RealGM

Hey, I am just wondering what your team would offer for the following bucks players straight up or a package deal.

Choose 1 or more:

-Greg Monroe
-John Henson
-Matthew Dellavedova
-Mirza Teletovic
-Spencer Hawes
-Rashad Vaughn

Really interested in any offer for these players on the bucks as I view them all as expendable.

Hmmmm.

Monroe, Hawes and Vaughn have some value as expiring contracts. Monroe offers some value on the floor too (honestly if I were the Bucks I'd keep him around for my bench). Hawes and Vaughn are probably negative value (maybe Vaughn is neutral just because of how small his contract is).

Henson's overpaid, not that good, and plays the least valuable position in the NBA. Think he's negative value.

Delly's not that good—his value entirely depends on how he goes this year. He's probably negative value.

Teletovic the same, but if he can get back to where he was with shooting he could be a lesser version of Ryno for someone.

Of all those guys, Teletovic is the only one I'd be interested in. Maybe McD/Singler/2nd? I'd love to send out Kanter and get Telly/a cheap center back, but doubt that would happen.

Agreed with much of what Andre said.

I'd do a Wes Matthews/Saleh Mejri for Monroe swap in a heartbeat if I were the Mavs brass, but would assume it's not enough considering Monroe is expiring. Not sure if a Devin Harris-Spencer Hawes addition to that trade makes it easier to swallow, but I'd be fine with either scenario. Bucks get a 3&D wing in Matthews who has local ties to the area and known for his vet leadership, Mejri is a very serviceable and cheap backup. Dallas gets out of Wes' contract and Monroe can give them a body as a backup big that may help force Noel's hand into signing the contract.

As a Jazz fan, I quite like Monroe, I hate Henson less than most, and we'd have roles for Delly and Telly. (No real interest in the last two.)

The problem with all of them is their contracts. They'd all be backups at best on Utah and I wouldn't be interested in paying them their current deals.

Leuer for Henson? About the same salary. Henson stats make him look like a rim protector but is he?

OP, you are right to view them as expendable... the problem is the rest of the league does as well. I don't think any of these guys could be traded for a significant asset (including Monroe who's actually good) and many are negative contracts. Given that it's hard the answer the OPs question without knowing what the plan is. Just cut salary? Get back another viable player in a different role? It's unclear.

There's probably a team that would give an expiring and a decent 2nd rounder for Monroe... but Monroe is still your best big. I don't see why you'd dump him for that only to create a huge whole at center.

Telly and Delly are serviceable NBA rotation players, but are bad contracts. So if you want to take back a bad contract there are probably options, but you're definitely not getting assets back. Also right now you need Delly as a back PG and Telly is in the rotation at least until Parker is back. Honestly, if you didn't have those guys and someone else was asking who might want them... the Bucks would be high on the list.

Vaughn and Hawes are owed little enough that they could be moved but certainly Hawes and probably Vaughn would have to have a small asset attached. No one is taking them thinking they are going to play. If you want to dump them it's probably easier to buy them out.

Henson is a third center, in a league where 3rd centers aren't even on the 12 man roster on a lot of teams and he's still owed over $30M. I think you have to attach a thinly protected first that has a chance to be pretty good or two late firsts to move him.

MotownMadness wrote:Leuer for Henson? About the same salary. Henson stats make him look like a rim protector but is he?

If I was the Bucks I'd jump all over that.

I think my question for the OP is, would the Bucks have any use for Evan Turner and which of those guys do the Bucks prioritize as the ones they want traded the most?

loserX wrote:As a Jazz fan, I quite like Monroe, I hate Henson less than most, and we'd have roles for Delly and Telly. (No real interest in the last two.)

The problem with all of them is their contracts. They'd all be backups at best on Utah and I wouldn't be interested in paying them their current deals.

Something around Burks for Delly or Telly could make sense if they wanted those guys and they thought Burks was done. Basically take on an extra year to get a better player.

But is Telly better than Johnson or Jerebko? I think Delly is better than Exum/Neto but are the Jazz willing to punt on Exum yet?

Maybe mid year if Exum is a total disaster and Kidd hates Delly and believes he can reform Burks as a PG?

Myth wrote:I think my question for the OP is, would the Bucks have any use for Evan Turner and which of those guys do the Bucks prioritize as the ones they want traded the most?

Turner makes a strange amount of sense as a backup point forward playing 15 mpg behind Giannis.

Henson for Turner actually I think could make sense for the Bucks... but after the Crabbe trade Portland kind of needs Turner to give them minutes.

Golabki wrote:

Myth wrote:I think my question for the OP is, would the Bucks have any use for Evan Turner and which of those guys do the Bucks prioritize as the ones they want traded the most?

Turner makes a strange amount of sense as a backup point forward playing 15 mpg behind Giannis.

Henson for Turner actually I think could make sense for the Bucks... but after the Crabbe trade Portland kind of needs Turner to give them minutes.

I don't know how other Blazer fans feel, but I'd be down with Henson for Turner. We would then have to go find a cheap free agent backup SG, but I'm fine with that. I'm guessing Hawes would need thrown in to make salaries work. Blazers could waive Hawes for all I care.

How far off is and who says no to a Turner for Henson and Hawes deal?

Mamba4Goat wrote:How far off is and who says no to a Turner for Henson and Hawes deal?

Adding roughly 8 million to our cap number in 18-19 and 19-20 makes very little sense to me.

Something centered around Turner/Napier/ for Teletovic/Henson makes more sense for MKE if they think Turner is a good fit here. Portland shaves 8 million from their number in 19-20 and Milwaukee gets under the Luxury Tax this season. With that being said, I'm still dont think MKE makes that deal. Turner is an eyesore for sure.

What are the Bucks in need of?

skones wrote:

Mamba4Goat wrote:How far off is and who says no to a Turner for Henson and Hawes deal?

Adding roughly 8 million to our cap number in 18-19 and 19-20 makes very little sense to me.

Something centered around Turner/Napier/ for Teletovic/Henson makes more sense for MKE if they think Turner is a good fit here. Portland shaves 8 million from their number in 19-20 and Milwaukee gets under the Luxury Tax this season. With that being said, I'm still dont think MKE makes that deal. Turner is an eyesore for sure.

I don't think that combo will make sense for Portland given Portland seems to be trying to get under luxury tax this season themselves, because the next year we will definitely be over the luxury tax, so I think there is a goal of avoiding the repeater tax, which is only possible if they get under now. With the Henson/Hawes deal, Portland mildly takes on immediate salary, but not enough to truly hurt the goal of getting under the tax, but a Teletovic/Henson deal makes it much more challenging for Portland to do that.

Myth wrote:

skones wrote:

Mamba4Goat wrote:How far off is and who says no to a Turner for Henson and Hawes deal?

Adding roughly 8 million to our cap number in 18-19 and 19-20 makes very little sense to me.

Something centered around Turner/Napier/ for Teletovic/Henson makes more sense for MKE if they think Turner is a good fit here. Portland shaves 8 million from their number in 19-20 and Milwaukee gets under the Luxury Tax this season. With that being said, I'm still dont think MKE makes that deal. Turner is an eyesore for sure.

I don't think that combo will make sense for Portland given Portland seems to be trying to get under luxury tax this season themselves, because the next year we will definitely be over the luxury tax, so I think there is a goal of avoiding the repeater tax, which is only possible if they get under now. With the Henson/Hawes deal, Portland mildly takes on immediate salary, but not enough to truly hurt the goal of getting under the tax, but a Teletovic/Henson deal makes it much more challenging for Portland to do that.

So there's an impasse. I wouldn't call taking on 300k "mildly taking on immediate salary." It's a negligible jump. There's no real incentive to just do a straight Henson/Hawes deal. They get the worse contract, take on salary, and see no benefit.

Julius Randle, Top 10 protected 2021 pick, and Loul Deng for Monroe.

Lost Angel wrote:Julius Randle, Top 10 protected 2021 pick, and Loul Deng for Monroe.

Nobody is taking on Deng for a protected pick in 2021, let alone taking him on and giving up the best player in the deal.

skones wrote:

Lost Angel wrote:Julius Randle, Top 10 protected 2021 pick, and Loul Deng for Monroe.

Nobody is taking on Deng for a protected pick in 2021, let alone taking him on and giving up the best player in the deal.

Randle is better than Monroe. RealGM has a weird perception of his game. Now that he has a stretch 5 in Lopez and a real point guard in Lonzo everyone will see he has true talent.

I'd do top 5 protected on the pick, but would never, ever consider trading an unprotected pick.

I think Monroe sucks, and just want him for the expiring aspect.

Lost Angel wrote:

skones wrote:

Lost Angel wrote:Julius Randle, Top 10 protected 2021 pick, and Loul Deng for Monroe.

Nobody is taking on Deng for a protected pick in 2021, let alone taking him on and giving up the best player in the deal.

Randle is better than Monroe. RealGM has a weird perception of his game. Now that he has a stretch 5 in Lopez and a real point guard in Lonzo everyone will see he has true talent.

I'd do top 5 protected on the pick, but would never, ever consider trading an unprotected pick.

I think Monroe sucks, and just want him for the expiring aspect.

You're very very wrong on both accounts and you can't really make a case for Randle being better.

The Lakers are 7.4 points better per 100 possessions with Randle off the floor than on. He's less efficient than Monroe. He's far worse defensively. WS/BPM/VORP/RPM all show substantial advantages in favor of Monroe. It's not even close.