Mayo signs with Bucks - 3 years/$24 million per Woj

crkone · Post #161 » by **crkone** » Sat Jul 6, 2013 3:20 am

rodgersxlvmvp wrote:this is why I don't post much on this board but enjoy the info/laughing at you ppl.... OJ MAYO OMG!!! terrible!!!! what is Hammond thinking????? now a complete 360... good deal he has room to improve and is only 25 plus a chance to resign when hes still young at 28. HA

Like OmG totally, right? Plz don't post again if you don't know what you're talking about.

Ayt · Post #162 » by **Ayt** » Sat Jul 6, 2013 3:22 am

Sherman Douglas wrote:
rodgersxlvmvp wrote:now a complete 360

You're very smart.

Bet that is Charles Gardner's account.

DukeH · Post #163 » by **DukeH** » Sat Jul 6, 2013 3:23 am

Wilford Brimley wrote:
rodgersxlvmvp wrote:this is why I don't post much on this board but enjoy the info/laughing at you ppl.... OJ MAYO OMG!!! terrible!!!! what is Hammond thinking????? now a complete 360... good deal he has room to improve and is only 25 plus a chance to resign when hes still young at 28. HA

because you clown, there was talk about him getting 4/40 if not more.

Yes, talk originating from this board that got you hyped up over nothing at all.

Baddy Chuck · Post #164 » by **Baddy Chuck** » Sat Jul 6, 2013 3:23 am

rodgersxlvmvp wrote:this is why I don't post much on this board but enjoy the info/laughing at you ppl.... OJ MAYO OMG!!! terrible!!!! what is Hammond thinking????? now a complete 360... good deal he has room to improve and is only 25 plus a chance to resign when hes still young at 28. HA

Bernman · Post #165 » by **Bernman** » Sat Jul 6, 2013 3:24 am

We have low standards in Milwaukee. Like DB stated early on in this thread, Mayo has been a net negative so far in his career. He's only had one Roland Rating that eclipsed 0 thus far in his career, and it was just barely, at +0.5, a few years ago. And we're happy we only gave him 8 million per year? I guess it's an OK deal for the Bucks, when precedents are contracts like 5/32 for Drew freaking Gooden.

A lot of people here were scared about overpaying Smith, but he only got 6 million per year, and he's a much better player than Mayo. Smith's Roland Ratings during Mayo's career: +3.7, +0.5, +1.8, +3.5, and +6.5. I'd have been thrilled with giving him 8-9 million per year in comparison. That should have landed him in Milwaukee.

I think this is another mistake by the Bucks, it's just not a Bucks' bad mistake, so I guess we're supposed be relieved about that. It's sickening being a fan of this franchise. <Cue Jim Paschke clone appearing to tell me how much of a baby I am to expect to win more than 43% of the time and have occasional hope to contend>

Wilford Brimley · Post #166 » by **Wilford Brimley** » Sat Jul 6, 2013 3:24 am

DukeH wrote:
Wilford Brimley wrote:
rodgersxlvmvp wrote:this is why I don't post much on this board but enjoy the info/laughing at you ppl.... OJ MAYO OMG!!! terrible!!!! what is Hammond thinking????? now a complete 360... good deal he has room to improve and is only 25 plus a chance to resign when hes still young at 28. HA

because you clown, there was talk about him getting 4/40 if not more.

Yes, talk originating from this board that got you hyped up over nothing at all.

huh?

europa · Post #167 » by **europa** » Sat Jul 6, 2013 3:25 am

DukeH wrote:Yes, talk originating from this board that got you hyped up over nothing at all.

In fairness to this board Jim it's been right a helluva lot more than the Bucks have lately.

LeopoldStotch · Post #168 » by **LeopoldStotch** » Sat Jul 6, 2013 3:25 am

bentley wrote:There is hope. Injuries aside, players reach their potential in year 5 (approximately) Even Michael J did not much in years 1-4 of his NBA career. Year 5 everything got much much better.

Except MJ averaged 37 PPG in his 3rd year.

DukeH · Post #169 » by **DukeH** » Sat Jul 6, 2013 3:25 am

europa wrote:
DukeH wrote:Yes, talk originating from this board that got you hyped up over nothing at all.

In fairness to this board Jim it's been right a helluva lot more than the Bucks have lately.

Selective memory probably has a lot to do with this viewpoint.

Baddy Chuck · Post #170 » by **Baddy Chuck** » Sat Jul 6, 2013 3:26 am

Bernman wrote:We have low standards in Milwaukee. Like DB stated early on in this thread, Mayo has been a net negative so far in his career. He's only had one Roland Rating that eclipsed 0 thus far in his career, and it was just barely, at +0.5, a few years ago. And we're happy we only gave him 8 million per year? I guess it's an OK deal for the Bucks, when precedents are contracts like 5/32 for Drew freaking Gooden.

A lot of people here were scared about overpaying Smith, but he only got 6 million per year, and he's a much better player than Mayo. Smith's Roland Ratings during Mayo's career: +3.7, +0.5, +1.8, +3.5, and +6.5. I'd have been thrilled with giving him 8-9 million per year in comparison. That should have landed him in Milwaukee.

I think this is another mistake by the Bucks, it's just not a Bucks' bad mistake, so I guess we should be relieved. It's sickening being a fan of this franchise. <Cue Jim Paschke clone appearing to tell me how much of a baby I am to expect to win more than 43% of the time and have occasional hope to contend>

I don't know what this Roland Rating is, but OJ Mayo is not worse then JR Smith so I don't think I'd ever be using it anyways.

LittleRooster · Post #171 » by **LittleRooster** » Sat Jul 6, 2013 3:26 am

europa wrote:
DukeH wrote:Yes, talk originating from this board that got you hyped up over nothing at all.

In fairness to this board Jim it's been right a helluva lot more than the Bucks have lately.

Does anyone know if this is, for real, Jim?

europa · Post #172 » by **europa** » Sat Jul 6, 2013 3:27 am

DukeH wrote:
europa wrote:
DukeH wrote:Yes, talk originating from this board that got you hyped up over nothing at all.

In fairness to this board Jim it's been right a helluva lot more than the Bucks have lately.

Selective memory probably has a lot to do with this viewpoint.

Nope. Just the facts.

Then again, given the Bucks' batting average lately it's not like they present a real difficult opponent to attempt to conquer. So yeah there's that.

DukeH · Post #173 » by **DukeH** » Sat Jul 6, 2013 3:28 am

LittleRooster wrote:
europa wrote:
DukeH wrote:Yes, talk originating from this board that got you hyped up over nothing at all.

In fairness to this board Jim it's been right a helluva lot more than the Bucks have lately.

Does anyone know if this is, for real, Jim?

Nah, this board is paranoid and thinks anyone who isn't on the tank bandwagon is part of the Bucks FO.

RickInCali · Post #174 » by **RickInCali** » Sat Jul 6, 2013 3:28 am

The idea that Mayo is better than Monta is ridiculous. The other thing to me is that I don't see how you bring back Jennings to start with this guy? You can't roll with 2 guys who absolutely cannot go to the hole (and finish), especially when we have no real interior scoring. I'm happy if Hammond agrees. Note that for those of you on the "Monta is crap" bandwagon....take a look at who wants him and you'll see he has much better prospects than the Bucks or what Mayo obviously had.

That said, I hated the idea of Mayo because I thought it would take 4/40 to make that happen. Shows what I know.....I even thought that after Tyreke's deal. I'm happy as I could be at this price, but there's no way this improves what we were last year. Still need a backup 2, a PG and a 3, but I'm hopeful because this deal isn't bad for what was out there. Let's get with Minny and get a PG!

europa · Post #175 » by **europa** » Sat Jul 6, 2013 3:30 am

DukeH wrote:Nah, this board is paranoid and thinks anyone who isn't on the tank bandwagon is part of the Bucks FO.

Technically, you don't work for the FO though do you Jim. Unless you got a promotion we don't know about. If so, congrats. I remember watching you in Madison at Channel 15. Seems like a long time ago, doesn't it?

apdamico · Post #176 » by **apdamico** » Sat Jul 6, 2013 3:31 am

Step #1 accomplished, now let's get rid of Jennings and move on!

DukeH · Post #177 » by **DukeH** » Sat Jul 6, 2013 3:33 am

europa wrote:
DukeH wrote:Nah, this board is paranoid and thinks anyone who isn't on the tank bandwagon is part of the Bucks FO.

Technically, you don't work for the FO though do you Jim. Unless you got a promotion we don't know about. If so, congrats. I remember watching you in Madison at Channel 15. Seems like a long time ago, doesn't it?

They first said I was a cronie, then decided I was Pashke. I hear they make meds for paranoia.

Serge28 · Post #178 » by **Serge28** » Sat Jul 6, 2013 3:33 am

Much better than what I feared. Both in terms of number of years and the amount per year. I can easily live with 3/$24 million. We didn't overpay huge due to being in the Milwaukee market, we didn't spend a ton of money on an old guy. Mayo still has some upside and in the beginning of last sseason played very well. Not a bad gamble. Mayo at this contract is much better value than Ellis at $12 million or Reddick at $6 million. Ersan at $8 million per as well. I can't see Jennings being given a huge deal and him becoming the highest paid player on the team now, which is great.

europa · Post #179 » by **europa** » Sat Jul 6, 2013 3:34 am

DukeH wrote:
europa wrote:
DukeH wrote:Nah, this board is paranoid and thinks anyone who isn't on the tank bandwagon is part of the Bucks FO.

Technically, you don't work for the FO though do you Jim. Unless you got a promotion we don't know about. If so, congrats. I remember watching you in Madison at Channel 15. Seems like a long time ago, doesn't it?

They first said I was a cronie, then decided I was Pashke. I hear they make meds for paranoia.

I'm many things Jim but paranoid ain't one of 'em.

Bernman · Post #180 » by **Bernman** » Sat Jul 6, 2013 3:34 am

Baddy Chuck wrote:I don't know what this Roland Rating is, but OJ Mayo is not worse then JR Smith so I don't think I'd ever be using it anyways.

It's the combined stat of PER differential and on/off +/-. It's not perfect, as no stat is, but a logical way to judge a player. How well did you do production and efficiency wise in comparison to your opposition, and if you're not a stat stuffer or put up hollow stats, what is your effect on a team then to compensate.

It's there to correct mistakes like the misperception OJ Mayo is not worse than JR Smith. He is worse, because of defense, less ability to create quickly in late clock situations, and slightly lower efficiency over his career.