A. Randolph to the Wolves? (Update pg. 32)

allweneedisLOVE · Post #1 » by **allweneedisLOVE** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 10:53 pm

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=5248951

Kind of funny how the 1 guy most of us talk about and think has a ton of potential is the first player that we hear rumors about. Does Kahn post on our forums? :lol:

Krapinsky · Post #2 » by **Krapinsky** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 11:01 pm

Ok, this is a little awkward. I swear I'm not David Kahn or related to him in any way.

Krapinsky · Post #3 » by **Krapinsky** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 11:04 pm

Added 20 lbs of muscle

I wanted to trade Love for him in the past, and honestly still would.

But what about 4 + 16 for Randolph + 6?

At 6 we get Johnson and then we could still look to move Love or Al in a separate deal.

allweneedisLOVE · Post #4 » by **allweneedisLOVE** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 11:06 pm

I think ideally we would want to have Randolph & Cousins. Trade Love + 16 and then Jefferson to Sacto for #5 and take Johnson :lol:

Rubio/Brewer/Johnson/Randolph/Cousins

shangrila · Post #5 » by **shangrila** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 11:19 pm

Yeah I'd think pairing Randolph and Cousins would be the goal, although if Kahn could do that then massive kudos. Randolph is definitely a guy that'd look good in both a running and triangle/ball movement offence

[RCG] · Post #6 » by **[RCG]** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 11:24 pm

I'd rather do a Love/#16 than a #4/#16 for Randolph/#6

The article has the Warriors wanting to move up (obviously our #4) but I don't think Johnson will be available at the #6, otherwise I'd be all for a #4 for Randolph/#6 type deal

Esohny · Post #7 » by **Esohny** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 11:27 pm

Krapinsky wrote:Added 20 lbs of muscle

I wanted to trade Love for him in the past, and honestly still would.

But what about 4 + 16 for Randolph + 6?

At 6 we get Johnson and then we could still look to move Love or Al in a separate deal.

He gains 20 lbs of muscle every 6 months according to GSW fans and news reports. He should weigh more than Cousins by now.

Esohny · Post #8 » by **Esohny** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 11:29 pm

I wouldn't do Love + 16, I think we'd have a shot at the #3 and Favors for that.

Krapinsky · Post #9 » by **Krapinsky** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 11:30 pm

Esohny wrote:
Krapinsky wrote:Added 20 lbs of muscle

I wanted to trade Love for him in the past, and honestly still would.

But what about 4 + 16 for Randolph + 6?

At 6 we get Johnson and then we could still look to move Love or Al in a separate deal.

He gains 20 lbs of muscle every 6 months according to GSW fans and news reports. He should weigh more than Cousins by now.

He's only been in the league two years. That only puts him at like 240.

Esohny · Post #10 » by **Esohny** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 11:33 pm

Krapinsky wrote:
Esohny wrote:
Krapinsky wrote:Added 20 lbs of muscle

I wanted to trade Love for him in the past, and honestly still would.

But what about 4 + 16 for Randolph + 6?

At 6 we get Johnson and then we could still look to move Love or Al in a separate deal.

He gains 20 lbs of muscle every 6 months according to GSW fans and news reports. He should weigh more than Cousins by now.

He's only been in the league two years. That only puts him at like 240.

He was only 160 when he came in?

Post #11 » by **C.lupus** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 11:37 pm

Esohny wrote:I wouldn't do Love + 16, I think we'd have a shot at the #3 and Favors for that.

GSW would not do that either because Love doesn't play DEFENSE. :evil:

Randolph, in the mean time, played a really GREAT game against HOWARD once. :onfire:

Esohny · Post #12 » by **Esohny** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 11:38 pm

Now that I think of it, this might be an interesting experiment. If this trade went down, most of the GSW forum would riot...until Love got there and became a cross between Moses Malone and Tim Duncan.

Post #13 » by **The J Rocka** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 11:39 pm

Im kinda happy to hear about this. I wonder if more is gonna be added to this to make it a blockbuster? Anyways this move COULD pay off.

Krapinsky · Post #14 » by **Krapinsky** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 11:40 pm

Esohny wrote:
He was only 160 when he came in?

More like 120. I don't care. He's incredible. I wouldn't trade Cousins for him, but if we were number 5 I would do a Randolph swap.

allweneedisLOVE · Post #15 » by **allweneedisLOVE** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 11:40 pm

Kevin Love in GSW's system = Lol. 20 pts, 68 rebounds a game. However, he would give up 75 pts a game to his opponent.

Esohny · Post #16 » by **Esohny** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 11:41 pm

Krapinsky wrote:
Esohny wrote:
He was only 160 when he came in?

More like 120. I don't care. He's incredible. I wouldn't trade Cousins for him, but if we were number 5 I would do a Randolph swap.

He seems kinda soft.

Post #17 » by **The J Rocka** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 11:44 pm

In espn article it mentions that GS wants to move up in draft to 4. Whats that mean for us? I like Cousins a lot on this team.

Krapinsky · Post #18 » by **Krapinsky** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 11:48 pm

Esohny wrote:
Krapinsky wrote:
Esohny wrote:
He was only 160 when he came in?

More like 120. I don't care. He's incredible. I wouldn't trade Cousins for him, but if we were number 5 I would do a Randolph swap.

He seems kinda soft.

He just needs to get stronger and rumor has it he is. He was tied for 12th in the league for blocks per game at 1.6, and did that in only 22 minutes per game.

Esohny · Post #19 » by **Esohny** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 11:52 pm

Krapinsky wrote:
Esohny wrote:
He seems kinda soft.

He just needs to get stronger and rumor has it he is. He was tied for 12th in the league for blocks per game at 1.6, and did that in only 22 minutes per game.

I meant more mentally soft. I'm not denying that the kid is really talented. It depends on what we'd have to give up for him, I suppose. I will admit I'd much rather have him than make a trade for Beasley.

Dewey · Post #20 » by **Dewey** » Fri Jun 4, 2010 12:07 am

Fortunately for us Randolph has not had a pleasant experience in GS ... however that does toss up some flags, plus he's not the sharpest tac in the box. Love/#4 for Randolph/#6 is a NO for me. We need the athleticism and some shot-blocking from a big man, but that's giving alot. If it's contingent on Johnson at #6, I'd consider it, but would still like to see a future pick added in..