I don't know...you're the one that came up with that term Luther Head averages as many rebounds as Redd...Luther Head! What, last year's stats? Sure, they compare favorably. Of course, Arenas has Redd beat on the per 48 minute stats this year AND last year. Arenas is a triple double threat every night. If you think Redd is as complete as player as Arenas, then I really don't know what to say. Everybody is entitled to their opinion, I guess. Nov. 6 @ Chicago - 30 points, zero assists, LOSS Nov. 8 vs. Houston - 34 poins, zero assists, LOSS Nov 11 vs. Utah - 57 points, zero assists, LOSS Yes, it's obvious that all the shooting is really helping the Bucks out. Would you be satisfied if McGrady had numbers like that and the Rockets lost every game? I hope the answer is no. Redd does have a good team, at least a team that's better than McGrady had in 03/04. Bogut and Villanueva is one of the best frontcourts in the East. I never called Redd a horrible player. And when exactly was clutchness part of this conversation? Anyways, we'll see where this takes us. It's not like I want Redd to fail. I think Bucks fans deserve a good team after so many years of ineptitute and mediocrity. I just hope you don't honestly think that the Bucks can succeed with Redd playing selfishly like he is.
Oh hell no. T-Mac is a much better defender with quickness for a guy his size. He's a great passer (he was playing point guard for a decent amount of the heat game) and has an all around game. Here's the difference. When Redd's shot isn't falling, he's worthless as a player. He doesn't have the passing and all around game to make up for that. Despite T-Mac's horrendous shooting, he's still making an impact on the game.
I'm not speaking Chinese. It's English. You should be able to tell that those terms are roughly equivalent. What's your point? I never said Redd was a good rebounder. I said he didn't need to be. As a SHOOTING GUARD, why does he need to be a good rebounder to be a standout player? And Chuck Hayes has Arenas beaten out this year in efficiency... I never said Redd was as complete a player as Arenas. I said his +/- was better. That's it. I only brought up that stat because YOU used that stat against Redd in your first post. I was only demonstrating that that doesn't mean much if you take it out of context. No. As a Magic fan, I would not be happy that McGrady was scoring a lot and my team was losing. Does that mean it's McGrady's fault? No. Does it mean McGrady is not a fanchise-level player? No. Those performances didn't lead to wins, but I'm quite sure the Bucks would not have been better off without Redd, which seems to be what you're saying (or at least, no better without him). Yes, Redd has a better team. And this years Bucks will win more than 21 games. So what's your point? No you didn't, but you did say that he is "a great scorer, but not a great player," and you based this on two things: first that the team's record is poor (this is what you emphasized most), and you also said that he "doesn't play both ends." Well, McGrady's 21-61 season invalidates your first point, and you're basing the assertion that Redd's defense is terrible on one game that you watched. I have seen him play much, much more, and I disagree with you on that point. He does play both ends. And in my opinion, Redd is a "great player." Not as great as, say, Kobe Bryant, but still great. It wasn't. I was just pointing out that I can make simple-minded assertions based on team success, too. I think they can't succeed until his supporting cast gets better. Simmons has been hurt, Bogut has done nothing this year, Mo is really average, and Charlie V. has been hot-and-cold. And by "better supporting cast," I'm not saying they even have to make any moves... their whole team is ridiculously young, and they have yet to learn to play effectively together. Would it be a better situation if Redd could pass off and have the same chance of a positive result? Yes. but right now, the Bucks are more likely to score if they just hand him the ball and get out of the way. He's that gifted on offense. Somehow I doubt you were calling for Hakeem's head when he was shooting through triple-teams in the early 90s because that was his team's best chance to score. Redd is doing the exact same thing.
WTF? Tmac best offensive output led to the greatest season ever by a perimiter player since MJ. Tha magic were an 8th seed that year with no one around him
couldnt help laugh at redds 57pts no assist game. how do u get zero assist in 45 mins. wouldnt say overrated since nobody really talks about him. but hes definatly not a complete player by any stretch
this is the typical post of someone who relies COMPLETELY on statistics to determine the true value of a player. i hate to break it to you, statistics don't tell you the entire story. and sites like 82games.com plug in a complicated number of statistics into a computer and fail to actually give you an ACCURATE depiction of the game. while you are sitting here and telling us michael redd is an awful defender according to these rankings, you fail to mention that defensive juggernauts Dirk Nowitzki, Vince Carter, Ben Gordon, DeMarr Johnson, Eddie Jones, and countless other mediocre to awful defenders are listed as top 10 in their respective positions. I agree Michael Redd is not a good defender, but i can think of A LOT worse than him in the nba. using statistics derived from a college economics professor should not be the way the world should view who can and can't play basketball. I think we should WATCH actual games and see the impact players have on their team. not everything is measured in statistics. I've seen a good share of Michael Redd and he's one of the most complete scorers in recent memory. he is a GREAT shooter off the dribble, a GREAT catch & release shooter, a GREAT scorer driving to the hole, and does it with tremendous effeciency. After watching Redd I could care less if he averages 1-2 assists per game because he is so damn good at scoring and rarely takes bad shots, and rarely misses the ones he does take. I do agree he should be a better rebounder at 6'6 and 215 pounds and very good athleticism. but to say he's overrated because he isn't a great rebounder or has poor assist numbers, and because some college professor who plugs numbers into his computers without WATCHING the games says so is completely flawed logic. i can think of A LOT more overrated players who make little to NO impact because they are constantly injured, have bad attitudes, and are locker room cancers. you can't say that about redd. he goes out there and does exactly what he team asks of him: carry the entire offensive load while we give you very little help.
REDD IS GODD! Seriously, Michael Redd is a great scorer. Not a great all-around player, but a great scorer. I have tremendous respect for him. Is he overrated? Depends on who you ask. But I think he deserves it after being so underrated comnig out of tOSU and going in the early 40s in one of the weakest drafts in recent memory.
Michael Redd is OVERPAID, and he's one dimensional. But he's not overrated. I hardly hear his name anywhere.
Terry Stotts may be the worst coach in the NBA. Why he keeps playing Skinner while Gadz gets 11 minutes a game (and averages one rebound per game more than Skinner, while playing six less minutes) makes no sense to me.
http://www.82games.com/0506/0506MIL.HTM Redd's +/- was great last season. It's early this season, his current +/- is likely a fluke.
dirk nowitzki gets rebounds, ben gordon doesn't make a bunch of money, demarr johnson, not sure how he fits in this thread, and eddie jones is a pretty damn good defender. vince carter gets assists and rebounds.
i'm talking about the ability to play good man-to-man defense, something the 82games.com stats don't determine very well because these guys showed up on the top 10 lists of best defenders in their respective positions. there is no way in all human honesty you can tell me those guys are "top 10" defenders in the entire nba at their respective positions. remind you, i'm not talking about overall ability or saying these guys being better players, i'm trying to make a point about how all these statisitical sites are ridiculous because they don't reflect what happens on the floor accurately.
Who cares about the Bucks? And if you didnt want a discussion as to whether or not he is over/under rated why start a thread about it?
Wrong link. You showed us his Roland Rating. Here is his +/-, which is a different measure. +1.2 is good, but it's hardly "great". http://www.82games.com/0506/0506MIL1.HTM
i remember when the rocks played the bucks, and he shot about nine three pointers in a game. He didn't seem overrated then. This board was trying to figure out the most obscure trade for him. I guess that was the trend them. Some random dude would beat the Rockets, so the next day, we would figure out how to trade for him.
That's how the Rockets got Brent Price. Milwaukee has issues, but Redd isn't one of them. Their defense is terrible as a team. And only Redd and Villa (to a lesser extent) are consistent on offense. I don't care if he's over or underrated...that team had talent and trade-able assets and their GM and coach screwed everything up. If I was their owner, I'd be pissed too. Simmons' return will make them better, but they have deeper problems.
overrated? i think hes UNDERrated. no one talks about him, yet he is one of the top scorers in the league. sure, he is lacking in the other categories, but there are already very few players in the nba who can score liked redd.
