Minny gets Sessions on the cheap..

Steve's career TS% is 0.522 while Ramon's is 0.523... so you're saying Steve can't shoot?

you're welcome to your opinion

STOMP

 

I think this worked out well for both Sessions and Minny.

I know many might think Sessions is underpaid, but imagine where he would be if Minny didn't lose Rubio . . . I think he would have been looking at a much smaller offer form another team. As it turned out, Minny needed a PG to save some face and Sessions makes a respectable signing.

So Minny gets a good PG in a buyer's market (NBA is down and sweepstakes next year) . . . and Sessions found a team that desperately needed to sign a quality PG.

 

great signing, particularly considering he's the diametric opposite of jonny flynn.

 

I guess I should be amazed that Aldridge played over Lafrentz considering Lafrentz made 4 times as much and LMA.

 

Sounds a lot like Andre Miller to me.

 

I was using last year's numbers. You know, like you did with Sessions' PER? Blake has a lower career PER as well, due in large part to his lower usage rate. Also, I notice you didn't include career eFG%. Hint - Blake is at 50% for his career; Sessions <45%.

Minny overpaid for Sessions. There, I said it again.

 

yep, perfectly parallel comparison to point to. KP really had a lot invested in seeing Raef playing. It's not like he was viewed as a dead weight contract in the trade that brought him in and now was an embarrassing example of his ineptitude that the press could pick at.[/sarcasm]

sorry that I tried to add some context.

STOMP

 

the twolves definitely didn't overpay for sessions. at worst, they got him at appropriate value(being an above average backup pg). at best, they got him at a pretty decent bargain(though i don't think his true value could be anything more than the full mle).

that said, sessions isn't really a very good fit for their team. that doesn't necessarily matter since they aren't going anywhere at all. they'll try to figure out what they have with flynn and sessions and see if either guy if the pg of the future(and present) for the team. when you're a terrible team, adding young assets is never really a bad thing.

 

Good points. I admit my view of Sessions has been skewed somewhat by the over-the-top posts on this board this summer about offering him a contract. I didn't see the value then, and I still don't see the value now by the T-Wolves. That said, he has at least proven he belongs on an NBA court, but I still think a 4 year deal for him was excessive, and I'm still glad Portland never went after him.

 

I'm curious now. What do all the anti-Sessions folks think about Andre Miller? I like both Miller and Sessions. No defense and no 3ball I guess is something that makes me swoon. Seriously though, vision and ability to get assists and score at the cup are to me the number one and two jobs of a PG with defense coming in a very close third with 3ball 4th.

 

I understand it wasn't the perfect comparison and I guess I'm over-sensitive to the payroll argument. I could spend the time to site a better example of a high-paid player being a backup to a lower-paid player, but I don't think it would make much of a difference.

Skiles doesn't strike me as the type of coach that uses salaries to determine his depth chart. In fact, any coach who gives out playing time or starting jobs based on the payroll will likely be looking for a different job.

As bad as my comparison was, I would say the idea that Ridnour is starting because the Bucks have invested so much in him is equally as silly.

Either way, I'm glad our PG situation wasn't that bad last year!

 

Subtract Miller's strength, post-up ability, and track record in the league, I would agree with you that they have similarities.

 

by mentioning KP, I was indicating the GM as the guy who might meddle in such matters. Skile's job is to win games, but as far as I'm aware he also has to answer to John Hammond who would have a vested interest in seeing the guy he traded starter Mo Williams for not rot on the bench behind a guy he probably knew a while back that they weren't going to retain. The Bucks don't have a Paul Allen type owner bankrolling them and the lux tax was clearly looming over their 2009-10 roster well back into last season... Hammond has to answer to the owner and bottom line.

This is just my speculation of what might have affected the PT/roles of Luke and Ramon last year. I'm not saying it definitely did, but it's a reasonable possibility and hardly silly.

STOMP

 

The Bucks could have signed up Sessions for 4 years on for very cheap on the Minny offer. Ridnour's contract expires next year. Perhaps the Bucks tired of Sessions poor shooting, bad defense, and dominating the ball?

 

it would have put them over the luxury tax. and they drafted jennings to be their pg of the future.

 

The T-Wolves drafted Rubio/Flynn to be their PG of the future, and with their young talent, they will be over the tax without a move within three years.

Let's just all admit they overpaid for Sessions, who Milwaukee didn't even see worth extending on a relatively cheap contract for a supposed good PG.

 

milwaukee would have gone over the luxury tax now had they resigned him. saying that the twolves might go over the tax in a few years is not at all the same.

 

And my speculation is that his value in the league as a player is similar to the contract he got. Bottom half.

 

they are about two Mil under the lux cap, so no...

are you aware that your record has a skip? Are you trying to be obnoxious?

STOMP

 

Yeah. So clearly he isn't worth the luxury tax. He just isn't that good. Now he's a back-up PG for a very bad team.