The Bucks are dumb

tbach24 · #1 07-01-2005, 11:53 PM

Redd offered the max

Why would they do this? He's the worst defensive player ever. His offense does not make up for it. They should deal him for some pick because he is overvalued IMO

tolbiny · #2 07-02-2005, 12:02 AM

Hes a free agent, no? They can't trade him.

Aytumious · #3 07-02-2005, 12:28 AM

They certainly overpaid, but the market forced their hand. The Cavs offered the max that they could, roughly 5yrs 70 mil, so the Bucks had to counter with what they could to ensure that they didn't lose him for nothing. Also, he still hasn't signed it.

Phoenix1010 · #4 07-02-2005, 01:01 AM

What is bizarre to me is that any team in the league has Redd as their number one target when Ray Allen is also available. Allen is a fair bit better than Redd in just about every category, and would be worth every penny of a maxed out contract, whereas Redd would be tremendously overpaid. It just doesn't make sense to spend most of your energy pursuing a pretty good shooting guard when a superstar is available at the same position.

[censored] · #5 07-02-2005, 01:24 AM

[ QUOTE ]
What is bizarre to me is that any team in the league has Redd as their number one target when Ray Allen is also available. Allen is a fair bit better than Redd in just about every category, and would be worth every penny of a maxed out contract, whereas Redd would be tremendously overpaid. It just doesn't make sense to spend most of your energy pursuing a pretty good shooting guard when a superstar is available at the same position.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think what happens is teams decide they have no shot at the #1 guy available so they scramble after the #2 guy, throwing everything they can at him.

Phoenix1010 · #6 07-02-2005, 01:26 AM

I would think this, except that the Cavs have more cap room this Summer than anyone else in the league, even after signing most of their free agents, and Allen has given no less indication that he wants to test the market than Redd.

Dan Rutter · #7 07-02-2005, 01:33 AM

Reed is more value than Allen to more teams because of his age. Allen still has years left in the NBA but if a team is looking at future potential along with immediate help, Reed is a player teams may value now.

LBJ · #8 07-02-2005, 01:36 AM

I agree somewhat and see why teams are so aggressively going for Redd and shunning Allen.

1. Age- Redd is 4-5 years younger than Ray Allen.
2. Money- Redd will cost much less than Ray Allen.

I can see why a team be hesitant to throw $15 million per year at a 30 year old.

Aytumious · #9 07-02-2005, 02:01 AM

Personally, I think Hughes is the best SG on the market, and possibly the best player, but Washington is likely to offer him a monster deal too. Most likely Allen is the only SG to change teams, since the Suns have made it clear after trading Q that they won't let Johnson get away. Lots of over paying good but not great players.

Also, players like Curry, Dalembert, and Chandler could get deals that on the surface appear to be ridiculous. It's the nature of the FA market in sports.

holeplug · #10 07-02-2005, 02:05 AM

I think I would rather have Larry Hughes than Redd since he at least plays defense and is only 25 or 26 years old.

But Ray Allen is obviously better than both of them. I don't think 30 is that old for a guard though, they wear down slower than big men do. And Allen is a shooter and doesn't take the punishment that other shooting guards that get their points in the paint do.