Beyond The Scapegoat. (The Hammond Shuffle.)

[europa]

I'm struggling to see what "assets" the Bucks got.

Remember, Europa, I'm not comparing this to possible outcomes he could have done like trading healthy Bogut for Horford last year or accepting Steph Curry instead of what he took.

I'm merely looking at the fact a new owner or new GM taking over today has the potential for a load of cap space this summer if Monta opts out. Or you could have traded Monta earlier or in the next month for some type of asset. And we got another $10mm of cap space from Capt. Jack that they used on Ersan. Plus a good backup center which Hammond wasn't able to acquire anytime prior. And on the timing, had Hammond not dealt Bogut for something last March, we'd be sitting with $27 million of microfracture on the bench.

Show me other Hammond trades where the assets we acquired had the ability to be used in a very positive way. Other than Salmons, there just aren't any. Capt. Jack, Maggette, RJ, dropping 12 spots in the 2011 draft.

Realize I'm giving faint praise here.

The problem Press is this isn't a hypothetical. We know what the Bucks could have gotten. Instead, they chose (in my opinion) the lesser option. There's no speculation necessary. We know what the offer was and we know what the Bucks ultimately did. Given how far superior (again in my opinion) the initial offer was it's impossible for me to consider the Bogut trade to be anything other than a failure and a massive one at that. If we want to speculate I'll say again that the Bucks were holding all the cards there given how badly the Warriors wanted Bogut so on top of what GS offered I think if Hammond had played the situation right he could've bent them over and asked for even more. They wanted Bogut bad.

[paulpressey25]

Europa, we could have done better. No arguments there. Just pointing out that it was the only major trade he made save for Salmons where we actually won on assets.

Chuck sums up my thoughts well. Hammond is a great #2 guy who would help a good GM find people like Larry Sanders. But he's way out of his league in the ability to navigate the modern NBA with all the financial considerations of today. And he doesn't have the people skills to negotiate with other GM's nor with Kohl.

[europa]

Europa, we could have done better. No arguments there. Just pointing out that it was the only major trade he made save for Salmons where we actually won on assets.

And I disagree that the Bucks "won" that trade. I think it was a failure and easily one of the worst moves of Hammond's tenure. I think Hammond's made a number of far superior trades. The two I listed and I'd include Mo for Ridnour too. In fact, I've always thought Hammond did quite well with most of his trades in his first two seasons. But Season 3 everything started going in the toilet and little has positively surfaced since then.

[DocHoliday]

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/features/rumors

Kevin Pelton

More changes ahead for Bucks?

"The most immediate task for Boylan will be finding a consistent rotation in the frontcourt. Guards Ellis and Brandon Jennings have started all 32 games, but eight different players have made a start at either forward or center. Hammond hasn't made things easy on his coach by drafting up front the last three years (Larry Sanders, Tobias Harris and John Henson), adding another young player (Ekpe Udoh) via trade and accumulating veterans Samuel Dalembert, Drew Gooden and Ersan Ilyasova. None of the group has been able to stand out and secure a consistent spot, leaving the lineup in constant flux. ... Bucks management faces bigger questions after the season. Hammond is also in the final year of his contract, and since winning Executive of the Year in 2009-10, his moves have left Milwaukee stuck on the treadmill of mediocrity. Sneaking into the playoffs may not be enough to save Hammond's job."

[europa]

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/features/rumors

Kevin Pelton

More changes ahead for Bucks?

"Guards Ellis and Brandon Jennings have started all 32 games, but eight different players have made a start at either forward or center.

Trying to fix the problem by ignoring the problem. I'm stun that didn't work.

[Run-MKE 311]

Hammond does not skate by any means, Skiles is painted as the main villian, but Johnny has also done little to inspire confidence.

Anyone who wants to climb into the insane mind of Herb Kohl, be my guest.

[xTitan]

This would be a surprise to me and extremely disappointing....

1250 WSSP ‏@1250WSSP
John Hammond RT @jpcadorin: "The senator and I are in the process of working out an extension for me"

[xTitan]

1250 WSSP ‏@1250WSSP
Here ya go! Goal is playoffs! RT @jpcadorin: JH: Goals remain the same. Most of all, we want to win, we want to be a playoff team.

[xTitan]

This I can promise you is a lie......

Andrew Wagner ‏@ByAndrewWagner
"Scott and I did not have a frosty relationship and Scott did not hate his team." -Hammond

[Epicurus]

I believe that there is considerable variation in the decisions made by gms, as opposed by coaches. Thus believe the NBA is first a players' league, but next a gm league. Thus when a franchise is problemmatic, of the nonplayer moves would first be getting rid of the gm and not the coach.

[europa]

I believe that there is considerable variation in the decisions made by gms, as opposed by coaches. Thus believe the NBA is first a players' league, but next a gm league. Thus when a franchise is problemmatic, of the nonplayer moves would first be getting rid of the gm and not the coach.

This is the same pattern Kohl used with Stotts. Coach got fired, GM stayed, cheap already-on-staff assistant was promoted. That's why I always believed Skiles would go before Hammond.

[MickeyDavis]

I couldn't agree more Epi.

And don't forget it was Kohl who gave Dunleavy an 8 year coaching contract before he hired a GM. When he couldn't find anyone who wanted to be GM with a long term coach already in place he gave the job to Dunleavy.

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

factors that determine whether a small market gm is "good" or not

1st would be solid drafting... and this trumps almost everything else combined
2nd would be effective cap management... ie not making bad use of salary via fa or trades
3rd would be low level cost effective fa signings who can contribute within the framework of #2
4th would be turning positive assets into better assets via trade

the things that wouldnt even be on the radar would be bigtime free agent signings or trading junk for other teams junk that becomes needle moving contributors. that just doesnt happen enough for small market teams to assess it on any radars.

hammonds made some mistakes but he could have done alot worse too. id say hes been better than average. i support a 2 year extension with a new coach on board. any more than 2 years seems like too much.

[LUKE23]

I'd say drafting is #1 if you're under a rebuild mandate. Under a win now mandate where you're continually drafting 10 or worse, it becomes less paramount, but still important.

[InsideOut]

factors that determine whether a small market gm is "good" or not

1st would be solid drafting... and this trumps almost everything else combined
2nd would be effective cap management... ie not making bad use of salary via fa or trades
3rd would be low level cost effective fa signings who can contribute within the framework of #2
4th would be turning positive assets into better assets via trade

the things that wouldnt even be on the radar would be bigtime free agent signings or trading junk for other teams junk that becomes needle moving contributors. that just doesnt happen enough for small market teams to assess it on any radars.

hammonds made some mistakes but he could have done alot worse too. id say hes been better than average. i support a 2 year extension with a new coach on board. any more than 2 years seems like too much.

One winning season out of 4 is above average?! Could you walk us through the logic that got you to the conclusion that winning one season out of 4 and having an overall losing record is ABOVE average?