RealGM

Posted: **Sun Jan 6, 2008 9:46 pm**

We have a team designed for half court offense with pieces like Redd, Bogut and Yi, the coach has indicated that he wants to run half court offense and the fans know that only half court offense wins rings, yet our pointguard can only run a up tempo run and gun offense efficiently. Whenever we start to run half court sets we stagnate, Redd starts to handle the Ball and poor looks are created if any my our point.

Even more so however, Mo and Redd dominate the shots in the half court offense leading to perimeter happy brick laying offense.

Discuss

Posted: **Sun Jan 6, 2008 9:48 pm**

This team's offense is better when the run and gun is instituted. Half court just falls to shambles.

Posted: **Sun Jan 6, 2008 9:48 pm**

Only way I trade Mo is if it means getting rid of Bobby or Gadz.

Mo is definitely not the problem with this team.

Posted: **Sun Jan 6, 2008 9:48 pm**

Maybe we could run an effective half court offense that wouldn't have to "chuck" if we had a post player.

Posted: **Sun Jan 6, 2008 9:50 pm**

trwi7 wrote:Maybe we could run an effective half court offense that wouldn't have to "chuck" if we had a post player.

Posted: **Sun Jan 6, 2008 9:59 pm**

Am I the only one who thinks Bobby Simmons, Dan Gadzuric, Desmond Mason and Charlie Bell are our problem...?

I dunno, just a thought that we are spending 26 million per year on those guys seems like it is a lot more of an issue than our guys who actually produce?

Bobby Simmons gets paid to be a Teyshaun Prince or a Gerald Wallace and he plays like he's David Noel.

We pay Gadzuric to be a premier back-up center and he is a third stringer who should never (And rarely does) see the court unless an injury occurs.

Desmond Mason has no basketball skills and is a mediocre back-up at best.

Charlie Bell got a longterm deal to be a solid role player/defender and he has performed like the worst player in the NBA.

Can we stop trying to blame Mo, Redd or Bogut? Those three guys are clearly not the problem with this team.

Posted: **Sun Jan 6, 2008 10:00 pm**

LukePliska wrote:Am I the only one who thinks Bobby Simmons, Dan Gadzuric, Desmond Mason and Charlie Bell are our problem...?

Nope

Posted: **Sun Jan 6, 2008 10:01 pm**

LukePliska wrote:Am I the only one who thinks Bobby Simmons, Dan Gadzuric, Desmond Mason and Charlie Bell are our problem...?

Nope. I think you, CBQ and myself are the only ones who have tried to point this out, though. It should be pretty obvious this team's biggest problem is an appalling lack of talent and the ridiculous amount of money being paid to players who aren't very good or who are playing poorly. Sadly, that reality isn't making much of a dent around here lately.

Posted: **Sun Jan 6, 2008 10:05 pm**

Saying Mo aint the problem lacks forsight. If our aim is to one day contend for a championship, then we need a point guard that can run half court offense.

Kidd or Calderon would be my aims for this team and then a swingman from the draft.

I like Mo, dont get me wrong, he is fun to watch, but for the development of an offense that can win championships as well as for the development of our young players, Milwaukee needs to realise that Mo (at least at starting point) is not the option.

His value is actually high at the moment, and though he stunk up his last game, it is a good time to shop him.

Kidd for Mo and Simmons would be intriguing

Posted: **Sun Jan 6, 2008 10:06 pm**

bigricho12 wrote:Kidd or Calderon would be my aims for this team and then a swingman from the draft.

How many rings does Kidd have? Same amount as I do.

Posted: **Sun Jan 6, 2008 10:08 pm**

Yeah, trading Mo and Simmons (The worst contract in basketball) for a top 5 point guard seems ideal...

Trading Michael Redd and Simmons for Kobe seems like a good idea as well...

Sadly we aren't playing NBA Live.

If we didn't have 26 million dollars tied up in garbage then we could afford to sign another PG and make Mo a 6th man if you'd like... We could also have two reasonable SFs and a solid back-up big...

26 million dollars can go a long way.

Posted: **Sun Jan 6, 2008 10:12 pm**

bigricho12 wrote:Kidd or Calderon would be my aims for this team and then a swingman from the draft.

Honestly I like Mo and don't want him to go, but if he does get traded, if he gets traded for another no-defense PG like Calderon, I'll flip.

We already have a horrible back-court defensively. It would probably be a good idea not to add more sieves to it.

Posted: **Sun Jan 6, 2008 10:12 pm**

europa wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Nope. I think you, CBQ and myself are the only ones who have tried to point this out, though. It should be pretty obvious this team's biggest problem is an appalling lack of talent and the ridiculous amount of money being paid to players who aren't very good or who are playing poorly. Sadly, that reality isn't making much of a dent around here lately.

Yes you are the only ones who thinks that. Everyone else on the board is perfectly fine with them. :roll:

Posted: **Sun Jan 6, 2008 10:15 pm**

Nowak008 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Yes you are the only ones who thinks that. Everyone else on the board is perfectly fine with them.

I'm not saying that. I'm saying that people keep coming up with ideas that are allegedly going to rid this team of its "problems" and yet the real problems (that $26M devoted for extremely poor production) almost always remains. So while Redd, Mo and Bogut aren't perfect by any means I think they get too much of the blame when things go bad because they aren't able to compensate for the fact the vast majority of their teammates are either terrible or playing poorly or both.

Posted: **Sun Jan 6, 2008 10:17 pm**

LukePliska wrote:Yeah, trading Mo and Simmons (The worst contract in basketball) for a top 5 point guard seems ideal...

Trading Michael Redd and Simmons for Kobe seems like a good idea as well...

Sadly we aren't playing NBA Live.

If we didn't have 26 million dollars tied up in garbage then we could afford to sign another PG and make Mo a 6th man if you'd like... We could also have two reasonable SFs and a solid back-up big...

26 million dollars can go a long way.

NJ have been reported to be shopping Kidd and threatening to blow the NJ experiment up for over 12mths now, the reality of it happening only gets more tangible.

If Ford fails to return, Toronto may actually look at a trade that included CV and Mo for Calderon and other pieces, as Mo could replicate Ford and have as many shots as he truly really wants, while CV would be welcomed back at Toronto as well.

Sticking your head in the sand and saying there is nothing we can do doesnt solve the problem we have.

For mine, I want to keep Redd, Yi and Bogut as I think with a true Pointguard and an athletic and 'talented' wing from the draft, coupled with better depth on the bench we could be getting somewhere.

Posted: **Sun Jan 6, 2008 10:19 pm**

Why would the Raptors trade Calderon - who I'd argue is better than Mo; at worst it's a wash - and why would they want to bring back Villanueva when their team got massively better after getting rid of him?

If Ford is forced to retire, Calderon becomes the Raptors' PG of the future. I'd be very surprised if he went anywhere given Ford's situation.

Posted: **Sun Jan 6, 2008 10:20 pm**

I'm pretty sure New Jersey would want to start their rebuilding process by taking on the worst contract in the NBA... That makes a lot of sense I guess.

Toronto will not deal Calderon for Mo, it is pretty much a lateral move for them... Though Mo is probably a little bit better player at the moment, but Calderon's new contract won't be as large most likely.

Posted: **Sun Jan 6, 2008 10:20 pm**

europa wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

I'm not saying that. I'm saying that people keep coming up with ideas that are allegedly going to rid this team of its "problems" and yet the real problems (that $26M devoted for extremely poor production) almost always remains. So while Redd, Mo and Bogut aren't perfect by any means I think they get too much of the blame when things go bad because they aren't able to compensate for the fact the vast majority of their teammates are either terrible or playing poorly or both.

Yet if we trade Redd, Mo etc. (i.e. the only desirable pieces that could be available) we could get out of these horrible contracts and start to rebuild this wretched franchise.

Posted: **Sun Jan 6, 2008 10:22 pm**

trwi7 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Yet if we trade Redd, Mo etc. (i.e. the only desirable pieces that could be available) we could get out of these horrible contracts and start to rebuild this wretched franchise.

And a massive rebuilding effort likely means this team loses more money and more fans - two things the Bucks badly cannot afford to have happen. There are no easy solutions to the mess this team is in; I just think things would look a whole lot better if Harris hadn't saddled the team with so many bad contracts for players who are playing poorly.

Posted: **Sun Jan 6, 2008 10:22 pm**

europa wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Nope. I think you, CBQ and myself are the only ones who have tried to point this out, though. It should be pretty obvious this team's biggest problem is an appalling lack of talent and the ridiculous amount of money being paid to players who aren't very good or who are playing poorly. Sadly, that reality isn't making much of a dent around here lately.

Everyone knows this man. It's just that we know no one will take these contracts so it's nearly pointless to talk about.

What's done is done with those deals, the real discussion should be how to fix it, not complain that the deals are there. We all know no one is taking them though, so that is why so few talk about it.

RealGM

Mo has to go as he is the real problem.....

Mo has to go as he is the real problem.....