Milwaukee Bucks Thread 2008–2009 (part 2)

[trwi7]

The only way they get cap space next year is if they trade Redd for expirings. With his salary and with so many teams looking for 2010 cap space, that's easier said than done.

[davego]

I say they target Ruben Patterson and Marcus Fizer.

[Diskono]

If anybody is being targeted, I would imagine it to be via trade. With all of these young-to-in-their-prime players we're bringing in on reasonable contracts, some of them are bound to run with the opportunity and have a breakout season. Then, maybe we can trade a few of them for an established star. Hammond is "buying low" on a lot of young-ish players, and that really can't be considered to be a bad thing.

[craig712]

I like what Hammond has done so far. It would be real nice to see Maxx Redd get traded even if it is for expiring deals. I think it would be nice to have some salary cap space for next offseason if guys like Warrick can really put it together with some consistent playing time. On Sessions, I would try to work out a S&T but don't know how feasible it would be. Otherwise, I would let him walk.

[olliegjw]

Per jsonline, the Bucks will not match the offer for Sessions.

[Mr QL]

I'm an optimist but this really shakes my confidence in Hammond. We could of actually got value for CV and Sessions last year. What is he doing? His job depends on Jennings becoming a superstar.

[Eddiehitsthefoulpole]

I read in The Sporting News this week that the Bucks have been trying to stay below the luxury tax treshold. Because NBA revenues went down this year that threshold is going down. The NBA recently told teams that the threshold is going to be lower than first thought (it is not set yet). I think that is why the Bucks have been letting people go that they could have traded in February. They probably that they could fit in Sessions and CV in February. I don't expect to be contending for a play-off spot this year, but I think it will look like a Scott Skiles team. I think that for a change we will play harder than our opponents (that is more of a shot at the teams before 08-09). We may decide to like this team the way we liked the 2003 Brewers. I think it is a bit early to give up on Hammond. A lot of the players we have gotten rid of are guys who create headaches for their coaches (see Charlie Villanueva) while a lot of the guys we have added have a reputation for being coachable, high effort guys. It will take time, but our core was not the core of a play-off team.

[Paulus88]

I'm confused. If the Bucks are really worried about the luxury tax then why did they spend money on Delfino, Warrick, Ukic, Kurt Thomas, Sharpe? Wouldn't it have been cheaper to get multiple years of Sessions for $4m/per then have either multiple year deals (Delfino, Ukic?) or expirings that you'll have to replace again next year. It seems to me that the Bucks downgraded their talent this summer without the attendant savings such an effort should produce. I wasn't a huge fan of Villanueva on the court but the fact that the Bucks got nothing for him and Sessions doesn't smack of good asset managment.

[Gobias Industries]

So Hammond cut ties with our young assets (CV and Ramon), receiving absolutely nothing in compensation, and replaced them with older players with little to no upside? I hate Hammond, but I didn't think he was capable of this much fail.

 

You could make an argument for it if his goal is to completey tank this season, and have a low payroll, but still, yet again, we're right up against the luxury tax. I know I'm basically repeating what Paulus88 said, but I just need to vent. No one I know cares about the Bucks, and moves like this show why hardly anyone does anymore.

[trwi7]

I'm confused. If the Bucks are really worried about the luxury tax then why did they spend money on Delfino, Warrick, Ukic, Kurt Thomas, Sharpe?

You're exactly right. Nobody buy the garbage that MJS and Hammond are going to give you about our luxury tax problems and not being able to keep Sessions. Hammond created that problem.

[olliegjw]

Hammond didn't sign Redd to his ridiculous deal, nor Gadz, nor Charlie Bell. The team is stuck with the contracts. Even if they trade them, they have to take near equal salaries back. His hands are tied until those contracts expire.

 

Neither Sessions, nor CV, will be vital pieces of deep playoff runs for any team. At best, they would be role players. Why sign role players to 5 or 6 year deals (see Gadz and Bell).

[trwi7]

Hammond didn't sign Redd to his ridiculous deal, nor Gadz, nor Charlie Bell. The team is stuck with the contracts. Even if they trade them, they have to take near equal salaries back. His hands are tied until those contracts expire.

Delfino, Ukic, Thomas Warrick. Those guys will make $11M this year and we'll be paying Bowen over $2M and he retired. Don't be swayed by the reporting and Hammond's quotes. You're doing exactly what he wants you to do.

[olliegjw]

Hammond didn't sign Redd to his ridiculous deal, nor Gadz, nor Charlie Bell. The team is stuck with the contracts. Even if they trade them, they have to take near equal salaries back. His hands are tied until those contracts expire.

Delfino, Ukic, Thomas Warrick. Those guys will make $11M this year and we'll be paying Bowen over $2M and he retired. Don't be swayed by the reporting and Hammond's quotes. You're doing exactly what he wants you to do.

And those are all short term deals. Sessions got a 4 year deal, and CV a 5 or 6 year deal. Role players are not worth contracts that long, especially when you have no chance at a championship in the next two years.

[trwi7]

So teams just shouldn't sign any role player to a long term deal? Considering age, current production and ability to improve, this was a great deal.

 

Even if you don't want to sign Sessions, you have to get value of some sort for him. So turning down that Conley/1st for Sessions/Alexander trade is awful.

 

John Hammond has done nothing since becoming GM and should be fired.

[homer]

Was that Conley trade rumor confirmed as real?

[nate82]

So teams just shouldn't sign any role player to a long term deal? Considering age, current production and ability to improve, this was a great deal.

 

Even if you don't want to sign Sessions, you have to get value of some sort for him. So turning down that Conley/1st for Sessions/Alexander trade is awful.

I thought it was Conley/and an expiring for Sessions/Alexander I never heard of anything about a pick being in the mix with that trade. But I could be not remembering it correctly.

[trwi7]

Was that Conley trade rumor confirmed as real?

It was real. As was the RJ for Wally deal which would've saved an additional $7M.

[patrickgpe]

the thing that irks me is that we were told that that jefferson was traded to sign CV or sessions as they both walked. If Jennings becomes a top level pg, than the moves this offseason are fine, but if not, there maybe some coming after hammond's head. I know skiles likes ridnour, but i'd rather have a pg tandem of sessions and jennings.

[JJHardy7]

I still think Hammond will be fine, but obviously losing CV and Sessions for nothing is not ideal. I know it stinks, but I also think the system is bad in the NBA as well. It's the only league (among the major three) that restricted free agents mean nothing (if you consider arbitration as a way to receive compensation). I just don't get that. I know during the season some moves may have been botched, but I don't understand why they didn't try to deal Sessions on draft night or something like that. Once Jennings was drafted I'd imagine the sign and trade possibilities were somewhat limited since it didn't appear the Bucks were going to go into the season with more than 3 point guards.

[trwi7]

but I don't understand why they didn't try to deal Sessions on draft night or something like that.

Because nobody can do anything until July 1st.

[davego]

Good point was made in Jennings better be able to play. Ersan Ilyasova too.

[Gobias Industries]

If Hammond could look forward 2 years, and see that Jennings is gonna be a Chris Paul talent, I'd argue he should still lock up Ramon to the deal he wound up getting. That contract is gonna prove to one of the biggest bargains in the league in a season or two. I was 99% sure he wasn't gonna match, but I still can't believe it actually happened.

[Diskono]

I'm an optimist but this really shakes my confidence in Hammond. We could of actually got value for CV and Sessions last year. What is he doing? His job depends on Jennings becoming a superstar.

In order to get something back though, we would have had to take on salary. Would it make people feel better if we did sign & trades of CV for Warrick and Sessions for Delfino/Ukic? That's probably about as much of a return as we could have hoped for anyway. This isn't the end of the world. How do we know Sessions didn't turn down an offer from us, and then Hammond only went for Warrick/Delfino/Ukic after that?

 

And now we actually have a decent bench too! No more Josh Davises and Eddie Gills...instead, we actually have talented players to watch when half of our starters get injured at the same time.

[JJHardy7]

Because nobody can do anything until July 1st.

 

Trades are made before then, correct? They're just not official, right? I believe that's the way it 'works', but I'm not sure to be honest.

[trwi7]

Actually, I guess they could but it would've had to have been done between the draft and July 1st. I think it's absolutely inexcusable to get nothing for him. Just a ridiculous move and such a reasonable contract as well.