Trade Targets (postcript on yesterday-other teams)

BobbyLight · Post #6741 » by **BobbyLight** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:05 pm

Guess I was wrong about not much happening today.

SkilesTheLimit · Post #6742 » by **SkilesTheLimit** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:05 pm

Things seem to be picking up. Woj's phone must be constantly buzzing off at this point. Less than 3 hours to go....

xTitan · Post #6743 » by **xTitan** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:05 pm

TroyD92 wrote:
xTitan wrote:
Boilerup21 wrote:
Miller is George Karl's guy.

Karl does like old players....Ersan for Nick Stauskus and filler....boom, everyone is happy

Ersan isn't old though.

He is 34

dc634 · Post #6744 » by **dc634** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:05 pm

tski1972 wrote:could the Bucks have taken on McGee/1st?

Sure, but it wouldn't make as much sense for this team. McGee's salary would take place of Larry's and that would be pointless. The '6ers aren't going to be using that cap in FA as they are all in on the draft.

JayMKE · Post #6745 » by **JayMKE** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:05 pm

Newz wrote:Can anyone explain to me why we want Ty Lawson?

I keep seeing people wanting to trade for him. Why? Why does anyone think that's a good move?

pure point, lock up for few more years on a favorable contract, would force Knight to play off the ball?

TroyD92 · Post #6746 » by **TroyD92** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:06 pm

JayMKE wrote:
Newz wrote:Can anyone explain to me why we want Ty Lawson?

I keep seeing people wanting to trade for him. Why? Why does anyone think that's a good move?

pure point, lock up for few more years on a favorable contract, would force Knight to play off the ball?

Or us to get rid of Knight. That would be my hope.

GHOSTofSIKMA · Post #6747 » by **GHOSTofSIKMA** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:06 pm

we aren't trading Henson, and dumping sanders without a big coming back some how

dc634 · Post #6748 » by **dc634** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:06 pm

We should know how things look for the Bucks within the hour with the practice coming up, right?

LUKE23 · Post #6749 » by **LUKE23** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:06 pm

Newz wrote:Can anyone explain to me why we want Ty Lawson?

I keep seeing people wanting to trade for him. Why? Why does anyone think that's a good move?

I think the rationale would be he'd be acquired to take Knight's place. He will cost less than Knight most likely and I think the chances of him being better the next two seasons after this one are well over 50%. I don't think he'd be the long-term answer, we'd still need to find a young one, but Lawson is 27, not 32. He'd be a 2.5 year stopgap and he's a top half of league starter.

M-C-G · Post #6750 » by **M-C-G** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:06 pm

Nebula1 wrote:
M-C-G wrote:
Nebula1 wrote:Trade Knight and Henson to Houston...

Trade DMo to Milwaukee

ok

http://basketball.realgm.com/tradecheck ... de/6572136

Done, I'll have my people draw up the paper work.

MKE IN: DMo, Capela, PaPa, Canaan

HOU IN: Knight, Henson, JOB

Maybe follow that up with a 3 way deal with SAC and DEN. Offer up some of those pieces to Denver for Lawson;

SAC IN: Ersan, 2nd
SAC OUT: Thompson, Stauskas, Cassipi

DEN IN: Stauskas, PaPa, Bayless, 2016 1st, Clippers 1st
DEN OUT: Lawson

MKE IN: Lawson, Cassipi, Thompson
MKE OUT: Ersan, Bayless, PaPa, 2016 1st, 2017 Clippers 1st, 2015 2nd

MKE
PG Lawson, Canaan
SG Middleton, Mayo
SF Dudley, Cassipi
PF: Giannis, Thompson
C : DMo, ZaZa, Capela

Amazeballs.

SkilesTheLimit · Post #6751 » by **SkilesTheLimit** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:07 pm

Newz wrote:Can anyone explain to me why we want Ty Lawson?

I keep seeing people wanting to trade for him. Why? Why does anyone think that's a good move?

1. He's a better PG than Knight
2. It prevents us from feeling pressure to match an exorbitant contract that Knight gets as a RFA

wichmae · Post #6752 » by **wichmae** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:08 pm

I guess Philly is banking on a OKC meltdown in 2016. Going rate for late firsts are way less than 17.5 mil theyre going to have to pay in salary to McGee

Giannis Parker · Post #6753 » by **Giannis Parker** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:08 pm

At this point, still think we are standing still.

A deal with the Kings makes more sense during the draft where we can trade our pick, likely 17th, and Ersan for the Kings pick, likely 10-12.

That would give the Bucks the ammo they need to package that pick along with Henson to move into the 6-8 range and grab the Center they want for the long term.

The Wet Whistle · Post #6754 » by **The Wet Whistle** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:09 pm

Plus Lawson could take Tyus Jones under his wing next year 8-)

Newz · Post #6755 » by **Newz** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:09 pm

JayMKE wrote:
Newz wrote:Can anyone explain to me why we want Ty Lawson?

I keep seeing people wanting to trade for him. Why? Why does anyone think that's a good move?

pure point, lock up for few more years on a favorable contract, would force Knight to play off the ball?

Lawson is a sub-six foot PG whose game relies a lot on his speed. I agree we likely have him for the remainder of his good years and then he expires... but do you really think that the Lawson/Knight backcourt is a good idea? Our defensive system is based on length and that combination lacks length big time. In addition you are likely looking at one of the most ball dominant backcourts in the entire league.

So you give up assets to add Lawson for 2-3 years and then either lose him or give him a bad contract into his 30's because odds are he won't be much of a player in his later years given his size.

To me adding Lawson seems like the very definition of a Herb Kohl move UNLESS the idea is to trade Knight/let him go in free agency. Then we could use Lawson as a stop gap starter until we find a better option... and even then it still seems like a Herb Kohl move because you are just using a veteran to prop up your win total for a couple of years.

Post #6756 » by **humanrefutation** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:09 pm

Randive is nuts. Let's go get DeMarcus.

Henson/Knight/Clips 1st/Bucks lotto-protected 2016 1st for Cousins.

EastSideBucksFan · Post #6757 » by **EastSideBucksFan** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:10 pm

Newz wrote:Can anyone explain to me why we want Ty Lawson?

I keep seeing people wanting to trade for him. Why? Why does anyone think that's a good move?

He's 2nd in the NBA in assists and averaging almost double assists what our starting point guard is averaging.

TroyD92 · Post #6758 » by **TroyD92** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:10 pm

humanrefutation wrote:Randive is nuts. Let's go get DeMarcus.

Henson/Knight/Clips 1st/Bucks lotto-protected 2016 1st for Cousins.

Kings would laugh.

Newz · Post #6759 » by **Newz** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:11 pm

LUKE23 wrote:
Newz wrote:Can anyone explain to me why we want Ty Lawson?

I keep seeing people wanting to trade for him. Why? Why does anyone think that's a good move?

I think the rationale would be he'd be acquired to take Knight's place. He will cost less than Knight most likely and I think the chances of him being better the next two seasons after this one are well over 50%. I don't think he'd be the long-term answer, we'd still need to find a young one, but Lawson is 27, not 32. He'd be a 2.5 year stopgap and he's a top half of league starter.

I could be wrong. I think the plan would be to retain Knight and run with a Lawson/Knight backcourt.

Maybe I'm wrong though. If I am that plan isn't that bad, I guess. But it seems like adding a 2.5 year stop gap to inflate your win total is the exact opposite of what the owners promised to do and what I'd want to see.

xTitan · Post #6760 » by **xTitan** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:11 pm

SkilesTheLimit wrote:
Newz wrote:Can anyone explain to me why we want Ty Lawson?

I keep seeing people wanting to trade for him. Why? Why does anyone think that's a good move?

1. He's a better PG than Knight
2. It prevents us from feeling pressure to match an exorbitant contract that Knight gets as a RFA

Isn't the strength of Giannis running the half court offense moving forward?