Milwaukee Bucks 2016 - 2017

[GAME05]

Well, if Giannis wasn't here we'd also be talking about how great Fulz looks in a Bucks uniform. We'd have had a lot higher draft picks.

 

Vaughn is young, but you could expect to see flashes of talent now and again. Maybe he shows promise during practice. I kinda figure he's still here only because nobody else is banging on the door to take his spot on the roster.

[CheezWizHed]

Drafting Giannis caused massive groans in the fanbase because he was very raw. Yet he was thought to have the highest upside in the draft that year. So I do believe there was a thought he could be this good.

 

I also remember when we drafted some German putz that no one knew, but thankfully traded him for that BB legend Robert Tractor Traylor.

 

Sure, there is always some luck involved in how good a player gets (or in Gianni's case grows). But one thing that John Hammond did well was draft talented players. Not 100%, but certainly better than average.

[tmwiese55]

Drafting Giannis caused massive groans in the fanbase because he was very raw. Yet he was thought to have the highest upside in the draft that year. So I do believe there was a thought he could be this good.

 

I also remember when we drafted some German putz that no one knew, but thankfully traded him for that BB legend Robert Tractor Traylor.

 

Sure, there is always some luck involved in how good a player gets (or in Gianni's case grows). But one thing that John Hammond did well was draft talented players. Not 100%, but certainly better than average.

 

But we're talking about these owners. They had literally nothing to do with getting Giannis that's why they got so lucky for him to fall in their lap. And i don't think even the biggest optimists thought that he'd be starting an ASG at age 22 or that he had "best player in the world" potential. They came in the offseason when we'd already secured the #2 pick/Jabari. Pretty much every offseason since has been, well, not good.

[PrestigeWorldwide]

 

I also remember when we drafted some German putz that no one knew, but thankfully traded him for that BB legend Robert Tractor Traylor.

 

 

Not picking on you, but every time I have read a statement like this over the past 19 years it has driven me crazy.

 

Dallas had the #6 pick, Milwaukee had picks #9 and #19. This trade was a pre-draft deal. If the Bucks did not agree to this deal, Dallas would have simply picked Dirk at #6. Dallas made the deal because the Bucks were willing to trade them #19 (which they flipped to Phoenix for Nash). There is no scenario in which the Bucks could have ended up with Dirk. They could not have "kept" him because he was never theirs. As soon as the deal was made prior to the draft, he always belonged to Dallas, and if the deal had never been made, he would have been picked by Dallas.

 

The Bucks have made some incredibly dumb moves over the years, but this one should not be included since they really did not "trade away a future HOFer" which is how people tend to characterize this deal. The criticism they truly deserve from that draft? Paul Pierce was pick #10.

[hurricanecrush]

 

I also remember when we drafted some German putz that no one knew, but thankfully traded him for that BB legend Robert Tractor Traylor.

 

Not picking on you, but every time I have read a statement like this over the past 19 years it has driven me crazy.

 

Dallas had the #6 pick, Milwaukee had picks #9 and #19. This trade was a pre-draft deal. If the Bucks did not agree to this deal, Dallas would have simply picked Dirk at #6. Dallas made the deal because the Bucks were willing to trade them #19 (which they flipped to Phoenix for Nash). There is no scenario in which the Bucks could have ended up with Dirk. They could not have "kept" him because he was never theirs. As soon as the deal was made prior to the draft, he always belonged to Dallas, and if the deal had never been made, he would have been picked by Dallas.

Thank you!

[LouisEly]

Just out of curiosity, wasn't Dallas taking a risk that the Kings would have drafted him at #7 or the 76ers at #8? What would have stopped that from happening?

[PrestigeWorldwide]

My recollection is that they were pretty confident no one else was taking him in the top ten, and it was a chance they were willing to take.

[CheezWizHed]

Drafting Giannis caused massive groans in the fanbase because he was very raw. Yet he was thought to have the highest upside in the draft that year. So I do believe there was a thought he could be this good.

 

I also remember when we drafted some German putz that no one knew, but thankfully traded him for that BB legend Robert Tractor Traylor.

 

Sure, there is always some luck involved in how good a player gets (or in Gianni's case grows). But one thing that John Hammond did well was draft talented players. Not 100%, but certainly better than average.

 

But we're talking about these owners. They had literally nothing to do with getting Giannis that's why they got so lucky for him to fall in their lap. And i don't think even the biggest optimists thought that he'd be starting an ASG at age 22 or that he had "best player in the world" potential. They came in the offseason when we'd already secured the #2 pick/Jabari. Pretty much every offseason since has been, well, not good.

 

Then they weren't lucky. They bought him. Sounds like a good business deal. I'm not trying to defend the owners (the GM search was embarrassing). I just think its silly to say they were lucky.

 

Re: I don't recall the talk about Dallas drafting Dirk if Milwaukee didn't trade for him. But I do remember a lot of applause for the Bucks in making that trade. And both players they traded away were better than Traylor. Anyway, my point was that our talent evaluation bad in the day was terrible.

 

Hopefully, the ownership does get back on the same page. I think they started well, but this GM search was a head-scratcher.

[OnTheBlack]

If you think Kidd is a good coach, that's a non-starter with me.

They didn't draft Giannis. Giannis was drafted and the owners were gifted the #2 overall pick.

 

The fact that I can come back with an incredibly long list of stupidly horrible moves that this new ownership group has made since taking over and you listed 2 things that are... well, not spectacular and they were both in last year's draft, that gives me no faith in this group moving forward.

 

 

Likewise if you don't think he is.

[OnTheBlack]

Drafting Giannis caused massive groans in the fanbase because he was very raw. Yet he was thought to have the highest upside in the draft that year. So I do believe there was a thought he could be this good.

 

I also remember when we drafted some German putz that no one knew, but thankfully traded him for that BB legend Robert Tractor Traylor.

 

Sure, there is always some luck involved in how good a player gets (or in Gianni's case grows). But one thing that John Hammond did well was draft talented players. Not 100%, but certainly better than average.

 

But we're talking about these owners. They had literally nothing to do with getting Giannis that's why they got so lucky for him to fall in their lap. And i don't think even the biggest optimists thought that he'd be starting an ASG at age 22 or that he had "best player in the world" potential. They came in the offseason when we'd already secured the #2 pick/Jabari. Pretty much every offseason since has been, well, not good.

 

Then they weren't lucky. They bought him. Sounds like a good business deal. I'm not trying to defend the owners (the GM search was embarrassing). I just think its silly to say they were lucky.

 

Re: I don't recall the talk about Dallas drafting Dirk if Milwaukee didn't trade for him. But I do remember a lot of applause for the Bucks in making that trade. And both players they traded away were better than Traylor. Anyway, my point was that our talent evaluation bad in the day was terrible.

 

Hopefully, the ownership does get back on the same page. I think they started well, but this GM search was a head-scratcher.

 

 

Nelson was the guy who found Dirk. He went over there, Dirk wasn't planning on playing in the NBA...at least anytime soon. He talked to the parents, he said he'd take care of him. I don't think any other teams were even considering Dirk and I don't think he was considering coming to play for any other team. That being said, we wanted to move up to get our guy. Like people have already said, he was never an option for the Bucks. My guess...at that time, if Dirk hadn't been drafted by us for Dallas in a pre-arranged trade, he'd have been taken in the 2nd round and maybe have come over years later if a team even held his rights that long. European markets weren't scouted nearly as well at that time.

 

We got lucky this time around with Giannis though because another front office guy, Harris, desperately tried to convince Cuban to pick Giannis a few spots ahead of the Bucks, something Cuban confirmed. Instead he was more concerned with trying to sign FA's, that year Dwight was the target and he needed to keep his cap space for a max, so he traded back. So Dallas actually could have stolen a superstar from us whereas we never really had any chance at Dirk.

[tmwiese55]

Drafting Giannis caused massive groans in the fanbase because he was very raw. Yet he was thought to have the highest upside in the draft that year. So I do believe there was a thought he could be this good.

 

I also remember when we drafted some German putz that no one knew, but thankfully traded him for that BB legend Robert Tractor Traylor.

 

Sure, there is always some luck involved in how good a player gets (or in Gianni's case grows). But one thing that John Hammond did well was draft talented players. Not 100%, but certainly better than average.

 

But we're talking about these owners. They had literally nothing to do with getting Giannis that's why they got so lucky for him to fall in their lap. And i don't think even the biggest optimists thought that he'd be starting an ASG at age 22 or that he had "best player in the world" potential. They came in the offseason when we'd already secured the #2 pick/Jabari. Pretty much every offseason since has been, well, not good.

 

Then they weren't lucky. They bought him. Sounds like a good business deal. I'm not trying to defend the owners (the GM search was embarrassing). I just think its silly to say they were lucky.

 

Re: I don't recall the talk about Dallas drafting Dirk if Milwaukee didn't trade for him. But I do remember a lot of applause for the Bucks in making that trade. And both players they traded away were better than Traylor. Anyway, my point was that our talent evaluation bad in the day was terrible.

 

Hopefully, the ownership does get back on the same page. I think they started well, but this GM search was a head-scratcher.

 

When they bought the team they had absolutely no inclination or idea that he would be anywhere near this. No one did. That was very lucky to have that happen when they personally had nothing to do with it. And now it's covering up basically terrible basketball ops management since they took over. That's all I'm saying and I don't think it's crazy.

[Boomer5]

If they trade a number 1 to unload Henson so they can sign Rose to a $20M per year deal I might be officially done with this leadership. He is fragile and a bad fit for us.

 

I'd rather they just coach up their bad contracts and hope one or two produces rather than trade a number one and lock up Rose to a big deal.

[Boomer5]

 

I also remember when we drafted some German putz that no one knew, but thankfully traded him for that BB legend Robert Tractor Traylor.

 

 

Not picking on you, but every time I have read a statement like this over the past 19 years it has driven me crazy.

 

Dallas had the #6 pick, Milwaukee had picks #9 and #19. This trade was a pre-draft deal. If the Bucks did not agree to this deal, Dallas would have simply picked Dirk at #6. Dallas made the deal because the Bucks were willing to trade them #19 (which they flipped to Phoenix for Nash). There is no scenario in which the Bucks could have ended up with Dirk. They could not have "kept" him because he was never theirs. As soon as the deal was made prior to the draft, he always belonged to Dallas, and if the deal had never been made, he would have been picked by Dallas.

 

The Bucks have made some incredibly dumb moves over the years, but this one should not be included since they really did not "trade away a future HOFer" which is how people tend to characterize this deal. The criticism they truly deserve from that draft? Paul Pierce was pick #10.

 

This is very polite spin from the Bucks over the years. If the Mavs wanted Dirk that bad they would have just taken him at 6 and Bucks would have messed up 9 and 19 just fine on their own. To risk 7 and 8 taking Dirk would make no sense for Dallas.

[hurricanecrush]

 

I also remember when we drafted some German putz that no one knew, but thankfully traded him for that BB legend Robert Tractor Traylor.

 

 

Not picking on you, but every time I have read a statement like this over the past 19 years it has driven me crazy.

 

Dallas had the #6 pick, Milwaukee had picks #9 and #19. This trade was a pre-draft deal. If the Bucks did not agree to this deal, Dallas would have simply picked Dirk at #6. Dallas made the deal because the Bucks were willing to trade them #19 (which they flipped to Phoenix for Nash). There is no scenario in which the Bucks could have ended up with Dirk. They could not have "kept" him because he was never theirs. As soon as the deal was made prior to the draft, he always belonged to Dallas, and if the deal had never been made, he would have been picked by Dallas.

 

The Bucks have made some incredibly dumb moves over the years, but this one should not be included since they really did not "trade away a future HOFer" which is how people tend to characterize this deal. The criticism they truly deserve from that draft? Paul Pierce was pick #10.

 

This is very polite spin from the Bucks over the years. If the Mavs wanted Dirk that bad they would have just taken him at 6 and Bucks would have messed up 9 and 19 just fine on their own. To risk 7 and 8 taking Dirk would make no sense for Dallas.

Because they didn't think anyone else knew about him or had him ranked that high and thought gaining the 19th pick was worth the risk. If they wanted Traylor so badly, why did they trade him?

 

And did the Bucks actually draft Marbury and trade him after they made the pick or was it prearranged?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzhJRTtWS6I

 

That's how things were done back then, teams that owned that pick made the selection and trades weren't officially announced until July 1 (I think it was July 1).

[Boomer5]

We all understand how trades were made back then. That's irrelevant.

 

The fact is the team thought Tractor Traylor was a better player than Dirk (and Pierce) then actually added the 19th pick for good measure. So the fact that they couldn't have drafted Dirk isn't true. They absolutely could have and did.

 

The end result was a trade that would prove to be one of the top 5 worst trades in pro sports.

[Baldkin]

We all understand how trades were made back then. That's irrelevant.

 

The fact is the team thought Tractor Traylor was a better player than Dirk (and Pierce) then actually added the 19th pick for good measure. So the fact that they couldn't have drafted Dirk isn't true. They absolutely could have and did.

 

The end result was a trade that would prove to be one of the top 5 worst trades in pro sports.

 

Saying that is the same as saying Bill Belichik traded away Clay Matthews.

[Baldkin]

If you think Kidd is a good coach, that's a non-starter with me.

They didn't draft Giannis. Giannis was drafted and the owners were gifted the #2 overall pick.

 

The fact that I can come back with an incredibly long list of stupidly horrible moves that this new ownership group has made since taking over and you listed 2 things that are... well, not spectacular and they were both in last year's draft, that gives me no faith in this group moving forward.

 

 

Likewise if you don't think he is.

 

I honestly, and I know this will sound sarcastic, but I honestly want to know what you think makes him a good coach. I simply don't think he does the fundamental aspect of his job very well, which is putting players (and as a result the team) in the best position to succeed.

[Boomer5]

We all understand how trades were made back then. That's irrelevant.

 

The fact is the team thought Tractor Traylor was a better player than Dirk (and Pierce) then actually added the 19th pick for good measure. So the fact that they couldn't have drafted Dirk isn't true. They absolutely could have and did.

 

The end result was a trade that would prove to be one of the top 5 worst trades in pro sports.

 

Saying that is the same as saying Bill Belichik traded away Clay Matthews.

 

Im fine with that statement too. The draft means you pick the players you like who are available when your turn comes up. If you trade out it means you don't see the value in that specific player.

[CheezWizHed]

Regardless of if we could've "kept" Dirk or not, the main point I was making was that the Bucks (and lots of people) thought the Bucks mode off like a bandit in that trade when it was made. But obviously it worked completely the opposite. People that work hard and make good evaluations get good players. Back in the day, the Bucks mainly made the poor choice. Allen for Maybury was probably the exception to that.

 

More recent drafting has shown to be much better.

[OnTheBlack]

If you think Kidd is a good coach, that's a non-starter with me.

They didn't draft Giannis. Giannis was drafted and the owners were gifted the #2 overall pick.

 

The fact that I can come back with an incredibly long list of stupidly horrible moves that this new ownership group has made since taking over and you listed 2 things that are... well, not spectacular and they were both in last year's draft, that gives me no faith in this group moving forward.

 

 

Likewise if you don't think he is.

 

I honestly, and I know this will sound sarcastic, but I honestly want to know what you think makes him a good coach. I simply don't think he does the fundamental aspect of his job very well, which is putting players (and as a result the team) in the best position to succeed.

 

 

Ok, something has to give. The Bucks haven't made ANY good moves since the new owners came in, right? And their coach...the guy who has brought in guys like KG to work with Giannis is a terrible coach.

 

Then how exactly did we pick the rookie of the year in the 2nd round? How did a kid who wasn't supposed to be eligible for this years draft become an impact starter for a team that lost it's 2nd best player and started and contributed to the Bucks in the playoffs this year?

 

I thought Kidd was an awful hire at the time. But I think he's done a good job...or at the very least the young core has improved with him as coach. I don't buy the "he doesn't put guys in position to succeed," as that's pretty much the fans canned answer.

 

I'd also like to point out every fanbase complains about every coach. Bulls fans hated Tibs, Cards fans bashed LaRussa(especially hitting the pitcher 8th, but other times). And even in New England when they went through a little lull there was a large contingent of the fanbase that complained.

Plus, this is a guy who put Plumelee in a position to actually look good for a few weeks. That right there ought to put him next to Phil and Red in the NBA coaching pantheon.

 

Seriously though, moving Monroe to the bench, moving Maker into the starting lineup, how he brought back Middleton slowly, how he turned over the starting job to Brogdon...these are further down on my list than helping the young guys develop, but still areas in which I think he did good.

[OnTheBlack]

We all understand how trades were made back then. That's irrelevant.

 

The fact is the team thought Tractor Traylor was a better player than Dirk (and Pierce) then actually added the 19th pick for good measure. So the fact that they couldn't have drafted Dirk isn't true. They absolutely could have and did.

 

The end result was a trade that would prove to be one of the top 5 worst trades in pro sports.

 

Saying that is the same as saying Bill Belichik traded away Clay Matthews.

 

 

Almost....now make Clay Matthews a 18 year old kid who almost nobody else is looking at and who has built his trust up within ONE single person and by extension one organization(Dallas) and make Matthews a player who almost certainly isn't going to come to Green Bay even if he is drafted the following season...and NOW that's a even closer comparison.

 

The end result of the "Dirk trade" was one of the most mythical and misunderstood trades in sports history. They don't make that trade, the Mavs pick Dirk with their original pick and that's the end of the story.

 

Dirk was never playing on the Bucks. You can massage it however you like. More than blame, there should be credit going to the Mavs and Nelson for their scouting. You want to blame them for missing out on Pierce, fine, but lots of teams passed on him and if you want to use hindsight when evaluating draft picks, ever team can be made to look dumb.

[patrickgpe]

IF they sign Rose to a contract of equal or less length than what Henson has left (3 years or less) and trade Henson / 1 for salary relief, i think that is OK. Henson doesn't fit this team at all. I would rather see that money be spent on someone other than Rose though. In theory it should be a late 1st which is a crapshoot in the NBA.

 

seems like ownership is more concerned in bringing in a name that will sell jerseys rather than someone that can help this team and now we have a GM that is over his head and will do the owners bidding.

[Boomer5]

IF they sign Rose to a contract of equal or less length than what Henson has left (3 years or less) and trade Henson / 1 for salary relief, i think that is OK. Henson doesn't fit this team at all. I would rather see that money be spent on someone other than Rose though. In theory it should be a late 1st which is a crapshoot in the NBA.

 

seems like ownership is more concerned in bringing in a name that will sell jerseys rather than someone that can help this team and now we have a GM that is over his head and will do the owners bidding.

 

Trading a number 1 should always be a no go for a small market team unless you're clearing space to bring in a young All Star. Rose is the opposite of that. Just coach up the guys you have instead. Rose is done.

 

Let's hope that when they do this insane move that they buy an early 2nd round pick instead of selling them.

[trwi7]

Henson doesn't fit this team at all.

 

Neither does Rose. Like it's hard to think of a worse fit at PG on this team.

[superfly]

Henson doesn't fit this team at all.

 

Neither does Rose. Like it's hard to think of a worse fit at PG on this team.

 

I'm in the camp of lets try something new. John Henson has zero future here and is no more than a warm butt on a bench. The bench may actually start on fire pretty soon it's so hot from him sitting on it. Sure Rose isn't ideal, but I don't really see much downside. Maybe his knees get a little better with another year and he becomes a bit closer to what he once was. You can always use slashers. Giannis can't be asked to do everything, even Lebron can't do it all himself.