Malik Allen: Our starting PF?

[raferfenix]

I still don't get where this period where this board's insiders were so incredibly wrong happened?

They were 100% right about the most minute details of Herb Kohl's inner circle.

They were 100% right about the potential Zach Randolph trade.

They were 100% right about Mo having little value to our team as well as on the open market.

Furthermore, the later to be confirmed insdie information about Mo's shenanigans in the lockerroom was incredible context for fans without such connections to understand why he needed to go so badly.

So the "more to come" insinuation of a Kirk Hinrich trade never happened, so what? A draft day trade was hinted at, and I'd say that the threads of hypotheticals of what that trade could be was one of my favorite periods on the Real GM boards.

As far as CV goes though, all of this has once again been proven moot, since once again our insiders' negative interpretations they were getting on CV have again been confirmed by the MJS being spoonfed these kinds of stories. If CV was killing it and earning a starting spot (or even Skiles' respect) would have been a story ahead of one describing all the glory that is Malik Allen?

[LUKE23]

CV is just a better player as a starter. It doesn't mean that is right or justified, but that is the reality of the situation. The numbers reflect that. Considering he is the better talent anyway, doesn't it make sense to maximize our assets this year? It's not like Allen can't still get his 12 minutes per game off the bench.

14.9 and 8 in 30 minutes. That is CV's numbers as a starter. If he doesn't defend he's not going to play anyway, so what is everyone's beef with the more talented scorer/rebounder starting?

[europa]

I want the best team on the court to start the game. If Villanueva can start doing more things that will help the team win, then he should start. If he continues to fail in those critical areas, then someone else deserves a chance. I don't care either way but I do think it's quite telling that a third coaching staff isn't entirely convinced he deserves to start.

[BDUB_30]

I still don't get where this period where this board's insiders were so incredibly wrong happened?

They were 100% right about the most minute details of Herb Kohl's inner circle.

They were 100% right about the potential Zach Randolph trade.

They were 100% right about Mo having little value to our team as well as on the open market.

Furthermore, the later to be confirmed insdie information about Mo's shenanigans in the lockerroom was incredible context for fans without such connections to understand why he needed to go so badly.

So the "more to come" insinuation of a Kirk Hinrich trade never happened, so what?

Look , their was a period on this forum where " TJ FORD " insiders were going absoulty nuts with " inside information" ..


I remember specificaly the " Bucks will put their money on MO " thread ...which was really a classic , humerous thread in all truth .


but bucks insiders came in like gangbusters claiming they had " inside sources " that tj ford would be given a long term deal and mo would be sent packing ..


when the exact opposite came to happen . " Insiders " then changed their tune that the onlyyyy way the bucks could of goten charlie v was if we gave up TJ and NOT mo ...Which was extremely funny given the fact that " insiders " claimed how much in loveeee bucks management was with TJ and mo was frowned upon with inside the organization ..So the bucks ended up given up their love child , almighty savior at the pg position for charlie v and going with the anti-christ mo ? it didnt make sense at all .


Inside information also told us that TJs back was " no diffrent then yours or mine and the chance for him to injure his back again was LESS then say .....you or I " ...

wasnt their some " inside information " on tj house getting raided ..?


Im not even trying to be prick or nothing like that .. im just saying , lets not point out people that really dont like the idea of people using inside information to validate their own opionons , and label them as " crybabys " and act like people havent clearly used the guise of inside information to make their own opionons seem like gospel truth .. Its happend plenty of times on this forum ...but thats not to say that inside sources havent been extremely credable as well ..

[europa]

Just out of curiosity, which insiders said the Bucks were going to give Ford a long-term contract? I don't recall that but maybe I missed it.

[BDUB_30]

CV is just a better player as a starter. It doesn't mean that is right or justified, but that is the reality of the situation. The numbers reflect that. Considering he is the better talent anyway, doesn't it make sense to maximize our assets this year? It's not like Allen can't still get his 12 minutes per game off the bench.

14.9 and 8 in 30 minutes. That is CV's numbers as a starter. If he doesn't defend he's not going to play anyway, so what is everyone's beef with the more talented scorer/rebounder starting?

My beef with it is this :


If were trying to change the culture , and skiles feels that CV is so inadequate in an area of his game that him being with the starting unit is going to hamper that change .. Then i dont want him starting either .


If skiles is trying to implement defensive schemes and charlie isnt buying in , then i dont want that wink link in the starting 5 to where his inabilitys have a residual effect on the others .


Now one could say , well how do ya know this ?


I know this because im of the belief that charlie v is light years ahead of malik allen offensivly ...so it HAS to be the defensive that skiles has a problem with or rebounding ...


but it could really also be a number of things .. look im not trying to get down on the guy . But its not like Charlie V's shot selection is so great anyways to where hes not capable of hurting you literally at ANY moment of the game . How many games have we watched where Johnie Mac is harping about Charlie setteling for permiter jumpers ? in other words BAD SHOTS ! ..Its damn near every game where johnie mac gets into talking about charlie v shooting to many jumpshots ..and its 100% TRUE ..


Youre advocating charlie v being in the starting group because hes better offensivly then ALLEN ..When in all truth , the bucks might feel like they dont want to deal with a guy who has a history of shooting to many bad shots ! He is clearly more talented then Allen in regards to scoring , but its at what cost ? Is he going to play within the offense and take shots as they come ? Or are we going to see the charlie v who pumps up jumpers with hands in his face , refuses to swing the ball , and goes one on 4 into the paint literally at any time .. its this lack of discipline / poise that plauges charlie v ...


put it this way .. If were getting the same charlie v that weve seen thruout his entire nba carrer .. I dont want him on the floor PERIOD ! .. Not for offense , not for defense , not for rebounding . He does NOTHING well , unless hes " hot " ..i dont want to base our nightly chances on charlie v's f'n hot streaks and i doubt skiles does either . ~!

[raferfenix]

Skiles giving up on having a team that cares about team play, hard work, tougness, and defense will DEFINITELY not be in our interest. Some of Skiles' biggest challenges will be to convince players like Redd, Ridnour, and Sessions to buy into all three. However, CV is a much much bigger challenge due to his lack of history of even working on his game in the offseason.

Unless CV has a complete atittude change, why should we have Skiles undercut his own message? It's not like he's that incredible---if he were ready to be an Antawn Jamison it might be different, but who needs Tim Thomas 2.0 dictating terms under the new regime based on how much he'll sulk if he doesn't get his way?

[BDUB_30]

Just out of curiosity, which insiders said the Bucks were going to give Ford a long-term contract? I don't recall that but maybe I missed it.

Im not going to name names . i already feel like a jerk for bringing it up .It really is counter-productive to endludge in the past . I just didnt want it to be left unsaid that people who dont like the inside sources being used to back up opionons really shouldnt be labled as crybabys . Its really kind of unfair .


i personaly dont care what people say in regards to inside sources . i either take it with a grain of salt or i acknolwedge the possibilites of it ..i think the more info people have the more they should share .. in the end their has been some great debates and people have been right about alot of stuff and wrong about alot of stuff ... its all about keeping the information flowing because as far as this team goes , this forum really is by far the best place to go for the info . I mean its not even close , some of you guys should be getting paid for this .

[raferfenix]

Yeah I don't remember any TJ Ford extension talk either, and even if there was, going back that long ago for evidence that someone is full of it is a little rich. Even if people were wrong, should we ignore all the points where they were right due to something getting screwed up? Player transactions can fall apart for any number of reasons. Why begrudge somebody for reporting on something they believe at one point but which later disintegrates? It's not like this board's insiders are doing this for thier own aggrandizement---they're helping out fans without that input that do want to hear about it.

This board has so much speculation that it's a awesome to get speculation based on evidence from the inside once in a while. I'm willing to listen to a source even if they are dead wrong sometimes, because it's not like that speculation is inherrently worse than other sorts anyways.

I am happy that TJ was brought up though (even if I disagree with the context), as Larry Harris' need to make that trade look better could very easily have led to him not wanting to trade him on the cheap even if it was the right move. That just isn't the case anymore, and Hammond trading CV in a deal people perceive as cruddy wouldn't be a knock on his reputaiton like it would to Harris. it'd be just like the Mo Williams situation, where fans will have to accept that Harris made a goof and Hammond is deciding to clean up the mess. Our insiders reporting that Hammond is waiting for a deal just decent enough to pull the trigger is osmething i'm willing to trust, especially given the void of any laudatory reporting on his behalf.

[Nowak008]

I'm not sure why any of the locker room problems involving Mo, Bell, Simmons, attitudes toward Redd or anything else should be used to excuse Villanueva's poor play.

Is that story accurate though?

He stunk coming off the bench. That's on him in my opinion.

So you agree with me? He stunk coming off the bench, so you want him to start?

Coming off the bench to provide instant offense is a skill. Not to many guys in this league can come into the game cold and light up the scoreboard.

[europa]

Is what story accurate?

As far as Villanueva starting, I want him to earn the position. If he can do that, great. If he can't, then put him back on the bench and hope like hell he doesn't pout and play like s**t the way he did last season.

[icat2000]

Just out of curiosity, which insiders said the Bucks were going to give Ford a long-term contract? I don't recall that but maybe I missed it.

I don't recall insiders stating that Ford was going to be given a long contract. I do however recall some posters stating categorically that Ford would not be traded. I believe you were one of those posters.

[BDUB_30]

Yeah I don't remember any TJ Ford extension talk either, and even if there was, going back that long ago for evidence that someone is full of it is a little rich. Even if people were wrong, should we ignore all the points where they were right due to something getting screwed up? Player transactions can fall apart for any number of reasons. Why begrudge somebody for reporting on something they believe at one point but which later disintegrates? It's not like this board's insiders are doing this for thier own aggrandizement---they're helping out fans without that input that do want to hear about it.

This board has so much speculation that it's a awesome to get speculation based on evidence from the inside once in a while. I'm willing to listen to a source even if they are dead wrong sometimes, because it's not like that speculation is inherrently worse than other sorts anyways.

I am happy that TJ was brought up though (even if I disagree with the context), as Larry Harris' need to make that trade look better could very easily have led to him not wanting to trade him on the cheap even if it was the right move. That just isn't the case anymore, and Hammond trading CV in a deal people perceive as cruddy wouldn't be a knock on his reputaiton like it would to Harris. it'd be just like the Mo Williams situation, where fans will have to accept that Harris made a goof and Hammond is deciding to clean up the mess. Our insiders reporting that Hammond is waiting for a deal just decent enough to pull the trigger is osmething i'm willing to trust, especially given the void of any laudatory reporting on his behalf.

well i didnt know you were looking for a specific time period of when using inside information was pausable or not ...i dont think citing those examples is " RICH" , i think if anything dismissing those examples due to them being a bit old is " rich" ...i think its that kind of useage of using inside information that turned off alot people and made alot of people question if people were using the idea of having a source to further their own personal opionons . You have to have selective memory then because thats when all of the inside information began on this forum .

the idea that we got worked over in the mo trade is also questionable. Are you of the beleif that mo is a better pg then Luke ? Cause im not ... i think we upgraded that position in the trade , so im not so sure that the entire premise of " mos value being reported as low was right " is even remotely accurate concidering we traded a pg and got back a better pg in the process ... unless of course desmond mason was the deal breaker for you ? I think were all going to be very happy with ridnour especially in comparison to what mo brought to the position. Alot of reports out of camp is how great of a passer Ridnour is with Charlie Bell specificaly saying he " wishes he could pass like Luke " ... Ive yet to hear such a high praise for mo .

[europa]

Just out of curiosity, which insiders said the Bucks were going to give Ford a long-term contract? I don't recall that but maybe I missed it.

I don't recall insiders stating that Ford was going to be given a long contract. I do however recall some posters stating categorically that Ford would not be traded. I believe you were one of those posters.

Nope. What I did say was that in my opinion the Bucks would be making a mistake if they traded Ford. I never cited any sources on that. It was merely my opinion based on what I believed was his talent and upside. I also said that if the Bucks made a bad trade with Ford, it would be the type of trade that would get a GM fired.

[icat2000]

Just out of curiosity, which insiders said the Bucks were going to give Ford a long-term contract? I don't recall that but maybe I missed it.

I don't recall insiders stating that Ford was going to be given a long contract. I do however recall some posters stating categorically that Ford would not be traded. I believe you were one of those posters.

Nope. What I did say was that in my opinion the Bucks would be making a mistake if they traded Ford. I never cited any sources on that. It was merely my opinion based on what I believed was his talent and upside. I also said that if the Bucks made a bad trade with Ford, it would be the type of trade that would get a GM fired.

Pretty sure you used your standard attiribute "several coaches around the NBA ...." I do remember you getting rather upset during that time.

[europa]

Pretty sure you used your standard attiribute "several coaches around the NBA ...." I do remember you getting rather upset during that time.

I don't talk to head coaches around the league very often so once again you're misrepresenting my position. And it's interesting how you recall me getting "rather upset" when there's only been one instance in my time in this forum where I got legitimately angry and it had nothing to do with T.J. Ford.

[BDUB_30]

its to bad we didnt have some of the older threads .. just for laughs if nothing else .




the thread " THE BUCKS WILL PUT THEIR MONEY ON MO " was really the birth of " mo nation " ... Mo nation was just a spawn of Ford nation in all truth ...but that thread specificaly was heated and their was a TON of " inside information" claims being thrown around in that thread .



its kind of funny to me that really the ford vs mo thing honestly ended up with both sides being wrong ...neither were the answer for this team and they clearly divided the forum up ..I think mo suporters felt they were right when ford got traded , and really they were , but in the end mo didnt pan out for us and he was moved for a pg himself so how right were we ?

[LUKE23]

Malik Allen? Starting? Ummmmm, no.

[steger_3434]

Malik Allen? Starting? Ummmmm, no.

If I can't get down to much on this team after the first preseason game, then you shouldn't use the same game to base your assumption that Allen shouldn't start. Now if you just think he plain sucks, then I'm with you on that one. I hope we go with CV in the starting unit to begin the year.

[LUKE23]

I just think he sucks. But I thought that years before this preseason game.