Windhorst & Stein: Bucks trade Plumlee to Hornets for Hawes and Hibbert

[ackypoo]

how is the winter in MIL this year? Do you think it can scare Hawes?

10°F
Few Clouds
Feels like -1°

[worthlessBucks]

how is the winter in MIL this year? Do you think it can scare Hawes?

Not bad. Not bad at all.

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

Plumlee's contract was certainly not "market value." Better players got like 49 million less dollars.

this trade proves beyond a shadow of a doubt, in retrospect, that of course it was market value.

that doesn't mean we should have done it.... but the fact other teams would have make it the very definition of "market value"

and what other players get....... doesn't have a damn thing to do with what teams are willing to pay for miles plumlee. what other teams are willing to pay for miles plumlee determines his market value. guys like dedmon obviously were undervalued in retrospect.

[drew881]

Late to this thread, but excited nonetheless. How do we see this trade affecting minutes? I'm a bit worried Hawes ends up taking Thon's minutes in an effort to win now. I'm also curious to see what Plumlee does in Charlotte. Frank/Plumlee lineup will be starting with Zeller out?

[Mags FTW]

It WASN'T a dream...

[BucksRule18]

It WASN'T a dream...

I really hope Charlotte doesn't realize they traded for the other Plumlee before signing the trade agreement!

[AussieBuck]

Lots of new pages here and I'm really, really **** drunk. Any news? No picks?

[jute2003]

I guess this is another feather in the message board posters have no clue wtf they're talking about cap.

[M-C-G]

Lots of new pages here and I'm really, really **** drunk. Any news? No picks?

No picks homie

[AussieBuck]

Lots of new pages here and I'm really, really **** drunk. Any news? No picks?

No picks homie

Oh **** yeah baby. I even like Plms relatively speaking but yeah, see ya round Miles.

[M-C-G]

Lots of new pages here and I'm really, really **** drunk. Any news? No picks?

No picks homie

Oh **** yeah baby. I even like Plms relatively speaking but yeah, see ya round Miles.

I think this trade is one of those that works out pretty well for both teams. Plum with a regular role and Kemba running the PnR should get him back to being the dunking donkey we all knew he could be.

[AussieBuck]

No picks homie

Oh **** yeah baby. I even like Plms relatively speaking but yeah, see ya round Miles.

I think this trade is one of those that works out pretty well for both teams. Plum with a regular role and Kemba running the PnR should get him back to being the dunking donkey we all knew he could be.

Charitable but they are getting a volleyball player for $50 million. Whatevs tho.

[M-C-G]

Oh **** yeah baby. I even like Plms relatively speaking but yeah, see ya round Miles.

I think this trade is one of those that works out pretty well for both teams. Plum with a regular role and Kemba running the PnR should get him back to being the dunking donkey we all knew he could be.

Charitable but they are getting a volleyball player for $50 million. Whatevs tho.

They also get their 8.4M MLE ( I saw that number and it didn't seem right, but that's what a Charlotte poster said) to add something back in free agency that they wouldn't have had otherwise. I have no idea the logistics of it, but the poster said that was a big incentive for Cho to make the move.

[H2tObes]

Hopefully for Charlotte Plums can revert to who he was last season. He has looked like he hasn't ever played basketball before all season

[humanrefutation]

Call me crazy but I'm shocked people want to get rid of Monroe. I guess if you think he's going to opt out and get paid more elsewhere. I don't see a reason he can't stick around on a deal similar to what he makes now. He's a good player to have. I think we're still caught up on the fact that we gave him a max deal, even though we all knew the cap was going to skyrocket.

Monroe has really surprised me this year. Came in lean, gives max effort, took the new role in stride. That all said, he's not a guy I want to watch play for my favorite team for another year or more. Still a really bad defender and overall frustrating player. Sell "high" right now.

I think I'm on the same boat. I definitely give him a ton of credit for the way he's worked his ass off to become a better fit. He's not the same plodding center who sits in the paint and waits to get the ball - he's leading fast breaks and working his ass off and trying like hell on defense. He's a good teammate.

If he was about 10% better at finishing around the rim, I'd even consider giving him a similar contract again because that would make him an elite offensive player - with the caveat that I'd expect Kidd, or whoever replaced him, to implement a defensive scheme that isn't so dependent on Monroe closing out shooters. I could see him leading the second unit.

But right now, he's not a good enough finisher, and he is a massive liability on defense when you already have to cover for Jabari. He's also going to want a huge contract that I'm not giving him.

So, I'd definitely try to move him.

[SupremeHustle]

Henson most likely but I doubt we'd be lucky enough to do a complete salary dump like we just did with Plumlord

I do too but I can't see getting an expiring for him. Maybe there's another dumb team out there

Sure, there's always a dumb team. Maybe the Wizards would be interested in doing a deal. They're rolling now, though so maybe not.

I agree. It's a minor miracle what the Bucks just pulled off, so I'm hopeful that they can do it again.

Couldn't have said it better myself. You're my favorite poster.

And you're mine. Cheers.

It became known as the first case of message board schizophrenia, but not the last.

[BucksRule18]

The one good thing about both Hawes and Hibbert is that they're making about 80% of their FT's over the past couple of seasons. Both John Henson and Plumlee missed half their FT's the few times they went to the line (although John has been around 70% this year).

[GrandAdmiralDan]

Can we also trade one of Henson or Hawes till the deadline? Preferably John.

The old CBA allowed you to flip a player, but he could be the only player in the package you're sending to another team. No combining him with other players. You could take multiple players in return though.

That was a frequent misconception. You could always turn around and trade the player again as soon as acquired, even in a package with other players. What you could not do is aggregate his salary with other salaries in order to make the trade legal. If you could separate the trade into components that didn't require that, you could still do it as just one big trade.

For example, we can trade Hawes and X for Y and Z, if both Hawes for Y works and X for Z works. Then it can be all one trade.

[Aaron It Out]

Call me crazy but I'm shocked people want to get rid of Monroe. I guess if you think he's going to opt out and get paid more elsewhere. I don't see a reason he can't stick around on a deal similar to what he makes now. He's a good player to have. I think we're still caught up on the fact that we gave him a max deal, even though we all knew the cap was going to skyrocket.

$17 million for a backup center. No thanks.

If you were confident of him sustaining this level of play, 17m would be a good value even as a half timer.

Right, if he's playing 30+ minutes a game that's hardly a backup. Henson and Plumlee are backups. Guys that you keep for "oh ****" moments. I think we'd really miss Monroe but that's just me. For being so talent deprived I'm just a little surprised we want to dump more talent. Nobody is giving anything up for Monroe with that player option.

[coolhandluke121]

Can we also trade one of Henson or Hawes till the deadline? Preferably John.

The old CBA allowed you to flip a player, but he could be the only player in the package you're sending to another team. No combining him with other players. You could take multiple players in return though.

That was a frequent misconception. You could always turn around and trade the player again as soon as acquired, even in a package with other players. What you could not do is aggregate his salary with other salaries in order to make the trade legal. If you could separate the trade into components that didn't require that, you could still do it as just one big trade.

For example, we can trade Hawes and X for Y and Z, if both Hawes for Y works and X for Z works. Then it can be all one trade.

That rings a bell. In practice, it often made a big difference because matching salaries within 25% was much easier with combined contracts. I think the media often misquoted the rule for that reason.

The real question though it whether that rule is still basically the same. Not that I care much - perfectly fine with an extra year for Hawes at $6m, and it's debatable whether he'll even opt in.