WT: Giannis Antetokounmpo's Future With Bucks 'The Elephant In The Room' In NBA

[Pointgod]

They're not going to send him somewhere he doesn't want to go. He's going to want to go somewhere that can compete for a championship. How many rosters can afford to take on Kuzma's dead weight and still compete for one?

Gianni’s has 2 years left on his contract and due to his stature with the Bucks he’s earned the ability to influence where he wants to go but at the same time the Bucks won’t make a bad deal just to please Giannis. And 30 GMs out of 30 would take Giannis on a 2 year deal because even if things go tits up they can still trade him to recoup some value.

Who's saying they need to take a bad deal? There's going to be contending teams that put out good offers where Giannis will be fine with going to.

The problem is that most of the contenders are over the luxury tax or over the aprons so they’re limited in who they can send out and take back. Other than OKC who has the picks and assets to put together one of the best packages for Giannis, the Bucks would be taking back an inferior package compared to other teams if they send Giannis to a contender.

[Pointgod]

The bucks arent exactly a destination, and never have been, I doubt that it will factor in much. I can believe they would care due to their relationship with him over the years, but for a team with zero future assets, they cant afford to placate him.



You can't be serious right lol?

If the 2025 pick lands in the top-4, that becomes a pretty strong offer. We'd still need to add a few extra FRPs though.

But it's also a trade that makes no sense for us as we'd be bringing Giannis into the same situation he was in on the Bucks.

Yep, I mentioned earlier, this is basically the KD trade 2.0, you have to gut the team to get the player, so much so to the point that the team left behind isn't good enough to accomplish much to make it worth it.

That's why you have to spend time accumulating assets so that when these trades surface, you can actually be a player. Kawhi for instance, good team that needed a step to be great, not a 30 win team with a bunch of question marks going into next season. Kawhi was added to that team, Giannis would be a major replacement, and his 2nd option is a guy who barely plays 60 games a year and would be his first season here.

2 years of Giannis who could potentially opt out and go elsewhere, and all it costs is a whole slew of FRPs, a very good player in Scottie, and 2 solid players on dirt cheap contracts. Sometimes the risk is worth it, others it isn't, IMO this is the latter.

But I was told by the Masai hive that trading for picks is overrated because draft picks have a low probability of being a good player

[TimeForChange]

If the 2025 pick lands in the top-4, that becomes a pretty strong offer. We'd still need to add a few extra FRPs though.

But it's also a trade that makes no sense for us as we'd be bringing Giannis into the same situation he was in on the Bucks.

Yep, I mentioned earlier, this is basically the KD trade 2.0, you have to gut the team to get the player, so much so to the point that the team left behind isn't good enough to accomplish much to make it worth it.

That's why you have to spend time accumulating assets so that when these trades surface, you can actually be a player. Kawhi for instance, good team that needed a step to be great, not a 30 win team with a bunch of question marks going into next season. Kawhi was added to that team, Giannis would be a major replacement, and his 2nd option is a guy who barely plays 60 games a year and would be his first season here.

2 years of Giannis who could potentially opt out and go elsewhere, and all it costs is a whole slew of FRPs, a very good player in Scottie, and 2 solid players on dirt cheap contracts. Sometimes the risk is worth it, others it isn't, IMO this is the latter.

But I was told by the Masai hive that trading for picks is overrated because draft picks have a low probability of being a good player

"There's no difference between pick 20 and pick 33"

[Pointgod]

Yep, I mentioned earlier, this is basically the KD trade 2.0, you have to gut the team to get the player, so much so to the point that the team left behind isn't good enough to accomplish much to make it worth it.

That's why you have to spend time accumulating assets so that when these trades surface, you can actually be a player. Kawhi for instance, good team that needed a step to be great, not a 30 win team with a bunch of question marks going into next season. Kawhi was added to that team, Giannis would be a major replacement, and his 2nd option is a guy who barely plays 60 games a year and would be his first season here.

2 years of Giannis who could potentially opt out and go elsewhere, and all it costs is a whole slew of FRPs, a very good player in Scottie, and 2 solid players on dirt cheap contracts. Sometimes the risk is worth it, others it isn't, IMO this is the latter.

But I was told by the Masai hive that trading for picks is overrated because draft picks have a low probability of being a good player

"There's no difference between pick 20 and pick 33"

That quote is so beautiful it should be hung in the Louvre

[PushDaRock]

Gianni’s has 2 years left on his contract and due to his stature with the Bucks he’s earned the ability to influence where he wants to go but at the same time the Bucks won’t make a bad deal just to please Giannis. And 30 GMs out of 30 would take Giannis on a 2 year deal because even if things go tits up they can still trade him to recoup some value.

Who's saying they need to take a bad deal? There's going to be contending teams that put out good offers where Giannis will be fine with going to.

The problem is that most of the contenders are over the luxury tax or over the aprons so they’re limited in who they can send out and take back. Other than OKC who has the picks and assets to put together one of the best packages for Giannis, the Bucks would be taking back an inferior package compared to other teams if they send Giannis to a contender.

You're assuming teams that Giannis wouldn't want to go to would be giving Godfather offers despite knowing he doesn't want to be there.

[DreamTeam09]

Jimmy to PHX
KD to GS
Giannis to Houston
Milwaukee gets Jalen green + Jabari Smith + Kuminga picks from Houston and 1 pick from GS

[Scase]

If the 2025 pick lands in the top-4, that becomes a pretty strong offer. We'd still need to add a few extra FRPs though.

But it's also a trade that makes no sense for us as we'd be bringing Giannis into the same situation he was in on the Bucks.

Yep, I mentioned earlier, this is basically the KD trade 2.0, you have to gut the team to get the player, so much so to the point that the team left behind isn't good enough to accomplish much to make it worth it.

That's why you have to spend time accumulating assets so that when these trades surface, you can actually be a player. Kawhi for instance, good team that needed a step to be great, not a 30 win team with a bunch of question marks going into next season. Kawhi was added to that team, Giannis would be a major replacement, and his 2nd option is a guy who barely plays 60 games a year and would be his first season here.

2 years of Giannis who could potentially opt out and go elsewhere, and all it costs is a whole slew of FRPs, a very good player in Scottie, and 2 solid players on dirt cheap contracts. Sometimes the risk is worth it, others it isn't, IMO this is the latter.

But I was told by the Masai hive that trading for picks is overrated because draft picks have a low probability of being a good player

It's weird how all we hear is about how these are the types of trades we should be making, yet whenever these trades are proposed, or happen, they rely pretty heavily on a ton of picks or high pick/quality players.

The things that are "overrated". I'm sure we can totally get Giannis by trading players like mogbo/dick/ochai/jkw. Like man, I like all those players, genuinely, but those are not the types of assets you trade for big name players, those are the side deals you make after you get that player. But if you don't ever really have the assets to get the marquee player, it doesn't really get you anywhere.

Trades like this Giannis one, were used as the excuse as to why we shouldn't be tanking, yet here we are, and still won't have the assets to get him without putting out an anemic lineup.

[CazOnReal]

The funniest part about the "no difference" quote is that, Walker aside, there was literally a difference between 32 and 33.

One spot separated them from the guy they were rumored to be interested in: Andrew Nembhard.

[DreamTeam09]

Whenever we see these deals go down, the general public always overestimates what these guys get traded for. We see it all the time,

After the PG for Shai followed by the Mitchell n Gobert trades, teams haven't really been reaching for stars, all deals end being pretty fair or less value than expected.

[AkelaLoneWolf]

I disagree. Players of Giannis' magnitude get to pretty much pick their destination. If the Bucks screw him over by sending him somewhere he doesn't want to go, they can forget about retaining future superstars.

Ask Lillard and Butler and see if they agree lol
Giannis leverage is lower because he has 2 more years. If he was expiring he would have more leverage to call his shots

Giannis is a top 5 player. Much different than Lillard and Butler, who never achieved those heights, and also are at the back end of their careers.

Luka got traded, but that deal was seen as a complete mess, primarily because it was rushed. Had he known he was on the block, he would have had more control in the situation. But in the end, he was still gifted to the Lakers.

I do believe bucks will work with giannis to get him to his destination of choice but not at the cost of destroying their rebuilding efforts. we have the right mix of assets and picks to make a good offer which is all you can ask for. if giannis doesn't want to come, then so be it. but I fail to see how we're a worse destination than Houston or Indiana or any of these other destinations from a livability standpoint.

[AkelaLoneWolf]

Gianni’s has 2 years left on his contract and due to his stature with the Bucks he’s earned the ability to influence where he wants to go but at the same time the Bucks won’t make a bad deal just to please Giannis. And 30 GMs out of 30 would take Giannis on a 2 year deal because even if things go tits up they can still trade him to recoup some value.

Who's saying they need to take a bad deal? There's going to be contending teams that put out good offers where Giannis will be fine with going to.

The problem is that most of the contenders are over the luxury tax or over the aprons so they’re limited in who they can send out and take back. Other than OKC who has the picks and assets to put together one of the best packages for Giannis, the Bucks would be taking back an inferior package compared to other teams if they send Giannis to a contender.

okc is the team i fear in terms of putting together a good package; everyone else we'll be competitive with

[basketballto]

Yep, I mentioned earlier, this is basically the KD trade 2.0, you have to gut the team to get the player, so much so to the point that the team left behind isn't good enough to accomplish much to make it worth it.

That's why you have to spend time accumulating assets so that when these trades surface, you can actually be a player. Kawhi for instance, good team that needed a step to be great, not a 30 win team with a bunch of question marks going into next season. Kawhi was added to that team, Giannis would be a major replacement, and his 2nd option is a guy who barely plays 60 games a year and would be his first season here.

2 years of Giannis who could potentially opt out and go elsewhere, and all it costs is a whole slew of FRPs, a very good player in Scottie, and 2 solid players on dirt cheap contracts. Sometimes the risk is worth it, others it isn't, IMO this is the latter.

But I was told by the Masai hive that trading for picks is overrated because draft picks have a low probability of being a good player

"There's no difference between pick 20 and pick 33"

When you pick the same player picking at 33 saves millions and removes a guarantee contract in case of injury. Looking back Masai got to draft the player he wanted for cheaper and with more downside protection plus get the player he wanted for now.

Why are you pining for a worse situation?

[brownbobcat]

But I was told by the Masai hive that trading for picks is overrated because draft picks have a low probability of being a good player

"There's no difference between pick 20 and pick 33"

When you pick the same player picking at 33 saves millions and removes a guarantee contract in case of injury. Looking back Masai got to draft the player he wanted for cheaper and with more downside protection plus get the player he wanted for now.

Why are you pining for a worse situation?

Aaaaand there it is, without fail.

There is no difference between 20 and 33
The 20th pick wasn't good anyway
You're just cherrypicking every good player available at 20
Masai would have picked Koloko at 20 anyway

[mdenny]

But I was told by the Masai hive that trading for picks is overrated because draft picks have a low probability of being a good player

"There's no difference between pick 20 and pick 33"

That quote is so beautiful it should be hung in the Louvre

What's beautiful is how none of these teams that accumulate picks ever win a chip. And you guys have no perceptive value of picks that resembles the reality of outcomes.

That's what is really hilarious.

4 years ago your type was all over the Atlanta hawks."why can't we be more like the Atlantic hawks" lol

Watch what happens to okc 14 months from now when they have to pay their prospects. They have a 14 month window. Two shots at a chip. Then they will be handcuffed.

You'd know that if you could add.

This isn't a complicated question: which NBA franchise won a chip because they accumulated draft picks through trade?

I'll let you sit on that.

[CPT]

"There's no difference between pick 20 and pick 33"

That quote is so beautiful it should be hung in the Louvre

What's beautiful is how none of these teams that accumulate picks ever win a chip. And you guys have no perceptive value of picks that resembles the reality of outcomes.

That's what is really hilarious.

4 years ago your type was all over the Atlanta hawks."why can't we be more like the Atlantic hawks" lol

Watch what happens to okc 14 months from now when they have to pay their prospects. They have a 14 month window. Two shots at a chip. Then they will be handcuffed.

You'd know that if you could add.

This isn't a complicated question: which NBA franchise won a chip because they accumulated draft picks through trade?

I'll let you sit on that.

Boston.

[WuTang_CMB]

No surprise

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=0YpMScWXY2zRUqR8fH-usg

[ciueli]

That quote is so beautiful it should be hung in the Louvre

What's beautiful is how none of these teams that accumulate picks ever win a chip. And you guys have no perceptive value of picks that resembles the reality of outcomes.

That's what is really hilarious.

4 years ago your type was all over the Atlanta hawks."why can't we be more like the Atlantic hawks" lol

Watch what happens to okc 14 months from now when they have to pay their prospects. They have a 14 month window. Two shots at a chip. Then they will be handcuffed.

You'd know that if you could add.

This isn't a complicated question: which NBA franchise won a chip because they accumulated draft picks through trade?

I'll let you sit on that.

Boston.

Also the Cavs, they only had Kyrie Irving due to the trade they made with the Clippers post LeBron to Miami. It's arguable LeBron doesn't even return if they don't have a clear second star, so it completely turned the franchise around and led to the title + year of them making the NBA Finals.

[GreatWhiteStiff]

No patience for a rebuild. When a possible opportunity is mentioned, people jump immediately, regardless of how likely it might be.

We want/need Giannis for this retool, Dangerboy.

[ontnut]

There has been talk of Boston trying to unload salary this offseason, because of the financial constraints coming. I wonder if they would jump into the Giannis sweepstakes, and offer Brown and White?

I think they SHOULD offer them if Giannis is available, but I don't think they will.

[ForeverTFC]

No surprise

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=0YpMScWXY2zRUqR8fH-usg

Beck also said Chicago is potentially on the list. List is likely broader than the usual suspects.