Vet minimum candidate: Michael Redd

It doesn't seem that long ago that Michael Redd spurned the Cavaliers to resign with the Bucks. It was at a point where I said to myself "Thank god, the Cavs didn't get Redd, he'd be a great fit with LeBron".
The Cavs got Larry Hughes, and when you Hughes, you lose.

However, things wouldn't have gone much better with Redd who then spent most of the time after that with stints on the injured list due to a series of major knee problems and surgeries. Not only that, but the allure of his shooting has dropped off some as well. We now have to go back into the way back machine, back to the 2002-3 season to find one where Redd managed to knock down 40% or more of his threes.

All signs point to Michael Redd being done as a player. He no longer has the upside or athleticism of his youth, his knees are shot, and he's struggled shooting the ball for the past three seasons. However, these are also the reasons Michael Redd is likely available for the veteran minimum.

I think Redd would fit in well with the locker room, despite all the knee injuries, despite Milwaukee's dim playoff hopes, he kept fighting to get back on the court. He kept fighting to attempt to contribute. It eventually became a problem in Milwaukee, because they no longer wanted him around. A tough blow to take for a guy who was once the franchise player.

However, I think Redd is willing to work as a role player for our Chicago Bulls. I don't know that his knees will hold up, in fact, there's little reason to suspect that they can. There's also little reason to hope for much defensive effort out of Redd who wasn't a particularly good defender when in his athletic prime and three or four knee injuries probably haven't enhanced his lateral quickness any.

Still, the Bulls need shooting. There's a good chance Redd can provide it, and the price is right.

One problem with bringing him in is the crunch at SG for minutes. You can't add five role players to complete for the minutes at one position and hope that it works out. It's a breeding ground for hurt feelings and bad locker room chemistry for the couple guys who it won't work out for. It might be worse for Redd who's likely deserving of a starting spot if healthy, but you can't count on his health.

As such, you need to bring in a quality vet with Redd, and if he loses to that Vet than Korver is still likely the spot up shooter while Brewer is likely the defender, and Redd isn't getting any backup PG minutes.

I said Redd is willing to be a role player, but is he willing to be the 12th guy? That I'm not so sure of.

Still, if he wants to come, I want to take the chance, if it doesn't work out, attitude problems can always be waived.

Comments

Leave a comment
  • Do you really think he could help the Bulls for the 2013-14 season? Maybe the extra rest with the lockout will rejuvinate him.

    Seriously, I would be interested but I am hoping for a bigger acquistiion at SG.

  • In reply to UnstopaBull:

    i rather have bogans

  • Probably pass on Redd. Doug, you made excellent arguments why the Bulls should not sign Redd. I would have preferred taking a chance on a guy like Charles Jenkins or Malcom Lee being the 12th man with a second round pick. At least these guys are all upside and if they don't work out it's no big deal.

    On the other hand if Redd were truly rehabilitated physically (like Grant Hill) to perform at a high level then sure.

  • I think time has passed him. This is like the Mike Bibby signing in Miami. If Bibby who is younger and not as injured can struggle, why waste a roster spot on this guy. Plus, if he performs in one game....fans will be clamoring for him like a Rasual Butler. I would rather they give a chance to somebody promising if they can find one.
    It depends on the position on where you get a veteran for the 3rd player on the depth. For a Center or a PG, you get a veteran(like a Kurt Thomas or a Anthony Carter). But, for a SG/SF/PF....get a younger kid who will give you more energy especially if you have decent veterans at the starting position.

  • Before reading this article, I would have said "Yes, let's take a flyer on Redd." But you make way too may good points on why the Bulls shouldn't sign him.

    That said, if they strike out on their first targets (Mayo, Afflalo, JR Smith, Jason Richardson, etc.) and their choice is to either sign Redd to the vet minimum or go with what they have.... I say sign him. He'll replace Butler on the end of the bench and we can hope that he replaces Bogans when healthy as a veteran shooter for 15-20 minutes a night. I don't think you bring him in with another free agent SG to pair with Brewer, Korver, and Bogans.

  • I know it's the offseason and a lockout and all, but I think the lack of comments lately should be a sign for the site to change the comment section back to the old format. Hopefully it happens soon.

  • Thought I'd be getting used to the new format a bit more now, no, I hate it a little more every day.

    The only reason to Redd would be because it was for the vet min, would not count against the cap essentially, & they could waive him whenever they wanted. I see it as a low risk (albeit low reward) move.

    It simply is not the answer to any holes we have in the lineup. He probably wouldn't even make the rotation, but yet it still is worth it. I still like a trade for C. Lee, Afflalo, Ray Allen, or an MLE signing of J. Richardson.

  • This lockout is so depressing. Despite how the playoffs ended for us personally, they truly were great playoffs. I have the feeling this offseason would be exciting as well, obviously not matching last season's, but still holding its own. We appear to be 1 piece away, I want to see what that piece is. Not a lot of big name free agents, but in my eyes thats just going to spur more action in the trade department. ESPN has an article on the big 6 names who could be dealt : Howard, Paul, Nash, Ray Allen, Deron Williams, & KG. http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=5-on-5-110705

  • one word ...... WHY ????

  • So Doug, what are your thoughts on JR Smith? As well as JRich? I think JR smith has talent but chemistry issues and i think Jrich's talents are overated and he wont help us as much as people hope. I think Jrich and CJ Miles have the same impact.

    Thoughts?

  • I'd rather give the 12th man spot to a young guy who is happy to have just made the league than an old guy who is just happy to still be in the league. At this point I think there's more chance a young guy turns out to be a surprise packet than Michael Redd ever gets back to being a rotation player.

    I guess it depends on the lockout though, if it goes on long enough all the decent undrafted guys will probably head overseas and it might only be the vets left.

  • Hey, Thonus upside down comment thread BS sucks

  • With his aptness for injury, wouldn't it be safest option to get him on the vet min for a potential trade bait value. If he is healthy he is our best No. 2 option, but if he is not than we are right where we were last season. This team is too good not to be able to land a reliable 2 scoring threat. The ball is in Gar's court.

    Well not until the lockout is over of course.....

  • fb_avatar

    Aslong as the bulls think he's not a total cripple at this stage I'd definatly take him just from a pure spot up shooter, for the vet minimum ofcourse, I'm not too happy or upset either way if they sign him for the vet min, im more concerned on if were able to land someone like JR Smith or Jason richardson, I'd rather have smith, but either would be a huge improvement over our current cast, but with the lockout, I have no clue who we'd be able to sign financially, we'll just have to wait and see I guess, if there is even a season...

  • fb_avatar

    Redd is a veteran presence in the locker room for sure, but has he ever won anything? I think that should be a consideration too.

Leave a comment