Milwaukee Bucks Thread 2008–2009 (part 2)

[trwi7]

Again, there's two sides to the ball. Nene is a good defender, Redd is not.

 

Kidd is still easily better than Redd, he rebounds, he gets assists and he's still a better defender than Redd.

 

Love got those numbers in 25 minutes. 9 rebounds in 25 minutes as a rookie is very impressive. Redd was also the #1 or at worst #2 option when he was playing. Love was probably 4th or 5th.

[homer]

If you want to get into the "sabermetric" side of things, Redd is still very valuable and much better than people give him credit for. The four factors (in order of importance) to winning a game are:

 

1) shooting well

2) Taking care of the ball (in other words, don't turn the ball over)

3) offensive rebounding

4) getting to the foul ine

 

Redd does 1, 2, and 4 very well. Given his position it's not surprising that he doesn't get all that many rebounds.

[JJHardy7]

Kidd is easily better than Redd, as is Millsap and Prince.

 

Again, where's your proof? You just can't state your opinion like it's fact. The facts posted a few pages ago by homer and sam state that Redd is a pretty darn good player.

 

If you take Redd and put him on let's say the Kings, my guess is he'll come close to averaging 30 ppg. Does that make him worse or better than how he played on the Bucks this year?

 

As far as Kidd being a better defender, I don't see it. He was abused this year. I'm not saying Redd is awesome at defense. I just don't think it's a slam dunk that Kidd is anywhere near above average on defense. He got abused and that's due to his age. He WAS a great player, but IMO he's not there anymore and PGs abuse him because he's lost foot speed.

[trwi7]

If you want to get into the "sabermetric" side of things, Redd is still very valuable and much better than people give him credit for. The four factors (in order of importance) to winning a game are:

 

1) shooting well

2) Taking care of the ball (in other words, don't turn the ball over)

3) offensive rebounding

4) getting to the foul ine

 

Redd does 1, 2, and 4 very well. Given his position it's not surprising that he doesn't get all that many rebounds.

Interesting that you want to go to the sabermetric side of things. Here is a link that takes all of your list into account. The top 15 shooting guards of 2007-2008 (I would use this years, but that isn't up yet.) Redd isn't on the list.

 

The most overrated players from 2007-2008, #1 is Richard Jefferson, #7 is Michael Redd.

[homer]

I'm not sure if Wins Produced is the same as Win Shares but Win Shares are slightly flawed in that the better team you are on the higher your win shares will be by osmosis. For 2008- 2009 if you ranked players by win shares, Ray Allen would be #8 and Mo Williams #19.

[trwi7]

It's not the same. Here are the top 15 win producers from each position this year.

 

Kevin Durant was fourth amongst SF's despite playing for a terrible Thunder team. Jose Calderon was fourth amongst PG's despite playing for a bad Toronto team.

 

http://www.wagesofwins.com/Top152009.html

[LouisEly]

I just hope that when Redd is FINALLY off the Bucks cap, along with Jeffersons bad contract, whoever is running the Bucks will have learned the lesson about players like those two.

 

Then who is going to score? If you take those two out, even if you keep CV (which you probably won't because he will make more than $6M per year) the average ppg for the remaining group is about 80ppg. Not many teams are going to win many games averaging 80ppg.

 

Now maybe if the Bucks would have done the smart thing by letting Redd walk and trying to rebuild properly, they could still have struggled to build a contender. History has shown that rebuilding via the lottery won't always work, but history has also shown that teams trying to become a legit contender with a one dimensional scorer at SG as your best player is nearly a futile exersise.

 

So if rebuilding via the lottery doesn't always work, how are they supposed to rebuild? If the team is rebuilding and not a contender then free agents are not going to want to come there unless they are overpaid. Players take smaller contracts to go to contenders, not rebuilders.

 

Let's look at the top teams in the league and how they've gotten there. Lakers - trades (Kobe, Gasol), Cleveland - luck (won lottery the right year), trades (Williams, Varejao); Celtics - trades (Garnett, Allen, Davis), draft (Pierce); Orlando - luck (won lottery in right year), trades (Lewis, Nelson); Denver - draft (Anthony), trades (Billups, Smith); San Antonio - luck (won lottery in right year), draft (Ginobli, Parker); Detroit - trades (Billups, Hamilton, Wallaces).

 

So it looks like it takes either luck in winning the lottery (there was no Lebron, Howard, Shaq, etc., sure fire #1 pick when the Bucks won the lottery - Jason Kidd and Chris Paul might have been better picks than Big Dog and Bogut but IIRC none of them have won a title), and/or great trades to build a contender. In no case is it free agents. But in all cases it takes multiple stars, something the Bucks haven't had. Let's not forget that the Bucks did not draft Allen, but traded Marbury for him, in which case it was a very good trade. They just haven't done a good job of trading since then. Yes some of that comes from having cap room, but it's not like Redd takes up 50% of the cap room. What's the cap limit, roughly $65-70M? That leaves at least $50M after Redd to pay players. After Jefferson it leaves at least $35M - what are they doing with that $$?? There is plenty of cap room to have a couple more guys on the team making $5-10M; you just can't have guys like Simmons, Gadzuric, Keith Van Horn, etc., making the kind of money they did. They didn't sign Jefferson, they traded for him - they should have made a better trade. If your argument was that they should have made a better trade then I would agree with that (an argument could be made that Jefferson is a better player than Yi, so in some ways it was a good trade); but your argument is that they should dump Redd and Jefferson and that's not going to solve anything unless they make better moves to acquire players after that. In the cases above none of those teams were built by signing free agents so they have to make good trades, in which case dumping Redd's and Jefferson's contracts for the proverbial bag of balls won't get anything accomplished. In order to make a trade you have to give up something of value in order to get something of value (unless you just get lucky - how did Orlando get Lewis for a conditional second round pick, and how does Denver get JR Smith for two second round picks??)

 

So if your argument is that they should made a good trade, even if it involves Redd or Jefferson, then I would agree with that. But your stance is that you advocate getting rid of their contracts, in which case if they don't get better players for those salaries or less to replace them it isn't going to do any good and they aren't going to get any better.

 

Edit: I also wanted to add that even if Redd is the 30th best player in the NBA, paying him the 15th highest salary in the NBA is hardly the worst contract in the history of the league. It's not like Keith Van Horn or Bobby Simmons.

[trwi7]

Top teams:

 

Cleveland - Lottery

Orlando - Lottery

Boston - Lottery (Pierce), traded lottery pick for Allen, developed a young big and other players so they could trade for Garnett.

Lakers - Lottery (Bryant) who was acquired using Divac. Gasol for cap room and picks as well as Marc Gasol who is a decent center.

Denver - Lottery (Carmelo) and trading Iverson's big expiring for Billups and traded Antonio McDyess, draft rights to Frank Williams and a 2003 2nd round pick to New York for Marcus Camby, Mark Jackson and the draft right to Nene Hilario.

Dallas - Lottery (Nowitzki), Antawn Jamison traded for the 5th pick Devin Harris. Harris traded for Jason Kidd.

San Antonio - Lottery (Duncan)

Portland - Lottery (Oden, Aldridge, Roy)

Houston - Lottery (Yao)

New Orleans - Lottery (Paul)

Utah - Lottery (Williams)

 

Also, who cares who we have to score? You can replace scoring and winning wouldn't be the main priority right now. It would be about remaining cap flexible, getting high draft picks and putting those picks to good use so you can build up a core of talented young players.

 

Again, trying to win now while rebuilding at the same time never works and it never will.

[davego]

...boy am I stunned that the Cavs are starting to question how Mo defends...

[JJHardy7]

Kevin Durant was fourth amongst SF's despite playing for a terrible Thunder team. Jose Calderon was fourth amongst PG's despite playing for a bad Toronto team.

 

Don't your links kind of show how this is not objective? Durant is ranked the second most overrated in one, but in another he is one of the best SF?

 

Dallas - Lottery (Nowitzki), Antawn Jamison traded for the 5th pick Devin Harris. Harris traded for Jason Kidd.

 

Trading Harris for Kidd was a terrible trade. That will set the Mavs back quite some time. I wouldn't give them any credit for that.

 

Again, trying to win now while rebuilding at the same time never works and it never will.

 

I don't agree with this. The Bucks can do it. NBA teams can do it. Look at the lottery picks the Bucks have had in the past few years. When they haven't traded it, they've bene in the lottery along with all the other teams you've mentioned. I would say the Bucks have failed (to this point) to draft well in the lottery the past few years. I still have hope for Joe Alexander, but no doubt they could've taken a guy that would've had a lot more impact this year. Drafting Yi led to RJ's big contract, but we got to dump Simmons. It wasn't a bad pick, but it prevented the Bucks from getting a somewhat cheap player for a few years. It wasn't a terrible trade either, but given RJ's contract and the dumping of Simmons it's somewhat of a push in that manner. It would still be nice to have young, talented, cheap players to go along with Redd and Bogut...that could lead to winning now and rebuilding. I think the draft has been the Bucks biggest failure.

[JJHardy7]

Then who is going to score? If you take those two out, even if you keep CV (which you probably won't because he will make more than $6M per year) the average ppg for the remaining group is about 80ppg. Not many teams are going to win many games averaging 80ppg.

 

I agree. I also think some are not seeing the 'whole picture'. Who wants to come and play for the Bucks? Some think signing Redd was dumb, getting Jefferson was dumb, etc. Well...I don't recall players lining up to play for the Bucks. Sure I wish that Redd wasn't a max contract guy. He's very good, but IMO max guys are limited to the top 5 or 10 guys in the league. None of them will ever be in Milwaukee unless they're drafted or traded. Redd seems to like Milwaukee and sure maybe we paid him too much...that's the case with any free agent that will ever come to Milwaukee (at least free agents that will be all-stars, etc). Again, I'll never get the Redd hate.

 

danzig -- how are the Bucks supposed to get guys to play here? They have to draft well because they will go against what you want in free agency because simply nobody will play in Milwaukee unless they're paid a premium. The franchise isn't a 'winner', has little history, and players have to live in the midwest during the winter. The T-Wolves and the Bucks are kind of in the same boat.

[southpaw121505]

Yeah, I'd take any of those listed players over Redd any day of the week. Redd can score, but he dominates the ball too much and does nothing to create for his teammates or make other people better. I'd take less ppg from one player if it means better ball flow and involving everyone else, not to mention Redd's lack of effort on the other side of the ball.

[JJHardy7]

Yeah, I'd take any of those listed players over Redd any day of the week. Redd can score, but he dominates the ball too much and does nothing to create for his teammates or make other people better. I'd take less ppg from one player if it means better ball flow and involving everyone else, not to mention Redd's lack of effort on the other side of the ball.

 

I'll agree to disagree on you opinion since I don't personally feel that's true. I'd ask you this though...how do the Bucks get some of those players? The only answer IMO is free agency or trades. They'd have to pay more than any other team and some would call that player garbage, overpaid, etc, etc. Or we trade. In order to trade, you need assets that other teams want...that means making smart draft picks. There's a reason why Redd has been an Olympian and an all-star. There's also a reason why this team loses and I don't think I'd blame that on Redd. Milwaukee needs to draft well and overpay to keep the player or trade the player. It's not an easy task IMO. Nobody would choose to play in Milwaukee IMO. You either need to draft very well, trade very well, or have a once in a lifetime pick like a LeBron player who grew up in Wisconsin.

 

The Bucks will be moved in 5 years or less unless something 'good' happens for this organization IMO.

[southpaw121505]

I agree with most of what you said. The thing I'd disagree on is that I feel our only hope at getting that type of player is hitting big in the draft. Either by getting lucky and winning the lottery the right year when theres a Dwight Howard or Lebron James. Or by finding a gem. Roy was 6th overall, Rondo 21, Bynum 10, Granger 17, Iguidala 9, Al Jefferson 15, Josh Smith 17, David West 18, Josh Howard 30. Those guys aren't all stars but are realistic for the Bucks to acquire players like that by drafting better. I think it has to be done through the draft with value picks similar to these because like you said, you'd have to overpay so much to get guys to sign here.

 

The other thing is about Redd being an All Star and Olympian. Both true, and I'd love to have Redd on a team that has a star where he's second or third fiddle. I think he'd be awesome on any number of teams, Cleveland, Denver, to name a few of the top of my head. I don't think he sucks I just don't think he'll ever be "the guy" on a good team.

[nate82]

I don't believe Redd sucks it is just that Redd is not a number one option and for the amount he is being paid I don't see the value for the Bucks. I still wish the Bucks would have been able to trade Redd away last year and were able to draft Mayo who I believe will be like Redd just a lot better defensively and cheaper. I just don't see Redd leading a team to the playoffs on his own. Redd is a role player who scores and that is about it. When you are the Bucks and you don't have the other pieces and you are paying Redd all that money to lead your team through the playoffs you have to trade him and get what you can for him.

 

The Bucks really need to rebuild the team. I would keep Bogut, Sessions, and the rest of the younger players while trading away Jefferson and Redd. The Bucks really should have traded away Jefferson for an expiring contract. The salary cap space it would have created would have been perfect for the Bucks. I wouldn't mind keeping Redd until the end of his contract with Jefferson out of the picture. Having a team of Sessions, Redd, Villanueva, Bogut, and whoever at the other position wouldn't be a horrible team certainly not one that would win a championship but one that the future would at least look bright with Sessions and Bogut.

[LouisEly]

Roy was 6th overall, Rondo 21, Bynum 10, Granger 17, Iguidala 9, Al Jefferson 15, Josh Smith 17, David West 18, Josh Howard 30.

 

For every guy picked past #5 who became a great player (Redd was a 2nd round pick himself), there are five Ndudi Ebi's (#26), Dorrell Wright's (#19), and Joey Graham's (#16). Other than Marcus Haislip and Joel Przybilla, they haven't made a bad pick in the first round since 1991. Their worst picks the last 10 years have come in years where the draft was very thin (Haislip, Przybilla - look at how few starters were picked after those guys those years, and the year they drafted Przybilla they got the best player in the entire draft in the 2nd round in Redd). In fact, I'd argue that they didn't make bad picks - they made bad trades after they picked (IIRC Respert wasn't their pick - they picked Trent and traded for Respert.. at least according to basketball-reference.com that's what happened; Fortson was a good pick but didn't they trade him for Ervin Johnson?) Their other biggest problem is that many years they haven't had picks because of bad trades. Look at 2004, a year they didn't have a first round pick - a Josh Smith, JR Smith, Jameer Nelson, Delonte West, or Kevin Martin would have been nice... but you can't draft well when you don't have a pick because of a bad trade.

 

The Bucks really should have traded away Jefferson for an expiring contract. The salary cap space it would have created would have been perfect for the Bucks.

 

And then do what with the cap space? As JJ and others have established, players don't want to come to Milwaukee unless you overpay them. I fail to see how cap room is going to make them any better, because if you look at the top teams in the league this year none of them acquired any stars via free agency.

[nate82]

And then do what with the cap space? As JJ and others have established, players don't want to come to Milwaukee unless you overpay them. I fail to see how cap room is going to make them any better, because if you look at the top teams in the league this year none of them acquired any stars via free agency.

Without trading Jefferson away the Bucks are stuck with him until at least the trading deadline. The Bucks will also be losing at least one of Sessions or Villanueva both of them would be a cheaper option than Jefferson would be and would contribute just as much as Jefferson did. It is not about free agents it is about keeping the players the Bucks need at a reasonable price.

 

If the Bucks sign both Villanueva and Sessions expect them to either trade their pick away or pick a foreign player who is not even interested in playing in the NBA right now. I doubt the Bucks are going to go over the cap limit this year so the Bucks are stuck with the decision of signing one of Sessions and Villanueva and a draft pick or both Sessions and Villanueva and no draft pick.

 

Now do you see where I am coming from with talking about Jefferson being traded? It had absolutely nothing to do with free agency and everything to do with signing the correct pieces in Villanueva and Sessions. Sessions and Villanueva > Jefferson.

[trwi7]

And then do what with the cap space? As JJ and others have established, players don't want to come to Milwaukee unless you overpay them. I fail to see how cap room is going to make them any better, because if you look at the top teams in the league this year none of them acquired any stars via free agency.

 

Umm, easily re-sign Sessions, Villanueva and Ilyasova with Jefferson's $14 million salary gone? And I'd much rather have Sessions signed to around a 3-4 year, $17-24 million deal, Villanueva who could probably be had for his qualifying offer of 1 year $4.6 million and Ilyasova who could be had for 2-3 years $6-8 million.

 

Also, if the Bucks had cap space last summer, they would've had Marcus Camby for a right to flip 2nd round picks with the Nuggets. Cap space is always valuable. Not only can you sign other teams' players and your own players, but you can also take good players off the hands of teams looking to shed salary by not having to match salary.

 

Paying $14 million combined next year to Sessions, Villanueva and Ilyasova is better than paying that to Jefferson.

[danzig6767]

I just hope that when Redd is FINALLY off the Bucks cap, along with Jeffersons bad contract, whoever is running the Bucks will have learned the lesson about players like those two.

 

Then who is going to score?

 

I don't care. Constantly thinking short term has for the most part left the Bucks wallowing in mediocrity at best or garbage teams for the majority of two decades. It reminds me somewhat of the Brewers under Selig mentality for many years. Instead of just fully stripping down and going into full blown rebuild mode, the Brewers would waste money and time trying to patch together teams to be "competitive". They'd waste money on nothing special vets and then go cheap in the draft. The Bucks on the other hand have kept trying to patch together 40-45 win teams if everything went perfectly and IMO during the last few years they've done this based on a false belief that they already had a franchise player in place with Redd that you can build a contender around. The problem in that thinking is Redd isn't good enough for that.

 

Worry to much about next year vs the next 3-4 years has lead to to many of the Bucks mistakes in team building. You focus mostly on next year when you have the pieces in place to realistically contend, not when you can hope to win 42 games.

 

So if rebuilding via the lottery doesn't always work, how are they supposed to rebuild?

No plan is ever guaranteed to work. That said, i've never seen a contender built around their best player being a soft one dimensional scorer at SG with no leadership skills. So yea, even though i know that multiple trips into the lottery is by no means a lock to work, it has worked may times vs never working by building around a player like Redd. I'd have gone the young route awhile ago along with keeping cap room. Then hope one of the years you get lucky and draft a special or very close to special player. Then with the extra cap room, use that space say to trade for a quality second option from a team looking to clear room under the cap. As it stands now there is a pretty good chance that once the contracts of Redd/RJ expire, they'll have to rebuild anyways. But they'll have wasted more years yet again delaying the process all in their desire to be mediocre enough to get a late playoff seed in the bad Eastern Conference besides for the top 3 teams.

 

 

So it looks like it takes either luck in winning the lottery (there was no Lebron, Howard, Shaq, etc., sure fire #1 pick when the Bucks won the lottery - Jason Kidd and Chris Paul might have been better picks than Big Dog and Bogut but IIRC none of them have won a title), and/or great trades to build a contender.

The only times in the history of the Bucks franchise that they've been really good is via high draft picks.

 

Jabbar was the 1st pick in the draft

 

Moncrief 5th overall/Marques Johnson 3rd overall

 

Big Dog 1st overall/Ray Allen 5th overall

 

Granted, the Bucks have blown many other lottery picks and the Big Dog/Allen team only had one great season. That said, the Bucks haven't been good a single time without high picks leading the way. Plus, the Bucks did pass on Chris Paul not long ago who is a clear franchise player. There at least was the chance there for a true franchise changing player, management just made a bad evaluation. There is almost no other chance for the Bucks to land a Chris Paul, Melo, Dirk, Dwight Howard, Wade, etc etc type of talent that makes a contender than via the lottery. I'd rather take the route of at least having a chance at landing a stud player, even if it can have the odds against it vs wasting years and money trying to build around way overpaid nothing special veteran wings like Redd/RJ that have zero chance to be a legit contender.

[Gobias Industries]

I just can't see how anyone can justify keeping Redd and Jefferson. Look at what the OKC has done since lucking out and having Durant fall in their lap aka Building block #1. First, they trade Ray Allen AFTER getting Durant. A guy like Hammond, would of course keep Ray with Durant and hope they can squeak in the playoffs for a few years to appease casual fans. Not Sam Presti. Gets the fifth pick and drafts Jeff Green, a good, cheap sixth man who won't start only because he plays the same position as their star. Creates cap room, and basically gets 1st Round Picks for FREE from teams that can't afford them. Teams like the Bucks, but usually if you can't afford your first-round picks you're actually, you know, good, like the Suns. Last year drafts Russell Westbrook, a player who had a good rookie year and has a ton of upside. Building block #2. I believe they have the #3 pick this year, and might have Rubio fall into their lap if Chris Wallace drafts Thabeet. Building black #3.

 

Hammond had the chance to ditch them for expirings, and passed on it for a laughable reason that danzig noted earlier. Who's gonna replace Redd's scoring? Who cares!! Redd could average 35 ppg next year, and we'd still have a 0% shot of winning a title. He's not a first option on a contender. His max contract is hindering the team from filling out a decent bench and roster. We're gonna lose CV for sure, everyday it's looking more like Sessions as well, we don't have enough money to bring over Ilyasova, a guy who has really improved and actually LIKES Milwaukee. The man gave Francisco Elson and Malik Allen player options. MALIK FREAKIN' ALLEN. I was happy when we got Hammond, instead of the rumored Donnie Walsh, but wow was I wrong. Walsh has already cleared out most Isiah's mistakes, and is poised to sign a really good player, or two, next summer.

[southpaw121505]

they haven't made a bad pick in the first round since 1991.

You'd rather have Joe Alexander over Brook Lopez? Or Bayless? Or Augustin? Or....anyone else from the first round? Alexander was a terrible pick.

[trwi7]

I'd rather have Joakim Noah, Brandan Wright or Rodney Stuckey over Yi (fully aware he's not with the Bucks anymore.)

 

I'd rather have Chris Paul or Deron Williams over Andrew Bogut.

 

I would've rather had David West or Josh Howard over T.J. Ford.

 

I would rather have Tayshaun Prince or Carlos Boozer over Marcus Haislip.

 

But drafting busts isn't even the biggest problem for the Bucks. It's not having many 1st round picks. In the last 10 drafts, the Bucks have only had six 1st round picks. For a team that doesn't have free agency as an option you absolutely need to keep draft picks and then draft well with them. Not only do we not draft well when we have them, we also don't have very many of them.

[LouisEly]

While Paul and Williams might be better players than Bogut, drafting a guy who has averaged a double-double or darned near it every year is not a bust. T.J. Ford was a very good player until he got hurt - not a bust. I said Haislip was a bad pick, but lots of teams made bad picks in the first round that year. Nine teams whiffed on their picks after the Bucks before Detroit drafted Prince, and 17 teams whiffed before Boozer was picked. You'd rather have Brandan Wright, who has played a total of 77 games in two years and has averaged fewer points and rebounds per game than Yi? I said I'd rather have Lopez or Jason Thompson over Alexander, but it is still early to judge that one.

 

Oklahoma City was 23-59 this year, and they lucked out in the lottery. Look at Sacramento this year - worst record and they're picking fourth. Had that happen to OKC they woudn't have Durant. Hardly a model there. Will they be in the playoffs in two years when Durant is a free agent and has the chance to leave, and will Durant want to stay?

 

I'd rather take the route of at least having a chance at landing a stud player,

 

Other than Blake Griffin, who I'd say isn't as good as Durant much less any of the guys you mention, there isn't anyone in this draft that would qualify as a stud player.

 

The man gave Francisco Elson and Malik Allen player options.

 

That's my point!! It's not Redd or even Jefferson that's killing them - it's guys like those two and Gadzuric, Simmons, Bell, Van Horn, Ervin Johnson, etc., that have/had the contracts that are killing them. After Redd and Jefferson they still have $35-40M in cap room, eaten up by bad contacts for role players. I've said that.

 

Umm, easily re-sign Sessions, Villanueva and Ilyasova with Jefferson's $14 million salary gone? Villanueva who could probably be had for his qualifying offer of 1 year $4.6 million. Paying $14 million combined next year to Sessions, Villanueva and Ilyasova is better than paying that to Jefferson.

 

Thank you for finally saying what you would do with the cap room, instead of saying "dump their contracts". But CV for one year at $4.6M? No way even in this economy does that happen. You can get two of those three for $14M, but not all three. And they could easly fit that $14M in the cap in addition to Redd and Jefferson because after those two they still have $35-40M in cap space if they didn't have bad contracts with Gadzuric, Bell, Elson, and Allen.

 

Also, if the Bucks had cap space last summer, they would've had Marcus Camby for a right to flip 2nd round picks with the Nuggets.

 

So you're saying that 34-year-old Marcus Camby at $12M per year is the key to the playoffs or rebuilding (can't tell which you're advocating) and a much better bargain than a 28-year-old Jefferson at $14M?

[danzig6767]

I'd rather take the route of at least having a chance at landing a stud player,

 

Other than Blake Griffin, who I'd say isn't as good as Durant much less any of the guys you mention, there isn't anyone in this draft that would qualify as a stud player.

First of all, my issues with the team and the general direction/plan is over many years now, not just this year and this upcoming draft. As for this draft though, i'd agree that it looks to be a weaker draft than usual. That said, many thought last year was going to be a weak draft after the top 2 picks, yet guys like Westbrook, Mayo, Love, Gordon, and Lopez all had impressive rookie seasons. Odds are a couple of players taken in the lottery this year will turn out to become better than expected and thus become a young building block for their teams, something the Bucks badly need.

 

That's my point!! It's not Redd or even Jefferson that's killing them - it's guys like those two and Gadzuric, Simmons, Bell, Van Horn, Ervin Johnson, etc., that have/had the contracts that are killing them. After Redd and Jefferson they still have $35-40M in cap room, eaten up by bad contacts for role players. I've said that.

No question that the Bucks for many years have been lighting millions on fire with both their socalled stars like Redd/RJ, they've also done it with Gadzuric, Simmons, Bell, etc etc like you mentioned. As i brought up before, IMO it's not just the wasted millions by overpaying Redd that's hurt the franchise. Once they gave Redd that contract, they were making a decision that they were going to a more win now mode because they viewed Redd as their franchise player being in place. When a team feels they have their needed franchise player in place, they generally make moves to build around that guy. Thus i think after paying Redd, it contributed to them making some other poor decisions. They after paying him went into win now mode, so i think that made the team fear losing Gadzuric more and played a big role in going after Simmons. Even with a smaller contract like Bell got, the Bucks have been chasing late playoff seeds so they overvalued the need to have a bench player like Bell.

 

I'm not blaming Redd himself for other poor decisions, but i do believe his signing set forth the direction the Bucks perceived they were going to take and it lead to a negative snowball effect. They've been trying to build a contender around Redd since the day they gave him that bad contract and he's simply not good enough to be considered a franchise player that you'd want to build a team around unless your goals are only just making the playoffs regardless if you'd be first round fodder.

 

A lot of the blame falls on Kohl. He means well and has spent money even though we play in a small market. I think he badly wants to win and thus it's interfered with him to objectively decide where the team has been at, so he just refused to strip down and build properly like small market NBA teams need to do. He'd rather not go through that process which no doubt can lead to some ugly seasons and instead he's spent many years overrating his players and chasing 40ish win seasons that might include a playoff berth. No move has been a better example of that mentality than signing Redd to a max contract. In the end though, the team has still endured multiple ugly seasons since that signing anyways.

[trwi7]

While Paul and Williams might be better players than Bogut, drafting a guy who has averaged a double-double or darned near it every year is not a bust.

 

He's averaged 11.9/8.7 in his career. Not really close to a double-double and not the kind of production you want from a #1 pick.

 

You'd rather have Brandan Wright, who has played a total of 77 games in two years and has averaged fewer points and rebounds per game than Yi?

 

Wright is much more efficient than Yi, played much less minutes (hence less points and rebounds per game) and is playing with Don Nelson. Who never plays young players. Especially in that system. Stephen Jackson, a SG/SF played 15% of his minutes at PF this year.

 

Oklahoma City was 23-59 this year, and they lucked out in the lottery.

 

Even if the did "luck out", I would still much rather have their team. Tons of cap space and they would still have Westbrook and Green to go along with their #3 pick this year and they'll have another top pick next year and could have two lottery picks if Phoenix doesn't make the playoffs. When's the last time the Bucks picked twice in the 1st round? That would be a refreshing change from not picking in the 1st round at all in 4 of the last 10 years.

 

Other than Blake Griffin, who I'd say isn't as good as Durant much less any of the guys you mention, there isn't anyone in this draft that would qualify as a stud player.

 

I would take Griffin over Durant and Rubio has a chance to be a stud player, as do DeRozan and Holiday.

 

That's my point!! It's not Redd or even Jefferson that's killing them

 

Elson and Allen make a combined $3 million. That $3 million is killing us because Redd and Jefferson make $31 million. Why on earth would you pay two non-special wing players a combined $31 million and name another circumstance in which that has ever worked. If they were making a combined $20 million like they should be, then it wouldn't be a problem.

 

But CV for one year at $4.6M? No way even in this economy does that happen.

 

That's what his qualifying offer is. If he's tendered that offer and doesn't think he can get anything better, he would take that and then hold more power next year as an unrestricted free agent.

 

You can get two of those three for $14M, but not all three.

 

Sessions - $5.8 million

Villanueva - $5 million

Ilyasova - $3.5 million

 

That's $14.3 million, Jefferson makes $14.2 million next year. That's the maximum Sessions can make next year, Villanueva would probably accept the qualifying offer and Ilyasova probably wouldn't get $3.5 million either. So, you could likely get those three for less than what Jefferson makes next year.

 

So you're saying that 34-year-old Marcus Camby at $12M per year is the key to the playoffs or rebuilding (can't tell which you're advocating) and a much better bargain than a 28-year-old Jefferson at $14M?

 

It's pretty clear that I want to rebuild, but Hammond wants to reach for the stars to get that glorious 8th seed in the playoffs. Camby would've helped more than Jefferson and Camby makes $4 million less.