4-1 without Redd

Post #41 » by **paulpressey25** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 3:55 am

europa wrote: plus it leaves open the possibility of moving Mo for another piece should that become necessary down the road

Good point.....

I agree we need a player of Redd's caliber against the good teams...we will get pounded. But I can even see you cracking just a tiny bit with this comment:

europa wrote: If Redd misses any of those games and the Bucks win, it will add more fuel to the fire that maybe he should be traded.

It has been fun these last two games to watch other guys get some O2 on offense......I do think Bell, Bogut and CV are stepping up with their newfound air.

Comet · Post #42 » by **Comet** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 3:56 am

MVP4Champ wrote:Redd for Noc and Hinrich is a horrible trade for the Bucks. The Bulls with Redd would instantly be the #3 team in the East battling Detroit and Boston for the Eastern Conference Championship.

I think you're overvaluing Redd a bit here. We would get 2 starters, plus it would split Redd up from Mo. Also, Chicago is floundering right now. Redd wouldn't be a savior for them.

If I'm the Bucks GM and I'm proposed this deal I accept it.

Post #43 » by **paulpressey25** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 4:02 am

The Bulls are about to lose to the Knicks at home tonight.....time to place that call to Paxson.....of course if he trades for Redd, he can't necessarily afford to pay Gordon.....so it becomes a Gordon and Noc for Redd trade.

xTitan · Post #44 » by **xTitan** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 4:03 am

In response to some one here, yes the Bucks did beat 3 bad teams...but they also lost to Charlotte and Philly this year with Redd as well. The big difference comes down to 2 basic things, better ball movement / team play and also better defensively/ more athletic. Redd just always goes one on one...always tries to take things over. I actually feel Mo has played much better, more relaxed basketball with Redd out. It almost seems like he is competeing with Redd at times to see who can make a better individual move, where as these last 3 games he has blended in real well.

upnorthfan · Post #45 » by **upnorthfan** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 4:06 am

xTitan wrote:In response to some one here, yes the Bucks did beat 3 bad teams...but they also lost to Charlotte and Philly this year with Redd as well. The big difference comes down to 2 basic things, better ball movement / team play and also better defensively/ more athletic. Redd just always goes one on one...always tries to take things over. I actually feel Mo has played much better, more relaxed basketball with Redd out. It almost seems like he is competeing with Redd at times to see who can make a better individual move, where as these last 3 games he has blended in real well.

Mo is mostly playing better becAUSE HE ISN'T HANDLING THE pg POSITION NEAR AS MUCH. aS FOR THE REST OF THE TEAM OUR DEFENSIVE fg % THE LAST TWO GAMES HAS BEEN 40 AND 45% COMPARED TO 47.5% FOR THE SEASON.
(SORRY FOR CAPS)

In addition, that blowout against the Wizards was the first game without Redd.

Post #46 » by **paulpressey25** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 4:08 am

UNF makes a great point....Mo has been playing two guard a fair amount these last two games....both on offense and defense.....

jerrod · Post #47 » by **jerrod** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 4:09 am

paulpressey25 wrote:UNF makes a great point....Mo has been playing two guard a fair amount these last two games....both on offense and defense.....

i don't think that's true at all

he was the primary ball handler and creater tonight

europa · Post #48 » by **europa** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 4:09 am

paulpressey25 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

It has been fun these last two games to watch other guys get some O2 on offense......I do think Bell, Bogut and CV are stepping up with their newfound air.

It would've been nice if Bell and Villanueva (and Simmons who also is playing better of late) did that earlier in the season. It's not like Villanueva hasn't gotten plenty of chances even when Redd was playing, for example. He's just been awful most of the time. That has nothing to do with Redd.

And it's not a question of me cracking a bit. I've always been fine with trading Redd if it's the right deal. And if the Bucks could beat some good teams without Redd - assuming he misses any of the games on the upcoming road swing - that will certainly lend more validation to the belief that trading him might be in the team's interests. Just as the Bucks' pitiful record last season without Redd was a strong indication of how badly the team needed him, a winning record without him would be a strong indication that it possibly could succeed without him.

It's all about applying the standards equally.

upnorthfan · Post #49 » by **upnorthfan** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 4:17 am

jerrod wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

i don't think that's true at all

he was the primary ball handler and creater tonight

Watch for the subtleties. It was shared tonight more than usual, especially early.

Post #50 » by **paulpressey25** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 4:17 am

jerrod wrote:-= i don't think that's true at all

he was the primary ball handler and creater tonight

You Mo guys are again focusing on offense....Ivey was playing D on the PG at times tonight.....

I don't want to do the TIVO thing, but if someone wants to count the times Ivey brought the ball up, it was more than once. Larry K. remarked in the pregame before Charlotte he wanted Mo to be able to set up on offense and not face two guys at the halfcourt line every time, so he was going to have Ivey do more ball-handling....which he has done now the last two games.

I'm not down on Mo....he's been effective....but he's also getting a break from the O and D responsibilities which may be helping him a bit.

xTitan · Post #51 » by **xTitan** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 4:28 am

paulpressey25 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

You Mo guys are again focusing on offense....Ivey was playing D on the PG at times tonight.....

I don't want to do the TIVO thing, but if someone wants to count the times Ivey brought the ball up, it was more than once. Larry K. remarked in the pregame before Charlotte he wanted Mo to be able to set up on offense and not face two guys at the halfcourt line every time, so he was going to have Ivey do more ball-handling....which he has done now the last two games.

I'm not down on Mo....he's been effective....but he's also getting a break from the O and D responsibilities which may be helping him a bit.

You are correct it seemed Ivey ran the offense alot until the last quarter and they went to Mo, Bogut, charlie V. alot with Bell spotting up.

Chuck Diesel · Post #52 » by **Chuck Diesel** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 4:29 am

I love Ivey

Max Green · Post #53 » by **Max Green** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 4:34 am

Ivey is a great backup to have for Mo' until Sessions is ready next year. I think we should keep him on the team next year as our 3rd String PG.

xTitan · Post #54 » by **xTitan** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 4:34 am

Chuck Diesel wrote:I love Ivey