Washington Post: RJ A "Great" Option For The Wizards

[paulpressey25]

From Bill Simmons Column (RJ reference below). Ferry just needed to offer either Hickson or maybe just their first round pick and I think that deal would have gotten done.

Q: What should I have done differently?
-- D. Ferry, Cleveland

SG: You mean other than trading Wally Szczerbiak's expiring contract in February when 20 teams were dying to save money and you had a chance to turn a zero into a crunch-time guy? Besides that?

You looked around at the playoff landscape, shrugged your shoulders and said, "Yeah, we're good," even though you didn't have a backup center or a true perimeter player with size other than LeBron. If you turned Wally into Antawn Jamison and Brendan Haywood, that could have worked. If you turned Wally, J.J. Hickson and a future No. 1 into Marcus Camby and an expiring deal, that could have worked. If you turned Wally into Richard Jefferson (whom the Bucks were trying to give away), that would have worked. If you turned Wally and Pavlovic into Shaq and Matt Barnes when Phoenix was desperately trying to shave money, that REALLY would have worked. By doing nothing, you basically said, "We can win with what we have." And you didn't. Note to Cavs fans: If you're looking for a place to direct your anger and dismay, start here. Your front office choked. Not only could Shaq have defended Dwight Howard without help, he could have out-Tweeted him after every game. You were robbed.

[europa]

I thought at the time Pritchard screwed up badly with regards to Raef's contract. And the Blazers got burned in the playoffs as a result. In retrospect (and that's tricky given how good the Cavs were looking at the time), Ferry screwed the pooch with Wally's expiring too. I'm not absolving Hammond for passing on a trade I think he should have made but as Simmons points out, Ferry should have been more aggressive and the fact he wasn't cost his team a chance to get to the Finals and possibly a championship.

[LUKE23]

Hammond is drunk out of his mind if he thinks RJ is worth a big expiring and Hickson or a first. Wow talk about overrating your players.

RJ and Redd are not viewed that highly around the league. The sooner Hammond realizes that, the better. We're not going to get great talent in return for those two.

[europa]

Hammond is drunk out of his mind if he thinks RJ is worth a big expiring and Hickson or a first. Wow talk about overrating your players.

You do realize there isn't a single quote or shred of evidence that suggests this is what Hammond wanted from the Cavs, right? The Hickson and/or first is what Press proposed. All we know is Hammond didn't want Wally only. We don't know what it would have taken to get a deal done.

[LUKE23]

Considering that RJ for Wally is nearly identical salary-wise as is, it's safe to say that whatever else Hammond wanted wasn't worth very much, so that would be either a guy on a rookie contract or a first round pick (that has no trade value). Those are the only two options that would make it work, unless the Bucks were including something else, which was never speculated.

[blueedwards]

If the Wizards pass on trading for Redd. I still think Knicks would consider Redd. Ya they want to take less salary on. But they also want stars next to LeBron in 2010. Knicks probably go over payroll soon as they sign LeBron anyway and either Bosh or Amare. So it wont be that big of difference with Redd there too. Knicks been riding a $100M+ payroll for years now. That was with garbage players even. Redd for #8 and Curry. They probably want us to take Jefferies back to. Not sure if I want him. I know Skiles cant stand Curry. Curry is crap for rebounding but decent scorer. Unless the Knicks dont want Redd but expiring deals. We could offer Ridnour,Elson,Allen for #8 and Curry. lol

[LUKE23]

Redd would double NY's committed salaries for 2010-11. Yes, they would still have enough for LeBron, but it would make filling out the rest of the roster with quality players pretty difficult.

[blueedwards]

Well im sure the Knicks wont have troubles landing vets for the minimum if they know there gonna be with LeBron,Bosh and Redd. Thats better then the Celtics and close enough to top Orlando.

[Rockmaninoff]

I don't have a problem with Hammond asking for more than Szczerbiak, if that is indeed the case.

Jefferson would have been able to check either Paul Pierce or Hedo Turkoglu, leaving Steroid Jaw to matchup on the 4's, play help defense, and conserve more energy for offense. Their best perimeter defender, Delonte West, could then check the 1's and 2's, instead of the Turkoglu. The odds are that the Cavaliers would have made it to the Finals.

Of course, there is a large subset of people here who think giving multiply rotation players to a contender is just great. I personally think it would have just added to the stigma surrounding the Herb Kohl Bucks, while at the same time giving our new General Manager the appearance of a rube or a collusionist in the eyes of his peers and of the general public.

[LUKE23]

Of course, there is a large subset of people here who think giving multiply rotation players to a contender is just great.

No, they don't think it's "great", they just think it's not relevant to worry about what other teams are doing when you yourself are not yet a contender. We need to improve us regardless of how it helps others. If the Bucks were a contender now, then making the Cavs better would matter. They are not, so it does not.

[paul]

Hammond is drunk out of his mind if he thinks RJ is worth a big expiring and Hickson or a first. Wow talk about overrating your players.

RJ and Redd are not viewed that highly around the league. The sooner Hammond realizes that, the better. We're not going to get great talent in return for those two.

Actually I think Hammond did EXACTLY the right thing turning those two sh*t trades down and both Pritchard and Ferry both made a complete mess of their deadline negotiations. You do not give away someone of RJ's quality for exactly zero talent in return unless you are in 100% pure tank mode, no one will ever be able to convince me that you do.
Had either Ferry or Pritchard offered a first or a young player with talent in those deals chances are either of their teams are preparing for a finals series right now. They completely f***** it up and if it was our GM this board would be in complete meltdown mode over it, but because this is the Bucks board people are STILL whining about our GM making the right call. I know there's an extroadinarily vocal group on here who think he made the wrong call, but that doesn't make them right no matter how many times it's repeated. It's time this organization stopped being everyone elses bitch.

[LUKE23]

Actually I think Hammond did EXACTLY the right thing turning those two sh*t trades down and both Pritchard and Ferry both made a complete mess of their deadline negotiations. You do not give away someone of RJ's quality for exactly zero talent in return unless you are in 100% pure tank mode, no one will ever be able to convince me that you do.

Well paul, I will always disagree with that short-sighted thinking. For me, if I'm a GM, and I evaluate my roster and see that at no point in the future will THAT roster be a contender, then I'm making moves to starting changing it now. I'm not waiting. If anyone thinks a Redd/RJ/Bogut core is going to contend, fine, but I will never agree with that at all. In the NBA you have to have a concrete plan, it's the hardest sport to build a contender. I don't think clearing out bad salaries, locking up young talent relatively cheap, and then having a few years of higher picks is a bad plan for the Bucks.

You don't just incrementally improve in the NBA from mediocrity to contention without some drastic moves. That's just how it is. Why some people want to just hold onto Redd/RJ for two more years and THEN start making some moves is beyond me.

[europa]

Paul, I didn't agree with Hammond's decision not to trade RJ to the Cavs. I hope that decision doesn't bite him in the ass but there is a possibility it will. But I wanted to tell you I thought that was a damn good post. I especially liked the last sentence.

[paul]

Luke you and I will disagree on this until the end of time and I have no problem with that, honestly. I respect your opinion, like you as a poster and appreciate that you have a great knowledge of the game.

That being said my view is NOT shortsighted. I'm a long view guy. You can disagree with me all you like, but I didn't shoot down those deals because I wanted gratification in the way of 20 points from RJ the next night or wanted him leading a playoff push this season, that had absolutely nothing to do with it in fact.

You guys can bitch and moan about us 'not having room' for CV all you want, but our gm DOES NOT WANT HIM. It has nothing to do with cap room and everything to do with the fact that the gm and/or coach made a CONSCIOUS DECISION not to clear the space to keep him, that should have been patently clear on deadline day. RJ is more valuable to this team than CV, that is not in question imo. But regardless of that, this organization has been a laughing stock for FAR too long among the rest of the league. Hammond had Pritchard (reportedly) being a dick with him and jacking up the price as the negotiations went along, well guess what KP, get f*****, because the Bucks don't roll like that any more. Ferry was getting handed a title if he could get RJ (or equivilant) and he knew it, but instead of getting it done he decided to get greedy and give up nothing but Wally in the deal. Again, eat it Danny, your now trying to figure out how the hell you are going to improve AND keep LBJ instead of lining up tickets to the finals for your former teammates. If you want something we've got that we want to keep then be damn sure your going to pay for it, I don't care what city you come from or who your owner is.

The Bucks are no longer a doormat to be taken advantage of and we don't give up quality players who we want to keep for no talent in return just to make another GM happy while they snigger at us under their breath. Hammond will build a winner here imo, whether some posters like it or not. You and many (most) others disagree Luke, but the most important first thing that had to change with this organization was the mentality, and it is.

[paul]

Paul, I didn't agree with Hammond's decision not to trade RJ to the Cavs. I hope that decision doesn't bite him in the ass but there is a possibility it will. But I wanted to tell you I thought that was a damn good post. I especially liked the last sentence.

Cheers Europa

[LUKE23]

The Bucks are no longer a doormat to be taken advantage of and we don't give up quality players who we want to keep for no talent in return just to make another GM happy while they snigger at us under their breath. Hammond will build a winner here imo, whether some posters like it or not. You and many (most) others disagree Luke, but the most important first thing that had to change with this organization was the mentality, and it is.

Hope you're right paul. I think we'll be a winner (42+ games), but I think Hammond will have to change his approach and his financial view if we're going to contend.

[paul]

When I said a 'winner' I wasn't using the textbook definition Luke - I mean becoming a force in the East, I mean being a top 4 team in the East, I mean pushing for conference titles and who knows. I don't think that will happen this coming season but I do think Hammond can get us there over time. I don't think of a .500 team going out in the first round as being a 'winner', that is not my goal nor what I was referring to in my post.

EDIT - you changed your post, sneaky! But yeah your POV didn't change so I thought I'd leave this post to clear up what I meant anyway.

[DH34Phan]

You guys can bitch and moan about us 'not having room' for CV all you want, but our gm DOES NOT WANT HIM.

So that means we automatically have to accept the decision and not care that we are giving CV away for nothing?

It has nothing to do with cap room and everything to do with the fact that the gm and/or coach made a CONSCIOUS DECISION not to clear the space to keep him, that should have been patently clear on deadline day.

Again, regardless of not wanting to keep him, they should have gotten something for him. I guarantee we could have gotten a 2nd rounder at the very least.

RJ is more valuable to this team than CV, that is not in question imo.

I don't know about that. You can get a guy making 5-7 million a year to do what RJ does. For what CV does at 5-7 million a year compared to RJ is more valuable IMO. You can get CV, RJ's replacement, and another average player for RJ's contract.

But regardless of that, this organization has been a laughing stock for FAR too long among the rest of the league.

And with this past season, there is no reason IMO to see that coming to an end anytime soon.

Hammond had Pritchard (reportedly) being a dick with him and jacking up the price as the negotiations went along, well guess what KP, get f*****, because the Bucks don't roll like that any more.

This sounds really awesome, but do you think Pritchard is really kicking himself at not being able to acquire Richard Jefferson or Michael Redd? He had nothing to lose, and almost ended up with Sessions. Can you also tell me how the Bucks "roll" now?

Ferry was getting handed a title if he could get RJ (or equivilant) and he knew it, but instead of getting it done he decided to get greedy and give up nothing but Wally in the deal. Again, eat it Danny, your now trying to figure out how the hell you are going to improve AND keep LBJ instead of lining up tickets to the finals for your former teammates. If you want something we've got that we want to keep then be damn sure your going to pay for it, I don't care what city you come from or who your owner is.

This is a deal that both sides should have made. I personally think we screwed up that one. It was a perfectly fair deal, especially for a team, the Bucks, that need financial relief more than on court production. RJ to the Cavs would have hardly "handed" them the title, anyways.

The Bucks are no longer a doormat to be taken advantage of and we don't give up quality players who we want to keep for no talent in return just to make another GM happy while they snigger at us under their breath.

Name me deals that we have been "taken advantage of" in the last 5 years. The only deals that we have been taken advantage of are the ones we wanted! cough**Mo Williams trade**cough** Seems like we would rather take no talent in return rather than keeping the quality players.

Hammond will build a winner here imo, whether some posters like it or not. You and many (most) others disagree Luke, but the most important first thing that had to change with this organization was the mentality, and it is.

Yeah man, some posters here wouldn't like to see Hammond build a winner here. I like the positive attitude, but just because we talk a big game, doesn't mean the mentality has changed. If it had changed, there is no way Redd or RJ would be Milwaukee Bucks.

[paul]

It's going to take me too long to put all the quotes together, so in order -

No, it doesn't. But if a gm and highly respected coach don't want a guy on their team I'd suggest there's a reason for that.

There obviously wasn't a decent deal out there for him or it would have been made. There is still the possibility of a S&T, but I do feel they'll let him walk and that's ok by me. I also think Hammond and probably Kohl were extremely conscious of not allowing this team to 'fall off a cliff' like it has in the past. That is important in building a long term winner imo, and worth the 50th pick in a crappy draft or whatever we might have gotten.

RJ is more important to this (or almost any other) team than CV period, I'm not going to get into a debate about that. If you're talking money versus production then maybe but I could also make that argument by saying Moute at his contract level is worth more than Kobe on that scale when clearly that isn't the case.

This past season saw the Bucks take giant steps to no longer being a laughing stock imo.

Yes, I do, if his arrogance allows it. For Jefferson not Redd.

I don't think we screwed it up, nor do I think it was a fair deal, nor do I think financial flexibility is more important to the Bucks than on court production.

You must have missed the part where I said players 'who we want'. We did not want Mo, that is incredibly obvious.

I'm absolutely certain some posters hope Hammond fails, the four most powerful words on this board seem to be 'I told you so". Of course they'd rather see the Bucks win, but you can't tell me people (including yourself) don't enjoy bagging the hell out of Hammond, or you guys wouldn't spend half your lives doing it. And yes, the mentality has changed.

[raferfenix]

I definitely like your attitude Paul! I've never been entirely of the blame Hammond, but I've been very worried about his moves/nonmoves from this season. I really hope you are right though, and that Hammond not trading RJ had to do with a long term negotiating posture and, more importantly, changing the attitude of this franchise top down.

However, one caveat---you can't just say we didn't trade RJ because we didn't want to keep CV. That's certainly true, but what I think has everyone upset is the difficulty with which we have to keep Sessions, our draft pick, Ersan, and whatever else necessary to set up a playoff caliber bench.

Here's hoping he'll still be able to do this. Even more ideally, his hardball at the deadline will convince teams to raise their offers---it's not like the Cavs have any less need for a guy like RJ at this point!