Bucks off-season thread (non-draft)

[Baldkin]

Still think Tor should've won Executive of the Year though. Granted, this is voted after regular season but still. Look what he picked up for last season and how little he gave up. And past moves like Siakam and FVV paying off.

 

Horst signed Lopez, brought in Budenholzer, Hill and Mirotic. They went from 44 to 60 wins.

 

Toronto went from 59 to 58.

[tmwiese55]

Still think Tor should've won Executive of the Year though. Granted, this is voted after regular season but still. Look what he picked up for last season and how little he gave up. And past moves like Siakam and FVV paying off.

 

Horst signed Lopez, brought in Budenholzer, Hill and Mirotic. They went from 44 to 60 wins.

 

Toronto went from 59 to 58.

 

Horst also had nothing to do with Giannis. Of course I see the argument but when you're at 58 wins you obviously have next to no room for improvement for regular season wins. And of course, as I said it's a regular season award so it's fine and it make sense.

 

But, the Kawhi trade was for postseason and he made a great deal on it for what he gave up. Stole him with eyes on playoffs only, not regular season. Then sat him a ton of games, which hurt the record you bring up. Then the Gasol trade which was also for postseason and done so late in the year it doesn't affect regular season record. Their GM also fired their coach and brought in a new coach this year who won 58 games, so also a good hire. Then combine it with all the past moves he's made that led to this team and I think he deserved. I assume he's won one or two in the past though, so whatever it's fine and not a big deal. I mean, the Bucks probably gave up more to acquire Hill, Mirotic than Tor gave up to aquire Kawhi/Gasol. I actually saw a tweet that laid it out that way and it shocked me.

 

Again, it's fine. Not an egregious mistake and certainly debatable since it's voted at end of regular season. But that's where I'd have voted. Of course one could argue that all awards could be voted after postseason, which I'd generally disagree with as everyone would get too Ringzzz obsessed and be skewed by recency bias. But if there is one that could be argued shouldn't be voted til after postseason I'd say it's executive.

[OnTheBlack]

 

 

That's not true at all. When stars want out, they often go for trade packages of expiring contracts, solid veterans, picks, and/or non-blue-chip prospects. Look at the KG to Boston deal, Melo to Knicks deal, Kawhi to Raptors deal, George to OKC deal, or even the Kyrie to Boston deal. Some times a potentially good pick changed hands in those deals and others like them, but the Bucks have an asset at least worth that in Brogdon. They have young guys like Wilson, Brown, Pat C, and DDV, all of whom showed promise and contributed to a 60-win team. They have expiring contracts in Hill, Leuer, and Ersan. And they could have good veterans like Bledsoe, Khris, Brogdon, and Mirotic, all of whom have trade value, whether it be directly to a team looking to trade a star without rebuilding or to a 3rd team which would send more assets and/or cap relief their way.

 

For example, suppose Paul George or Damian Lillard wants out. With their contracts, most of the trade proposals would probably be comparable to a package the Bucks could put together with, say, Brogdon, Bledsoe or Khris, Pat C, Wilson, and an expiring contract.

 

 

Sure it is. You cannot even bring up the gift Danny Ainge's old teammate gave him when they traded for KG. That trade was a joke. But even in that trade, was KG a top 5 player? Probably. But even while McHale gave Danny Ainge a huge gift..and they still got back a whole lot more than what the Bucks could offer right now. They gave up two 1st round picks, Al Jefferson who was 22 years old and put up 16/11 the year before he was traded(then put up 21/11, 23/11 at ages 23 and 24), 21 year old Sebastian Telfair who was a highly touted young player, Gerald Green was 22 years old and valuable young asset. Even Ryan Gomes was just 24 years old and a good looking young player. The only guy who fits is Theo Ratliff who was thrown in to make the deal work. But the Bucks couldn't make a deal like that. They don't have those types of assets.

 

Kawhi was traded for a perennial all-star and only because he forced his way out of SA on what was considered by just about everyone to be a one year deal.

 

In order for the Bucks to make a deal like that work, all those players you listed would have to improve pretty dramatically because Brogdon isn't going to be that huge asset much longer as he'll be paid far closer to his worth.

 

Hopefully DDV, Wilson, Pat C and Brown end up improving significantly on what they've been...there's certainly time. But as it stands now, even the trade that people joke about(the KG to Boston trade) we wouldn't be able to do much with.

 

The closest of the trades you mentioned would be what Indy got for Paul George, but again, with Kawhi, it looked like a given that he was going to leave for LA(and Kawhi still may). But Oladipo didn't have as much value at the time as he does now..he really broke out and Sabonis was a valuable young asset, but not crazy valuable.

 

The thing these all pretty much have in common is that you're talking about superstars forcing their way out and almost always multiple 1st going back.

 

I disagree with the level of talent you believe we could get and the level of talent I believe we could get. If you're talking about trading Middleton for a guy like George or Lillard if they're forcing their way out(I know, just examples of the types of talent you're talking about) but what's in it for Portland or OKC? Yeah, we'll be able to match salary, but we won't be able to provide the draft picks they want and at least as of now, the type of young talent they want.

 

I think we're more in the Melo FROM the Knicks/Chris Paul territory right now than we are the Paul George/Dam Lillard group. We need our young guys to show a LOT more than they have thus far to go after a star on the level you're talking about. Otherwise, most of the teams that would be trading AWAY the star would get a worse player back, not much young talent, no firsts and we'd only be able to match salaries. If Lillard leaves Portland, they're probably rebuilding. If George were to demand out, OKC would get a TON more than they gave up for him.

 

 

I hope you end up being right though...hopefully Wilson and the rest of the young guys will show more promise moving forward and Horst can keep finding some young talent and Bud can develop them like SA did, but we're a long way off from having much in the way of desirable assets.

[OnTheBlack]

Better than a 3:1 margin over Harden, just as I said it should be all along. There really wasn't much controversy at all IMO. People acted like I was disrespecting Harden, but he really didn't have much of a case against Giannis.

 

[sarcasm]Wow...it's not like you to pat yourself on the back for an argument that never really took place.[/sarcasm]

 

 

You weren't getting people arguing with you that Giannis WAS the MVP. You were getting people arguing with you for brushing off Harden and dismissing what he was doing by claiming he was inefficient(he wasn't). So yeah, you were disrespecting Harden.

 

 

Pretty much everyone said Giannis was the MVP....you weren't out on a limb there at all. I think the whole board said the same thing.

[OnTheBlack]

I think I can revise their options with Brogdon. Some site said his offer sheet kicks in immediately, but I read that part of the CBA and it seems his cap hold is still in effect until they actually match.

 

That would make it slightly more realistic to create cap space and use it before matching an offer, but you'd still have to lose several good players to do so. Therefore the question of whether you're losing more than you gain is still in play; it's just the fact that you wouldn't have to worry about losing the cap space to a Brogdon offer sheet until 48 hours after the moratorium ends and free agency officially begins.

 

 

You COULD do it if you had an agreement with Brogdon and Middleton and you could just get them to hold off. I think it's unlikely they pursue Mirotic very much given their cap situation.....and if they did, it'd likely be because they had an idea going into it that he's looking more in the 8-10 per year range as opposed to the 12-13+ that has been thrown out.

Who else would they lose that they wouldn't otherwise? Unless you're still counting Hill, who's it's pretty much a given will be waived. Who else would they be losing?

[coolhandluke121]

Better than a 3:1 margin over Harden, just as I said it should be all along. There really wasn't much controversy at all IMO. People acted like I was disrespecting Harden, but he really didn't have much of a case against Giannis.

 

[sarcasm]Wow...it's not like you to pat yourself on the back for an argument that never really took place.[/sarcasm]

 

 

You weren't getting people arguing with you that Giannis WAS the MVP. You were getting people arguing with you for brushing off Harden and dismissing what he was doing by claiming he was inefficient(he wasn't). So yeah, you were disrespecting Harden.

 

 

Pretty much everyone said Giannis was the MVP....you weren't out on a limb there at all. I think the whole board said the same thing.

 

Nope. I said Giannis was clearly the MVP and it wasn't even close in my eyes, and people said that was unfair to Harden. Wasn't much more to it than that. I even predicted roughly a 75/25 split and people were incredulous. And yes, efficiency was a factor because Giannis is more efficient. Defense is another huge factor. Ball-hogging is an issue.

 

Harden is a manipulator and a quirk of the times. Giannis is an MVP for the ages because of his greatness on both ends. Shame on everyone who gave Harden their first-place vote.

[coolhandluke121]

Who else would they lose that they wouldn't otherwise? Unless you're still counting Hill, who's it's pretty much a given will be waived. Who else would they be losing?

 

Hill was comfortably the team's second-best player in the playoffs. They would have to renounce Mirotic to have any cap space at all. They would have only the room MLE for Lopez or his replacement, which is almost an insulting offer, so they'd probably lose him too.

 

I'm not losing those 3 to over-pay some aging veteran who was never even a superstar in his prime. I'm definitely not doing it for a no-defense cancer like Kyrie. Now that KD tore his Achilles, the only guy I'm doing it for is Kawhi, and he's not walking through that door.

[OnTheBlack]

 

Toronto went from 59 to 58.

 

Horst also had nothing to do with Giannis. Of course I see the argument but when you're at 58 wins you obviously have next to no room for improvement for regular season wins. And of course, as I said it's a regular season award so it's fine and it make sense.

 

But, the Kawhi trade was for postseason and he made a great deal on it for what he gave up. Stole him with eyes on playoffs only, not regular season. Then sat him a ton of games, which hurt the record you bring up. Then the Gasol trade which was also for postseason and done so late in the year it doesn't affect regular season record. Their GM also fired their coach and brought in a new coach this year who won 58 games, so also a good hire. Then combine it with all the past moves he's made that led to this team and I think he deserved. I assume he's won one or two in the past though, so whatever it's fine and not a big deal. I mean, the Bucks probably gave up more to acquire Hill, Mirotic than Tor gave up to aquire Kawhi/Gasol. I actually saw a tweet that laid it out that way and it shocked me.

 

Again, it's fine. Not an egregious mistake and certainly debatable since it's voted at end of regular season. But that's where I'd have voted. Of course one could argue that all awards could be voted after postseason, which I'd generally disagree with as everyone would get too Ringzzz obsessed and be skewed by recency bias. But if there is one that could be argued shouldn't be voted til after postseason I'd say it's executive.

 

 

Horst did a great job this year. But this should have gone to Ujiri. The voting on this one should DEFINITELY be done after the season since the job is to build a championship team, not the best regular season team.

 

He took a HUGE risk and traded away a perennial all-star who actually wanted to stay in Canada for a great player who almost everyone just assumed was going to be there for just one year(and he may still be here just for one year). He added Gasol in season which was huge, he saw Siakam years ago in Africa and followed him through college and stole him in the 1st round as he keeps finding young talent.

 

But the trade for Kawhi should have won it for him. There's just so much on the line there.

 

 

I thought Coach of the year could have gone to any of the three guys...the only thing that Doc did wrong was not lose enough after they traded away Harris. They even pushed a healthy Warriors team to 6 while "rebuilding." Malone did an awesome job and was more under the radar than us without the bigger name superstar.

 

Giannis could have won DPOY. I think as good as George was, it was really a two man race.

 

 

There were three that should have been pretty obvious, MVP, 6th Man, and Executive of the Year. In fact, I was kinda surprised that Trae Young didn't close the gap on the ROY voting with his second half, but withe Doncic going ~21/8/6 as a 19 year old was pretty impressive. I thought that was the dumbest possible trade the Hawks could have made last year. I still think it was dumb, just not historically dumb like I'd thought originally.

[OnTheBlack]

Better than a 3:1 margin over Harden, just as I said it should be all along. There really wasn't much controversy at all IMO. People acted like I was disrespecting Harden, but he really didn't have much of a case against Giannis.

 

[sarcasm]Wow...it's not like you to pat yourself on the back for an argument that never really took place.[/sarcasm]

 

 

You weren't getting people arguing with you that Giannis WAS the MVP. You were getting people arguing with you for brushing off Harden and dismissing what he was doing by claiming he was inefficient(he wasn't). So yeah, you were disrespecting Harden.

 

 

Pretty much everyone said Giannis was the MVP....you weren't out on a limb there at all. I think the whole board said the same thing.

 

Nope. I said Giannis was clearly the MVP and it wasn't even close in my eyes, and people said that was unfair to Harden. Wasn't much more to it than that. I even predicted roughly a 75/25 split and people were incredulous. And yes, efficiency was a factor because Giannis is more efficient. Defense is another huge factor. Ball-hogging is an issue.

Harden is a manipulator and a quirk of the times. Giannis is an MVP for the ages because of his greatness on both ends. Shame on everyone who gave Harden their first-place vote.

 

 

 

Dude, WHO ARE YOU ARGUING WITH? You're bragging about being right in an argument that you're just creating. Harden has finished in the top 2...what, 5 straight years? He wasn't just a "quirk of the times." He's a historically great offensive player.

 

So A-Just about everyone agreed with you that Giannis was the MVP.

B-You're CLEARLY disrespecting Harden right there.

 

But again man, do you need to pat yourself on the back THAT badly?

[OnTheBlack]

Who else would they lose that they wouldn't otherwise? Unless you're still counting Hill, who's it's pretty much a given will be waived. Who else would they be losing?

 

Hill was comfortably the team's second-best player in the playoffs. They would have to renounce Mirotic to have any cap space at all. They would have only the room MLE for Lopez or his replacement, which is almost an insulting offer, so they'd probably lose him too.

 

I'm not losing those 3 to over-pay some aging veteran who was never even a superstar in his prime. I'm definitely not doing it for a no-defense cancer like Kyrie. Now that KD tore his Achilles, the only guy I'm doing it for is Kawhi, and he's not walking through that door.

 

 

Great. The Bucks still aren't paying Hill 19 million next year. You keep saying he was great in the playoffs. I keep agreeing. But you've never actually said that you think they're going to keep him because obviously nobody thinks that.

 

Kyrie? Has ANYONE brought up trying to sign him? LOL...and Kawhi's not walking through that door, but it was a chance KD was? And who suggested we do the part in bold? The suggestion was to use the cap space to sign Hill and Lopez before they signed Middleton and Brogdon. Who are the three players we'd be losing?

 

Oh, and the MLE for Lopez is not really an insult. He signed for roughly 3.3 this year. Not sure why a raise to 9.7 million would be this huge slap in the face, but if that's a slap in the face, please, prey tell, what exactly do you think he WOULD sign in Milwaukee for? And wouldn't that be the point in trying to create cap space? In the event that they want to sign Lopez and Hill? They can try and use the cap space and MLE before they sign their two core FA's in Middleton and Brogdon? That's the only suggestion I've seen. Haven't seen anything about Kyrie(though you'll no doubt tell us how you told all of us we wouldn't sign him with NOBODY arguing that we would).

 

 

Just answer this, do you believe that the Bucks will waive Hill, yes or no? You keep repeating the same thing while ignoring what's a foregone conclusion to seemingly everyone else, the Bucks aren't paying Hill the 18 Mill that's NOT guaranteed. Do you agree or disagree? You'll manage to tell us how you told us so the whole time either way, I'm just curious what you ACTUALLY think will happen vs what's I guess you want to happen?

[coolhandluke121]

Who else would they lose that they wouldn't otherwise? Unless you're still counting Hill, who's it's pretty much a given will be waived. Who else would they be losing?

 

Hill was comfortably the team's second-best player in the playoffs. They would have to renounce Mirotic to have any cap space at all. They would have only the room MLE for Lopez or his replacement, which is almost an insulting offer, so they'd probably lose him too.

 

I'm not losing those 3 to over-pay some aging veteran who was never even a superstar in his prime. I'm definitely not doing it for a no-defense cancer like Kyrie. Now that KD tore his Achilles, the only guy I'm doing it for is Kawhi, and he's not walking through that door.

 

 

Great. The Bucks still aren't paying Hill 19 million next year. You keep saying he was great in the playoffs. I keep agreeing. But you've never actually said that you think they're going to keep him because obviously nobody thinks that.

 

Kyrie? Has ANYONE brought up trying to sign him? LOL...and Kawhi's not walking through that door, but it was a chance KD was? And who suggested we do the part in bold? The suggestion was to use the cap space to sign Hill and Lopez before they signed Middleton and Brogdon. Who are the three players we'd be losing?

 

Oh, and the MLE for Lopez is not really an insult. He signed for roughly 3.3 this year. Not sure why a raise to 9.7 million would be this huge slap in the face, but if that's a slap in the face, please, prey tell, what exactly do you think he WOULD sign in Milwaukee for? And wouldn't that be the point in trying to create cap space? In the event that they want to sign Lopez and Hill? They can try and use the cap space and MLE before they sign their two core FA's in Middleton and Brogdon? That's the only suggestion I've seen. Haven't seen anything about Kyrie(though you'll no doubt tell us how you told all of us we wouldn't sign him with NOBODY arguing that we would).

 

 

Just answer this, do you believe that the Bucks will waive Hill, yes or no? You keep repeating the same thing while ignoring what's a foregone conclusion to seemingly everyone else, the Bucks aren't paying Hill the 18 Mill that's NOT guaranteed. Do you agree or disagree? You'll manage to tell us how you told us so the whole time either way, I'm just curious what you ACTUALLY think will happen vs what's I guess you want to happen?

 

There's a good chance Hill will be claimed on waivers, you have to renounce Mirotic, and the room MLE is about half of the full MLE - so yes, that is an insulting offer for Lopez considering the year he had.

 

I don't think anybody here said Kyrie. The point is that, other than Kawhi, there aren't free agents worth the trouble of creating cap space because you lose Hill, Mirotic, Leuer's expiring contract, and Lopez. I wasn't listing free agents that people here have suggested; I was just making the point that I'd rather keep the team intact. The grass is not greener on the other side.

 

You can only use the room MLE if you create cap space, but you can use the full MLE (almost double that) if you don't. So it might be easier to keep Lopez if you don't create cap space. Even the tax-payer MLE is $1m more than the room MLE, and that compounds over a 3-4 year deal. Unless you need to pay him more than the MLE, in which case they should keep everyone else and let him walk.

 

I believe they'll waive Hill if they think they can keep Middleton, Brogdon, and Lopez. If they think they're losing one of them, I think there's about a 50% chance they'll keep him.

 

I'm not freeing up cap space to keep Hill and Lopez when Hill is already under contract and you can use the tax MLE to replace Lopez. You probably won't get someone with his skill set unless he takes a team-friendly deal, but there are some guys who do other things well who will command only the tax MLE or thereabouts.

[Baldkin]

Still think Tor should've won Executive of the Year though. Granted, this is voted after regular season but still. Look what he picked up for last season and how little he gave up. And past moves like Siakam and FVV paying off.

 

Horst signed Lopez, brought in Budenholzer, Hill and Mirotic. They went from 44 to 60 wins.

 

Toronto went from 59 to 58.

 

But, the Kawhi trade was for postseason and he made a great deal on it for what he gave up. Stole him with eyes on playoffs only, not regular season. Then sat him a ton of games, which hurt the record you bring up.

 

 

They went 18-4 without Kawhi playing. That's a 67 win pace.

[tmwiese55]

But, the Kawhi trade was for postseason and he made a great deal on it for what he gave up. Stole him with eyes on playoffs only, not regular season. Then sat him a ton of games, which hurt the record you bring up.

 

 

They went 18-4 without Kawhi playing. That's a 67 win pace.

 

 

 

How is that a bad thing? Sounds like a GM who built a deep great team, so good that he could rest it's best players a lot (lowry also sat 17 games) and still win, that was well rested and ready to win in the playoffs. Yea, definitely a knock on him.

[Baldkin]

But, the Kawhi trade was for postseason and he made a great deal on it for what he gave up. Stole him with eyes on playoffs only, not regular season. Then sat him a ton of games, which hurt the record you bring up.

 

 

They went 18-4 without Kawhi playing. That's a 67 win pace.

 

 

How is that a bad thing? Sounds like a GM who built a deep great team, so good that he could rest it's best players a lot (lowry also sat 17 games) and still win, that was well rested and ready to win in the playoffs. Yea, definitely a knock on him.

 

I'm done here. You're completely fabricating statements to try to further your argument.

 

It was a regular season award. The Bucks improved by 16 games. Toronto by negative 1.

 

Which GM did a better job improving his team during the regular season?

[tmwiese55]

But, the Kawhi trade was for postseason and he made a great deal on it for what he gave up. Stole him with eyes on playoffs only, not regular season. Then sat him a ton of games, which hurt the record you bring up.

 

 

They went 18-4 without Kawhi playing. That's a 67 win pace.

 

 

How is that a bad thing? Sounds like a GM who built a deep great team, so good that he could rest it's best players a lot (lowry also sat 17 games) and still win, that was well rested and ready to win in the playoffs. Yea, definitely a knock on him.

 

I'm done here. You're completely fabricating statements to try to further your argument.

 

It was a regular season award. The Bucks improved by 16 games. Toronto by negative 1.

 

Which GM did a better job improving his team during the regular season?

 

Relax man. What did I fabricate? Are you arguing that playing Kawhi in those games wouldn't have increased their chances of winning those games? Logic would be if they won the ones without him they very likely would have as well if he played. Then logically their chances increase in the losses. Then apply this to Lowry as well. And again, it should be a credit to him that he built a team deep and strong enough they could do this in order to prep for the playoffs, that is a good thing he should be credited for. Just like how it was dumb to hold it against Giannis in MVP that he did so well that he sat 4th Qs and games late in the season. It is not a most improved team award, you're essentially saying a previously good team can't win this award and ignoring that they overhauled the team. And while yes it is a yearly award looking at it this narrowly ignores years of work that lead to building a team.

 

You're missing that Tor turned over 4/5 starters and got a new HC this year and still won the same amount games while sitting their two best players a ton. They did not run back their team, he very astutely remade the whole team and it all worked. He also made a great HC hire, just like ours did.

 

ETA: So in this way of thinking, if GSW makes a bunch of great moves to still win the same amount of games they just did this year their GM can't win this award even though he would have had to build a completely different team? Also, it's funny Orlando improved 17 games this year, Hambone FTW, haha. Also made me remember a COY quirk my Jazz friend always brings up, Coach Sloan never won a COY of the year, essentially because he won every year.

 

2nd ETA: GSW won this award the first year of KD in spite of winning 6 less regular season games. Houston improved 14 that year, and of course several normal improvements in the 7-10 range

[coolhandluke121]

I honestly don't think Masai Ujiri has done impressive work at all. Basically they became a regular 50-ish win team the year he took over, but with almost all the same core guys they had they year before... not guys he acquired. Then they were stuck on a rich man's treadmill for 5 years on his watch. Why didn't he trade for Kawhi then? Oh right, because it was a great opportunity that fell into his lap.

 

Also, he could get away with making a risky, all-in move like that (not to mention trading a young center with 20/10 potential for Marc Gasol) precisely because he had them stuck in place for so long. It's actually his long-term failure to get the team forward that made it acceptable to make such a ballsy move in the first place. Horst made more dramatic improvements in 2 years than Ujiri made in 6, title or no title. Why didn't Ujiri get guys like Lopez, Bledsoe, Hill, and Mirotic for next to nothing?

 

I'm happy for them that they got a title, and they deserved it. But before this year, they were unanimous first-ballot candidates for induction into the Pretender HOF, brought to you by the Buffalo Bills.

[tmwiese55]

IDK, seems a fairly negative view of it all to me. Seems to have set himself up perfectly with good moves for years to acquire assets. Didn't give away assets for nothing. Made two trades for AS level guys while giving up very little. Made good draft picks for years. Most trades all worked out well. Go back and look at some of the trades he's made and its almost comical how badly he ripped people off. And then yea he got lucky with the Kawhi situation happened, but good management for years allowed him to make the move. ANd lucky that GSW got hurt too of course. BTW, that same Kawhi opportunity fell in everyone's lap but he's the only one who did it.

 

Take the DD signing. yea, a treadmill move on the surface and an overpay or whatever. But, he didn't just let that trade ticket/contract go for nothing like so many MKE fans want to do with our guys now because he knew he'd need the contract and ability to operate above the cap. And if something didn't come up or work out, well then in the meantime DD keeps helping you be good, filling the seats, keeping fans engaged, etc.

[coolhandluke121]

It's not negative. It only seems negative compared to Horst.

 

Ujiri just went years without screwing up, and when the opportunity came to get Kawhi, he didn't screw that up either. But the engine was already in place for a run of 50-win seasons before he even took the job. I believe Horst (and Bud?) had more impact with astute personnel moves.

[pacopete4]

Maybe they should sign Kawhi. He seems to know how to win.

[tmwiese55]

It's not negative. It only seems negative compared to Horst.

 

Ujiri just went years without screwing up, and when the opportunity came to get Kawhi, he didn't screw that up either. But the engine was already in place for a run of 50-win seasons before he even took the job. I believe Horst (and Bud?) had more impact with astute personnel moves.

 

That's one way to look at it. As Bucks fans, if only it was so easy to not screw it up, haha.

 

I think he did more than you give credit for in getting value in his picks, winning trades throughout, and maneuvering the cap. For example, his first move as GM was ripping off the Knicks in the Barnagni trade, which you guessed it, led to Poetl, who they used in the Kawhi trade. Plus clearing 22 mil in cap space. I know he wasn't the key piece or anything and I'm sure they find a way to do it anyway, but it was another asset gained. Go through the trades, he's done very well. Also consistently hit on later picks and of course FVV UFA. Sure it's fine Horst won the award, easily could go either way imo and after such a statistaclly dominant season it made sense. But I think everyone overlooked what Tor did because they'd kinda been written off as pretenders for years. Plus, I do get that it's a yearly award so it's tough to give credit for all these previous years moves but imo it should be nuanced enough and people smart enough to dig deeper than "whoever improved most games wins it"

[tmwiese55]

Maybe they should sign Kawhi. He seems to know how to win.

 

Well yea the only guy worth clearing the cap to sign. Thought exercise though, what if we had trumped Tor's weak offer for Kawhi?

[OnTheBlack]

 

There's a good chance Hill will be claimed on waivers, you have to renounce Mirotic, and the room MLE is about half of the full MLE - so yes, that is an insulting offer for Lopez considering the year he had.

 

I don't think anybody here said Kyrie. The point is that, other than Kawhi, there aren't free agents worth the trouble of creating cap space because you lose Hill, Mirotic, Leuer's expiring contract, and Lopez. I wasn't listing free agents that people here have suggested; I was just making the point that I'd rather keep the team intact. The grass is not greener on the other side.

 

You can only use the room MLE if you create cap space, but you can use the full MLE (almost double that) if you don't. So it might be easier to keep Lopez if you don't create cap space. Even the tax-payer MLE is $1m more than the room MLE, and that compounds over a 3-4 year deal. Unless you need to pay him more than the MLE, in which case they should keep everyone else and let him walk.

 

I believe they'll waive Hill if they think they can keep Middleton, Brogdon, and Lopez. If they think they're losing one of them, I think there's about a 50% chance they'll keep him.

 

I'm not freeing up cap space to keep Hill and Lopez when Hill is already under contract and you can use the tax MLE to replace Lopez. You probably won't get someone with his skill set unless he takes a team-friendly deal, but there are some guys who do other things well who will command only the tax MLE or thereabouts.

 

 

Ok, so you think Hill's going to obviously get waived, these are just the disclaimers so when it happens you aren't wrong.

And what team do you think is going to want to pay Hill 18 million to claim him off waivers when they could just let him pass through(as he's going to) and then sign him for a quarter of that? Which team is going to use 18 million in cap space and claim him before the top FA's make their decisions? I think the decision to waive Hill was made about 2 seconds after they completed the trade to dump salary early in the season.

 

There are a number of players who could be signed to reasonable deals that the Bucks could target and then sign Lopez to the full MLE...if he's not too offended by that. Marcus Morris would be a great fit with the Bucks. Patrick Beverly would be a great fit. It's really not a decision between Kyrie and losing everyone...which I believe you know, you for some reason are just choosing to be difficult here...in a thread YOU created to discuss the Bucks off-season.

[OnTheBlack]

Maybe they should sign Kawhi. He seems to know how to win.

 

Well yea the only guy worth clearing the cap to sign. Though exercise though, what if we had trumped Tor's weak offer for Kawhi?

 

 

I don't think they could have. The top piece going back to SA was DeRozan who was a perennial all star. We could have started with Middleton. I'm not sure what you could have added on. I'm sure Brogdon would have been included. I doubt SA is going to take back any bad contracts to make it work in that deal and you're only at about 15 million right there. And it'd depend on what SA thought of those two.

 

But if the Bucks had been able to? We'd be celebrating right now and probably hoping we could lure someone like Kemba to Milwaukee because I don't think Kawhi would have stayed.

[OnTheBlack]

It's not negative. It only seems negative compared to Horst.

 

Ujiri just went years without screwing up, and when the opportunity came to get Kawhi, he didn't screw that up either. But the engine was already in place for a run of 50-win seasons before he even took the job. I believe Horst (and Bud?) had more impact with astute personnel moves.

 

That's one way to look at it. As Bucks fans, if only it was so easy to not screw it up, haha.

 

I think he did more than you give credit for in getting value in his picks, winning trades throughout, and maneuvering the cap. For example, his first move as GM was ripping off the Knicks in the Barnagni trade, which you guessed it, led to Poetl, who they used in the Kawhi trade. Plus clearing 22 mil in cap space. I know he wasn't the key piece or anything and I'm sure they find a way to do it anyway, but it was another asset gained. Go through the trades, he's done very well. Also consistently hit on later picks and of course FVV UFA. Sure it's fine Horst won the award, easily could go either way imo and after such a statistaclly dominant season it made sense. But I think everyone overlooked what Tor did because they'd kinda been written off as pretenders for years. Plus, I do get that it's a yearly award so it's tough to give credit for all these previous years moves but imo it should be nuanced enough and people smart enough to dig deeper than "whoever improved most games wins it"

 

 

He's done an awesome job adding talent to that team while keeping them in contention. And Kawhi didn't "fall into his lap," he went out and made an incredibly risky trade, trading away a fan favorite, a perennial all star to go all for it this year and then believe that the young guys he picked up developed into enough that he'd be able to make a case to sign on long term.

 

The argument that he fell into his lap is the same one that people used to make about Rodgers. They're different scenario's, but if it was so easy to go out and so obvious to get Kawhi, why did only one team do it? I think Horst has done a very good job getting rid of some of the mistakes we'd made. I think Ujiri has done a great job at NOT making those mistakes while also adding young talent.

 

He picked a budding young start in Siakam at the bottom of the 1st. He traded for Kawhi. He signed VanVleet as an undrafted FA. He's drafted Anunoby and Norman Powell, both look like they'll be good players. And aside from Kawhi, he's also traded for Marc Gasol and Danny Green. Traded for Serge.

 

But to me, it really comes down to this. Horst did a good job of hiring Bud. But he had the centerpiece to this franchise in place right out of the gate. Ujiri who was on the "rich mans's treadmill," took the risk of blowing that up to add probably the best player in the NBA.

 

As I said before in this thread, this is one of those awards that had they voted on it after the playoffs, it would have been soooo obvious. And this award is the one that SHOULD be voted on after the playoffs as the goal is build a championship team. He did that this year and he did it by actually adding the best player to his team this year.

 

 

Host has done an amazing job, we're lucky to have him. But even if you think Horst should have won, how in the hell does Ujiri finish 4th? C'mon.

[monkeyman343434]

The "chatter" on the interwebs, is that the Bucks and Lopez could sign an extension, then sign Middleton, then sign (or match) Brogdon, and in the meantime, waive George Hill, and at this point Niko is gone. Which, I feel like this scenario has to play out to justify the Snell/30 trade.

 

In the above scenario, the team has 10 guys signed. Bledsoe, Brogdon, DDV, Pat C, Brown, K-Midd, Ersan, Wilson, Giannis, Lopez.

 

What happens next? Seems that the team would have great guard and wing depth, but a little thin up front. How do you see the team filling the roster after this? I'm guessing they would have to sign everyone else coming in at veteran minimum contracts?