Post#55 » by old skool » Thu Feb 14, 2008 1:10 am
I think that Larry Harris will have a very difficult time getting top value - even decent value - for Bucks' players. The team's performance over the past four seasons makes that a difficult proposition.
I think that the biggest risk that the Bucks run is jettisoning their young players too soon. The pitfall of the youth movement in the NBA is that so many young players languish through their rookie contracts and blossom after moving on to other teams. T-Mac, Jermaine O'Neal, Chauncy Billups, Steve Nash. To a lesser degree, Ron Artest, Elton Brand.
The other problem is that they surround their good young players with other young players, and the team never develops. For years, that was the challenge facing the Clippers, and the Bulls. Until recently, the Hawks. To some extent the Grizzlies and T-Wolves, except for the rare season when those teams went deep into the playoffs.
Those teams don't make it out of their doldrums by making trades. More often than not, they progress by staying the course. Of course, staying the course is risky. Progress is not guaranteed. The team can remain sucky.
I think that the Bucks best chance for significant improvement is to keep the current core together and let them develop. I think that approach, as maddening as it may be, offers the best hope for POSSIBLY improving their talent level.
I would pursue trades, and make one if a clear winner can be found. But I would not trade a key young player (Bogut, Yi, Mo, and to some extent CV) unless the deal is clearly weighted in the Bucks favor.
Trading Redd is fools gold. One thing is nearly certain in the NBA - the team that trades away the best individual player in a given trade almost always loses out. The team receiving the best player almost always comes out ahead. I have no trouble trading Redd, but it should be for a player of comparable ability - not picks and cap space.
I would also forget about cap space. That never works. You cannot ignore contracts in the NBA, but the Bucks don't lose games because Gadzuric and Simmons have big contracts that don't expire for several years. They lose games because Gadz and Simmons are not playing better. It takes better players not better contracts.
Blowing up the roster cannot be done in a vaccuum. The team would be improved just by benching Yi. But the Bucks are committed to developing a young player who might become a star. Also, the Bucks have a rookie coach, learning on the fly. I don't think that Larry Krystkowiak is the coach to rebuild a team. I think that his hiring was a committment to developing the team steadily, with the players and coaches learning together.
Teams can improve their performance without improving their talent significantly. Look at the Hornets. They have made a major leap in the standings with a roster that could not perform near that level a year ago. Look at the Blazers. They turned it around in the flick of an eye- Nate McMillan said that he stopped coaching them so hard and just let them play - that's his explanation for their sudden turn around. Look at the Raptors of a year ago. They went from lottery to top of their division in a couple of months.
I would feel better about continuing to develop the young core if the Bucks had a veteran coach in place. But massive roster turnover for the sake of massive roster turnover, is pointless. Besides, it remains to be seen if the reasonable trades proposed by some people - like Europa at the top of this thread - can come to pass. There are too many wildcards in the mix with unpredictable players and agents involved.
oLd sKool
