POLL: What should be our plan before the trade deadline?

[jerrod]

That's why I feel CV is a lock to be an All Star reserve.

damn, beat me to it

[LUKE23]

If you want to see a contender in the relative short-term, you should want this team blown up now. They have no way to get there with the current roster. Even if you trade Redd/RJ later (say offseason or next season), you're trading salary for salary and not getting a star, so you're just spinning wheels. If your goal as a fan is to see a .500 team next year as well, then you should want the Bucks to stand pat at the deadline, and take a $65M payroll into next season.

Basically it comes down to this:

1. We're keeping Bogut, so he's out of any trades
2. Redd/RJ cannot bring back a star player, even paired with anyone else on the roster other than Bogut
3. If we don't trade Redd/RJ now, we take a $65M+ salary into next season, and at that point are trading salary for salary without moving anywhere up the playoff ladder
4. The longer we sit in .500 land the longer we go without a good shot at a game-changer in the draft
5. Keeping Redd/RJ also very likely prevent us from keeping one or both of Sessions and CV

There is just no way to get around it. If the team salary was less, I'd say lets try and make a trade where we can take on some salary and go for it, but we have to go salary for salary, and we have to go salary for salary for all of next season if we keep Redd and RJ past the deadline this year.

We will have at least one more .500ish season next year if we keep them. We would probably be able to deal them after 2009-10 because then they will be expiring. Personally, I don't want to waste the 2009 and 2010 drafts on picks in the 15ish range while Bogut ages two more years.

And I know some will retort with, "why can't we just make other moves to improve the team". If you're not trading Bogut, what other assets are teams really going to be coming after that they would be willing to give up a big piece?

[lawrybeard]

The only real option here is to push for a playoff spot given how close the trade deadline is. Our only expendable and tradeable pieces we have are sessions and CV, so if anything is going to happen I think it would be with them. Neither really fit into a standard Skiles defensive unit (nor does Redd, but I really think he is almost untradeable), so I wouldn't consider either of them to be big losses. If we can get a decent 4/5 for them, then maybe we can look at finishing around the 40-45 wins. If we bomb out, then we can look at blowing it up over the summer.

[LUKE23]

We should trade our young players that are playing well this season and keep our overpriced vets? No. We should be going the other direction. Unless you think trading Sessions/CV without trading Bogut/Redd/RJ is going to land us a star. Personally I don't see how that is possible.

The only way you trade young pieces if it gets you a player that is clearly better than Bogut, our best player. Otherwise, it's spinning wheels.

I think they need to do it before this offseason. Do you really want to take a $65-70M payroll into next season with no superstar player? I don't.

[europa]

Interesting that people would name Redd over Bogut. I'd be curious to know what the rationale for that is. It's just the usual points per game thing?

Of course.

To a degree. But the league-wide perception is that Redd is the Bucks' best player. He's the Olympian. He's the guy who's played at an All-Star level for the past several years.

I do think the Bucks merit consideration for an All-Star if they remain a playoff team. I think Bogut is more deserving of consideration than Redd and he also plays at a weaker position so one would think that would help him. On the other hand, there might be some justice in Redd getting picked in a year when he isn't really an All-Star (in my opinion) after not being picked the past few years when he was definitely playing at that level.

[pilprin]

Does it matter? Herb will nix another trade and screw things up again. I have little hope for this team improving via trade as long as the crotchety one is alive.

[lawrybeard]

We should trade our young players that are playing well this season and keep our overpriced vets? No. We should be going the other direction. Unless you think trading Sessions/CV without trading Bogut/Redd/RJ is going to land us a star. Personally I don't see how that is possible.

The only way you trade young pieces if it gets you a player that is clearly better than Bogut, our best player. Otherwise, it's spinning wheels.

I think they need to do it before this offseason. Do you really want to take a $65-70M payroll into next season with no superstar player? I don't.

I think it comes down to what is realistic. Would I move Max if I could - of course. Would I move RJ if I could - possibly, depending on what I could get. Would I give away both for next to nothing - not yet. We're still in the 8th seed so what is the hurry?

I'm also happy to trade away our young pieces (CV/Sessions) simply because they aren't very good. I'm sure Sessions has some value around the league, but CV has no doubt been shopped all year with no takers. I would much rather see if I could get a banger forward for them both and try for the playoffs this year and see what happens.

[El Duderino]

Sadly the draft is really our only hope for a star. A star is likely required to win it all.

Most of the current top teams acquired their best player from the draft and Milwaukee stands little chance to land a star via FA like Boston did, who of course had Pierce whom they drafted.

So if winning it all is one and our only goal, then our choices are to build a team more similar to the Pistons model (ie trade, FA and without a true star) and hope for the best or to try a land a star via the draft.

Sadly this approach has let us down in my time as a Bucks fan. Dog. Bogut. #1 overall and this is what we get? Come on. Yi. CV. 2 hopefuls that certainly will not be stars and its questionable as to their value as a whole.

My opinion is that you try to always improve your team and don't take the risk in the draft. I loved our Bucks teams in the Moncrief era for example and they were not a championship caliber team. I'll take a run like that over this crap of losing and then getting some hopeful that really doesn't pan out anyways.

I'd be plenty fine also with a non-title winning run like those Moncrief led teams had.

That said, you didn't include that Moncrief was drafted 5th overall and Marques Johnson was selected 3rd overall by the Bucks. How would that Bucks run of success have happened if they hadn't been in position to draft the two key cogs in that run of success?

Plus, 1st overall pick by the Bucks, Kent Benson was traded for Bob Lanier. So three top 5 draft picks by the Bucks turned into Moncrief, Johnson, and Lanier. Those high draft picks were just a bit important wouldn't you say in all those years of fun Bucks basketball to watch?

Hell, even though Big Dog/Ray Allen were never superstars, their high picks gave us at least a little run of success. Kareem obviously did wonders after being picked first overall.

So yea, high draft picks haven't always done wonders for the Bucks franchise, but they've also provided the key pieces to the only successes the franchise has ever had.

[jeremyd236]

Interesting that people would name Redd over Bogut. I'd be curious to know what the rationale for that is. It's just the usual points per game thing?

Of course.

To a degree. But the league-wide perception is that Redd is the Bucks' best player. He's the Olympian. He's the guy who's played at an All-Star level for the past several years.

I do think the Bucks merit consideration for an All-Star if they remain a playoff team. I think Bogut is more deserving of consideration than Redd and he also plays at a weaker position so one would think that would help him. On the other hand, there might be some justice in Redd getting picked in a year when he isn't really an All-Star (in my opinion) after not being picked the past few years when he was definitely playing at that level.

The only reason I think Redd is being chosen over Bogut on the experts' picks is because Bogut is hurt right now, and Redd was hurt earlier. The TV guys especially think of just recently, not necessarily earlier in the season.

Redd's averaging the most minutes per game in the NBA this month, is scoring very well this month, etc. Nobody put David Lee on there which really surprised me.

[europa]

I agree about Bogut's injury. Redd is also putting up incredible numbers lately so his play has risen dramatically. The Bucks are viewed by many people around the league as an improved team and Redd's playing at a high level of late. Combine that with the fact he's played at an All-Star level every year he's been a starter and was clearly snubbed at least once before and it's not hard to see him get picked by some as an All Star.

[InsideOut]

Sadly the draft is really our only hope for a star. A star is likely required to win it all.

Most of the current top teams acquired their best player from the draft and Milwaukee stands little chance to land a star via FA like Boston did, who of course had Pierce whom they drafted.

So if winning it all is one and our only goal, then our choices are to build a team more similar to the Pistons model (ie trade, FA and without a true star) and hope for the best or to try a land a star via the draft.

Sadly this approach has let us down in my time as a Bucks fan. Dog. Bogut. #1 overall and this is what we get? Come on. Yi. CV. 2 hopefuls that certainly will not be stars and its questionable as to their value as a whole.

My opinion is that you try to always improve your team and don't take the risk in the draft. I loved our Bucks teams in the Moncrief era for example and they were not a championship caliber team. I'll take a run like that over this crap of losing and then getting some hopeful that really doesn't pan out anyways.

I'd be plenty fine also with a non-title winning run like those Moncrief led teams had.

That said, you didn't include that Moncrief was drafted 5th overall and Marques Johnson was selected 3rd overall by the Bucks. How would that Bucks run of success have happened if they hadn't been in position to draft the two key cogs in that run of success?

That was the first thing that popped into my mind Dude. All the best Bucks teams used high picks to build their core. This rebuild while trying to finish .500 plan hasn't worked for 7 years now. I thinks it's time to go back to what has worked for us in the past.

[El Duderino]

That was the first thing that popped into my mind Dude. All the best Bucks teams used high picks to build their core. This rebuild while trying to finish .500 plan hasn't worked for 7 years now. I thinks it's time to go back to what has worked for us in the past.

I've already accepted that's not going to happen so all i'm left with is to hope Hammond is some basketball savant that is able to turn a capped out team with two overpaid wings and no young studs into a contender sometime soon.

Hey though, tiny David Spade has managed to spend a life nailing super models, so sometimes in life things do happen that you have a hard time envisioning.

[BuckFan25226]

5. Keeping Redd/RJ also very likely prevent us from keeping one or both of Sessions and CV

Who cares about CV and Sessions? Do you truly think those 2 guys will be a main pieces of a championship team in the future? Maybe solid bench/role players, but nothing more.

I don't have any problem trading Redd, RJ, or anyone for that matter. I just need it to be for young talent and picks. It appears to me people on this board assume Hammond isn't looking to move RJ or Redd just because of the fact they are still in Bucks uniforms. But he's not going to move them just to move them.

The bottom line is, I trust Hammond. I trust him to handle Redd, RJ, and any other contract like Gadz the right way. I just don't see a point to speculate and constantly plead for RJ and Redd to get moved when we don't even have the information at hand as to what's out there.

[europa]

I don't have any problem trading Redd, RJ, or anyone for that matter. I just need it to be for young talent and picks. It appears to me people on this board assume Hammond isn't looking to move RJ or Redd just because of the fact they are still in Bucks uniforms. But he's not going to move them just to move them.

The bottom line is, I trust Hammond. I trust him to handle Redd, RJ, and any other contract like Gadz the right way. I just don't see a point to speculate and constantly plead for RJ and Redd to get moved when we don't even have the information at hand as to what's out there.

Well said.

[jeremyd236]

I don't have any problem trading Redd, RJ, or anyone for that matter. I just need it to be for young talent and picks. It appears to me people on this board assume Hammond isn't looking to move RJ or Redd just because of the fact they are still in Bucks uniforms. But he's not going to move them just to move them.

The bottom line is, I trust Hammond. I trust him to handle Redd, RJ, and any other contract like Gadz the right way. I just don't see a point to speculate and constantly plead for RJ and Redd to get moved when we don't even have the information at hand as to what's out there.

Well said.

Exactly. It gets really old with literally every other thread or post on here saying TRADE ________. Or all the "we need to" stuff about how we have no cap room to sign CV/Sessions.

We all know our (bad) situation financially here, but it's not like Hammond is more likely to make a trade based on how many times we bitch about it. Whatever he does, it'll be what he feels is best. The guy's been here for half a season....I think he deserves a little more time than this. It feels like if we don't trade Redd/RJ at the deadline, this board will just explode. If we want the best value for our players, we'll wait to to get the best offer. LH hugely overspent on our roster and it's going to take a while to not only get rid of the contracts, but secure a bright future for the franchise as well.

[europa]

I think Hammond took the job knowing full well what the team's salary situation was. I think he made the RJ trade knowing full well what the salary situation was. I doubt any of this is lost on him and I doubt he's waking up each day trying to figure out what to do next. I trust that his plan not only involves improving the team presently but for the future as well.

[smauss]

The bottom line is, I trust Hammond. I trust him to handle Redd, RJ, and any other contract like Gadz the right way. I just don't see a point to speculate and constantly plead for RJ and Redd to get moved when we don't even have the information at hand as to what's out there.

I totally agree with this. I trust Hammond as well, there is absolutely no reason not to IMHO. We all simply speculate, while he has the data and the information and knows the market a whole lot better than we do. He stated that he would do things that we won't all agree with, and if we don't shed some significant salary I will be scratching my head, but I still trust him!

[xTitan]

Young talent and picks...hmmmmmm..who is going to give up any proven young talent for what the Bucks have? Why would you want picks in this years draft when the overall talent level appears to be quite low? You need to pick up talent, a quality #4 is first and foremost on the wish list. Young teams rarely win, for every Portland there is a bunch of horrible young teams.

[BuckFan25226]

Young talent and picks...hmmmmmm..who is going to give up any proven young talent for what the Bucks have? Why would you want picks in this years draft when the overall talent level appears to be quite low? You need to pick up talent, a quality #4 is first and foremost on the wish list. Young teams rarely win, for every Portland there is a bunch of horrible young teams.

Young talent doesn't mean proven talent. And picks mean absolutely nothing, a little luck is involved in trading for picks, hoping your GM cashes in on them.

[Nebula1]

Trade for me, I say.