RealGM

Posted: **Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:30 am**

Spunds like Hunt has been reading the boards again and is echoing a lot of stuff already said on here.

Aligning crosshairs for Bucks' GM
Posted: April 15, 2008

Michael Hunt
E-MAIL

John Hammond said three particularly encouraging things when he was introduced Saturday as the Milwaukee Bucks' new general manager.

One, that he believes in defense. Not just any defense, but Hank Iba defense. Old-school, hard-nosed defense. Good, because the Bucks haven't played acceptable defense in 20 years.

Two, that he believes you cannot win in the NBA by outshooting people. Better, because the Bucks have been a soft, jump-shooting team for far too long, and you've seen where that's gotten them.

And three, he's not afraid to make unpopular trades, as they did in Detroit when Jerry Stackhouse was moved for Rip Hamilton. Best, because the Bucks' best hope for immediate change, outside the high lottery pick, will come through trades because the $62.4 million payroll next season won't give Hammond a lot of free-agent flexibility.

So let's get to it with a little unsolicited off-season personnel advice for the new guy.

Keepers: Andrew Bogut, Yi Jianlian and Ramon Sessions.

One of the things that got overlooked in this lost season was Bogut's improvement. You might be able to name one, maybe two big men in the East you'd rather have. Bogut is a piece to build around.

The results from Yi's injury-marred rookie season were mixed at best. He has to get stronger and you'd rather see him play small forward. If the Bucks get lucky in the lottery with Michael Beasley, a position switch could be accommodated. Yi's potential and international marketability make him a definite keeper.

Sessions, who has developed into a nice backup point guard, will become an important piece as the backcourt is sorted out.

Should be traded: Mo Williams or Michael Redd.

The Bucks can't go on with this backcourt. Too much money and too little payoff for a team that must change its perimeter-based character.

Williams, who is not a point guard, should be gone if the Bucks can jump up to draft Derrick Rose or Jerryd Bayless as the starter. But good luck in moving Williams, though, as the Bucks gave him a six-year, $51 million contract last year to keep him around.

And as a maximum-contract player, Redd cannot carry a team as a one-dimensional shooter. The Bucks owe him $51 million over the next three years, so they need to extract his value while they can, especially if O.J. Mayo is there in the draft. This is where Hammond not being afraid to make an unpopular trade might pay off.

Got to go: Bobby Simmons, Dan Gadzuric and Charlie Villanueva.

Simmons and Gadzuric are dead-weight contracts, offering almost nothing for their combined $15 million a season. Larry Harris almost moved them; Hammond must finish that job.

Villanueva has to go so Yi can flourish, and Charlie V. should be the easiest Buck to trade. He's at the end of an inexpensive rookie contract, and the fact that he played relatively well should make him marketable.

Should stay: Desmond Mason and Charlie Bell.

To his credit, Hammond wants to rebuild this franchise around people with good character. Mason is one of the finest humans to ever wear a Bucks uniform, but he's not a starter. That's OK, because his contract is affordable and he's a great locker-room influence. Likewise for Bell, at least after he stopped moping about the Miami situation. Both are decent role players.

So there you are, Mr. GM. Fortunately, this is a good year to be in the lottery. That takes luck. The rest is why the Bucks hired you.

Send e-mail to mhunt@journalsentinel.com

Posted: **Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:31 am**

Nice to see it in a publication, but it's been on the board for some time now.

Posted: **Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:33 am**

I give Michael Hunt credit for taking up the cause and writing about the team......

And CBQ is obviously energized about the Hammond hiring as she's back camping on the MJS site at 11:15 for the new stories to post....

Posted: **Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:34 am**

''Keepers: Andrew Bogut, Yi Jianlian and Ramon Sessions.''

Nice to see my sig in print you bastard.

:lol:

Posted: **Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:37 am**

paulpressey25 wrote:I give Michael Hunt credit for taking up the cause and writing about the team......

And CBQ is obviously energized about the Hammond hiring as she's back camping on the MJS site at 11:15 for the new stories to post....

Yep got to admit, Hammond impressed me with his thoughts on PG/C play and its importance to a winning team. I'm hoping he can make something happen for the good of the team this summer.. but I know he has a lot of work to do and he won't be able to get everything done in one offseason.

Back to the article though.. there is one part I disagreed with. I still don't think that Yi is capable of playing the 3 full time, and I also am still not interested in Beasley.

Posted: **Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:39 am**

I agree....Yi can't play the 3.....and I'm not sure Beasley can play either position because he's a tweener although he's too talented not to make an impact somehow.

Posted: **Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:44 am**

Why do you guys feel Yi can't play the 3?

Posted: **Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:47 am**

rilamann wrote:Why do you guys feel Yi can't play the 3?

I think he's severely lacking in overall quickness (for a 3 - he's got good quickness for a 4) and his perimeter game isn't developed enough.

Posted: **Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:54 am**

Wade-A-Holic wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

I think he's severely lacking in overall quickness (for a 3 - he's got good quickness for a 4) and his perimeter game isn't developed enough.

The quicknbess is a bit of concern to me at least on the defensive end if you are talking about Yi playing the 3.

It would take some adjusting but I belive in time Yi could play the 3.Yi is one of those players who seems like he is going to gain more quickness as he matures and as him game matures.

To me Yi seems like a very talented and gifted (physically) player but very raw at the NBA level at this point.A versatile guy who by his 3rd or 4th year could play the 3 or 4 with no problem in my opinion

Posted: **Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:59 am**

The fact that Beasley isn't a good defender lessens his appeal in my opinion. So I'm not high on taking him.. and like I have said before would probably be willing to explore trades involving him if I got a good offer and he was our pick.

Posted: **Wed Apr 16, 2008 5:02 am**

You guys do a lot of ego stroking on this board. Perhaps Hunt really did just read this board for the "keep Bogut, Yi, Sessions" line and other stuff, but c'mon, I'd say it is pretty apparent from watching the Bucks that those guys are the keepers.

Posted: **Wed Apr 16, 2008 5:07 am**

Oh you're under the assumption that the jsonline staff pays attention when they do attend games.. that's cute (not really accurate but cute nonetheless that you believe that)!

My 5 year old nephew is more well versed on the Bucks players and the team needs than any of the writers on the MJS Bucks sports writing staff.

Posted: **Wed Apr 16, 2008 5:16 am**

gobbler wrote:You guys do a lot of ego stroking on this board. Perhaps Hunt really did just read this board for the "keep Bogut, Yi, Sessions" line and other stuff, but c'mon, I'd say it is pretty apparent from watching the Bucks that those guys are the keepers.

I was being sarcastic.

I realize its not a secret that those 3 are ''keepers''.

Nice screen name and avitar by the way.

:lol:

Posted: **Wed Apr 16, 2008 6:02 am**

And three, he's not afraid to make unpopular trades, as they did in Detroit when Jerry Stackhouse was moved for Rip Hamilton. Best, because the Bucks' best hope for immediate change, outside the high lottery pick, will come through trades because the $62.4 million payroll next season won't give Hammond a lot of free-agent flexibility.

This part of his piece made me laugh

Not only is there massive apathy about the Bucks, there isn't a single player on the roster that's some big fan favorite. Bogut is probably the guy that the few fans left would least want traded, but it's not like he's viewed as some beloved player like a Sidney Moncrief while he played here.

If Hunt is talking about a possible Redd trade, he's vastly overrated the fans feeling towards him because not making any big moves would be more unpopular than trading Redd would be unpopular.

Hammonds won't have to sweat at all catching a lot heat for trading any player on this team.

Posted: **Wed Apr 16, 2008 1:43 pm**

El Dude, it was Hammond who brought up the point about making "unpopular" trades. It seems clear to me based on that comment he was referring to Mo, Redd or both. It's not so much a matter of how beloved the players are or aren't, but rather the fact that one is the team's best player and the other the team's starting PG and both have been majorly rewarded by the team financially.

Of course, he could have been directing his comment at Kohl. That's something else to keep in mind. Given the money Kohl has bestowed upon Mo and Redd, he may not view trading one or both of them in a positive light at the present time.

Then again, based on Mo's behavior this season I'm not sure if there's anyone in the organization who would be sorry to see him go at this point.

Posted: **Wed Apr 16, 2008 1:56 pm**

Actually it's always interesting how the general public responses to the trading of a player. When the Bucks traded Tim Thomas, I really didn't expect the casual fan to care as much.. but I was surprised at the number of casual fans that were upset with that trade. Even radio stations that usually don't talk sports (like V-100) allowed people to call in and talk about how disappointed and angry they were that the beloved Tim Thomas was no longer a part of the team. Talking to a few of the people I knew at the time (who only watched games where they liked the other teams player or where they thought we would win) about why he HAD to be traded.. most were willing to admit that they knew he was somewhat inconsistent, they knew he didn't live up to his potential, but they liked him anyway. These casual fans didn't watch every game and weren't diehard Bucks fans but they were attached to certain players even if they shouldn't have been.

So thinking that the masses of casual fans wouldn't care as much about a Redd, Mo Williams or other popular player trade (based on their weaknesses as a player and the underacheivement of the team) is more idealistic rather than reality. Some of these guys are loved and seen as less responsible for the problems with the team than others. And yes even with our horrific record and the contributions by those players too it.. many will still be upset and still state the Bucks made the wrong move. Afterall we have to continuously remember that most here are fans of football over basketball and only pay attention every once in awhile anyway.

Posted: **Wed Apr 16, 2008 2:31 pm**

europa wrote:starting PG and both have been majorly rewarded by the team financially.

Of course, he could have been directing his comment at Kohl. That's something else to keep in mind. Given the money Kohl has bestowed upon Mo and Redd, he may not view trading one or both of them in a positive light at the present time.
.

I like the idea of "unpopular" trades. I think that means he'll look at moves like a mo (scorer) for a guy like haslem that doesn't excite fans but also does whats needed to win.

I can also see this lead to a Redd trade that perhaps bring backs role players that free up some salary flexibility without a clear cut star coming back.

It may not be exciting like the Larry Harris trades were, but its going to lead to a better team.

Posted: **Wed Apr 16, 2008 3:46 pm**

Mike Hunt wrote:You might be able to name one, maybe two big men in the East you'd rather have [than Bogut].

What a joke.
Without Question:
Howard
Garnett
Bosh
Horford

Possibly:
Okafor

Posted: **Wed Apr 16, 2008 3:51 pm**

adamcz wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

What a joke.
Without Question:
Howard
Garnett
Bosh
Horford

Possibly:
Okafor

No way on Okafor, and too early to tell on Horford. And I think he was talking centers with how we was writing that.

Posted: **Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:08 pm**

I'm talking centers too. Garnett is without question, a better center than Bogut. If we swapped him in for Bogut and left everything else the same, our record would improve. The fact that Boston doesn't have him play that position doesn't change the fact that he could play it better than Bogut.

I don't think it's too early to tell with Horford. Year 1 Horford is roughly equal to Year 3 Bogut.

RealGM

Hunt: Aligning crosshairs for Bucks' GM

Hunt: Aligning crosshairs for Bucks' GM