason not to go out and make a long term commitment for a guy like Zach.