Keep CV/Sessions Thread (Ideas to do it)

[EastSideBucksFan]

For the season CV is averaging

.456 FG% .856 FT% 0.9 3PTM 14.7 PTS 2.1 ORB 6.5 REB 1.5AST 0.5 STL 0.8 BLK 1.8 TO

For the past month CV is averaging

.504 FG% .825 FT% 1.43PTM 18.4 PTS 1.9 ORB 6.5 REB 2.0 AST 0.7 STL 0.8 BLK 1.8 TO

One big knock on CV is that he's seen as a volume shooter. Notice he's shooting 50% in the last month and 45% on the year. He's really mixed up his approach on offense this year cause he knows what gets him playing time. Skiles loves to see him take it to the rack. He can score so well down low, he can post up and he's a threat to shoot it, score a floater in the lane or take it all the way to the rack. His offensive abilities are almost limitless, hes definitely the Bucks most versatile scoring weapon and probably our best offensive weapon at this point. I think CV is stepping up to the challenge with Redd and Bogut having missed games and when we've needed CV to produce. He's being consistent and he's complementing Bogut well when they play together.


For the season Ramon is averaging

.439 FG% .791 FT% 0.1 3PTM 10.4 PTS 2.9 REB 4.2 AST 0.9 STL 1.7 TO

For the past month Ramon is averaging

.461 FG% .774 FT% 0.1 3PTM 7.8 PTS 2.6 REB 3.4 AST 0.9 STL 1.6 TO


Ramons numbers over the past month haven't been quite so kind, he's had a couple decent games though since being inserted in the starting lineup. It sucks we can't get too much burn for him as a point guard so we can evaluate him better before we have to decide whether to pay him or trade him. He's obviously a scoring guard, he can definitely play the point but can he play it at an elite level. Knocks against him right now are his outside shooting, careless handling at critical times (his TO numbers are pretty low for a guy who many consider to be turnover prone) and his scoring first mentality. I think you need a PG who can score in this league or he is a guy who just tops out as Luke Ridnour, no offense to him, but you can't really expect him to step up for you on offense more than once in 10 games.

Sessions has the ability to drive the lane, get guys in foul trouble, and finish at the basket. He needs to get better at drive and kick, but I think all the knocks on him are fine for a guy who has less than a full season under his belt. Not to mention the Bucks have needed a physically big point guard in the worst way for the longest time after getting beat up by Billups for years.

To reference info from another article there are only 7 teams with cap space of $7M or more this offseason and they include: Oklahoma City, Memphis, Portland and Detroit, Miami, Atlanta and Minnesota.

The only teams likely to potentially make a run at CV might be Oklahoma CIty or Memphis both of which have holes in their frontcourt. David Lee, Paul Millsap and Carlos Boozer are all more desirable than CV to a team with a lot of cap space looking for a PF though.

The teams that could be interested in Sessions I would project to be Portland, Oklahoma City, Memphis, maybe Atlanta as well with Bibby up in the air. But his numbers aren't great, I can't really expect him to command much more than 3YRS/$12M (what Redd got his initial extension). Theres a number of PGs ahead of him on the pecking order that are going to get signed to the teams that have significant cap space available, Mike Bibby, Jason Kidd, Andre Miller, Raymond Felton, Nate Robinson and Ben Gordon will be all be looking for new deals.


So, it seems to me there might not be really that much money available out there as teams will be cautious with their money this year for economic reasons and for 2010 cap space reasons. I'd let the market determine the value of CV as recent history hasn't shown to be too favorable for RFA's, I think we have the upper hand.

I'm not a financial guru so I don't know exactly what kind of space and moves we need to keep these guys as long as we are talking about reasonable deals. I've heard many here would be comfortable with a 3YR/$21M contract for CV and I think Sessions is worth about 3YRS/$12-15M

Can we keep both of them without dumping RJ? Perhaps GAD can weigh in here. I'm not in the camp looking to dump RJ for cap space or any other Portland deal. I'm not totally averse to trading him this year, but it had to be a deal where we get back talent

I've put in poll to see where everybody is at right now

[GrandAdmiralDan]

I think my response to this europa post from the postgame thread is more appropriate in this thread, so I'll respond to it here:

Villanueva had a terrific game. He still makes me cringe defensively (Bargnani embarrassed him in the first quarter) but he's scoring at a high level and rebounding very well. I think Hammond may very well need to re-think his feelings about Villanueva. If it means pushing beyond the $70M salary level (which I think Kohl may be prepared to do), so be it. I'd still like a stronger defender as the starting PF and I am leery that what we're seeing from Villanueva is contract year greatness, but he's delivering. I'd be hesitant to give him a deal longer than three years, but 3/$20M-$21M is something to consider in my opinion.

Hell hath frozen over.
I too have been coming around more on the idea of Villanueva remaining a Buck, even on more than just the QO for next season. Earlier today, during the 1st quarter of the game, another person worried about locking up Villanueva long term remarked to me that they were starting to change their opinion of Villanueva. I've been making similar comments in recent days.

I don't know that I'm quite at the 3 year $20 mil level of comfort yet. Soon, perhaps.
I would see if Villanueva would consider a player option for that third year in exchange for making the total 3 year value $17.5 mil instead of of $20 mil. That gives CV an opportunity to sooner earn a more lucrative contract, and it lessens our commitment by $2.5 mil if he DOESN'T live up to his contract in years 1 or 2, as compared with the straight 3 year $20 mil offer. I think it is a reasonable exchange. That way, even if Villanueva has fooled us all right now with just a contract year performance this season, we'll only have to wait through next season before he is in a contract year (well, kind of) again. Then, we can reap the rewards of another Villanueva contract year, but not be fooled twice.

Or, hopefully, what we're seeing from him now is not just the result of a contract year and we've either misjudged him (albeit with good reason) or he has matured, etc.

I'll say this, though. If renowned Villanueva skeptics like europa and myself are starting to change our opinions of Villanueva, then there is a good chance that two more important Villanueva skeptics, John Hammond and Scott Skiles, have altered their opinion on Villanueva as well.

If CBQ now weighs in and has similar sentiments, that would be the ultimate sign, I think

I just hope that big-time CV fan Herb Kohl doesn't use Villanueva's month of January as an excuse to neuter Hammond (since Hammond has been attempting to trade Villanueva since our 07-08 season ended). Even if you judge that to be a mark against Hammond, Kohl better fire Hammond immediately or stay out of his way EVEN if Hammond tries again to trade Villanueva now that his value has obviously risen. Despite coming around on Villanueva, I'd still totally be on board with exploring a "sell-high" trade of Villanuea, if we can get more favorable terms because of his recent play. It's worth looking into for sure.

You aren't a 20/10 guy until you do it FOR A SEASON.

And to keep things in perspective, Villanueva isn't even doing that as a starter this season. He's averaging 16-8 as a starter. That's a good line, but it isn't 20-10.

At the same time we're trying to settle down the talk of Villanueva being worth "$8 mil a year easy" because he is a "20/10 player" by pointing out that he isn't even averaging that in this career month of his, and even if he did, one month of that wouldn't be worth $8 mil a year yet... I think I also just saw something that made it seem like he would be worth $8 mil a year if he could average 20/10 for a season. That is not so. If Villaueva can average 20/10 for a season, that earns him a near-max contract (it's only not a complete max contract because he is too small to play center and even with some defensive improvement he shows at times, he is still not a good defender)

I don't think it is reasonable to expect him to average 20/10 for a season. That is a very difficult thing to do.

Can we keep both of them without dumping RJ? Perhaps GAD can weigh in here. I'm not in the camp looking to dump RJ for cap space or any other Portland deal. I'm not totally averse to trading him this year, but it had to be a deal where we get back talent

I happen to think it would be a reasonable use of money for Kohl to be willing to incur a small amount of lux tax costs in order to keep this talent level without having to use assets to dump other salary, but it is at the same time not completely unreasonable for Kohl to set a fair budget that coincides with the lux tax threshold.

If Kohl will not allow our payroll to exceed his stipulated budget, then there is unfortunately no way we can keep everything we have right now. We will have to do SOMETHING to change our payroll situation for next season. There are many possibilities.

If the goal is to try and still "win now" and get into the playoffs this season, with an eye on retaining Sessions and Villanueva (or assets that would have similar salary next season if we trade one or both for that kind of asset), then I think the obvious play would be to see if we could trade Gadzuric and Alexander for an expiring contract (or 2 or 3 contracts that expire).

Gadzuric is the worst combination of non-contributor and contract on our roster. Alexander is not really a contributor this season and there is a reasonable possibility that he won't be much of a contributor yet next season either. Maybe so, maybe not. But to me, that is a move that should be looked into, regardless of what we want to do with CV or Sessions even, but DEFINITELY if we are attempting to retain them.

[msiris]

Sorry but 17 games is just not enough for me to go by. If he can be had for a good price than fine. How would 6 in 09-10, 7 in 10-11 and a team option of 8 in 11-12?

[paulpressey25]

Both these guys can finally breath now that Redd has stopped sucking all the oxygen out of the room. Unfortunately Redd's contract will continue to haunt us.

We've all worked this one over pretty well. There are only two obvious moves as discussed.

a) Trade RJ

b) Trade Gadz

The question is though whether you can make such a move and also better position the team along a win-now/win next season approach. I'm going under the assumption that Kohl and Hammond will not want to blow up the team as many are advocating but keep shooting to make this team into 45-50 wins somehow.

If that is the case, IMO this team still needs a John Salmons equivalent bench weapon, still probably needs a Brad Miller type center and/or still needs a banging PF to compliment CV like Haslem or Carl Landry.

Those would be the targets. I'm still coming back to where I was 30-days ago. Try to figure out how to get Brad Miller and John Salmons from the Kings in a three way deal where RJ goes to Portland and Gadz goes out as well. But I don't think we have the assets to do something like this, even if we put in our #1 and Alexander into the mix.

[msiris]

a) Trade RJ

I think this is your only realistic option. Nobody in their right mind wants anything to do with Gadz.

[paulpressey25]

Gadz can move out if we offered up our #1 this year with it.

Here's another idea (not endorsing, but if Hammond/Kohl want the impossible twin goals of win now and get money to retain Ramon/CV)

Milwaukee sends RJ and Bell
Toronto sends Anthony Parker, Kapono, Humphries

Parker expires, Humphries can expire and thus we net $12mm in payroll savings next year. Keep Kapono as 3-pt. shooter for two more years on his crappy deal. Resign Parker if you can to a 2-year/$4mm deal.

I'm not sure though that Toronto would do this given the long-term nature of the RJ/Bell contracts since they are only shedding Kapono's contract.

[msiris]

Gadz can move out if we offered up our #1 this year with it.

Here's another idea (not endorsing, but if Hammond/Kohl want the impossible twin goals of win now and get money to retain Ramon/CV)

Milwaukee sends RJ and Bell
Toronto sends Anthony Parker, Kapono, Humphries

Parker expires, Humphries can expire and thus we net $12mm in payroll savings next year. Keep Kapono as 3-pt. shooter for two more years on his crappy deal. Resign Parker if you can to a 2-year/$4mm deal.

I'm not sure though that Toronto would do this given the long-term nature of the RJ/Bell contracts since they are only shedding Kapono's contract.

I am not in favor of giving up draft picks. We still need younger talent to fill roles that are now resting with the likes of Lue, Allen, Gadz, and Elson. Is CV and Sessions worth a possible lotto pick? Remains to be seen.

[ssssssnake]

CV is a good player. He's as good as Redd and could be had for much cheaper. The problem is, Larry Harris signed so many bad contracts that now we might be forced to lose CV because we can't afford to have both him and Redd being so bad at defense and playing major minutes.

I'd honestly dump Redd right now for a **** expiring player just to get rid of him. The problem is, I don't think a team would give up a worthless player with an expiring contract because at Redds current salary he's worse than worthless. He's a big, ugly debt.

[paulpressey25]

I'd honestly dump Redd right now for a **** expiring player just to get rid of him.

Unfortunately John Hammond had that option for the last nine months and completely misjudged what he had with Redd on the contract liability side. In the meantime the guy he reportedly tried for nine months to give away appears to be turning into the next Antawn Jamison in his prime.

Here's another stab in the dark.

Gadz and our #1 (top five protected) to OKC for Chris Wilcox.

Wilcox might give you some up front bench help now for a playoff run and he expires. He doesn't fit in OKC's plans. We'd hold his Bird rights so if it looked like CV was going to get some massive offer we couldn't match, we could always switch directions and then try to re-sign Wilcox to a reasonable deal.

[europa]

Both these guys can finally breath now that Redd has stopped sucking all the oxygen out of the room.

Give it up. Villanueva's long-standing issues have had nothing whatsoever to do with Redd. Whatever struggles Sessions has had this season have had nothing to do with Redd. You're straining credibility with your constant misfiring on your current whipping boys - namely Hammond and Redd. If you want to argue against them, do so with legitimate points, not ones conjured up by your feverish imagination. Villanueva was putting up good numbers before Redd got hurt. Sessions has had good games when Redd was on the court with him. I realize that blaming Redd for issues that are well out of his control is a time-honored tradition in this forum but I'd like to believe (or hope) a mod would exercise better judgment rather than inflame the crowd with these types of comments.

Back on topic, I really don't want to lose Sessions and would prefer to keep him over Villanueva if a choice had to be made. I strongly dislike getting rid of talented young PGs unless the return is great. The issues Villanueva has had in the past lead me to remain open to a sell high deal should his value rise by the deadline. And despite his offensive prowess, I still believe his significant defensive weaknesses are an issue so if Hammond was to find a PF with less offensive ability but stronger defensive skills, losing Villanueva might not be a damaging long-term blow. But as I posted in the postgame thread, I am again weighing the idea of keeping him as a sixth-man option if the price is right.

I'll also post something I've posted before that nobody has responded to (or at least no one has that I have seen) - I wonder if Kohl is prepared to push into the $70M range in team salary next season. If Hammond was prepared to keep Redd and RJ past the deadline this year (and at this point that appears to have been the plan), then the team would already be around $70M. Toss in the first-round pick, possibly Ilyasova and then either Villanueva or Sessions and now you've exceeded $70M in team salary. Is it possible Hammond has been operating with the knowledge that Kohl was set to go that high next year? Could that be why (or one of the reasons why) he's refrained from trading Redd and/or RJ? Perhaps Kohl has told him if the team makes the playoffs he'll pay in that range and then whatever moves Hammond makes next summer will be done to bolster the roster even if it doesn't mean reducing salary.

I think that's possible when you look at the fact neither Redd nor RJ have been traded and when you look at the other moves Hammond has been trying to make (i.e. the Landry and Conley trades). If the Bucks keep Redd and RJ and if Hammond had acquired Landry and Conley, the team's salary (someone correct me if I'm wrong) would be at $71M for next season. Throw in the first-round pick and maybe Ilyasova and it goes up even higher. So I'm wondering if Kohl has already given a green light for a $70M salary and that's one of the reasons that Hammond hasn't rushed out to trade Redd and RJ. Even if Villanueva and Sessions had been removed as Hammond planned, the Bucks would be looking at a team salary in excess of $70M next season. That leads me to believe the moves he's making are being done with the understanding Kohl is prepared to pay that much.

[Ruzious]

I think the folks that are expecting Kohl to sign these guys even if it means paying the lux tax are not being realistic. Even owners in large markets are mostly not willing to do that. And with the Bucks not being a championship contender - it just doesn't make economic sense. They've basically got to make a trade (or trades) or likely lose both Sessions and Villa for nothing.

Hope Portland doesn't mind adding a ton of future salary and make this trade with them:
Jefferson and Sessions for Raef, Outlaw, and the rights to Koponen.

[europa]

I think the folks that are expecting Kohl to sign these guys even if it means paying the lux tax are not being realistic. Even owners in large markets are mostly not willing to do that. And with the Bucks not being a championship contender - it just doesn't make economic sense. They've basically got to make a trade (or trades) or likely lose both Sessions and Villa for nothing.

But as I posted, if Hammond had made the two trades he wanted to make so far involving Villanueva and Sessions, the team's salary would be in excess of $70M next season. So something's going on here with regard to the salary that nobody is talking about. If Kohl is prepared to pay $70M-plus next year, why should people here be getting so worked up about it being lower? It's his money so let him pay that much if he wants and give Hammond the opportunity to improve the team within that budget. Seems sensible to me.

Also, to the best of my understanding the luxury tax has not been set for next year. If I'm wrong about that, someone let me know. The last report I saw about it was in December and it projected a luxury tax of around $74M.

[LUKE23]

If I had the choice of keeping CV on a 3-4 year deal at 6-7M, or riding out RJ's deal, that is an easy decision for me. The problem, and I think it's a short-sighted view, is that Hammond will not make any moves that hinder our playoff chances. That isn't how a GM should manage. He needs to be planning 2009-10 right now, and make according moves before the deadline.

I'd rather have Sessions and CV at the same amount combined per year that RJ makes, and it's by a considerable margin.

This is one of Hammond's big decisions. He either needs to clear salary with a RJ trade now, or if he knows he cannot retain Sessions/CV, he needs to turn them into a future asset before the deadline. If he just keeps all three of those guys in an attempt to land the 8th seed, and then doesn't retain Sessions/CV, a ton of Bucks fans are going to be pissed off and they will have every right to be.

[SupremeHustle]

I'm not a stats guy so forgive me if this is common knowledge, but Is there a stat that shows point differential between individual players and their opponents? Someone said CV scores 20 but gives up 25, so his would be -5. Is there a way to see the exact number?

[Nebula1]

Put me in the keep Ramon, trade Villanueva camp. I think Villanueva can bring back some real value and resigning him is probably a mistake. We can find talented 6th men all over the place.

I'd like to see Villanueva, Ridnour and Bell packaged together to bring back a pick and a young talent.

Perhaps Jefferson can raise his value and you could put Jefferson and Villanueva together in a trade.

[europa]

I'd like to see Villanueva, Ridnour and Bell packaged together to bring back a pick and a young talent.

If the Bucks fall apart by the deadline, I'd like to see Hammond include Ridnour in any trade packages he might be discussing. He'll have an expiring deal after next season and that should carry some value. Plus he's having a solid season and playing well for the most part.

[SupremeHustle]

This "CV is a sixth man" stuff is a joke, just like the "Mo is a sixth man" stuff was laughable.

CV is a starter in the NBA. Some of his detractors even compare him to Glenn Robinson who was a two-time NBA all star.

You guys won't be happy until a PF that averages 9 and 9 comes in and you'll be fooled by his "good defense" because he holds his opponent to 16 pts.

[europa]

Until Villanueva puts up 20 points year in and year out over the course of several seasons, nobody in their right mind should be comparing him to Robinson. The only thing the two of them have in common is neither one of them could/can defend my dead grandmother.

[SupremeHustle]

Until Villanueva puts up 20 points year in and year out over the course of several seasons, nobody in their right mind should be comparing him to Robinson. The only thing the two of them have in common is neither one of them could/can defend my dead grandmother.

Different circumstances. Glenn came in with a greenlight. CV has had to earn his the old fashion way. Give CV the minutes and the shots that Dog had and tell me he wouldn't average 20 pts a game.

[LISTEN2JAZZ]

This "CV is a sixth man" stuff is a joke, just like the "Mo is a sixth man" stuff was laughable.

It really does boggle the mind. Michael Redd is worthy of a max contract, but CV isn't worthy of a starting position. To the same people!

If CV could score just 5 more points per game, would he move from sixth man to max contract worthy?