Bucks off-season thread (non-draft)

[Samurai Bucky]

I read that the Bucks tried to get Frank the Tank Kaminsky before they got Mirotic. Perhaps that would be a better cost effective option. Plus, Kaminsky is a bit more athletic. I think he would thrive in Coach B's system.

[HiAndTight]

I read that the Bucks tried to get Frank the Tank Kaminsky before they got Mirotic. Perhaps that would be a better cost effective option. Plus, Kaminsky is a bit more athletic. I think he would thrive in Coach B's system.

 

 

That could have worked. Kaminsky has pretty nice footwork around the basket as well. He's obviously not as good as Mirotic, but you're right, he might have thrived in this offense.

 

He'd be a nice guy to target, I just can't think how we could make it work. One of those rare times a UW guy actually makes sense for a pro team.

 

 

The off-season is going to be really interesting. The Bucks are limited, but there are still a ton of different options for them. They could pick up Hill's option and trade him for a guy who's overpaid, but who could help us(essentially what Middleton will be if we sign him most likely). Who they sign or don't, options they have on players.

 

 

Are the Bucks a better or worse team if they sign...lets say Patrick Beverly to an MLE for ~9.25 and then find a way to acquire Kaminsky but have to let Hill and Mirotic go? Beverly is worse passing the ball, but a ~40 pct 3 point shooter and probably near Marcus Smart-type of a defensive player. Kaminsky doesn't have to do a ton, just spread the floor.

[tmwiese55]

Frank is a FA and I doubt he gets much if anything above the minimum. He did finish the year well but he's not going to command much. Probably will get a small one year prove it deal. Though he is restricted so complicates it a bit unless they renounce right away, but they have other bigs ahead of him.

[HiAndTight]

Especially when the other two best teams in Tor/GSW are likely losing their best players.

 

Absolutely. That's going to help quite a bit. I just think Giannis' weaknesses got exposed and he was outplayed by a pretty decent margin by Kawhi and he's going to come back a much better shooter and an even more all-around player.

 

I did see that Kawhi is apparently buying a property in Toronto, but no clue if there's any truth to that. Even if there is, I still like the Bucks chances going forward.

 

I floated a bunch of names of FA PG's who could sign a MLE in the past, but the guy I'm kinda stuck on is Patrick Beverly. I think he's a game changer, more than his numbers indicate. And we could even start him and bring Bled off the bench. Not diminish his minutes, just have him play more as the primary ball handlers and the guy who attacks coming off the bench. Might put a little less pressure on him.

I guess they'd have to agree to deals with Middleton, Brogdon and decide what to do with Mirotic and Lopez first in this scenario-but have them put off actually signing until they use their full MLE as I really doubt Beverly would play for the tax payers MLE.

 

Anyway, it'll be fun to see how it plays out.

[HiAndTight]

Frank is a FA and I doubt he gets much if anything above the minimum. He did finish the year well but he's not going to command much. Probably will get a small one year prove it deal. Though he is restricted so complicates it a bit unless they renounce right away, but they have other bigs ahead of him.

 

 

Sounds like the Hornets are hanging onto him because they know somebody wants him. And it makes sense. No reason not to. They have bigs, but nothing special and there are reports the Bucks are interested in Kaminsky. Marvin Williams would be a guy from Charlotte that would be a nice guy to add as well. Though he has a PO for 15 million this year, so that's unlikely to happen, baring a buyout.

[nate82]

Frank is a FA and I doubt he gets much if anything above the minimum. He did finish the year well but he's not going to command much. Probably will get a small one year prove it deal. Though he is restricted so complicates it a bit unless they renounce right away, but they have other bigs ahead of him.

 

 

Sounds like the Hornets are hanging onto him because they know somebody wants him. And it makes sense. No reason not to. They have bigs, but nothing special and there are reports the Bucks are interested in Kaminsky. Marvin Williams would be a guy from Charlotte that would be a nice guy to add as well. Though he has a PO for 15 million this year, so that's unlikely to happen, baring a buyout.

 

Probably a sign and trade deal but no idea who the Hornets would want in exchange. They wouldn't want Snell maybe Connaughton?

[tmwiese55]

Sign and trades are way more difficult now. I'd guess they're just going to see what someone signs frank to then decide. And since no one is going to want to risk offering Frank a big contract he might just sit there forever because teams know if they offer what they're comfortable paying (cheap) then Cha will just keep him.

 

Hornets option that could convert Snell into something useful could be Zeller. Similar but slightly more expensive contract. we'd have to add on, with maybe a Pat type guy or picks. Seems Cha really loves Zeller though. Wouldn't surprise me that with proper coaching Zeller could learn to shoot 3s at respectable clip. Not something I'm looking to do, but Snell's money spent on Zeller is better than on Zeller (and you could then let Brook go saving the Exception for Hill).

[FVBrewerFan]

All of this is a painful reminder how this season very well could have been a one year window. Every day I hear from family, friends, random people about how this was just the first step. Bring everyone back and take the next step.

 

I don't even have the heart anymore to correct them. First, it will near impossible to bring everyone back. Then, even if they could, is that even good enough when it wasn't this year? With no real way to improve the roster. No cap space, no tradeable players to bring back a difference maker.

 

As you can see, I will be pleasantly surprised if they're able to pull off a miracle off-season.

 

 

How would you correct people who believe that this was the Bucks first step and they'll be back?

 

I'm not sure why this is so far fetched. Again, every great player has to overcome something. Giannis wasn't able to this year at 24, so that means it was a one year window?

 

And growth from a team can come from it's younger players getting better among other things. DJ Wilson is a 6'10, athletic and active big man who shots about 36 pct from 3. Not sure he's hit his ceiling. I know Giannis hasn't because as great as he is, he struggled in his first time in a big spot in the playoffs. Bringing back Mirotic would almost certainly be growth right there as he played very few games for the Bucks this year and given his track record, would almost certainly be significantly better next season.

 

There will be turnover. As long as we bring back Middleton, Brogdon and can find a competent, veteran PG, I don't see any reason why we won't be back and competitive.

 

I just don't understand the defeatist attitude when we've got a 24-year-old who will most likely be MVP this year and still has a lot of room for growth in his game and we were up 2-0 in the ECF's.

 

I'll start getting upset if Giannis leaves. Past that, I'm pretty confident if he sticks around here, the Bucks are going to be a contender every year he's healthy. I don't know what more you can ask for.

 

Because, as I said, bringing everyone back is not realistic. Let's say they lose Lopez. That's a bigger hit than most people realize. He really anchors the defense, and a true stretch 5 on offense. If they leave who replaces him with no cap room? Wilson is a nice player, but he's not a 5.

 

Yea, GS and Toronto are losing their best players but GS isn't going anywhere. And there are always other teams that step up sooner than expected. Like the Bucks and Nuggets this year. Especially if the Lakers, Knicks, whoever make the right decisions and put a great team together. Indians is lurking depending on what moves they make.

 

I'm not saying the Bucks window IS closed, but it COULD be closed. Yea, they'll still be competitive. And I'll enjoy watching. But I think this this season may turn out to be their best chance to win it all when we look back 10 years from now. Hope I'm wrong. Next year Giannis supporting cast is probably Middleton, Bledsoe (counting on him in the playoffs?), maybe Brogdon, and then a bunch of questions. This is not a young team on the rise is my point. Everyone is already at their ceilings for the most part.

[HiAndTight]

All of this is a painful reminder how this season very well could have been a one year window. Every day I hear from family, friends, random people about how this was just the first step. Bring everyone back and take the next step.

 

I don't even have the heart anymore to correct them. First, it will near impossible to bring everyone back. Then, even if they could, is that even good enough when it wasn't this year? With no real way to improve the roster. No cap space, no tradeable players to bring back a difference maker.

 

As you can see, I will be pleasantly surprised if they're able to pull off a miracle off-season.

 

 

How would you correct people who believe that this was the Bucks first step and they'll be back?

 

I'm not sure why this is so far fetched. Again, every great player has to overcome something. Giannis wasn't able to this year at 24, so that means it was a one year window?

 

And growth from a team can come from it's younger players getting better among other things. DJ Wilson is a 6'10, athletic and active big man who shots about 36 pct from 3. Not sure he's hit his ceiling. I know Giannis hasn't because as great as he is, he struggled in his first time in a big spot in the playoffs. Bringing back Mirotic would almost certainly be growth right there as he played very few games for the Bucks this year and given his track record, would almost certainly be significantly better next season.

 

There will be turnover. As long as we bring back Middleton, Brogdon and can find a competent, veteran PG, I don't see any reason why we won't be back and competitive.

 

I just don't understand the defeatist attitude when we've got a 24-year-old who will most likely be MVP this year and still has a lot of room for growth in his game and we were up 2-0 in the ECF's.

 

I'll start getting upset if Giannis leaves. Past that, I'm pretty confident if he sticks around here, the Bucks are going to be a contender every year he's healthy. I don't know what more you can ask for.

 

Because, as I said, bringing everyone back is not realistic. Let's say they lose Lopez. That's a bigger hit than most people realize. He really anchors the defense, and a true stretch 5 on offense. If they leave who replaces him with no cap room? Wilson is a nice player, but he's not a 5.

 

Yea, GS and Toronto are losing their best players but GS isn't going anywhere. And there are always other teams that step up sooner than expected. Like the Bucks and Nuggets this year. Especially if the Lakers, Knicks, whoever make the right decisions and put a great team together. Indians is lurking depending on what moves they make.

 

I'm not saying the Bucks window IS closed, but it COULD be closed. Yea, they'll still be competitive. And I'll enjoy watching. But I think this this season may turn out to be their best chance to win it all when we look back 10 years from now. Hope I'm wrong. Next year Giannis supporting cast is probably Middleton, Bledsoe (counting on him in the playoffs?), maybe Brogdon, and then a bunch of questions. This is not a young team on the rise is my point. Everyone is already at their ceilings for the most part.

 

 

I disagree that everyone's already reached their ceilings. That'd be like saying LeBron reached his ceiling when he was 24 and SA was able to stop him using a similar defensive scheme as the ones used against Giannis this year because he struggled to shoot. The guy has gotten better every year in the league and I think there's a whole other level he could still get to. There are several guys who are pretty much at their ceiling, but some of them just flat out didn't play well in the post-season. Bledsoe didn't. But Kyle Lowry struggled for years in the biggest series in the post-season.

 

I think we have a few young guys who could also step up and improve and losing Lopez would hurt, but he also hurt us in the playoffs as much or more than he helped us.

 

The only way I believe we look back years from now and say this was our best chance is if Giannis doesn't re-sign I would hope. As long as we have him, an elite coach, I feel pretty good.

 

That's not to say it's ok they lost a series they were up 2-0 in, but I do think this team had to go through some adversity and get some experience. I cannot think of a single superstar who led his team to a title in his first try without having another legit Superstar on his team.

 

 

As CHL said, this is going to be a really interesting off-season. We'll see how invested the owners are in building a championship team. If they lose Middleton over a few million a season or Brogdon, then you'll end up being right. I am however confident that won't happen. I think they'll pay Middleton what it takes. It'll hurt a bit because it'll most likely be overpaying, but unlike the other leagues, sometimes you just have to do that in the NBA and you particularly have to do that when you have a guy who is a generational talent like Giannis and he's deciding if he's going to stay with you or if he's going to move on.

[coolhandluke121]

I can see why anyone would be nervous. Normally when you get to the point where you're at risk of losing a lot of talent to unrestricted free agency, you've had a nice 3-5 year run. The Bucks could take a big step backwards after just one really good year.

 

It really comes down to all the terrible moves they made after they bought the team. Henson, Teletovic, Dellavedova, and Plumlee all got 8-figure salaries (or very close to it) on 3-4 year deals. They gave Monroe a max contract and traded multiple picks for Greivis Vazquez. They drafted Thon Maker 10th when Sabonis was still available and was clearly a perfect fit. They drafted Rashad Vaughn 17th because he had the same agent as Kidd. They must have had tons of chances to trade Jabari Parker for something of real value, but they insisted on shoehorning him into the core even though he was a terrible fit and had shown all kinds of red flags.

 

Imagine how good they could have been the last few years if they had just made decent moves half the time. The only good move they made before Horst was drafting Brogdon... unless you count Giannis's first extension, which should have been a no-brainer.

 

All that said, like I've been saying all along, just pay the luxury tax and run it back. They got a ton of help on the arena and their investment is already way up. They can afford it. Don't let them tell you they can't. Portland, OKC, and Cleveland have had some of the biggest payrolls in the entire league in recent years. Revenue sharing is adequate in the NBA for small market teams to push the payroll. What really worries me is that there are lots of unrestricted free agents, and all it takes is one dumb, desperate team to overpay any given one of them. And even if they don't, someone could choose to leave anyway.

[coolhandluke121]

George Magic Oscar Hill

----------------

$18m non-guaranteed salary with $1m guaranteed if the Bucks waive him

This is technically not the same as a team option, a term I and many others are guilty of sometimes using carelessly

It's complicated, but everything I've read indicates that Hill has to be waived to avoid the $18m salary

I've looked everywhere I know of, including reading the CBA, but I can't find what waiving a player means for holding his Early Bird Rights

Hill would not be eligible for full Bird Rights after just 2 years on his current deal

Hill would have full Bird Rights in 2020 if the Bucks don't waive him

His contract can't be extended or renegotiated (doesn't meet the minimum number of years for either strategy)

Technically, I think waivers would make him eligible to be claimed by another team that wants to pay him $18m

Otherwise, he's a free agent

 

I know the CBA pretty well, but this is confusing as all heck. I really don't think the Bucks retain his Early Bird rights if they waive him, but I can't find anything that specifically says one way or the other. Furthermore, waiving would expose him to other teams. In any case, suffice to say that it may not be realistic to think the Bucks can keep him if they use the MLE on Lopez and waive Hill. I'm just not convinced that they have the right to pay him any more than a minimum salary. However, I am not 100% ruling out the possibility that they would still have his early Bird Rights, which would allow them to go well over the cap to pay him.

 

Bottom line, I'm keeping him unless they have his early Bird Rights... and even then, I would be worried about losing him to a higher bidder. Getting his full Bird Rights in 2020 could come in handy. Furthermore, it would be incredibly stupid to waive him in hopes of keeping most of the other guys, only to end up losing other players anyway. You waive Hill, Lopez gets more than the MLE, and Mirotic leaves to start somewhere else.... or god forbid, Khris gets 4/$140m and you just can't bear to beat that... why lose all that talent just to spare the owners a big tax bill? Hill is the guy you're in control of retaining (beside Brogdon who's an RFA), the only guy who actually played better in the playoffs (whereas nearly everyone else played worse), and is a perfect fit on the team. They need him. After watching the lack of poise and experience against Toronto, I don't see how anyone can doubt how badly they need Hill.

[HiAndTight]

I can see why anyone would be nervous. Normally when you get to the point where you're at risk of losing a lot of talent to unrestricted free agency, you've had a nice 3-5 year run. The Bucks could take a big step backwards after just one really good year.

 

It really comes down to all the terrible moves they made after they bought the team. Henson, Teletovic, Dellavedova, and Plumlee all got 8-figure salaries (or very close to it) on 3-4 year deals. They gave Monroe a max contract and traded multiple picks for Greivis Vazquez. They drafted Thon Maker 10th when Sabonis was still available and was clearly a perfect fit. They drafted Rashad Vaughn 17th because he had the same agent as Kidd. They must have had tons of chances to trade Jabari Parker for something of real value, but they insisted on shoehorning him into the core even though he was a terrible fit and had shown all kinds of red flags.

 

Imagine how good they could have been the last few years if they had just made decent moves half the time. The only good move they made before Horst was drafting Brogdon... unless you count Giannis's first extension, which should have been a no-brainer.

 

All that said, like I've been saying all along, just pay the luxury tax and run it back. They got a ton of help on the arena and their investment is already way up. They can afford it. Don't let them tell you they can't. Portland, OKC, and Cleveland have had some of the biggest payrolls in the entire league in recent years. Revenue sharing is adequate in the NBA for small market teams to push the payroll. What really worries me is that there are lots of unrestricted free agents, and all it takes is one dumb, desperate team to overpay any given one of them. And even if they don't, someone could choose to leave anyway.

 

 

I'd argue they should have signed Giannis to a max the first time around and made it a 5 year deal. It may end up working out better for both sides, but when you have a superstar like Giannis, you don't make the mistake the Wolves did with Love. I'm not a fan of asking a guy like that to take a little less to keep talent around him. Particularly on his first deal. I REALLY hope they don't even think about trying to give him less than the Supermax next year unless he's firmly on board with it well in advance.

 

Some of those moves they made...they look worse in retrospect than they did at the time. I was never a fan of the Vasquez trade, but if he doesn't get hurt, he's a pretty solid backup PG. The deals they signed when the cap went through the roof, those are the types of deals that were made across the league.

 

With regards to Parker, that hurts the most. Hitting an HR on Giannis and then getting the #2 pick should have provided the core for this team. Instead, we got a very talented scorer who tore his knee up twice, never got going and now seems to be a pretty irrelevant player.

 

I can't blame them for Thon either because that type of risk is the type of risk that netted us Giannis.

 

But getting every single one wrong and not getting any luck just backed us into a corner. I think Horst has done an amazing job at fixing some of those bad deals by dumping salary though.

 

 

I'd imagine a great deal fo the trepidation also comes from the fact that the last time the Bucks were in this position, they let a coach with an enormous ego blow the team up so he could get a guy well past his prime to come to Milwaukee even though he didn't want to. This time...we've got Giannis. As long as Giannis is saying he wants to stay in Milwaukee, I'm going to feel pretty confident.

[HiAndTight]

George Magic Oscar Hill

----------------

$18m non-guaranteed salary with $1m guaranteed if the Bucks waive him

This is technically not the same as a team option, a term I and many others are guilty of sometimes using carelessly

It's complicated, but everything I've read indicates that Hill has to be waived to avoid the $18m salary

I've looked everywhere I know of, including reading the CBA, but I can't find what waiving a player means for holding his Early Bird Rights

Hill would not be eligible for full Bird Rights after just 2 years on his current deal

Hill would have full Bird Rights in 2020 if the Bucks don't waive him

His contract can't be extended or renegotiated (doesn't meet the minimum number of years for either strategy)

Technically, I think waivers would make him eligible to be claimed by another team that wants to pay him $18m

Otherwise, he's a free agent

I know the CBA pretty well, but this is confusing as all heck. I really don't think the Bucks retain his Early Bird rights if they waive him, but I can't find anything that specifically says one way or the other. Furthermore, waiving would expose him to other teams. In any case, suffice to say that it may not be realistic to think the Bucks can keep him if they use the MLE on Lopez and waive Hill. I'm just not convinced that they have the right to pay him any more than a minimum salary. However, I am not 100% ruling out the possibility that they would still have his early Bird Rights, which would allow them to go well over the cap to pay him.

 

Bottom line, I'm keeping him unless they have his early Bird Rights... and even then, I would be worried about losing him to a higher bidder. Getting his full Bird Rights in 2020 could come in handy. Furthermore, it would be incredibly stupid to waive him in hopes of keeping most of the other guys, only to end up losing other players anyway. You waive Hill, Lopez gets more than the MLE, and Mirotic leaves to start somewhere else.... or god forbid, Khris gets 4/$140m and you just can't bear to beat that... why lose all that talent just to spare the owners a big tax bill? Hill is the guy you're in control of retaining (beside Brogdon who's an RFA), the only guy who actually played better in the playoffs (whereas nearly everyone else played worse), and is a perfect fit on the team. They need him. After watching the lack of poise and experience against Toronto, I don't see how anyone can doubt how badly they need Hill.

 

 

I thought that you lost a players Bird rights if you did either, but I hope I'm wrong. Just logically speaking, it wouldn't really make sense to retain a players Bird rights if you waive that player.

 

I do have a little bit of confidence that Middleton will stick around based on the way he was talking about the future in Milwaukee, how "we'll" be back here and the like.

The standard we've used in the past with regard to how we value guys is kinda thrown out the window this off-season. A 7th seed doesn't give serious consideration to giving Middleton 30+ million a year or bringing Hill back.

 

I just hope Horst has a clear understanding of roughly what these guys want and how eager they are to come back.

 

This is also probably the sport that has the strongest case for paying players based on playoff performance. A guy has a bad series in MLB, you kinda throw that out and go off the whole body of work, NFL, it's one game. Post-season in the NBA, you find out a lot about the players. Hill was pretty bad last year in the playoffs, but aside from that, he's been a better post-season player than regular season player. Going back a year, people would have Mirotic a priority to re-sign after his post-season, now, I doubt most Bucks fans care or they'd be upset with giving him 4/48.

 

 

 

These are great little profiles or write up's on these guys.

[coolhandluke121]

 

 

I thought that you lost a players Bird rights if you did either, but I hope I'm wrong. Just logically speaking, it wouldn't really make sense to retain a players Bird rights if you waive that player.

 

It seems so obvious that I just took it for granted, but I researched it to be 100% sure and couldn't find it anywhere. That doesn't mean it's not there, but I can't see anything about losing Bird exceptions for waiving a player with a non-guaranteed salary.

 

It would seem really odd if the CBA allowed it though. The players union would probably be against it because they don't want to give teams incentives to waive players. Then again, allowing them to keep Bird Rights at least helps the player because it leaves a team with the right to go over the cap to sign him without using some other exception.

 

It's not the same as declining a team option, so those rules have nothing to do with it. And it's not the same as renouncing a player, which is giving up their Bird Rights... although it's possible that renouncing Bird Rights is assumed to be part of the process of waiving a player.

 

There are rules about re-acquiring a player you traded away after his new team waives him, but that's not the same.

 

By the letter of the law, it almost seems like they could waive him and keep his Early Bird rights, because he did not change teams via free agency or waiver for 2 years (3 years would make full Bird Rights). But some other team could claim him on waivers and make it a moot point, and even if he clears waivers, he would be a UFA.

 

 

I do have a little bit of confidence that Middleton will stick around based on the way he was talking about the future in Milwaukee, how "we'll" be back here and the like.

 

He always gives non-committal answers when asked directly, but I think it's revealing that he slips into that when it's about the team. Giannis did the same when he said "we're going to be contenders for a long time."

[tmwiese55]

I can see why anyone would be nervous. Normally when you get to the point where you're at risk of losing a lot of talent to unrestricted free agency, you've had a nice 3-5 year run. The Bucks could take a big step backwards after just one really good year.

 

It really comes down to all the terrible moves they made after they bought the team. Henson, Teletovic, Dellavedova, and Plumlee all got 8-figure salaries (or very close to it) on 3-4 year deals. They gave Monroe a max contract and traded multiple picks for Greivis Vazquez. They drafted Thon Maker 10th when Sabonis was still available and was clearly a perfect fit. They drafted Rashad Vaughn 17th because he had the same agent as Kidd. They must have had tons of chances to trade Jabari Parker for something of real value, but they insisted on shoehorning him into the core even though he was a terrible fit and had shown all kinds of red flags.

 

Imagine how good they could have been the last few years if they had just made decent moves half the time. The only good move they made before Horst was drafting Brogdon... unless you count Giannis's first extension, which should have been a no-brainer.

 

All that said, like I've been saying all along, just pay the luxury tax and run it back. They got a ton of help on the arena and their investment is already way up. They can afford it. Don't let them tell you they can't. Portland, OKC, and Cleveland have had some of the biggest payrolls in the entire league in recent years. Revenue sharing is adequate in the NBA for small market teams to push the payroll. What really worries me is that there are lots of unrestricted free agents, and all it takes is one dumb, desperate team to overpay any given one of them. And even if they don't, someone could choose to leave anyway.

 

 

I'd argue they should have signed Giannis to a max the first time around and made it a 5 year deal. It may end up working out better for both sides, but when you have a superstar like Giannis, you don't make the mistake the Wolves did with Love. I'm not a fan of asking a guy like that to take a little less to keep talent around him. Particularly on his first deal. I REALLY hope they don't even think about trying to give him less than the Supermax next year unless he's firmly on board with it well in advance.

 

Some of those moves they made...they look worse in retrospect than they did at the time. I was never a fan of the Vasquez trade, but if he doesn't get hurt, he's a pretty solid backup PG. The deals they signed when the cap went through the roof, those are the types of deals that were made across the league.

 

With regards to Parker, that hurts the most. Hitting an HR on Giannis and then getting the #2 pick should have provided the core for this team. Instead, we got a very talented scorer who tore his knee up twice, never got going and now seems to be a pretty irrelevant player.

 

I can't blame them for Thon either because that type of risk is the type of risk that netted us Giannis.

 

But getting every single one wrong and not getting any luck just backed us into a corner. I think Horst has done an amazing job at fixing some of those bad deals by dumping salary though.

 

 

I'd imagine a great deal fo the trepidation also comes from the fact that the last time the Bucks were in this position, they let a coach with an enormous ego blow the team up so he could get a guy well past his prime to come to Milwaukee even though he didn't want to. This time...we've got Giannis. As long as Giannis is saying he wants to stay in Milwaukee, I'm going to feel pretty confident.

 

Good post overall. Couple things, first MKE didn't ask Giannis to take 4 years. That was him, he wanted to get to this mega contract a year earlier. It wasn't out of MKE being cheap. In order to have it be locked in amount instead of a % of cap I think they had to make slightly less than max. Either way, this is what Giannis wanted so he could get the 200 mil contract locked in asap.

 

Thon, for sure they can be blamed for reaching on a guy projected to be a 2nd round pick that high especially after the age info leaked that day. Huge mistake.

 

Jabari, while you're right you can't blame them for taking him and that it's horrible luck overall with the injuries and that a #2 pick flopped. But there is blame that they didn't see the issues two years prior to him being a FA and moving him for a better fit. Would've been ballsy and way forward thinking but signs were all there. Most basic being that the other two best players on the team played the same positions.

[coolhandluke121]

Regarding all the free agents and the uncertainty, just another reminder that it can be very helpful to have contracts like Hill's expiring deal and solid players like Mirotic and Middleton just to make salaries work in mega-deals. The Bucks were one of just 4 teams on Anthony Davis's wish list, and it's easy to see why an outside star would view this as a great situation. Players like the coaching staff and Giannis seems like an easy star to get along with. And it's not the same as Durant joining a team that already had multiple stars, so a guy like Davis wouldn't have to worry about being discredited for that.

 

And even if it's not Davis, it seems there's an unhappy perennial all-star or even a true superstar available every year or two these days. Keeping as many assets as possible can only help make something like that possible.

[OnTheBlack]

Regarding all the free agents and the uncertainty, just another reminder that it can be very helpful to have contracts like Hill's expiring deal and solid players like Mirotic and Middleton just to make salaries work in mega-deals. The Bucks were one of just 4 teams on Anthony Davis's wish list, and it's easy to see why an outside star would view this as a great situation. Players like the coaching staff and Giannis seems like an easy star to get along with. And it's not the same as Durant joining a team that already had multiple stars, so a guy like Davis wouldn't have to worry about being discredited for that.

 

And even if it's not Davis, it seems there's an unhappy perennial all-star or even a true superstar available every year or two these days. Keeping as many assets as possible can only help make something like that possible.

 

 

That's a great point. I don't know if we have the assets to other than potential salary relief to offer for a legitimate superstar like AD, but in future years this could become more important. A Mike Conley/Chris Paul type of player/deal could come up if a superstar doesn't. Players who are a little overpaid but still have value and fit in well. Mirotic on a shorter deal could become one of these types of options if he signed a 2-3 year deal with a Hill like final year. 2 years/24 million 3rd year option for 15 million, 14 of which is guaranteed.

[OnTheBlack]

I'm just eager to see how invested these owners are into winning. I understand they put up a lot of money for both the stadium(300 million IIRC with 100 of that coming from Kohl) and the team not that long ago, but if we're going to go off that Daryl Morely, "5 pct" rule, meaning if your team has even a 5 pct chance of winning it all, you have to go all in on that season, then the Bucks should be willing to do pretty much everything(yes, including signing Hill).

 

I'm thinking they're probably taking a long term view more so than just looking at this season. The worst thing they could do is take a David Stearns like approach to these FA's though. Put a value on them and refuse to go above what they think said players value is. Makes absolute sense when Stearns does it with FA's, it would make zero sense for Horst to do it with his FA's.

[coolhandluke121]

I'm just eager to see how invested these owners are into winning. I understand they put up a lot of money for both the stadium(300 million IIRC with 100 of that coming from Kohl) and the team not that long ago, but if we're going to go off that Daryl Morely, "5 pct" rule, meaning if your team has even a 5 pct chance of winning it all, you have to go all in on that season, then the Bucks should be willing to do pretty much everything(yes, including signing Hill).

 

I'm thinking they're probably taking a long term view more so than just looking at this season. The worst thing they could do is take a David Stearns like approach to these FA's though. Put a value on them and refuse to go above what they think said players value is. Makes absolute sense when Stearns does it with FA's, it would make zero sense for Horst to do it with his FA's.

 

Exactly. The NBA financial landscape is completely different from baseball. Except for the most egregiously high payrolls, you're not so much limited by being a small market as you are by what salary cap exceptions are available to you and whether you have a roster worth maximizing them. This team won 60 games and has a ton of exceptions to play with. A lot of people are talking about whom to prioritize, and I get it, but I still say they should just pay a buttload of tax and keep everyone who wants to stay. I do think some of them will be overpaid, but I don't think any of them will be awful contracts unless they get hurt.

[tmwiese55]

That's been one of my main points on KM the whole time. Once he's signed and locked in he immediately becomes the trade chip/contract when a disgruntled star comes available again like happens over and over. Folks that don't follow closely enough or know how intricate the cap system is in the NBA don't grasp that. Now, of course it's still much better to have him locked in around 25 mil rather than 35 mil though, which is what I'm hoping here. That and of course as we wait and see what happens in that trade landscape it's better to have him here helping the team win

[coolhandluke121]

I went to realGM and confirmed that the Bucks lose Hill's Early Bird Rights if they waive him. Not that anyone is likely to change their opinion over that.

[OnTheBlack]

I'm just eager to see how invested these owners are into winning. I understand they put up a lot of money for both the stadium(300 million IIRC with 100 of that coming from Kohl) and the team not that long ago, but if we're going to go off that Daryl Morely, "5 pct" rule, meaning if your team has even a 5 pct chance of winning it all, you have to go all in on that season, then the Bucks should be willing to do pretty much everything(yes, including signing Hill).

 

I'm thinking they're probably taking a long term view more so than just looking at this season. The worst thing they could do is take a David Stearns like approach to these FA's though. Put a value on them and refuse to go above what they think said players value is. Makes absolute sense when Stearns does it with FA's, it would make zero sense for Horst to do it with his FA's.

 

Exactly. The NBA financial landscape is completely different from baseball. Except for the most egregiously high payrolls, you're not so much limited by being a small market as you are by what salary cap exceptions are available to you and whether you have a roster worth maximizing them. This team won 60 games and has a ton of exceptions to play with. A lot of people are talking about whom to prioritize, and I get it, but I still say they should just pay a buttload of tax and keep everyone who wants to stay. I do think some of them will be overpaid, but I don't think any of them will be awful contracts unless they get hurt.

 

It's just concerning when you hear how teams like the Warriors are worried about going too far into the luxury tax and how it stopped and OKC dynasty and how just about every team not run by a Russian Oligarch has said the same. It really sets the Bucks owners up to justify not wanting to go too deep into it. Especially when you look at another 20 million being added to the cap in the future with Giannis hopefully signing onto a extension next summer. Just playing devils advocate here. If you're taking a view that we have a 6 year window(Giannis and then assuming one SuperMax deal as anything too far out is too hard to imagine) that's where they'd be able(and where I've been arguing) that they won't sign Hill. They'd be saying we're trying to build a sustainable contender. But winning a title with an international superstar is going to create immeasurable benefits to the city and team.

 

Just a quick correction, when I was talking about tradable assets and Mirotic, I meant signing him with that 3rd year option of 15 million with only 1 million guaranteed(like Hill's this year). That would be a pretty nice trade asset.

[coolhandluke121]

 

It's just concerning when you hear how teams like the Warriors are worried about going too far into the luxury tax and how it stopped and OKC dynasty and how just about every team not run by a Russian Oligarch has said the same. It really sets the Bucks owners up to justify not wanting to go too deep into it. Especially when you look at another 20 million being added to the cap in the future with Giannis hopefully signing onto a extension next summer.

 

We've seen a lot of small markets have some of the highest payrolls over the past decade. OKC, Portland, and Cleveland have been near the top on several occasions. I'll grant that there's a limit but I would certainly hope they'll go into the top 5 in payroll. Most contenders do when it's necessary to keep the team together. It is unusual to have so many guys that need to be paid though.

 

There's another argument in favor of Hill, and that is avoiding a long-term luxury tax commitment. The repeater tax is brutal, and it's not just about the rich owners' money. If you waive Hill and keep Khris, Lopez, Mirotic, and Brogdon, you're committed to a high tax bill for years. That means you lose the BAE, which is how you got Lopez in the first place, and you are stuck with the tax MLE every year. Giannis comes due for the super-max and you're in trouble. I think keeping, say, Mirotic, is worth the difference between the full MLE and the tax MLE for one year... but is it worth losing the full MLE every year and losing the BAE? The same thing applies even to Khris or Brogdon considering the wing depth they might have with Brown, DDV, and Pat C.

 

I have nothing against Khris in terms of his value on the court (even though I've talked extensively about how I think he could be better), but if he gets 4/$140m from someone else, I could easily talk myself into being glad they can keep everyone else and get comfortably back under the luxury tax when Hill and Ersan are off the books. Just estimating, but I believe if they let Khris walk, they could probably use the full MLE every year for 3-4 years (plus use the BAE every other year during that time) before they go over the tax apron again, even with a super-max extension for Giannis. That's potentially appealing because there will be ring-chasers like Pau Gasol this year, only better, and because needs change and injuries happen, which the flexibility of the full MLE helps you address.

[coolhandluke121]

One correction: I think Khris's max contract in a sign-and-trade may be 30% of the cap after all. I think it's just players who qualify for 30% despite having only 5 years experience (i.e. via various awards combinations) who have their max salary in a sign-and-trade reduced from 30% to 25%.

[patrickgpe]

looks like the bucks are loosing an assistant to the grizzlies. To be honest I had no idea who Taylor Jenkins was before the announcement. While he was only here 1 year, it is nice to see bucks assistants being mentioned for HC positions. I can't remember the last time a current bucks assistant was plucked away from Milwaukee for a head coaching job.