Woohoo! Z's coming back next year!

[e0y2e3]

Fuck.

I'm never going to get to stop watching him. Love the guy. Great career. All-time Cav. But he needs to go the fuck away.

http://nba.fanhouse.com/2010/01/08/big- ... etirement/

[scott]

As long as he is ready for a dramatic pay and minutes cut, what's the problem?

I realize this team needs to get more athletic in the middle, but there's 15 minutes a night for Z.

[e0y2e3]

My eyes bleeding is the problem.

[leadpipe]

As long as he is ready for a dramatic pay and minutes cut, what's the problem?

I realize this team needs to get more athletic in the middle, but there's 15 minutes a night for Z.

What does 15 minutes a night from a pretty awful player get you, besides a bad 15 minutes.

Again, great guy, was once useful, but he is at this moment clearly a 7 foot spot up shooter, who frankly, doesn't shhot well enough to be strictly a spot up shooter.

He gets no more rebounds etc. that any other warm body wouldn't get at his point, and probably less.

[jack_tors]

As long as he is ready for a dramatic pay and minutes cut, what's the problem?

I realize this team needs to get more athletic in the middle, but there's 15 minutes a night for Z.

What does 15 minutes a night from a pretty awful player get you, besides a bad 15 minutes.

Again, great guy, was once useful, but he is at this moment clearly a 7 foot spot up shooter, who frankly, doesn't shhot well enough to be strictly a spot up shooter.

He gets no more rebounds etc. that any other warm body wouldn't get at his point, and probably less.

I have this same argument daily with a co-worker who is a huge Z fan. She doesnt want to see him traded unless he comes back after being bought out. Again, the guy has been great for the city, very classy individual, and I wish him nothing but the best. However, I want to win it all dammit and if we have to move him to do so, sorry Z nothing personal.

Its hard to be a loyal to athletes when most of them leave to the highest bidder. I know basketball is different due to contract structure, etc.. but the other sports have jaded me. We need to make the moves that will make this team the best it can be and if that includes moving a really good guy past him prime, so be it.

[just another fool]

the best case scenario for this is the cavs win it all this year and maybe Z decides to retire after he gets a ring.

as great of a guy as he seems to be, loyal as he is, etc. i agree with everyone else that Z should be done with the cavs after this season whether he gets a ring or not.

[papacass]

I guess I'm the dissenter here. I've long said that I'd be in favor of moving Z for a final-piece kind of player (i.e. Jamison), but if he stays, I think he still very much helps the team.

Is he slow and getting slower by the year? Not going to dispute that. Is he a starting center on an NBA championship team? Last season answered that question. But I think the whole "He's a totem pole with a decent-but-not-great jumper, and useless beyond that" argument is going too far in the other direction.

The ability to have Shaq and/or Z on the floor at all times, even together, helped this team win in Orlando and against the Lakers. Z can't guard Dewey and Gasol straight-up, but he is still good as an auxiliary piece against other teams with extreme height. It's all part of having versatility.

Z's height still impacts games around the rim at the defensive end. He can still redirect shots, and he still gets some stickbacks simply by virtue of being 7'-3". And his jumper has been falling with the usual Z-type consistency ever since the benching controversy. Maybe it re-lit his competitive fire.

I guess if you want to liken Z to a player in history, think Celtics-era Bill Walton. Very slow afoot, no longer a starter, but capable of playing well in a narrowly-defined area.

His contract is trade bait, no question. But I can't just sit here and let people refer to Z as washed-up, useless garbage on the court, when that simply isn't true.

[metalhead9x9]

I guess I'm the dissenter here. I've long said that I'd be in favor of moving Z for a final-piece kind of player (i.e. Jamison), but if he stays, I think he still very much helps the team.

Is he slow and getting slower by the year? Not going to dispute that. Is he a starting center on an NBA championship team? Last season answered that question. But I think the whole "He's a totem pole with a decent-but-not-great jumper, and useless beyond that" argument is going too far in the other direction.

The ability to have Shaq and/or Z on the floor at all times, even together, helped this team win in Orlando and against the Lakers. Z can't guard Dewey and Gasol straight-up, but he is still good as an auxiliary piece against other teams with extreme height. It's all part of having versatility.

Z's height still impacts games around the rim at the defensive end. He can still redirect shots, and he still gets some stickbacks simply by virtue of being 7'-3". And his jumper has been falling with the usual Z-type consistency ever since the benching controversy. Maybe it re-lit his competitive fire.

I guess if you want to liken Z to a player in history, think Celtics-era Bill Walton. Very slow afoot, no longer a starter, but capable of playing well in a narrowly-defined area.

His contract is trade bait, no question. But I can't just sit here and let people refer to Z as washed-up, useless garbage on the court, when that simply isn't true.

Don't see how people don't even see him as a useful role player? You tellin' me that you're gonna find two centers to replace Shaq and Z and have em fit in seamlessly?

[Orenthal]

Do not have to add any more to what Cass just posted...

[FUDU]

I guess I'm the dissenter here. I've long said that I'd be in favor of moving Z for a final-piece kind of player (i.e. Jamison), but if he stays, I think he still very much helps the team.

Is he slow and getting slower by the year? Not going to dispute that. Is he a starting center on an NBA championship team? Last season answered that question. But I think the whole "He's a totem pole with a decent-but-not-great jumper, and useless beyond that" argument is going too far in the other direction.

The ability to have Shaq and/or Z on the floor at all times, even together, helped this team win in Orlando and against the Lakers. Z can't guard Dewey and Gasol straight-up, but he is still good as an auxiliary piece against other teams with extreme height. It's all part of having versatility.

Z's height still impacts games around the rim at the defensive end. He can still redirect shots, and he still gets some stickbacks simply by virtue of being 7'-3". And his jumper has been falling with the usual Z-type consistency ever since the benching controversy. Maybe it re-lit his competitive fire.

I guess if you want to liken Z to a player in history, think Celtics-era Bill Walton. Very slow afoot, no longer a starter, but capable of playing well in a narrowly-defined area.

His contract is trade bait, no question. But I can't just sit here and let people refer to Z as washed-up, useless garbage on the court, when that simply isn't true.

IMO you can find a younger body to do most of all that, the hardest thing to replace (that we actually really need) would be the consistent ability to knock down the shot.

If his minutes get appropriately limited as he stays I am at least OK with this, but not advocating it so much.

[peeker643]

Remove the sentiment and add up the money.

He wants to come back and play, sure, there's a spot. But for how much? There ain't room for a "Let's Show Z Appreciation" contract. He's not worth Andy's money, not even close now and certainly not next year.

So yeah, if you can do a deal that accounts for all of that you'd love to see him retire here.

Otherwise I wish him well in his future endeavors.

[leadpipe]

I guess I'm the dissenter here. I've long said that I'd be in favor of moving Z for a final-piece kind of player (i.e. Jamison), but if he stays, I think he still very much helps the team.

Is he slow and getting slower by the year? Not going to dispute that. Is he a starting center on an NBA championship team? Last season answered that question. But I think the whole "He's a totem pole with a decent-but-not-great jumper, and useless beyond that" argument is going too far in the other direction.

The ability to have Shaq and/or Z on the floor at all times, even together, helped this team win in Orlando and against the Lakers. Z can't guard Dewey and Gasol straight-up, but he is still good as an auxiliary piece against other teams with extreme height. It's all part of having versatility.

Z's height still impacts games around the rim at the defensive end. He can still redirect shots, and he still gets some stickbacks simply by virtue of being 7'-3". And his jumper has been falling with the usual Z-type consistency ever since the benching controversy. Maybe it re-lit his competitive fire.

I guess if you want to liken Z to a player in history, think Celtics-era Bill Walton. Very slow afoot, no longer a starter, but capable of playing well in a narrowly-defined area.

His contract is trade bait, no question. But I can't just sit here and let people refer to Z as washed-up, useless garbage on the court, when that simply isn't true.

IMO you can find a younger body to do most of all that, the hardest thing to replace (that we actually really need) would be the consistent ability to knock down the shot.

If his minutes get appropriately limited as he stays I am at least OK with this, but not advocating it so much.

No disrespect, but you just cannot liken current Z to Celtics Bill Walton.

Yes, they were both slow. Outside of that Walton was still a viable post threat, a FANTASTIC passer, a better defender....outside of hitting more 23 footers Z isn't close.

Yes, if you replace his 7 foot 3 body with nobody, it might hurt the team a bit, all I'm saying is you don't have to look too hard and far to find someone to fill his shoes, and not much harder to find someone better.

[Orenthal]

2 years at less then MLE is all I would be willing to give. At least a 60% cut from this years number, and I believe everything Cass posted, just that Peek's money/loyalty trumps all that, at least in today's sports.

[papacass]

No disrespect, but you just cannot liken current Z to Celtics Bill Walton.

Yes, they were both slow. Outside of that Walton was still a viable post threat, a FANTASTIC passer, a better defender....outside of hitting more 23 footers Z isn't close.

In 1977, everything you say about Walton is true. By 1986, after years and years of foot and ankle problems, the only essential difference between end-of-career Walton and end-of-career Z is that Walton played inside and Z plays outside.

Walton was Z for the '86 Celtics: 7.6 PPG, 6.8 RPG, 2.1 APG in 19.3 MPG. This year's Z: 7.8 PPG, 5.6 RPG, 0.6 APG in 21.7 MPG. Z is shooting 45.4 percent from the field this year. In '85-'86, Walton shot 56.2 percent. That's the only real difference. But even that's kind of cancelled out by the above-stated condition that Z takes a proportionately larger percentage of his shots from outside of 15 feet.

It's a better comparison than you might think.

[FUDU]

I was talking more in analogous terms. Walton is a HOFer.

In 1977, everything you say about Walton is true. By 1986, after years and years of foot and ankle problems, the only essential difference between end-of-career Walton and end-of-career Z is that Walton played inside and Z plays outside.

Walton was Z for the '86 Celtics: 7.6 PPG, 6.8 RPG, 2.1 APG in 19.3 MPG. This year's Z: 7.8 PPG, 5.6 RPG, 0.6 APG in 21.7 MPG. Z is shooting 45.4 percent from the field this year. In '85-'86, Walton shot 56.2 percent. That's the only real difference. But even that's kind of cancelled out by the above-stated condition that Z takes a proportionately larger percentage of his shots from outside of 15 feet.

It's a better comparison than you might think.

When history reads "The 2009/2010 NBA Champion Cleveland Cavaliers" I'll be completely in your camp.

[leadpipe]

No disrespect, but you just cannot liken current Z to Celtics Bill Walton.

Yes, they were both slow. Outside of that Walton was still a viable post threat, a FANTASTIC passer, a better defender....outside of hitting more 23 footers Z isn't close.

In 1977, everything you say about Walton is true. By 1986, after years and years of foot and ankle problems, the only essential difference between end-of-career Walton and end-of-career Z is that Walton played inside and Z plays outside.

Walton was Z for the '86 Celtics: 7.6 PPG, 6.8 RPG, 2.1 APG in 19.3 MPG. This year's Z: 7.8 PPG, 5.6 RPG, 0.6 APG in 21.7 MPG. Z is shooting 45.4 percent from the field this year. In '85-'86, Walton shot 56.2 percent. That's the only real difference. But even that's kind of cancelled out by the above-stated condition that Z takes a proportionately larger percentage of his shots from outside of 15 feet.

It's a better comparison than you might think.

Well, numbers and all - it's this simple;

Z has been a cipher 3 of the last 4 years in the playoffs - and the other one wasn't great.

Walton was a KEY player in those championships. He wasn't Bird, McHale or the Chief, but he MATTERED.

Take Z away 3 of the last 4 playoff years and nothing changes. Not a thing.

Walton wouldn't have been losing playoff miiutes to a young Andy V or a stone dumb Drew Gooden.

And by the way, Walton shot better because he took shots a big man should be taking. Which is partially to the point. If Walton was exclusively a 20 foot shooter does he see the floor for the Celtics? And that's the bottom line - an old Bill Walton would be much better for the Cavs than Z, just like he'd was much better for the Celts than Z would have been.

One was an aging all-time great. The other an aging player.

[hermanfontenot]

No disrespect, but you just cannot liken current Z to Celtics Bill Walton.

Yes, they were both slow. Outside of that Walton was still a viable post threat, a FANTASTIC passer, a better defender....outside of hitting more 23 footers Z isn't close.

In 1977, everything you say about Walton is true. By 1986, after years and years of foot and ankle problems, the only essential difference between end-of-career Walton and end-of-career Z is that Walton played inside and Z plays outside.

Walton was Z for the '86 Celtics: 7.6 PPG, 6.8 RPG, 2.1 APG in 19.3 MPG. This year's Z: 7.8 PPG, 5.6 RPG, 0.6 APG in 21.7 MPG. Z is shooting 45.4 percent from the field this year. In '85-'86, Walton shot 56.2 percent. That's the only real difference. But even that's kind of cancelled out by the above-stated condition that Z takes a proportionately larger percentage of his shots from outside of 15 feet.

It's a better comparison than you might think.

Cass... you're comparing Z with Bill Walton.

Come on, now.

[Cerebral_DownTime]

My eyes bleeding is the problem.

Why is that a problem? Alot of people here would love the idea of you bleeding from the eyes.

[papacass]

Cass... you're comparing Z with Bill Walton.

Come on, now.

'09-'10 Z with '85-'86 Bill Walton. Yes.

They were similar statistically and workload-wise, and they have filled similar roles for their respective teams.

No one is trying to place Z in the class of Walton from a body of work standpoint. Walton was named one of the 50 greatest players in NBA history. Z, at his best, was good but not great. But in those respective years, I think it's a reasonably accurate comparison.

[papacass]

Well, numbers and all - it's this simple;

Z has been a cipher 3 of the last 4 years in the playoffs - and the other one wasn't great.

Walton was a KEY player in those championships. He wasn't Bird, McHale or the Chief, but he MATTERED.

Take Z away 3 of the last 4 playoff years and nothing changes. Not a thing.

Walton wouldn't have been losing playoff miiutes to a young Andy V or a stone dumb Drew Gooden.

And by the way, Walton shot better because he took shots a big man should be taking. Which is partially to the point. If Walton was exclusively a 20 foot shooter does he see the floor for the Celtics? And that's the bottom line - an old Bill Walton would be much better for the Cavs than Z, just like he'd was much better for the Celts than Z would have been.

One was an aging all-time great. The other an aging player.

FTR, Walton was only a member of the '86 Celtics title team.

I'm not talking about past performances or body of work. Obviously, that tilts the argument vastly in Walton's favor. I'm talking about comparing this year's Z to Walton of 1986. I'm talking about comparing their roles and stats for their respective teams, and all I'm saying is that Z is filling the role for this year's Cavs team that Walton filled for the '85-86 Celtics. He's a seven-points-per-game backup center playing 20 reasonably effective minutes per night.

If you're scoring seven per game, does it really matter how you get the seven, whether it's from 20 feet or from right under the hoop? If Walton was drawing extra fouls, getting to the line with regularity and adding an extra 2-4 free throws a night onto his field goal totals, the low-post fact might have a little more validity for the '86 Walton.

Walton average 2.5 free throw attempts per game in '85-86, making 1.8 of them, for a 71.3 FT percentage. Z this year is averaging 1.6 attempts and 1.2 makes per game, for 77.6 percent. The 1.8 makes vs. 1.2 is what matters. The difference isn't even one point on the scoreboard, so Walton's low-post presence in the '85-'86 season really isn't at much of an advantage over Z's.

Let's look at another advantage of having a low-post banger like Walton versus Z, who has a supposed aversion to setting foot in the paint: Offensive boards. One of the great advantages of having height down low is the ability to recycle possessions. That year, Walton grabbed 1.7 ORPG. This year, Z is grabbing 1.8. The difference is virtually nil.

So all I'm saying is everyone, please try to get past the "OMFG you're comparing Bill Walton to Zydrunas-Freaking-Ilgauskas???!!" shock factor, and realize that all I'm trying to say is that, sum total, '85-86 Bill Walton is a remarkably similar player to '09-10 Z.

It's not a guarantee of a world championship for the Cavs, playoff success for Z, and I'm certainly not saying the Cavs should hang onto Z come hell or high water. All I'm saying is that Z is roughly as productive for this year's Cavs team as Walton was for that Celtics team, so the argument that Z is trash is no more valid than saying Walton was trash for the '85-86 Celtics. That is all.

[leadpipe]

Cass... you're comparing Z with Bill Walton.

Come on, now.

'09-'10 Z with '85-'86 Bill Walton. Yes.

They were similar statistically and workload-wise, and they have filled similar roles for their respective teams.

No one is trying to place Z in the class of Walton from a body of work standpoint. Walton was named one of the 50 greatest players in NBA history. Z, at his best, was good but not great. But in those respective years, I think it's a reasonably accurate comparison.

Again, similiar statistically.

I'm guessing you didn't watch much of the Celtics that year, because Walton in two playoff games from the high post contributed more toward winning than Z has his entire playoff career.

Can you remember two plays Z has made in the playoffs? His most significant playoff moment was hugging Lebron after the Detroit game.

Again, Z doesn't touch the floor for the Celtics, and Walton would make this years Cav team better. Clearly.

Man, I read and agree with much of what you write, but this is borderline preposterous. Bill Walton, THAT OLD Bill Walton, is superior in EVERY aspect of the game, with the exception of 20 footers, which he didn't take. And, 20 feet from the hole, Walton was still an excellent facilitator of the offense.

Stats, smats, Walton was an INTREGAL part of that team, and was an INTREGAL part of the offense and defense.

While Z...eats up minutes.

And this isn't "an OMFG Bill Walton" vs. Z argument, as you say. When it's over, it's over, even for the greats. For Walton in wasn't over, for Z, it is.

[papacass]

Again, similiar statistically.

I'm guessing you didn't watch much of the Celtics that year, because Walton in two playoff games from the high post contributed more toward winning than Z has his entire playoff career.

Can you remember two plays Z has made in the playoffs? His most significant playoff moment was hugging Lebron after the Detroit game.

Again, Z doesn't touch the floor for the Celtics, and Walton would make this years Cav team better. Clearly.

Man, I read and agree with much of what you write, but this is borderline preposterous. Bill Walton, THAT OLD Bill Walton, is superior in EVERY aspect of the game, with the exception of 20 footers, which he didn't take. And, 20 feet from the hole, Walton was still an excellent facilitator of the offense.

Stats, smats, Walton was an INTREGAL part of that team, and was an INTREGAL part of the offense and defense.

While Z...eats up minutes.

I'm trying to make my point without tearing down Walton, who was important to that team. This really didn't even start with a direct comparison of Walton to Z. The only thing I was really trying to do was show that Z is not dead weight on the roster any more than Walton was dead weight on that Celtics team. I think this thread was going way too far down the road of "Fuck Z," which I thought was wrong.

But I myself am not going to go down the road of making myself a lightning rod any further. The Z haters believe what they want to believe, I'll believe what I want to believe.

If that's not good enough, if you absolutely have to try and change my mind or show me how unbelievably wrong I am, have at it. Last word on the matter is up for grabs. It won't be me.

[leadpipe]

My last word:

I'm by no means a Z "Hater"

The guy just isn't a good basketball player anymore.

[British_Pharaoh]

He's got plenty left. He's a great shooting Center and money from the line
I'm happy with the news provided his services don't cost too much

[Cleveland Transplant]

We gripe about how Cleveland is nothing but a farm system for places like New York and that our players have no loyalty and they always leave us to go for the money. And yet here's a guy who is still a solid player despite his age and can contribute and we're so willing to dump him just to get a championship? I don't want to ever hear anyone on this board ever complain about player loyalty ever again if he goes.

[e0y2e3]

I'm not a Z Hater either per-say. That said, there is a reason Ferry was praying Hibbert dropped to us when we ended up w/ Dumbass Hickson. If we cannot find a better backup option then Z, fine resign him, but IMO we should be able to do so in FA or the draft. Z is not good anymore.

Not to mention that we could very possibly end up w/ a smaller starting center next year in Andy, or have to bring in a starting center. In any instance I would prefer more Andy at C (assuming we bring in a PF this year, which w/ S-Jax gone already looks like our target position) and if Andy is your starting center you need a fat clogger behind him on the bench, not Z. Z backing up Andy opens up all the fun match-up issues you talk about daily while crediting Shaq w/ our victories over LA and Orlando Cass.

If Powe comes back and we get a Murphy or Jamo all of the sudden Andy is going to cut deeply into Z's remaining value as a five on this team this year.

[e0y2e3]

We gripe about how Cleveland is nothing but a farm system for places like New York and that our players have no loyalty and they always leave us to go for the money. And yet here's a guy who is still a solid player despite his age and can contribute and we're so willing to dump him just to get a championship? I don't want to ever hear anyone on this board ever complain about player loyalty ever again if he goes.

Yeah, Z was so kind to this organization when they paid him all that nice money while he was having fifteen foot surgeries. And it was really kind of him to reup here for max money. Let's not pretend like Z wasn't a money drain and an anchor around the neck of this franchise at one point and let's not pretend like he was not paid the max amount he could be paid when he overcame those issues. This franchise has given to Z and rewarded him when he overcame, more than enough.

This isn't the MLB where everyone cries that CC should sign here for 15 cents on the dollar, this is the NBA and Z was paid as much as anyone else in the NBA could have paid him and he got to make max money while playing next to LBJ. Now he's past his prime, wants to play again and would like to play where he is comfortable. Loyalty to Cleveland is not why he is still here, no matter what you think.

PS: Loyalty can eat a dick if it wins a title.

[FUDU]

He's got plenty left. He's a great shooting Center and money from the line
I'm happy with the news provided his services don't cost too much

Plenty of what left?

Dude gets gassed from taking off his warm ups.

You make it sound like saying no to him would be like trading Warfield or Colavito.

[Cleveland Transplant]

We gripe about how Cleveland is nothing but a farm system for places like New York and that our players have no loyalty and they always leave us to go for the money. And yet here's a guy who is still a solid player despite his age and can contribute and we're so willing to dump him just to get a championship? I don't want to ever hear anyone on this board ever complain about player loyalty ever again if he goes.

Yeah, Z was so kind to this organization when they paid him all that nice money while he was having fifteen foot surgeries. And it was really kind of him to reup here for max money. Let's not pretend like Z wasn't a money drain and an anchor around the neck of this franchise at one point and let's not pretend like he was not paid the max amount he could be paid when he overcame those issues. This franchise has given to Z and rewarded him when he overcame, more than enough.

This isn't the MLB where everyone cries that CC should sign here for 15 cents on the dollar, this is the NBA and Z was paid as much as anyone else in the NBA could have paid him and he got to make max money while playing next to LBJ. Now he's past his prime, wants to play again and would like to play where he is comfortable. Loyalty to Cleveland is not why he is still here, no matter what you think.

PS: Loyalty can eat a dick if it wins a title.

Really? Because this is the same guy who never griped about having those foot surgeries and playing second fiddle to guys like Chris Mihm back in the dark ages of the 90s and early 00s. Not only that but he never griped about taking a backseat to an older center who can't shoot a free throw if his life depended on it, and not only that, but he never publicly griped about getting benched earlier this year when it came down to games played for this organization. The only other active player who has played for a single organization as long as he has is Kobe Bryant. Loyalty is not why he's here? Really?

This is a guy who isn't a cancer in the locker room, who has been a total professional his entire career, has put up solid numbers when he does play, and has played the game the right way - which is more than what you can say not only just about most NBA athletes, but professional athletes in general these days. The man deserves more respect than this topic is showing.

[leadpipe]

We gripe about how Cleveland is nothing but a farm system for places like New York and that our players have no loyalty and they always leave us to go for the money. And yet here's a guy who is still a solid player despite his age and can contribute and we're so willing to dump him just to get a championship? I don't want to ever hear anyone on this board ever complain about player loyalty ever again if he goes.

Yeah, Z was so kind to this organization when they paid him all that nice money while he was having fifteen foot surgeries. And it was really kind of him to reup here for max money. Let's not pretend like Z wasn't a money drain and an anchor around the neck of this franchise at one point and let's not pretend like he was not paid the max amount he could be paid when he overcame those issues. This franchise has given to Z and rewarded him when he overcame, more than enough.

This isn't the MLB where everyone cries that CC should sign here for 15 cents on the dollar, this is the NBA and Z was paid as much as anyone else in the NBA could have paid him and he got to make max money while playing next to LBJ. Now he's past his prime, wants to play again and would like to play where he is comfortable. Loyalty to Cleveland is not why he is still here, no matter what you think.

PS: Loyalty can eat a dick if it wins a title.

Really? Because this is the same guy who never griped about having those foot surgeries and playing second fiddle to guys like Chris Mihm back in the dark ages of the 90s and early 00s. Not only that but he never griped about taking a backseat to an older center who can't shoot a free throw if his life depended on it, and not only that, but he never publicly griped about getting benched earlier this year when it came down to games played for this organization. The only other active player who has played for a single organization as long as he has is Kobe Bryant. Loyalty is not why he's here? Really?

This is a guy who isn't a cancer in the locker room, who has been a total professional his entire career, has put up solid numbers when he does play, and has played the game the right way - which is more than what you can say not only just about most NBA athletes, but professional athletes in general these days. The man deserves more respect than this topic is showing.

Much of this is nonsense, as EO explained in the post above, but beyond that, it has NOTHING to do with Z being a good player, and helping the team win.

It matters not whether you think he's better than Shaq - is he good?

It matters not if he's been here for 45 years - is he good?

He's obviously not a cancer in the lockeroom, but is he good?

As EO stated, the Cavs have been as good to Z as he's been to them. This has nothing to do with the main point.

Again, not a Z hater, great guy, but I'll be damned if I see a good basketball player out there.

[e0y2e3]

I don't understand this post at all.

Z never griped about having surgery when he was hurt and getting paid millions of dollars to chill? Three fucking cheers!!!

As for sitting behind Mihm, WTF are you talking about? When Z was finally fully healthy in 02 he started every game and has done so since (up until this year). From the time Z was drafted up until 2002 he appeared in a whopping 42% of the Cavs overall games and was recovering from injuries during many of those appearances (and 82 of the 173 games he played in came in 1997 when Z started all but one game he appeared in).

You know how much Z has been paid to date by the Cavs? $112,530,000

Z was given a 70MM extension after the 98 season, and over the next three years (while he was hurt or recovering) Z made $30MM for 62 games.

So essentially you have a player that played one season (he was hurt and sat out the 1996 season), played well and showed potential, got locked up and was hurt for half of the contract. Next time FA came up we gave him a max extension over five years (meaning no one else could offer more beyond years and no one was going longer w/ Z) and he got the opportunity to catch passes from one of the greatest ever. Z did not stay in C-town because of loyalty, this is business, players go where they make the most money 99.9999999999999% of the time. This time it just so happened the Z made the most money in the same place he had been for most of his career (largely due to him getting reupped to a huge contract very early on).

And please, spare me this Z was so kind as of to sit behind Shaq. Guy is a professional and did what was best for the team. For that I give him kudos. Guy is not a cancer and is a great team player. Cheers to him. Was an all-time Cavs and who knows how much better he would have been if not for the injuries. But he got paid the most money he could have been paid to stay in Cleveland. Truthfully a lot of his longevity may be because of how many years he missed, who knows. What we do know is that Z is not a good NBA center anymore and he should gracefully bow out after this year.

We owe him nothing more. He has $112MM for being here. His jersey will hang. He'll be remember for a good while. That's enough.

[peeker643]

And yet here's a guy who is still a solid player despite his age and can contribute and we're so willing to dump him just to get a championship?

The credibility was gone here IMHO.

If that's a legit question then we're all done, no?

[e0y2e3]

Fuck, well, nicely put Lead. My point made while embracing brevity.

I should work on learning said skill.

[Cleveland Transplant]

My original point was simply an observation on how this board act. This town cried about player loyalty for decades and as soon as one of our teams sniff a championship, fans are willing to dump a guy who's been loyal. It's interesting how the winds change so fast around these parts. I still maintain that stance.

But to get into it further:

Yes, Z is still a good player. His height still impacts the game and he gives the team second chance points because of that. He moves a little slow? Sure. No one is going to question that, especially with a guy who is that tall and has had that many foot problems but here's a guy who can shoot. He can stretch the defense by standing on the arc and threaten to take a 3. You put him out there with the likes of Shaq and Andy and you're talking huge defense inside of the paint. He's not going to give a whole lot of numbers with the way the offense is set up now, but he's going to provide a lot of intangibles both on and off the court simply due to his size and threat outside of the paint.

He can still contribute. His numbers have gone down this year, but I suspect a lot of it has to do with coming off the bench and trying to find his rhythm, it's a new role for him and he's had to adjust. Not only that but he's probably been under-utilized because of Mike Browns lack of offense (as is the rest of the team); he's not going to overpower a guy like Howard in the paint - but he's never been that type of center anyways. The guy has been a cornerstone for this organization, and especially during the Lebron era. He's still someone I want starting and would gladly take him over a lot of other centers in this league, especially the one that currently starts for us.

[jb]

I guess if you want to liken Z to a player in history, think Celtics-era Bill Walton. Very slow afoot, no longer a starter, but capable of playing well in a narrowly-defined area.

Cass, I never, ever, thought I'd add this to one of your pieces or posts. Especially when it comes to the cavs. They are always rock solid.

Until now.

[jb]

His jersey will hang.

OIC

[RedDawg]

I thought our twin towers lineup of Shaq and Z in together DOMINATED the Lakers when it was on the floor.

Just gives the roster more versatility, which is always a good thing.

Now if we can get A. Jamison type scoring presence in a deal which includes Z, we do it.

[DrPoove]

It's all about value and I agree with Lead and Eeyore that right now Z's contract is more valuable than Z himself. If you can use that contract to upgrade the Cavs this year or beyond, you do it. No brainer.

It has been a mutally beneficial relationship for a long time. But now the Cavs owe Z nothing and vice versa.

"This isn't personal, Sonny, it's just business."

[Hi Oktane]

I guess I'm the dissenter here. I've long said that I'd be in favor of moving Z for a final-piece kind of player (i.e. Jamison), but if he stays, I think he still very much helps the team.

Is he slow and getting slower by the year? Not going to dispute that. Is he a starting center on an NBA championship team? Last season answered that question. But I think the whole "He's a totem pole with a decent-but-not-great jumper, and useless beyond that" argument is going too far in the other direction.

The ability to have Shaq and/or Z on the floor at all times, even together, helped this team win in Orlando and against the Lakers. Z can't guard Dewey and Gasol straight-up, but he is still good as an auxiliary piece against other teams with extreme height. It's all part of having versatility.

Z's height still impacts games around the rim at the defensive end. He can still redirect shots, and he still gets some stickbacks simply by virtue of being 7'-3". And his jumper has been falling with the usual Z-type consistency ever since the benching controversy. Maybe it re-lit his competitive fire.

Agreed. There's also value in making defensive lane cloggers wander 17-22 feet from the rack. Also concede the negatives to Z's current skillset that +/- offset the aforementioned contributions (P&R and helpside D come immediately to mind). Personally, while he's cooled of late, I did feel Z's play at the offensive end had been as good (from a contribution standpoint) the 3 weeks or so post-Benchgate than at any time in the Lebron era. Verdict: I'm jiggy with keeping him at the end of the bench on the cheap.

[hornet84]

My eyes bleeding is the problem.

Why is that a problem? Alot of people here would love the idea of you bleeding from the eyes.

or from somewhere else

[e0y2e3]

Andy can make defensive lane cloggers run all over the court chasing him around if need be.

Z standing 20 feet away is not beneficial against the biggest and baddest centers if they are just dunking in his face on the other end of the court.

Guy isn't completely useless at this point, but he's not a good NBA center.