What is the most you would match for Sessions?

[MilBucksBackOnTop06]

PP is right ...and not only is he right about the economy ...But whats even more important is their is rumblings about having non guarenteed contracts in pro ball .


the bucks would be STUPID to put more then 3 years out their for sessions during a time when the entire landscape of nba contracts may be changing . Im sure hammond has heard the rumblings as well and hes not going to commit mo williams type money to ramon freaken sessions .




9-10 millon as the original poster suggested ( LUKE23 ) ...is just flat out ignorant . Its not happening and time will show that very soon .


Sessions will be coming in at 14 mil over 3 years and the bucks WILL NOT be matching .. You heard it here first .. by the way , we will all see over time that this guy wasnt the pg many of you thought he was ..

Hear! Hear! Hear!

Absolutely...I echo these sentiments. Ramon will not be what many of you thought he would be...

[blueedwards]

Its hard to say for matching price if we still have Redd and RJ. But if one or both is moved for less salary coming back and players and picks. Be a different story for matching.

[europa]

Sessions is a talented young player, but he hasn't earned a big time contract... He hasn't accomplished nearly as much as Mo Williams did before he got his deal.

Mo also had three seasons of being either a starter or key backup with the Bucks when he got his deal with Milwaukee. So there was a much greater track record to use when trying to formulate his contract. That's what makes it tricky for the Bucks with Sessions. He's shown a lot but it's been one-season and change so there is some risk involved. Can he get better and if so, how much better can he get? I know what I believe but I'm not sure Hammond and Skiles agree with me.

In terms of comparing Mo to Sessions, from a team perspective, neither of them accomplished anything meaningful. The Bucks were a lottery team every year Mo was a starter and were a lottery team again this season when Sessions started. So that's a wash. From an individual perspective, this is what Mo averaged in the season before his big contract with the Bucks:

17.3 points/6.1 assists/4.8 rebounds/44.6% FG shooting/85.5% FT shooting/3.0 TOs/36.1 minutes

This what Ramon averaged as a starter this season:

15.1 points/7.6 assists/4.2 rebounds/44.4% FG shooting/78.6% FT shooting/2.4 TOs/33.4 minutes

FG% are virtually identical but Mo was (and is) a much better FT shooter. Scoring and rebounding are virtually even with Sessions much better in terms of assists. He also took better care of the ball. So if we're going strictly off numbers, it's not a reach to say Sessions deserves something similar to what Mo got. The good news there in my opinion is I don't expect the market to be strong for Sessions and a lot of players this summer so I don't believe Sessions is going to get Mo Money - from the Bucks or anyone else.

Mo got 6/$52M from the Bucks after they bungled the negotiations and outbid themselves. I don't see Hammond making that same mistake. When he talks about the problem contracts the Bucks have handed out prior to his arrival, I think you could list four of them as being the key culprits in his eyes - Redd, Simmons, Gadz and Mo. Maybe Bell's too. But I'd guess that he'd list those four and given the way the Mo negotiations went I think Hammond will make a point to not make a mistake of that magnitude. I didn't think Mo was worth nearly $9M at the time and I don't believe Sessions is worth more than $8M now. As much as I like him, I'd be reluctant to pay him more than that this summer.

So my number is $8M a year average - $8.5M a year tops. My guess is he won't get a deal worth more than $6M a year and I think he could get one that averages less.

[nikip43]

I have a question that I hope a few people will take the time to read and answer.

Question:
Is Ramon Sessions that good if management was going to package Sessions and Joe Alexander (not here to debate the merits of Alexander) for Mike Conley Jr?

I see two variables here. The first is Scott Skiles the second in John Hammond’s history in watching Detroit being built.

Variables:
Coach: Scott Skiles had his battles with point guards in Chicago. Skiles is also a former point guard who may or may not have a certain “criteria” that he desires in his quarterback.
GM’s history: Pistons- watched Detroit build a contender by making one terrific trade (A. Houston for R. Hamilton), one risky trade (scraps for young hothead R. Wallace), one savy PG signing (buying on a guy who’s value was all of a sudden starting to rise again), and a great draft pick (T. Prince).

I’ll be honest; I really really want to like Ramon Sessions. Whenever the Bucks drafted him I hopped on a few websites and immediately liked some of the things I was reading. This was during an evening of Dan Fegan, over drafting of a wimpy post player, foreign player age discrepancy, and wondering why oh why Milwaukee had to fall so far in the lottery. Sessions was a lone bright spot when I read things like “pass first” and “young with upside.” Finally, a pure point guard on the team since Terrell Brandon last roamed.

However, I scratch my head at the move/lack of move this past winter whenever the Bucks were rumored to be sending RS/JA for a young-quick defensive minded point guard who very well looked like we were buying him at his lowest possible value.

That is the point of my question. Mike Conley isn’t that good…and the redeeming virtue he holds is raw-upside. The same thing that we were dealing in both RS and JA. So, why were we dealing two guys (RS is the one name I’m really taking into consideration here) with upside for another. Was Skiles or Hammond sold out/in love with Conley? Or is there a lack of confidence with Sessions being the point guard of the future.

If anyone can riddle me a thought to my question I’d be ecstatic. My brains been itching with this all weekend and I need someone else’s thought…maybe someone to just tell me that the trade rumor wasn’t even true.

[aboveAverage]

Conley could be better than Sessions. So I don't see Sessions being viewed negatively in that trade. The Bucks just thought that Conley would be even better than Sessions, and cheaper too.

[BDUB_30]

Nikpik43 , nobody will riddle you thru that question with a valid answer because the answer to that question you have already provided .


Sessions is not the kind of pg this staff / front office wants . I find it very hard to understand how we just traded away a guy that plays similiar but not as limited ( mo williams ) as Ramon. Mo COULD stretch a defense out , mo COULD hit the long ball ..Ramon does neither of these things .


The bottom line is you could even take your critical thinking process to the next level . Something less speculative though . As imo , the trade scenerio you outlined was for conversation purposes IS a rumor .

What is not a rumor is how this front office did nothing to clear salary to make room for ramon . If this team was so blown away with Ramons talent , they would of made the room somehow / someway .. But they didnt ..This is what leads me to beleive the bucks just are not that interested in ramons services especialy if the market is going to be anywhere in the realm of something of these predictions .


Hes just not the kind of guy this team wants .. I just cant fathom how much weve heard about hammond and skiles wanting to build a program that plays defense yet their going to throw money at ramon sessions .. It doesnt make sense , at all . I understand that people on this forum ALWAYS love young buck talent regardless of how talented said player is . But time will , once again , prove otherwise . Ramon will not be a buck , and in all truth .. fianances have nothing to do with it . The bucks dont want to have a player on the roster that doesnt defend and dominates the ball so heavily to have any kind of impact at all .


Sometimes its not who ya sign , but who ya DONT sign .. this is why im glad john hammond is here . He sees the mirage that is Ramon Sessions .

[europa]

Conley averaged 14.5/5.6 with 1.7 steals on 46.4% shooting in the second half of the season. He's starting to play closer to his potential so trading Sessions for him isn't a knock on Sessions at all in my opinion. Both are talented young PGs but it's very possible Hammond and Skiles prefer Conley's defensive potential over Sessions' offensive potential. That's one of the reasons I was in favor of the deal at the time.

[aboveAverage]

Bdub, you shouldn't make so many guarantees, you might be disappointed when everything you believe about Hammond turns out to be untrue.

[BDUB_30]

Bdub, you shouldn't make so many guarantees, you might be disappointed when everything you believe about Hammond turns out to be untrue.

I wouldnt be disapointed , i would just be wrong .

[europa]

I'm not sure how Sessions can be criticized for dominating the ball when his assist average as a starter has been so good. If you're averaging more than 8 assists per game (which Sessions has done as a starter dating back to last season), then I want the ball in your hands - especially if you're shooting a respectable percentage and showing the ability to get to the line.

I don't see many similarities between him and Mo other than neither one is/was a good defender (and I agree that could be something which makes Hammond and Skiles skittish about Sessions). Mo was a jump shooter who took more shots per game than Sessions and didn't get to the line as effectively. Sessions is a slasher who is much better at drawing fouls (a huge asset in my opinion) and is a far better distributor than Mo was (another huge asset in my opinion). Offensively, their games have little in common in my opinion.

[BDUB_30]

Well ive been watching ball for awhile .. ive seen players put up impressive stat lines yet their on court impact said something diffrent .


For an example Allen iverson has had some seasons where he averaged close to 8 assist per games ... But nobody would ever make a case that due to his assist numbers that he WASNT dominating the ball .


Nobody would say " well iverson averaged 7.9 so he cant be a ball hog " ... it just wouldnt sound right ...


So trying to excuse sessions over dribbling and exsessive proding of the defense while ignoring the half court sets with something like assist totals , as you can see with the iverson comparison ... Its just not a valid arguement .. You cant just assume because a guy gives up the ball to rack up an assist here or there that he is STILL making the proper reads in the half court set ...and bringing fluidity to the offense .


We have already heard skiles say that he couldnt run certain plays because Ramon " GET IT " .

[Ayt]

Conley averaged 14.5/5.6 with 1.7 steals on 46.4% shooting in the second half of the season. He's starting to play closer to his potential so trading Sessions for him isn't a knock on Sessions at all in my opinion. Both are talented young PGs but it's very possible Hammond and Skiles prefer Conley's defensive potential over Sessions' offensive potential. That's one of the reasons I was in favor of the deal at the time.

He also shot 217 threes on the season and made 41% of them. I definitely did not expect that in only his second season.

[Jollay]

3 years, 18 million, is more than he's earned so far, and he'll be just 26 when it expires.

What's our max options for backloading the cash to the third year?

[emunney]

Max raise of 10.5%, so for a 3 yr 18m deal you'd be looking at a ~5.43m first year salary.

[Jollay]

Max raise of 10.5%, so for a 3 yr 18m deal you'd be looking at a ~5.43m first year salary.

Thanks. Yup, that's as high as I'd go.

[BDUB_30]

Man you want to talk about a hilarious thread!!!!!!!


Whats up Luke23? Ohh thats right you cant post for a month now so you wont be sayin whats up back... !





The funny part is how much venom i received for simply telling it exactally how it was going to be. 8 mil per was the general consensus? HAHAHA !!!! " OHH BDUB IS SO OUT OF TOUCH WITH NBA SALARIES"



Clearly!

[BDUB_30]

Some of these numbers are insane. $9-10 mil? Crazy. $7mil is too much. So is 6 probably. Are we trying to have the most over paid team in the league? If you think Mo's contract was too much throwing $9-10mil at Sessions is ridiculous. By the way, as of now Mo's the better player.

You're blatantly out of touch with today's NBA salaries if you think 6 is too much.

[icat2000]

Nothing.

[Sigra]

[jerrod]

another old thread i didn't post in, damn