Trading Redd Is Not The Way

[schweig]

I was about to reply to Brewers' thread but I didn't beat the lock:

Those guys can shut the **** up until they gameplan or play worth anything at all.

It is disturbing like xtitan mentioned, that players leave our team complaining about the selfish atmosphere.

And it's a darkly hilarious idea that such a humble religious player with no killer instinct could hold dozens of other players and coaches hostage for years without anyone doing something useful about it.

[bigzy]

Redd's gotta go. I've seen this time and time again with NBA teams.

"Why would we trade our best player? How would that make us better?"

I watched the Indiana Pacers for years trying to win a championship behind Reggie Miller. Every year they got close but were never good enough to win it all. They tried all kinds of different players around him and most of them did their jobs great. Dale Davis was a terror on the boards, not to mention Antonio Davis. Mark Jackson and other PGs did their job of distributing the ball. Rik Smits was serviceable in the pivot. Where could they improve?

I finally came to the realization that Reggie Miller, as great as he was and as much as he overachieved as an NBA player, just wasn't good enough to lead a team to an NBA championship. I italicize lead because obviously Reggie Miller is good enough be be a part of a championship team but he couldn't do it as a leader. And his competitiveness didn't allow him to let the other players contribute the way they needed to as a team. Now, late in his career he did relish the role of being more of a team player and, in my opinion, the Pacers were better because of it.

I view Redd the same way. I'd call him one of the worst very good players in the league. Thus, Milwaukee's saddled with him trying to lead the team and the lopsided win/loss column is the result. And I don't think he can change his game enough to suit this team and even if he does, can the Bucks afford to pay him that type of money to be just another cog in the machine?

As much as it might seem like a move in the wrong direction, I really think the Bucks need to move him and try to develop a better team concept of playing basketball. At least if they want to ever entertain thoughts of going deep into the post season.

A rediculous statement, Miller was one of the best clutch players in NBA history, and maybe if a guy wearing #23 wasn't in the league he might have won a few championships. Comparing Redd to Miller is a joke!!! Those Pacer teams you talked about were just like Utah in the West without #23 they would have won a championship.

[paul]

I keep going back to one fact that is undeniable...TJ Ford, Kukoc, Mags, and Steve Blake all left this team saying they were glad to go because this was an incredibly selfish team.......its pretty damn easy to figure out who they were talking about....not to mention some subtle hints that not everyone on this team is happy with how things are run.

And he played with another guy on a previous team who liked to shoot the ball a bit.....

[carmelbrownqueen]

-= original quote snipped =-



What the F is your problem? You said that the insiders here can confirm your claims, but I named one (GAD) who said the exact opposite of your claim. If you cannot name someone who corroborates your claim, just admit that you don't know what you're talking about.

Either you have no idea who made such claims, or you're being a total jerk for replying "look it up" instead of posting the name of your source.

And seriously, what is your problem. Several different posters made statements regarding this stuff..and the confirmation I received on certain things from my sources I can't and won't reveal. I don't consider it being a "jerk" to tell you to go search for information on your own. It is in previous posts if you take the time too look for. I didn't have the time for that today..

[jligon]

A rediculous statement, Miller was one of the best clutch players in NBA history, and maybe if a guy wearing #23 wasn't in the league he might have won a few championships. Comparing Redd to Miller is a joke!!! Those Pacer teams you talked about were just like Utah in the West without #23 they would have won a championship.

That's the sad thing about Milwaukee's situation. Miller was an incredibly clutch player and was far superior to Redd, in my opinion, but he still never won a championship. In fact, he only had one championship series appearance. And I don't think the era in which he played very much mattered. It's not like the years of Bulls dominance were the only years that there were good championship teams. The Pacers were, in fact, more often eliminated by New York than they were Chicago.

Besides, I wasn't comparing Miller to Redd in the sense that they were equal players. They're not. I was making the analogy of Redd thinking he has to carry his team, like Miller did, and his inability to effectively do it. Whether Miller was effective in carrying his team, while up for debate, is somewhat beside the point.

[LISTEN2JAZZ]

And seriously, what is your problem. Several different posters made statements regarding this stuff..and the confirmation I received on certain things from my sources I can't and won't reveal.

The only source you have is constantly refreshing JS, trying to be the first to post an article here. You've never revealed a single thing of value to this board, and are just one of a dozen nobodies trying to make themselves sound important here with the constant name-dropping of "inside sources."

[schweig]

What's the point of a personal attack over a disagreement like this? Is it necessary for you to be a bitch because we lose so much?

There's too few true Bucks fans for any of them to be a nobody. Especially someone like CBQ who seems to love the game more than just love to bitch about it all the time.

[LISTEN2JAZZ]

What's the point of a personal attack over a disagreement like this? Is it necessary for you to be a bitch because we lose so much?

She's making a claim which is most likely wrong, and her source is "go look it up," backed up by a secondary source that she "cannot and will not reveal." It's an unearned attempt to pull rank, and it's plain rude.

The message board is simply plagued by people who claim to have "inside information," and they need to understand that unsubstantiated sources can never be a substitute for fact based discussion. Most of us make an attempt to back up all our claims with logic and sources but we've got a couple examples such as CBQ who resort to things like "people I've talked to around the league say this is true," or "this has been confirmed by sources I cannot reveal."

Until you establish some sort of track record of breaking stories, or of demonstrating greater-than-normal knowledge of some basketball related subject, you have no right to play the "source" card. This is just simple, common etiquette. Maybe you know a hot dog vendor at the Bradley Center, and maybe you don't. I wouldn't know. But it's getting ridiculous the number of posters on this board who think that their word should suffice to overrule more tangible evidence.

If you can't establish the credibility of your sources, don't mention them. That should be obvious to everyone, but we've got a dozen posters here who don't seem to understand it. Guess what? I've got a source who says he's been feeding you suckers false information. Your source works for my source but is actually out of the loop, so only I get to play the source card from now on. See how this works?

CBQ, how can I follow your order to look up your SAR claim even if I wanted to? I asked you several times who the "inside source posters" are who broke this story, and you have thus far refused to tell me. So how can I look it up? If you don't remember who it is, how do you know they have inside sources? The only regular poster here who has established a track record of actually having information (GAD) said the opposite of what you claim is true.

It's of course not that important whether Abdur-Rahim turned down the Bucks offer for less money, or whether the Bucks withdrew the offer when Simmons got there first. But show some respect. I never tell people "go look it up" to cover for not knowing what I'm talking about, and I expect the same from you.

[Nowak008]

-= original quote snipped =-



No question but I do think there's a prevailing mindset among many in this forum that just removing Redd is going to improve this team. And as we've seen rather consistently without Redd the Bucks not only are a bad team, they are wretchedly bad. So now you have a lot of ground to make up with the new players you bring in for Redd just to become mediocre.

That's what I believe is being overlooked consistently in all of the Redd discussion.

Actually if we would have been able to get rid of him during the off season for nothing we could have renounced Mo then signed Billups/Wallace/Barnes. That would have been nice.

[Simulack]

Until you establish some sort of track record of breaking stories, or of demonstrating greater-than-normal knowledge of some basketball related subject, you have no right to play the "source" card. This is just simple, common etiquette. Maybe you know a hot dog vendor at the Bradley Center, and maybe you don't. I wouldn't know. But it's getting ridiculous the number of posters on this board who think that their word should suffice to overrule more tangible evidence.

If you can't establish the credibility of your sources, don't mention them. That should be obvious to everyone, but we've got a dozen posters here who don't seem to understand it. Guess what? I've got a source who says he's been feeding you suckers false information. Your source works for my source but is actually out of the loop, so only I get to play the source card from now on. See how this works?

I agree 100% with your general point that there is no point in arguing opposing positions unless both parties at least try to obey basic standards of logic, reasonable proof, etc.

To bring anything meaningful to a discussion, a statement should be falsifiable (in the sense of it being possible to disprove it). Saying "X is true because my sources told me but I can't reveal them" doesn't qualify and Adamcz is capable of repeating the same thing so what is the point? Exceptions can be made for those who have a proven track record of having actual inside information to convey but the number of those people is significantly less than the number claiming to.

[steger_3434]

I agree with the source crap that goes around on here as well. If you are going to use that card you better be able to back it up, otherwise DON"T bring it up. A few guys have proven to actually have insider info and that is Gad, XTitan, and I believe a little of Europa (although that TJ not being traded really set him back).

Using that card makes this board useless. We can have a good argument going about what Redd is worth and who he compares to and all it takes is for someone to discredit anything we say by only using the argument, "my sources tell me league coaches think Redd is top 10) Give me a break, how do we even argue with that? Prove that you have sources, break some news, let us know who you know, etc, and then you reserve the right to talk about "my sources"

[paulpressey25]

My best source is Plamenco.......and vice-versa....

[steger_3434]

My best source is Plamenco.......and vice-versa....

I can't believe I left him off my list of who I believe has sources. Plamenco trumps all ya'll.

[trwi7]

My best source is Plamenco.......and vice-versa....

My best source is that guy who called into the postgame show last night with the trade of Mo, Simmons and a 1st for Wade and Gadz, Bell and a 2nd for Butler.

[Simulack]

My best source is Plamenco.......and vice-versa....

I just want to know which RealGM poster that guy is (if he isn't just a lurker). The other night Sparky basically hung up on him when Plamenco started spewing some nonsense.

I did a google image serach on Plamenco and got:



Now there is a face to the man.

[steger_3434]

-= original quote snipped =-





I just want to know which RealGM poster that guy is (if he isn't just a lurker). The other night Sparky basically hung up on him when Plamenco started spewing some nonsense.

He better keep calling in. I can't get enough of that mono tone, semi (Please Use More Appropriate Word) voice.

[schweig]

I pretty much agree, and I've never known cbq to be anything close to one of the worst offenders at that, and she has a lot of worthwhile observations to go along with anything like that I've missed, but although I'm around here a lot there are still some gaps and things I miss.

But all that aside I'd like to apologize Adam, for seeing your personal attack and raising you, that wasn't necessary.

[Simulack]

He better keep calling in. I can't get enough of that mono tone, semi (Please Use More Appropriate Word) voice.

That is awfully nice of you, Steger.

[steger_3434]

-= original quote snipped =-



That is awfully nice of you, Steger.

Hey, he's obviously a big bucks fan since he calls into an am station about the team and spends some time on this board. Can't put fellow Bucks fans down too much.

[REDDzone]

The only sources on this board that I ever listen to are FormerBuckFan, and GAD.

Formerbuckfan is the man; GAD doesn't break as much stuff, but always provides entertaining, feasible rumors and has broken contract information more than once.

I have noticed our other 'insiders' are right sometimes, but also wrong sometimes. Selective perception for whatever reason seems to only recall the correct calls though...

Of course I don't fault them for these wrong times, I am sure they hear stuff (Hell even I have heard stuff a time or two), but perhaps their sources aren't quite as credible. I want as much 'inside info' as possible, as it provides for great discussion, but, like Adamcz, don't like it when people use it as an ends to an argument.