Trade on Bobcats Board

[Bernman]

Call me delusional, but I would not give up Sessions under most circumstances. I'd trade him for pick #3 (Mayo) on a stand alone deal. I would not trade Sessions even up for pick #4 or lower.

You're delusional.

[REDDzone]

Call me delusional

Delusional.



So you're essentially saying you wouldn't trade Sessions straight up for Love or Mayo?

Because that is essentially what it boils down to IMO.

[paulpressey25]

So you're essentially saying you wouldn't trade Sessions straight up for Love or Mayo?

I'd trade Sessions straight up for pick #3 (Mayo). Implied in that is the obvious of picks 1 an 2 (Rose and Beasley).

But I'd rather have Sessions than Love, Bayless, Gordon, etc. I don't care how crappy his competition was. The numbers he put up in his starts was insane. Chris Paul-esque.

[Johnny Newman]

CV and Sessions

for

Adam Morrison and #9

Draft
#8 Westbrook
#9 Randolph
# 37 Hudson

Maybe delegate Mo to 6th man

Westbrook/Mo/Hudson
Redd/Mo/Mason/Hudson
Morrison/Simmon/Illyasova
Yi/Randolph/Gadz
Bogut/Gadz

I prefer to keep Sessions.

[Nowak008]

Call me delusional

Delusional.



So you're essentially saying you wouldn't trade Sessions straight up for Love or Mayo?

Because that is essentially what it boils down to IMO.

He said he would deal him for Mayo. I'd do Sessions + #8 for #3. Other then that I have no idea what his value is.

[REDDzone]

To me Sessions is the biggest wildcard/question mark on this team. Who knows what we have with him as an asset.

If we trade him, a year from now we could be kicking ourselves for giving up a talented young PG with some actual size and pass-first instinct.

On the other hand, we could always keep him, have him turn into a complete bust, and wish we had sold high to a GM who saw nothing but those assist numbers in garbage time in a garbage Bucks season.

[Simulack]

If Sessions could move us from 8 to 3 to get Mayo, I'd do it. Maybe we regret it when Sessions proves his mind-blowing stats toward the end of last season were no fluke on a new team. But personally I'd be more worried about Mayo turning into the all-star type talent he's been projected to be since he was in the 7th grade and us thinking: "****, the inclusion of a 2nd round draft pick was the deal breaker or we could have had this guy!"

The Sessions talk is an interesting question. If you guys had to translate his value into a pick in this years draft, what would it be?

[Wise1]

Call me delusional, but I would not give up Sessions under most circumstances. I'd trade him for pick #3 (Mayo) on a stand alone deal. I would not trade Sessions even up for pick #4 or lower.

A bird in hand....

[NeedsMoreCheese]

The prospect of watching Adam Morrison play basketball in Milwaukee makes my stomach turn.

Yeah thats another one of those transactions where the urge to kick Kohl in the nuts with some sort of steel toed boot would be nearly impossible to resist.

[NeedsMoreCheese]

So you're essentially saying you wouldn't trade Sessions straight up for Love or Mayo?

I'd trade Sessions straight up for pick #3 (Mayo). Implied in that is the obvious of picks 1 an 2 (Rose and Beasley).

But I'd rather have Sessions than Love, Bayless, Gordon, etc. I don't care how crappy his competition was. The numbers he put up in his starts was insane. Chris Paul-esque.

Obvious? Have you not noticed all the huge signs and hints that have Riley picking Mayo?

[jeremyd236]

Why are we even discussing this deal or deals like it?

The Bucks are not trying to get younger. This has been reported several times. The Bucks are not going to trade players with great potential for a draft pick. If anything, we're going to trade that potential for proven players.

For once I absolutely agree with you. The Bucks no longer have the luxury to build for the future. We need to see a sharp two-year turnaround, and adding more lotto picks won't accomplish that.

veterans > young prospects > draft picks

For once? I don't usually offer my opinion on here, I just try to keep people level headed. Like when they say Redd isn't a top 50 player in the league, that's just dumb. So I say it's dumb. Or like when people say we need to trade all of our players for unproven rookies instead of proven veterans

Truth is I don't have much of an opinion on the current Bucks team. I know they have to stop getting in the lottery every single year, because that never amounts to a great future no matter what people think. I've just been so disappointed in this Bucks franchise over the last 5 or so years. Hopefully the Hammond era with a real NBA coach (Skiles) will make a difference.

[El Duderino]

Why are we even discussing this deal or deals like it?

The Bucks are not trying to get younger. This has been reported several times. The Bucks are not going to trade players with great potential for a draft pick. If anything, we're going to trade that potential for proven players.

For once I absolutely agree with you. The Bucks no longer have the luxury to build for the future. We need to see a sharp two-year turnaround, and adding more lotto picks won't accomplish that.

veterans > young prospects > draft picks

I sure hope Hammond doesn't share these beliefs that the team can't build for the future, that kind of narrow thinking is often how sports franchises never get over the hump. Instead of accepting that a team really stinks and is going to need time to rebuild it properly if the intention is to become a legit contender, impatience sets in and band-aid type of moves get made that lack long term thinking all in the rush to win a few extra games that are meaningless in the grand scheme of things. Then two years later when the team is still only a fringe playoff team at best, along with not being young with much upside growth either, the franchise is still stuck in the mud with little hope to contend anytime soon.

That was the Brewers plan way to long. Instead of rebuilding fully and properly, they'd bring in vets that did little to make them a contender, but the team was trying to appease frustrated fans over doing what needed to be done and being honest with fans by telling them rebuilding was needed and would take time.

I'm not 100% against bringing in vets at the expense of higher upside youth, but it has to come with a realistic plan for a few years from now vs just mainly trying to be better next season.

[MilBucksBackOnTop06]

Adam Morrison...

Eh, I don't know. Too soft. Talented yes but a Scott Skiles guy. I would rather have Sean May if he was healthy.
This Westbrook of which you all speak, I don't know...

Randolph? Hell no.

You got too many of the same type of players with him and Yi. Now you add Morrison and Ilyasova to Randolph?

That is real light in the a-- type players with no basketball IQ! You are not building a college team man, this is an NBA team!

You can move Mo to Miami for Haslem and there you go. But no, I pass on this one.

[NeedsMoreCheese]

Why are we even discussing this deal or deals like it?

The Bucks are not trying to get younger. This has been reported several times. The Bucks are not going to trade players with great potential for a draft pick. If anything, we're going to trade that potential for proven players.

For once I absolutely agree with you. The Bucks no longer have the luxury to build for the future. We need to see a sharp two-year turnaround, and adding more lotto picks won't accomplish that.

veterans > young prospects > draft picks

I sure hope Hammond doesn't share these beliefs that the team can't build for the future, that kind of narrow thinking is often how sports franchises never get over the hump. Instead of accepting that a team really stinks and is going to need time to rebuild it properly if the intention is to become a legit contender, impatience sets in and band-aid type of moves get made that lack long term thinking all in the rush to win a few extra games that are meaningless in the grand scheme of things. Then two years later when the team is still only a fringe playoff team at best, along with not being young with much upside growth either, the franchise is still stuck in the mud with little hope to contend anytime soon.

That was the Brewers plan way to long. Instead of rebuilding fully and properly, they'd bring in vets that did little to make them a contender, but the team was trying to appease frustrated fans over doing what needed to be done and being honest with fans by telling them rebuilding was needed and would take time.

I'm not 100% against bringing in vets at the expense of higher upside youth, but it has to come with a realistic plan for a few years from now vs just mainly trying to be better next season.

Yeah generally that sounds good. But then I thought about it a bit and theres a few things here,

Boston Celtics 07/08 champs - Traded away most of their youth and a top 5 pick for a win now situation. Filled out roster with role players and some second round selections that turned out to be very good for them

Miami Heat 05/06 champs - Traded away a 24 and a 23 year old (at the time of the deal) who are both easily the 2nd best player on most NBA teams for a 32 year old SuperStar who was declining and filled out the roster with cheap vets in their 30's


Redd isnt even close to Pierce or Wade, but trade for a more complete team to add to his surroundings and theres no reason he cant be on a contender. This half assed Rebuild, half assed win now **** definitely isnt working. You need to pick one. (Im not saying trade all future picks and anyone under 24 away), I'm saying you cant win with just young guys, especially ones that will take a few years to be useful to a playoff team. Which is why the bucks are looking to move Mo, CV, and the 8 for some pieces that can help now. Theyre keeping Redd and Bogut but other than that anyone is available.