ImageImage

RJ offers Mo advice

Moderators: paulpressey25, MickeyDavis

Debit One
Starter
Posts: 2,362
And1: 84
Joined: Apr 21, 2005
Location: YOU WANNA KNOW HOW I FEEL ABOUT THIS TEAM?

Re: RJ offers Mo advice 

Post#41 » by Debit One » Tue Jul 8, 2008 5:50 pm

adamcz wrote:We have over twenty insiders here. It isn't possible for a trade to go down without plenty of chatter about it here way in advance.


What was the earliest mention of Jefferson to the Bucks?
User avatar
TripleDouble
Senior
Posts: 535
And1: 19
Joined: Jul 18, 2002
     

Re: RJ offers Mo advice 

Post#42 » by TripleDouble » Tue Jul 8, 2008 6:00 pm

Debit One wrote:
adamcz wrote:We have over twenty insiders here. It isn't possible for a trade to go down without plenty of chatter about it here way in advance.


What was the earliest mention of Jefferson to the Bucks?

I think that is pretty much his point... he just didn't use the green font for you.
User avatar
ReddManBogieMan
Senior
Posts: 722
And1: 0
Joined: May 02, 2007
Location: ReddMan's Funeral

Re: RJ offers Mo advice 

Post#43 » by ReddManBogieMan » Tue Jul 8, 2008 6:49 pm

Richard also said he wasn't opposed to the Bucks making more moves before the season. Which would likely be upgrading PG and PF. Maybe he is sending his message that what Mo has done is ok but this team needs better if we want to compete with the best. IDK though, just trying to read between the lines here.
Image
GrandAdmiralDan
RealGM
Posts: 15,104
And1: 1,291
Joined: Jul 24, 2004
Location: New Berlin, WI (Milwaukee)
Contact:
     

Re: RJ offers Mo advice 

Post#44 » by GrandAdmiralDan » Tue Jul 8, 2008 10:26 pm

fam3381 wrote:I agree that CV is probably a worse overall defender than Mo, but I actually think that Mo could hurt us just as much or more when you consider the nature of their positions and the other players on our roster.

Almost no teams have more than one good post scorer, so Bogut can usually cover up some of CV's poor post defense by simply taking his guy down low. That's why against teams like Utah you'd usually see Bogut taking players like Boozer, even though he's not a center. You still get CV's clueless team/perimeter defense, but you can at least hide him a bit with Bogut.

You really can't hide Mo like that, since Redd obviously isn't going to D up PGs obviously (not that many SGs do that anyway). And while Bogut is a solid man defender I think his help defense on PnR still leaves a lot to be desired, which again makes Mo's defensive weakness more pronounced.

Moreover, if you can't stop the other team's PG from penetrating you have to help and that provides lots of easy shots for everyone else. If you have to help on a PF you're less likely to get punished simply because PFs aren't going to create for others like a PG.


I agree with that completely (well, almost, as I am not quite as discouraged as you are with Bogut's help defense on PnR, but I see your point).

That is why if we end up going into next season with one of Mo or CV still on the roster, I'd rather it be Villanueva.
97-98
Nick Van Exel (LAL) on defending the Stockton-Malone pick-and-roll: "Yeah,
I got a way to defend it. Bring a bat to the game and kill one of them."
GrandAdmiralDan
RealGM
Posts: 15,104
And1: 1,291
Joined: Jul 24, 2004
Location: New Berlin, WI (Milwaukee)
Contact:
     

Re: RJ offers Mo advice 

Post#45 » by GrandAdmiralDan » Tue Jul 8, 2008 10:48 pm

paul wrote:It ran out June 30th unless I'm mistaken, but obviously no deal can be done in the moratorium which finishes on the 9th.


Yep.
Technically the last day of the July Moratorium this year is July 8th.
The 9th is actually the first day after the moratorium, which is why it is the first day most transactions can occur.

paul wrote:If it was Larry Harris I'm pretty certain we would have heard a rumor, but as best I know nobody heard anything before the RJ trade so it's quite possible we wouldn't again. It's also worth remembering that if, for example, something was worked out or discussed with the Bulls our coach has some pretty solid contacts there so the circle of 'ears' hearing about any negotiations could possibly be kept much smaller than usual. I don't know anything but like I said I wouldn't be at all surprised.


Those are very good points.

I'll add this...
It wasn't all that much Larry Harris who was responsible for much of the info coming out of the organization, although Larry Harris DID like to share things with people he had become familiar with (especially after the guy got a Corona or two in him). But relative to Bucks' GMs, Grunfeld was more of a leaker than Harris ever was.

The bigger "problem" when it came to leaks was the fractured and dysfunctional state of the entire Bucks front office. There were competing interests between the actual front office people (Harris, Babcock, etc.), John Steinmiller, Mike Burr, Ron Walter, other various lackeys and cronies, and Kohl himself. There were way too many people involved, and the general dysfunction squeezed out info that otherwise might not have came out.

One common reason Bucks info ended up being circulated around was other teams' front offices being flabbergasted at the Bucks dysfunctional situation, to the point where they'd mention something specific in disbelief, such as thinking they had a done deal with Harris, only to find out the deal died when Harris tried to get it approved, or having dealt with people other than Harris on a matter that would have been dealt with by Harris in a normal organization.

Stuff like that.

At least for the moment, Hammond doesn't appear to have the "too many cooks in the kitchen" problem, but that will not totally prevent leaks. For one thing, you still have all the much lower level employees that end up being privy to this or that bit of info.
And regardless of what Hammond does on his end, there is always the other involved parties: the other team and their employees, the player and their people, the agents and their people, the league office and their people, and a plethora of lawyers.
97-98

Nick Van Exel (LAL) on defending the Stockton-Malone pick-and-roll: "Yeah,

I got a way to defend it. Bring a bat to the game and kill one of them."
coolhandluke121
RealGM
Posts: 13,270
And1: 6,834
Joined: Sep 23, 2007

Re: RJ offers Mo advice 

Post#46 » by coolhandluke121 » Tue Jul 8, 2008 11:22 pm

adamcz wrote:
coolhandluke121 wrote:Here's the issue with Mo. I agree that he's a very efficient jumpshooter and that's a big part of the Bucks offense. One thing people have brought up is that the team is just as good with Mo making the shot as with Mo passing to someone else who then converts. True indeed, but there's more to the story.

Suppose your average pg would make about 6 out of every 14 shots, or a little over 42%. Mo makes about 7 of 14, a much nicer percentage and since 14 shots per game, give or take a few, is normal for a pg that means Mo would seem to be good for 2 extra ppg. However, a better playmaking pg raises the shooting percentage of all his teammates by a similar amount. All of a sudden Bogut, Redd, CV, and RJ are probably each good for an extra point or two a game, as we seemed to observe with Sessions on the floor last year (though admittedly that was a small sample of games with other possible explanations). Combine that with the fact that Mo rarely drives to the basket or gets to the ft line, and you have an inefficient offense no matter how efficient Mo's individual numbers are.

And that's not even taking into account the intangible effect of having good chemistry because everybody's involved in the offense. If this is the team the Bucks go with, I would definitely want Sessions and CV to start and Mo to come off the bench.
So why isn't there any correlation between playmaking pg's and efficient offenses?


I wasn't aware of that. It's possible that overall there is no correlation, but clearly there are some situations where a playmaking pg is preferred, i.e. when other players on the team need a little boost. I'm sure that not all playmaking pg's are in that situation because most good offensive players create their own opportunities, but I think the Bucks have a lot of guys who would be much more offensive players with a playmaker at pg.

For all his scoring, Redd has only been a consistently efficient player when he was with the Big Three (didn't have to create), during Ford's rookie year (Redd was a no-brainer all-star), during Ford's other season with the Bucks (would have been an all-star if not for injury), and with Team USA. The rest of the time he has been asked to create his own opportunities, his percentages have suffered, he's had more turnovers, and he's struggled mightily with shot selection.

Bogut clearly is better at scoring off movement (catch and convert) than creating his own offense in the low-post, and Bell is a good spot-up shooter. CV has struggled for two years now with Mo as his pg. Even Gadz is a decent scorer when somebody is looking to get him the ball in the right situations, like Kukoc used to do. Bottom line, I don't believe that pass-first pg's are right for every team and I can see why there's no correlation as you say, but I definitely do believe a better playmaker is right for the Bucks because there are players on the team who need to "made better" on offense.

I also believe that teams with a good scorer at every position need a distributor at pg, so even if a playmaker doesn't make every team more efficient he would do that for the Bucks.
Wut we've got here is... faaailure... to communakate.
icat2000
RealGM
Posts: 14,256
And1: 42
Joined: Feb 25, 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: RJ offers Mo advice 

Post#47 » by icat2000 » Wed Jul 9, 2008 1:08 am

CAnnot enter the season with both Redd and Mo starting. One simply has to go. Both would be better. Otherwise its just like the previous seasons, just different year. And so over that!
LISTEN2JAZZ
RealGM
Posts: 13,277
And1: 172
Joined: Feb 21, 2005
Location: Madison
 

Re: RJ offers Mo advice 

Post#48 » by LISTEN2JAZZ » Wed Jul 9, 2008 1:11 am

coolhandluke wrote:I also believe that teams with a good scorer at every position need a distributor at pg, so even if a playmaker doesn't make every team more efficient he would do that for the Bucks.
Maybe - I guess it depends on the player. Sessions is much more of a playmaking pg than Mo, but we were probably worse with him starting. That's not a knock on our rookie, just something to weigh against the idea that we'll get better with that type of player.
User avatar
Jez2983
RealGM
Posts: 17,912
And1: 7,879
Joined: Dec 10, 2006
Location: #team56.4%eFG
   

Re: RJ offers Mo advice 

Post#49 » by Jez2983 » Wed Jul 9, 2008 1:16 am

I'd be OK with Mo at PG, as I feel he could contribute of defense if he really put his mind to it. I'm not excited about CV at PF, but I'm unsure as to where we are going to come up with a better option. That leaves Redd. I think he's the likely one to go at this point. People were talking previously about the knee-jerk trades in the WC last year to try and get over the line. Similarly, I think this is our best option - trading Redd to a team who thinks he is what they need to get over the line.
Someone mentioned TMac earlier, and he'd be great (if uninjured) but I don't see Houston doing that and I don't see TMac wanting to come here. Mo and TMac together could create enough scoring for our other players but its another pipedream.
trwi7 wrote:Will be practicing my best Australian accent for tomorrow.

"Hey ya wankers. I graduated from Aranmore back in 2010 and lost me yearbook. Is there any way you didgeridoos can send anotha yearbook me way?"
User avatar
Nowak008
RealGM
Posts: 14,588
And1: 4,303
Joined: Jul 07, 2006
Location: Book Publisher
Contact:

Re: RJ offers Mo advice 

Post#50 » by Nowak008 » Wed Jul 9, 2008 1:26 am

I'm curious. Why does Mo get a "let's see what Skiles can get from Mo" pass, but "CV still needs to go"?


I'd say it is because Mo is a much much much better player.
Image
John Hammond apologists:
emunney wrote:
Ron Swanson wrote: 9 YEARS!? like any of that matters


THAT LITERALLY IS HIS TENURE.
User avatar
ReddManBogieMan
Senior
Posts: 722
And1: 0
Joined: May 02, 2007
Location: ReddMan's Funeral

Re: RJ offers Mo advice 

Post#51 » by ReddManBogieMan » Wed Jul 9, 2008 2:28 am

coolhandluke121 wrote:
adamcz wrote:
coolhandluke121 wrote:Here's the issue with Mo. I agree that he's a very efficient jumpshooter and that's a big part of the Bucks offense. One thing people have brought up is that the team is just as good with Mo making the shot as with Mo passing to someone else who then converts. True indeed, but there's more to the story.

Suppose your average pg would make about 6 out of every 14 shots, or a little over 42%. Mo makes about 7 of 14, a much nicer percentage and since 14 shots per game, give or take a few, is normal for a pg that means Mo would seem to be good for 2 extra ppg. However, a better playmaking pg raises the shooting percentage of all his teammates by a similar amount. All of a sudden Bogut, Redd, CV, and RJ are probably each good for an extra point or two a game, as we seemed to observe with Sessions on the floor last year (though admittedly that was a small sample of games with other possible explanations). Combine that with the fact that Mo rarely drives to the basket or gets to the ft line, and you have an inefficient offense no matter how efficient Mo's individual numbers are.

And that's not even taking into account the intangible effect of having good chemistry because everybody's involved in the offense. If this is the team the Bucks go with, I would definitely want Sessions and CV to start and Mo to come off the bench.
So why isn't there any correlation between playmaking pg's and efficient offenses?


I wasn't aware of that. It's possible that overall there is no correlation, but clearly there are some situations where a playmaking pg is preferred, i.e. when other players on the team need a little boost. I'm sure that not all playmaking pg's are in that situation because most good offensive players create their own opportunities, but I think the Bucks have a lot of guys who would be much more offensive players with a playmaker at pg.

For all his scoring, Redd has only been a consistently efficient player when he was with the Big Three (didn't have to create), during Ford's rookie year (Redd was a no-brainer all-star), during Ford's other season with the Bucks (would have been an all-star if not for injury), and with Team USA. The rest of the time he has been asked to create his own opportunities, his percentages have suffered, he's had more turnovers, and he's struggled mightily with shot selection.

Bogut clearly is better at scoring off movement (catch and convert) than creating his own offense in the low-post, and Bell is a good spot-up shooter. CV has struggled for two years now with Mo as his pg. Even Gadz is a decent scorer when somebody is looking to get him the ball in the right situations, like Kukoc used to do. Bottom line, I don't believe that pass-first pg's are right for every team and I can see why there's no correlation as you say, but I definitely do believe a better playmaker is right for the Bucks because there are players on the team who need to "made better" on offense.

I also believe that teams with a good scorer at every position need a distributor at pg, so even if a playmaker doesn't make every team more efficient he would do that for the Bucks.


I agree with everything in your post especially the parts I bolded.
Image
MilBucksBackOnTop06
Banned User
Posts: 12,827
And1: 14
Joined: Nov 10, 2005

Re: RJ offers Mo advice 

Post#52 » by MilBucksBackOnTop06 » Wed Jul 9, 2008 6:42 am

LUKE23 wrote:To me it's not about assist number with Mo, it's about two things:

1. FG%
2. A/TO

In other words, him maximizing the possessions on offense. If he shoots how he did last year (he was damn good from all three spots, field, FT, 3), and get his A/TO closer to the 3/1 range, then he's doing a great job on offense. So basically, the main thing he needs to improve on is decision-making and being less careless with the ball in his hands.

Defense is another story, but if he doesn't play it he's not going to be on the court anyway under Skiles.

I've come to the conclusion that I do not think we are trading Mo Williams though, unless we could land an upper tier PG like Hinrich, which I see as unlikely at this point.

This is erroneous...Mo was one of the best assist to turnover guys in the league the last two years.
And he shoots a good percentage from the field...

I like Mo's game for some reason. He has some heart to his game when he wants to be motivated and is with the right guys around him, and in the right role.

Mo is a quality player that has managed to get paid outside of his real niche' yet, as a key cog on a winning playoff team getting 25-30 minutes with THE SECOND GROUP.

We get so caught up into labeling him as a '1' or a '2' guard...He is just a basketball player who can get his own shot and makes some plays in the open court and in the pull up game. He is a second group player...because of his defensive liabilities like a Ben Gordon.

The one thing about Mo is he is not a complementary set up piece to our bigs because he can not really create for others well.

His survival and success has come from setting himself up to score not facilitate or play through others.

Charlie Bell is more of a supplemental set up player then Mo is and so is Ramon Sessions and to a certain extent Royal Ivey. Mo is a shot-maker and a playmaker in the open floor or on the break.

But paired with Redd that is not gonna work. He and RJ will work well together because Mo can play with a slasher and wing who likes to run the floor like Jefferson. But RJ plays defense so you can have him and Mo on the floor together a lot. Bell or Ivey should play with Redd instead...

Redd likes to iso and dribble and hold the ball when he is double teamed and does not want to be a passer. So everyone stands around waiting to see what he will do.

And many times Mo cannot make a simple entry pass and get the team into the offense quick enough. Both of these tendencies hold the ball up and do not get the ball down to work through the 'bigs' often enough.

But that is because either Bogut does not flash and command the ball or get in a good base position to catch an entry pass or Mo deems it is his time to pound the dribble, dance around and then jack up a end of the shot clock jumper that goes for a long rebound and ends in a fastbreak basket.

I can blame some of that on weak coaching and poor discipline. Neither coach Stotts or Coach K could devise a set system that fit Mo. Terry Porter let TJ Ford take the reins and brought Mo off the bench and that is WHY THE BUCKS MADE THE PLAYOFFS!

Mo was in his role. But then everyone whined about TJ Ford's shots and cried that Bogut did not get enough shots. Every one shoots too much except Bogut it seems...

Until Bogut gets a mindset like an Amare, Dwight Howard and J.O and Bosh and now an Elton Brand he should hush. You run your offense THROUGH BOGUT not TO HIM...Mo and Redd do not do that when they feel they have to launch shots off broken plays off of one pass down the court.

This is where Coach Skiles will be invaluable...with adding some offensive and defensive structure and cohesive discipline to this team like he did in Chicago. I simply loved how both the Pistons and Bulls were coached and managed with committed professionals.

Lets hope we can see that here with our ballclub?
thefloorgeneral
Ballboy
Posts: 38
And1: 0
Joined: Jun 26, 2008

Re: RJ offers Mo advice 

Post#53 » by thefloorgeneral » Wed Jul 9, 2008 3:57 pm

wow, i agree with just about everything you just said.
kamaze
General Manager
Posts: 7,791
And1: 1,315
Joined: Jul 10, 2005

Re: RJ offers Mo advice 

Post#54 » by kamaze » Wed Jul 9, 2008 4:38 pm

RJ's allready trying to motivate Mo Williams Milwaukee wil love him for his leadership alone.
IThey should make the playoffs as long as they don't have too many injuries.
I got the burner-Kevin Durant

Cream rises to the top-Nic Claxton
User avatar
lajes55
Sophomore
Posts: 103
And1: 0
Joined: Mar 19, 2008

Re: RJ offers Mo advice 

Post#55 » by lajes55 » Wed Jul 9, 2008 7:20 pm

For all his scoring, Redd has only been a consistently efficient player when he was with the Big Three (didn't have to create), during Ford's rookie year (Redd was a no-brainer all-star), during Ford's other season with the Bucks (would have been an all-star if not for injury), and with Team USA. The rest of the time he has been asked to create his own opportunities, his percentages have suffered, he's had more turnovers, and he's struggled mightily with shot selection.

I just wanted to point out that it was the year after Ford was traded that Redd missed out on the all star game because he was injured. I agree it would be nice to have a "pass first point" to run the team but thats mostly because most of the pass first point guards also happen to be the top point guards in the league. The only one who might be available is Andre Miller but he's old and needs a new contract after this year, the sixers probably aren't looking to trade him either.

If people really want a change of pace from Mo I think the best bet would be to look at Earl Watson, he's a similar type of player as Kirk Hinrich except without the big name and contract. Personally, I'm kind of curious to see if Skiles can get Mo to play any kind of defense, If he does he'll be close to an all star.

Return to Milwaukee Bucks