ImageImage

Hammond Comments: Boston Model?

Moderators: paulpressey25, MickeyDavis

User avatar
JimmyTheKid
General Manager
Posts: 8,869
And1: 5,099
Joined: Feb 10, 2009

Re: Hammond Comments: Boston Model? 

Post#81 » by JimmyTheKid » Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:20 pm

DocHoliday wrote:Westbrook wasn't a "no-brainer" pick


Neither was Harden
User avatar
LUKE23
RealGM
Posts: 72,264
And1: 6,213
Joined: May 26, 2005
Location: Stunville
       

Re: Hammond Comments: Boston Model? 

Post#82 » by LUKE23 » Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:21 pm

GHOSTofSIKMA wrote:maybe i shouldnt have said harden and westbrook were no brainers..... thats maybe not fair. durant was the one no brainer.

a better description would be that he picked players projected to go in the range they got picked. that was his shining moment..... he didnt blow it by reaching for guys further down the board.


And by sticking to a long-term plan, and scouting well, and not adding any bad contracts, and amassing young assets/picks to make future moves.

The Bucks method has worked out much better for sure.
Sigra
RealGM
Posts: 15,160
And1: 1,221
Joined: Sep 08, 2005
Location: Sarajevo, Bosnia
     

Re: Hammond Comments: Boston Model? 

Post#83 » by Sigra » Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:21 pm

JimmyTheKid wrote:
LUKE23 wrote:Besides drafting Durant, Westbrook, Harden, Ibaka, trading Green for Perkins, and trading a mid 20's 1st for an elite wing defender in Sefolosha, and amassing multiple 1sts wherever possible, I agree, Presti has done very little of significant impact.


:lol:

Durant was the ONLY no-brainer on that list.


Durant was no-brainer as you say. Westbrook was mistake IMO (Love was aviable).

Harden and Ibaka were great picks indeed.

Trading for Perkins mistake. Trading Harden mistake. Coach choise mistake. Everything else mistake.

Harden and Ibaka picks made them look inteligent. Everyting else blah.
GHOSTofSIKMA
RealGM
Posts: 21,628
And1: 7,926
Joined: Jan 21, 2007
Location: NC
     

Re: Hammond Comments: Boston Model? 

Post#84 » by GHOSTofSIKMA » Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:28 pm

LUKE23 wrote:
And Green for Perkins is lateral? Green added nothing of value, while Perkins is a really good defender. Westbrook/Harden/Durant/Ibaka/Perkins/Sefolosha are guys that would be in the top 8 of any rotation in the league, and Presti acquired all of them


i know perkins and sefolosha play good defense. :roll:

he gave up the return on prime ray allen, and the pick that became taj gibson to get them. go ahead and give the guy an award for his amazing moves to fill out the roster if you want to. i know presti is a god to you. lets just move on.
User avatar
LUKE23
RealGM
Posts: 72,264
And1: 6,213
Joined: May 26, 2005
Location: Stunville
       

Re: Hammond Comments: Boston Model? 

Post#85 » by LUKE23 » Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:31 pm

GHOSTofSIKMA wrote:he gave the return on ray allen, and the pick that became taj gibson to get them. go ahead and give the guy an award for his amazing lateral moves to fill out the roster if you want to. i know presti is a god to you. lets just move on.


I'm not the one saying crazy things here. Lets remember that you are a person that has lauded the work Hammond has done to ridiculous levels, even though we're well under .500 under his watch, and are now taking all the work Presti has done and basically boiling it all down to luck. I'm fine moving on, just stop saying ridiculous ****.
4xBuck
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,917
And1: 569
Joined: Sep 07, 2009

Re: Hammond Comments: Boston Model? 

Post#86 » by 4xBuck » Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:32 pm

LUKE23 wrote:Besides drafting Durant, Westbrook, Harden, Ibaka, trading Green for Perkins, and trading a mid 20's 1st for an elite wing defender in Sefolosha, and amassing multiple 1sts wherever possible, I agree, Presti has done very little of significant impact.


No doubt OKC has done it the right way, also liking how Cleveland is doing it now.

But, OKC also got lucky, which is OK… If OKC gets Beasley rather than Durant, they’re no better than Denver & Utah- two other teams doing it right but not lucky enough to land a franchise player.
User avatar
Kerb Hohl
RealGM
Posts: 34,466
And1: 4,155
Joined: Jun 17, 2005
Location: Hmmmm...how many 1sts would Jason Richardson cost...?

Re: Hammond Comments: Boston Model? 

Post#87 » by Kerb Hohl » Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:33 pm

Image
GHOSTofSIKMA
RealGM
Posts: 21,628
And1: 7,926
Joined: Jan 21, 2007
Location: NC
     

Re: Hammond Comments: Boston Model? 

Post#88 » by GHOSTofSIKMA » Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:34 pm

LUKE23 wrote:

The Bucks method has worked out much better for sure.


i know. we tanked the wrong years and didnt trade guys like redd and bogut for nothing in order to suck and tank in even more years :x
4xBuck
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,917
And1: 569
Joined: Sep 07, 2009

Re: Hammond Comments: Boston Model? 

Post#89 » by 4xBuck » Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:38 pm

E-Buck wrote:Hammond is an idiot if he doesn't realize that he just lacks an eye for talent. A prime example was taking Henson instead of J.Lamb. Like why?


You’re power whining is gonna fit right in around here. All the cool chicks love to turn every thread into a bitch fest.

Well done!
User avatar
LUKE23
RealGM
Posts: 72,264
And1: 6,213
Joined: May 26, 2005
Location: Stunville
       

Re: Hammond Comments: Boston Model? 

Post#90 » by LUKE23 » Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:43 pm

GHOSTofSIKMA wrote:
i know. we tanked the wrong years and didnt trade guys like redd and bogut for nothing in order to suck and tank in even more years :x


And signed Gooden. And signed Salmons. And traded for Maggette. And traded for Jax while moving down in the draft 12 spots. And refused to clear Redd and RJ for full salary relief. And wasted assets we weren't going to keep anyway (Sessions) even when we could have gotten good assets back.

I will give Hammond some credit, overall he's drafted well with respect to draft position. Overall his FA work has been pretty bad. His trades for the most part have been either lateral or have hurt us (Jax, Maggette). But hey, it's just all bad luck anyway, right?
GHOSTofSIKMA
RealGM
Posts: 21,628
And1: 7,926
Joined: Jan 21, 2007
Location: NC
     

Re: Hammond Comments: Boston Model? 

Post#91 » by GHOSTofSIKMA » Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:44 pm

LUKE23 wrote:
GHOSTofSIKMA wrote:he gave the return on ray allen, and the pick that became taj gibson to get them. go ahead and give the guy an award for his amazing lateral moves to fill out the roster if you want to. i know presti is a god to you. lets just move on.


I'm not the one saying crazy things here. Lets remember that you are a person that has lauded the work Hammond has done to ridiculous levels, even though we're well under .500 under his watch, and are now taking all the work Presti has done and basically boiling it all down to luck. I'm fine moving on, just stop saying ridiculous ****.


i was going to move on until you called what i say ridiculous sht. thats low man!

see you in the game thread. we win this then 5-2 and hammond for prez :wink:
randy84
RealGM
Posts: 23,904
And1: 6,376
Joined: Jul 01, 2006

Re: Hammond Comments: Boston Model? 

Post#92 » by randy84 » Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:46 pm

I think the big point that people are missing on this is that two different approaches were taken by the Thunder and the Celtics at the same time.

Thunder decided to blow it up and built through draft, Celtics decided to built a team by trading for veterans.
GHOSTofSIKMA
RealGM
Posts: 21,628
And1: 7,926
Joined: Jan 21, 2007
Location: NC
     

Re: Hammond Comments: Boston Model? 

Post#93 » by GHOSTofSIKMA » Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:47 pm

joking about hammond btw... i like him alright but when i see him monday night im gonna lay into him a bit if i get the chance.
GHOSTofSIKMA
RealGM
Posts: 21,628
And1: 7,926
Joined: Jan 21, 2007
Location: NC
     

Re: Hammond Comments: Boston Model? 

Post#94 » by GHOSTofSIKMA » Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:49 pm

randy84 wrote:I think the big point that people are missing on this is that two different approaches were taken by the Thunder and the Celtics at the same time.

Thunder decided to blow it up and built through draft, Celtics decided to built a team by trading for veterans.


thats been our biggest mistake. weve not tanked, and weve gone for 2nd rate vets by not offering players AND picks. weve been straddling the fence.
User avatar
Badgerlander
RealGM
Posts: 26,398
And1: 6,970
Joined: Jun 29, 2007
     

Re: Hammond Comments: Boston Model? 

Post#95 » by Badgerlander » Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:53 pm

GHOSTofSIKMA wrote:thats been our biggest mistake. weve not tanked, and weve gone for 2nd rate vets by not offering players AND picks. weve been straddling the fence.


You mean like giving the Bobcats the 7th pick in the draft AND Maggette for Jax and the 19th pick?
Shoot, Move, and Communicate...

Spoiler:

I'm just here for my own amusement,"don't take offense at my innuendo..."


Countless waze, we pass the daze...

A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men.
GHOSTofSIKMA
RealGM
Posts: 21,628
And1: 7,926
Joined: Jan 21, 2007
Location: NC
     

Re: Hammond Comments: Boston Model? 

Post#96 » by GHOSTofSIKMA » Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:59 pm

DocHoliday wrote:
GHOSTofSIKMA wrote:thats been our biggest mistake. weve not tanked, and weve gone for 2nd rate vets by not offering players AND picks. weve been straddling the fence.


You mean like giving the Bobcats the 7th pick in the draft AND Maggette for Jax and the 19th pick?


we could have gone bigger than that. we could have offered maggette/ #7/ ersan / and a future pick....or bogut/ #7...... go for a move the way houston did. get a bigtime player.

i dont think we offered enough and thats why we got back guys like jackson. jackson was trash but whats weird is he really wasnt just the year before. he was monta level just older.
User avatar
Baddy Chuck
RealGM
Posts: 49,544
And1: 22,612
Joined: Apr 18, 2006
 

Re: Hammond Comments: Boston Model? 

Post#97 » by Baddy Chuck » Wed Nov 14, 2012 11:05 pm

GHOSTofSIKMA wrote:jackson was trash but whats weird is he really wasnt just the year before. he was monta level just older.

He was a lot worse here but he was a ridiculously high usage player with bad shooting percetanges in Charlotte. There's a reason why guys like Maggette, Jackson, Monta etc can't replicate previous numbers with us, they can't play team basketball.
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
CanadaBucks
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,374
And1: 314
Joined: Sep 14, 2012

Re: Hammond Comments: Boston Model? 

Post#98 » by CanadaBucks » Wed Nov 14, 2012 11:06 pm

DocHoliday wrote:You mean like giving the Bobcats the 7th pick in the draft AND Maggette for Jax and the 19th pick?

Was this not a three way trade? Because if it wasn't you would have to give him huge credit for turning Salmons and 10 into beno and 7 right? I think ina ll truth we never had 7, we essentially traded Salmons, maggette and 10 for Jax, Beno and 19. I'll agree that if he doesn't sign Maggette and Salmons this trade is not made but let's not leave out half of the picture
bizarro
RealGM
Posts: 14,782
And1: 7,290
Joined: Jul 13, 2005

Re: Hammond Comments: Boston Model? 

Post#99 » by bizarro » Wed Nov 14, 2012 11:11 pm

4xBuck wrote:
LUKE23 wrote:Besides drafting Durant, Westbrook, Harden, Ibaka, trading Green for Perkins, and trading a mid 20's 1st for an elite wing defender in Sefolosha, and amassing multiple 1sts wherever possible, I agree, Presti has done very little of significant impact.


No doubt OKC has done it the right way, also liking how Cleveland is doing it now.

But, OKC also got lucky, which is OK… If OKC gets Beasley rather than Durant, they’re no better than Denver & Utah- two other teams doing it right but not lucky enough to land a franchise player.


I think this is another feather in the cap of OKC and it is also a testament to getting the right pick in the right draft. If you look at who Cleveland has drafted beyond Kyrie - who like Durant was the unanimous choice in their slot - they've reached in a draft with sub-par talent. OKC wisely selected Westbrook and Harden. Yes, as Sigra pointed out, they could have drafted Love who is a complete stud BUT then they lack an elite PG.

Thompson was and is a reach. Though it was a weaker draft, they could have potentially traded back and/or selected a different player. Who that player is, well, it's a tough sell. Do you really select Leonard @ 4 or Klay Thompson...potentially, Valenciunas. Waiter was a complete reach. Though he has had a couple nice shooting nights I really don't like his game alongside Kyrie. I would have preferred any one of Lillard, Drummond, Ross or Barnes at that slot.

I think, in the end, OKC was wise with their picks AND they had the picks in quality drafts AND they had a bit of luck...for example, in 2009 Memphis selected Thabeet :o
User avatar
Badgerlander
RealGM
Posts: 26,398
And1: 6,970
Joined: Jun 29, 2007
     

Re: Hammond Comments: Boston Model? 

Post#100 » by Badgerlander » Wed Nov 14, 2012 11:19 pm

CanadaBucks wrote:
DocHoliday wrote:You mean like giving the Bobcats the 7th pick in the draft AND Maggette for Jax and the 19th pick?

Was this not a three way trade? Because if it wasn't you would have to give him huge credit for turning Salmons and 10 into beno and 7 right? I think ina ll truth we never had 7, we essentially traded Salmons, maggette and 10 for Jax, Beno and 19. I'll agree that if he doesn't sign Maggette and Salmons this trade is not made but let's not leave out half of the picture

It didn't need to be a 3 way trade, and yes the trade of Salmons+10 for Beno+7 was an AMAZING trade, which makes the trade with the Bobcats look like even more of a colossal failure. The potential of Tobias is really the only thing that keeps it from being a complete bust. Also we didn't sign Maggette, that was another Hammond trade bust.
Shoot, Move, and Communicate...

Spoiler:

I'm just here for my own amusement,"don't take offense at my innuendo..."


Countless waze, we pass the daze...

A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men.

Return to Milwaukee Bucks