I wouldn't trade Baby for him now. I agree that in 3 years he might fit in nicely with Rondo and Perk. But for now, we're gonna need Baby's ability to finish with either hand in the paint to mesh with Sheed, or Baby's 15 footer when Sheed is in the post. I don't think its worth losing that versatility now for something that may only pan out 4 years from now.
there is zero chance the warriors would trade him for big baby davis or any of our other bench players. anyone who thinks otherwise is drinking the kool-aid -- plain and simple.
It sounds as though they think, as do I, that he's never gonna amount to much. if you can get Baby, a proven performer, and expirings for him, why not?
Because even if they think that he's never going to amount to much, they'll try to sell him to someone who believes otherwise.
They're submarining the chances of that by coming out and saying he has maturity issues.
I'm sure we'll all aware of the spiraling disfunctionality of the Warriors. They have a lot of players with maturity issues, NO veteran leadership, Randolph and his agent make a stink about playing time, and with the exception of Curry, Nelson hates young guys.
I'm not saying he's a great fit for the Cs -- and we do NOT have the pieces to get him -- but is there any doubt if he went to San Antonio or LA or Boston or even the Knicks (i.e. well run, well coached teams) that he's probably stand a pretty good chance of turning that potential into some results?
Calling a kid of his talent at his age 'bad' because of short terms results in the first quarter of his second year on the worst run team in sports with a coach noted for mind games is.... not so bright.
They'll test the market and see if they can get anything for him. If the offers suck they'll keep him. Oklahoma City would be an interesting one, though they're going to run out of room for young player who will require bigger contracts.
Topic: Anthony Randolph on the block (Read 17817 times)