# Source: Randolph On The Block, Could End Up In Milwaukee



## Ruff Draft (Nov 21, 2004)

*Source: Randolph On The Block, Could End Up In Milwaukee*


> Oregonian -
> An NBA source told John Canzano of the Oregonian via telephone on Wednesday night that Zach Randolph is on the trading block, and that he's likely to end up in Milwaukee.


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

There's a reason he's always available. He's the Steve Francis of big men. You don't want him in the long run.


----------



## Dean the Master (Feb 19, 2006)

I doubt the credibility of the source. I don't think he is going to be in Milwaukee. There is no point getting Randolph. The Bucks need some good guards not front court.


----------



## NewAgeBaller (Jan 8, 2007)

As I said in the other thread, that'd be horrible for Bogut and Yi's development.
Hope not cause this trade would hold you in mediocrity (ie. you wouldn't get any better) for a while..


----------



## Resume (Jul 17, 2007)

I feel bad for your team if you get Zach. He needs to stay in NY.


----------



## majic_sean (Dec 22, 2004)

He is the anti Steve Nash


----------



## narek (Jul 29, 2005)

Dave Babcock of the Bucks was on a Milwaukee Radio station at 6 (WSSP) - he said "We're not trading for that guy" when the rumors came up.

It makes no sense whatsoever. The Bucks have a few bad contracts, but none as bad as Randolph's so it didn't even make sense as a contract dump, let alone basketball sense.


----------



## Resume (Jul 17, 2007)

narek said:


> Dave Babcock of the Bucks was on a Milwaukee Radio station at 6 (WSSP) - he said *"We're not trading for that guy"* when the rumors came up.


LMFAO that is awesome!!! Smart. He would ruin your team. You got something special in Yi (even though he has no honor) and Bogut as 4 and 5's. You don't need Zach to clog your lanes and black hole the ball.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

narek said:


> Dave Babcock of the Bucks was on a Milwaukee Radio station at 6 (WSSP) - he said "We're not trading for that guy" when the rumors came up.
> 
> It makes no sense whatsoever. The Bucks have a few bad contracts, but none as bad as Randolph's so it didn't even make sense as a contract dump, let alone basketball sense.


One, Larry Harris is your GM, so there's no move so stupid that he's incapable of making it. Two, you guys have some atrocious contracts for some mediocre players (Bobby Simmons, Mo Williams) and then Gadzooks, who is the only MLE signing in NBA history that makes Mark Blount's look like a bargain. 

To quote a friend of mine, "This trade makes absolutely zero sense for either side, so I'm guessing that it's nearly done." :bsmile:


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

Would you guys go for a trade of Kwame Brown and LA's 2008 First Round Pick for Charlie Villanueva and Dan Gadzuric?

It would save you $23.5+M over the next three years, so just wondering...


----------



## narek (Jul 29, 2005)

Damian Necronamous said:


> Would you guys go for a trade of Kwame Brown and LA's 2008 First Round Pick for Charlie Villanueva and Dan Gadzuric?
> 
> It would save you $23.5+M over the next three years, so just wondering...


Yes!


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

Have fun with "I turn around and argue with Refs while my team is playing defence" Zach Randolph.:cheers:


----------

