2/7/09 Chauncey can't pay for Cash and Money post game

[paulpressey25]

I don't think either one of them gets a deal next year from any team (including the Bucks) that pays them an average of $8M a year..

I agree. That's why i think the stars are alligned to actually keep both guys this summer on reasonable deals. Maybe we'd match either a full MLE offer of 5/$30 or do a three-year/$18mm for each guy. Neither of those would be franchise killers if they didn't pan out.

What I can't recall is whether or not guys like Todd Day and Mayberry (who we knew weren't building block guys) ever had games like Ramon last night or a stretch of games like CV has had. Houston has been a troublesome team for a long time. Will be interesting to see how they do against them Monday.

[xTitan]

Ramon has the big upside and is the main player you would want to keep, CV is playing great ball but we know way to much about him to know that giving him big $$$ is an absolute mistake.

[europa]

Ramon has the big upside and is the main player you would want to keep, CV is playing great ball but we know way to much about him to know that giving him big $$$ is an absolute mistake.

I'd rather keep Sessions if I had to choose between the two. If a team was willing to take Gadz's contract off the books in a trade involving Villanueva, I'd be hard-pressed to turn it down.

I'll say again, though, I think Villanueva might be someone who's best served taking the QO next summer and trying to cash in during the summer of 2010 if many (or most) of the elite FAs stay with their current teams. He's precisely the type of guy a team would overpay for if they have a ton of cap room and nobody great left to spend it on. Villanueva could play one year at a higher salary than he's currently getting and then try to really cash in after next season.

Ask Ben Sheets, for example, if he should've taken the one-year arbitration offer from the Brewers instead of badly misreading the market this winter. Different sports I realize but in the case of both players, you have talent with issues (Sheets it's durability and with Villanueva it's motivation, defense and inconsistency).

[europa]

The other thing to take into consideration is what's the lowest salary figure for next season Villanueva and Sessions could have if the Bucks re-signed them? That's something else to be factored into the equation and it goes in line with my thread about how much Kohl might be prepared to spend next season.

[Nebula1]

Is there any way to watch this game online?

[trwi7]

Other than the Alexander pick - which clearly hasn't worked thus far - I think all of Hammond's primary moves have enabled the team to improve.

Wasting over $5 million on Elson, Allen and Lue and then compounding that mistake by wasting $3 million next year on Elson and Allen has helped the team improve?

[ReasonablySober]

I'm halfway through the post game thread, but nice job guys. Good discussions. I'm out to find bloody marys and greasy pizza but I'm looking forward to reading the final eight pages.

[DH34Phan]

Other than the Alexander pick - which clearly hasn't worked thus far - I think all of Hammond's primary moves have enabled the team to improve.

Wasting over $5 million on Elson, Allen and Lue and then compounding that mistake by wasting $3 million next year on Elson and Allen has helped the team improve?

Mortgaging our future in an attempt to make the 8th seed is good in Europa's mind, because that 4 game playoff series will do wonders.

[europa]

Other than the Alexander pick - which clearly hasn't worked thus far - I think all of Hammond's primary moves have enabled the team to improve.

Wasting over $5 million on Elson, Allen and Lue and then compounding that mistake by wasting $3 million next year on Elson and Allen has helped the team improve?

No, but I don't view those as primary moves. I agree when it comes to end-of-the-bench filler types, he didn't do very well although Elson has been better of late. I don't think Lue was that bad either all things considered. But I did give him a poor grade for these moves in the Grade Hammond thread a few weeks back.

[MilBucksBackOnTop06]

What does this topic thread mean????

Why did you change it? This is (Please Use More Appropriate Word) ....what the hell are you saying?

What in the world does Chauncey Billups (who I begged the Bucks to get when many of you said, "he is too old...") have to do with this?

I am trying to find out how to answer and respond to this thread...

Please focus on the Bucks' game at hand!

It should be: The Ramon $e$$ion and Charlie Villanueva Play for Ca$h and Money Big $tats game..

that has all you Bucks' fans in a tizzy...


Cha-ching!

[trwi7]

This is (Please Use More Appropriate Word) ....what the hell are you saying?

What in the world does Chauncey Billups (who I begged the Bucks to get when many of you said, "he is too old...") have to do with this?

[msiris]

This is (Please Use More Appropriate Word) ....what the hell are you saying?

What in the world does Chauncey Billups (who I begged the Bucks to get when many of you said, "he is too old...") have to do with this?

Come on now and be a nice guy and explain it to him.

[raferfenix]

I still trust Hammond to a degree, but my anger and worry about him stems from his decision to go with Redd/RJ. Europa----whatever you say about winning now, that decision was indefensible and has worked out to be almost as bad as it possibly could have been.

Many GM's make mistakes, but not many get stuck with two albatross contracts like that by choice. What better time could Hammond have found to push Kohl to make a clean break from the Larry Harris era instead of compounding his mistake by taking on RJ?

The Alexander pick is small potatoes when compared to his decision to hang onto Alan Houston 2.0 especially.

[randy84]

I love this board. We've been having the same conversations since the Gadz and ZaZa debates.
I find it laughable that people actually think this board could run the team better than Hammond.

Let see.
We signed Gadz over ZaZa which most of the board wanted.
We traded for Magilore which everyone agreed with.
We overpaid Michael Redd, which most of the board agreed with.
We resigned Mo, which most of the board wanted.
We signed Simmons to a contract and everyone thought it was great.
We kept Bell instead of letting him go to Miami, which most of the board agreed with.
We went out and made a trade for a SF in Rj, which everyone was ecstatic about.
We drafted JA who a lot of guys said had the most upside in the draft. (Remember the work ethic and he sleeps in the gym. Just look at the tapes of him dunking on walk-ons)
We then traded Mo, which most of the board wanted for nothing. (Remember not a team player, doesn't pass the ball. Can't play defense. Redd or Mo can't play together, one has to go no matter what)
All the while alternating between rebuilding and going for the playoffs.

This board is more schziophrenic than Sybil and in no way would I like them to be GM over Hammond.

I do like what someone said earlier. It's not about whether we should keep Session and CV. It's more about if we are able to under the cap and how much we would have to pay them.

Looking back getting rid of Bell, Gadz, and even Redd would have been better than where we are at now. But at the time it was like we had to keep them at all costs and now the team is paying the price.

I don't want a repeat of those mistakes.

[LISTEN2JAZZ]

I love this board. We've been having the same conversations since the Gadz and ZaZa debates.
I find it laughable that people actually think this board could run the team better than Hammonds.

Why do so many posters put an "s" at the end of his name? Is "Hammonds" a really common name around Milwaukee or something?

[JoeHova]

But then again, nobody expected him to be this bad either. If Joe develops into a great player, he will be the first player in history to make that type of improvement at his age. If I'm wrong about that, I'd love to see examples of a guy who didn't look like a capable 7th/8th man at age 22 but went on to become a great player.

Jeff Green. He was a year younger last year but he was terrible and he was an even higher draft pick. This year he looks OK and people are back to hyping him as a future great player.

[GrandAdmiralDan]

I love this board. We've been having the same conversations since the Gadz and ZaZa debates.
I find it laughable that people actually think this board could run the team better than Hammonds.

Why do so many posters put an "s" at the end of his name? Is "Hammonds" a really common name around Milwaukee or something?

I can't quite figure it out either, but my best guess would be because of this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Hammonds

I also recall for a while after Larry Harris was promoted to GM, people would from time to time accidentally call him Lenny:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenny_Harris

[BDUB_30]

I love this board. We've been having the same conversations since the Gadz and ZaZa debates.
I find it laughable that people actually think this board could run the team better than Hammond.

Let see.
We signed Gadz over ZaZa which most of the board wanted.
We traded for Magilore which everyone agreed with.
We overpaid Michael Redd, which most of the board agreed with.
We resigned Mo, which most of the board wanted.
We signed Simmons to a contract and everyone thought it was great.
We kept Bell instead of letting him go to Miami, which most of the board agreed with.
We went out and made a trade for a SF in Rj, which everyone was ecstatic about.
We drafted JA who a lot of guys said had the most upside in the draft. (Remember the work ethic and he sleeps in the gym. Just look at the tapes of him dunking on walk-ons)
We then traded Mo, which most of the board wanted for nothing. (Remember not a team player, doesn't pass the ball. Can't play defense. Redd or Mo can't play together, one has to go no matter what)
All the while alternating between rebuilding and going for the playoffs.

This board is more schziophrenic than Sybil and in no way would I like them to be GM over Hammond.

I do like what someone said earlier. It's not about whether we should keep Session and CV. It's more about if we are able to under the cap and how much we would have to pay them.

Looking back getting rid of Bell, Gadz, and even Redd would have been better than where we are at now. But at the time it was like we had to keep them at all costs and now the team is paying the price.

I don't want a repeat of those mistakes.

this is just the cold hard truth and to be honest ..very few if any of the regular posters would admit to this .

[paulpressey25]

-This board is more schziophrenic than Sybil and in no way would I like them to be GM over Hammond

Let's hit all these one by one for factual discussion.

We signed Gadz over ZaZa which most of the board wanted.
Not true. Most of this board wanted ZaZa save for Wise1 and JoeHova(?). Most were aghast at the contract given Gadz.

We traded for Magilore which everyone agreed with.
Right. And I doubt anyone here has any grave reservations about the move. The only reservations people had was what we traded him for.

We overpaid Michael Redd, which most of the board agreed with.
No, I was an accomplice with a large group of people led by J-Man (Healer420) who didn't want this. We wanted him traded during February 2005 so we didn't have to pay him all the dough.

We resigned Mo, which most of the board wanted.
I'd say there was a reasonable contingent including Europa and myself who didn't like the deal at the dollar amounts. I wanted the cap space to go after Billups or Gerald Wallace.

We signed Simmons to a contract and everyone thought it was great.
Yes, this you are accurate on. There were however a handful of guys who said we flat out got ripped off.

We kept Bell instead of letting him go to Miami, which most of the board agreed with.
Not true. Most didn't want us to match that offer sheet once the terms were 5-years and $18mm. GAD wanted it matched ONLY for the reason that it would tell other RFA's that Milwaukee wouldn't get bluffed out of a player.

We went out and made a trade for a SF in Rj, which everyone was ecstatic about.
True.

We drafted JA who a lot of guys said had the most upside in the draft. (Remember the work ethic and he sleeps in the gym. Just look at the tapes of him dunking on walk-ons)
False. Probably 75% of the regulars on this board wanted nothing to do with Alexander, each having their own guy they would have preferred we draft. About 25% were big supporters.

We then traded Mo, which most of the board wanted for nothing.
I think the Mo trade reaction here was 70% against/30% for, but you'd have to review that thread.

All the while alternating between rebuilding and going for the playoffs.
I'm one of the few who alternates on this, because I think it is a close call. Most people are strongly in win-now or blow it up categories.

[bigkurty]

Oh but wait PP, who should I trust more, BDUB who has been around since June 2008 or you? Man this is a tough choice.