MCW traded for Tony Snell - Deal Done

[Beorn]

4/75 offer for July 1st is ready

[ReasonablySober]

4/75 offer for July 1st is ready

Hammond's boned RFA before. Let's see if he learned his lesson .

[imithanos]

So now we're hoping Snell gets a Plumlee deal???

[AussieBuck]

$25 mil ayrar for Snell and Moose if it's 4 years, maybe a bit more change if they want 3 years

[freewhitemoon]

watch us let monroe go just to use all the space on Tony fml

[Dante80]

Snell will be worth around 4/48 in FA after this post-season performance. He will get it.

If we give him 4/40, I think we can get him to stay. He won't settle for less, and he really shouldn't.

The guy is 25, good on defense, has a great work ethic, has bonded with the team and can be a very reliable perimeter shooter. I think that the Bucks development team can work with those attributes in mind, and help him reach a good peak.

Shedding him off is not a good option imo.

[Gam]

watch us let monroe go just to use all the space on Tony fml

I'd be fine with this honestly. No Monroe means Thon is our C of the future which he is already. No Tony means Vaughn is our SG of the future (lol) or we're banking on Jabari returning to a starting forward role and Khris moving back to SG and if that happens Tony is still a good 6th man.

[Pachinko_]

Snell will be worth around 4/48 in FA after this post-season performance. He will get it.

If we give him 4/40, I think we can get him to stay. He won't settle for less, and he really shouldn't.

The guy is 25, good on defense, has a great work ethic, has bonded with the team and can be a very reliable perimeter shooter. I think that the Bucks development team can work with those attributes in mind, and help him reach a good peak.

Shedding him off is not a good option imo.

I'd love to keep him too
The problem is if we pay Snell (and Moose opts in) we can't afford anybody else, and we really need one more player who can create his shot off the dribble because Snell can't.
It's gonna be a difficult summer cap wise

[Dante80]

I'd love to keep him too
The problem is if we pay Snell (and Moose opts in) we can't afford anybody else, and we really need one more player who can create his shot off the dribble.
It's gonna be a difficult summer cap wise

Agreed on that. I don't think that we can buy anyone to do that this year though anyway. At least, not in a reliable, long term basis.

My personal opinion is that we cannot properly move to a contender status roster before the 2018-9 season ends. We really need the Parker dilemma concluded. Also, by then we will have seen whether the Brogdon and Thon projects pan out as hoped or/and expected.

With that in mind, and given the expectation to get to the playoffs next season (winning one series would be the ultimate objective here), I would target the next off-season for a big move. By then - and if everything goes well - Milwaukee will also have emerged a lot more enticing target for serious FAs.

Thus, out of our current roster I think the proper move would be to keep Delly and Tonny. And dump as much salary cap as we can until the next off-season.

I really, really, REALLY wish we could keep Beasley too, the guy is a very positive element in the locker room and gym. I don't think that we can do that really though.

[Pachinko_]

I'd love to keep him too
The problem is if we pay Snell (and Moose opts in) we can't afford anybody else, and we really need one more player who can create his shot off the dribble.
It's gonna be a difficult summer cap wise

Agreed on that. I don't think that we can buy anyone to do that this year though anyway. At least, not in a reliable, long term basis.

My personal opinion is that we cannot properly move to a contender status roster before the 2018-9 season ends. We really need the Parker dilemma concluded. Also, by then we will have seen whether the Brogdon and Thon projects pan out as hoped or/and expected.

With that in mind, and given the expectation to get to the playoffs next season (winning one series would be the ultimate objective here), I would target the next off-season for a big move. By then - and if everything goes well - Milwaukee will also have emerged a lot more enticing target for serious FAs.

Thus, out of our current roster I think the proper move would be to keep Delly and Tonny. And dump as much salary cap as we can until the next off-season.

I really, really, REALLY wish we could keep Beasley too, the guy is a very positive element in the locker room and gym. I don't think that we can do that really though.

Yep
My goal for this summer is to make cap space: be incredibly frugal with new contracts and try to get rid any big contract you can. Moose & Hawes, let them expire. Henson, Telly, even Delly, I wouldnt think twice if there's a chance to get them off the books. You want a Delly on the team but you want him on his Cavs salary. Try to find him the draft, DLeague, Europe. He is out there somewhere, friggin Jonathon Simmons paid out of his pocket to try out in the DLeague and two years later he plays 15mins for the Spurs.

Snell is like Schrödinger's cat, he's both the guy you want to keep and the guy you want to get rid of at the same time. It all comes down to price.

[skones]

I'm curious to see if Snell gets an offer less than 3&D wings of previous years because he's Tony Snell.

[freewhitemoon]

watch us let monroe go just to use all the space on Tony fml

I'd be fine with this honestly. No Monroe means Thon is our C of the future which he is already. No Tony means Vaughn is our SG of the future (lol) or we're banking on Jabari returning to a starting forward role and Khris moving back to SG and if that happens Tony is still a good 6th man.

Overpaying Snell is what my main grievance is, not Monroe leaving. I fear that Hammond will just feel comfortable overpaying with the space he gets from Monroe opting out instead of trying to find better FAs.

But I think you underestimate how important Monroe was to this team, especially relative to Snell. Snell was a stopgap who didn't make us worse but didn't really bring much value either. Monroe was actively good and singlehandedly gave us a good bench. I think it'd be much easier finding a replacement for Snell than Monroe. Just because Tony leaves dosent mean we have to start Vaughn.

[coolhandluke121]

$25 mil ayrar for Snell and Moose if it's 4 years, maybe a bit more change if they want 3 years

I like that. They could just offer Moose the exact same contract they gave him last time. Force him to stay motivated for another payday. Then Snell gets his 8-figure salary with a chance at free agency again in a few years when it's less of a buyer's market.

[LuessiT]

I get that Snell's skill set is simple but it's also effective. Our coach doesn't like running plays but the dribble handoff we've been running with Snell and Giannis could be used with much higher freakuency. Giannis defender goes over the screen, Giannis could instead fake the DBH and drive to the hoop. There is no reason to not run this play 10-15 times as long as Snell shoots like 35% in those.

[skones]

I get that Snell's skill set is simple but it's also effective. Our coach doesn't like running plays but the dribble handoff we've been running with Snell and Giannis could be used with much higher freakuency. Giannis defender goes over the screen, Giannis could instead fake the DBH and drive to the hoop. There is no reason to not run this play 10-15 times as long as Snell shoots like 35% in those.

We were 5.1 points per 100 possessions worse with Snell on the floor than we were when he was off the majority of that disparity was actually on the defensive end. How effective was he exactly?

[LuessiT]

I get that Snell's skill set is simple but it's also effective. Our coach doesn't like running plays but the dribble handoff we've been running with Snell and Giannis could be used with much higher freakuency. Giannis defender goes over the screen, Giannis could instead fake the DBH and drive to the hoop. There is no reason to not run this play 10-15 times as long as Snell shoots like 35% in those.

We were 5.1 points per 100 possessions worse with Snell on the floor than we were when he was off the majority of that disparity was actually on the defensive end. How effective was he exactly?

You completely missed the point. There is a play we've used like 2 to 3 times per game I'd say that works and that should work the same way if you use it 10 to 15 times per game. Snell is a very limited offensive player other than shooting the 3-ball but if you play more to his strengths even he can be effective on offense.

[crkone]

One day people will realize that Snell is from the defensive school of Royal Ivey.

[skones]

I get that Snell's skill set is simple but it's also effective. Our coach doesn't like running plays but the dribble handoff we've been running with Snell and Giannis could be used with much higher freakuency. Giannis defender goes over the screen, Giannis could instead fake the DBH and drive to the hoop. There is no reason to not run this play 10-15 times as long as Snell shoots like 35% in those.

We were 5.1 points per 100 possessions worse with Snell on the floor than we were when he was off the majority of that disparity was actually on the defensive end. How effective was he exactly?

You completely missed the point. There is a play we've used like 2 to 3 times per game I'd say that works and that should work the same way if you use it 10 to 15 times per game. Snell is a very limited offensive player other than shooting the 3-ball but if you play more to his strengths even he can be effective on offense.

I didn't completely miss the point. Point blank, Snell filled a role for us, but his level of effectiveness has been greatly exaggerated. I'll also say this. If you think because a play works 2 to 3 times it will work 10-15 times, you don't understand the way the game works. Teams catch onto those things and alter their defense. Also, if a play results in a shot that's hit at a 35% clip, the play isn't very good.

[LuessiT]

We were 5.1 points per 100 possessions worse with Snell on the floor than we were when he was off the majority of that disparity was actually on the defensive end. How effective was he exactly?

You completely missed the point. There is a play we've used like 2 to 3 times per game I'd say that works and that should work the same way if you use it 10 to 15 times per game. Snell is a very limited offensive player other than shooting the 3-ball but if you play more to his strengths even he can be effective on offense.

I didn't completely miss the point. Point blank, Snell filled a role for us, but his level of effectiveness has been greatly exaggerated. I'll also say this. If you think because a play works 2 to 3 times it will work 10-15 times, you don't understand the way the game works. Teams catch onto those things and alter their defense. Also, if a play results in a shot that's hit at a 35% clip, the play isn't very good.

There is not much you can alter about that play though. If Snell's defender does fight over, Snell can cut in the opposite direction, forcing a reaction out of Giannis' defender. If Snell's defender doesn't fight over the screen either Giannis' defender sticks to Giannis which results in a 3-point shot or he double teams which lets Giannis fake the DBH and drive to the hoop. There is no way to reliably stop that play. And being able to shoot a 3 at 35% in half-court offense at any point in the shot clock is pretty good. And that was a rough estimate, that number could be higher.

[jschligs]

You completely missed the point. There is a play we've used like 2 to 3 times per game I'd say that works and that should work the same way if you use it 10 to 15 times per game. Snell is a very limited offensive player other than shooting the 3-ball but if you play more to his strengths even he can be effective on offense.

I didn't completely miss the point. Point blank, Snell filled a role for us, but his level of effectiveness has been greatly exaggerated. I'll also say this. If you think because a play works 2 to 3 times it will work 10-15 times, you don't understand the way the game works. Teams catch onto those things and alter their defense. Also, if a play results in a shot that's hit at a 35% clip, the play isn't very good.

There is not much you can alter about that play though. If Snell's defender does fight over, Snell can cut in the opposite direction, forcing a reaction out of Giannis' defender. If Snell's defender doesn't fight over the screen either Giannis' defender sticks to Giannis which results in a 3-point shot or he double teams which lets Giannis fake the DBH and drive to the hoop. There is no way to reliably stop that play. And being able to shoot a 3 at 35% in half-court offense at any point in the shot clock is pretty good. And that was a rough estimate, that number could be higher.

If there was no good way to stop that play why wouldn't we run it 40 times a game? There is absolutely ways to stop it and teams will adjust.