Atlanta:
1) Okay... explain the Redd trade. You knew it was going to be unpopular, but what did you see in it?
2) Zach Randolph -- isn't this guy a complete bum and locker room cyanide?
1. Yes, the Redd trade. One that I did not enter into lightly without some soul-searching.
I felt OK with trading Redd, Harrington, and filler for Gordon, Hibbert, and Terry for a couple reasons. Firstly, I knew that Gordon, despite his flaws, would attract some interest around the league; I was confident I'd be able to spin him in another deal that would address some other needs, and even if I couldn't, he didn't represent a huge downgrade in terms of offensive production from Redd. Second, I wanted to acquire a veteran backcourt player, one who could score and shoot (thus providing a complementary skill-set to Rondo). Thirdly, I also wanted Hibbert, either as my C for the future, or as a chip to use in another deal.
In short, I saw the trade as a swap of Harrington for Terry--a trade of 6th men that addressed my team's greater need for backcourt depth--and a trade of Redd for Gordon and Hibbert: a return that allowed me to either make another deal or continue looking to the future.
2. Re: Randolph, yes, I have to admit his conduct and attitude is a legitimate concern. He's immensely talented, and I'd like to think that his reputation stems from the fact that he's been on teams that struggled to win, coupled with a perceived lack of touches within the offense. I don't think either of these situations will come into play: we're going to win more games than we lose, and Randolph will be a big part of the offense (perhaps the second option to Richardson, if not the first). But I also think that Richardson and Terry both have the kind of strong, alpha-dog personality that can keep Randolph from getting out of hand.
All that said, if someone were to make me a legitimate offer for Randolph, I'd certainly consider it.