2008-2009 Starting Point Guard/Rotation

xTitan · Post #61 » by **xTitan** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:31 pm

Nowak008 wrote:I know some of you hate Mo, but how can you possibly want Chris freakin Duhon starting over him?

Duhon would be backing up Sessions I believe....I would not want Duhon to start for the Bucks either....however, this trainwreck won't be cleared up in one year.

xTitan · Post #62 » by **xTitan** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:34 pm

Tom Doerr, play by play man for the Bulls was on with Homer and he actually loves Skiles....said there were many reasons for the Bulls downfall this year, most we have heard about with one exception. Doerr said that Hinrich got married and went on a honeymoon right before training camp open and he never had the focus from the start...it was downhill from there, perhaps that rubbed his teammates wrong.

Ayt · Post #63 » by **Ayt** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:37 pm

europa wrote:Found it:

One former Bull said the players believe Duhon is the best PG on the team and once his minutes declined under Boylan that's when the team lost its faith in him as a heade coach.

As _snake_ pointed out, it came from a former Bulls player. Who knows what kind of agenda that person had and how close it was to reality.

I think the problems the Bulls had under Boylan go way beyond Duhon.

Bernman · Post #64 » by **Bernman** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:37 pm

Hinrich or draft (Westbrook?)/Ramone

If Duhon is your point guard you better have a bunch of players who can score one on one, with efficiency. Duhon is a liability as a scorer for himself and overrated at making plays for his teammates.

europa · Post #65 » by **europa** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:41 pm

I agree the problems go beyond Duhon and we don't know what agenda the former player had. Maybe it was Williams or maybe it was a player traded to the Cavs. It's also possible the info is accurate and players on the team really did view Duhon highly.

Again, I'm not advocating Duhon as being anything other than what he is. But I do think he would have value to this team especially given his defensive ability.

Chapter29 · Post #66 » by **Chapter29** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:52 pm

I have zero interest in Duhon. Not as a starter, not as a backup.

I do agree that Mo doesn't seem to fit what Skiles looks for in a player.

El Duderino · Post #67 » by **El Duderino** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 10:34 pm

I could live with Duhon as a backup only if these things happened

1. He knows his job is a backup and won't complain about not starting

2. He isn't signed for longer than two years

3. Charlie Bell can be thrown in with a trade of Mo or Redd

smalls · Post #68 » by **smalls** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 11:59 pm

LUKE23 wrote:I don't think we bring Duhon in. I think we draft Westbrook, trade Mo, and figure it out between Sessions, Bell, and Westbrook at PG next year.

Westbrook is a total Hammond/Skiles type player. Tenacious defender on and off the ball, and a hard worker.

I think we draft Westbrook and turn Mo and CV into a pretty solid small forward.

this would be my ideal "realistic" scenario (personally I trade des simmons Mo redd Gadz and cv and build from there, but that is the fan talking)

I stated b4 that westbrook also gives hammond some flexibility in future dealings because he can play the point or the 2.

unklchuk · Post #69 » by **unklchuk** » Tue Apr 22, 2008 1:17 am

I can't believe the outrage at the Duhon possibility. If acquired, he wouldn't cost a pick, wouldn't cost a player. Would Westbook be a more impressive acquisition? Hell yes, but that costs the 7th pick (or so). Is Bell as good a choice? Well, Bell is not a point guard. And his head and hunger are still uncertain. So I don't want Bell getting regular minutes at PG.

If I give in to a generalization, I'd say that the Mo-lovers of old, now that Mo is publicly discredited and unsupportable, are trying to apply Mo Values to fresh players.

I don't want Mo Values anywhere near the Bucks PG position. Get your adreniline rushes somewhere else. I want leadership combined with the vision to see the whole game and break down the opposite team. And it looks very much like we have a GM and a Coach who think similarly.

(Is Duhon the encapsulation of the PG I want? Hell no. But at low cost he can be part of the team solution. Do I think we should absolutely acquire him? No. But if the PG we need isn't there for next season, we could do worse...)

(I also think the mandate to Win Now will be just as strong next season as it's ever been.)

http://www.last.fm/user/DPF55 · Post #70 » by **Buck You** » Tue Apr 22, 2008 1:24 am

Royal Ivey and Chris Duhon's numbers are eerily similar.

El Duderino · Post #71 » by **El Duderino** » Tue Apr 22, 2008 1:54 am

unklchuk wrote:
(Is Duhon the encapsulation of the PG I want? Hell no. But at low cost he can be part of the team solution.

I can only speak for myself, but if we do end up signing Duhon, the exact cost will dictate whether i like the signing.

If the Bucks signed him for say 2yrs/7-8 million total, i'd be ok with the move. If though we signed him for around 4-5 years to some Charlie Bell like contract, i won't be happy.

As with any acquisition, trade or signing, the exact details of it tell the story.

Post #72 » by **paulpressey25** » Tue Apr 22, 2008 3:11 am

Skiles will want to win next year. One way he will consider a jump start to that end is to have a defending PG that he trusts.....so I can see Duhon here.

Does that mean we are married to Duhon forever? I don't think so. It just gives us flexibility with the 7th pick. We can now trade it and are covered at PG or we could select a froncourt player and are covered..or we could even draft Westbrook, but not have to rely on him playing 25mpg next year, like we've forced our past rookies into.

Badger-in-Exile · Post #73 » by **Badger-in-Exile** » Tue Apr 22, 2008 8:51 pm

unklchuk wrote:I can't believe the outrage at the Duhon possibility. If acquired, he wouldn't cost a pick, wouldn't cost a player. Would Westbook be a more impressive acquisition? Hell yes, but that costs the 7th pick (or so). Is Bell as good a choice? Well, Bell is not a point guard. And his head and hunger are still uncertain. So I don't want Bell getting regular minutes at PG.

If I give in to a generalization, I'd say that the Mo-lovers of old, now that Mo is publicly discredited and unsupportable, are trying to apply Mo Values to fresh players.

I don't want Mo Values anywhere near the Bucks PG position. Get your adreniline rushes somewhere else. I want leadership combined with the vision to see the whole game and break down the opposite team. And it looks very much like we have a GM and a Coach who think similarly.

(Is Duhon the encapsulation of the PG I want? Hell no. But at low cost he can be part of the team solution. Do I think we should absolutely acquire him? No. But if the PG we need isn't there for next season, we could do worse...)

(I also think the mandate to Win Now will be just as strong next season as it's ever been.)

Great post...saved me a bunch of typing (and said it better than I would have).