To tank or not to tank (possible new lotto rules pg 5)

[InsideOut]

Until then it is not bad idea to trade a #1 pick to get a young emerging star to add to the overall talent level of the team.

You realize that if you want to trade a pick for a "young emerging star" it will need to be a very high pick. You get that high pick by losing a lot of games. You don't get that pick by winning 35 games and draft 13th.

No we don't need a mix of vets. That is what has kept us in this mess for decades. All those vets we've been brining in the past 10 years did nothing but keep us stuck in no--mans-land.

This teams need great young talent. We aren't getting it via FA. We've aren't trading for it. This team lucked into Hammond sucking so bad that we are finally drafting it. Now they need to learn from that and my guess is the new owners have that figured out. KD won 20 and 23 games his first two seasons in the league. We could do the same by unloading vets and playing the youth. One or two more high picks is what we need.

That is not true at all. If this team is going to maybe 25 games next year as most of you think then we would have a high pick in next year's draft. so trading it to another team for a young player who has shown he has what it takes like an Andre Drummond is very possible and and a good piece now, not a hope we get lucky later.

You lost me. I thought you said you didn't want to be bad again or tank next year and end up with 25 wins. I thought you were against another 25 wins because we need to change the culture and learn how to win.

[BUCKSFORLIFE]

You realize that if you want to trade a pick for a "young emerging star" it will need to be a very high pick. You get that high pick by losing a lot of games. You don't get that pick by winning 35 games and draft 13th.

No we don't need a mix of vets. That is what has kept us in this mess for decades. All those vets we've been brining in the past 10 years did nothing but keep us stuck in no--mans-land.

This teams need great young talent. We aren't getting it via FA. We've aren't trading for it. This team lucked into Hammond sucking so bad that we are finally drafting it. Now they need to learn from that and my guess is the new owners have that figured out. KD won 20 and 23 games his first two seasons in the league. We could do the same by unloading vets and playing the youth. One or two more high picks is what we need.

That is not true at all. If this team is going to maybe 25 games next year as most of you think then we would have a high pick in next year's draft. so trading it to another team for a young player who has shown he has what it takes like an Andre Drummond is very possible and and a good piece now, not a hope we get lucky later.

You lost me. I thought you said you didn't want to be bad again or tank next year and end up with 25 wins. I thought you were against another 25 wins because we need to change the culture and learn how to win.

I am against tanking and not trying to start a winning atmosphere but that will not happen overnight either. The point is use an asset we have now to get a players that can be part of a solid core vs putting all our eggs in a basket hoping for a good draft pick. Also by trading Larry Sanders with our next years pic we get rid of a huge contract on a player that has shown he does not have the smarts not to dumb things on or off the court. If we make this move first before signing any other players we will still appear to be a 25 win team but adding a few nice pieces after a trade like this, I think we can do much better than that and still give the majority of our playing time to the younger players.

[InsideOut]

That is not true at all. If this team is going to maybe 25 games next year as most of you think then we would have a high pick in next year's draft. so trading it to another team for a young player who has shown he has what it takes like an Andre Drummond is very possible and and a good piece now, not a hope we get lucky later.

You lost me. I thought you said you didn't want to be bad again or tank next year and end up with 25 wins. I thought you were against another 25 wins because we need to change the culture and learn how to win.

I am against tanking and not trying to start a winning atmosphere but that will not happen overnight either. The point is use an asset we have now to get a players that can be part of a solid core vs putting all our eggs in a basket hoping for a good draft pick. Also by trading Larry Sanders with our next years pic we get rid of a huge contract on a player that has shown he does not have the smarts not to dumb things on or off the court. If we make this move first before signing any other players we will still appear to be a 25 win team but adding a few nice pieces after a trade like this, I think we can do much better than that and still give the majority of our playing time to the younger players.

You want to trade next years pick before you know what it is? Do you think another team will trade their "young emerging star" for Sanders and an unknown pick? What is your definition of tanking? Do you think the Bucks tanked last year?

I have no problem trading next years pick for a "young emerging star" but I feel that isn't realistic...especially when he number of the pick in unknown.

[BUCKSFORLIFE]

You lost me. I thought you said you didn't want to be bad again or tank next year and end up with 25 wins. I thought you were against another 25 wins because we need to change the culture and learn how to win.

I am against tanking and not trying to start a winning atmosphere but that will not happen overnight either. The point is use an asset we have now to get a players that can be part of a solid core vs putting all our eggs in a basket hoping for a good draft pick. Also by trading Larry Sanders with our next years pic we get rid of a huge contract on a player that has shown he does not have the smarts not to dumb things on or off the court. If we make this move first before signing any other players we will still appear to be a 25 win team but adding a few nice pieces after a trade like this, I think we can do much better than that and still give the majority of our playing time to the younger players.

You want to trade next years pick before you know what it is? Do you think another team will trade their "young emerging star" for Sanders and an unknown pick? What is your definition of tanking? Do you think the Bucks tanked last year?

I have no problem trading next years pick for a "young emerging star" but I feel that isn't realistic...especially when he number of the pick in unknown.

I think in the case of Andre Drummond it can be realistic. They get a similar type player and a first round pic. We not likely to to better than 5 as there are teams that will be much worse than us. Detroit is for sure rebuilding as well and two have two lottery picks for them gives them lots of options. The worry I have is we dont get an impact player next year in the draft. Now all that hope and time is wasted. This way it does not have to be.

[SpottedBadger]

I am against tanking and not trying to start a winning atmosphere but that will not happen overnight either. The point is use an asset we have now to get a players that can be part of a solid core vs putting all our eggs in a basket hoping for a good draft pick. Also by trading Larry Sanders with our next years pic we get rid of a huge contract on a player that has shown he does not have the smarts not to dumb things on or off the court. If we make this move first before signing any other players we will still appear to be a 25 win team but adding a few nice pieces after a trade like this, I think we can do much better than that and still give the majority of our playing time to the younger players.

You want to trade next years pick before you know what it is? Do you think another team will trade their "young emerging star" for Sanders and an unknown pick? What is your definition of tanking? Do you think the Bucks tanked last year?

I have no problem trading next years pick for a "young emerging star" but I feel that isn't realistic...especially when he number of the pick in unknown.

I think in the case of Andre Drummond it can be realistic. They get a similar type player and a first round pic. We not likely to to better than 5 as there are teams that will be much worse than us. Detroit is for sure rebuilding as well and two have two lottery picks for them gives them lots of options. The worry I have is we dont get an impact player next year in the draft. Now all that hope and time is wasted. This way it does not have to be.

There is absolutely zero way Detroit is trading Andre Drummond. ZERO. It's just a matter of fact. And Larry Sanders has a "massive" contract? Since when? Last time I checked he makes $11 million a year. That's $1 million less per year than what Kris Humphries makes.

[BUCKSFORLIFE]

You want to trade next years pick before you know what it is? Do you think another team will trade their "young emerging star" for Sanders and an unknown pick? What is your definition of tanking? Do you think the Bucks tanked last year?

I have no problem trading next years pick for a "young emerging star" but I feel that isn't realistic...especially when he number of the pick in unknown.

I think in the case of Andre Drummond it can be realistic. They get a similar type player and a first round pic. We not likely to to better than 5 as there are teams that will be much worse than us. Detroit is for sure rebuilding as well and two have two lottery picks for them gives them lots of options. The worry I have is we dont get an impact player next year in the draft. Now all that hope and time is wasted. This way it does not have to be.

There is absolutely zero way Detroit is trading Andre Drummond. ZERO. It's just a matter of fact. And Larry Sanders has a "massive" contract? Since when? Last time I checked he makes $11 million a year. That's $1 million less per year than what Kris Humphries makes.

Detroit did not have a first round pic this past draft. They were said to be trying acquiring picks. As for Sanders contract. It is massive in the fact that he has done more bad for this team than he he done good so far and that is not likely to change because he is a knucklehead.

[InsideOut]

I am against tanking and not trying to start a winning atmosphere but that will not happen overnight either. The point is use an asset we have now to get a players that can be part of a solid core vs putting all our eggs in a basket hoping for a good draft pick. Also by trading Larry Sanders with our next years pic we get rid of a huge contract on a player that has shown he does not have the smarts not to dumb things on or off the court. If we make this move first before signing any other players we will still appear to be a 25 win team but adding a few nice pieces after a trade like this, I think we can do much better than that and still give the majority of our playing time to the younger players.

You want to trade next years pick before you know what it is? Do you think another team will trade their "young emerging star" for Sanders and an unknown pick? What is your definition of tanking? Do you think the Bucks tanked last year?

I have no problem trading next years pick for a "young emerging star" but I feel that isn't realistic...especially when he number of the pick in unknown.

I think in the case of Andre Drummond it can be realistic. They get a similar type player and a first round pic. We not likely to to better than 5 as there are teams that will be much worse than us. Detroit is for sure rebuilding as well and two have two lottery picks for them gives them lots of options. The worry I have is we dont get an impact player next year in the draft. Now all that hope and time is wasted. This way it does not have to be.

I'll believe it is realistic if you can find just two other posters that agree with you that Drummond can be had for Sanders and a pick in the 6 - 10 ranger. Think about it. If we had Drummond would you trade him for Sanders and say the 7th pick? Tell us, would you tell the Bucks to make that deal?

[nyrfan28]

i'm in the full-on tank camp.

hopefully there's top-down leadership with the strategy behind the tank and clear, effective communication of those plans to the organization, players and fans in the process.

i'm also for essentially buying future assets from teams trying to clear cap space so long as it doesn't derail the tank and nets the bucks 1st round picks.

finally, the bucks should draft the best players available, period. when in doubt, err on the side of the player with the highest ceiling.

a good gm can trade surplus talent for quality players at positions of need. i type that realizing full well there are justified concerns about hammond's poor trade history as the team's gm and that the bucks are already fully-stocked with bigs heading into a big-heavy draft. still in the rebuilding process, talent trumps all.

[JabariParker12]

i'm in the full-on tank camp.

hopefully there's top-down leadership with the strategy behind the tank and clear, effective communication of those plans to the organization, players and fans in the process.

i'm also for essentially buying future assets from teams trying to clear cap space so long as it doesn't derail the tank and nets the bucks 1st round picks.

finally, the bucks should draft the best players available, period. when in doubt, err on the side of the player with the highest ceiling.

a good gm can trade surplus talent for quality players at positions of need. i type that realizing full well there are justified concerns about hammond's poor trade history as the team's gm and that the bucks are already fully-stocked with bigs heading into a big-heavy draft. still in the rebuilding process, talent trumps all.

I'm also in this camp, but with the caveat of Parker/Wiggins playing a ton of minutes. If that is enough in the East to net a decent amount of wins, so be it. I don't want to stunt their growth in any way. That said, I feel that playing the young core and getting them experience still realistically maxes out to around 25 wins.

The goal should be to put ourselves in decent odds to hop a couple teams in the lotta and net a top 5 pick again.

Then we can announce plans for new arena, new unis, and bring in one more draft piece to build our contender along with Parker/Giannis.

[Ruben Douglas]

If the Bucks can get a legit point guard, I say no tank. Until then, I think the Bucks will be tanking unintentionally.

Sent from my SM-G900V using RealGM Forums mobile app

[kbrow20]

Can't you move Sanders without a pick involved?

[Ayt]

I am against tanking and not trying to start a winning atmosphere but that will not happen overnight either. The point is use an asset we have now to get a players that can be part of a solid core vs putting all our eggs in a basket hoping for a good draft pick. Also by trading Larry Sanders with our next years pic we get rid of a huge contract on a player that has shown he does not have the smarts not to dumb things on or off the court. If we make this move first before signing any other players we will still appear to be a 25 win team but adding a few nice pieces after a trade like this, I think we can do much better than that and still give the majority of our playing time to the younger players.

You want to trade next years pick before you know what it is? Do you think another team will trade their "young emerging star" for Sanders and an unknown pick? What is your definition of tanking? Do you think the Bucks tanked last year?

I have no problem trading next years pick for a "young emerging star" but I feel that isn't realistic...especially when he number of the pick in unknown.

I think in the case of Andre Drummond it can be realistic. They get a similar type player and a first round pic. We not likely to to better than 5 as there are teams that will be much worse than us. Detroit is for sure rebuilding as well and two have two lottery picks for them gives them lots of options. The worry I have is we dont get an impact player next year in the draft. Now all that hope and time is wasted. This way it does not have to be.

[HurricaneKid]

I know a lot of people were hoping to land Mudiay and it sounds like he is going to play in Europe for a year because he won't be eligible to play (got paid?) this season. Don't know where else to put this. I think this does likely bump him down the draft a few spots and makes it more likely we can get him.

[BUCKSFORLIFE]

You want to trade next years pick before you know what it is? Do you think another team will trade their "young emerging star" for Sanders and an unknown pick? What is your definition of tanking? Do you think the Bucks tanked last year?

I have no problem trading next years pick for a "young emerging star" but I feel that isn't realistic...especially when he number of the pick in unknown.

I think in the case of Andre Drummond it can be realistic. They get a similar type player and a first round pic. We not likely to to better than 5 as there are teams that will be much worse than us. Detroit is for sure rebuilding as well and two have two lottery picks for them gives them lots of options. The worry I have is we dont get an impact player next year in the draft. Now all that hope and time is wasted. This way it does not have to be.

nice pic. Glad to see you went to so much trouble just to quote my wonderful suggestion!!!!

[thepuckchucker]

I think they need to build through their picks. They shouldn't have given up a pick in acquiring (Coach) Kidd.

Sent from my SM-N900V using RealGM Forums mobile app

[paulpressey25]

I'm bumping this based on the news that Philly is opposing any changes to the lotto process. I'd much prefer they ditch the lotto and go by straight record, but the lotto is a goldmine of publicity for the league.

Interesting opinion piece here. I don't agree with these lotto changes but do agree with the excerpt on OKC. Pure statistical odds say it is unlikely anyone can repeat his hat trick.

http://hoopshabit.com/2014/07/30/nba-ph ... ry-reform/

In many ways, the worst thing that ever happened to the NBA was Sam Presti, first in Seattle and later in Oklahoma City, hitting three draft home runs in a row with Kevin Durant, Russell Westbrook and James Harden.

It provided a blueprint for the Sam Hinkies of the world to attempt to follow.

[Thunder Muscle]

I agree the lotto will be tough to drop. It creates so much buzz and publicity - even if people think it is rigged, people are talking. I mean look at us. We were talking lottery odds for months, having parties the night of, etc. Flawed or not, it draws attention to the league.

[Chapter29]

Yep and we fast tracked our rebuild by landing Giannis who should have been a top pick in 2013.

So we effectively have

2013's #1 overall
2014's #2 overall

Plus

Mayo a 2008 #3 overall (laugh all you will, he isn't a terrible player, just not sure he's a #3 talent of course)
Brandon Knight 2011 #8 overall
Kendall Marshall 2012 #13 overall
John Henson 2012 #14 overall
Larry Sanders 2010 #15 overall

And lessor selections like Ersan, Middleton and Inglis that can contribute and in Inglis' case may be another steal in the draft.

Not a terrible talent base. Clearly for us to improve these selections must pan out, most importantly Giannis and Parker.

[Down To Buck]

Interesting opinion piece here. I don't agree with these lotto changes but do agree with the excerpt on OKC. Pure statistical odds say it is unlikely anyone can repeat his hat trick.

http://hoopshabit.com/2014/07/30/nba-ph ... ry-reform/

In many ways, the worst thing that ever happened to the NBA was Sam Presti, first in Seattle and later in Oklahoma City, hitting three draft home runs in a row with Kevin Durant, Russell Westbrook and James Harden.

It provided a blueprint for the Sam Hinkies of the world to attempt to follow.

It's taken a while, but people are starting to realize that the "Oklahoma City Model" (closing your eyes and praying for good draft mojo) of team-building isn't really a thing. I cringe when I see people say that the Bucks should try and emulate them. It's true that our best chances for good players are in the draft, but being really bad for a bunch of years in a row (with an incompetent FO to boot) is way more likely to yield a Kings-type situation than a championship contender.

We lucked into Giannis, and bungled into Parker, and we're still gonna be bad this year. OKC-like in a sense. But at some point you have to be able to make shrewd moves to construct a contender. OKC failed when they ditched Harden for crap. Hopefully in the coming years the Bucks can take what should be a solid core and mold it into something more.

[paulpressey25]

We lucked into Giannis, and bungled into Parker, and we're still gonna be bad this year. OKC-like in a sense. But at some point you have to be able to make shrewd moves to construct a contender. OKC failed when they ditched Harden for crap. Hopefully in the coming years the Bucks can take what should be a solid core and mold it into something more.

Two thoughts then---

The thread title--should we tank the crap out of this year? That will mean some trades to dump some guys, might even mean you consider trading Sanders for future assets if that were possible.

On the Simmons/Lowe podcast earlier this week Simmons was ripping on OKC for not maximizing their window. Since hitting that hat trick on lotto picks, they haven't exactly killed it with their other roster moves.