Bucks News, Trade Ideas, Transactions

[-Jragon-]

Giannis & Lillard together have a +2.5 net rating this season & it was worse the last. That's not even close to a championship contender.

But w/ Khris they had a +17.5 net rating, which would make them a championship favorite. He's needed to compete on the highest levels.

Furthermore, having 3 stars instead of 2 means you have more margin for error when it comes to injuries during the playoffs. Last yr it wasn't even enough, & Khris was the most healthy of the 3.

Khris also doesn't have trade value right now to get a difference maker back. Dame does. So if this is your interest, the play would be to trade him, during this season or after, before his value bottoms out.

Makes zero sense. You need 3 stars because 2 isn't enough..so trade 1 of them. What?

Well the idea is that you'd be getting a good player back. That person would actually play in basketball games whereas our current 3rd star does not. Is that person a "star", who knows what you could get. But say you got Grant back from Por so they can clear salary or something like that. But yea, its a tough needle to thread on a trade since KMs value is trash right now. ETA: unless you were responding to the trading Dame reply. I was referring to the original idea

Right, trading Dame doesn't add another star that plays.

[Badgerlander]

Keegan Murray feels like poor mans Tobias Harris

[Bernman]

Makes zero sense. You need 3 stars because 2 isn't enough..so trade 1 of them. What?

You make 0 sense. You're responding to me, instead of him, who made the argument, cuz I suggested if anything deal Dame instead of Middleton, who you're obsessed with.

And yes, trading Middleton reduces you to 2 stars, but Dame you stay at 3 in the postseason cuz you should get one in return. So that is the more logical decision under the objective. Middleton doesn't enable you to think logically though.

To wit, you never grapple with the objective difference when Middleton has been on the court vs. off either. You'd rather have 2 stars & be a good team, than 3 & great one, just so you don't have to look at this face anymore.

[Ron Swanson]

Well, if we wanna play the "Khris is the force multiplier" card based on last season's data, then we should probably also keep in mind the Dame/Giannis duo had a +10.2 net-rating, and that 5-man lineup with Crowder instead of Khris had a +15.6 net-rating on a not-so-insignificant sample size. We can cherry-pick the data to reach whatever conclusion we want, but none of this really matters if the Dame/Giannis duo isn't awesome. They've proven they can be, they just haven't had the opportunity to prove it in the postseason.

[LUKE23]

I think both things are true regarding Midds - there is relatively high likelihood we don't get to the playoffs with our core trio healthy, and there is also VERY high likelihood the trio steamrolls folks if it is healthy. So what's the alternative? You make a trade with the core three for more health likelihood but a lower ceiling? No. You get Midds healthy, manage the roster, and make trades on the margins to improve things like Bobby's ghastly on/off rating with pretty much every goddam lineup.

But the above is also why it's EXTREMELY frustrating to have to wait this long regarding Middleton as well - you want to be able to evaluate that trio with a larger sample size.

[EasyE31]

Giannis & Lillard together have a +2.5 net rating this season & it was worse the last. That's not even close to a championship contender.

But w/ Khris they had a +17.5 net rating, which would make them a championship favorite. He's needed to compete on the highest levels.

Furthermore, having 3 stars instead of 2 means you have more margin for error when it comes to injuries during the playoffs. Last yr it wasn't even enough, & Khris was the most healthy of the 3.

Khris also doesn't have trade value right now to get a difference maker back. Dame does. So if this is your interest, the play would be to trade him, during this season or after, before his value bottoms out.

Makes zero sense. You need 3 stars because 2 isn't enough..so trade 1 of them. What?

Well the idea is that you'd be getting a good player back. That person would actually play in basketball games whereas our current 3rd star does not. Is that person a "star", who knows what you could get. But say you got Grant back from Por so they can clear salary or something like that. But yea, its a tough needle to thread on a trade since KMs value is trash right now. ETA: unless you were responding to the trading Dame reply. I was referring to the original idea

I don't agree that KM has no value right now. He played really well in the playoffs last year and would be helpful to any number of competitors. I don't have any doubts the Bucks could get at least one first that they could use to reroute somewhere else.

[RogerMurdock]

To be in 8-10 convo, you would have to think he is better than 3 of Steph/Hakeem/Shaq/Duncan/Kobe (assuming we all agree Jordan, LBJ, Wilt, KAJ, Magic, Bird, Bill** are top 7) No way I put Giannis ahead of Steph, Shaq or Duncan. I don't think there is really a conversation to be had on those guys.

Giannis is easily better than Shaq.

define easily? is there a reason or data behind it, or just just like his play style better?

They are similarly dominant in the paint, but while Shaq is clearly one of the greatest players of all time, he was basically just a stand a few feet from the basket and dominate the paint player. And that was awesome.

Giannis, in addition to being the most unstoppable player at the rim of this generation, also runs the floor, handles the ball, plays point forward, can defend on the perimeter, is the best paint help defender in the league, and while it's obviously not a strength, can shoot the ball sometimes.

[Licensed to Il]

Honest question, is four on four any more dangerous or strenuous than three on three?

[German Athens]

Honest question, is four on four any more dangerous or strenuous than three on three?

I’ve been wondering the exact same thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BigO]

Well, if we wanna play the "Khris is the force multiplier" card based on last season's data, then we should probably also keep in mind the Dame/Giannis duo had a +10.2 net-rating, and that 5-man lineup with Crowder instead of Khris had a +15.6 net-rating on a not-so-insignificant sample size. We can cherry-pick the data to reach whatever conclusion we want, but none of this really matters if the Dame/Giannis duo isn't awesome. They've proven they can be, they just haven't had the opportunity to prove it in the postseason.

And the bolded part, my friends, sums up all the net rating arguments ever made on this board.

[Bernman]

Well, if we wanna play the "Khris is the force multiplier" card based on last season's data, then we should probably also keep in mind the Dame/Giannis duo had a +10.2 net-rating, and that 5-man lineup with Crowder instead of Khris had a +15.6 net-rating on a not-so-insignificant sample size. We can cherry-pick the data to reach whatever conclusion we want, but none of this really matters if the Dame/Giannis duo isn't awesome. They've proven they can be, they just haven't had the opportunity to prove it in the postseason.

You're skewing data & have repeated this one multiple times. That 10.2 is w/ Khris being on the court much of the time inflating the duo overall so much that it's -7.3 from the trio.

The Giannis/Dame duo doesn't have to be awesome if it's Khris on the court w/ them and it makes them awesome. If Dame gets injured, Giannis-Middleton already won a championship w/ just a defensive role player (Jrue) supporting them.

[Bernman]

And the bolded part, my friends, sums up all the net rating arguments ever made on this board.

No, you're just too stubborn or old-fashioned to understand them. The point of team sport is to make your team better. If they're much worse w/ you on the court for 3 years, and only mediocre w/ you on it when they were perennial contenders, then you've proven at that point to fail at the objective.

You're cherry picking priority. The priority to you was to remind you of Bob Pettit, when the game was about long 2's in the post. Now it's to not admit you were wrong or move w/ new info, as I have as a former Bobby fan to now be "anti-Bobby". Not one of the good soldiers in the pro-Bobby army. I'm a Bucks' fan. I thought this was a Bucks' forum.

[flaco]

Claiming Midds has mininal trade value is widely misleading. While no one would pay fair value for him right now, the same would have been true even if he were 100% healthy. Why? Cause we are 2 months away from the trade deadline.

Trades are like the game of chicken. It's when teams run out of time that the true negotiations begin. No wonder the majority of trades happen at the deadline. Chances are Midds will be back way before then.

[emunney]

Honest question, is four on four any more dangerous or strenuous than three on three?

More feet to step on I guess?

[-Jragon-]

Honest question, is four on four any more dangerous or strenuous than three on three?

I’ve been wondering the exact same thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

4 more feet to land on

[Ron Swanson]

Well, if we wanna play the "Khris is the force multiplier" card based on last season's data, then we should probably also keep in mind the Dame/Giannis duo had a +10.2 net-rating, and that 5-man lineup with Crowder instead of Khris had a +15.6 net-rating on a not-so-insignificant sample size. We can cherry-pick the data to reach whatever conclusion we want, but none of this really matters if the Dame/Giannis duo isn't awesome. They've proven they can be, they just haven't had the opportunity to prove it in the postseason.

You're skewing data & have repeated this one multiple times. That 10.2 is w/ Khris being on the court much of the time inflating the duo overall so much that it's -7.3 from the trio.

The Giannis/Dame duo doesn't have to be awesome if it's Khris on the court w/ them and it makes them awesome. If Dame gets injured, Giannis-Middleton already won a championship w/ just a defensive role player (Jrue) supporting them.

I’m not skewing anything anymore than you guys are. That sample also included plenty of minutes where Khris wasn’t on the court as evidenced by the notorious 5-man lineup with Beasley and washed Crowder. If you believe the Giannis/Dame/Khris lineup data then that also means you should believe that sticking any 2-3 capable starters around Dame and Giannis would/should also juggernaut through other teams.

But at some point, I’m just kinda over with clinging to this whole “best 5-man net-rating” stuff from last season. Khris is a year older and the reason it’s become a point of discussion is that his durability concerns have reached a breaking point.

[msiris]

Honest question, is four on four any more dangerous or strenuous than three on three?

I’ve been wondering the exact same thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

4 more feet to land on

He could get injured landing
on nothing. Fast becoming a bubble boy.

[Ayt]

All the Bucks really need to do is be healthy and make a trade of Bobby and whatever for Nance Jr.

[randy84]

All the Bucks really need to do is be healthy and make a trade of Bobby and whatever for Nance Jr.

Seems like the first part has been the toughest for the Bucks the last few years, especially during the playoffs.

[ShootingtheJ]

All the Bucks really need to do is be healthy and make a trade of Bobby and whatever for Nance Jr.

Bobby has more trade value than Nance Jr. It'll need to be a 3 way though. Hawks are full with forwards and centers. They need guards. I'm guessing they'd also take a 2nd or 2 and an expiring for Nance.