Redd and Bogut vie for control of the Bucks' offense

[Bucks_Revenge]

like I said before trade Redd before he kills the season.

[Epicurus]

-= original quote snipped =-



I can agree with that but I will take the younger Center over the older shooting guard any day.

True, if push comes to shove.

[Fight the Tank]

[quote="jeremyd236"][/quote]

I never said we had to trade Redd but what are his motives with making this comments after a win. Is he trying to take back control over this team? Is his ego getting in the way of allowing Bogut to become a main figure offensively? I don't get it. It screams that Michael Redd is a very selfish player who only cares about getting his points as evidenced by him chucking up one last 3 pointer at the buzzer to try and get his 40. Guys like Ricky Davis do garbage like that.

I would love to see Redd and Bogut coexist with Bogut getting 15 pts a game while making Redd better and more efficient. I just don't think it will happen. Not to mention Redd's usual non existent defense. If the right trade comes around I would have no problem trading him.

Hey my user name may scream of Bogut "bias" but I am a fan of the Bucks first and foremost.

[jeremyd236]

-= original quote snipped =-



I never said we had to trade Redd but what are his motives with making this comments after a win. Is he trying to take back control over this team? Is his ego getting in the way of allowing Bogut to become a main figure offensively? I don't get it. It screams that Michael Redd is a very selfish player who only cares about getting his points as evidenced by him chucking up one last 3 pointer at the buzzer to try and get his 40. Guys like Ricky Davis do garbage like that.

I would love to see Redd and Bogut coexist with Bogut getting 15 pts a game while making Redd better and more efficient. I just don't think it will happen. Not to mention Redd's usual non existent defense. If the right trade comes around I would have no problem trading him.

Hey my user name may scream of Bogut "bias" but I am a fan of the Bucks first and foremost.

See this is where I question of how the conference actually went. If you actually read the original quote, you see that Redd isn't saying "give me the ball, let me play", etc. He's interpreting what LK said to Redd during that meeting. And for all we know, that very well could have happened.

The original point of this thread was to question the interpretations of Bogut and Redd, and to try and make it seem like they don't see eye to eye.

I don't think this is true. Redd can still play his way and still feed Bogut the ball. Don't forget, Redd had 5 assists last night. I know that's not a ton, but everyone here makes it seem like all he wanted to do was score. He wanted to win the game, just like Bogut.

I think it's important to get all information on quotes before jumping to conclusions and making decisions on the players' motives. We don't know how the interview went, or how the conference went for that matter.

[Fight the Tank]

[quote="jeremyd236"][/quote]

Well if Redd was misquoted he should come out and say that he was taken out of context because the way I read it doesn't shed a positive light on him.

[jeremyd236]

-= original quote snipped =-



Well if Redd was misquoted he should come out and say that he was taken out of context because the way I read it doesn't shed a positive light on him.

I'm not saying he was misquoted. He said what he said word for word. But he was interpreting the way the supposed "conference" went. I don't think Redd would sit there and lie.

The original poster and creator of this thread is saying that there's fictional tension between our players as to who the offense has to "run through".

I mean, there is no "battle" taking place. Redd's not going to win or lose this "battle", because its not happening.

If people actually read the article and the context it was in, it's obvious that he's not making demands or saying how he wants to to play. And maybe it just came out wrong too. LK could've simply been telling him not to think as much and just go out there and play basketball. If that is true then it doesn't look so bad, does it?

[paul]

[quote="jeremyd236"][/quote]

The 'let me play, let me loose etc' quote is pretty difficult to misconstrue, no matter what context it was said in. Given at least 3 teammates that I can remember (Bobby, CB, Bogut) along with the coach, came out with quotes regarding 'team play' being the only way to play while Redd was injured, I'll say again I don't think this would be sitting well in the locker room.

[Dags]

Well if Redd was misquoted he should come out and say that he was taken out of context because the way I read it doesn't shed a positive light on him.

He probably wouldn't know if he's been misquoted. He's probably only just getting out of bed after a late night flight to Toronto. And I doubt that his daily priorities include checking the internet for fanboys reactions to his comments.

[Fight the Tank]

-= original quote snipped =-



I'm not saying he was misquoted. He said what he said word for word. But he was interpreting the way the supposed "conference" went. I don't think Redd would sit there and lie.

The original poster and creator of this thread is saying that there's fictional tension between our players as to who the offense has to "run through".

I mean, there is no "battle" taking place. Redd's not going to win or lose this "battle", because its not happening.

If people actually read the article and the context it was in, it's obvious that he's not making demands or saying how he wants to to play. And maybe it just came out wrong too. LK could've simply been telling him not to think as much and just go out there and play basketball. If that is true then it doesn't look so bad, does it?

Well now you are trying to interpret stuff that wasn't there while the rest of us are reading what he said. Right?

[dunhill]

I flly expect Redd to deal with guys like Mike Dunleavy (letting him go for 22 is a problem) his worth as a star (if he is one) comes against the next level of guards in the league guys like Joe Johnson, Rip, the aging Ray Allen who are IMO on the same level as him (occasional All Star) and superstars, MVP candidates (Kobe, AI, dwayne wade). If he thinks he's as good as they are then he has to be able to get his without killing the morale and confidence of his teammates. (look at how wade uses Haslem, Bogut is at least as good as good if not light years ahead offensively, Haslem gets opportnuities in the places he can score and Wade is more than willing to let him, I've never seen him denied an opportnity on a mismatch or when he has good position, he gets rewarded for running the floor etc etc)

I mean I really think about it sometimes about who I'd rather have on a team in the pool of players on the same level he is and I think about MAnu Ginobili, Kevin Martin, Monta Ellis, Joe Johnson etc etc and what they bring in terms of chemistry and what Redd has failed to do so far in his career and it makes it tough as a fan to think this nothing but posturing.

A lot of people here are fans and they're divided, what we see on the cort is no different to what they see on the court. I really do think there is a lot of unhappiness on the team and it really comes down to AB and Redd and how they play together. It's gotten better in recent times, becase there is balance, but yo have to wonder if AB gets frozen out, what happens to Yi, what happens to the next lottery pick/FA that comes?

[jeremyd236]

-= original quote snipped =-



Well now you are trying to interpret stuff that wasn't there while the rest of us are reading what he said. Right?

No, I'm doing exactly what the original poster did. To sit here and speculate as to what "really" is going on behind the scenes is just ludacris. We are fans, we do not know. If the players do not have a problem with eachother, why should we?

I mean it's okay to not like a player's game, but lets not create fictional tension by bolding quotes in an article that selectively chose quotes to begin with....

[Epicurus]

Your view of Dunleavy, dunhill, is a bit out of date. He is having a good year (O'Brien is obviously thus a better coach than his previous one). He was in a game or two shooting slump prior to the Bucks game. But his scoring decently has occured against more than just Redd.

[dunhill]

I'm also starting to wonder if AB will be the one to be traded. Packaging him and one of the bad contracts is easier than Redd on his own. It's interesting that he became the focus of the offense suddenly despite not having very many plays run through him in 3 seasons (pretty much nil, 0 to focus is a big jmup) right around trade time. (Yes Redd was injured but it wouldn't of surprised me if Mo got the lions share of shots in Redds place)

As a young centre he has the more value and at that price more than a few teams could use an upgrade and be willing to take bad contracts and lotto picks.

Maybe I'm just being cynical.

[carmelbrownqueen]

-= original quote snipped =-



That's all fine except, hang on, we won tonight, then after the game Redd made these comments. I would question his motivation for making them. Was he trying to say 'Well I haven't been playing well but it's been because coach took my team away and gave it to a guy who isn't as good as me?'
What possible motivation could the guy have for coming out and saying this to the press after a win? As far as the sensationalized power struggle and the 'hero complex' go, well as best I can tell there's only one guy talking. It could be just me but I don't think these comments would go down well with his teammates.

Yes we won last night.. but you aren't going to see the complaining stop until we are consistently winning games. If our record was more like 26-17 rather than 17-26 then quotes like this wouldn't be as concerning. Our inability to put together a winning record is making everything seem so much larger.

[Bucks_Revenge]

so CBQ when the trade happens will this issue be resolve.

[75totheMACCfund]

so CBQ when the trade happens will this issue be resolve.

what trade?

[75totheMACCfund]

damn you chuck diesel.

[BuckUp]

Wow! Some people need to learn how to read without "reading into."

The article said,

"Let me play, let me go, let me loose," was the way Redd described the result of the meeting. "Just go play. No thinking. Play basketball."

First of all, the writer said that was "the way Redd described the result of the meeting."

Second, at no point does the writer say that Redd demanded, "Let me play," etc. That quote could have, and probably likely was, taken from an exchange like this...

Reporter: "So, what was the result of the meeting?"

Redd: "Coach said I was thinking too much... He communicated to me that he wanted to Let me play, let me go, let me loose. He said, Mike, 'go play. No thinking. Play basketball.'"

BTW, that's what the reporter seems to be reporting.

Third, coach K kept Redd in for 45 min! And said, "There's nobody on our team I'd rather have taking an open shot than Michael."

I think what is going on with the Bucks right now is that everyone is trying to find their role. IMO, Redd and Bogut are the Buck's stars. Everyone else is the supporting cast. I think Redd and Bogut can work well with eachother and feed off of eachother, but it will require everyone else being happy with being 3rd, 4th, and 5th fiddles.

[carmelbrownqueen]

so CBQ when the trade happens will this issue be resolve.

[MikeIsGood]

I'm not happy about Redd's comments either. He played a terrific game against the Pacers. The Bucks wouldn't have won without him playing at such a high level in all probability. But if he felt the need to demand a larger role in the offense as opposed to realizing how beneficial it will be to him to have the offense run through Bogut than that's a serious problem. I can understand that Redd is frustrated and maybe even confused given how he's never had a strong post player to work with since becoming a starter (hell Bogut's probably the best post player the Bucks have had since Vin Baker). But he needs to understand that if Bogut can keep playing at this level it makes him even more dangerous and effective. He doesn't need to force his will on the offense, he can allow the offense to run through Bogut and his production will remain high and he'll get easier looks in the process. It really is fundamental basketball.

But I'll say it again - if Redd is unable or unwilling to grasp this then he should be traded.

This team has A LOT of issues right now internally. And they don't all revolve around Redd by any means.

I went through this thread looking for a few different poster's thoughts, one of them being yours. I had to cycle the thread a second time because I knew you had posted in here (the thread count said so), but I didn't see your avatar. Moral of the pointless story if that ou really need a new avy, even if it isn't animated heaven.

Anyways, I completely agree. I stick up for Redd when I feel necessary, and last night was one of those nights. I've always been a Redd supporter, even back when I wanted to trade him for a big out of desperation (glad those days are passed for the most part), but he needs to understand that the offense will be best run through the post. We can run the offense through Bogut and still get Redd his touches, and as many have said they will start to come easier. Inside-out. It doesn't even have to mean that he plays second fiddle. It just means that we need to get the ball to Bogut on the block on a higher % of possessions, even if it works its way back out for an open jumper.

Hopefully they can get this worked out. At this point I feel like they likely have the rest of the season to do so before any major move is made (unless something impossible to turn down comes around at trade deadline). At that time, if they don't feel like it can work, I hope they make the right decision of who to move and who to keep (keep Bogut).