Should Redd Just Be A Scorer?

[europa]

Dirty Harry once said - "A man's got to know his limitations." I bring this up with regard to Redd because, by his own admission, this was his worst season as a starter. Interestingly (or perhaps coincidentally), this came in a season which saw Redd try (though not consistently) to expand his game and become a more well-rounded player.

So I ask the following? Should Redd just focus on what he does best and not try to expand his game?

It's a crazy thought, I realize. You want players to do more on the court and be able to contribute in a number of ways. But when Redd tried to do it, he went from being an elite scorer to often struggling with his shot and often becoming a team weakness in the clutch.

Given that, is it possible that with regard to this player it's in his best interests and in the best interests of his team (whether it's the Bucks or another team next season and beyond) for Redd to not try and be something he isn't and instead focus on the one clear standout skill he's proven to have in this league?

I'm not sold on this to be honest. And I'd just as soon see this be something for his next team to ponder. But if Redd isn't traded is this something that Hammond and Skiles should get Redd to focus on - don't try and be Kobe or LeBron and play an all-around game; just be Michael Redd and bring the standout ability to score you've displayed in the past?

Thoughts on this?

[midranger]

I'll take Kapono for 5 million at 50%/40%/90% in that role if that's all he's bringing to the table.

[Bucks_Revenge]

I thought Redd was just a shooter...I wasn't aware that he was trying to expand his game..did I see the same games you guys saw.

[LUKE23]

Dirty Harry once said - "A man's got to know his limitations." I bring this up with regard to Redd because, by his own admission, this was his worst season as a starter. Interestingly (or perhaps coincidentally), this came in a season which saw Redd try (though not consistently) to expand his game and become a more well-rounded player.

So I ask the following? Should Redd just focus on what he does best and not try to expand his game?

It's a crazy thought, I realize. You want players to do more on the court and be able to contribute in a number of ways. But when Redd tried to do it, he went from being an elite scorer to often struggling with his shot and often becoming a team weakness in the clutch.

Given that, is it possible that with regard to this player it's in his best interests and in the best interests of his team (whether it's the Bucks or another team next season and beyond) for Redd to not try and be something he isn't and instead focus on the one clear standout skill he's proven to have in this league?

I'm not sold on this to be honest. And I'd just as soon see this be something for his next team to ponder. But if Redd isn't traded is this something that Hammond and Skiles should get Redd to focus on - don't try and be Kobe or LeBron and play an all-around game; just be Michael Redd and bring the standout ability to score you've displayed in the past?

Thoughts on this?

I think the biggest issue is salary. Can you really hope to contend if you're paying a one-dimensional player $15M+ per year? Maybe, but not likely.

[europa]

-= original quote snipped =-



I think the biggest issue is salary. Can you really hope to contend if you're paying a one-dimensional player $15M+ per year? Maybe, but not likely.

I'm not worried about the salary with regard to this. I'm merely wondering if the best way to maximize Redd's ability is to have him focus on the one clear strength he has and not try to improve in areas where he's weak.

Like I said, I'm not sure I buy it. It goes against many of my fundamental beliefs about the game. But I do think it's curious that Redd's shooting declined in the same season when he passed the ball better better than he ever has and rebounded at one of his highest career rates.

I'd be interested in what epi thinks about this.

[jerrod]

i'm gonna say no

in those first 7 or so games we saw that he could be a better overall player if he wants to. so it's hard to be satisfied with less than that because he just doesn't want to pass or defend

[midranger]

But salary does matter.

Epi will agree with the premise of course, as will most others.

But, the fact remains that you can't pay 17 million to a glorified Juan Dixon or Eddie House.

[midranger]

i'm gonna say no

in those first 7 or so games we saw that he could be a better overall player if he wants to. so it's hard to be satisfied with less than that because he just doesn't want to pass or defend

True.

[REDDzone]

Europa, just to clarify? You mean "scorer" right? Because the title says shooter?

Redd as just a shooter? Hell no!

Redd as just a scorer? I want Redd gone personally, but if he won't be moved, then sure, why not?

[fam3381]

I think there's a difference between Redd trying to pass more within the offense and Redd trying to pass more while dominating the ball. A guy like LBJ gets a lot of assists not because he's simply moving the ball around the perimeter, but because he's the offensive focal point, running pick/roll, drawing doubles, driving/kicking. Obviously Redd isn't LBJ, but I think he saw himself becoming more of an all-around player without sacrificing touches/being the offensive focal point. I don't think Redd had any problem with trying to become that type of player, because he thought he could shed the tag of being a pure scorer. And he had more than a few games where he was doing it all...rebounding, passing, scoring.

Problem is, he's simply not good enough to be the do-it-all 25/5/5 type, which is what Europa is saying if I'm reading him correctly. If he were that kind of guy, then playing him $51 million over the next three seasons woudn't be so bad, but as it stands Redd is probably best as a scorer and not a guy trying to QB the offense all the time (I can just picture him palming the ball behind his head, waiting for a double-team, then dribbling around for five seconds rather than just moving the freakin' ball).

The benefit of that is in the fact that he'd be expending less energy offensively (needlessly) and would hopefully have more left over to play defense and go after rebounds. I don't think even then he'll earn his paycheck per se, but especially if Mo is moved then we can clearly still use a big-time scorer at the other backcourt spot.

[EastSideBucksFan]

I don't have time to find the numbers, but Redd is our best shooter and is also the best on our team at getting to the line. I know Redd has increased his free throw attempts over the past two years (maybe it declined this past year though). But one of the Bucks problems (we've got plenty of them) is our teams inability to get the line.



Redd can be both a shooter and scorer/slasher on our team.


BUT, we have to limit the ISO's which just kill all ball movement.

[europa]

i'm gonna say no

in those first 7 or so games we saw that he could be a better overall player if he wants to. so it's hard to be satisfied with less than that because he just doesn't want to pass or defend

But - and I'm just playing devil's advocate here - what if it doesn't result in less for the Bucks but more for the team in terms of wins? What if Redd just doing what he does best - scoring - means more wins for the Bucks and a stronger chance at success? If that's the case, wouldn't it then be in the team's best interests to have him focus on that one standout skill he has?

Again, I'm just playing devil's advocate here. I can't embrace the idea of asking a player to do less - especially when he's shown (like you said) he can do more and the team can do well when he does. But I also remember epi talking about how the Bucks need to get Redd more shots instead of fewer ones to maximize his ability to score. I never agreed with that belief (and epi correct me if I'm misquoting you with that) but it is curious that in the season when Redd shot less and passed and rebounded more, he got worse in the one area in which he previously had excelled.

[europa]

Europa, just to clarify? You mean "scorer" right? Because the title says shooter?

Yes, that's what I mean. I'll edit the title. Thanks.

[Kerb Hohl]

Yes, I think he should only be a shooter. I thought this a few years ago as well an that is why I did not want them to sign him to the humongous contract that they did. Now that I am 100% sure that he has no desire to pass or play defense, I am even more angered by his contract.

[jerrod]

-= original quote snipped =-



But - and I'm just playing devil's advocate here - what if it doesn't result in less for the Bucks but more for the team in terms of wins? What if Redd just doing what he does best - scoring - means more wins for the Bucks and a stronger chance at success? If that's the case, wouldn't it then be in the team's best interests to have him focus on that one standout skill he has?

if there was some magical way that we could know that for sure, then of course, you do whatever helps the team win. but we don't know that, and at the beginning of the season when he was playing like that, the team did much better than the rest of the season.

also, i think calling him just a scorer implies that the defense and rebounding aren't there either

[midranger]

-= original quote snipped =-



But - and I'm just playing devil's advocate here - what if it doesn't result in less for the Bucks but more for the team in terms of wins? What if Redd just doing what he does best - scoring - means more wins for the Bucks and a stronger chance at success? If that's the case, wouldn't it then be in the team's best interests to have him focus on that one standout skill he has?

Again, I'm just playing devil's advocate here. I can't embrace the idea of asking a player to do less - especially when he's shown (like you said) he can do more and the team can do well when he does. But I also remember epi talking about how the Bucks need to get Redd more shots instead of fewer ones to maximize his ability to score. I never agreed with that belief (and epi correct me if I'm misquoting you with that) but it is curious that in the season when Redd shot less and passed and rebounded more, he got worse in the one area in which he previously had excelled.

It's not really possible for it to amount in less wins.

I'd rather Redd try out the JR Smith role elsewhere. We've seen the results here.

[europa]

-= original quote snipped =-



if there was some magical way that we could know that for sure, then of course, you do whatever helps the team win.

It's not about finding magical solution; it's about analyzing the players on this team and determining what they can do to help this team win. If Redd isn't traded, I wonder if perhaps Hammond and Skiles would want him to get back to being Michael Redd instead of trying to be more of an all-around player.

It sounds ridiculous and I fully understand that. But his production strongly indicates maybe that's what should be done and given how the Bucks have had more success in the past with him playing that way then they had this season maybe it's not so crazy after all.

I'm just tossing this out there for discussion to see what people think because like I said, I'm not sure I agree with the premise at all. My natural response is to disagree with it.

[rilamann]

Kinda OT here.

I have been as critical of Redd this past season as anyone but I still have it the back of of my mind that maybe with better coaching and with better teammates Redd can still be a positive factor for the Bucks.

But his lack of defense and Dr Jeckel & Mr Hyde mentality on and off the court realy bugs me.


My biggest fear is that we trade Redd to a good team where he is a #2 or #3 option (Dallas for example) and he is a big (positive) factor on a playoff team.And we sit here next year watching him be a factor in the playoffs and wish we could have him back.

As critical as I have been of Redd I can honestly see that sort of thing happening.

[MickeyDavis]

Absolutely Redd could thrive on a team like Dallas where he isn't the focal point. Let Dirk be the main guy and have a ton of wide open shots.

[smauss]

Personally, I think that Redd's primary contribution will and should always be scoring but that doesn't mean that he can't improve his passing and rebounding. He can't create like the Kobe's & LBJ's of the league but that doesn't mean that if Redd is put in good offensive position to be able to draw and kick that he can't also contribute and improve in that facet as well. Eastside made a good point about the offensive position Redd got the ball in many times last season where he was forced to try create and then dish or shoot; I don't believe Redd will be very successful in that scenario; but if someone can create or breakdown the defense and put Redd in a position where the defense must react/rotate, then he stands a much better chance of being sucessful in scoring or drawing and kicking. Just my opinion.