Commitment to Bogut Needed

[Bucks_Revenge]

-= original quote snipped =-

That's why you always always draft best player available until you have your franchise player.

BOGUT WAS THE BPA.......

just get over it people.

[heynow]

[quote="Nowak008"][/quote]


First you put up a list of bigs (not just Centers and PFs) and some how left the best big in the NBA off.

I will leave it to others and you to figure out who you left off. It is not Shaq.

[europa]

-= original quote snipped =-

In regards to Wade, I think he's every bit as good as Wade. Sid didn't get the benefit of playing in the diluted expansion era with 30 teams where you could team up Sid with one other player and win a title.

I think Sid is a better player than Wade. But Wade can walk onto the court against any superstar and get all the calls he needs - just ask Cavs fans about that. Sid couldn't do that. To me, that's one of the critical things that makes a superstar. Can he get the calls in a big game regardless of the opponent? Sid couldn't do that. That's what knocked him down a peg in my opinion in terms of the star status. He was a second-tier player in my opinion. A pretty damn good one and a very under-rated one in a lot of ways, but still a second-tier talent.

Back to Bogut, as much as he needs the jumper I think improved FT shooting is even more important. If he can just get his percentage up to at least 70% - which isn't a reach given what he shot in college - that will improve his offensive game immeasurably. That's the one area of his game that has really disappointed all season long.

[jerrod]

I swear if I hear one more person says we should of drafted Paul over Bogut one more time..................

you swear you'll do what?

we already had 2 pg....what team drafts a pg when you already have 2 good ones....and at the time Bogut was the best player in college basketball....what is wrong with you guys.

don't you think that if we actually had 2 really good pgs, we wouldn't be looking for one now?

[ReasonablySober]

Anyone that believes the Bucks, or any team, should follow the Pistons model should be beaten until at least a shred of senses returns to their body.

They had four All-Star caliber players on that team. They had two younger guys in Okur and Prince that would go on to become All-Star caliber in the coming years. They had vets that knew how to play in Hunter and James.

What's more likely: the Bucks landing six All-Star caliber players or them being bad enough to land one star player in the draft?

I hate this romanticized notion of "Hey, lets consistently add solid players and one day we'll be a group that defends well and plays unselfish offense and we'll be an conference contender". It's crap. Stars win in the NBA.

One thing that always seems to be lacking in the argument against bottoming out and tanking to get the high pick is that Bogut was the #1 overall pick. So while so many here seem to be against tanking and high lotto picks and getting much worse, they also seem to love the result of tanking and claim he's the lone bright spot on this team.

Want to add another Bogut? Lose more games.

Miller or Harris even Conley/Sessions/Ivey
Butler/CB
Battier/Bobby
Haslem or Maxiell/Yi
Bogut/Gadz/Ruffin

That's a 45 win team, if that. Good enough to make the playoffs in a lousy East but not good enough to win a playoff series. Congratulations paul, you just put the Bucks in NBA purgatory.

[raferfenix]

Drugbust----what do you want us to do? Should we tank year after yaer until we get a superstar? I hope that's not your plan, though i agree we need to have a long term strategy rather than 1 year strategies.

Drafting and developing a player into a superstar is hard though, especially for a team devoid of good coaching or managemnet like ours. Signing one as a free agent is probably impossible in milwaukee. I think what you are suggesting is that we would need to consider trading Bogut for a superstar, but i'm curious who you have in mind that would be available in a package for him and worht it for us to mkae that trade?

Bogut may not be a superstar, but as you said, the Pistons didn't have a superstar either. They had a lot of all-star caliber players, but they all were 2nd tier stars for the most part. Bogut is showing that very soon he could be a perennial 2nd tier star, and conisdeirng that he brings an attitude that has been desperately missed here, I think it would take an unbelievable deal to amke it worth it for us to trade him.

[blkout]

I hate this romanticized notion of "Hey, lets consistently add solid players and one day we'll be a group that defends well and plays unselfish offense and we'll be an conference contender". It's crap. Stars win in the NBA.

I think you're right and you're wrong... by "stars" we're talking Tim Duncan, Michael Jordan, Shaquille O'Neal... they are once in a generation type guys, there are so many superstars in the league who'll probably never win a championship... hell the 2nd best PF of all time never won one purely because there was a better 'star' on a better team hanging around at the same time.

I actually think it's easier for most teams to build a contender in the mould of what the Pistons did than it is for them to find one of those generational superstars to bring them to the next level. Maybe they have the same view that you NEED a star to win, that could be why we don't see more of those kind of teams.

Look at the Nuggets for instance, they have not one but two of those superstar guys, and a bunch of solid roleplayers including the best defensive big man in the league, but it doesn't really work and it didn't with Carmelo on his own which is why they went for Iverson in the first place.

That being said, I think it's easier to build a strong contender for those teams who already have a superstar in place... i.e the Lakers with Kobe this season, Miami next year if they end up with Brand and a high draft pick.

[ReasonablySober]

Bogut may not be a superstar, but as you said, the Pistons didn't have a superstar either.

Yea, and how did we get Bogut? How did the Blazers get all that young talent? How did the Hornets get Paul?

We have to get much worse before we can get much better.

[raferfenix]

-= original quote snipped =-



Yea, and how did we get Bogut? How did the Blazers get all that young talent? How did the Hornets get Paul?

We have to get much worse before we can get much better.

I disagree. I think our best hope is developing our talent and making a trade for a star later on by consolidating them and ending contracts.

The draft lottery is tough, and our team has proven that even if we get a #1 pick you're far from guaranteed a superstar. In addition to that, we'll have two top 8 picks on our team, 3 if we keep CV. I just don't think hoping for a 20 win season is the way to go at all at this point, especially since such an environment is anathema to developing young talent as is.

[LISTEN2JAZZ]

The best way to make the same mistake all over again would be to give Bogut a large franchise player type contract, and then say "well now that we've committed to him, we better sign some other players that complement his game."

Sign a couple role players to long term deals, and it's the Michael Redd mistake, part 2.

[raferfenix]

The best way to make the same mistake all over again would be to give Bogut a large franchise player type contract, and then say "well now that we've committed to him, we better sign some other players that complement his game."

Sign a couple role players to long term deals, and it's the Michael Redd mistake, part 2.

I disagree on a few levels:

1. Bogut won't be as overpaid as Redd. The is no competition for his services that will drive up his value, and if it was all about the money for him he'd try to get the hell out of milwaukee (and instead he's looking to wrap up contract negotiations quickly).

2. Bogut is not like Redd since he's unselfish and plays defense. taht is what you need in your team leaders, and Redd being our highest paid guy and best player yet not caring at all about these qualities has been horrible for our team the last few years.

[LISTEN2JAZZ]

If we filled up our budget without having a franchise player in place, it would be exactly the same thing.

[ReasonablySober]

-= original quote snipped =-



I disagree. I think our best hope is developing our talent and making a trade for a star later on by consolidating them and ending contracts.

The draft lottery is tough, and our team has proven that even if we get a #1 pick you're far from guaranteed a superstar. In addition to that, we'll have two top 8 picks on our team, 3 if we keep CV. I just don't think hoping for a 20 win season is the way to go at all at this point, especially since such an environment is anathema to developing young talent as is.

But again, the #1 pick is how we got our best, or at least most promising, player.

Sure the lotto is tough. But because it hasn't paid immediate dividends doesn't mean that you abandon the strategy all-together.

As for developing young talent, that IS the way we'll see 20 win seasons. Forcing the ball to Bogut, giving Sessions burn and letting Yi shoot 8-10 times a game is the quickest way to a 60 loss season. Which I'm perfectly fine with.

[Chapter29]

Back to Bogut, as much as he needs the jumper I think improved FT shooting is even more important. If he can just get his percentage up to at least 70% - which isn't a reach given what he shot in college - that will improve his offensive game immeasurably. That's the one area of his game that has really disappointed all season long.

Very similar skill set. Improve in one, you will likely improve at both.

[dunhill]

I could swallow that. It's he best way to see what you have. Ok we've seen what Redd and co are good for if all things fall into place 1st round playoff exit.

Right now IMO no one has a clue how good Yi, CV or AB could be. No one can say they've shown potential with each providing sporadic glimpses of awesomeness. Look at the posts on each of these 3 guys some say bust and some say they're key peices - there's no clear picture.

I's not so much a commitment to Bogut thats required - It's a commitment to developing the young talent even if you lose.

[rilamann]

-= original quote snipped =-


As for developing young talent, that IS the way we'll see 20 win seasons. Forcing the ball to Bogut, giving Sessions burn and letting Yi shoot 8-10 times a game is the quickest way to a 60 loss season. Which I'm perfectly fine with.

That is exactly what the Bucks need to do,clean house and develop the young talent they do have and will soon have via the draft.

Trading for guys that might make us a 45 win team next year would be stupid.

Which is why I expect the Bucks to do just that.

If the Bucks where smart they would keep Bogut,Yi & Sessions and clean house.

Try to unload the bad contracts and trade anyone with any value for some draft picks.

Then you would have Bogut,Yi & Sessions next year along with whoever we take with our own lottery pick this year (top 8 pick) and another solid player or two if we can trade for some more picks.

Because we would go young and develop our talent we wouldnt win a ton of games in 2009 but that would be a good thing because then we add another #5 pick into the mix.

Fast forward two years from now and we would have,
Bogut
Yi
Sessions
A top # 8 draft pick (2008)
A top #15 draft pick via trade (2008)
A Top #5 draft pick (2009)

And if Herb hires a solid GM you should have a solid group of role players around those guys within 2 years.

I would rather go that route and suck for another year or two and have a chance to contend in 3 years than trade for a vetran or two now that will keep us stuck in (at best) 40/45 win mode and first rd and out playoff team for the next 5 years.

[carmelbrownqueen]

I can't **** believe people took that high-fiving thing as anything other than a joke. Sorry rafer, I couldn't read anything after that first sentence.

[paul]

Anyone that believes the Bucks, or any team, should follow the Pistons model should be beaten until at least a shred of senses returns to their body.

They had four All-Star caliber players on that team. They had two younger guys in Okur and Prince that would go on to become All-Star caliber in the coming years. They had vets that knew how to play in Hunter and James.

What's more likely: the Bucks landing six All-Star caliber players or them being bad enough to land one star player in the draft?

I hate this romanticized notion of "Hey, lets consistently add solid players and one day we'll be a group that defends well and plays unselfish offense and we'll be an conference contender". It's crap. Stars win in the NBA.

One thing that always seems to be lacking in the argument against bottoming out and tanking to get the high pick is that Bogut was the #1 overall pick. So while so many here seem to be against tanking and high lotto picks and getting much worse, they also seem to love the result of tanking and claim he's the lone bright spot on this team.

Want to add another Bogut? Lose more games.

Miller or Harris even Conley/Sessions/Ivey
Butler/CB
Battier/Bobby
Haslem or Maxiell/Yi
Bogut/Gadz/Ruffin

That's a 45 win team, if that. Good enough to make the playoffs in a lousy East but not good enough to win a playoff series. Congratulations paul, you just put the Bucks in NBA purgatory.

We're going to have to agree to disagree DB, although I'm happy to take the mentioned beating

I believe that team, or one like it, well coached, would deliver 50+ wins to this franchise - therefore becoming our best team since the halcyon days of the big 3. The key pieces in Bogut Yi and Butler would still be young, it would be a defensive minded strong willed scrapping team who fought for everything and would compete night in night out. You want purgatory? Just have a look around, we have been smack bang in it for 3 years waiting for the ping pong (and teams) balls to drop.

Understand too that I'm not pushing necessarily for THAT team, it's the principle. As the singer Brighteyes says 'I'd rather be working for a paycheque than waiting to win the lottery'.

[ReasonablySober]

-= original quote snipped =-



We're going to have to agree to disagree DB, although I'm happy to take the mentioned beating

I believe that team, or one like it, well coached, would deliver 50+ wins to this franchise - therefore becoming our best team since the halcyon days of the big 3. The key pieces in Bogut Yi and Butler would still be young, it would be a defensive minded strong willed scrapping team who fought for everything and would compete night in night out. You want purgatory? Just have a look around, we have been smack bang in it for 3 years waiting for the ping pong (and teams) balls to drop.

Understand too that I'm not pushing necessarily for THAT team, it's the principle. As the singer Brighteyes says 'I'd rather be working for a paycheque than waiting to win the lottery'.

The problem with that team is the ceiling. It might win you your 50 games, but without any elite talent it's still getting bounced early in the playoffs. Also, because they're in the playoffs, the chances of adding an elite talent in the offseason is nil because the Bucks are picking in the mid-to-late teens. Forget about free agency. Everyone on that roster is a high-priced vet.

I couldn't think of a more depressing team.

edit: to drive home my point, I'd rather have the Sonics roster, right now, than the roster you just put together.

[paul]

-= original quote snipped =-



The problem with that team is the ceiling. It might win you your 50 games, but without any elite talent it's still getting bounced early in the playoffs. Also, because they're in the playoffs, the chances of adding an elite talent in the offseason is nil because the Bucks are picking in the mid-to-late teens. Forget about free agency. Everyone on that roster is a high-priced vet.

I couldn't think of a more depressing team.

edit: to drive home my point, I'd rather have the Sonics roster, right now, than the roster you just put together.

If you couldn't think of a more depressing team I'm not sure who you've been watching all season. You've got Bogut Butler and Yi all still on steep upward trends, Battier and Haslem/Maxiell as your scrappers and Miller providing some class distribution from the point. I understand what your getting at with wanting to get younger to lose and find your stud but I can't take any more of that. I'd actually love to find a way to work Okafur into the 4, just not sure how to do it.
If you were to match that team up with the team I was modelling them on however, how do you think they'd go?

Miller/Billups
Butler/Rip
Battier/Prince
Haslem/McDyess
Bogut/Sheed

The Pistons have been the benchmark in the East for a long time now, I think that matchup looks very competitive in it's current form, and I KNOW our team would have a hell of a lot more improvement in them.