New Bucks Plan?

[MilBucksBackOnTop06]

I told you in my locked thread...what we should do.

SELL THE TEAM....it is that simple to me. I do not mean to be in dire straits here but this team is not gonna win anything in the next 3 years.

If winning games and making the playoffs and returning to a contending status is profitable then that is it...that is what you do and let someone else try.

Or you break it completely down...NOW! Like you should have had sense enough to do before the season started when you could have got some more picks in a fruitful draft this year.

All the Bucks did was stupid and senseles middle of the road cosmetic surgery and band-aids with Ridnour and Jefferson to surround around overratted, and overvauled losing players like Redd and Bogut thinking they are more then what they are!!!!

They are not. HELL, YOU COULD HAVE KEPT GM LARRY HARRIS TO DO WHAT Hammonds has done if this was all he was gonna do! Why did you fire Harris!?

We've made too many mistakes in the draft and and waste too much time with holding onto to the wrong guys and making ill-timed deals for others who don't fit.

We are bogged down with a front office of guys who have no vision or long term plan, and a league that is passing us by.

These things used to be said of the Seattle Sonics (Oklahoma City) and Minnesota Timberwolves and now both of those teams look rosier then we do!!!

This is not being negative. This is a hurtful and painful FACT from as rabid and as loyal and devoted a long time fan as any one in here. But losing and trading away real winners has hardened me a great deal...

Prove me wrong. I challenge any of you! Don't make me go down the line of 'I told you so's' because I will, and I will take time to hunt down posts in which I said don't do this or don't do that and sure as all get out it went down like that...

I am not here to be a smarta-- and play like I know it all. I hate when I am on cue about issues for our team most of the time...

But that is the plan. In a flounderng economy when the entertainment dollar is short we are in big trouble. Many of you do not want to read it or hear it and want to ingore it, but the Bucks are not the Brewers!

the Brewers have their stuff together! They draft well, they develop players with a plan in mind, and they go out and spend money and get the pieces they need to fill in the gaps and they get IMPACT PLAYERS not scrubs!

We can haggle about no salary cap and this or that, but the point is they make sound descisions. The Bucks do not. They run a club like they do in the 70's and 80's....it.....won't .....work!

[Kerb Hohl]

How about CV/Gadz/Jefferson/Bell for Marion/Blount? Haven't checked the trade checker...but something like that.

They get the asset of CV. They get RJ. They take back RJ's longer contract and add a year to the GadzBlount monster and take on Bell in return. Marion doesn't even get on the plane to Milwaukee. He can go wherever the hell he wants.

EDIT: Works in trade checker.

Our salary next year is approximately -14 million and the year after is only at a total of 32 million with JA/Redd/Bogut as the only ones under contract. Add Sessions and make it 37 million or something.

I have proposed this deal on the Heat board.
http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=823898&p=18385004#p18385004

[Kerb Hohl]

I'd follow my aforementioned trade up MAYBE with Sessions/JA/Lue for Bayless/Outlaw as well. Sign LRMAM to an extension next year.

You can evaluate Outlaw next year and see if he is going to be worth signing at the end of 09-10.

[Kerb Hohl]

How about RJ/Sessions/Gadz for JO/2nd?

We need to clear some cap ASAP. Let JO man the front court for a while this year and then tell him he can fake an injury again next year unless we are in some sort of contention (which I doubt).

Basically the trade is Sessions as the price for 20 million less in cap dollars in 2010-2011.

[Fight the Tank]

MBBOT what the hell is your plan? Can you sum it up in less than a page?

Would it include a lineup of Starbury, Mo, TJ, Zebo?

[old skool]

I think that the Bucks are likely to keep Jefferson because they do not want to fall prey to the Clipper syndrome.

The Clippers have failed miserably for years, even though they get great talent. The problem is that great talent alone never learns to play the game properly. It doesn't work to put a handful of young players on the court. That stifles their development. You need to have a mix of veterans and young talent. That is why Jefferson is valuable.

Recall what sKiles said early in the season. He wasn't concerned about wins and losses. He was concerned about HOW the Bucks played the game. sKiles is trying to establish a culture like Sloan has in Utah. To do that, he needs players like Jefferson to lead that development.

Playing Mbah a Moute and Sessions and Alexander (and to some degree Bogut and Villanueva) together does not help any of those young guys learn how to play in the NBA. I think that it is foolish to think that Hammond cares about record without regard for player development. You can develop a couple of young players at one time - just not five at once. The poster child for this might be Eddy Curry. Curry got tons of playing time with the Bulls and Knicks, but never with solid veterans teaching him to play the proper way. As a result, he is about as worthless today as he was five years ago. It would be a shame for that to happen to the Bucks young talent.

As for the prospect of losing CV and Sessions for nothing, I hope that does not happen. But Hammond probably realizes that those two are not once in a decade talents. They are nice solid NBA players who have flaws and limitations. Players of their ability come around every single year. It would be better to lose a couple of young players for economic reasons and have the remaining young players become good NBA players, than to keep all of the youngsters and have none of them develop.

oLd sKool

[paulpressey25]

I think that the Bucks are likely to keep Jefferson because they do not want to fall prey to the Clipper syndrome.

I 100% agree with this as it relates to RJ. Where we blew it was keeping Redd around, since I'd argue he is not the type of individual that can be a team leader nor does he have the credibility for it like RJ (80+ playoff games?)

The problem is that their collective contracts greatly limit Hammond's options to get better players in here.

[SportsFan215]

Clippers fan here, would the Bucks do either Z-Bo for RJ straight up, or would they want to add a (Ricky Davis or Jason Hart) for Charlie Bell swap: Z-Bo/(either Davis or Hart) for RJ/Bell?

[Fight the Tank]

Clippers fan here, would the Bucks do either Z-Bo for RJ straight up, or would they want to add a (Ricky Davis or Jason Hart) for Charlie Bell swap: Z-Bo/(either Davis or Hart) for RJ/Bell?

I would rather cut my arm off with a butter knife.

[Kerb Hohl]

Clippers fan here, would the Bucks do either Z-Bo for RJ straight up, or would they want to add a (Ricky Davis or Jason Hart) for Charlie Bell swap: Z-Bo/(either Davis or Hart) for RJ/Bell?

Tempting, but I'm not sure it accomplishes what I want. RJ/Bell basically add up to Z-Bo's contract plus an extra 4 mil the final year for Bell so that is basically a wash.

We get less of a team player who does however address the need for a PF for the immediate future.

However, we still have way too much tied up in a set of players that aren't taking us anywhere. I guess I'd take it, but it would be at 11:59 PM on the trade deadline night if no other offers were there.

[trwi7]

Clippers fan here, would the Bucks do either Z-Bo for RJ straight up, or would they want to add a (Ricky Davis or Jason Hart) for Charlie Bell swap: Z-Bo/(either Davis or Hart) for RJ/Bell?

The idea of an RJ trade is to clear salary, not take on the same amount of salary.

[LUKE23]

That's like swapping Rosie O'Donnell for Kathy Bates. I'd rather just rub one out.