With/Without Redd

LUKE23 · Post #1 » by **LUKE23** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 3:18 pm

With/without Redd:

With Redd (33 games, 17-16): 99.4 ppg, 98.0 ppg allowed
Without Redd (26 games, 11-15): 100.2 ppg, 101.7 ppg allowed

Looks like we are better offensively and worse defensively without Redd, which goes against the general thought of most. I think the record is somewhat misleading, a good portion of Redd's missed games were in the first month during the brutal schedule in games we probably would have lost anyway. So what is the overall difference without him? I'd say we miss him somewhat, but not that much.

msiris · Post #2 » by **msiris** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 3:26 pm

I like watching them without him. RJ plays better without him. Its seems like CV plays better without Bogut. Sessions plays better without Luke. I really do not know what to make of this team. Right the current team's D does blow and that is not a good sign. It's fun to watch, but how long will it last?

jerrod · Post #3 » by **jerrod** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 3:27 pm

are we really worse defensively or just playing slightly faster?

without looking at other stats, my guess is that we're a little worse offensively and a little better defensively but the pace increase is bumping up both numbers.

LUKE23 · Post #4 » by **LUKE23** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 3:30 pm

Yeah, I'm not going to go through the time to look at pace with vs. pace without, but that is why I tried to show PPG differential with vs. PPG differential without, to try and illustrate both ends of the court. If anyone has offensive and defensive efficiency splits with/without, those would probably be the best to look at, but don't know if they are available.

drew881 · Post #5 » by **drew881** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 3:44 pm

I think there are too many variables here. One example being whether or not Bogut was also in the lineup, strength of schedule, etc. I would have no problem dumping Redd (which I realize is almost impossible) and playing a lineup of Sessions, LRMAM, Jefferson, CV (if resigned, lets not debate that), Bogut with Bell, Elson and Bogans off the bench.

Again, I realize that this lineup might be impossible to put together given our salary situation, but in terms of the personnel I like where we are going without Redd, even if our record worse without him at the moment. The players in that 5 (everyone but Jefferson) should still improve, whereas Redd has reached his limit (skill and physical) on consistently losing teams. I really wish we could buy him out, but he is still owed a ridiculous amount of money.

Duncanfan · Post #6 » by **Duncanfan** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 3:45 pm

CV plays better with Bogut in there. Bogut helps to open the floor for CV and CV always looks for Bogut for those inside passes. They work well together, so I don't think having Bogut in there has negative effect on CV's game. If anything, our offense seems very unselfish without Redd. Look at CV, he has been averaging 4+ assists the past few games now, RJ makes those passes, ditto for Bell and Sessions. Everyone is looking for each other. People might say that CV is a chucker and takes too many shots, but none of his shots are forced as he takes them in the flow of the offense and believe it or not(gasp!) Skiles is calling plays specifically for CV. The beauty of it all is that Bogut doesn't really need the ball to be effective, you run 9-10 plays for him throughout the game and he'll be playing to his strengths and put up 15-10 type numbers game in and game out.

I am excited to see what we do in the offseason as this team's chemistry has never been better the past few years I have been watching them.

blueedwards · Post #7 » by **blueedwards** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 3:50 pm

Redd isnt impossible to trade. He just needs to be healthy before we pull the trigger. I can see Cuban saving us and trading for Redd. He wanted him in the past. In the hoopshype article he saying he needs to lure more stars around Dirk. I see us getting Terry and Stackhouse next deadline if Redd is healthy. Terry's deal is kinda long and hes getting up there in age. But Stack expires. Terry be our Mo we never kept.

LUKE23 · Post #8 » by **LUKE23** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 3:51 pm

I think he's untradeable until a year from this offseason. So July 2010ish.

power4wardjinx · Post #9 » by **power4wardjinx** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 3:53 pm

drew881 wrote:I think there are too many variables here.

There are far too many, including whether Charlie Bell played, how healthy he was if he did play and how many minutes he played, which has an impact defensively.

Also, the strength of schedule in games Redd has missed is formidable.

msiris · Post #10 » by **msiris** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 3:56 pm

Duncanfan wrote:CV plays better with Bogut in there. Bogut helps to open the floor for CV and CV always looks for Bogut for those inside passes. They work well together, so I don't think having Bogut in there has negative effect on CV's game. If anything, our offense seems very unselfish without Redd. Look at CV, he has been averaging 4+ assists the past few games now, RJ makes those passes, ditto for Bell and Sessions. Everyone is looking for each other. People might say that CV is a chucker and takes too many shots, but none of his shots are forced as he takes them in the flow of the offense and believe it or not(gasp!) Skiles is calling plays specifically for CV. The beauty of it all is that Bogut doesn't really need the ball to be effective, you run 9-10 plays for him throughout the game and he'll be playing to his strengths and put up 15-10 type numbers game in and game out.

I am excited to see what we do in the offseason as this team's chemistry has never been better the past few years I have been watching them.

My statement was not directed at Bogut. But CVs numbers offensively are higher without Bogut and for a good reason. I should have added without Redd also.

And the years that they have been together they have done nothing record wise, which is the bottom line.

I think it all comes down to Redd.

trwi7 · Post #11 » by **trwi7** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 4:04 pm

Our FG% against with Redd is 45.8%, without it's 45.3%.

Our FG% with Redd is 45.8%, without it's 44.2%.

Post #12 » by **ReasonablySober** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 4:13 pm

Too many variables to make any determination on the Redd factor.

Eye-ball test makes me think the ball movement is better and we're playing at a quicker pace. RJ, Bell and CV seem to be playing better ball. We also seem more susceptible to fast-breaks. In the past I think the Bucks could always count on Redd shooting when he got the ball in position to score; they knew they would have to get back. Without him I think the rest of the team feels more involved and that they may be the one to fire up a shot at any time. Less people are getting back on defense as a result and we're giving up easier buckets as a result.

But that's just what I think I'm observing.

JoeHova · Post #13 » by **JoeHova** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 4:29 pm

If Elson wasn't so terrible, we could get a better read on what Redd means to this team. Having one of the worst players in the NBA starting for you is going to skew your numbers.

jeremyd236 · Post #14 » by **jeremyd236** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 4:31 pm

People are all in love with RJ because of how he's played since Redd went down, but don't forget how Redd looked the last month before his injury.

27 ppg on 51% shooting, not to mention playing 40 minutes per game (the most in the NBA). Also 2nd on the team in +/- and is still 2nd overall on our roster (behind Bogut of course).

If Redd truly is untradable and we need to dump salary next year, I wouldn't feel bad about getting rid of RJ. I think Redd can be just as valuable to this team, assuming he returns to health.

JoeHova · Post #15 » by **JoeHova** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 4:38 pm

jeremyd236 wrote:People are all in love with RJ because of how he's played since Redd went down, but don't forget how Redd looked the last month before his injury.

27 ppg on 51% shooting, not to mention playing 40 minutes per game (the most in the NBA). Also 2nd on the team in +/- and is still 2nd overall on our roster (behind Bogut of course).

If Redd truly is untradable and we need to dump salary next year, I wouldn't feel bad about getting rid of RJ. I think Redd can be just as valuable to this team, assuming he returns to health.

I agree. I still believe that Redd is better than RJ.

LUKE23 · Post #16 » by **LUKE23** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 4:39 pm

RJ is a better overall player than Redd if you have either isolated individually with this core. It's when both are on the court that RJ's value goes down, because Redd prohibits ball movement when he's in, and he also slows the pace of the game down, and RJ thrives in a fast-paced offense with ball movement. Redd and RJ together are a bad fit.

Redd isn't that valuable to this team. It is what it is. But if people had their choice of RJ vs. Redd with Sessions/LRMAM/CV/Bogut, my guess is most would take RJ, and there is a reason for that.

JoeHova · Post #17 » by **JoeHova** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 4:44 pm

LUKE23 wrote:But if people had their choice of RJ vs. Redd with Sessions/LRMAM/CV/Bogut, my guess is most would take RJ, and there is a reason for that.

Yeah, and truthfully, the reason is that Redd has been here longer so more hate has been built up towards him. If RJ had been here the same amount of time, people would hate him just as much for exactly the same reasons. He's an average-ish player making star money, just like Redd. His contract inhibits flexibility, just like Redd's. He does very little other than score, just like Redd. He used to be an excellent rebounder for his position but stopped giving an effort in that area over the years, just like Redd.

jerrod · Post #18 » by **jerrod** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 4:44 pm

luke is right on.

whatever you think about the 2 guys individually, there's no denying that the team runs better with rj than with redd.

trwi7 · Post #19 » by **trwi7** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 4:46 pm

LUKE23 wrote:RJ is a better overall player than Redd if you have either isolated individually with this core. It's when both are on the court that RJ's value goes down, because Redd prohibits ball movement when he's in, and he also slows the pace of the game down, and RJ thrives in a fast-paced offense with ball movement. Redd and RJ together are a bad fit.

Agreed. Personally, I don't think either is a great player and their contracts far outweigh what they provide. However, if I had to choose one to go with Sessions, Villanueva, LRMAM and Bogut. It would be Jefferson.

LUKE23 · Post #20 » by **LUKE23** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 4:47 pm

Yeah, and truthfully, the reason is that Redd has been here longer so more hate has been built up towards him. If RJ had been here the same amount of time, people would hate him just as much for exactly the same reasons. He's an average-ish player making star money, just like Redd. His contract inhibits flexibility, just like Redd's. He does very little other than score, just like Redd. He used to be an excellent rebounder for his position but stopped giving an effort in that area over the years, just like Redd.

RJ makes less and is a better player. And I thought RJ was a better player than Redd even when he was on NJ, so that isn't revisionist history here. Neither is worth their contract, but it's a no brainer who I'd rather have with the current core taking everything into account. And while I'm not a big intangibles guy, I'm willing to bet that RJ is a better vet leader for this team right now than Redd ever has been, and that isn't necessarily a rip on Redd, but it's just not his personality to be a leader.

But no, I disagree with you that Redd is better than RJ. In identical situations without the other player, RJ is better.