LUKE23 wrote:coolhandluke121 wrote:I think the idea of the Bucks trading Harris and Henson for a good veteran makes some sense. They could win 50+ easily if they made the right deal, and it's not like Harris and Henson are a driving force behind their current good play. But Gortat is not the right deal because it's not a big upgrade at center. Here are some guys I might consider trading Henson and Harris for:
Matthews
Afflalo
Deng
Eric Gordon
The only one of those names that would even be debatable for trading both Henson and Harris would be Gordon, and he's making the max and has barely played the last two years. However, at least he's young and has played at an extremely high level before. I like both Matthews and Afflalo, but they are both at their ceiling as just really solid role playing starters.
It's weird to me though that anyone that has strongly been against trading young for old in the past would advocate a young for old trade now, when it appears the current core has a lot of potential despite being young. This is legitimately one of the last times under JH/SS that I'd actively seek out a youth for veteran deal. It seems that the ones calling for it are doing so just to be a vocal minority.
I think a lot of "really solid role players" are often much more valuable than players who are often considered borderline stars. Especially when you factor in defense. I see it as somewhat unlikely that either Harris or Henson ends up as productive as Matthews/Afflalo. Shooting nearly 40% from 3 is a great asset by itself; when the player also can play very good defense and score 16 ppg that's the type of player that should be considered for all-star games IMO. And those players do get considered when they're on good team. Both players remind me of Dan Majerle. Players like that tend to find themselves on good teams often, and it's not surprising to me because they play a winning brand of basketball. They're better on the court than on paper.
I normally hate trading for veterans, but I believe this team has much more potential than any line-up the Bucks have had in years. That goes to even when they had Bogut, Redd, young Mo, young CV, etc. I wanted those teams to unload vets and tank because I thought they were good on paper but terrible on the court. I see this team as the opposite. They're too good on the court to even consider tanking. Furthermore, I've always wanted to tank for star players at the top of the draft, not for just potential solid starters like Harris and Henson. So I get why you would think trading them is a contradiction, but I don't really think it is. They have good young players at pf/c with Ersan, Udoh, Sanders, and LRMAM, and for the future they could have LRMAM plus Deng, Matthews, or Afflalo to play some sf as well. I love youth, but there's only so many good-but-not-great young players you can have before it becomes worthwhile to trade a couple of them for a good vet and make a run. The Bucks have never been in that position recently, but I think they are now.
I'm not strongly in favor of any of those trades, I just said I would consider any of them.
Wut we've got here is... faaailure... to communakate.
