ImageImage

The Josh Smith eventually to the Bucks thread (maybe)

Moderators: MickeyDavis, paulpressey25

User avatar
blazza18
RealGM
Posts: 22,476
And1: 4,155
Joined: Dec 02, 2010
Location: Aussie bias
     

Re: The Josh Smith eventually to the Bucks thread (maybe) 

Post#3261 » by blazza18 » Sat Feb 23, 2013 3:31 am

tonyreyes123 wrote:why the hell didn't we trade for Harden? Ellis/Harris would have gotten it deal easily.


Considering that is a win now move I'm pretty pissed we didn't at least try to get him.

Our FO is just so idiotic.
Image
trwi7 wrote:Nah, I prefer touching real men.
User avatar
Baddy Chuck
RealGM
Posts: 29,169
And1: 3,502
Joined: Apr 18, 2006
Location: Monta Ellis have it all.
 

Re: The Josh Smith eventually to the Bucks thread (maybe) 

Post#3262 » by Baddy Chuck » Sat Feb 23, 2013 3:31 am

AussieBuck wrote:Rudy Gay is less efficient than Monta for Toronto. The primary reason for their improvement has been Amir in Bargnani's spot.

Nah.

Image
John Henson wrote:This lady just asked me who I play for and I said the Milwaukee Bucks, she quickly replied “oh the highschool across the street?”
User avatar
GHOSTofSIKMA
RealGM
Posts: 11,224
And1: 732
Joined: Jan 21, 2007
Location: NC
     

Re: The Josh Smith eventually to the Bucks thread (maybe) 

Post#3263 » by GHOSTofSIKMA » Sat Feb 23, 2013 3:32 am

AussieBuck wrote:Rudy Gay is less efficient than Monta for Toronto. The primary reason for their improvement has been Amir in Bargnani's spot.


woah... i hadnt looked at his %. you gotta be right. his ts% sucks balls so far. but somethings changed beyond just amir for bargnani too. bargnanis been out of the lineup before. maybe lowry... maybe just the whole blend is better somehow. they are clearly better the little ive followed them basically score watching. weird whats going on there since the trade no less.
User avatar
GHOSTofSIKMA
RealGM
Posts: 11,224
And1: 732
Joined: Jan 21, 2007
Location: NC
     

Re: The Josh Smith eventually to the Bucks thread (maybe) 

Post#3264 » by GHOSTofSIKMA » Sat Feb 23, 2013 3:34 am

Baddy Chuck wrote:
GHOSTofSIKMA wrote:in retrospect its bugging me quite a bit that we didnt take a look at gay either. he was panned horrendously here and hes blowing up in toronto making them obviously better in the process.

He's shooting like 35% :lol:


yeah **** it... im busted.
User avatar
AussieBuck
RealGM
Posts: 24,569
And1: 2,938
Joined: May 10, 2006
Location: saveourbucks.com
 

Re: The Josh Smith eventually to the Bucks thread (maybe) 

Post#3265 » by AussieBuck » Sat Feb 23, 2013 3:34 am

GHOSTofSIKMA wrote:
AussieBuck wrote:Rudy Gay is less efficient than Monta for Toronto. The primary reason for their improvement has been Amir in Bargnani's spot.


woah... i hadnt looked at his %. you gotta be right. his ts% sucks balls so far. but somethings changed beyond just amir for bargnani too. bargnanis been out of the lineup before. maybe lowry... maybe just the whole blend is better somehow. they are clearly better the little ive followed them basically score watching. weird whats going on there since the trade no less.

Bargs out, Lowry lifting his game, Derozan being pushed out the 'star' role by Gay where he's less harmful to the offense, it's a bunch of stuff probably.
aol4532 wrote:what exactly is the difference between him (Bill Russell), and say a guy like Ryan Hollins, who is 20 lbs heavier and can get his head over the rim? He would get in foul trouble so quick, just trying to hold position.
whatthe_buck!?
Banned User
Posts: 5,143
And1: 163
Joined: Jul 20, 2006

Re: The Josh Smith eventually to the Bucks thread (maybe) 

Post#3266 » by whatthe_buck!? » Sat Feb 23, 2013 3:42 am

GHOSTofSIKMA wrote:
whatthe_buck!? wrote:
GHOSTofSIKMA wrote:and why would atl agree to this? im sure we told them we had other options with our assets and we might pull them and all that yada yada bs in order for them to do a deal on tuesday night. big fin deal. atl probabaly was like yeah whatever :roll:
atl knew smith was the big ticket in the whole deadline deal.... the last 15 minutes is probably when the best offer WOULD come in.

They wouldn't agree to it. It's called an ultimatum, one of the ways to create leverage for yourself in a situation like that. If the Hawks answer is they dont want to agree to anything 15 minutes before because they want to wait until the very last second so they can get the best possible offer that's ur clue they are probably on bs and probably don't like ur offer enough to accept but want to keep it on the table to use it to solicit better offers from other teams.

This is not a complicated concept and its one that should be almost instinct to someone who is truly qualified to run an NBA team. We got used plain and simple and we have nobody to blame but ourselves IMHO. Unless dude you're dealing with is ur brother or a longtime friend u know u can trust 100% u can't allow yourself to be in situation where ur other alternatives are erased because u want to believe the person you're dealing with is 100% on the up and up...


dont talk to me about negotiation tactics if your a rookie. there are no real ultimatums in negotiations.... only the fake ass ones. that may be the first 2 lessons you learn in negotiation 101...

1. dont give an ultimatum because your adversary is gonna either ignore it or walk away
2. if you get an ultimatum from your adversary either ignore it or walk away

not a complicated concept my ass. ultimatums work as well as a shake on a plate

The reason youre wrong and your general negotiation guideline tactics arent applicable is that what Im talking about isn't some business deal with an open ended timetable. This is a unique deadline situation where if u don't get an answer far enough in advance u start missing out on alternatives. If its just an arbitrary ultimatum that is clearly being used to force a decision that's one thing and yeah it's not smart to let someone force into a decision that you're not ready to make. In this case, an ultimatum at some ridiculously late hour (we were both using 15 minutes before as and example) is reasonable because they know you're not lying when u say that if u don't have an answer by that time u start risking missing out on alternatives. There's your leverage. At that point if they walk away that's fine, u now know the probability they would have done a deal if u had waited (incredibly small and not worth waiting on).

As an aside, if you believe the info coming out from the Bucks side today about the Magic deal being the fallback deal and the Hawks one just being something the Bucks were shooting for but had no expectation of getting this argument about negotiating tactics is moot because then my premise about things going down a certain way on deadline day and second guessing it wasn't right. But then again that doesn't make u any less wrong.
User avatar
GHOSTofSIKMA
RealGM
Posts: 11,224
And1: 732
Joined: Jan 21, 2007
Location: NC
     

Re: The Josh Smith eventually to the Bucks thread (maybe) 

Post#3267 » by GHOSTofSIKMA » Sat Feb 23, 2013 3:54 am

whatthe_buck!? wrote:The reason youre wrong and your general negotiation guideline tactics arent applicable is that what Im talking about isn't some business deal with an open ended timetable. This is a unique deadline situation where if u don't get an answer far enough in advance u start missing out on alternatives. If its just an arbitrary ultimatum that is clearly being used to force a decision that's one thing and yeah it's not smart to let someone force into a decision that you're not ready to make. In this case, an ultimatum at some ridiculously late hour (we were both using 15 minutes before as and example) is reasonable because they know you're not lying when u say that if u don't have an answer by that time u start risking missing out on alternatives. There's your leverage. At that point if they walk away that's fine, u now know the probability they would have done a deal if u had waited (incredibly small and not worth waiting on).

As an aside, if you believe the info coming out from the Bucks side today about the Magic deal being the fallback deal and the Hawks one just being something the Bucks were shooting for but had no expectation of getting this argument about negotiating tactics is moot because then my premise about things going down a certain way on deadline day and second guessing it wasn't right. But then again that doesn't make u any less wrong.


as the hawks proved on thursday at 3.00 pm eastern standard time.....they were perfectly willing and able to ignore the arbitrary timetable set out by the league with its imposed trade deadline. the trade deadline was in fact a deadline for us.... it wasnt for them. they took offers and josh smith is still a hawk... he played tonight as a matter of fact.

you cant give an ultimatum in a situation where you dont have any leverage. you use ultimatums when you have all the leverage. thats why in the cba talks the owners used ultimatums and the players didnt. even then the players took the owners final offers like 23 times and just kept negotiating :roll:
whatthe_buck!?
Banned User
Posts: 5,143
And1: 163
Joined: Jul 20, 2006

Re: The Josh Smith eventually to the Bucks thread (maybe) 

Post#3268 » by whatthe_buck!? » Sat Feb 23, 2013 4:03 am

GHOSTofSIKMA wrote:
whatthe_buck!? wrote:The reason youre wrong and your general negotiation guideline tactics arent applicable is that what Im talking about isn't some business deal with an open ended timetable. This is a unique deadline situation where if u don't get an answer far enough in advance u start missing out on alternatives. If its just an arbitrary ultimatum that is clearly being used to force a decision that's one thing and yeah it's not smart to let someone force into a decision that you're not ready to make. In this case, an ultimatum at some ridiculously late hour (we were both using 15 minutes before as and example) is reasonable because they know you're not lying when u say that if u don't have an answer by that time u start risking missing out on alternatives. There's your leverage. At that point if they walk away that's fine, u now know the probability they would have done a deal if u had waited (incredibly small and not worth waiting on).

As an aside, if you believe the info coming out from the Bucks side today about the Magic deal being the fallback deal and the Hawks one just being something the Bucks were shooting for but had no expectation of getting this argument about negotiating tactics is moot because then my premise about things going down a certain way on deadline day and second guessing it wasn't right. But then again that doesn't make u any less wrong.


as the hawks proved on thursday at 3.00 pm eastern standard time.....they were perfectly willing and able to ignore the arbitrary timetable set out by the league with its imposed trade deadline. the trade deadline was in fact a deadline for us.... it wasnt for them. they took offers and josh smith is still a hawk... he played tonight as a matter of fact.

you cant give an ultimatum in a situation where you dont have any leverage. you use ultimatums when you have all the leverage. thats why in the cba talks the owners used ultimatums and the players didnt. even then the players took the owners final offers like 23 times and just kept negotiating :roll:

That would be true if they had ALL the leverage, but how the hell can u argue they had all the leverage? They now risk losing Smith as an asset for nothing in the offseason. What r u talking about?

And that's not really the point anyway. It wasn't about forcing them into a disadvantageous situation. What im talking about is to keep ourselves out of the disadvantageous position of not knowing exactly where we were with the hawks past the point of being able to capitalize on other potential offers from other teams besides the magic.
User avatar
humanrefutation
RealGM
Posts: 13,394
And1: 1,001
Joined: Jun 05, 2006
       

Re: The Josh Smith eventually to the Bucks thread (maybe) 

Post#3269 » by humanrefutation » Sat Feb 23, 2013 4:11 am

paulpressey25 wrote:
SupremeHustle wrote:This thread was awesome then turned sad with people trying to come to terms about why their dog was suddenly murdered.


That really is a good way to put it. That's how I feel.

This was the greatest thread in our history for that 60 minute stretch. Santa Claus was coming. He was bringing the all the toys. We'd be the center of the NBA universe for the next week. We'd actually have a top 20 player on our roster for the first time in ages. All the years of Herb Kohl futility temporarily erased in one giant board orgasm. Excitement, swag, local media coverage. All of it.

Then those tweets from the national guys....."Atlanta keeping Josh Smith, Bucks out #tradedeadline"

This is going to take a long time to recover from.


I definitely agree about this thread being amazing for that 60 minute stretch and that acquiring Smith would have made our team relevant nationally for a week, but I don't agree that everyone here was excited about trading for Smith or that Smith was a top 20 player. I think the majority of the board was actually more nervous that we'd make a catastrophic decision than they were excited that we're going to acquire Smith. It was like we were all having a tumor removed by an inexperienced surgeon and hoping he wouldn't screw up and kill us. When we all woke up from the anesthesia, we realized that we were still living, but also realized that the tumor was still there.
User avatar
Ayt
RealGM
Posts: 45,103
And1: 2,049
Joined: Jun 27, 2005

Re: The Josh Smith eventually to the Bucks thread (maybe) 

Post#3270 » by Ayt » Sat Feb 23, 2013 4:16 am

tonyreyes123 wrote:why the hell didn't we trade for Harden? Ellis/Harris would have gotten it deal easily.


OKC wouldn't have wanted a scrub like Ellis instead of Kevin Martin and we also didn't have a potentially nice lotto pick to send them like Houston did with the Toronto pick. Harris also doesn't fit like Lamb as a young guy because he's a strict SF and they already have a decent SF on their roster.
User avatar
GHOSTofSIKMA
RealGM
Posts: 11,224
And1: 732
Joined: Jan 21, 2007
Location: NC
     

Re: The Josh Smith eventually to the Bucks thread (maybe) 

Post#3271 » by GHOSTofSIKMA » Sat Feb 23, 2013 4:19 am

whatthe_buck!? wrote:That would be true if they had ALL the leverage, but how the hell can u argue they had all the leverage? They now risk losing Smith as an asset for nothing in the offseason. What r u talking about?


they get to keep him for the rest of the season and i think they are fully aware their bird rights will be able to net them similar offers in the offseason. the team that wins josh smith in free agency is the team that gives him the 5 year deal..... not the 4 year one.

danny ferry is a spur. that front office is renowned for not allowing themselves to get pushed into a corner. i think hammonds tactics worked well considering we were the last team standing. we just didnt get it done. my guess was that the price was too high in regards to sanders.... not this ellis stuff. ferry may have preferred ellis as an expiring but he wasnt going to hang up the phone if we preferred to keep him either.
whatthe_buck!?
Banned User
Posts: 5,143
And1: 163
Joined: Jul 20, 2006

Re: The Josh Smith eventually to the Bucks thread (maybe) 

Post#3272 » by whatthe_buck!? » Sat Feb 23, 2013 4:53 am

GHOSTofSIKMA wrote:
whatthe_buck!? wrote:That would be true if they had ALL the leverage, but how the hell can u argue they had all the leverage? They now risk losing Smith as an asset for nothing in the offseason. What r u talking about?


they get to keep him for the rest of the season and i think they are fully aware their bird rights will be able to net them similar offers in the offseason. the team that wins josh smith in free agency is the team that gives him the 5 year deal..... not the 4 year one.

danny ferry is a spur. that front office is renowned for not allowing themselves to get pushed into a corner. i think hammonds tactics worked well considering we were the last team standing. we just didnt get it done. my guess was that the price was too high in regards to sanders.... not this ellis stuff. ferry may have preferred ellis as an expiring but he wasnt going to hang up the phone if we preferred to keep him either.

One thing I'm sure we can both agree on, all the vague and conflicting reports combined with what we simply don't know about what actually happened makes arguing about how well the bucks did or how badly they f*cked up at deadline essentially impossible lol...
jtrinaldi
Banned User
Posts: 1,040
And1: 21
Joined: Jan 16, 2009

Re: The Josh Smith eventually to the Bucks thread (maybe) 

Post#3273 » by jtrinaldi » Sat Feb 23, 2013 4:47 pm

only 150 more pages to the forum record, get on it guys
User avatar
SkilesTheLimit
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,414
And1: 754
Joined: Oct 23, 2010
Location: Pop Up Zone
     

Re: The Josh Smith eventually to the Bucks thread (maybe) 

Post#3274 » by SkilesTheLimit » Sun Feb 24, 2013 4:15 pm

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/bucks/192796111.html

Bucks guard Brandon Jennings admitted Friday it was a tantalizing prospect to think about playing with Smith, a strong defender and versatile player who has averaged 15.2 points, 8.0 rebounds, 3.2 assists, 2.2 blocks and 1.3 steals in his NBA career.

Smith smiled when told of Jennings' comments.

"He's a talented player and has a lot of potential in this league," Smith said of Jennings. "Who wouldn't want to play with a Brandon Jennings?

"But I'm an Atlanta Hawk and we're seeing how we can beat this team."


Let the speculation of free agency continue...
This is about winning basketball games. This is about winning Championships.

-Wes Edens
User avatar
LUKE23
RealGM
Posts: 66,425
And1: 1,961
Joined: May 26, 2005
Location: Stunville
       

Re: The Josh Smith eventually to the Bucks thread (maybe) 

Post#3275 » by LUKE23 » Sun Feb 24, 2013 4:22 pm

I hope neither is a Buck next season.
Trade Impact:

Before: 30-23, 104.4 O, 102.2 D, 93.9 Pace, 1.42 SRS, .547 TS, .154 TOV
Now: 36-38, 102.7 O, 102.7 D, 93.8 Pace, -.29 SRS, .536 TS, .155 TOV
MCW Per 36 w/MIL: 15.4 PTS, 4.0 REB, 6.5 AST, 2.2 STL, 4.0 TO, .468 TS, .257 USG, .197 TOV
User avatar
drew881
Head Coach
Posts: 6,089
And1: 614
Joined: Aug 14, 2007

Re: The Josh Smith eventually to the Bucks thread (maybe) 

Post#3276 » by drew881 » Sun Feb 24, 2013 4:25 pm

They can both go to Dallas:

Jennings
Carter
Marion
Smith
Dirk
User avatar
BigDoggyStyle
Senior
Posts: 726
And1: 49
Joined: Jul 13, 2012

Re: The Josh Smith eventually to the Bucks thread (maybe) 

Post#3277 » by BigDoggyStyle » Sun Feb 24, 2013 5:13 pm

Well now I'm officially scared. Want no part of maxing out Josh Smith, or overpaying Jennings.
User avatar
Wise1
RealGM
Posts: 18,047
And1: 123
Joined: Jun 27, 2005
Location: Devouring worlds.
     

Re: The Josh Smith eventually to the Bucks thread (maybe) 

Post#3278 » by Wise1 » Sun Feb 24, 2013 7:25 pm

I'd like to see it. Bring it on.
The Bucks are one defensive center away from being the best defense in the league. Own the future. Get me Willie Cauley-Stein
User avatar
unklchuk
Head Coach
Posts: 6,118
And1: 83
Joined: Jun 27, 2005

Re: The Josh Smith eventually to the Bucks thread (maybe) 

Post#3279 » by unklchuk » Sun Feb 24, 2013 7:50 pm

I'll try almost anything that gives the team cohesion. If Smith, Ellis and/or Jennings,Sanders will hang together (as trained instincts players?), that may be a start.

Could be more promising than doing a housecleaning, going after good free agents, and having to settle for middling ones. Continued mediocrity with fresh faces doesn't much appeal to me.
AFAIK, IDKM
Wilford Brimley
Banned User
Posts: 13,482
And1: 76
Joined: Dec 16, 2006
Location: Super Bowl I, II, XXXI, XLV Champions

Re: The Josh Smith eventually to the Bucks thread (maybe) 

Post#3280 » by Wilford Brimley » Sun Feb 24, 2013 7:53 pm

drew881 wrote:They can both go to Dallas:

Jennings
Carter
Marion
Smith
Dirk


I can't decide if that team would be fun to watch, or terrible to watch.

Return to Milwaukee Bucks