What can we get for #8+Simmons?

Sigra · Post #1 » by **Sigra** » Sat Jun 14, 2008 8:09 am

If we are going in "win now" direction then I think it would be great first step to pack our pick with bad contract (Simmons) in order to get veteran help for Bogut and Redd. What could we get for that package? Kirk Hinrich? Richard Jefferson? Mile Miller? Any more ideas?

JoeHova · Post #2 » by **JoeHova** » Sat Jun 14, 2008 11:10 am

I would say that package is similar to the one that brought Zach Randolph to New York.

So, a similar, but less expensive, player. IE, an OK or even good player, but one who is widely seen as a cancer (or maybe an old or injury-prone player instead of a cancer). Maybe Ron Artest if he doesn't opt out and there are no better offers from other teams. Darko Milicic (not that he's a good player). TJ Ford, maybe. Wally Szczerbiak. Maybe Raja Bell depending on what Phoenix tries to do this summer. Maybe Drew Gooden if they're lucky.

I dunno, using the #8 to dump Bobby's contract might be smart if they think there are no good players available at that spot, but then how do they improve? I don't think this is a good year to try to package a broken-down guy with a pick because teams don't seem to love this draft beyond the top 2-3. I'm not sure the #8 has a ton of value especially if they package it with a washed up guy who still has 2 years left on his deal at over $20 million. Not sure why a team would want to pay $20 million and a good player in order to get a Brook Lopez or a DeAndre Jordan.

I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see them getting much for such a package. A rotation guy possibly, but not a 3rd or 4th option (uness they could get Artest. I see other teams offering more (or at least a shorter contract) for him though).

Chapter29 · Post #3 » by **Chapter29** » Sat Jun 14, 2008 11:59 am

Sigra wrote:If we are going in "win now" direction then I think it would be great first step to pack our pick with bad contract (Simmons) in order to get veteran help for Bogut and Redd. What could we get for that package? Kirk Hinrich? Richard Jefferson? Mile Miller? Any more ideas?

This is exactly what I hope we don't do. It basically accomplishes the loss of a bad contract, likely not much more is my guess and I would doubt the players you mention. Right now taking on Bobby Simmons would be a huge risk for a team.

If we can land any of those stated players for that package it would be a done deal.

I'm afraid that Simmons will likely be here this upcoming season. Obviously I would move him, but I must admit that part of me looks forward to seeing a potentially healthy Simmons. Essentially I am hoping to see the player we signed for a couple years ago. Those feet were an issue nearly right away and it sounds as though he may be healthy.

LISTEN2JAZZ · Post #4 » by **LISTEN2JAZZ** » Sat Jun 14, 2008 12:41 pm

Sigra, I think all the names you mention are realistic. Hinrich, Miller, Jefferson. Probably any of those three could be had, but Miller is both the best player of that group, and the most likely to be had since Memphis is in a complete rebuild.

Sigra · Post #5 » by **Sigra** » Sat Jun 14, 2008 12:53 pm

JoeHova,

I hope you are wrong as well. I think #8 has much more value then you think and I think Bobby's contract is not nearly as bad as you think. Bobby is working to get back to his preinjury form and I agree with Chapter that he may be even healthy right now. After this season he is expiring.

This is basicle #8 for veteran player (which make sense if we want to win insteed of develop) only Simmons have to be there as a filler. Offcourse, Bobby will lower the value of that package but still #8, even lowered with Bobby, could get us solid veteran like Hinrich, Jeferson or Miller IMO. You will note that I choised teams that could have interest to do that kind of deal

Sigra · Post #6 » by **Sigra** » Sat Jun 14, 2008 12:54 pm

adamcz wrote:Sigra, I think all the names you mention are realistic. Hinrich, Miller, Jefferson. Probably any of those three could be had, but Miller is both the best player of that group, and the most likely to be had since Memphis is in a complete rebuild.

I agree

Sigra · Post #7 » by **Sigra** » Sat Jun 14, 2008 12:56 pm

Chapter,

This:

Chapter29 wrote:This is exactly what I hope we don't do.

and this:

Chapter29 wrote:If we can land any of those stated players for that package it would be a done deal.

are like day and night. :-?

Chapter29 · Post #8 » by **Chapter29** » Sun Jun 15, 2008 11:54 am

Sigra,

I think you are misunderstanding me.

I hope we don't do that type of trade as I feel that we wont do much more than rid ourselves of a bad contract. I'd rather keep the bad contract and still have #8. I am not giving Hinrich for Simmons and 8 if I am the Bulls.

BUT

If I am wrong and we can get back a player like you mentioned then yes, absolutely I would do it.

And a complete forum layout change. Interesting.

worthlessBucks · Post #9 » by **worthlessBucks** » Sun Jun 15, 2008 12:15 pm

I'm hoping Hammond is opting for the young route, but I think those are the type of players that could be had for that package Sigra.

:offtopic:

It will take me awhile to get used to the new template and whatever new features exist here. I was shocked when I opened our forum to see this.

LISTEN2JAZZ · Post #10 » by **LISTEN2JAZZ** » Sun Jun 15, 2008 12:47 pm

Looks like we get a couple new smilies, and the archive of posts only goes back to Jan 08. I have no idea what else is new.

ETA: And it correctly displays the time of posts!

Isocleas2 · Post #11 » by **Isocleas2** » Sun Jun 15, 2008 2:09 pm

I still don't get why we should trade Simmons now. If we wanted to shed his bad contract we should have done it last year, or the year before. At this point were better off just sticking it out with him for one more season, then using his expiring contract as trade bait.

#8 + Gadz is a better package imo.

drew881 · Post #12 » by **drew881** » Sun Jun 15, 2008 5:28 pm

Using the number 8 to dump simmons is SUCH a stupid move. It doesn't really hurt us much to keep simmons next year. He doesn't have to play, and we should at least test him out in our new system and see if he can produce anything.

The next year, we trade his expiring pick with something else for a decent player. This is how you use your expirings. Trading number 8 with Gadz is a better idea if we can bring back an expiring or more established player, because Gadz still is on board for 1 more year than simmons.

Simmons is valuable to us. I don't see why we RUIN our draft by trying to unload him - we won't get anything good in return if a team wants to take back simmons

Bernman · Post #13 » by **Bernman** » Sun Jun 15, 2008 5:31 pm

This new forum is so bizarre!

I don't understand the logic of packaging Bobby w/ #8. All that will do is devalue the pick to the point where our return will be a borderline starter. Don't we have enough of those type of players?

It would make much more sense to attach another player of value with the #8 pick (Redd, Yi, maybe even Mo), and hope that .5 + .5 = 1 major difference maker (a Brand type, although on a longer contract than he is).

And if we were eager to move an albatross contract, the better option clearly would be to deal Gadzuric. Gadzuric isn't trying to recover from an injury, he just sucks. He'll never get any better, only worse with his unskilled style only predicated on athleticism and energy. The longer he stays the further his value declines. Meanwhile, Bobby was enough of a value a few offseasons ago to offer 9-10 million per or whatever. Give him an opportunity to keep recovering from his injury, and reap the potential return to form, either for our own team on court or through a trade as a commodity at a later date. Even if his plantar fascitis always is nagging he'll be an expiring soon enough. IT WOULDN'T BE PRUDENT TO TRADE BOBBY PERIOD.

A rebuilding team like Memphis doesn't want an albatross so they're mismatching pieces from the other direction also.

Screw you drew......you stole my thunder.....I was trying to make this post yesterday when the forum c-blocked me. My post is more relevant people. I definitely didn't try to piggyback his opinion. He's using telepathy to steal my thoughts.

Licensed to Il · Post #14 » by **Licensed to Il** » Sun Jun 15, 2008 6:01 pm

All valid points regarding the value of an expiring contract.

I think Sigra was pretty clear that packaging the #8 with Simmons was more for salary matching purposes than for any on court production Simmons would provide to another team. On its own, it would be hard to get anything other than a player in their rookie deal for the #8 (and match it cap wise). But with Simmons included, now we can pretty much start work out a deal for any player (give or take a throw in salary or two).

Normally I would be opposed to a move like this, as the draft is our biggest chance to add talent. But if a "better than average" tier player like Marion, Deng, Prince, Iguadala could be had for 8 and Simmons... I would like to think that Hammonds would consider it.

drew881 · Post #15 » by **drew881** » Sun Jun 15, 2008 6:15 pm

Bernman wrote:This new forum is so bizarre!

Screw you drew......you stole my thunder.....I was trying to make this post yesterday when the forum c-blocked me. My post is more relevant people. I definitely didn't try to piggyback his opinion. He's using telepathy to steal my thoughts.

Guess that new view before you post thing could have worked here

You put all of the points together more eloquently (and bizarre that we had them in the same order), but i got it out a bit more quickly

Oh well, good to see that someone realizes packaging Bobby is not the answer. he is one of our best assets going into next year. Since we can't bring lure people in free agency, using an expiring is the next best thing. Its up to the team now to make some changes (Mo or Redd for another solid player) and then use Bobby the year after (maybe then with a draft pick) to bring in a good or decent player that makes us a solid playoff team.

Sigra · Post #16 » by **Sigra** » Sun Jun 15, 2008 7:12 pm

Will Perdude wrote:I think Sigra was pretty clear that packaging the #8 with Simmons was more for salary matching purposes than for any on court production Simmons would provide to another team. On its own, it would be hard to get anything other than a player in their rookie deal for the #8 (and match it cap wise). But with Simmons included, now we can pretty much start work out a deal for any player (give or take a throw in salary or two).

Exactly. This is not about dumping Simmons. He is there only for salary reasons. This is about geting veteran help insteed of rookie. If Bucks are really in win now mode then they will not have patience to wait for rookie to grow up. I don't see superstar at #8 anyway. Some rebuilding team could give us their veteran (Miller or Jefferson) for rookie. Simmons is only there for salary matching purposes.

Bernman · Post #17 » by **Bernman** » Sun Jun 15, 2008 7:29 pm

Sigra wrote:
Will Perdude wrote:I think Sigra was pretty clear that packaging the #8 with Simmons was more for salary matching purposes than for any on court production Simmons would provide to another team. On its own, it would be hard to get anything other than a player in their rookie deal for the #8 (and match it cap wise). But with Simmons included, now we can pretty much start work out a deal for any player (give or take a throw in salary or two).

Exactly. This is not about dumping Simmons. He is there only for salary reasons. This is about geting veteran help insteed of rookie. If Bucks are really in win now mode then they will not have patience to wait for rookie to grow up. I don't see superstar at #8 anyway. Some rebuilding team could give us their veteran (Miller or Jefferson) for rookie. Simmons is only there for salary matching purposes.

Why not include Maurice for salary reasons? Gadzuric for salary reasons? Even Redd? Combine two players to equal around Simmons' salary like Bell + Dez. Simmons isn't the only player who makes a significant salary on the team. All of the suggestions I made would either increase the value of our return or at least allow us to rid ourselves of a player who definitely won't become an asset in the future (Gadzuric). The latter of which as I said I wouldn't be in favor of because we can't do anything in free agency anyways.

Sigra · Post #18 » by **Sigra** » Mon Jun 16, 2008 2:26 am

Bernman wrote:
Why not include Maurice for salary reasons? Gadzuric for salary reasons? Even Redd? Combine two players to equal around Simmons' salary like Bell + Dez. Simmons isn't the only player who makes a significant salary on the team. All of the suggestions I made would either increase the value of our return

Offcourse and I am talking about that all off season. I would like to get more. But the reality is that we can use #8 as asset only to teams that want to rebuild. That teams usualy doesn't have superstars or all-stars to trade therefore we don't need to increase the value of our packet to get their players. Memphis and Miller is good example. Miller is only player in Memphis (rebuilding team) that make sense for us if we want to win now. And we can probably have him for #8 and Simmons. No need to increase the value of our package because there is no way we increase the value of return. Same with Nets and Jafferson.

But, again, I am big fan of trading #8 together with Redd to get player better than Redd. I just don't see what kind of team would do that.