# The trimmed down Zach Randolph:



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

Wow...he looks like a different player.


----------



## handclap problematic (Nov 6, 2003)

Yeah, he looks alright. I just hope, for our team's sake and for Zach personally, that his knee is feeling fine. That would make things great for both sides....
But seriously, Zach has a huuuuuuge head. And I dont mean that in the ego kind of way. His head is just completely massive. 


Prunetang


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

where'd this come from? he certainly looks a lot skinnier than I've ever seen him as a Blazer. I'd guess he's lost 25 pounds.


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

mook said:


> where'd this come from? he certainly looks a lot skinnier than I've ever seen him as a Blazer. I'd guess he's lost 25 pounds.


Zach at Work in the ATL 

There's about 15 pictures from his workout today, and a couple with him and his daughter.


----------



## MercyKersey (Jul 22, 2003)

Wow, he looks really good.. He could be the best power forward in the league if he can get into karl malone shape, and he looks like hes about half the way there from these pics.. Great job Zach :cheers:


----------



## The Sebastian Express (Mar 3, 2005)

He definitely looks thinner. But damn does he have a huge head (actual size wise) like Prune said.

I am not a big Zach fan anymore, but I certainly hope he gets it this year. At least by his workouts, it looks like maybe, just maybe, he's starting to get it.

Now we need Medina working with L-Train.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

Wow! I just hope he can still bang with the big guys. He may want to play inside even less. He's sure going to be a lot quicker though! Looks like he's really into being better this season.


----------



## Target (Mar 17, 2004)

The Sebastian Express said:


> He definitely looks thinner. But damn does he have a huge head (actual size wise) like Prune said.


Could be half interest in the Bubba Gump Shrimp Company with a head like thet. Bubba Randolph.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

I'd sure like to see him get a little more vertical. seemed like he'd go entire months without dunking. 

he's still a ways away from being LaMarcus-thin. I'd rather my PF be a little too thin than too fat, especially the way the game has sped up.


----------



## BigDtoPDX (Jun 30, 2005)

he still has some chicken legs. You know, about karl Malone, I once saw his measurements in SI or something while he was in his prime, it was something along the line of:

6ft 8 (maybe 9in)
240 lbs
with a 33 in waist! amazing
He was one of the first NBA players that I can remember who really hit the gym hard and it obviously paid.


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

He should be quicker, which would make me believe that he'll turn and face more in the post. Players who can turn and face (ie: Kevin Garnett) are great if they can: a) go both directions, which Zach hasn't been able to do, but is now working on. b) explode and jump over people like Amare, which Zach clearly can't do.

Overall my post seems negative, but I'm happy to see he's in good shape. With his touch if he could develope one or two counter moves when defenders take away his left, he would be deadly. This should help his defense too.


----------



## Ukrainefan (Aug 1, 2003)

It's interesting that the Blazers are devoting some resources (two coaches) to Zach's development and also promoting Zach on their website. This would seem to indicate they have no plans for trading Zach in the near future.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

zbo looks in great shape , say what you want about zach but please dont compare him to darius he cars and wants to win .


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Maybe Zach can play SF in a huge lineup of Joel, Aldridge, Zach, Webster and Roy.


----------



## Anonymous Gambler (May 29, 2006)

I'll settle for Zach just being able to guard 4s!!

But this is very encouraging!

Maybe this is the year for an Elton Brand type jump in Zach's game?


----------



## blue32 (Jan 13, 2006)

Damn, he's looking good.....this is getting me all excited! EDIT: (not in THAT way) :biggrin:


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

Whoa! That's encouraging.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

The Sebastian Express said:


> He definitely looks thinner. But damn does he have a huge head (actual size wise) like Prune said.


What are you seeing that I don't? In the picture posted at the top of the thread, his head looks completely normal in proportion to the rest of his body.


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

Tince said:


> He should be quicker, which would make me believe that he'll turn and face more in the post. Players who can turn and face (ie: Kevin Garnett) are great if they can: a) go both directions, which Zach hasn't been able to do, *but is now working on. *


That's the thing that gets me excited about Zach. At times he was a one trick pony going left all the time and guys caught on and blocked off his left hand side. If he can consistantly go right the sky's the limit for him.

I'd still rather he went with his back to the basket, but it's good to have a variety of tools.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

Ukrainefan said:


> It's interesting that the Blazers are devoting some resources (two coaches) to Zach's development and also promoting Zach on their website. This would seem to indicate they have no plans for trading Zach in the near future.


I agree... and if Zach is working this hard to improve, it could be a good thing we arent trading him.


more from Barrett:
http://fans.blazers.com/blogs/mike_barrett/2006/07/another-day-of-work-for-zach-and-jj.html


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

Ukrainefan said:


> It's interesting that the Blazers are devoting some resources (two coaches) to Zach's development and also promoting Zach on their website. This would seem to indicate they have no plans for trading Zach in the near future.


I wouldn't say that. Bobby Medina is there to check on Zach and Jarrett and how they are working out this summer. Next he goes to see Darius in St. Louis. Not trying to degrade you, just thought I'd correct.

But still, I am pleasantly surprised with Zach. I've been saying this all offseason that he goes back to 20/10, and I think that's looking pretty good right now..


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Blazer Freak said:


> I wouldn't say that. Bobby Medina is there to check on Zach and Jarrett and how they are working out this summer. Next he goes to see Darius in St. Louis. Not trying to degrade you, just thought I'd correct.
> 
> But still, I am pleasantly surprised with Zach. I've been saying this all offseason that he goes back to 20/10, and I think that's looking pretty good right now..




While it's true that it will look good if Zach get's 20/10 this year I'll be more curious to see HOW he gets them. If Zach continues to grab 6 of his rebounds off of his own misses and blocked shots or off of freethrow attempts then those numbers don't really help us. If he averages 20 points, but the offense stalls so he can do it then that really doesn't help us either.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

thanks for posting the blog. thought this was interesting:



> Some complained last season that Zach ended up settling for the outside shot too often, and he agrees with that. Medina explained that today by saying Zach's knee was getting worn down in the post, where it took a beating. Randolph was also double-teammed all the time, and teams tried to attack him physically. Medina's goal is to get Zach strong enough to wage war in the paint this season, and not have to go outside as much.


guess he was just "lazy," eh?


----------



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

mediocre man said:


> ....If Zach continues to grab 6 of his rebounds off of his own misses and blocked shots or off of freethrow attempts then those numbers don't really help us.


They certianly couldn't _hurt_, though, right?

jus sayin


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

one other point from the blog on Jack:


> n 2004, as a sophomore, Jack led Georgia Tech to the Final Four. His junior season ended on a sour note. In the 2005 ACC Tournament Jack injured his ankle, and then played his first NBA season basically on one leg. Earlier this summer he had surgery on that ankle. Doctors were amazed with what they found during the surgery. Medina told us that doctors said 85 percent of the tissue in Jarrett's ankle was "unhealthy tissue" and they wondered how he was able to play at all. The ankle isn't 100 percent yet, but Jack says it's getting there. Just this week he was cleared to play full-court hoops. He's been doing that in the mornings here in Atlanta with some other NBA and college players.


is it even possible to walk when you've got "85% unhealthy tissue"? I mean, if you aren't Keith Richards?


----------



## Redbeard (Sep 11, 2005)

maybe it is just me, but this is the first year I can remember having so much off-season training of players.

IMO Zach deserves a little slack from fans. Although he has made some dumb moves off the court, on the court he went through a through couple years. One being sidelined half way through and another trying to rehab after major surgery while being the only offensive option on a very poor team.

He got battled down low last year and I appreciate that he is taking the time to prepare to fight back. I haven't been against trading him, but he can be a dominant player and it would be difficult to get that in return since there are few players that can do that.

I am a little discouraged by the report from Jack's doctors. 85% unhealthy tissue in his ankle is not good. Maybe this is a reason why we have so many PG's right now.


----------



## TallBottom (May 24, 2006)

GOOD to see!!! If nothing else it shows that a-his knee is feeling better so that he can work out and b-losing those lbs will help his knee feel better and should help his durability for the season. While he does stupid things he is trying to improve, which can only help him and us (if we have to trade him down the road).


----------



## Blazer Maven (Sep 27, 2005)

mediocre man said:


> While it's true that it will look good if Zach get's 20/10 this year I'll be more curious to see HOW he gets them. If Zach continues to grab 6 of his rebounds off of his own misses and blocked shots or off of freethrow attempts then those numbers don't really help us. If he averages 20 points, but the offense stalls so he can do it then that really doesn't help us either.



MM..That's where Nate comes in.

Nate likes to run his offense through the perimeter guys. Unforunately, none of the perimeter players were talented enough to run the offense. This year, with Roy, Jack and Webster all able to contribute, Zach will be able to do what he does best, grabbing rebounds and finishing around the basket.

Zach will also benefit from having two guards who know how to get him the ball when he has an advantage down low.

The presence of LaFrentz will help, to give Zach an option to pass out of the post. Joel/Theo do not provide the same mid-range threat.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Blazer Maven said:


> MM..That's where Nate comes in.
> 
> Nate likes to run his offense through the perimeter guys. Unforunately, none of the perimeter players were talented enough to run the offense. This year, with Roy, Jack and Webster all able to contribute, Zach will be able to do what he does best, grabbing rebounds and finishing around the basket.
> 
> ...



If that's what Nate likes to do then why has he run a post offense every season he's been a coach? I sincerly hope you are right. I hope Nate's offense is perimeter oriented because that's just more fun to watch. Hopefully zach doesn't pout about it and jack up shots because he isn't getting enough touches. If those things happen then the Blazers will be a lot of fun to watch.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

> Some complained last season that Zach ended up settling for the outside shot too often, and he agrees with that. Medina explained that today by saying Zach's knee was getting worn down in the post, where it took a beating. Randolph was also double-teammed all the time, and teams tried to attack him physically. Medina's goal is to get Zach strong enough to wage war in the paint this season, and not have to go outside as much.


Best news I've heard in a long time. If Zach goes back to his "inside" game, we could have a pretty formidable offense this year.


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

mediocre man said:


> Maybe Zach can play SF in a huge lineup of Joel, Aldridge, Zach, Webster and Roy.


at first I thought 'no way, he will never be able to play D against SF's, but then I remembered, he can't play D against PF's either.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

just put aldridge or lefrenz at sf 

yeah zbo is not somone i would want to be zidaned by!


----------



## Zybot (Jul 22, 2004)

Amazing pic. Totally looks like a photo-shop. That is how dramatic the change is.


----------



## HAMMERHEAD (Jul 7, 2005)

In the season ticket holder conference call yesterday, Patterson/Pritchard said that Zach is 8 pounds lighter now than he was during training camp last season.


----------



## wizmentor (Nov 10, 2005)

Blazer Maven said:


> MM..That's where Nate comes in.
> 
> Nate likes to run his offense through the perimeter guys. Unforunately, none of the perimeter players were talented enough to run the offense. This year, with Roy, Jack and Webster all able to contribute, Zach will be able to do what he does best, grabbing rebounds and finishing around the basket.
> 
> ...


I agree 100%. However, you have to remember about Zach's other condition - yes, he has a
disease. I'm not sure of the official name of this disease, so I'll just call it the
Cliff Robinson/Rasheed Wallace/"Shoot from the Outside because I'm really a Do-It-All Player,
Can't you See That?" Disease.

I'm absolutely thilled about the pics and his workouts! Really, I am. But, you must understand
that admitting that he has a problem is the first step in a cure :biggrin: 

The Blazers have had a fantastic off-season. However, I'd like to see two more things:
1) Miles traded for cap space/future picks.
2) Randolph say "I plan to take fewer outside shots and rebound more" this year.

Here's hoping,
Wizmentor


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Utherhimo said:


> just put aldridge or lefrenz at sf


I don't understand why this would make ANY sense.

Why not put Blake at the small forward? He's just as much a SF as either Raef or Adridge.

Ed O.


----------



## HispanicCausinPanic (Jul 2, 2005)

I don't know why so many of you guys are down on Zach. For being slow, fat and not able to play defense.......He sure puts up some nice numbers. Everyone talks about the aforementioned traits and bag on his game. There aren't to many guys in this league in shape or not that can put up near 20/10 averages. Just support the guy and quit crackin' on him all the time!


----------



## kaydow (Apr 6, 2004)

HispanicCausinPanic said:


> I don't know why so many of you guys are down on Zach. For being slow, fat and not able to play defense.......He sure puts up some nice numbers. Everyone talks about the aforementioned traits and bag on his game. There aren't to many guys in this league in shape or not that can put up near 20/10 averages. Just support the guy and quit crackin' on him all the time!


When you sign an $84 million dollar contract, and REGRESS as a player (whether it's due to injury or other factors) you will take a beating from the press/fans. I'm not saying it's right - just the way it is. His 18/8 last year vs. 20/10 two years ago doesn't seem like much on the surface - but he wasn't the same player by a longshot. Sure, some of it was the injury, and the fact that there weren't any playmakers surrounding him didn't help either . . . bottom line is he didn't look like the guy BEFORE the huge contract. I could live with the '03-'04 Z-Bo. I mean, that guy still had weaknesses that I still HOPE he improves on (defense, passing), but if it doesn't happen - I won't complain. Just no more hoisting double digit 20 footers a night with nobody under the basket - please!!


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

kaydow said:


> When you sign an $84 million dollar contract, and REGRESS as a player (whether it's due to injury or other factors) you will take a beating from the press/fans. I'm not saying it's right - just the way it is. His 18/8 last year vs. 20/10 two years ago doesn't seem like much on the surface - but he wasn't the same player by a longshot. Sure, some of it was the injury, and the fact that there weren't any playmakers surrounding him didn't help either . . . bottom line is he didn't look like the guy BEFORE the huge contract. I could live with the '03-'04 Z-Bo. I mean, that guy still had weaknesses that I still HOPE he improves on (defense, passing), but if it doesn't happen - I won't complain. Just no more hoisting double digit 20 footers a night with nobody under the basket - please!!


Good post!


----------



## BlazerFanFoLife (Jul 17, 2003)

oh wow he lost 2 points and 2 rebs during a season where he is recovering from a major surgery. If anything i am willing to bet that Zach averages more than 20 pnts and atleast 9 rebs next season, barring any major injuries.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

I could easily see a lineup of Zbo in this kind of shape and Aldridge as a very formidable, hard to stop front line. At the very least, the Blazers should have a scoring presence from the PF position at all times on the court, not with lapses like the last 2 years. If you decide to go real big, you could go with Joel, Zbo and Aldridge on the court at the same time, as I have read Aldridge is capable of guarding a lot of 3's. Interesting....very interesting


----------



## drexlersdad (Jun 3, 2006)

wizmentor said:


> you have to remember about Zach's other condition - yes, he has a
> disease. I'm not sure of the official name of this disease, so I'll just call it the
> Cliff Robinson/Rasheed Wallace/"Shoot from the Outside because I'm really a Do-It-All Player,
> Can't you See That?" Disease.
> ...


What made Cliff Robinson and Rasheed special players, was that they were versatile and skilled enough to knock down an open 3. If you can't make em', don't take em'.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

Ed O said:


> I don't understand why this would make ANY sense.
> 
> Why not put Blake at the small forward? He's just as much a SF as either Raef or Adridge.
> 
> Ed O.


I'd rather have someone tall like Adridge who is at least a forward rather than a short PG. I think it does make a little more sense.

Matter of fact I think we should try Ha at SF! :biggrin:


----------



## kaydow (Apr 6, 2004)

drexlersdad said:


> What made Cliff Robinson and Rasheed special players, was that they were versatile and skilled enough to knock down an open 3. If you can't make em', don't take em'.


I'll buy 'Sheed being a "special player" (barely), but Uncle Cliffy? A "Special Player"? Unless of course, by "Special Player", you mean a journeyman who was always at his worst in the post season.


----------



## Dynasty Raider (Nov 15, 2002)

Good job Zach on both your body and your daughter.

He looks very good. I wouldn't worry about whether or not he can still bang, because banging is his game. I thought the same thing about Elton last year when I first saw his new body. I was completely wrong, he ENHANCED his game and his stamina. It has to be done correctly, so I hope he has a good trainer and dietician.

You know ... this could be a great sign for your team. It takes a tremendous amount of dedication and commitment to stick with losing weight and re-shaping your body. To me, it indicates that HE, at least, is coming to win next year. 

Good luck; I'm still pulling for the Blazers.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

mgb said:


> I'd rather have someone tall like Adridge who is at least a forward rather than a short PG. I think it does make a little more sense.


It's sort of a pick your poison, in some sense -- a PG gets shot over and a C gets blown by. That said, 'Sheed is a PF I think of as being reasonably capable of playing either the C or SF positions, and folks have been making 'Sheed parallels with Aldridge. If he actually comes close to living up to them, sure, for stretches of the occasional game at least, I could see Aldridge at SF.

That said, even if LaFrentz is in there at the 4 or 5, I'm not sure there'd be enough shooting or (perhaps especially) ball-handling with Roy, Webster, and Aldridge at the 1, 2, and 3. They'd be tall, but I'm not sure they'd be effective.


----------



## HispanicCausinPanic (Jul 2, 2005)

Some of you guys on here are great with stats and numbers. I would love to see a breakdown of the 30 starting power forwards in the league and they're averages


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

Utherhimo said:


> just put aldridge or lefrenz at sf
> 
> yeah zbo is not somone i would want to be zidaned by!


Aldridge and Raef cannot play small forward. I don't know where you got that notion.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

HispanicCausinPanic said:


> Some of you guys on here are great with stats and numbers. I would love to see a breakdown of the 30 starting power forwards in the league and they're averages


Not quite what you're asking about, but there are some quality stats here.

Z-bo was #4 last year among PFs in scoring, #7 in rebounds. And on half a leg, no less.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Just an outsider's opinion on this. Great news for you trailblazers. It takes a lot of dedication to do a thing like that. With the way things are/were looking in trailblazer land, its easy for a player like Z-bo to just relax with that fat contract (no pun intended).


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

wastro said:


> Not quite what you're asking about, but there are some quality stats here.
> 
> Z-bo was #4 last year among PFs in scoring, #7 in rebounds. And on half a leg, no less.


Sort by field goal percentage. There's a very defined dropoff.


----------



## Public Defender (May 5, 2003)

wastro said:


> Not quite what you're asking about, but there are some quality stats here.
> 
> Z-bo was #4 last year among PFs in scoring, #7 in rebounds. And on half a leg, no less.


And I think it's worth mentioning that he was ahead of Rasheed Wallace in the three most important categories (if you ask me, which I know you were going to...): points per game, rebounds per game, and field goal percentage. 

If Randolph's leg is really like new, I could see Zach pushing from 18 to 22 ppg easily, and from 8 boards to 10, and ideally up from just under 44% from the field to 48%. That'd be a very good year, IMHO - 22 and 10, shooting at 48%.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

I think the biggest statistical increase Zach will make this year is his FG%. I am going to predict a 75 game season at 20ppg, 9rpg and 50% shooting.


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

Seeing that picture makes me believe in Randolph a lot more. Before today I was pretty much hoping we'd just get rid of him for something, but after seeing that he's actually worked hard to improve himself (and the team), I'm looking forward to seeing him play this year.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Blazer Freak said:


> Aldridge and Raef cannot play small forward. I don't know where you got that notion.


By repeating something over and over, people can come to believe most anything is true. But once the season starts just a few moments watching plodding Raef not being able to match the quickness of 4's and 5's should put the notion that he can guard 3's down for good. I think Aldridge might be able to stay with some NBA 3's though... not many but some. I don't expect either can bring much of any ball handling skills from where ever they line up, and thats usually part of a SF's skills and a good team's attack.

STOMP


----------



## wizmentor (Nov 10, 2005)

LameR said:


> Sort by field goal percentage. There's a very defined dropoff.


OK, I did just that. He moved from 4th to 7th. Discarding 2 above him who scored
under 11.0 a game (The Mark West Effect), and he was 5th. Still, pretty good.

Granted, not where we want him to be (43.6%), but hopefully he'll be taking less
outside shots this year.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

ThatBlazerGuy said:


> I think the biggest statistical increase Zach will make this year is his FG%. I am going to predict a 75 game season at 20ppg, 9rpg and 50% shooting.


If Zach plays 75 games and shoots 50% from the floor, it will be a MASSIVELY successful season for him in my book... even if he only gets 14 or 15 ppg.

Unfortunately the odds of either of those conditions occurring are pretty slim IMO.

Ed O.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Ed O said:


> If Zach plays 75 games and shoots 50% from the floor, it will be a MASSIVELY successful season for him in my book... even if he only gets 14 or 15 ppg.
> 
> Unfortunately the odds of either of those conditions occurring are pretty slim IMO.
> 
> Ed O.


I don't know about that. He played 74 games last season, just months removed from very serious knee surgery.

I agree, it's not likely he shoots 50%, but I could see him getting back into the upper half of the 40's.


----------



## stockfire (Jul 17, 2004)

LameR said:


> Sort by field goal percentage. There's a very defined dropoff.




Keep sorting anyone's stats and you'll eventually be disappointed.


----------

