I have a post up at TrueHoop that lays out what I believe is a fair characterization of the debate over the Randolph acquisition:
When considering ‘desirability of location,’ we might also want to look at the organization itself. When the Clippers traded Cuttino Mobley and Tim Thomas (both of whose contracts expire in 2010) for Zach Randolph (whose contract expires in 2011), a debate ensued in Clipper Naçión. Some felt that the Clippers, as a traditionally dysfunctional franchise, would never attract a top-tier free agent in 2010. That being the case, wasn’t it smarter for the Clips to give up the fantasy, and instead acquire one of the league’s only 20-10 guys for a couple of spare parts?
Others felt that the Clippers forfeited a golden opportunity to get themselves in prime position for 2010. The Clips might not attract LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, Chris Bosh, or even Amare Stoudemire, but there’s only so much cash to go around. Los Angeles is still Los Angeles, and that might just be enough to entice a Joe Johnson when the music stops and everyone in the robust free agent class is trying to find a chair.