RealGM

NY Trades:

Marbury, Rose, #5

Milwaukee Trades:

Redd, Simmons, #7

Your thoughts?

No way.

If Marbury and Rose came to Milwaukee, then they'd never see the court. And if we trade Redd it'll be for more than a giant salary dump.

You'll have to do a lot better than that

This trade would give the Bucks $20 million in capspace in 09.

That could be spent much more wisely than on Redd/Simmons.

What teams are going to be willing to pay a SG who is not a "difference maker" that type of money? Not very many teams will be willing to take on his $50+ million over the next 3 seasons. NY is one team that possibly would.

I don't disagree with that, however when was the last time the Bucks signed a top free agent? Milwaukee isn't a haven for free agents, so the cap space is of limited use. If we could get rid of Redd for cap space and extra picks (rather than just moving up 2 spots) then that'd be a better deal.

I think getting Rid of Simmons is worth at least a pick...

Plus, moving up from 7th to 5th is probably worth a late pick (28-30) in its own right.

And you don't have to have a history of signing FA's.

Hammond will be able to find guys who will come in and be key players. Ben Wallace was a bench player Detroit signed as a FA. Billups was a bench player Detroit signed as a FA. Both of them turned into all-stars and champions.

I think you will look for Hammond to try to find "all-star caliber" or "borderline all-star" players at every position.... play great defense, and have depth. Hammond will pick up key FA's who will want to come to Milwaukee for a chance to start on an up and coming team.

I think you have one piece in Bogut, and a few questionable pieces. Another piece could come in at #5... I do not think Redd at $15mil plus can be a part of what Hammond will want to do.

I can see the merit in this approach. We gut the team and clear salary. That will guarantee that this next season will be spent tanking hard while force-feeding Bogut and Yi. End up with a high pick and have another shot at a potential superstar.

I don't mind that approach.

The alternative to this approach is to trade Redd for okay young players. Nobody's going to give up a potential future superstar. We'll likely get someone who'll eventually contribute but never be a star (like a Jarrett Jack caliber player). That could hurt us because it'll prevent us from really bottoming out and tanking.

Then once we have our star through tanking, hopefully, we can use the leftover money to sign a bunch of role players.

Dumars got Ben Wallace in the Grant Hill sign and trade, he wasn't a FA.

Only way I consider this is if the Knicks got #3, and we could get Mayo. Otherwise, no.

I think the biggest problem with the Salary Dump scenario is how do you sell tickets for next year? People aren't going to show up at the BC on the premise of "hey were really gonna suck this year, but we'll have cap space next year." The Bucks REALLY need to make the playoffs next year. I don't mind blowing up the team but it can't be for expiring contracts alone.

This might be the best trade proposal I've seen on here in a long time.

Follow this one up with a Mo to Cleveland deal of

Mo
Dan

for

Wally
filler.

If we deal Redd to NY for short contracts, I want to send both Simmons and Gadzuric with him. I think Gadzuric is easily a worse contract than Simmons, because it's longer, less valuable when it eventually becomes an expirer, and because he's a 12th man instead of a 7th/8th man. Sof if only one bad contract is included, it should be that one.

Yup, I'd push to get Gadz involved in this as well, but I'd definitely consider this offer. It depends if Redd can get a Josh Howard or Carmelo.

Otherwise I'd just assume move him for expiring contracts so Hammond can remold this team as he sees fit.

bstein14 wrote:NY Trades:

Marbury, Rose, #5

Milwaukee Trades:

Redd, Simmons, #7

Your thoughts?

I would pass on Marbury and Rose. Unless its the Derrick Rose in the lottery. But anyway back to the proposal. I would only want NY#5 or Lee,Chandler,Balkman for Redd. Go look what Sonics got for Allen.

Wasn't Walsh brought in to stop the Knicks from trading for one dimensional scorers that don't play defense and have ugly long term contracts?

El Duderino wrote:Wasn't Walsh brought in to stop the Knicks from trading for one dimensional scorers that don't play defense and have ugly long term contracts?

I agree that this trade was more likely with Isiah Thomas at the helm.




And to the earlier comment about Ben Wallace not being a FA signing, he was.

He was a FA that summer and once Hill decided he wanted to go to Orlando, Joe Dumars talked Ben Wallace into coming to Detroit. Ben Wallace and Atkins were both FA's who signed contracts that summer to come to Detroit.

Ben Wallace was traded to Detroit in the Grant Hill trade.

oLd sKool

Ben Wallace then was a unknown by all.

old skool wrote:Ben Wallace was traded to Detroit in the Grant Hill trade.

oLd sKool

He was a FA, who agreed to sign with Detroit.

Detroit got him in a sign and trade.

Johnny Newman wrote:Ben Wallace then was a unknown by all.

Not by Dumars.

He was a player who helped an Orlando Magic team win 41 games. A Magic team who's best player was BJ Armstrong.

He was young, athletic, played great defense... and came off the bench yet had one of the highest rebounding rates in the NBA.

bstein14 wrote:Ben Wallace was a bench player Detroit signed as a FA. Billups was a bench player Detroit signed as a FA.

The Magic traded Wallace to the Pistons the year after Wallace started 81 games in Orlando.

When the Pistons signed Billups, he was a five year NBA veteran. In four of those five years he started more than half the games he played in.

You could call them a lot of things, but not "bench players".

oLd sKool