Bucks off-season thread (non-draft)

[coolhandluke121]

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.

 

Terry Stotts should have been picked 10 times over. I remember George Karl was furious about that, even though he stood to lose Stotts as an assistant. Then Stotts finally got a job and got shafted with lazy, selfish Redd, Magloire, and Mo plus a moody Bogut.

 

Total side note, sorry. Incidentally, Kenny Atkinson is from the Bud coaching tree, and Bud is from the Pop coaching tree, so there is a lineage there that will likely continue.

[patrickgpe]

I'm probably forgetting some and people like Boylan and Larry K don't count. The only other case I can think of is Woodson, but he wasn't hired from the bucks.

[Mr Southpaw]

 

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.

 

I agree with this. Then draft a player that is similar to Kris (Louis King from Oregon is my choice and should be available). Between Malcolm, Donte, Hill, Connaughton, MLE, and the draft pick not to we should be able to shoot threes at an efficient rate from our twos and threes.

 

I hope they can resign everybody, but I think Kris needs to be reasonable. It is kind of like do you want to play with Giannis and be the number two guy and have a chance for a ring or two or some team like the Knicks, Mavericks or Hawks and be the number one guy and win half your games. I don't look at him as a number one guy, I just hope he wants to be the number two guy and stay put hear in the MKE.

[coolhandluke121]

 

Between Malcolm, Donte, Hill, Connaughton, MLE, and the draft pick not to we should be able to shoot threes at an efficient rate from our twos and threes.

 

 

I would add Snell and Brown too. They might actually be the team's best shooters after Brogdon. Snell only shoots when he's wide open, but he's hit around 40% three years straight and he'll be wide open a lot playing with Giannis. They're stuck with him anyway, but he gives some serviceable minutes with Giannis, who brings out the best in him. Brown shot an astounding 45% on almost 300 3-point attempts in college.

 

I don't even think they'd need to draft Khris's replacement, to be honest. And all of those guys except Snell are better at fast-paced, transition basketball than Khris. Khris loves a slow pace and that's always been a bit of an odd fit with Giannis.

 

But again, being able to keep everyone else and get right back under the tax threshold after just one year would be a huge benefit. I'm kind of playing devil's advocate, but I'm talking myself into it at the same time. I would get a sinking feeling if they paid Khris 4/$140m to compete with some irresponsible offer by a desperate team.

[HiAndTight]

I think people are vastly understating how easy it will be to replace Middleton, especially with a bunch of relatively unproven players.

 

We're talking about replacing Middleton with a bunch of guys who are 3-4 inches shorter than him and not nearly as long.

 

As for his pace of play, he's fine in the open court, but he is better in the half court relatively speaking. Where did the Bucks struggle the most? There's also Middleton's versatility.

 

Just having other guys who play on the wing doesn't mean they're capable of doing it at the level of Giannis. And speaking of Giannis, do you really think he's all that interested in the repeater tax? The impact will certainly be of consequence to him when it comes up in 4 years, but it's likely very low on his list of priorities now. Two future 1sts no longer available to us, and the Bucks having to convince Giannis to sign with us next off-season, counting pennies with your only other all-star is just not a smart way to play it.

 

 

This is why I don't think Hill's back. I like the 5 pct ideology, but IMO, you've got a 5 pct chance to win a title as long as Giannis is on your team. So you have to balance one year vs the next 4-5. In that scenario, you hope Wilson can take over for Mirotic and he is let go, you try to sign Lopez, but if he's not willing, there are other less effective bigs you can target for less money. Some of whom probably won't be the liability that Lopez was in the playoffs. And then you use the MLE on what hopefully will be either Hill or an upgrade to Hill(again, Beverly would fit that bill here).

 

Bring back Middleton, Brogdon, draft Porter is he's available at pick 30 and hope he can get a little tougher and improve his defense, but he's already a very good passer and can shoot the 3 according to scouting reports.

 

 

After that, the Bucks will likely be a favorite for many players who get bought out during the year as long as they remain competitive, so the team they have going into camp wont' be the team they finish the season with, so you can make some adjustments and tweaks there.

 

But I just don't see where you're going to be able to find a long, 6'8 SF who can shoot, score and pass(Middleton's passing is very underrated) and defend like he can. Certainly not among the collection of guys we have.

 

 

The Bucks were outstanding this year with Middleton, Brogdon and Giannis on the court together. At 27, 26 and 24, there's no reason to think that won't continue and actually improve as Giannis improves the parts of his game that are lagging a bit behind.

 

And there are teams that I believe will offer Middleton the max. The Kings would be in a perfect place to do it as they already have an incredible young core that would benefit from a guy like Middleton. I don't really think you have much of a choice. It's either keep Middleton or risk not only taking a BIG step back this year, but next year in the playoffs and allow the questions to start creeping into Giannis' mind about the future of the team.

[HiAndTight]

 

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.

 

I agree with this. Then draft a player that is similar to Kris (Louis King from Oregon is my choice and should be available). Between Malcolm, Donte, Hill, Connaughton, MLE, and the draft pick not to we should be able to shoot threes at an efficient rate from our twos and threes.

 

I hope they can resign everybody, but I think Kris needs to be reasonable. It is kind of like do you want to play with Giannis and be the number two guy and have a chance for a ring or two or some team like the Knicks, Mavericks or Hawks and be the number one guy and win half your games. I don't look at him as a number one guy, I just hope he wants to be the number two guy and stay put hear in the MKE.

 

 

Would you take about 40 million less than you could get? I think asking him to take less money to stay and play for your team is more unreasonable than if Middleton decided to leave and take the max. I already addressed how I think it's unreasonable to just list all of our wings and say they could fill in for Middleton, but in this scenario, you're paying Hill 19 million. Well, just from a money standpoint, that's hardly reasonable. Plus, he's a 6'3 PG. Not a 6'8 SF. DDV played very little this year. Hard to count on him to help replace an all-star. Brogdon is already on the team, so he's not helping to replace, but he does now need to take on a bigger role and we have no idea who that MLE may be. I'll agree that our shooting would be alright...in the regular season, but you really don't have a viable 2nd option. The second problem I have is you're also assuming he has to give up the chance to contend. Throw him on the Kings for next year, a team that has the money to give him a max deal and a lot of good young talent and he's on a contender. Especially with so much up in the air around him. That team on paper would be competitive with almost anyone and they're still so young and have so much more room for growth. Even throw him on the Hawks with Trae Young(who I was very wrong about as I thought he'd be a bust, but is a really good PG and can really pass well). That's a team that's interesting and got some good young pieces.

 

You can't just draft "someone like" Middleton. He's not a superstar, he probably shouldn't be a "max" player, but a lot of players shouldn't be and are. If you get rid of him, the Bucks next best player is???? It goes from having a clear cut #1 in Giannis, a clear #2 in Middleton and then a number of guys who can be that 3rd options on a given night. That's a formula that I think can win. It's a bit rarer in the NBA, but teams like the Mavs, Pistons, and others have done it. But if your second best player is a guy like Bled, Brogdon, or whoever else, you're in a lot of trouble.

 

You've got a core that's mostly in their 20's, their mid 20's. I think it's foolish to let them go when you have Giannis. I wasn't alive the last time the Bucks had a player this talented and even though I'm still fairly young, good chance I won't be the next time they do(and if I am, very little chance that player will be so eager to stick around Milwaukee). You cannot waste this chance.

[Mr Southpaw]

But, do you like Louis King? If you like Khris Middleton, then you will like the game of Louis King. 6'8" 195 7 foot wingspan, good 3 point shooter 39% in college and just 19 years old. Sounds like the kind of guy Bud would like to work with. Obviously more of a risk since he has not played seven years in the NBA like Middleton has.

 

https://www.nbadraft.net/players/louis-king

[coolhandluke121]

Khris isn't really that good in the half-court even though he likes to play slow. Their issue against Toronto was ball movement and not being quick enough to compete with Toronto's small-ball lineups. Khris doesn't help as much as Hill in either of those areas. Also, there's no rule that SF's have to be 6'8", especially not in this era.

 

I don't like arguing against Khris because I've said many times I hope they just pay the tax and keep everyone. But if they do have to let one guy go, I think it should be the guy who will make roughly twice as much as any of the others. In the spring of 2016, I thought they had a Reggie Miller Lite, but he's turned into roughly another Glenn Robinson before our eyes. His season could not have been more blah, and if that's what he can do in a contract year, I fear what he'll do when he gets his salary doubled. Is there really any doubt that he'll be average 17-20 ppg on ~45/38 shooting with a few too many turnovers and inconsistent defensive effort wherever he ends up?

 

Take Hill and Niko for example. Hill's already getting $1m, so it would take $17m more to keep him. Niko will probably get $12-15m. Combined that's up to $32m, which is still less than a max contract for Khris.

 

And I'm not judging Niko on these playoffs no matter how fashionable it is. He barely played with the team at all this year, and it was a terrible decision to start him at SF and expose him in the most unfavorable match-ups possible. He's just one year removed from replacing all-NBA superstar Demarcus Cousins and making the Pelicans significantly better in the process, and there's no reason he can't have the same effect complementing Giannis unless you think his confidence is shot (which I doubt). And he's only about 6 months older than Khris.

 

Just losing George Hill alone would arguably hurt them more in the short term than losing Khris. They really need him. He was the most composed player in the playoffs and the only guy who consistently rose to the occasion against the Toronto. You can tell he has a ton of experience and has been coached by some of the greats his whole career. The Bucks need that.

 

And then you get his Bird Rights in 2020 so he can be their Ron Harper for another couple years, plus the full MLE for 3 years and the BAE again in 2021, all of which you lose if you make long-term commitments to everyone else. It's not just losing Khris outright when you consider that you can keep Niko and Hill at that price and then get back under the luxury tax to keep using the full MLE for several years. That adds up to a lot more flexibility. There's lot to lose by keeping Khris if it comes to that.

 

I definitely don't want to lose Hill and Niko if it comes down to them or Khris. All year, there were 4 guys who all had a roughly equal chance of being the 2nd-best player on the team any given night (Bledsoe, Khris, Brogdon, Lopez) and then when Brogdon got hurt, Hill joined that group and even exceeded all of them in the playoffs. For the previous two years, Niko was good enough to be in that group too. Since they're all so close, there's no reason to lose two of them to keep one, if that's what it comes down to.

[OnTheBlack]

Khris isn't really that good in the half-court even though he likes to play slow. Their issue against Toronto was ball movement and not being quick enough to compete with Toronto's small-ball lineups. Khris doesn't help as much as Hill in either of those areas. Also, there's no rule that SF's have to be 6'8", especially not in this era.

 

I don't like arguing against Khris because I've said many times I hope they just pay the tax and keep everyone. But if they do have to let one guy go, I think it should be the guy who will make roughly twice as much as any of the others. In the spring of 2016, I thought they had a Reggie Miller Lite, but he's turned into roughly another Glenn Robinson before our eyes. His season could not have been more blah, and if that's what he can do in a contract year, I fear what he'll do when he gets his salary doubled. Is there really any doubt that he'll be average 17-20 ppg on ~45/38 shooting with a few too many turnovers and inconsistent defensive effort wherever he ends up?

 

Take Hill and Niko for example. Hill's already getting $1m, so it would take $17m more to keep him. Niko will probably get $12-15m. Combined that's up to $32m, which is still less than a max contract for Khris.

 

And I'm not judging Niko on these playoffs no matter how fashionable it is. He barely played with the team at all this year, and it was a terrible decision to start him at SF and expose him in the most unfavorable match-ups possible. He's just one year removed from replacing all-NBA superstar Demarcus Cousins and making the Pelicans significantly better in the process, and there's no reason he can't have the same effect complementing Giannis unless you think his confidence is shot (which I doubt). And he's only about 6 months older than Khris.

 

Just losing George Hill alone would arguably hurt them more in the short term than losing Khris. They really need him. He was the most composed player in the playoffs and the only guy who consistently rose to the occasion against the Toronto. You can tell he has a ton of experience and has been coached by some of the greats his whole career. The Bucks need that.

 

And then you get his Bird Rights in 2020 so he can be their Ron Harper for another couple years, plus the full MLE for 3 years and the BAE again in 2021, all of which you lose if you make long-term commitments to everyone else. It's not just losing Khris outright when you consider that you can keep Niko and Hill at that price and then get back under the luxury tax to keep using the full MLE for several years. That adds up to a lot more flexibility. There's lot to lose by keeping Khris if it comes to that.

 

I definitely don't want to lose Hill and Niko if it comes down to them or Khris. All year, there were 4 guys who all had a roughly equal chance of being the 2nd-best player on the team any given night (Bledsoe, Khris, Brogdon, Lopez) and then when Brogdon got hurt, Hill joined that group and even exceeded all of them in the playoffs. For the previous two years, Niko was good enough to be in that group too. Since they're all so close, there's no reason to lose two of them to keep one, if that's what it comes down to.

 

 

First of all, he is not like Glenn Robinson. You take exception when people only talk about one side of the ball, and that's what you're doing here. Robinson was a much worse ball handler and wasn't NEARLY as capable a defender. And nobody said you had to be 6'8 to be a SF, but I think the point was you can't replace Middleton with guys who've done nothing in the NBA, or with 6'4 guards, especially when one of this teams biggest assets is the length we've got.

 

With regard to Mirotic, I really loved the trade, but you're citing his playoff performance from last year, but he's gone deep in the playoffs 4 times, but has been bad 3 out of those 4 times. And since we're talking about replacing guys, you actually DO have someone similar to Mirotic who can step in and replace him, someone you can count on getting better in DJ Wilson. A guy we actually saw play this year and someone who may end up being more suited for the playoffs given his ability to close out on shooters and get back.

 

 

I'd agree, the two guys you cannot afford to lose are Middleton and Brogdon. I also see no reason and nothing in Middleton's history to suggest he's not going to play as hard when he gets paid.

 

Hill was a nice player for us in the post-season, but you can find PG's with playoff experience. I can't justify the Bucks losing their only other All-Star who's in his prime for an aging backup PG and a guy in Mirotic who they actually do have an in house replacement for.

[OnTheBlack]

But, do you like Louis King? If you like Khris Middleton, then you will like the game of Louis King. 6'8" 195 7 foot wingspan, good 3 point shooter 39% in college and just 19 years old. Sounds like the kind of guy Bud would like to work with. Obviously more of a risk since he has not played seven years in the NBA like Middleton has.

 

https://www.nbadraft.net/players/louis-king

 

I know this wasn't directed to me, but it's pretty easy to like pretty much all these guys. It's like hearing about the young guys on the Packers early in Training Camp. You usually focus in on the positives. But assuming he is as good as Middleton, he won't be in the near future. It'll take him...3-4 years? And that's assuming he ends up reaching his potential. Personally, I've come around to Jontay Porter, a big who can shoot, has great hands and a high upside. The type of big you could run the offense through with his passing and shooting ability for stretches. And an almost ideal guy to play next to Giannis in the future.

https://www.nbadraft.net/players/jontay-porter

 

But you could win a title next year. Especially with KD being out. I just can't see how you can justify drawing a line at 28 million or 25 million with Middleton and then paying George Hill 19 million this year.

 

I'd love to see everyone brought back, but if for instance, Louis King is the guy we pick and he works out as well as you hope, he likely won't hit his stride until Middleton would be finishing up his contract. So sure, I like the VERY little I've now seen and know of Louis, but not over Middleton.

 

There is just too much at stake to risk in my opinion to count on 19 year old rookies or guys who played in just a handful of games last year to step in and replace your most consistent and reliable player outside of Giannis.

 

I think there's TOO much recency bias. If we were going off the 2018 post-season, Mirotic would be the guy we couldn't afford to lose and we'd be talking about Hill choking. Now Hill has a long history of being a good post-season performer and Mirotic doesn't, but I think it's causing us to underrate Middleton.

 

Keep in mind, he was the guy who was primarily on Kawhi(and did about as good of a job as you could ask for) and Kawhi was on him(arguably the best on ball defender of this era). So he wasn't great in the post-season, but years of being a very good #2 help.

 

Giannis can't drag a team of 3rd and 4th options to a championship. So Middleton isn't the ideal option, but he's the only one we have. For the rest, we just have to hope guys work on their game and improve and if we lose Hill, we have to hope that we can find someone else to replace him.

[OnTheBlack]

But, do you like Louis King? If you like Khris Middleton, then you will like the game of Louis King. 6'8" 195 7 foot wingspan, good 3 point shooter 39% in college and just 19 years old. Sounds like the kind of guy Bud would like to work with. Obviously more of a risk since he has not played seven years in the NBA like Middleton has.

 

https://www.nbadraft.net/players/louis-king

 

 

Just wanted to add one more thing. I'd like to see the Bucks buy a 2nd round pick this year. Take a shot on a few guys. If they take a guy like Porter, you're taking a big risk and hoping for a big reward given his knee injuries. I like to believe that Horst and this front office know what they're doing and are pretty good at identifying talent and can at least find someone with some upside in the 2nd round. I'd like to see either a guy who can stretch the floor like Lopez or play the point, but whoever it is. Given their limited draft capital in the future, why not see who wants to sell one?

[FVBrewerFan]

I sense Lopez is really being glossed over. If they lose him, they literally don't have any 5- at all. Yea, Sova can play some 5 here and there against certain players/teams. But Lopez's presence on defense is really underrated. Coach Bud talks about it all the time, how his combo of just overall size/bulk and shot blocking really anchors the defense. Without him, the lane is open for business. Then on the offensive side, he helps spread the court, of course, because opposing teams have to respect him from 3.

 

How do they replace that with no cap space?

[Mr Southpaw]

Durant goes down and then THompson goes down.... It makes Middleton look that much better to teams wanting to win now.

[GAME05]

Ugh, not sure exactly where to put non-Bucks NBA news, but the Lakers just traded for Anthony Davis. Gave up Josh Hart, Lonzo, Brandon Ingram, the #4 overall pick this year and another two first-round picks.

[patrickgpe]

the trade actually seems like a good haul for New Orleans, all things considered. Basically only 2 teams could trade for him, so they were only bidding against the Knicks, who have much less assets to trade. yes Boston could have traded for him and gave up more and hope he would resign, but it would have been a huge risk for Ainge. Seems like a fair trade, which rarely happens in the NBA in these cases.

[OnTheBlack]

I sense Lopez is really being glossed over. If they lose him, they literally don't have any 5- at all. Yea, Sova can play some 5 here and there against certain players/teams. But Lopez's presence on defense is really underrated. Coach Bud talks about it all the time, how his combo of just overall size/bulk and shot blocking really anchors the defense. Without him, the lane is open for business. Then on the offensive side, he helps spread the court, of course, because opposing teams have to respect him from 3.

 

How do they replace that with no cap space?

 

 

They also have DJ Wilson. He's not a 5, but if you have Giannis and Wilson out there together, you've got rim protectors.

 

And you can always pick up a big. It's a stretch 5 that you want. Lopez is a nice player, but he's far more relevant during the regular season than in a post-season series. He was a liability vs guys like Horford and especially vs the Raptors. He couldn't guard Gasol on the perimeter.

 

This is one reason I'm really hoping we're not trading our 1st rounder this year. We have to find a way to develop good role players late in the 1st round. We already owe 6-7 future picks if not more. Only 2 are 1sts, but still, you don't want to paint yourself into a Cleveland like situation where you've got just terrible depth and no way to remedy it and you lose your franchise player.

[OnTheBlack]

the trade actually seems like a good haul for New Orleans, all things considered. Basically only 2 teams could trade for him, so they were only bidding against the Knicks, who have much less assets to trade. yes Boston could have traded for him and gave up more and hope he would resign, but it would have been a huge risk for Ainge. Seems like a fair trade, which rarely happens in the NBA in these cases.

 

I think it's a brilliant move by the Pelicans. You'd be hard pressed to find a superstar who netted such a huge return. The #4 pick in this draft, Brandon Ingram who has the wing span of a 747 and is extremely talented(though raw), Lonzo Ball who's a very-very good young PG, Josh Hart who is a smart and solid young PG, they also get 3 additional 1st round picks with so many conditions on them that the Pelicans COULD end up with a lot of high lottery picks in 4-5 years when LeBron is an older player, possibly no longer playing. They have the right to pass on picks in certain years if they don't like where the Lakers are picking and wait another year to see where they may be picking, they get to swap picks in other years if they chose to do so.

 

And the young talent now has a very good coach and suddenly a well run franchise to help them build. Zion Williamson, the 4th pick in the draft which should give them a good player, a potential franchise PG in Lonzo Ball(not superstar per say, but very-very smart player despite having such a moron for a father), a potential superstar in Ingram who looked like one at times this past year, but who also looked awful at other times.

 

The Pelicans got back talented players from the Lakers, but guys who may not develop, but they protected themselves by adding SOOO many future draft picks.

 

I don't think the Lakers give up this much for any other player in the NBA outside of Milwaukee right now.

[coolhandluke121]

I don't like the trade for New Orleans, but they had no leverage. They didn't do a good job surrounding AD with talent and now he's gone. Those are the breaks. This reminds me of the KG-to-Boston trade. Looks like a stockpile of assets on the surface, but one by one they all end up being poop. Not a fan of Ingram or Ball at all. I honestly think they're awful. Efficiency matters a lot. Those distant future picks could be okay, but I'm sure other stars force their way to LAL and make it unlikely.

[adambr2]

Bucks rumored to be near a 5 year extension with Middleton for just shy of the max.

 

https://clutchpoints.com/bucks-rumors-khris-middleton-expected-get-5-year-deal-close-max-money/

[tmwiese55]

I think considering their situation NOP did about as well as they could've. Other teams knew ADs hard on for LAL. I'm quite low on Ingram/Ball as well, especially Ball, but given the situation I think it's the best they could do. They rightfully held out for more picks and were smart to move them back and to not have protections on them so they might get lucky like the BKN/Bos trade after LBJ leaves. If I'm them I'd also be looking to flip Ingram/Ball now rather than face their contract situations in the coming seasons, just move them now for more building blocks and less chance of clogging up cap. Or at least do that with one of them to balance the risk a bit.

 

Yea I'd guess Mids deal was done a while back. And I think the 5th year is there to keep the yearly down and they'll have it be low for next season and then escalate. Trying as best to make it easier to keep the team together.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Ball and Ingram will be nice pieces to supplement Zion. I'd be excited if I were a Pelicans fan. Those guys are really, really young. There is plenty of room for them to grow.

[OnTheBlack]

I don't like the trade for New Orleans, but they had no leverage. They didn't do a good job surrounding AD with talent and now he's gone. Those are the breaks. This reminds me of the KG-to-Boston trade. Looks like a stockpile of assets on the surface, but one by one they all end up being poop. Not a fan of Ingram or Ball at all. I honestly think they're awful. Efficiency matters a lot. Those distant future picks could be okay, but I'm sure other stars force their way to LAL and make it unlikely.

 

 

I don't get it. Ingram, the 21 year old with absurd length had a better effective field goal pct this year than George Hill(the 2nd most important player on the Bucks in your view) and you don't like him?

 

 

A lot of writers have talked about how this is one of the biggest hauls for a superstar player that they've EVER seen.

 

I don't see how it's even similar to the KG trade. You had Al Jefferson who had a good year, not 3 young talented players like Ball, Ingram and Hart. And in that trade you didn't get nearly as much value in trades.

 

And sure, the Lakers may get superstars to come. That's why the Pelicans have the ability to just pass and say, "nah, we'll wait a year to take their pick" in 2024 or swap picks.

 

 

It's not even debatable that Ingram has a huge upside. And outside of the circus that has become the LAL, he has a much better chance to reach it. Lonzo Ball is already an elite passer/rebounder, he just needs to improve his shot, and Hart is a smart player who could play for any team.

 

Ingram's a guy who's just a shade under 6'10, has a 7'3 wingspan, put up 18+ a night last year and has the athleticism to play the 3. If this guy was a Buck, we'd be drooling about his upside. Of course you can find flaws in his game. He's 21...and if there weren't, he'd BE the 2nd superstar along LeBron, not being traded for it.

 

 

I don't know what more a team could have gotten back than 3 young players, 2 who have all-star/superstar potential, a 3rd who is a very good, solid, smart young player and 4 future draft picks and or rights to swap or wait for a better pick. The Pelicans future looks far better today than it did yesterday and I don't know what team in the entire NBA could have trade as much away without giving up their best player.

[OnTheBlack]

I think considering their situation NOP did about as well as they could've. Other teams knew ADs hard on for LAL. I'm quite low on Ingram/Ball as well, especially Ball, but given the situation I think it's the best they could do. They rightfully held out for more picks and were smart to move them back and to not have protections on them so they might get lucky like the BKN/Bos trade after LBJ leaves. If I'm them I'd also be looking to flip Ingram/Ball now rather than face their contract situations in the coming seasons, just move them now for more building blocks and less chance of clogging up cap. Or at least do that with one of them to balance the risk a bit.

 

Yea I'd guess Mids deal was done a while back. And I think the 5th year is there to keep the yearly down and they'll have it be low for next season and then escalate. Trying as best to make it easier to keep the team together.

 

It's just hard to get too excited about the Middleton deal. You're not adding anything. But to lose him would have been a huge blow, so it's good. It'd be even better if they could come to a mutual understanding and sign this deal after the Bucks have completed the rest of their off-season business. Allow them to keep that full MLE.

 

As for Ingram and Ball, maybe it's not the case with you, but I think people would like him a lot better if his Dad was literally anyone else. He's such a rare player. A 6'7 PG who's got great court vision. But like Ingram(and pretty much everyone their age) they still have their flaws. I guess it depends on how you look at young players. If you look at them as they are right now or if you look at what they're capable of. I put a greater emphasis on the later as that's how I feel you should build a team. It's why I'm still a big fan of Jayson Tatum and CHL isn't.

 

If nothing else, a lineup of Ball, potentially Culver, Ingram, Zion and Randle. That'd be a lineup that can get up and down the court and would be fun to watch. And they still have some assets they could trade away in the interim like Jrue Holiday who is locked up for the next 4 years, the last of which he'll be 32 and owed nearly 40 million dollars.

 

 

I will say this, the Pelicans right now don't have a basketball team, they've got a NBA portfolio. They've got assets. If you threw this team together and asked them to play next year, there'd be a lot of redundancy...similar to, but not as good as the Celtics.

 

I suspect you're right though. Maybe not with Ball/Ingram, but the Pelicans are going to have to move players.

[HiAndTight]

Ball and Ingram will be nice pieces to supplement Zion. I'd be excited if I were a Pelicans fan. Those guys are really, really young. There is plenty of room for them to grow.

 

 

I'd be absolutely thrilled. It's really not hard to envision a scenario in which the picks they end up getting from the Lakers are like the Picks the Celts got from the Nets. In 2024, LeBron could be doing his swan song in Cleveland or playing for LAL with a banged up AD.

 

And in the short term, they got some EXTREMELY talented players.

 

Somehow the Pelicans managed to get a better deal from the Lakers then they were getting at the deadline. And I'm a big fan of Kyle Kuzma, but all the draft picks they got instead?

 

I also like Alvin Gentry a lot and I really hope Lavar Ball can keep his mouth shut because his kid actually seems like a pretty good kid and he could be the next guy who averages a triple-double.

 

Ingram, the upside if there. Don't know about the desire, but there's really no reason he can't become a Kawhi-like player. Of course the same is true of dozens of players and it takes an obsessive like a commitment to the game, but he's got that first step, those long arms..he also has a nice shot.

 

The question is does he think he did something special this year or, like Giannis at that age, does he look at the 17/18 PPG he scored and know how much room for improvement he has. Because he does have a lot in common with Giannis at the same age. Giannis was more well rounded and obviously just more talented, but still, they're similar.

[OnTheBlack]

What in the heck is Al Horford thinking? He's opting out of a 30+ million dollar player option and he's going to look for a new team? He'd be the type of guy that IF he were a FA I'd like to see the Bucks target with that MLE. A vet on the downside of their career, but Horford and the Celtics are "too far apart" on contract talks, so he's leaving.

 

Absolutely baffling to me. That organization was primed to be a contender for years to come and just 1 year later, they're losing their lone superstar, a player who's lost a ton of his shine after the series he played vs us, their budding superstar decided that he was going to forgo the passing part of his game(Tatum) and now they're left with guys who think they're better than they are and then some really great role players like Smart.