RealGM

This narrative that Gay is pretty much equivalent to Monta is ridiculous. He is having a bad year for sure, and I guess its possible he is hitting the wall at 26, but it doesn't seem too likely.

ampd wrote:This narrative that Gay is pretty much equivalent to Monta is ridiculous.

TS% of .485 and last season it was only .520. He hasn't been good at all the past two season scoring the ball. He's obviously a much better defender but he is an inefficient chucker. Can't wait until we're over those type of guys. Especially ones make 55 million the next three years.

ampd wrote:This narrative that Gay is pretty much equivalent to Monta is ridiculous. He is having a bad year for sure, and I guess its possible he is hitting the wall at 26, but it doesn't seem too likely.

Agreed. Gay's TS% has been better than Ellis' the past five seasons (although neither are good this season). For me, the only real issue is his contract and it's a big issue without question. But I've always been partial to his talent and game and if the cost would be something along the lines of Ellis/Dunleavy I'm in. Again, I think the Grizzlies would seriously consider this offer if they like Ellis at all. I'm only interested in getting Gay if it means getting rid of Ellis and I have no interest in using Harris, Sanders, Moute or Henson in any trade for Gay. But they can have Ellis and anyone else on the roster.

europa wrote:

ampd wrote:This narrative that Gay is pretty much equivalent to Monta is ridiculous. He is having a bad year for sure, and I guess its possible he is hitting the wall at 26, but it doesn't seem too likely.

Agreed. Gay's TS% has been better than Ellis' the past five seasons (although neither are good this season). For me, the only real issue is his contract and it's a big issue without question. But I've always been partial to his talent and game and if the cost would be something along the lines of Ellis/Dunleavy I'm in. Again, I think the Grizzlies would seriously consider this offer if they like Ellis at all. I'm only interested in getting Gay if it means getting rid of Ellis and I have no interest in using Harris, Sanders, Moute or Henson in any trade for Gay. But they can have Ellis and anyone else on the roster.

Ellis/Gooden for Gay or Ellis/Dunleavy for Gay/Wroten- Only way I want Gay

So let's say you do that trade. You obviously aren't letting Jennings walk because you just invested 55 million in a win now move for Gay, so say you have to resign Jennings for $10 million. You'd be going into next season with an already full cap and a roster of

Jennings
Lamb
Gay / Tobes / LRMAM
Ersan / Henson / Gooden
Sanders / Udoh

Explain to me how you are making that team any bit relevant with no cap space and minimal assets. That team is no better then we have now.

Baddy Chuck wrote:So let's say you do that trade. You obviously aren't letting Jennings walk because you just invested 55 million in a win now move for Gay, so say you have to resign Jennings for $10 million. You'd be going into next season with an already full cap and a roster of

Jennings
Lamb
Gay / Tobes / LRMAM
Ersan / Henson / Gooden
Sanders / Udoh

Explain to me how you are making that team any bit relevant with no cap space and minimal assets. That team is no better then we have now.

Why do you keep saying 55 mil - he's owed 37 mil after this year

I don't see why acquiring Gay means you automatically have to keep Jennings. At this point based on what he's shown I see no reason to invest heavily in him long-term. I'd also be aggressively shopping Ilyasova and I think Dalembert could have some value as an expiring at the deadline. I like the Dalembert for Morrow idea that's been proposed. I think that has a shot if the Hawks are looking to bolster their frontcourt depth (which they should be). I'd also ship Jennings to Toronto for Lowry. Let's say for the sake of discussion the Bucks could make those trades. You'd be looking at:

PG: Lowry
SG: Morrow
SF: Gay
PF: Moute
C: Sanders

I think that lineup has far more upside than what the team currently is working with. Again, all this is being done under the pretense the Bucks aren't going to blow everything up and massively rebuild since they have shown no inclination toward pursuing that path. So given the current mindset and approach I think the lineup above is superior to what the team has and stands a better chance of accomplishing management's goals (however modest they may be).

mlloyd10 wrote:Why do you keep saying 55 mil - he's owed 37 mil after this year

Because you have to pay him this year? He's a $16 million player this season with $37 million on top of that. It's not like he's a Millsap or Monta who would be expiring this season or even a Gasol where he'd be expiring next season doesn't work out, he's a ridiculous burden of a deal if it all doesn't fall into place very soon.

Baddy Chuck wrote:

mlloyd10 wrote:Why do you keep saying 55 mil - he's owed 37 mil after this year

Because you have to pay him this year? He's a $16 million player this season with $37 million on top of that. It's not like he's a Millsap or Monta who would be expiring this season or even a Gasol where he'd be expiring next season doesn't work out, he's a ridiculous burden of a deal if it all doesn't fall into place very soon.

Ellis is a 11mil this year - so wouldn't that be 42 mil not 55 mil

Also Thats why you include Gooden in the deal....Like I said Ellis/Gooden/Dunleavy for Gay/Wroten/Ellington

You have to assume Ellis is opting in until he says so, so you are having Gay for 1 extra yr at 19.3 which is more trade-able because its expiring. But what I orinially said, I only want Gay, If Gooden is gone

I don't think the Grizzlies would have any interest in Gooden. The only reason they're considering trading Gay is because they don't want to commit to his salary long-term. Giving them another bad contract long-term isn't likely going to get a deal done. I think you have to hope they have interest in Ellis and then either an expiring like Dunleavy or a young "prospect" like Lamb or Udoh. I'd be surprised if they went for any deal involving Gooden.

I just don't see it with Gay. He's not a guy who leads a team by himself. Even with him as a second option your team likely isn't much better then .500. I don't see the point in paying out of the ass for a like that. He's really not a good player and being paid like a superstar.

For the price of Gay at 18 million a year we can sign Milsap at 10 million and Mayo at 8 million a year.

Not that those are franchise changing ideas, but a team like ours can't commit long term to guys making 18-20 million a year who haven't made a few all star teams at some point in their career.

paulpressey25 wrote:For the price of Gay at 18 million a year we can sign Milsap at 10 million and Mayo at 8 million a year.

That's assuming either guy has any interest in coming to Milwaukee. I'd consider that a very huge assumption. I can appreciate the reluctance to take on Gay's contract but I don't believe bypassing it with the hope of signing quality players in free agency is a good reason to do so. I don't see FA being a viable avenue for the Bucks at the present time. This is a team that couldn't get the likes of Kirk Hinrich and Jodie Meeks to sign as free agents last summer despite having the best deals on the table for both.

paulpressey25 wrote:For the price of Gay at 18 million a year we can sign Milsap at 10 million and Mayo at 8 million a year.

Not that those are franchise changing ideas, but a team like ours can't commit long term to guys making 18-20 million a year who haven't made a few all star teams at some point in their career.

Exactly. You can overpay for guys on Gay's level and they still don't cost you near $16-19 million a year like Gay will.

europa wrote:I don't think the Grizzlies would have any interest in Gooden. The only reason they're considering trading Gay is because they don't want to commit to his salary long-term. Giving them another bad contract long-term isn't likely going to get a deal done. I think you have to hope they have interest in Ellis and then either an expiring like Dunleavy or a young "prospect" like Lamb or Udoh. I'd be surprised if they went for any deal involving Gooden.

Even though you have to assume Ellis is not opting out - Let say is does, they save roughly 25 mil over the next 2 years

But getting back to my original trade - You make them take Gooden or no deal. It's like paying Gay 11 Mil next year and then 19 the following year

I was factoring in the Milwaukee premium on those deals. 4/40 for Milsap and 4/32 for Mayo

Teams with cap space go for bigger fish in FA like Dwight, Paul, etc. The good teams only have the MLE or mini MLE come next summer.

Houston could sign both but I don't see Morey spending that type of dough for either.

I just don't see FA being a viable option for the Bucks. I'd rather have Milsap and Mayo over Gay too but odds are the Bucks won't get an opportunity to make that choice. It'll likely be Gay or middling-type vets or Gay or nothing. Free agency has never been a strong option for the Bucks and it's not like Kohl has been shy about overpaying for players. I don't see Milwaukee suddenly becoming a viable FA destination anytime soon.

paulpressey25 wrote:For the price of Gay at 18 million a year we can sign Milsap at 10 million and Mayo at 8 million a year.

Not that those are franchise changing ideas, but a team like ours can't commit long term to guys making 18-20 million a year who haven't made a few all star teams at some point in their career.

Can we though? By that same logic we can just amnesty gooden and sign Dwight Howard, Josh Smith or CP3.

europa wrote:I just don't see FA being a viable option for the Bucks. I'd rather have Milsap and Mayo over Gay too but odds are the Bucks won't get an opportunity to make that choice. It'll likely be Gay or middling-type vets or Gay or nothing. Free agency has never been a strong option for the Bucks and it's not like Kohl has been shy about overpaying for players. I don't see Milwaukee suddenly becoming a viable FA destination anytime soon.

So in your opinion the options are

A. A slim chance at free agents
B. Nothing, cheap free agents and mostly rolling with what we have
C. Middle tier free agents like Redick, Jack, Landry
D. Gay

And your favorite option of the bunch is Gay? I can honestly say out of those options he's easily the last one IMO. A move like that that is the definition of .500 ball for atleast 2 more years.

I think our best bet is to emulate the Rockets. Assemble as many trade assets at various levels of salary as you can, and try to get involved in every single trade for a star that you can.

It gives you 3 ways to succeed - either you manage to put together some magical combination of guys like the Pistons and you can contend for years without ever bottoming out talent wise so that you don't end up like cleveland with a star but nobody around them and still horrible, or one of your draft picks overperforms and turns into a star, or you package your assets together for a star.