Bucks looking at Bledsoe, probably.

[Sherman Douglas]

Umm..., make that 6'4, capable of dishing, defending and scoring efficiently (likely to improve, since it was one of his main strengths in college).

I think by "other 6'1" guards he was referring to mostly Jennings.

[JimmyTheKid]

Jay Mohr absolutely killed the supposed NBA "experts" from 11:00-11:30 if you want a good laugh.

Have I missed anything in the last 24 hours? Has everyone figured out that we're not bad enough to tank this year unless we trade Larry Sanders? And why should we trade Larry Sanders when his value is currently equivalent to a bag of dog sh*t? We're just not going to be top-of-the-lottery bad so I see no reason not to go after Eric Bledsoe. Bledsoe/Giannis/Parker/Sanders is a very, very good start.

Pretty much spot on. Bledsoe/Parker/Giannis gives you arguably the best core trio at or under 24 years old in the league. I'm completely bewildered by the fact that people wouldn't even offer him a max contract just because they believe he doesn't fit in some theoretical "championship window" 6 years from now.

The irony is that, even if we stick to the "OKC model" and tank for 2-3 years for high picks, we would still need to find gems in the latter part of the draft (Ibaka, Reggie Jackson) to supplement the core anyways. So this idea that we can't win too many games "until we're ready to contend" just doesn't happen in even the most extreme examples of gradual rebuilding.

Young talent is young talent. This idea that we are going to tank, get lucky in the lottery, draft three straight 19-20 year old future all-star players, and have them all grow together with a clean cap slate is a pipe dream.

The OKC model is incredibly difficult if not nearly impossible to successfully replicate. And that isn't even going into the fact that, if Giannis, Parker, and our theoretical 2015 high lotto pick all turn into all-stars and form the next "big 3", you're not going to be able to keep all of them past a 4 year window anyways because they will all be up for max deals (see: OKC/Harden).

And, IMO, we already have a couple of those "complimentary" "gems" in Wolters, Middleton, Henson, Miroslav (maybe Inglis, too)

A Bledsoe/Giannis/Parker/Sanders core potentially has a nice balance of scoring, defense, and playmaking. "Potential" is the key word. But thats life as a young team in the NBA. The tools are there. And the more I think about it, the more I really want Eric Bledsoe.

[Newz]

The more I think about acquiring Bledsoe, the more I dislike it.

1. He isn't worth max money.
2. We may not be able to just sign him, we may have to give up assets to get him from PHX... and if that happens we are not only giving a max deal to a guy who isn't worth it, but we are also giving up assets to get him.
3. He is 24-25 years old and by the time we are ready to compete he will be 28-29 years old. That is a bit scary for a guy whose game is based so much on his athletic ability.
4. We don't know what we have in Jabari and Giannis yet. We are trying to acquire a "third star" when we don't even know if we have a star on the team yet. This is a good way to get stuck in NBA purgatory again if Giannis/Parker end up just being average/good players as opposed to great players.
5. Bledsoe qualifies as a "third tier" star type of guy at this point. He's not the best player on a title team and likely isn't a second banana type of guy either. These guys aren't incredibly difficult to acquire. Hell, Larry Sanders COULD potentially be a guy like that.

I like Bledsoe. I just don't want to max him out and I don't want to jump the gun on this thing. See what we have in Giannis and Jabari before we start to try and truly put a team around them. They may not even be good enough to 'build around'.

[Nowak008]

Jay Mohr absolutely killed the supposed NBA "experts" from 11:00-11:30 if you want a good laugh.

Have I missed anything in the last 24 hours? Has everyone figured out that we're not bad enough to tank this year unless we trade Larry Sanders? And why should we trade Larry Sanders when his value is currently equivalent to a bag of dog sh*t? We're just not going to be top-of-the-lottery bad so I see no reason not to go after Eric Bledsoe. Bledsoe/Giannis/Parker/Sanders is a very, very good start.

Yep.

We were 30th in D last year, assuming Bledose isn't on the team, how much does a healthy Sanders improve us for an entire year? Oh and factor in Parker will be playing a ton of minutes at the 4.

[MickeyDavis]

I think the reservations about maxing out Bledsoe are warranted. When is the last time a big money contract worked out well for us? Virtually every big deal has ended up costing us far more than money. Sanders was the latest and it wasn't even a max deal.

Personally I'd roll the dice on Bledsoe but I think it's far from a sure thing.

Meh, you can't NEVER sign a guy to a bigger contract just because past ones haven't worked out. There are TYPES of big money contracts they should avoid (those like the ones for Gooden and Salmons - guys past their primes or entering the downslide). I don't think a 4/48 deal for Bledsoe is going to end up hurting the Bucks in any meaningful way.

Yup but you also don't spend cap money just because you have it.

MANY red flags with Bledsoe.

[Kerb Hohl]

Just to chime in again. I personally want no part of any free agent. Especially on with one year of true (health) success. In no way shape or form is Eric Bledsoe worth a max contract. Just stay away from FA's

What would you do with the money? We have a 3 year window before Giannis and Parker have to start getting paid. I can definitely get on board with absorbing contracts and bringing assets back with some of the cap space. The only other option is getting a player that could be top 50, young, and would be only slightly overpaid.

In the new CBA, these max deals are short. I could buy a theory of some ability to tank over the next year or two but I don't see it happening for too long. Get a really good, young player in, even if you're overpaying him by 3-4 million/year. That's better than having a bunch of cap space for role players.

[ReasonablySober]

Jay Mohr absolutely killed the supposed NBA "experts" from 11:00-11:30 if you want a good laugh.

Have I missed anything in the last 24 hours? Has everyone figured out that we're not bad enough to tank this year unless we trade Larry Sanders? And why should we trade Larry Sanders when his value is currently equivalent to a bag of dog sh*t? We're just not going to be top-of-the-lottery bad so I see no reason not to go after Eric Bledsoe. Bledsoe/Giannis/Parker/Sanders is a very, very good start.

Yep.

We were 30th in D last year, assuming Bledose isn't on the team, how much does a healthy Sanders improve us for an entire year? Oh and factor in Parker will be playing a ton of minutes at the 4.

They were 12th the year before with Sanders and Ilyasova in the frontline getting 27 mpg. A ranking in the top 10 is reasonable if Sanders is healthy and getting 30 mpg.

[Newz]

They were 12th the year before with Sanders and Ilyasova in the frontline getting 27 mpg. A ranking in the top 10 is reasonable if Sanders is healthy and getting 30 mpg.

I would be willing to bet money we won't be a top 10 defense.

I have trouble predicting us even being a top 15 defense. We will be starting a 19 year old at PF who was benched against a mediocre program in college because of defensive concerns and who has a ton of tape on him being dreadful on that end. Jabari is going to be horrendous on D to start... that isn't to say he won't get better (or even significantly better), but he is going to be a major liability on that end to begin with.

I also think it's wishful thinking to assuming someone like Giannis (who is only 19) will suddenly be a superstar defender. Most guys around that age aren't elite defensive players. Even guys that are physical freaks like LeBron struggle on that end until they figure it all out.

Sanders is only one guy and he only had one year of being incredible on the defensive end. He can correct a lot of things, but one guy doesn't carry you to being an above average defense.

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

The more I think about acquiring Bledsoe, the more I dislike it.

1. He isn't worth max money.
2. We may not be able to just sign him, we may have to give up assets to get him from PHX... and if that happens we are not only giving a max deal to a guy who isn't worth it, but we are also giving up assets to get him.
3. He is 24-25 years old and by the time we are ready to compete he will be 28-29 years old. That is a bit scary for a guy whose game is based so much on his athletic ability.
4. We don't know what we have in Jabari and Giannis yet. We are trying to acquire a "third star" when we don't even know if we have a star on the team yet. This is a good way to get stuck in NBA purgatory again if Giannis/Parker end up just being average/good players as opposed to great players.
5. Bledsoe qualifies as a "third tier" star type of guy at this point. He's not the best player on a title team and likely isn't a second banana type of guy either. These guys aren't incredibly difficult to acquire. Hell, Larry Sanders COULD potentially be a guy like that.

I like Bledsoe. I just don't want to max him out and I don't want to jump the gun on this thing. See what we have in Giannis and Jabari before we start to try and truly put a team around them. They may not even be good enough to 'build around'.

so you were against trading for him last year too right? Hammond was being "smart" for passing and just going for the 2nds and butler is what youre saying?

[ReasonablySober]

They were 12th the year before with Sanders and Ilyasova in the frontline getting 27 mpg. A ranking in the top 10 is reasonable if Sanders is healthy and getting 30 mpg.

I would be willing to bet money we won't be a top 10 defense.

I have trouble predicting us even being a top 15 defense. We will be starting a 19 year old at PF who was benched against a mediocre program in college because of defensive concerns and who has a ton of tape on him being dreadful on that end. Jabari is going to be horrendous on D to start... that isn't to say he won't get better (or even significantly better), but he is going to be a major liability on that end to begin with.

I also think it's wishful thinking to assuming someone like Giannis (who is only 19) will suddenly be a superstar defender. Most guys around that age aren't elite defensive players. Even guys that are physical freaks like LeBron struggle on that end until they figure it all out.

Sanders is only one guy and he only had one year of being incredible on the defensive end. He can correct a lot of things, but one guy doesn't carry you to being an above average defense.

He did exactly that two years ago.

[MickeyDavis]

Sanders is a nutcase. I'd love for him to return to form, for the good of the team and/or to enhance his trade value. But IMHO anything you get out of him is gravy.

[Newz]

so you were against trading for him last year too right? Hammond was being "smart" for passing and just going for the 2nds and butler is what youre saying?

We weren't giving him a four year max contract last season. We would have controlled him as an unrestricted free agent. Two completely different situations.

[Newz]

He did exactly that two years ago.

How much would you be willing to bet that Parker is as good of a defender this year as Ersan was two years ago?

How much would you be willing to bet that the Bucks will be a top 15 defense this year?

How much would you be willing to bet that Sanders is as good as he was two years ago?

Whatever amount you are willing to bet, I would be willing to take on that bet. I do not think the odds are favorable for us that any of those three things happen.

[M-C-G]

For those fretting about a max of 4/64, or ~16M per year...keep in mind Lowry just went for 12M per year.

KL per 36 - 17.8 pts, 4.6 rbs, 7.4 ast, 1.5 stl, 2.4 TO, TS% 56.7% at age 27

EB per 36 - 19.4 pts, 5.1 rbs, 6.0 ast, 1.8 stl, 3.6 TO, TS% 57.8% at age 24

So you are getting pretty close to an equivalent offensively to Lowry, but younger and with what I would assume is vastly superior man defense (I still don't get how defensive metrics work).

It's an overpay, but that is just the Milwaukee premium.

[wichmae]

Just to chime in again. I personally want no part of any free agent. Especially on with one year of true (health) success. In no way shape or form is Eric Bledsoe worth a max contract. Just stay away from FA's

What would you do with the money? We have a 3 year window before Giannis and Parker have to start getting paid. I can definitely get on board with absorbing contracts and bringing assets back with some of the cap space. The only other option is getting a player that could be top 50, young, and would be only slightly overpaid.

In the new CBA, these max deals are short. I could buy a theory of some ability to tank over the next year or two but I don't see it happening for too long. Get a really good, young player in, even if you're overpaying him by 3-4 million/year. That's better than having a bunch of cap space for role players.

Just because you have it doesnt mean you need to spend foolishly. Handing out foolish contracts and wasting money has been a negative attribute of this team for over a decade. Why cant we sit here with space and wait for some team in a desperate situation to maximize the cap asset on. Its like having a credit card. Why go blow it at Macys when you can save it for that huge TV that will go on sale.

[ReasonablySober]

He did exactly that two years ago.

How much would you be willing to bet that Parker is as good of a defender this year as Ersan was two years ago?

How much would you be willing to bet that the Bucks will be a top 15 defense this year?

How much would you be willing to bet that Sanders is as good as he was two years ago?

Whatever amount you are willing to bet, I would be willing to take on that bet. I do not think the odds are favorable for us that any of those three things happen.

If Sanders is playing 75+ games, I'll take a bet that we're a top 15 defense. I agree that Parker will most likely be a negative on defense, but Wolters and Knight are upgrades over what we had in the backcourt on that end. Giannis is likely to take a big step forward on that end as well.

[Kerb Hohl]

For those fretting about a max of 4/64, or ~16M per year...keep in mind Lowry just went for 12M per year.

KL per 36 - 17.8 pts, 4.6 rbs, 7.4 ast, 1.5 stl, 2.4 TO, TS% 56.7% at age 27

EB per 36 - 19.4 pts, 5.1 rbs, 6.0 ast, 1.8 stl, 3.6 TO, TS% 57.8% at age 24

So you are getting pretty close to an equivalent offensively to Lowry, but younger and with what I would assume is vastly superior man defense (I still don't get how defensive metrics work).

It's an overpay, but that is just the premium for anyone to acquire a young, good player not on his rookie deal.

Liked the whole quote, but fixed the last sentence.

[Ron Swanson]

The more I think about acquiring Bledsoe, the more I dislike it.

1. He isn't worth max money.
2. We may not be able to just sign him, we may have to give up assets to get him from PHX... and if that happens we are not only giving a max deal to a guy who isn't worth it, but we are also giving up assets to get him.
3. He is 24-25 years old and by the time we are ready to compete he will be 28-29 years old. That is a bit scary for a guy whose game is based so much on his athletic ability.
4. We don't know what we have in Jabari and Giannis yet. We are trying to acquire a "third star" when we don't even know if we have a star on the team yet. This is a good way to get stuck in NBA purgatory again if Giannis/Parker end up just being average/good players as opposed to great players.
5. Bledsoe qualifies as a "third tier" star type of guy at this point. He's not the best player on a title team and likely isn't a second banana type of guy either. These guys aren't incredibly difficult to acquire. Hell, Larry Sanders COULD potentially be a guy like that.

I like Bledsoe. I just don't want to max him out and I don't want to jump the gun on this thing. See what we have in Giannis and Jabari before we start to try and truly put a team around them. They may not even be good enough to 'build around'.

I guess I don't really get this type of reasoning. You aren't going out and acquiring a "3rd star". You're acquiring a "potential star". Capping Bledsoe's ceiling as not even a "2nd best guy on a title team" is taking a massively pessimistic view on his potential. I don't think it's at all inconceivable to think that Bledsoe could be the best player out of that trio in 3 years.

If Bledsoe turns into a superstar, "Russell Westbrook" type player (his numbers are comparable with 2nd year Westbrook + much higher efficiency), then even if Giannis and Parker simply become 2nd tier, borderline all-star guys, you still have a contending squad depending on the make-up of the rest of the roster/Sanders development.

Acquiring a talent like Bledsoe gives this team three legitimate shots at a superstar player right from the get-go. Not acquiring him means that you're banking on either next year's draft pick (who knows where we'll be drafting?), or some future FA or RFA who has yet TBD.

[Nowak008]

They were 12th the year before with Sanders and Ilyasova in the frontline getting 27 mpg. A ranking in the top 10 is reasonable if Sanders is healthy and getting 30 mpg.

No freaking way.

- That team was a Skiles system team.
- Luc Richard was 6th in minutes on that team, all defense no offense guy.
- The average age between the two teams will probably be a 3-4 year difference. Veteran teams defend better than young teams.
-Playing a two 19 year olds in the starting line up is going to make us bad defensively.

[wichmae]

For those fretting about a max of 4/64, or ~16M per year...keep in mind Lowry just went for 12M per year.

KL per 36 - 17.8 pts, 4.6 rbs, 7.4 ast, 1.5 stl, 2.4 TO, TS% 56.7% at age 27

EB per 36 - 19.4 pts, 5.1 rbs, 6.0 ast, 1.8 stl, 3.6 TO, TS% 57.8% at age 24

So you are getting pretty close to an equivalent offensively to Lowry, but younger and with what I would assume is vastly superior man defense (I still don't get how defensive metrics work).

It's an overpay, but that is just the Milwaukee premium.

Why does it matter what Lowery got? We arent in a position to spend freely to contend for a middle tier playoff spot or even division title. Makes no sense. You dont spend just to spend because the neighbor is doing it.