Wizards @ Bucks - 1/4/08 - 7:30PM

icat2000 · Post #61 » by **icat2000** » Sat Jan 5, 2008 1:54 am

Yuck three turnovers now on Yi.

Simulack · Post #62 » by **Simulack** » Sat Jan 5, 2008 1:55 am

I think Yi is actually being aggressive on offense because he realizes no one on the Bucks tonight is going to get pissed off he is the higher scorer.

Plus he can save a lot of energy not having to fit with Redd for rebounds.

carmelbrownqueen · Post #63 » by **carmelbrownqueen** » Sat Jan 5, 2008 1:56 am

Glad that ball hog Redd isn't playing because our offense looks so much better without him. We aren't turning over the ball. We're defending better. Bogut is producing well because he is getting the ball more. We have no use for Redd whatsoever.

REDDzone · Post #64 » by **REDDzone** » Sat Jan 5, 2008 1:56 am

Seven turnovers, its more when you consider the garbage Bogut throwing up was basically turnovers.

Ugly.

icat2000 · Post #65 » by **icat2000** » Sat Jan 5, 2008 1:56 am

Yea the line should be shorter for the rebounds tonight

worthlessBucks · Post #66 » by **worthlessBucks** » Sat Jan 5, 2008 1:56 am

Mo is holding the ball too long on those double teams I'd say. That's a big cause for our crappy offense at the moment.

LUKE23 · Post #67 » by **LUKE23** » Sat Jan 5, 2008 1:56 am

Way to step up in Redd's absence Bogut. God you suck.

Getting easily outplayed by HAYWOOD.

Simulack · Post #68 » by **Simulack** » Sat Jan 5, 2008 1:57 am

Haywood>Bogut.

jerrod · Post #69 » by **jerrod** » Sat Jan 5, 2008 1:57 am

carmelbrownqueen wrote:Glad that ball hog Redd isn't playing because our offense looks so much better without him. We aren't turning over the ball. We're defending better. Bogut is producing well because he is getting the ball more. We have no use for Redd whatsoever.

tyland · Post #70 » by **tyland** » Sat Jan 5, 2008 1:57 am

How many players are out tonight? Redd, Voskul, Gadz???

Does that mean we will be seeing some Awvee and a fair amount of Ruffin?

LUKE23 · Post #71 » by **LUKE23** » Sat Jan 5, 2008 1:57 am

carmelbrownqueen wrote:Glad that ball hog Redd isn't playing because our offense looks so much better without him. We aren't turning over the ball. We're defending better. Bogut is producing well because he is getting the ball more. We have no use for Redd whatsoever.

No one has ever said this, any of it. The Redd lovers love to rationalize everything though.

REDDzone · Post #72 » by **REDDzone** » Sat Jan 5, 2008 1:57 am

carmelbrownqueen wrote:Glad that ball hog Redd isn't playing because our offense looks so much better without him. We aren't turning over the ball. We're defending better. Bogut is producing well because he is getting the ball more. We have no use for Redd whatsoever.

We suck with him, we suck without him.

Simulack · Post #73 » by **Simulack** » Sat Jan 5, 2008 1:57 am

LUKE23 wrote:Way to step up in Redd's absence Bogut. God you suck.

Getting easily outplayed by HAYWOOD.

I've compared Bogut to Haywood numerous times before so I was sort of jokingly looking forward to this match-up.

Pretty even players in terms of what they contribute right now.

LUKE23 · Post #74 » by **LUKE23** » Sat Jan 5, 2008 1:58 am

Simulack wrote:Haywood>Bogut.

Sad but true.

jerrod · Post #75 » by **jerrod** » Sat Jan 5, 2008 1:58 am

MFScho wrote:Mo is holding the ball too long on those double teams I'd say. That's a big cause for our crappy offense at the moment.

you don't think the 7 turnovers to 8 points might be hurting us?

cam2win · Post #76 » by **cam2win** » Sat Jan 5, 2008 1:59 am

carmelbrownqueen wrote:Glad that ball hog Redd isn't playing because our offense looks so much better without him. We aren't turning over the ball. We're defending better. Bogut is producing well because he is getting the ball more. We have no use for Redd whatsoever.

To be fair, we wouldn't GIVE Redd away...

worthlessBucks · Post #77 » by **worthlessBucks** » Sat Jan 5, 2008 1:59 am

jerrod wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

you don't think the 7 turnovers to 8 points might be hurting us?

That's a concern, but Mo is taking a bit too long to swing to the open man.

Simulack · Post #78 » by **Simulack** » Sat Jan 5, 2008 1:59 am

LUKE23 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Sad but true.

Its OK. There might still be a team out there that will trade a Caron Butler like prospect for Brown I mean Bogut just because he was a #1 pick.

LUKE23 · Post #79 » by **LUKE23** » Sat Jan 5, 2008 2:00 am

This game is over.

trwi7 · Post #80 » by **trwi7** » Sat Jan 5, 2008 2:00 am

Is forfeiting an option?