Grade John Hammond at the halfway point

[msiris]

But if the idea is to trade Redd so there's money to be spent on Villanueva, Sessions and Ilyasova I think that's a terrible idea.

Whoever suggested this would be a bad GM, This is just reall small thinking. None of these guys have proven to be core players.

[jeremyd236]

What I'm opposed to is giving him away which this forum has long advocated..

I think we may be at a different point though. A financial one. Given the economy, low ticket sales and now the team tossing games in the garbage like last night (and Philly, Miami, MN, etc) the decision may no longer be a basketball one. It's plausible that we'll need to dump one or both of Redd/RJ and go young for a year or two. I'm not sure Kohl can cash flow a $70mm payroll under these circumstances unless it is winning at a decent clip.

See PP, I think you've come out and said what nobody will.

Redd is overpaid. He isn't Kobe. He doesn't get a lot of rebounds/assists. He is a really good scorer, but he is overpaid.

People on here act like he's the the worst player on our team. Some even say he shouldn't be starting in the NBA or he makes "no impact" on an NBA roster.

At least you have the balls to come out here and say we need to trade Redd for pure financial reasons. For this purpose, I agree. It may not even be Redd's fault that he needs to be traded.

Think of this: If Harris doesn't sign Charlie Bell at all, signs Gadzuric to even 3 million/year, and doesn't get us "stuck" with Simmons's contract (which now leaves us "stuck" with RJ's 13 million).....is Redd's contract even that bad?

Let's be honest here....he's been playing great lately despite what some will admit. He's making $15 million dollars this year, NOT over $20 million like some act like. If Harris didn't make additional terrible moves other than overpaying Redd, this wouldn't be a big deal. But it's moved beyond basketball right now and we have to think of the future of the franchise, so trading Redd may be best.

For the record, I think RJ deals should be explored first or in addition, because I think he's more overpaid at $13 million than Redd is at $15 million.

[paulpressey25]

....so there's money to be spent on Villanueva, Sessions and Ilyasova .

But you can substitute in the guys you like to go with Ramon. Trade CV for Collison and don't bring back Illysova but sign a full MLE guy. Now we are talking about Collison, Ramon and say your choice again of:

Brandon Bass
Drew Gooden
Anderson Varajao
Chris Wilcox
Andre Miller
Matt Barnes
Anthony Parker
etc.

[europa]

....so there's money to be spent on Villanueva, Sessions and Ilyasova .

But you can substitute in the guys you like to go with Ramon. Trade CV for Collison and don't bring back Illysova but sign a full MLE guy. Now we are talking about Collison, Ramon and say your choice again of:

Brandon Bass
Drew Gooden
Anderson Varajao
Chris Wilcox
Andre Miller
Matt Barnes
Anthony Parker
etc.

Can the same things be done if RJ is traded?

[jeremyd236]

The Bucks haven't shown that they can win without Redd, but they HAVE shown that they can't win with him either. Trade both him and RJ. We aren't going to see attendance drop any further. We barely have fans the way it is. It's not like a Tuesday night game is going to draw 300 people if we trade Redd. I'd be willing to bet the attendance would be pretty close to what it is now, which for Kohl is actually a net gain considering lost ticket sales aren't more than Redd's salary.

This team has been trying to win and rebuild at the same time for 5 years now. It's about time to do it the right way, and that is parting with high priced players (Redd and RJ) for young guys and cap relief.

I disagree entirely. Redd/RJ result in the little fanbase we have at the BC. While they certainly aren't the fly highing superstars or marquee names people directly pay to see, they lead to Bucks wins whether you like it or not.

Some things people fail to acknowledge is the fact that Redd easily leads our team in +/- on the year, has a far better record over the last 3 years than the Bucks as a team do without him playing, and our team shoots a higher FG% and 3pt% when he plays. If that doesn't show that he "helps" the Bucks win, then I don't know what does.

Just because the guy gets doubled every single game in crunch time and opts to defer to offensively talented guys (like CV), that doesn't mean he doesn't help us win. We wouldn't even be in a lot of games if he doesn't start out so hot the way he has lately.

Obviously he struggles to score in the 4th. But trading him to have money to resign bench players on a losing team (Sessions/CV) just doesn't make sense. He's proven to be more valuable to our team this year than the combination of those players.

I think if you had to come down to it, you too would rather see RJ go.

[steger_3434]

What do you think the attendance would be if we trade RJ and Redd. Do you honestly think the team would only draw 4,000 people to the games? That's a ridiculous statement.

[paulpressey25]

Can the same things be done if RJ is traded?

You lose one guy out of that bunch since Redd makes $3.2mm more than RJ.

I'm fine trading RJ. To be honest, I think he's got a more value around the league for a variety of reasons, including the lower priced contract. I'm just of a belief that a Hammond/Skiles gritty defensive type team will function better with RJ on it than Redd if the choice is to keep one.

[europa]

Can the same things be done if RJ is traded?

You lose one guy out of that bunch since Redd makes $3.2mm more than RJ.

I'm fine trading RJ. To be honest, I think he's got a more value around the league for a variety of reasons, including the lower priced contract. I'm just of a belief that a Hammond/Skiles gritty defensive type team will function better with RJ on it than Redd if the choice is to keep one.

The problem is, there's no viable replacement for Redd on the roster so unless the trade brings one back (and your Cavs example doesn't) then the Bucks suffer a major downgrade offensively and lose the one consistent big-time scorer the team has. As we saw in the 14 games Redd missed, the Bucks struggle mightily without him and can't win games. I don't see any way at this time that Hammond makes a move to jeopardize the team's chances to make the playoffs and I don't think he should. Making the playoffs in my opinion is the first step on the road to team improvement. Trading Redd for expirings and crap would likely result in another trip to the lottery. That would be a huge negative that I think Hammond wants to avoid.

That's why I'm not surprised to read that RJ might be being shopped. The Bucks have a replacement for him (M&M). That would constitute acquiring a PF but Hammond has been trying for months to do that. Perhaps Collison is the guy. So if I was looking for a way to strengthen the team for a playoff run and improve the financial status for next year and beyond, my approach would be to deal RJ, trade Villanueva (or whatever) for Collison and make the Sessions/Alexander for Conley deal. Now you are in a better position financially and you've added one player who will help this season (Collison), possibly two depending on what Conley does and maybe more depending on what you get back for RJ.

That'd be my first plan if I was Hammond and I felt that I needed to trade either Redd or RJ.

[El Duderino]

I think RJ goes before Redd - unless somebody blows the Bucks away with a great offer for Redd. And I don't think that's going to happen this season. Redd carries more value to this team right now than RJ does and would be much more difficult to replace - as we saw in the 14 games he missed. So if the Memphis report is true that the Bucks are trying to gauge RJ's trade value (and it makes total sense), I'm fine with that.

Seeing the fairly drastic decline in Jefferson's athletic ability and thus not very well rounded offensive game, i'd also prefer moving Jefferson over Redd who has more diverse offensive skills. The thought of what Jefferson's game likely will look like in the final year of his contract is pretty frightening given we'd be paying him 15 million dollars. The thought of paying Redd 17 and 18 million the next two years though is nauseating in itself.

The main difference between me and you with these two guys is it seems to me that you believe that both of these guys have reasonably high value around the league and thus, if/when Hammond decides that he wants to trade either player or even both, that he can get a high quality proven player or two in return vs mainly having to settle for a salary dump and get say a late first rounder in return. Now just maybe Hammond could find a sucker willing to do this, but i put myself in the shoes of other GM's and with the ugly contracts that both Redd/RJ have, i'd view both as overall negative value when production vs paycheck is factored in together. Our biggest need IMO is a high quality PF that produces on both ends, but i ask myself, why would any GM with even a pea sized brain trade a PF like that for an aging overpaid SG or SF? I sure as hell wouldn't.

I also just have a hard time envisioning Hammond being able to add enough quality talent the next two years that can be put next to our 42 million dollar trio of Redd/RJ/Bogut so that the Bucks can get better than a ceiling of a 6th/7th/8th seed given the other contracts on the roster that Hammond is saddled with and that we won't be drafting high. I see little to nothing in assets for Hammond to use that can overcome the negatives of so many overpaid players on the roster and likely no high draft picks.

[europa]

The main difference between me and you with these two guys is it seems to me that you believe that both of these guys have reasonably high value around the league and thus, if/when Hammond decides that he wants to trade either player or even both, that he can get a high quality proven player or two in return vs mainly having to settle for a salary dump and get say a late first rounder in return.

I think Redd has value. He's a legitimate starter on a good team and everyone around the league knows that. His contract, though, is an issue and not one I'm oblivious too. But if Hammond could move Bobby Simmons and his horrible contract, I think he can move a significantly more talented player in Redd and even RJ, who is also a much better player than Simmons. So I'm not going to rule anything out when you have a GM in charge who appears to know what he's doing.

I will say again, though, that if one of them has to be moved this year in order to help the team's financial situation it should be RJ who's given away for less than his true value. Redd's too important to this team at the present time to just give him away. I think the Bucks can more easily replace RJ.

Where you and others disagree with me is you believe Hammond won't be able to continue to make the right moves to keep improving this team. I don't agree with that. I think he'll be able to execute his plan but he needs more time. Only such much can be done in a year's time. So I'm fine with being patient for the time being.

[jerrod]

yes, he moved bobby simmons' horrible deal, and our recent lottery pick for richard jefferson's horrible contract that we're looking to dump 6 months later. sweet

[LISTEN2JAZZ]

I think Redd has value. He's a legitimate starter on a good team and everyone around the league knows that.

Out of curiosity, how far below .500 does the adjective "good" extend? I'm sort of baffled when I hear people describe losing teams as successful, good, or even "winning."

[paulpressey25]

[Out of curiosity, how far below .500 does the adjective "good" extend?

I'd phrase the question to Europa a different way. How many good teams can afford Redd on their payroll and still keep their core guys that make them "good"?

The Lakers, Portland and Cavs and maybe one or two others could arguably dump some of their guys or expirings and take on Redd, but I'd doubt even they would want to do it, since it would really screw up their salaries for the next two years. But the common denominator with the good teams that could take on Redd is that they have a superstar in the LeBron, Kobe mold.

The lower tier good teams like the Pistons, Hawks, etc can't take on Redd given his contract. They have to give up too much else that helps them win. The only possible exception I could see is Utah giving up AK47.

[europa]

The Lakers, Portland and Cavs and maybe one or two others could arguably dump some of their guys or expirings and take on Redd, but I'd doubt even they would want to do it

The Cavs reportedly still would like to trade for Redd. So he's still in their sights. The Lakers don't need him since they already have a decent SG the last time I checked. The Blazers could be interested because they seem to want to add a big-time veteran to go with their collection of young talent. But they seem more intent presently at trying to land a veteran PG with Andre Miller reportedly at or near the top of their wish list.

For me, I'm not bothered by Redd's presence on this team like the majority are in this forum so I don't get all worked up about who might want him and who might not. Redd isn't a major problem who has to be moved so I don't feel any sense of urgency and to this point neither has Hammond. He's a pretty good player and can help any team - especially a team like the Bucks. But if Hammond can move the bad contracts Simmons and Mo had, I think he'll be able to move Redd and/or RJ, who are both better players should he decide one or both of them need to be traded.

[LISTEN2JAZZ]

70 wins = legendary
60 wins = elite
50 wins = good
41 wins = average
30 wins = bad
20 wins = horrible
10 wins = legendary, but for the wrong reasons

[LUKE23]

I'm not talking about career, I'm talking about role on the Bucks THIS SEASON. I don't care what Jefferson did in New Jersey and I don't care what CV did under Tweedle-Dee (Stotts) and Tweedle-Dum (LK). Taking minutes and contract into account, CV has been a more valuable player than RJ has to the Bucks this year.

It's fine if you want to trade him, and I'm not saying he's a long-term piece to this roster, but your post made it sound like he needs to be out of here pronto and at all costs. He's won us more games this year with his play than RJ has, most certainly.

To be quite honest, given play, salary, age, the only two players on this roster that I would even shed a tear over losing are Bogut and LRMAM. That is it.

[europa]

That's fine. I respect your opinion. I do want Villanueva gone. I don't trust him. I worry about the fact his best ball is coming in a contract year and I have no belief he'll consistently reverse his horrible defense which makes him a poor long-term fit on this team. Of the current rotation players on this team, I view Villanueva only ahead of Bell and Gadz in terms of importance. I don't view him as a necessary piece of the puzzle by any means. I'd gladly keep Redd and RJ over him because both, in my opinion, are better players and have more value to a team trying to get to the playoffs like the Bucks are this season. And if the choice is to be between keeping only Sessions or Villanueva as RFAs next season, I'm keeping Sessions without hesitation.

[paul]

To be quite honest, given play, salary, age, the only two players on this roster that I would even shed a tear over losing are Bogut and LRMAM. That is it.

I'd add that Ridnour is playing his way from apparent 'scrub' into 'valuable commodity' given his contract Luke, but I agree with your overall point.

Ridnour makes less money than Gadz next year

[InsideOut]

I'm not talking about career, I'm talking about role on the Bucks THIS SEASON. I don't care what Jefferson did in New Jersey and I don't care what CV did under Tweedle-Dee (Stotts) and Tweedle-Dum (LK). Taking minutes and contract into account, CV has been a more valuable player than RJ has to the Bucks this year.

It's fine if you want to trade him, and I'm not saying he's a long-term piece to this roster, but your post made it sound like he needs to be out of here pronto and at all costs. He's won us more games this year with his play than RJ has, most certainly.

To be quite honest, given play, salary, age, the only two players on this roster that I would even shed a tear over losing are Bogut and LRMAM. That is it.

Amen to that.

[LUKE23]

Sessions has been bad for a while as well, in fact a good portion of the season. He has some skills I like, but he's not a future starter on a good basketball team (not saying CV is either).

With salaries taken into consideration right now, what they are making this year, CV is no question more valuable than Redd and RJ.

You don't like him, I know, and I'm not saying we should give him a long-term contract, but he's been good for us this year, and he's accepted his role well. It's not really debatable.