Ramon Sessions pours 44 tonight in against Detroit. He basically out Iversoned Allen Iverson tonight.


Charlie V had a very efficient 33 points, but got jobbed by the refs on several fouls and fouled out 20 seconds into overtime.


The bucks need to lock both of these guys up, the only way they will be able to do it is to dump Jefferson for expirings. This needs to be done soon. These guys are integral to the future success of this organization.

I agree. CV is still a scoring forward, but he has been doing pretty good on the rebounding as well. Sessions is a shoot first PG, but is doing it right now due to lack of personnel.

The worst part is I am still posting in the Bucks' forum

Dump Redd as soon as you have a chance, Sessions can be that 2 guard of the future that can actually play defense.

quote:

Dump Redd as soon as you have a chance, Sessions can be that 2 guard of the future that can actually play defense.

If you honestly think he's the SG of the future, I am glad that you have no say in the Bucks decisions. Sessions is 6'3", and would be a mismatch against just about every SG in the NBA worth talking about. You'll say that Dwayne Wade has similar measurables, but do you really think he's Dwayne Wade?

I like Sessions, but a starting 2 he is not. He's a tweener PG that has some versatility, and is an excellent player to have off the bench- but I don't see him as a starting caliber PG or a SG. Maybe a future 6th man award winner. But if the price is right, sure- keep him. Perhaps he'll be the PG heir when Ridnour's contract is up after next year.

As far as Villanueve is concerned, I fear that it is the contract that motivates him. He knows that in order to get any kind if FA deal, he better start getting with the program. I mean, you love having a guy like him- 6'10", shoot from anywhere... but he plays z-e-r-o defense. He'll get some boards, but one-dimensional players like him are not who you pay monster contracts to. The only way you have a guy like him on your starting squad is if all the other players are really good defensively. The Bucks are defensively deficient at PG and SG, in addition to any time CV is on the floor.

The Bucks still lack the franchise player they need. I know the sentiment is to deal Redd, but who is going to accept a $17-18M player with a blown knee?

The players that they need to get rid of for expiring contracts are Gadzuric and Jefferson. If you can dangle Jefferson as a battle tested, playoff caliber player for a rising team in need of a SF, you ask them to take Gadzuric as well and then pick up some expiring contracts.

I could call up the Thunder and as them for Chris Wilcox ($6.75M in last year), Nick Collison ($6.25M with 2 years left at $13M total), and Donyell Marshall ($5.95M in last year). They get a veteran player that allows them to maybe make a push in 2009-10 for a playoff spot. The Bucks get 2 expiring deals and Nick Collison, who is a solid PF and would work well in Skiles' offense.

The room this opens up is re-allocating Gadzuric's deal for a player that can actually play (saving $1M in the process), and they free up $29M over the next 2 years.

Dwayne Wade coming "home" to Milwaukee? Carlos Boozer teaming with Andrew Bogut as the front line of the future? Make an offer to Brandon Roy that the Blazers cannot match? All 3 are possible after the 2010 season if they pull this off.

quote:

If you honestly think he's the SG of the future, I am glad that you have no say in the Bucks decisions. Sessions is 6'3", and would be a mismatch against just about every SG in the NBA worth talking about. You'll say that Dwayne Wade has similar measurables, but do you really think he's Dwayne Wade?

I like Sessions, but a starting 2 he is not. He's a tweener PG that has some versatility, and is an excellent player to have off the bench- but I don't see him as a starting caliber PG or a SG. Maybe a future 6th man award winner. But if the price is right, sure- keep him. Perhaps he'll be the PG heir when Ridnour's contract is up after next year.

- Thats what they said about Redd's shooting and Sessions can run circles around Redd.

You don't need the 2 to be a franchise player, you need him to score. Sessions is very nicely working his way towards that and its pretty obvious from Redd's play, I guy like Sessions can learn to improve his outside shot.

Yeah, he could be the PG but you'll have to pay him like a starting PG and Ridnour is fairly young and is an ideal assist man. Put it another way, he'll be the quickest 2 guard in the NBA and he CAN defend. BTW, if you have a solid 3,4,5 and a solid defending 4,5 coming off the bench ... anytime you have a 6'3 2 guard you'll be alright on the D end.

quote:

and would be a mismatch against just about every SG in the NBA worth talking about

- BTW, Who are we talking about?
The guys we have the most problems with are first rate PG's and teams with good 3 and 4 positions ... so I think you are wrong.

quote:

You don't need the 2 to be a franchise player, you need him to score. Sessions is very nicely working his way towards that and its pretty obvious from Redd's play, I guy like Sessions can learn to improve his outside shot.

Well, I think the ability to score is overrated. Redd could always do that- it never made them better.

Sessions is a better defender, for sure, but 6'3" going against the likes of Kobe, Johnson, Carter, Allen... he's at leats 2 inshes shorter than all of them. He's undersized, and come playoff time, it will be exposed. The league is full of guys like Sessions.

Like I said- as a 6th man, great. I could stomach him as a PG, but he'll never be elite there. I don't mean to sound like I'm down on the kid- quite the contrary. But I refuse to get excited over guys like this anymore. Mo Williams, Mike Redd, and a host of players from other teams like Mike James, Antonio Daniels, Gerald Wallace- yeah, these guys all showed they can play. But every one of them wound up getting valued like a potential star (and given 5 to 6 year $30-40M contracts) and never lived up to it because they just were never going to be elite. Sessions is keepable- but only for the right price.

quote:

Sessions is keepable- but only for the right price.

- Thats all I'm saying.

BTW, I'd be ecstatic for Sessions to possibly get abused in the playoffs by the #2's ... first, we'd be in the playoffs and 2nd, he'd blow by anyone not named Bryant from the list you named. If he knocks down outside shots like Redd has learned to do, he'd be a nightmare matchup if we also have Ridnour on the floor to take care of the PG.

IMO, you underestimate what Skiles does on defense to begin with ...

BTW, Great game last night with win over a pretty good Houston Rockets team.

If this team gets balanced scoring, they play such good fundamental defense that they'll be in almost every game until Bogut gets back and all you can ask for at this point is to get into the final 3 minutes close enough to win.

Could someone tell me why we got rid of Bogans the first time?
Man sure seems that was a steal/godsend getting him for Lue ... he is tough and defensive minded.

Nice to see the kid they brought up from D League gets some play. The consensus is he might be a "diamond in the rough" guy.

The Bucks biggest flub was keeping Redd and not moving him when they had the chance. Teams like Cleveland were lining up to get him and even ran a "race" for him this past offseason in 2008.

I never say him as a guy who bought into Skiles system and road the bench a few times because of his "me" first play.

With Session's numbers, it seems to me the Bucks may be set at PG between him and Ridnour. Could it be possible a healthy Bucks team is set at C, PG, and PF (Charly V)?

By the way, why are many here suggesting to let Jefferson go? Has his play been subpar?

Subpar - yes, at least IMO (although he's provided some level of intangibles).

However, he costs way too much & we likely lose CV (& possibly Sessions) if we don't trade him for cap space (unless Herb decides to pay the luxury tax).

I am probably one of the few people who actually thinks Sessions can be a starting level PG for this team. All the guy goes is play well- he plays D, he makes good decisions, and he can provide offense when needed. What I like best about him is he is unselfish, and in the NBA I think that is the #1 quality for a good PG. I would have no problems locking him up and making him the starting PG.

CV is a slightly different situation. He is a very skilled and gifted offensive player, but much like #22 he is a defensive liability and I question his effort at times on that end of the court. Personally, those kind of guys are easy to replace. There are a lot of guys that can score 15+ PPG in the NBA, but what separates the OK players from great players is that those such guys, ala KG, Kobe, LeBron, Wade, etc are complete- they play all aspects and make others around them better.

The other item is that I would keep Jefferson. Sure, he makes a lot of money, but I think his value to the team is high because he can be effective on the defensive end and he also rebounds OK for a guy his size. Bottom line, he's not a one trick pony.

quote:

The Bucks biggest flub was keeping Redd and not moving him when they had the chance. Teams like Cleveland were lining up to get him and even ran a "race" for him this past offseason in 2008.

Boom!

The good news is that they did unload that albatross of a deal in Mo Williams and he's a Redd clone- all offense, but no defense

When you have the other pieces on the floor and on the bench who are committed to playing good defense ... Sessions and Ridnour can be on the floor to start a game.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/d/dumarjo01.html

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/t/thomais01.html

quote:

When you have the other pieces on the floor and on the bench who are committed to playing good defense ... Sessions and Ridnour can be on the floor to start a game.

You cannot possibly justify your assertion by referring to Isaiah Thomas and Joe Dumars. For one thing, the Pistons were a guard-oriented offensive team. In other words, their tandem of guards ranks with the NBA ALL TIME best. Right there goes any justification.

More than that, your assertion seems to include dampening any guard defensive liabilities. Well, the Pistons had a front court of Laimbeer, Mahorn, and Rodman. All played tenacious defense with Rodman being near the best in the entire NBA.

Do you think CV will suddenly become a defensive and rebounding equivalent of a Dennis Rodman?

No ... now you are getting silly.

The premise that you can not have a 6'0 PG and a 6'3 SG in the same starting lineup is false. Of course you'd have to have other facets working with the right personnel but the idea that you can't is not right.