Discussion: Should the Bucks trade Larry Sanders?

LedZepp007 · Post #41 » by **LedZepp007** » Thu Dec 5, 2013 5:29 pm

I would like for him to be traded. Just too immature and out of control.

However, we can't trade him now as his value is close to rock bottom.

I would trade him straight up for Asik, honestly. I think Asik is almost the defender and a better offensive player. Flame away.

UWM_Brew_Buck · Post #42 » by **UWM_Brew_Buck** » Thu Dec 5, 2013 5:31 pm

The only untradeable player on this team right now is Giannis. I would only trade Sanders if we got his actual value back, the value of an elite defensive force, probably the best rim defender in the league. I do not think we would get that kind of value for him so I really hope we don't trade him.

One benefit I see for trading him would be to open up a spot to play Henson at C which looks more like his natural position to me. Ideally if Henson could play the 4 we could flip Illy for a pick. The length of our front court would cause a lot of issues, add a top 5 pick and a 1st rounder to that mix and you got a young team with potential.

SpursNBucks · Post #43 » by **SpursNBucks** » Thu Dec 5, 2013 5:33 pm

LUKE23 wrote:As usual, we disagree. You've lost it here. Even if we were going to trade him, why in the hell would we do it now? He started out the season poorly, then got into an altercation. Yes, lets get on the phone today and try and gauge his value. Great plan.

Start Henson at C? I like Henson, but he's never going to be the defender Larry is. He doesn't seem to have the mentality for it, and he doesn't have the frame Larry does either. I'm not necessarily against Henson at C in a vacuum, but if we are trying to become a contending team we need an elite paint defender. Sanders was the best paint defender in the NBA last year in my mind (with advanced stats to back it) and isn't 25 yet. Bail on him because of this? Dumb. Really dumb.

It seems like some of you want a bunch of choirboys on the roster or something. I could give two **** if Sanders got into a bar fight. In all honesty, that bar fight HELPED us this season. It's not like there is any risk to waiting, his value won't be lower later.

I couldn't agree more with you- at least 110%, but the part in bold. While I wouldn't trade him (or even think about it), I have to say this was a big disappointment. You have a guy who is supposed to be your new leader. He seems to want to take on that role, was very happy to see him in vegas supporting the Summer League guys- especially Henson. Now you wonder if there wasn't some other motivation for him being in Vegas. How many of you would be out with your best pimp suit hitting da club when your wife was about to pop. The guy is a high profile personality in Milwaukee- when you get those kind of buck$ you have certain obligations to the organization-one is to have an image that fans can rally around- your a public figure - big money, but also some pressure because you are going to be held to a higher standard. You want to truly be "THE LEADER" then you have to act like one on and off the court. Almost everyone on here was for the signing - now you have a pretty large divide on whether to dump him. This kind of idiotic decision making on Larry's part can really hurt a team in a number of ways. The fact that he is playing the victim and even pulling out the race card is not going to sit well with a lot of fans. If you needed another reason NOT to go see a Bucks game, you may have just got one.

ekpecNurollduh · Post #44 » by **ekpecNurollduh** » Thu Dec 5, 2013 5:44 pm

Sell low and buy high!

tedbrogen · Post #45 » by **tedbrogen** » Thu Dec 5, 2013 5:44 pm

UWM_Brew_Buck wrote:The only untradeable player on this team right now is Giannis. I would only trade Sanders if we got his actual value back, the value of an elite defensive force, probably the best rim defender in the league. I do not think we would get that kind of value for him so I really hope we don't trade him.

One benefit I see for trading him would be to open up a spot to play Henson at C which looks more like his natural position to me. Ideally if Henson could play the 4 we could flip Illy for a pick. The length of our front court would cause a lot of issues, add a top 5 pick and a 1st rounder to that mix and you got a young team with potential.

Even if they have Sanders, there are 96 minutes available at the 4 and 5 spots each game. Sanders will likely never average more than 35 MPG. Even if they draft Randle or Parker and play them at the 4, that's only another 35 or so MPG. Still have 25+ minutes available for a big, and that should be the plan with Henson. 6th man off the bench who backs up the 4 and 5. That way they don't have to rely the Zazas and Udohs of this league.

I'd flip Illy within the next year (this trade deadline or the off-season) because he is a bit older than the core they are building and will be on the downside of his career by the time their core would be peaking. Illy for a bad contract from another team would likely get them a first rounder in return as well.

Agreed that no one is untradeable besides the Greek.

On Asik, he is only signed for one more year and would hurt the tank. Only trade for assets that will help once the Greek is in his prime.

ConoverBucks · Post #46 » by **ConoverBucks** » Thu Dec 5, 2013 5:45 pm

The only reason you would trade Larry right now is if you think his value won't ever rise. Given that his value is pretty much at rock bottom right now it seems unlikely that his value won't rise.

Seeing as his value is at rock bottom no one is going to give up anything for him right now. So even if they wanted to trade him it might not be possible.

If the Bucks are really intent on trading Larry I would wait until he comes back and hopefully plays well. Then trade him in the offseason when teams have more flexibility to acquire players.

jakecronus8 · Post #47 » by **jakecronus8** » Thu Dec 5, 2013 5:53 pm

If someone offers a lottery pick for him I'd do it in a nanosecond.

Lippo · Post #48 » by **Lippo** » Thu Dec 5, 2013 5:59 pm

GHOSTofSIKMA wrote:if you supported moving andrew bogut at ANYTIME during his tenure here, then it makes zero sense to want to hang on to larry sanders.

move him for the best offer you can find.... and that includes a salary dump for cash if thats the best offer available.

Bogut was Bill Lambier
Sanders is Ben Wallace

It a likability thing.
No one liked Bogut, and injuries were a huge factor with him, Sanders is probably healthy enough to play now, but they are tanking so...they hold him out.
Sanders is a healthy 25 , Bogut was a decrepid 28 when we traded him

Max Green · Post #49 » by **Max Green** » Thu Dec 5, 2013 5:59 pm

Unless we have a young stud like Drummond or a top 5 pick in next years draft coming back, HELL NO.

Post #50 » by **ReasonablySober** » Thu Dec 5, 2013 6:07 pm

My default answer will always be I would trade anyone if the package is good enough.

If a team offers a high 2014 1st for Sanders, I'm make that move.

I don't see Henson and Sanders ever working on the court at the same time. Other teams have tried the two center thing and couldn't get it to go. Neither will the Bucks.

I think Sanders goes eventually, and my hope is that by then Henson has become an impact two way player. Use what we get for Sanders (it should be good if the Bucks don't move him in the next two weeks and his play rebounds) and the Bucks should have their core in place.

Post #51 » by **paulpressey25** » Thu Dec 5, 2013 6:09 pm

As we've seen so far, Henson does not have the bulk to handle anyone in the post. He's getting moved out of position a lot. Larry at least can hold his ground.

That said, Henson is showing a much better ability this year to block shots (maybe that is simply due to more minutes). But I just don't know that I like Henson as our starting center. We'd give up a lot of strength inside that Larry does have.

KingCammo · Post #52 » by **KingCammo** » Thu Dec 5, 2013 6:09 pm

While his value is at it's lowest? Sure, why not? Classic Bucks.

step3profit · Post #53 » by **step3profit** » Thu Dec 5, 2013 6:10 pm

geez, sometimes you bottle some albanians in a club, move along.

InsideOut · Post #54 » by **InsideOut** » Thu Dec 5, 2013 6:11 pm

I know people that buy a stock at $30 then don't sell it at $20 because why would they want to sell when it is low. Then it drops to $10 and they don't want to sell because it is low compared to when it was at $20.

I get people saying why sell low on Larry...my question is how do you know this is low compared to next year at this time? I'll also point out posters like to rip the Bucks for never selling high on a player. The Bucks instead wait until the players value drops to even lower levels. How do you know selling Larry now isn't selling high and waiting would be just another case of the Bucks holding onto a player way to long?

If you think Larry will clean up his act and play at a high level you keep him. If you think he'll be way too inconsistent and he'll always have behavioral issues then you move him. Time will tell. Just don’t assume selling now is selling low.

KidA24 · Post #55 » by **KidA24** » Thu Dec 5, 2013 6:11 pm

Move him for youth, sure.

Move him for Asik because he's just a '4'?

Heck no.

Nebula1 · Post #56 » by **Nebula1** » Thu Dec 5, 2013 6:13 pm

What if Sanders returns and starts hurting the tank? The Bucks are actually looking at a good shot at #1.

I'd consider moving Sanders to preserve the opportunity at #1. For fair value, of course.

Post #57 » by **paulpressey25** » Thu Dec 5, 2013 6:14 pm

InsideOut wrote:I know people that buy a stock at $30 then don't sell it at $20 because why would they want to sell when it is low. Then it drops to $10 and they don't want to sell because it is low compared to when it was at $20.

Well, that is the other part of this. If you assume Larry's play last year was the product of a contract drive, PED's, etc and he in reality turns into Bobby Simmons, then yes, that stock can go down further.

Interestingly, no one has bit yet with ideas of who might want him that has assets. I think there still would be a very healthy market for him.

step3profit · Post #58 » by **step3profit** » Thu Dec 5, 2013 6:14 pm

InsideOut wrote:I know people that buy a stock at $30 then don't sell it at $20 because why would they want to sell when it is low. Then it drops to $10 and they don't want to sell because it is low compared to when it was at $20.

I get people saying why sell low on Larry...my question is how do you know this is low compared to next year at this time? I'll also point out posters like to rip the Bucks for never selling high on a player. They instead wait until the players value drop to low levels. How do you know selling Larry now isn't selling high because this is just another case of a Bucks player we'll hold onto way to long?

If you think Larry will clean up his act and play at a high level you keep him. If you think he'll be way too inconsistent and he'll always have behavioral issues then you move him. Time will tell. Just don’t assume selling now is selling low.

Point taken. Pretty hard to say without any idea at all of what other teams would offer for him. Anything less than a high 1st (top 15) in this draft would be criminal. And even then, if it's not top 10, I'd feel robbed unless they took Butler with and gave back a decent piece.

GHOSTofSIKMA · Post #59 » by **GHOSTofSIKMA** » Thu Dec 5, 2013 6:16 pm

Lippo wrote:
GHOSTofSIKMA wrote:if you supported moving andrew bogut at ANYTIME during his tenure here, then it makes zero sense to want to hang on to larry sanders.

move him for the best offer you can find.... and that includes a salary dump for cash if thats the best offer available.

Bogut was Bill Lambier
Sanders is Ben Wallace

It a likability thing.
No one liked Bogut, and injuries were a huge factor with him, Sanders is probably healthy enough to play now, but they are tanking so...they hold him out.
Sanders is a healthy 25 , Bogut was a decrepid 28 when we traded him

bogut was a far better player than sanders will ever dream of being. sanders is a ervin johnson level baller made worse with a rasheed wallace head.

watching sanders in person last week in street clothes on this team grossed me out. it made me realize just how much i dont even like him personally. the idiot picked up a tech on the bench arguing nothing and was horsing around dancing and crap with henson before the game like a rodeo clown. all the insider reports coming out of the lockerroom have been that hes a total dick and now its spilled over into the community as well.

sanders is an idiot. hes our next jennings. only we paid him which makes it worse. hes useless to me. i will enjoy the team more and be generally less embarassed about the whole state of affairs with this team if he is gone.

Nebula1 · Post #60 » by **Nebula1** » Thu Dec 5, 2013 6:17 pm

paulpressey25 wrote:
InsideOut wrote:I know people that buy a stock at $30 then don't sell it at $20 because why would they want to sell when it is low. Then it drops to $10 and they don't want to sell because it is low compared to when it was at $20.

Well, that is the other part of this. If you assume Larry's play last year was the product of a contract drive, PED's, etc and he in reality turns into Bobby Simmons, then yes, that stock can go down further.

Interestingly, no one has bit yet with ideas of who might want him that has assets. I think there still would be a very healthy market for him.

Boston would be a good spot, potentially.