ImageImage

POLL: Rate John Hammond's Bucks Tenure

Moderators: paulpressey25, MickeyDavis

Fill in the blank: John Hammond was a ___________ GM.

Horrific
9
8%
Bad
34
28%
Average
54
45%
Good
22
18%
Tremendous
1
1%
 
Total votes: 120

User avatar
Wooderson
RealGM
Posts: 12,557
And1: 5,281
Joined: Mar 03, 2008

Re: POLL: Rate John Hammond's Bucks Tenure 

Post#41 » by Wooderson » Wed May 31, 2017 7:30 pm

Matches Malone wrote:I voted average.

My question though, is if this team get's good, do we praise Hammond for laying the foundation of what we are (John Wick) or does more credit go to the new GM for continuing to build upon the team and putting the right pieces around Giannis? 9 seasons and not much to show for seems like it should be an obvious failure, but if we're good with the core he helped assemble, does that deserve more praise?

I was initially down we lost Hammond, but I'm also excited for a fresh start. However, I'm scared this ownership is going to want us longing for greener pastures.


Depends. Is it the development of guys on the roster (namely Thon/Brogdon) that gets us to contender status or is it the auxiliary moves made by new management? Honestly I think the franchise is pretty screwed if Thon doesn't become at least a solid starter. No idea how you fill that spot otherwise.
Wiscfan92
Starter
Posts: 2,178
And1: 206
Joined: Feb 01, 2010
Location: In the Sports Section
     

Re: POLL: Rate John Hammond's Bucks Tenure 

Post#42 » by Wiscfan92 » Wed May 31, 2017 7:33 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:
M-C-G wrote:
Wiscfan92 wrote:His highs were high (albeit scarce) but his lows were much lower which is why I voted average. Maybe a tad below average if that was an option.


There is no high higher than Giannis, which also leads me to believe their is no inverse low lower than that. Hammond was just as Herb wanted, mediocre. Good for us that he has been pretty good the last couple of years and will leave the team in a better position than he found it.


The way I look at it is there wasn't a single negative that had the inverse effect as drafting Giannis or trading for Middleton and Knight. If he did something catastrophic that negated what Giannis provides, I could see an argument for average. But there isn't any move on the negative side that even comes close.


There wasn't one specific move that was that negative, but I'd argue that you could say combining all of negatives he had would come pretty close.
Play your role till your role change. Pay your dues till your dues paid.
User avatar
ReasonablySober
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 98,025
And1: 34,749
Joined: Dec 02, 2001
Location: Cheap dinner. Watch basketball. Bone down.
Contact:

Re: POLL: Rate John Hammond's Bucks Tenure 

Post#43 » by ReasonablySober » Wed May 31, 2017 7:36 pm

Wiscfan92 wrote:
ReasonablySober wrote:
M-C-G wrote:
There is no high higher than Giannis, which also leads me to believe their is no inverse low lower than that. Hammond was just as Herb wanted, mediocre. Good for us that he has been pretty good the last couple of years and will leave the team in a better position than he found it.


The way I look at it is there wasn't a single negative that had the inverse effect as drafting Giannis or trading for Middleton and Knight. If he did something catastrophic that negated what Giannis provides, I could see an argument for average. But there isn't any move on the negative side that even comes close.


There wasn't one specific move that was that negative, but I'd argue that you could say combining all of negatives he had would come pretty close.


If you could take back the worst of the worst (Tobes trade, Gooden signing, MCW > Lakers pick) but it meant you didn't sit here with Giannis (let alone Giannis and Middleton), would you? Because that isn't even a discussion in my mind. Unless you weigh those numerous bad moves as equal to the good, I don't see how you can rate him average or worse.
User avatar
skones
RealGM
Posts: 36,969
And1: 17,101
Joined: Jul 20, 2004
Location: Milwaukee
       

Re: POLL: Rate John Hammond's Bucks Tenure 

Post#44 » by skones » Wed May 31, 2017 7:38 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:
Wiscfan92 wrote:
ReasonablySober wrote:
The way I look at it is there wasn't a single negative that had the inverse effect as drafting Giannis or trading for Middleton and Knight. If he did something catastrophic that negated what Giannis provides, I could see an argument for average. But there isn't any move on the negative side that even comes close.


There wasn't one specific move that was that negative, but I'd argue that you could say combining all of negatives he had would come pretty close.


If you could take back the worst of the worst (Tobes trade, Gooden signing, MCW > Lakers pick) but it meant you didn't sit here with Giannis (let alone Giannis and Middleton), would you? Because that isn't even a discussion in my mind. Unless you weigh those numerous bad moves as equal to the good, I don't see how you can rate him average or worse.


Explain to me the position this team was in in June of 2013. 5 seasons into Hammond's tenure.
User avatar
ReasonablySober
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 98,025
And1: 34,749
Joined: Dec 02, 2001
Location: Cheap dinner. Watch basketball. Bone down.
Contact:

Re: POLL: Rate John Hammond's Bucks Tenure 

Post#45 » by ReasonablySober » Wed May 31, 2017 7:39 pm

skones wrote:
ReasonablySober wrote:
Wiscfan92 wrote:
There wasn't one specific move that was that negative, but I'd argue that you could say combining all of negatives he had would come pretty close.


If you could take back the worst of the worst (Tobes trade, Gooden signing, MCW > Lakers pick) but it meant you didn't sit here with Giannis (let alone Giannis and Middleton), would you? Because that isn't even a discussion in my mind. Unless you weigh those numerous bad moves as equal to the good, I don't see how you can rate him average or worse.


Explain to me the position this team was in in June of 2013. 5 seasons into Hammond's tenure.


Coming off a season in which they won seven more games with a first round loss.

But answer the question I posed.
Wiscfan92
Starter
Posts: 2,178
And1: 206
Joined: Feb 01, 2010
Location: In the Sports Section
     

Re: POLL: Rate John Hammond's Bucks Tenure 

Post#46 » by Wiscfan92 » Wed May 31, 2017 7:44 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:
Wiscfan92 wrote:
ReasonablySober wrote:
The way I look at it is there wasn't a single negative that had the inverse effect as drafting Giannis or trading for Middleton and Knight. If he did something catastrophic that negated what Giannis provides, I could see an argument for average. But there isn't any move on the negative side that even comes close.


There wasn't one specific move that was that negative, but I'd argue that you could say combining all of negatives he had would come pretty close.


If you could take back the worst of the worst (Tobes trade, Gooden signing, MCW > Lakers pick) but it meant you didn't sit here with Giannis (let alone Giannis and Middleton), would you? Because that isn't even a discussion in my mind. Unless you weigh those numerous bad moves as equal to the good, I don't see how you can rate him average or worse.


Of course I wouldn't want to trade all of those bad moves for Giannis. But for me, getting lucky on one draft pick doesn't make him above average to me considering the team's lack of success while he was here. I understand it's not solely on him, but he does deserve a good portion of blame considering he was in charge of putting the teams together. And yes, I get Herb was also a factor in this.
Play your role till your role change. Pay your dues till your dues paid.
User avatar
skones
RealGM
Posts: 36,969
And1: 17,101
Joined: Jul 20, 2004
Location: Milwaukee
       

Re: POLL: Rate John Hammond's Bucks Tenure 

Post#47 » by skones » Wed May 31, 2017 7:45 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:
skones wrote:
ReasonablySober wrote:
If you could take back the worst of the worst (Tobes trade, Gooden signing, MCW > Lakers pick) but it meant you didn't sit here with Giannis (let alone Giannis and Middleton), would you? Because that isn't even a discussion in my mind. Unless you weigh those numerous bad moves as equal to the good, I don't see how you can rate him average or worse.


Explain to me the position this team was in in June of 2013. 5 seasons into Hammond's tenure.


Coming off a season in which they won seven more games with a first round loss.

But answer the question I posed.


You're glossing over the point, and you know it. You're 5 years into Hammond's tenure. Monta Ellis and Brandon Jennings just **** the bed together and everyone knew it would happen. They're both on their way out of town, and you're picking 15. What is your franchise outlook?

You think Hammond is some sort of magician standing on stage, holding a top hat, and saying, "Wait until they see this!" No, he's not, because he knows the odds of Giannis EVER sniffing the level he has, let alone the level he did the year prior, are slim. He's sitting there sweating his ass off because he knows he's on the verge of getting his ass canned. Just because he reached into that hat, and whispers, "holy ****, there was actually a rabbit in there" 3 seasons later doesn't undo all of the piss-poor moves he made to put the franchise into that position.

As a GM you are NEVER one move here, or one move there. You are a collection of your moves. If Giannis is a 10, and you've got a collection of a moves that are -1s and -2s and -3s. Does that not add up?
User avatar
Nowak008
RealGM
Posts: 14,588
And1: 4,303
Joined: Jul 07, 2006
Location: Book Publisher
Contact:

Re: POLL: Rate John Hammond's Bucks Tenure 

Post#48 » by Nowak008 » Wed May 31, 2017 7:46 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:
Ok, would you rather be the Hawks? Or the Raptors? Memphis? Teams that consistently win and do relatively fine in the playoffs, but are clearly never going to contend?

That's what I always find amazing about the crowd that kills Hammond for the lack of playoff victories, as if winning a first round series is remotely worth celebrating.

I don't care that it took nine years. What I care about is that the Bucks have a conceivable path to contention when their window opens.


The Hawks have made the playoffs every year since Hambone was our GM, made it to the 2nd round 5 times, and had a 60 win season where they made the conference finals.... yes I'd much rather have been the Hawks.

Griz made the playoffs the last 7 years in a row. Made the 2nd round 3 times, including the conference finals once (in a much tougher western conference). They could have possibly played in the finals if Conley doesn't get hurt vs the Warriors.... Yes I would have much rather have been the Grizz.

Both of those teams had sustained good runs and if they would have gotten a little luck they could have played in the finals. Call me Herb Kohl, but I'll take those teams success all day. Plus I still think it's a debate who had more upside those teams vs our current team.

(Craptors no because I don't think they are very good)
Image
John Hammond apologists:
emunney wrote:
Ron Swanson wrote: 9 YEARS!? like any of that matters


THAT LITERALLY IS HIS TENURE.
User avatar
ReasonablySober
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 98,025
And1: 34,749
Joined: Dec 02, 2001
Location: Cheap dinner. Watch basketball. Bone down.
Contact:

Re: POLL: Rate John Hammond's Bucks Tenure 

Post#49 » by ReasonablySober » Wed May 31, 2017 7:46 pm

There seems to be a disconnect. Hammond deserves all the blame for his negative moves, but when they're positive it's luck. Okay, whatever guys. I can't argue with that so I won't. I'm moving on.
User avatar
emunney
RealGM
Posts: 60,039
And1: 36,432
Joined: Feb 22, 2005
Location: where takes go to be pampered

Re: POLL: Rate John Hammond's Bucks Tenure 

Post#50 » by emunney » Wed May 31, 2017 7:49 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:
emunney wrote:
ReasonablySober wrote:
This is a dumb argument. Do you need a list of guys perceived as good GMs who lost enough to find themselves at the top of the draft? Even multiple times?


Yes.


Ainge, Presti, Cho, Griffin and Riley off the top of my head.


Ainge has been GM for 14 seasons, has made the playoffs 11 times, deliberately stripped down to rebuild twice. Has a ring, another Finals appearance, just lost in the ECF and has the #1 pick this year and another likely high lotto pick next year.

Presti has made the playoffs 7 of 10 years after 1 stripdown. Has been to 4 WCFs and 1 Finals.

Griffin has only ever been GM for the Cavs. He may be perceived as a good GM, but I don't see where he's done anything super impressive. He's also been in the Finals every year, so why is he listed?

In 22 years as Heat president, Pat Riley has missed the playoffs 5 times and won 3 rings.

Wtf is Cho doing here?
Here are more legal notices regarding the Posts
Wiscfan92
Starter
Posts: 2,178
And1: 206
Joined: Feb 01, 2010
Location: In the Sports Section
     

Re: POLL: Rate John Hammond's Bucks Tenure 

Post#51 » by Wiscfan92 » Wed May 31, 2017 7:54 pm

His trades were not luck, I will certainly give him credit for that. But to not acknowledge that the Giannis pick was somewhat lucky is a little foolish to me. I know he was one of few people around the league scouting him, but like others have stated I don't think even Hammond in his wildest dreams thought he could turn into a top-10 player in the league. That is where I bring luck into this evaluation.
Play your role till your role change. Pay your dues till your dues paid.
User avatar
ReasonablySober
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 98,025
And1: 34,749
Joined: Dec 02, 2001
Location: Cheap dinner. Watch basketball. Bone down.
Contact:

Re: POLL: Rate John Hammond's Bucks Tenure 

Post#52 » by ReasonablySober » Wed May 31, 2017 7:54 pm

emunney wrote:
ReasonablySober wrote:
emunney wrote:
Yes.


Ainge, Presti, Cho, Griffin and Riley off the top of my head.


Ainge has been GM for 14 seasons, has made the playoffs 11 times, deliberately stripped down to rebuild twice. Has a ring, another Finals appearance, just lost in the ECF and has the #1 pick this year and another likely high lotto pick next year.

Presti has made the playoffs 7 of 10 years after 1 stripdown. Has been to 4 WCFs and 1 Finals.

Griffin has only ever been GM for the Cavs. He may be perceived as a good GM, but I don't see where he's done anything super impressive. He's also been in the Finals every year, so why is he listed?

In 22 years as Heat president, Pat Riley has missed the playoffs 5 times and won 3 rings.

Wtf is Cho doing here?


And if the Bucks go on a run of seven straight playoff appearances after they bottomed out, Hammond gets the credit and you guys eat crow, right?
User avatar
emunney
RealGM
Posts: 60,039
And1: 36,432
Joined: Feb 22, 2005
Location: where takes go to be pampered

Re: POLL: Rate John Hammond's Bucks Tenure 

Post#53 » by emunney » Wed May 31, 2017 7:58 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:
emunney wrote:
ReasonablySober wrote:
Ainge, Presti, Cho, Griffin and Riley off the top of my head.


Ainge has been GM for 14 seasons, has made the playoffs 11 times, deliberately stripped down to rebuild twice. Has a ring, another Finals appearance, just lost in the ECF and has the #1 pick this year and another likely high lotto pick next year.

Presti has made the playoffs 7 of 10 years after 1 stripdown. Has been to 4 WCFs and 1 Finals.

Griffin has only ever been GM for the Cavs. He may be perceived as a good GM, but I don't see where he's done anything super impressive. He's also been in the Finals every year, so why is he listed?

In 22 years as Heat president, Pat Riley has missed the playoffs 5 times and won 3 rings.

Wtf is Cho doing here?


And if the Bucks go on a run of seven straight playoff appearances after they bottomed out, Hammond gets the credit and you guys eat crow, right?


With a team mostly comprised of somebody else's players? You think THIS TEAM is going on a run??
Here are more legal notices regarding the Posts
User avatar
bigkurty
General Manager
Posts: 8,212
And1: 1,511
Joined: Apr 23, 2005
Location: Gilbert, AZ
     

Re: POLL: Rate John Hammond's Bucks Tenure 

Post#54 » by bigkurty » Wed May 31, 2017 7:59 pm

Nowak008 wrote:The Hawks have made the playoffs every year since Hambone was our GM, made it to the 2nd round 5 times, and had a 60 win season where they made the conference finals.... yes I'd much rather have been the Hawks.

Griz made the playoffs the last 7 years in a row. Made the 2nd round 3 times, including the conference finals once (in a much tougher western conference). They could have possibly played in the finals if Conley doesn't get hurt vs the Warriors.... Yes I would have much rather have been the Grizz.

:o Crazy. We have a player now better than any player on those teams I would think. Hopefully a new GM can put the right pieces around him. Starting to think I should change my vote from average to bad. I just like John as a person so much. Honestly the guy is an amazing human being. Just not the best at GMing.
User avatar
ReasonablySober
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 98,025
And1: 34,749
Joined: Dec 02, 2001
Location: Cheap dinner. Watch basketball. Bone down.
Contact:

Re: POLL: Rate John Hammond's Bucks Tenure 

Post#55 » by ReasonablySober » Wed May 31, 2017 8:00 pm

emunney wrote:
ReasonablySober wrote:
emunney wrote:
Ainge has been GM for 14 seasons, has made the playoffs 11 times, deliberately stripped down to rebuild twice. Has a ring, another Finals appearance, just lost in the ECF and has the #1 pick this year and another likely high lotto pick next year.

Presti has made the playoffs 7 of 10 years after 1 stripdown. Has been to 4 WCFs and 1 Finals.

Griffin has only ever been GM for the Cavs. He may be perceived as a good GM, but I don't see where he's done anything super impressive. He's also been in the Finals every year, so why is he listed?

In 22 years as Heat president, Pat Riley has missed the playoffs 5 times and won 3 rings.

Wtf is Cho doing here?


And if the Bucks go on a run of seven straight playoff appearances after they bottomed out, Hammond gets the credit and you guys eat crow, right?


With a team mostly comprised of somebody else's players? You think THIS TEAM is going on a run??


Um, yes? I think a core of Giannis, Thon, Brogdon, Snell, and Parker (and perhaps Moose) is a consistent playoff team.
User avatar
emunney
RealGM
Posts: 60,039
And1: 36,432
Joined: Feb 22, 2005
Location: where takes go to be pampered

Re: POLL: Rate John Hammond's Bucks Tenure 

Post#56 » by emunney » Wed May 31, 2017 8:03 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:
emunney wrote:
ReasonablySober wrote:
And if the Bucks go on a run of seven straight playoff appearances after they bottomed out, Hammond gets the credit and you guys eat crow, right?


With a team mostly comprised of somebody else's players? You think THIS TEAM is going on a run??


Um, yes? I think a core of Giannis, Thon, Brogdon, Snell, and Parker (and perhaps Moose) is a consistent playoff team.


I think it's those Hawks teams you so despise at best.
Here are more legal notices regarding the Posts
User avatar
ReasonablySober
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 98,025
And1: 34,749
Joined: Dec 02, 2001
Location: Cheap dinner. Watch basketball. Bone down.
Contact:

Re: POLL: Rate John Hammond's Bucks Tenure 

Post#57 » by ReasonablySober » Wed May 31, 2017 8:04 pm

emunney wrote:
ReasonablySober wrote:
emunney wrote:
With a team mostly comprised of somebody else's players? You think THIS TEAM is going on a run??


Um, yes? I think a core of Giannis, Thon, Brogdon, Snell, and Parker (and perhaps Moose) is a consistent playoff team.


I think it's those Hawks teams you so despise at best.


Okay.
User avatar
skones
RealGM
Posts: 36,969
And1: 17,101
Joined: Jul 20, 2004
Location: Milwaukee
       

Re: POLL: Rate John Hammond's Bucks Tenure 

Post#58 » by skones » Wed May 31, 2017 8:04 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:
emunney wrote:
ReasonablySober wrote:
And if the Bucks go on a run of seven straight playoff appearances after they bottomed out, Hammond gets the credit and you guys eat crow, right?


With a team mostly comprised of somebody else's players? You think THIS TEAM is going on a run??


Um, yes? I think a core of Giannis, Thon, Brogdon, Snell, and Parker (and perhaps Moose) is a consistent playoff team.


If you think Snell should be part of the core and not Middleton.....
User avatar
ReasonablySober
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 98,025
And1: 34,749
Joined: Dec 02, 2001
Location: Cheap dinner. Watch basketball. Bone down.
Contact:

Re: POLL: Rate John Hammond's Bucks Tenure 

Post#59 » by ReasonablySober » Wed May 31, 2017 8:05 pm

skones wrote:
ReasonablySober wrote:
emunney wrote:
With a team mostly comprised of somebody else's players? You think THIS TEAM is going on a run??


Um, yes? I think a core of Giannis, Thon, Brogdon, Snell, and Parker (and perhaps Moose) is a consistent playoff team.


If you think Snell should be part of the core and not Middleton.....


Ha, I honestly forgot him. Yes, I see Middleton as an important piece of the core.
User avatar
skones
RealGM
Posts: 36,969
And1: 17,101
Joined: Jul 20, 2004
Location: Milwaukee
       

Re: POLL: Rate John Hammond's Bucks Tenure 

Post#60 » by skones » Wed May 31, 2017 8:08 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:
skones wrote:
ReasonablySober wrote:
Um, yes? I think a core of Giannis, Thon, Brogdon, Snell, and Parker (and perhaps Moose) is a consistent playoff team.


If you think Snell should be part of the core and not Middleton.....


Ha, I honestly forgot him. Yes, I see Middleton as an important piece of the core.


Snell will be a disaster for this team. Giving him big money will end up hampering us in a big way.

Return to Milwaukee Bucks