Hammond Speaks-Season Ticket holder event

[BDUB_30]

Stop bolding a sentence in every one of your posts. It reeks of insecurity.

That wouldn't really support your point even if true, but God bless ya, you just need the slightest opening!

B DUB, I stopped reading your replies a while ago, just a heads up, might save you some time responding to my posts.

[/quote]



SO yeah we can kind of see the trend here ..Im just in this thread sharing my opionons on bucks basketball ...and this kind of crap comes from the same posters consitantly . anytime someone has a good opionon , or if people start gravitating towards a theory being true as many posters have done in this thread in regards to my opionons ... then the insults start flying ...

If i respond to it , a mod comes in and threatens to ban me ...but only if i respond with equaly insulting rhetoric .. which i will no longer do ..


Im going to point it out none the less ...Insulting me doesnt make your points any more valid guys ..In fact , it just drives home the likelyhood of my opionons being true even more .

[paulpressey25]

See you are using low numbers for these guys that I would match. I'm the one comparing Sessions to a possible mistake like mo or a semi-gadz type deal, because I don't want to compound mistakes and over pay them.

I agree that I'm not thrilled with paying Sessions 5/$35. I'd go the 5/$30 MLE for him, but be afraid in doing so. With CV, I'd pay him either the QO of 1/$4.6 or I'd go 2/$9 but no more. I guess it just don't see how we "win-now" and let these guys walk, because for all their faults, they are key contributors in a 9-man rotation.

I'd draft Ramon in that 6-10 range in this year's draft.

[europa]

Here is a simple breakdown:

1. If Sessions is kept, Hammond is absolved from passing on the Conley deal
2. If Sessions walks, Hammond gets bashed for passing on the Conley deal

There is no #3.

I agree. This is why I'm saying this is such a slam-dunk decision. If Hammond and Skiles didn't want Sessions, they had a golden opportunity to be rid of him. The Bucks passed on that deal - if it was Kohl then Hammond and Skiles should've pushed harder; if Hammond was in agreement then he has no excuse not to re-sign Sessions if the contract is reasonable.

I'll say again that I believe this to be arguably the easiest decision Hammond has had as the Bucks' GM. If the contract for Sessions is reasonable, you sign him. End of story.

[InsideOut]

Just do a search on the Sessions trade. This is what Woelfel reported...

I’ve been told both teams have virtually agreed on the conditions of the trade and only Bucks owner Herb Kohl had to give his stamp of approval.

It was also reported in the Memphis paper that they were waiting for Kohl to sign off. If anyone has any doubts just look back at the old threads. There were multiple reporters and our "insiders" all saying the same thing about how Kohl nixed the deal.

It has become almost impossible to discuss anything with some posters. Anything that is reported that helps their point is quoted and used as an "I told you so". If a fact is reported that hurts their point or favorite player/GM they dismiss it at rumor or someone lying.

[Sigra]

Actually, I'd take Sessions at the MLE for 3 years or so over RJ at 2 years at $14M any day. I think any Bucks fan that wants the team to improve would. You would have an extra $8M to work with in addition to Ramon's contract for what you're paying RJ.

That is very bad logic IMO. For example, LeBron James gets $14,410,581 this year. At the same time in Minnesota, Jason Collins, Troy Hudson and Shelden Williams together get around 14 millions. So with your logic, if Cavs trade LeBron for nothing they will have money to sign not only Collins but 2 other players as well (Hudson and Williams).

Yes, if the Bucks traded RJ for Wally they would have money to sign Sessions and would have an extra $8M to work with but that $8M could be used only at players not as good as RJ. Tell me your plan how to use that $8M? What players would you sign with that money?

[BDUB_30]

I Dont buy the Kohl arguement either , these conspiracy theories are wildly inconsitant .


You cant say on one hand that Hammond is signing Salim Stauadmire and making moves to basicaly prevent kohl from forcing hammond to retain sessions / cv . and then on the other hand claim a conspiracy theory saying that Kohl is a meddler who blocks deals like conley from getting done .


Simply put , if Kohl is meddling and has control of this team .. why didnt he meddle and stop Salim from being signed? .. Or if Kohl was so in love with Ramon and didnt want to do the conley trade ? Why didnt Kohl force hammond to trade RJ to clevland so they could make sure they had the dough to sign Ramon ?

This is wildly inconsitant logic . People are claiming Kohl is a meddler when it supports their theory , but hes not a meddler any other time .. Yeah he dictated to hammond not to trade Ramon sessions , yet he didnt dictate when Hammond signed Staudamire , yet he didnt dictate to hammond when hammond decided NOT to trade RJ ... I dont buy that at all ..


So if kohl is so involved in this team that hes willing to block very meaningless trades like ramon for conley under the guise of how much he like Ramon .. Why didnt kohl get involved when hammond signed salim , or when hammond didnt want to deal RJ ...Or any of the other scenerios .. The conistant variable , the common denominator is that the bucks simply dont like ramon or cv nor the players that were offered for them otherwise they would of pulled the trigger . Its really not that new of an idea ..

Kohl nixing a trade has nothing to do with a conspiracy. It's a decision made by a single actor that wasn't made public. Most of what the Bucks do behind the scenes is not made public because they don't want to display their hand to the whole league. We just have to deduce based on facts and reports from sources who have proven credible over time.

No theories I've laid out have been conspiracies. It's always one single actor. Hammond straddling the luxury tax so isn't forced to overpay Sessions is an ulterior motive, not a conspiracy. Conspiracy is just one of those buzz words like "socialist" used to tidily dismiss an opponent's perspective.

And it's not a conflicting ideology that Kohl would approve a Salim Stoudamire signing, and not force an RJ trade, but block Sessions from being moved. The senator has shown a tendency to get emotionally attached to players who were already on the team, so he could have developed the same affinity for RJ. Stoudamire could have been sold as a low cost signing, who has nothing to do with Sessions. I never said Kohl had a single mind the whole year to keep Sessions and it was his first line of thinking in every move that's made. The Bucks could still hypothetically re-sign Sessions after they signed Stoudamire. Couldn't if they traded Sessions though.
.

Youve perputrated the ideas before that hammond has intentionaly signed Stoudamire to put us that much closer to the threshold to spite Kohl and Kohls attempts to keep players that Kohl is fond of , and Hammond is not .

Im simply pointing out the inconsitancy of logic . The inconsitancy being that you claim that Kohl has meddled and vetoed a trade in an effort to keep a guy he likes ( Sessions ) .. Yet , Kohl has not meddled to the point to block a signing that has an impact to aquire Sessions . And Kohl has NOT meddled to the point of demanding Hammond takes clevland or portlands offer .


And to write off this inconistnacy in logic your answer to that is :

The senator has shown a tendency to get emotionally attached to players
.

Thats your grand logic , thats your out ? Sorry but that is not an out . You cant claim on one hand that kohl is involved so heavily that he would veto a trade in an effort to retain sessions ..but completly turn a blind eye to the fact that were going to lose Ramon if a move isnt made . If he was so much involved with this team he would of used the same kind of authority to retain sessions as he did to veto the move that would of shipped sessions ..



Youre talking out of both sides of your mouth , you claim hammond is so involved in this teams affairs that hes vetoing moves , and at the same time claim that hammond is CLUELESS as to the potential ramifications of signing Staudamire and the impact that would have on potentialy resigning Ramon .... ALL WHILE YOU HAVE BEEN ADVOCATING A CONSPIRACY THEORY THAT STOUDAMIRE WAS INTENTIONALY RESIGNED BY HAMMOND TO SPITE KOHLS EFFORTS TO RETAIN RAMON ???
The contradictory nature of your logic comes full circle my friend , you are simply all over the place on this and nothing adds up .. The reason why none of it adds up is because the reports by woefull were bull ...The bucks werent that close to this deal getting done , and i have SERIOUS doubt that the reason it didnt get done was because of Kohl ...

It doesnt add up , as ive clearly proven with the lack of conistancy in your logic .

[BDUB_30]

Here is a simple breakdown:

1. If Sessions is kept, Hammond is absolved from passing on the Conley deal
2. If Sessions walks, Hammond gets bashed for passing on the Conley deal

There is no #3.

I agree. This is why I'm saying this is such a slam-dunk decision. If Hammond and Skiles didn't want Sessions, they had a golden opportunity to be rid of him. The Bucks passed on that deal - if it was Kohl then Hammond and Skiles should've pushed harder; if Hammond was in agreement then he has no excuse not to re-sign Sessions if the contract is reasonable.

I'll say again that I believe this to be arguably the easiest decision Hammond has had as the Bucks' GM. If the contract for Sessions is reasonable, you sign him. End of story.

No , their is option #3

3. The bucks werent interested in aquiring anything that was offered for Ramon for a wide number of reasons .. Money , chemistry , or possibly even due to the fact that the bucks arent ready to just throw in Joe alexander after 5 months of him being in the NBA .



To suggest that these options arent only the most likely scenerio , or at least a mild probability is denial .

[LUKE23]

That is very bad logic IMO. For example, LeBron James gets $14,410,581 this year. At the same time in Minnesota, Jason Collins, Troy Hudson and Shelden Williams together get around 14 millions. So with your logic, if Cavs trade LeBron for nothing they will have money to sign not only Collins but 2 other players as well (Hudson and Williams).

Nope, it's perfect logic. Every decision in the NBA is weighing projected production vs. contract. Sessions was more productive than RJ last year already (Sessions produced the most wins on the team), and you can get him for less at a more valuable position by far, PG.

As far as to how I'd spend $14M, I'd take Sessions/Rasheed or Sessions/Childress, just for two examples off the top of my head. I'm sure there are several more I could find after looking at a free agent list.

Your problem is that you're overrating RJ badly. By every metric he was a barely above average SF last year, making $14M. To think that keeping him for two more years, over keeping Sessions for half of that or less for longer term is absolute lunacy, I can't even fathom it to be quite honest.

Hammond gets no pass on Sessions. If he's back, then good, if he's not back the Conley/Lakers first deal should have been done. It really is that simple.

[BDUB_30]

That is very bad logic IMO. For example, LeBron James gets $14,410,581 this year. At the same time in Minnesota, Jason Collins, Troy Hudson and Shelden Williams together get around 14 millions. So with your logic, if Cavs trade LeBron for nothing they will have money to sign not only Collins but 2 other players as well (Hudson and Williams).

Nope, it's perfect logic. Every decision in the NBA is weighing projected production vs. contract. .

I can tell you without a doubt , that is not true at all ..Every decision is not weighted by projected production vs contract ...


A teams needs come into play , a teams style and how certain players fit into that style . Chemistry and future needs as well .

Its not this robotic linear way of thinking where the only thing that matter is production vs contract .. If your team needs permiter defense due to a lack of it ( as our team does ) then we place a higher signifgance on players that bring that to the team and might be willing to pay more for it .... just an example ...


The cash is very important but their is a wide variety of other factors that go into it , dont beleive the hype .

[Sigra]

Rasheed in Milwaukee? The guy is at end of his career and will eather retire or sign for contender.

Childress? Same Childress who averaged 8.8 points, 4.6 rebounds and 1.1 assists per game during the Euroleague 2008-09 season? Same Childress who averaged 13.5 points, 3.8 rebounds and 0.8 assistes per game during the Greek HEBA A1 league?? Are you serious? You would rather have Childress and Sessions than Richard Jefferson? Well, we will never agree about that.

[LUKE23]

Rasheed in Milwaukee? The guy is at end of his career and will eather retire or sign for contender.

Childress? Same Childress who averaged 8.8 points, 4.6 rebounds and 1.1 assists per game during the Euroleague 2008-09 season? Same Childress who averaged 13.5 points, 3.8 rebounds and 0.8 assistes per game during the Greek HEBA A1 league?? Are you serious? You would rather have Childress and Sessions than Richard Jefferson? Well, we will never agree about that.

Sessions was better than RJ alone last year, thanks for ignoring that point. Better wins produced, better Roland Rating, better PER, better every metric. When Sessions was off the court we hurt more than when RJ was off the court (I can pull the numbers if you'd like). So if Sessions is better than RJ alone, surely Sessions + whatever you get for $8M is better than RJ. Pure common sense.

You're pretty biased for Hammond Sigra, that's why it's hard to get into these discussions with you. No matter what he does I can pretty much guarantee you'll rationalize it.

If you disagree that the Conley deal should have been done if losing Sessions was a strong possibility, it's no use in going any further in the discussion. That is blatant bias for GM incompetence.

[MartyConlonOnTheRun]

Hammond gets no pass on Sessions. If he's back, then good, if he's not back the Conley/Lakers first deal should have been done. It really is that simple.

I agree with 90% of what you say and this to some extent, but i think you taking this one as a guarantee we would've had conley and a first. We will never know exactly what could've been done. The most we can say right now is Hammond screwed up for not making any trades with Sessions and getting nothing in return. I find it unrealistic to say we could've for sure got those assets.

[LUKE23]

Sessions/JA for Conley/Lakers 2010 first was reported by several outlets, and they all had the same deal. Including insider Memphis blog and Woelfel (who said Kohl just needed to improve it). That deal was there man.

[Sigra]

I am not against trading RJ. LRMAM is our future at SF IMO so RJ can be traded. But if we are going to trade him then I hope we get equal value back. RJ is borderline all-star player and if we trade him I want same talent back.

[LUKE23]

I am not against trading RJ. LRMAM is our future at SF IMO so RJ can be traded. But if we are going to trade him then I hope we get equal value back. RJ is borderline all-star player and if we trade him I want same talent back.

Borderline all-star in what league? He was the fourth most productive player on the Bucks last year (if Bogut/Redd didn't miss any games). RJ is SLIGHTLY above average at his position Sigra.

[BDUB_30]

I think what needs to happen here is add some context to the comparison . Something Luke is failing to do .


Comparing RJ and Ramon is like comparing apples and oranges ..

Richard Jefferson played 82 games for us .. He started all 82 games for us .

Ramon sessions played in 79 games for us . He started in 39 games for us .


Comparing these two statisticaly is simply inaccurate and wildly invalid . Richard jefferson plays against the kobes , the lebrons , the Paul Pierces .

Ramon sessions plays against the acie laws , the royal iveys , the tyrone lues ...Its two diffrent levels of competition , it may as well be two diffrent leauges .


Futhermore , Richard jefferson played in a unit that was missing 3 of its 5 starters for alot of the year . Defenses could single on RJ more and make him alot less ineffective . Which is what happend on many of nights , their wasnt much help out their for RJ .


Anyone that is willing to just overlook this factor when comparing RJ and Ramon is bias . Its plays a signifigant role . Comparing statistical metrics for bench vs starters is inaccurate and a baseless point ..

[Sigra]

Sessions was better than RJ alone last year, thanks for ignoring that point. Better wins produced, better Roland Rating, better PER, better every metric. When Sessions was off the court we hurt more than when RJ was off the court (I can pull the numbers if you'd like). So if Sessions is better than RJ alone.

I am tired of all these stats people throw out. For example, Zydrunas Ilgauskas was a +23 against Orlando. Dwight Howard was ONLY a +10 the entire series. Are you telling me that Z was 13 points better than Dwight that series? Is that why he was eventually benched the ENTIRE second half of Game 6 because Dwight was acting like nobody was there in the most important game in Cavalier history?

Stats are nice tool but you can't say "Sessions is better than RJ and I have this stats to prove that". Sessions is not even close to RJ. They are not even at the same level. RJ is borderline all-star who had bad year but who has been starting SF for eastern conference champions Nets and is only 29 years old. Sessions is 2nd round pick who can drive and dish and who didn't even make rookie-sophmore all-star game. The guy was not even in rotation before Ridnour's injury and then Redd's injury. You guys overate Sessions like most fans of other teams overate their young players. We all laughed when Pistons fans said how "Amir Johnson is not aviable". Now majority here makes same mistake. Sessions is not worth it. You will see.

You're pretty biased for Hammond Sigra, that's why it's hard to get into these discussions with you. No matter what he does I can pretty much guarantee you'll rationalize it..

Why would I be biased for Hammond? He is not from my country, he is not my family, he has no connection with me whatsoever. Why would I be biased for Hammond? Makes no sense

[Sigra]

Sessions/JA for Conley/Lakers 2010 first was reported by several outlets, and they all had the same deal. Including insider Memphis blog and Woelfel (who said Kohl just needed to improve it). That deal was there man.

Please stop using Woelfel as some kind of source. The guy reads this forum and that is where he find his information. Did you all forget how he took my information from Kukoc's interview and presented it as a fact. I made wrong translation and he took it as a true. And you guys trust him

[LUKE23]

Stats are nice tool but you can't say "Sessions is better than RJ and I have this stats to prove that". Sessions is not even close to RJ. They are not even at the same level. RJ is borderline all-star who had bad year but who has been starting SF for eastern conference champions Nets and is only 29 years old. Sessions is 2nd round pick who can drive and dish and who didn't even make rookie-sophmore all-star game. The guy was not even in rotation before Ridnour's injury and then Redd's injury. You guys overate Sessions like most fans of other teams overate their young players. We all laughed when Pistons fans said how "Amir Johnson is not aviable". Now majority here makes same mistake. Sessions is not worth it. You will see.

I hope you honestly didn't just use the rookie/sophomore game as evidence of something? You're using that, but bashing me using a FULL SEASON of stats? I'm not using one game, I'm using the entire season. The offense suffered when Ramon was off the floor, it actually slightly improved with RJ off the court. That is FACTS, whether you like them or not.

Sessions isn't worth the MLE but RJ is worth $14M? That is hilarious. If anyone is overrating anyone, it's you overrating RJ. He was slightly above average this year, and he's not getting any better.

Why would I be biased for Hammond? He is not from my country, he is not my family, he has no connection with me whatsoever. Why would I be biased for Hammond? Makes no sense

If Sessions walks for nothing, you'll rationalize it, if Sessions re-signs, you'll rationalize it. You agree with Hammond no matter what. It's clear bias.

[paulpressey25]

Again it all comes back to the contract you are paid.

RJ is a great guy. Every team in the league would love to have him on their roster. But not at $14/$15 million a year.

I'd be curious if NBA GM's were asked whether they take Childress/Sessions for $14 million or RJ for $14 million. I'd bet that 80% of them would take Childress/Sessions. Maybe more.