Randolph deal not dead?
Moderators: MickeyDavis, paulpressey25
-
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,612
- And1: 3,179
- Joined: Jan 03, 2006
-
Nobody who would want Randolph on this team (or any team) as a starter could possibly have watched him play in the last year or two. It is not a stereotype to say that despite his very good stats (points and rebounds) that he hurts a team MUCH more than he helps him. I remember about two Bucks-Knicks games ago, the Bucks announcers actually laughed out loud a few times because Randolph was playing so lazily and dumb.
He doesn't defend, he doesn't swing the ball, he doesn't have a high basketball IQ, and if our main problem is already two offensive minded high volume shooters fighting for shots (Mo and Redd) THE LAST thing we would want would be another chucker.
There is seriously not a single reason why Randolph would be a good fit for this team, on the court or off, this season or long term. If Harris is seriously pushing for this trade as rumored, then it is because he hates Kohl and is trying to sabatogue the club.
He doesn't defend, he doesn't swing the ball, he doesn't have a high basketball IQ, and if our main problem is already two offensive minded high volume shooters fighting for shots (Mo and Redd) THE LAST thing we would want would be another chucker.
There is seriously not a single reason why Randolph would be a good fit for this team, on the court or off, this season or long term. If Harris is seriously pushing for this trade as rumored, then it is because he hates Kohl and is trying to sabatogue the club.
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 18,710
- And1: 4,490
- Joined: Jan 31, 2006
- Contact:
-
FutureBuck2008 wrote:Right now i think the Bucks should consider Z-Bo. I was not too sure about his D at first, but they had a report that he is a solid defender now.....and Randolph has at least a blocked shot or a steal in his last 5 games.
So i'd say go after him what the hell could it hurt? And i don't really care what Kohl has to say about it. He thinks that Z-Bo will be a problem and not be a fit for this team. Well are the Bucks doing any better with this team? Nope. But if the Bucks are to get Randolph they will surely have to deal at least Redd or Mo Williams but more likely both......and i would be content if they got rid of both of them for the sake of the Bucks.
They could package Redd for maybe a young SG (a guy who can score but D would help too) and somebody that could be help on D, rebounding, toughness, or any of those things. Mo Williams can be dealt for either a PG who is a pass-first shoot later type or an athletic SF or something along those lines. I'm not saying that will happen.....just throwing it out there and thinking it might be good.
So LH i'd say bring in Z-Bo and start this team over with a trade or two. So get it done!
Who is "they"?
I wouldn't listen to what "they" have to say anymore.....
Randolph has no clue how to play team basketball, he has no idea how to play defense and would kill the development of our frontcourt. Mo Williams had more blocks last night than Zach had for the first three months of the season.
It's not like he's an expiring contract or he's gone after next year. He's got three more years on his deal on a max contract.
I'm shocked we've talked about him so much on this board. I'm willing to bet the Bucks talked about much shorter than we did.
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 15,159
- And1: 1,440
- Joined: Jul 24, 2004
- Location: New Berlin, WI (Milwaukee)
- Contact:
-
Mags FTW wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
Thanks for the info GAD. Now I can stop spending $20 on Aquafina every weekend.

BlueJeep wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
Hey GAD, what do you and your boyfriend use?![]()
![]()
I have no problem with guys who are into other guys, but I'm not just not one of them. I hope I didn't just shatter any dreams of yours

For the ladies though, in most cases nothing is necessary for run of the mill stuff in my experience, as long as you know how to get them excited.
For some situations it is a requirement though, and in that case I suggest either Astroglide or KY Liquid

97-98
Nick Van Exel (LAL) on defending the Stockton-Malone pick-and-roll: "Yeah,
I got a way to defend it. Bring a bat to the game and kill one of them."
Nick Van Exel (LAL) on defending the Stockton-Malone pick-and-roll: "Yeah,
I got a way to defend it. Bring a bat to the game and kill one of them."
- trwi7
- RealGM
- Posts: 111,686
- And1: 27,270
- Joined: Jul 12, 2006
- Location: Aussie bias
-
GrandAdmiralDan wrote:I have no problem with guys who are into other guys, but I'm not just not one of them. I hope I didn't just shatter any dreams of yours
Thanks for leading me on in our chat. I feel so stupid now.

stellation wrote:What's the difference between Gery Woelful and this glass of mineral water? The mineral water actually has a source."
I Hate Manure wrote:We look to be awful next season without Beasley.
- trwi7
- RealGM
- Posts: 111,686
- And1: 27,270
- Joined: Jul 12, 2006
- Location: Aussie bias
-
GrandAdmiralDan wrote:According to the court documents, he actually took a bottle of water and poured some water on a girl's "special" place before he was about to have sex with her, because he actually thought that would work as a lubricator in that situation.
I think I figured this out. He got confused thinking that water was actually a water based lubricant.
stellation wrote:What's the difference between Gery Woelful and this glass of mineral water? The mineral water actually has a source."
I Hate Manure wrote:We look to be awful next season without Beasley.
-
- Sophomore
- Posts: 106
- And1: 0
- Joined: Jan 31, 2008
EastSideBucksFan wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
Who is "they"?
I wouldn't listen to what "they" have to say anymore.....
Randolph has no clue how to play team basketball, he has no idea how to play defense and would kill the development of our frontcourt. Mo Williams had more blocks last night than Zach had for the first three months of the season.
It's not like he's an expiring contract or he's gone after next year. He's got three more years on his deal on a max contract.
I'm shocked we've talked about him so much on this board. I'm willing to bet the Bucks talked about much shorter than we did.
they = inside scouting report on comcast.net (and its up-to-date too)
ok but eastsidefan look at his stats the last 5 games
3 straight double doubles
20 pts/13 rebs/1 stl
12pts/10 rebs/1 blk/1 stl
13 pts/10 rebs/1 stl
....and 2 games before that almost a double double (26 pts, 9 rebs/12 pts, 9 rebs) with a blk in one game
so Z-Bo can't play defense? yeah not while he was in Port maybe maybe not early with NY, but hes getting better and would help more than CV has.......so what if he's not a shot blocker.......be nice to have one of those but id be willing to take one that will play defense or at least try. Randolph isn't old either and on decline.....only 26....so all the Bucks would ask Z-Bo to do is keep getting better.
Ok, Randolph might have past issues, attitude problems, etc....but do u want another nice guy/role model here in Milwaukee??? i sure don't. it hasn't gotten the bucks much anywhere. We had two playoff chances but that's cuz we had offensive power (Cassell, Allen, Big Dog) and we got ousted by Detroit in the first playoff run...first round i believe.....Bucks need to take the risk whether good or bad and see if it works....and if it doesn't than trade Randolph or w/e.
Well defense wins championships. Plain and simple. The Spurs have done it. So keep Yi and Bogut, and build around with defensive minded guys or guys at least willing to play D. I mean getting a Haslem would be a better fit....but it's not like Z-Bo is the WORST option out there. So i'm all for getting him but if we can get someone who's a better fit (Haslem, B. Wallace, etc...).....than u do that deal over Z-Bo....but yeah u find the best deal available that gives the Bucks what they TRULY need and gives them a better chance to win.
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 20,545
- And1: 1,328
- Joined: May 30, 2005
- Location: Working on pad level
I could see the Bucks trading for Randolph, it would fit perfectly what this team has done over the years. Bring in or pay non defenders who put up good stats, like we are trying to build a good fantasy basketball team instead of a good NBA team.
Then come next year and following years when our record is say 20-34, whoever is the franchise GM/figurehead at time can come on a radio show acting like he can't understand why our "talented" team is underachieving again and ranked second last in defense.
Then come next year and following years when our record is say 20-34, whoever is the franchise GM/figurehead at time can come on a radio show acting like he can't understand why our "talented" team is underachieving again and ranked second last in defense.
- Magic 32
- Banned User
- Posts: 69
- And1: 0
- Joined: Feb 10, 2008
I dont think its a good idea. The Bucks dont need anyone off that Kincks team. At first I liked the Randolph deal becasue it was going to give Bogut some help down low in the box far as rebounding but that was it. After that trade was mentioned they went to Bogut ASAP and realized that Bogut could score if given the chance. Like DRUGBUST stated if it was a year less it would make it a better possiblity. I rather try to trade one of our crap contracts off the books then pick up one for one.
-
- Banned User
- Posts: 12,827
- And1: 14
- Joined: Nov 10, 2005
Locker room 'character' is overratted. If you lose THEN NO ONE SHOULD BE HAPPY! No one should be that complacent. Mason, Patterson, were all here when were struggling.JHSFIVE wrote:With our recently mentioned locker room issues, could you imagine adding one of these jokers to the mix?
omg.
Many of you whine about Anthony Mason, Ron Artest, Zach Randolph and as recently someone said that even Rueben patterson was a locker room menace which is why he is not back...
WELL SO WHAT! Look at this team of so called nice guys now. Nice guys finish last Leo Durocher used to say...and we are dead ass last!
The word 'team cancer' is overuse ...None of you know if a guy is a 'cancer' or not. Some cancer is malignant and some are benign.
You can have a hell raiser in a way that pushes those around them to excel. We all played ball on the street with various personalities on any given day. That's just life. Deal with it.
We need more tough minded guys on this team who have one purpose and one agenda. Now some pop off when we lose and they are not getting any PT, now that is different...
You only go by what you read and hear, from a reporter. And there are many times reports you read or hear are skewed by guys who have an axe to grind with a guy who does not give them a story or who helps sell papers.
No locker room in the world should be happy if you are losing! I don't get what the Bucks values are! These are grown men.
The Bucks need a knucklehead of sorts who wants to win so bad he is a guy who demands it. That is leadership too! If for no other reason to put things in check and REFUSE TO LOSE!
IT IS A SOFT LOCKER ROOM with jelly fish excuses and players with no pride and backbone!
Micheal Jordan had too much of it and that is why in the end he took a lot of heat playing alongside a bunch of lax losers!
I will take a gamble on a guy like Mason, or Randolph or Artest because those men PLAY TO WIN! They dont run from shots like Redd, and come up empty in the clutch.
Patterson was our best player last year. It is not the personalities in the locker room that matter...it is the lack of heart and tenacity in the player.