Milwaukee Bucks 2018 - 2019

[coolhandluke121]

I think they'll pay Hill the $1million to buy out his last year and then try and resign him.

 

If they don't pick up his option, I'm almost positive they won't have Bird Rights to re-sign him. That means either a veteran's minimum contract, which I'm quite confident he can easily beat on the open market, or the mid-level exception, which they probably want to offer to Lopez. Picking up his option, even though it's a big over-pay, is the only way they can keep him without compromising their ability to keep other personnel assets (the only asset it would cost is money from the owners' pocketbooks).

[Mr Southpaw]

I think they'll pay Hill the $1million to buy out his last year and then try and resign him.

 

If they don't pick up his option, I'm almost positive they won't have Bird Rights to re-sign him. That means either a veteran's minimum contract, which I'm quite confident he can easily beat on the open market, or the mid-level exception, which they probably want to offer to Lopez. Picking up his option, even though it's a big over-pay, is the only way they can keep him without compromising their ability to keep other personnel assets (the only asset it would cost is money from the owners' pocketbooks).

 

If that is the only way to keep him, then don't over-pay.

[coolhandluke121]

I think they'll pay Hill the $1million to buy out his last year and then try and resign him.

 

If they don't pick up his option, I'm almost positive they won't have Bird Rights to re-sign him. That means either a veteran's minimum contract, which I'm quite confident he can easily beat on the open market, or the mid-level exception, which they probably want to offer to Lopez. Picking up his option, even though it's a big over-pay, is the only way they can keep him without compromising their ability to keep other personnel assets (the only asset it would cost is money from the owners' pocketbooks).

 

If that is the only way to keep him, then don't over-pay.

 

So you'd rather he just not be on the team? Did you not notice how much of a different team they were when he was hurt? Do you remember how much they struggling right before they acquired him?

 

It would be a terrible idea to cancel his contract just on the principle of not over-paying him. They can't spend the money they save on anyone else. But hey, maybe next year they can make a 3rd-place-in-the-East banner with a note at the bottom saying "yeah but at least we didn't overpay George Hill".

[wallus]

Clippers shoot over 50% and lose by double digits. Are one or two of you still concerned?

[homer]

I think they'll pay Hill the $1million to buy out his last year and then try and resign him.

 

If they don't pick up his option, I'm almost positive they won't have Bird Rights to re-sign him. That means either a veteran's minimum contract, which I'm quite confident he can easily beat on the open market, or the mid-level exception, which they probably want to offer to Lopez. Picking up his option, even though it's a big over-pay, is the only way they can keep him without compromising their ability to keep other personnel assets (the only asset it would cost is money from the owners' pocketbooks).

 

Right he'd be a UFA correct? Then sign him to a UFA deal.I doubt he gets $18 million on the open market.

[coolhandluke121]

 

Right he'd be a UFA correct? Then sign him to a UFA deal.I doubt he gets $18 million on the open market.

 

Unless it's a minimum salary, which is much less than he's worth, they would need cap space to sign UFA's whose Bird Rights they don't own - and I'm 98% sure they won't own Hill's if they don't pick up his option. They won't have any cap space unless they renounce Bird Rights to Mirotic or Middleton and probably the cap hold on the MLE as well. It would be foolish to lose one of them to sign Hill when you can just keep all of them by keeping all their Bird Rights.

 

The cost is significant, but it's not prohibitive. The salary cap and luxury tax should not be viewed the same way as they are in baseball. Small markets can afford to do it when they have a contender. Revenue sharing is adequate. Building your brand helps recoup some of the costs. When deciding whether to pay a lot of luxury tax, the biggest factor in the NBA is not market size but rather whether you actually have a squad worth paying it for. The Bucks do. There is a point where it becomes prohibitive, but I don't think the Bucks would come close to that point unless Middleton and Mirotic get a lot more than I'm expecting them to.

[DuWayne Steurer]

Clippers shoot over 50% and lose by double digits. Are one or two of you still concerned?

 

Playoff basketball is played differently, with smaller rotations. There's no scenario where I won't not be concerned about Philly or Toronto (or especially GS).

 

I have no doubt that the Bucks should be absolutely heavy, heavy, heavy favorites in the first round over Miami or Orlando, but a 2nd or 3rd round series is by no means a gimme.

[adambr2]

Hard to find much to complain about as a Bucks fan, but the curious Christian Wood cut is really starting to look like a mistake as he is starting to emerge for the Pelicans.

 

I'd understand more if Tim Frazier was anything at all as we needed the PG depth. But Frazier is awful.

[RollieTime]

Hard to find much to complain about as a Bucks fan, but the curious Christian Wood cut is really starting to look like a mistake as he is starting to emerge for the Pelicans.

 

I'd understand more if Tim Frazier was anything at all as we needed the PG depth. But Frazier is awful.

 

He has a ton of talent. I couldn’t believe they got rid of him to sign Frazier. He’s going to be a good player in the NBA.

[Mr Southpaw]

So you'd rather he just not be on the team? No

 

Did you not notice how much of a different team they were when he was hurt? Do you remember how much they struggling right before they acquired him? He has done a good job

 

It would be a terrible idea to cancel his contract just on the principle of not over-paying him. Sorry I have a different opinion

 

They can't spend the money they save on anyone else. They can use it to keep their other starters

 

But hey, maybe next year they can make a 3rd-place-in-the-East banner with a note at the bottom saying "yeah but at least we didn't overpay George Hill". Really

 

My reasonable thoughts... George Hill is a nice backup piece on this team.

[Mr Southpaw]

Hard to find much to complain about as a Bucks fan, but the curious Christian Wood cut is really starting to look like a mistake as he is starting to emerge for the Pelicans.

 

I'd understand more if Tim Frazier was anything at all as we needed the PG depth. But Frazier is awful.

 

Absolutely, he was their diamond in the rough and they let him go for nothing.

[coolhandluke121]

They can't spend the money they save on anyone else. They can use it to keep their other starters

 

 

They can do that anyway. If you're saying this, I don't think you understand the CBA.

[Mr Southpaw]

They can't spend the money they save on anyone else. They can use it to keep their other starters

 

 

They can do that anyway. If you're saying this, I don't think you understand the CBA.

 

And they can not do that anyway. George Hill is not worth $19 million next year. My opinion and stop talking down to me.

[tmwiese55]

But are you missing the point that your choice is either George Hill at 18 mil or basically a Tim Frazier type guy at min salary? Which makes the team better? Since it's not my money I get the logic of paying it. Though I'm sure they won't since I think it'll put them in the tax so that 18ish mil costs them even more.

 

The one CBA argument I can come up with would be that if they let Hill go they could remain under the tax in order to avoid repeater penalties that could affect future roster moves. Top of my head, assuming they resign everyone else they're in the tax anyway so it wouldn't matter.

 

Also, I'm sure they're going to be trying to move Snell/Ersan in the offseason. I know I'd rather pay Hill 18 mil than Snell 11 mil. Both overpaid of course, but Hill is just better. So if Snell is moved somehow well then Hill's only 7ish mil more than him, thinking of it that way it's not so bad.

[Outlander]

I certainly hope the Bucks don't pay Hill $18 million, actually do think it is a good decision to cancel a contract over the principle of vastly overpaying the individual. He has been okay but his importance is quite overstated when someone says they will drop to 3rd in the East if Hill leaves.

[tmwiese55]

So essentially choosing to make your team worse out of principle and to save 3 billionaires some money. If that's your take, that's fine.

 

Another thing to note is that if picked up his large expiring contract becomes extremely valuable leading up to next year's deadline. Any star play that demands his way out between now and then comes into play for the Bucks since we have the perfect contract to trade back.

[adambr2]

I admittedly probably just don't know to what degree Hill's importance is to this team.

 

But I will say -- they are 35-7 with Hill on the court this year and 22-12 without him.

 

I don't know how much of that is causation and how much is correlation, but it's certainly a big swing.

[Outlander]

So essentially choosing to make your team worse out of principle and to save 3 billionaires some money. If that's your take, that's fine.

 

Another thing to note is that if picked up his large expiring contract becomes extremely valuable leading up to next year's deadline. Any star play that demands his way out between now and then comes into play for the Bucks since we have the perfect contract to trade back.

You are missing the vastly overpaid part, he isn't worth it. He is 33 and the basketball version of Curtis Granderson. He is fine to have on the team for the playoff run but is easily replaceable next year contrary to what you and Luke believe.

[nate82]

Magic # is down to 2 for the #1 seed. Could have been 1 if the Knicks weren't so pathetic.

[tmwiese55]

So essentially choosing to make your team worse out of principle and to save 3 billionaires some money. If that's your take, that's fine.

 

Another thing to note is that if picked up his large expiring contract becomes extremely valuable leading up to next year's deadline. Any star play that demands his way out between now and then comes into play for the Bucks since we have the perfect contract to trade back.

You are missing the vastly overpaid part, he isn't worth it. He is 33 and the basketball version of Curtis Granderson. He is fine to have on the team for the playoff run but is easily replaceable next year contrary to what you and Luke believe.

 

I don't think anyone is missing that he's vastly overpaid. Everyone knows that.

 

I disagree on easily replaceable. Think of our G play in recent years. Last year, the guys in this place were Liggins, Gary Payton Jr, and Brandon Jennings. This year its Tim Frazier. Take a look around at minimum contract Gs and see what's out there. Best one that probably would've come available this year was Rivers and I think most would cringe at him.

 

Quickly thinking about the best way to replace now, trading a redundant player like Ersan (assuming Niko is back) for a similar level backup G for similar money seems the best idea I can come up with, though I don't wanna comb through possible fits. One I can think of this year at that space would have been Jerrod Bayless. So Hill or Bayless type guy in that scenario. Or another option is you just trust improvement from Brown/DDV but that's a gamble at title contention.

 

All that said, I'm almost sure they'll decline the option just out of cost. Especially since they'll almost for sure be in the tax so his 18ish turns into several more mil.

[tmwiese55]

I assume Giannis sits one of these B2B games and one of the other B2B coming up. Keep his mins like 30ish or below to finish the year. Home court all the way should be basically done at this point. Just need him as healthy as possible.

[Pugger]

Clippers shoot over 50% and lose by double digits. Are one or two of you still concerned?

 

I'm not concerned but the Clippers were undermanned last night.

[homer]

I admittedly probably just don't know to what degree Hill's importance is to this team.

 

But I will say -- they are 35-7 with Hill on the court this year and 22-12 without him.

 

I don't know how much of that is causation and how much is a correlation, but it's certainly a big swing.

 

 

Opponent Offensive Rating when he is on the court: 97.7

Opponent Offensive Rating when he is off the court: 107.6

 

That's a pretty big swing.

 

By way of comparison, Giannis' numbers are 104.6 and 106.7 respectively. Obviously there are different lineups around each guy but still.

[True Blue Brew Crew]

Clippers shoot over 50% and lose by double digits. Are one or two of you still concerned?

 

I'm not concerned but the Clippers were undermanned last night.

 

Not sure if there are any playoff contenders more undermanned than the Bucks right now.

[homer]

The Bucks have a +9.2 Net Rtg. Next up is Golden State at +5.7. So basically they have +4.5 lead on Golden State. If you subtract 4.5 from Golden State you more or less end up at the Clippers who are 13th. The Bucks have been dominant this year.