Comments on: An optimistic take on Michael Redd

By: OBF-MKE

OBF-MKE — Wed, 18 Aug 2010 05:00:35 +0000

Yeah, I’d much rather have CDR shoulder some of the burden from Maggette than Redd. Redd’s minutes last season were just too painful to watch. Awful on defense, ineffective on offense and an all-around sluggish, slow game.

By: JB

JB — Tue, 17 Aug 2010 19:21:53 +0000

Buy him out like the Knicks did with Isaiah!

By: JB

JB — Tue, 17 Aug 2010 19:19:35 +0000

Its sad to know there are some people who still believe that Mike Redd belongs on this team or in this league. SAD. One dimensional, selfish, classless, nonathletic, chubby, slow, etc. Enough said.

By: Aaron Leventhal

Aaron Leventhal — Tue, 17 Aug 2010 18:51:55 +0000

His contract is guaranteed, but also insured. I read that if he doesn’t play due to injuries, the Bucks don’t have to pay, but the insurance does. I just don’t know what the details of that are.

By: scott

scott — Tue, 17 Aug 2010 18:12:04 +0000

Redd’s contract is guaranteed through this upcoming season, so if he can play let him play.

By: Eric

Eric — Tue, 17 Aug 2010 16:18:07 +0000

Great article! It is really nice to hear insight about Michael Redd and the bucks that includes him actually playing for us this year, and with a positive contribution. What team wouldn’t want Michael Redd to help contribute in the final stretch of a playoff run? If Redd is ready to play by game 60, our only problem will be being having too many guys who can score.

By: Aaron Leventhal

Aaron Leventhal — Tue, 17 Aug 2010 13:26:56 +0000

I wonder *exactly* what the insurance contract says, because that may determine whether he’s given a chance to play again this season. For example, is it just based on whether he’s healthy enough to play, or whether he does play? Does it pay out partially if he sits out most of the season but plays at the end?

If the full season’s salary is lost once he plays a single game, my guess is that he won’t play.