Are the Wizards a better team without Arenas?

Debit One · Post #1 » by **Debit One** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:57 pm

I think that one could make the argument that the Wizards are a better team without Gilbert Arenas. Not that he isn't a very talented player, but perhaps with Jamison and Butler they have enough offense without him, and the improved defense with Daniels at the point makes them a better squad in his absence.

With Arenas: 3 - 5

Without Arenas: 19 - 12

If they are better without Arenas, what are the implications for a Bucks team that has a mini-Arenas at the point?

Food for thought ...

InsideOut · Post #2 » by **InsideOut** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 2:20 pm

I started a thread on this about 2 months ago. What do these guys all have in common...Marbury, Francis, Iverson, Arenas and dare I say...Redd?

emunney · Post #3 » by **emunney** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 2:32 pm

He's talking about Mo Williams, not Redd.

Badgerlander · Post #4 » by **Badgerlander** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 2:43 pm

I think Washington is a better team this year for a few reasons. Jamison is in a contract year and playing like it. Haywood has started at Center and getting more minutes because Etan has been out. Butler, Blatche, and Stevenson are another year older, more experienced in their system. They have a good coach. Arenas is prone to being a selfish player when things are going right and that has both cost them regular season games and won them a few. To be successful in the playoffs though they will definitely need Arenas, and I would love to have him on the Bucks because he can take it to the hole, finish, and draw the foul. Arenas(606) was second to Kobe(667) in free throws made last year. Third on the list was Maggette at 519. Michael Redd was 24th at 345.

InsideOut · Post #5 » by **InsideOut** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 3:02 pm

emunney wrote:He's talking about Mo Williams, not Redd.

Really? Arenas shoots 20 times a game while over the past 4 years Redd has come close to 19. Mo shoots a lot less than Arenas so I don't see the comparison. Maybe that's what he meant by mini-Arenas? I also thought me meant Redd because he's showing how Washington is winning without their star. Kind of like how we stunk with Redd, played over .500 ball when he was out and now that he's back we stink again. So which is it D1.

jerrod · Post #6 » by **jerrod** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 3:18 pm

i'd say the redd comparison is a lot more accurate

jeremyd236 · Post #7 » by **jeremyd236** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 4:16 pm

InsideOut wrote:I started a thread on this about 2 months ago. What do these guys all have in common...Marbury, Francis, Iverson, Arenas and dare I say...Redd?

You know what these guys have in common?

If you take Redd out, they've all played on a team with 3 ALL-STARS.

It's not fair to compare Redd to these guys so don't even try to start this up again. I mean, seriously....

Marbury and Francis had eachother.

Iverson, Camby, Carmelo....???

Arenas, Jamison, Butler

Redd, ???, ???

Give Redd a proven All-Star before you try to make your point and compare him to these underachievers.

emunney · Post #8 » by **emunney** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 4:19 pm

Debit One wrote:what are the implications for a Bucks team that has a mini-Arenas at the point?

Debit One · Post #9 » by **Debit One** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 5:30 pm

I'm talking about the impact of a shoot-first PG who plays sub-standard defense (Arenas), wondering if the Wizards are better off with Daniels at PG than with Arenas, and then extending that to consideration of whether the Bucks can be a winning team with our own mini-Arenas (Mo) manning the point.

Post #10 » by **paulpressey25** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 5:45 pm

Debit, I'm with you on breaking up the Mo/Redd mess.....

But I think the tone of this thread should not be Arenas....this thread should deal with Ernie Grunfeld.

For all his faults and mistakes, the guy does know how to get players that compliment each other and are winners. Redd goes down for us last year and we lose 20 in a row. Arenas goes down for them and they go on a two-month winning streak.

Our selfish, chucking backcourt is only a SYMPTOM of the PROBLEM that we have a front office that is terrible at building a team.

L&H_05 · Post #11 » by **L&H_05** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:03 pm

I don't think so... In fact, whatever a team does in the first month of an NBA season is irrelevant IMO..

The Wizards have one of the most underrated coaches in the NBA... The Wiz fans rip Eddie Jordan all the time, but if you look at his offense, and what he gets out of his players, it's excellent... He was an assistant with Byron Scott in NJ, and you can see what he gets out of his squad in NO..

What the Wizards (without Butler and Arenas) did to the Cavs in the playoffs last year really impressed me... Sure, we swept them, but they were in every single game down the stretch.. His offense made it easy for guys like Jamison, Roger Mason and Antonio Daniels to score on us, and we're a pretty damn good defensive team, especially in the playoffs...

They know what they are, they're an average to below average defensive team, and a damn good offensive team..So I think it's quality coaching first and foremost, and putting his guys in a position to succeed.. And I think with a full training camp, and 20 games under his belt, Arenas could have integrated himself within the context of the team, and they could have found a nice mix that worked... Plus, it would have just made their bench deeper as well..And we know Arenas is clutch in those games down the stretch...

So I think it could really work...

The Bucks don't have that type of coaching... It's just a different situation.. They may be all offense and no defense, but it's just different..

The Wizard players seem to have a higher BBALL IQ, and use their offense as the platform to win...They play with heart and a desire to win... They execute extremely well, and just let the chips fall on the defensive end... However, they at least put forth an effort on the defensive end...

I don't see the same with the Bucks.. Just don't...

Kerb Hohl · Post #12 » by **Kerb Hohl** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:45 pm

jeremyd236 wrote:
InsideOut wrote:I started a thread on this about 2 months ago. What do these guys all have in common...Marbury, Francis, Iverson, Arenas and dare I say...Redd?

You know what these guys have in common?

If you take Redd out, they've all played on a team with 3 ALL-STARS.

It's not fair to compare Redd to these guys so don't even try to start this up again. I mean, seriously....

Marbury and Francis had eachother.

Iverson, Camby, Carmelo....???

Arenas, Jamison, Butler

Redd, ???, ???

Give Redd a proven All-Star before you try to make your point and compare him to these underachievers.

Iverson, Mckie, Snow, Hill, Over the hill Mutombo???

If anyone cries about Redd not having support one more time I'm going to punch my computer screen. He doesn't have a good defensive cast around him but I guarantee if we were somehow able to erase Michael Redd off the roster today, Bogut and Mo would be all stars or at least put up all-star numbers within the next 2 years.

If he gets more "support" (which he kind of already has) he is just going to piss them off by shooting all the shots and losing the game in the 4th quarter. The only thing you can really do to help Redd is put 2 or 3 elite defenders on his team and hope that his 4th quarter shooting isn't as terrible as it has been in recent years. You also need those 2-3 great defenders to make up for Redd's terrible defense.

Marbury and Francis had eachother.

And that worked out really well. Marbury did do decent with Garnett at his side.