Bucks News, Transactions, Trade Ideas - Darvin Returns

[raferfenix]

Yeah yeah not happening but holding out hope while we can for some crazy Middleton valuation after what we just saw with Bridges.

Draft could be wild.

And Khris aside there’s plenty of smoke Horst has been throwing some ideas around the league.

[Baddy Chuck]

3, Eason and Brooks would be intriguing, much more so if I liked someone at 3 or knew what Brooks/#3 could net us elsewhere. If you wind up with like Dejounte Murray and Tari Eason for Khris that wouldn't pain me, unless Tari Eason wound up just being Ryan Gomes or something.

[machu46]

The Wiggins for Portis rumor is DOA. Both are second apron teams

Technically two second apron teams could still trade with each other as long as they include a third team in it to make the salaries okay in both directions right? Or would that have to be structured in a way that one of them is aggregating salaries and therefore it still doesn't work?

[RiotPunch]

Seeing all these Middleton trades.



Proud of ya'll.

GOAT Hot Ones ep.

[machu46]

Seeing all these Middleton trades.



Proud of ya'll.

GOAT Hot Ones ep.

I have never watched an episode but I feel like I've seen so much of the show just from all the viral clips lol

[German Athens]

Come on Detroit, send us Stewart for Portis and Marjon.

[ShootingtheJ]

Pelicans get: Lopez, #33
Bucks get: Nance, Daniels, #21

Of course I'd do this.

I Don't like it at all. You're trading a starter for two players who are fringe rotational playoff players. I guess Daniels is young enough to consider him as a prospect in the draft but even still that would be Nance, a lotto pick, and #21 for Lopez and #33. I think Lopez is more valued.

Lopez is a fringe rotation player in the playoffs. We'd be better off not playing him, but we haven't had other options.

Daniels isn't fringe, he'd be the best defender on the team next to Giannis. Huge role for defenders in the playoffs. He's just presently wasted on a team that already has Herb Jones.

[German Athens]

Is that true? We could do a 2 for 2 trade?

if the salaries are right we could do 2 for 2 or 3 for 3 or whatever else

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/trade-machine/_/year/2024

Correct.

Confusion on what aggregating salaries means has been an ongoing nuisance since I started delving into the depths of the CBA. And the draconian restrictions now present in the current CBA have only exacerbated matters.

People equate restrictions on aggregating salaries as meaning that "the Bucks can only send out one player in a trade" while over the second apron.

Not true.

We can send out multiple players in a trade as long as we'd be able to break apart the trade into components that work on their own.

So if we would legally be able to do two trades of A for B, and C for D, then we would be able to do one trade of A+C for B+D. We can also receive more players than we are sending out, if, once again, the components of the trade would work if done separately. So if legally we'd be able to trade A for B and C for D+E, then we can do one trade of A+C for B+D+E. The second apron also restricts us from taking back even $1 more in a trade than we send out. We can take back less salary than we send out, but not more. We cannot send out two players for 1 if the player we are receiving makes more than just 1 of the players we send out. If we can legally trade A for B and C for no player in return (the other team would need a large enough traded player exception, disabled player exception, or enough cap space, to absorb the salary of player C, and then can send us a draft pick and/or cash instead of a player), then we can trade A+B for C+cash/pick(s).

Unfortunately, whatever team we would be trading with might have their own restrictions to deal with. They could be under first apron restrictions, second apron restrictions, or hard capped at either apron, because they chose to use one or more exceptions that trigger a hard cap, or made a trade that triggers the hard cap, etc.

"Bucks can only include one player in a trade" is just not accurate

Hey, GAD. I’ve seen Pat + Marjon proposed for thybulle with the explanation that we wouldn’t have to aggregate salaries for it to work. Is that true?

Pat 9.4M
Marjon 2.7M
Thybulle 11M

If we were a non tax team and could take back 125% of salary, then this being a two component trade of pat for thybulle and marjon for nothing lumped into one would work.

But

If we’re a second apron team, aren’t we still aggregating salaries with pat and marjon, because pat by himself wouldn’t work for thybulle, or are the individual components of trades not subject to our apron status?
I.e.

Component 1: Pat for thybulle falls under 125% of salary
Component 2: Marjon for nothing

In total 12.1 out and 11 back, so we fall under 100% salary as one trade.

[jakecronus8]

Crazy sellers market. I’d be trying to unload Lopez and Middleton asap.

[Turk Nowitzki]

Crazy sellers market. I’d be trying to unload Lopez and Middleton asap.

What do you do if Giannis balks at those moves? Just call his bluff and do it anyway?

[emunney]

if the salaries are right we could do 2 for 2 or 3 for 3 or whatever else

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/trade-machine/_/year/2024

Correct.

Confusion on what aggregating salaries means has been an ongoing nuisance since I started delving into the depths of the CBA. And the draconian restrictions now present in the current CBA have only exacerbated matters.

People equate restrictions on aggregating salaries as meaning that "the Bucks can only send out one player in a trade" while over the second apron.

Not true.

We can send out multiple players in a trade as long as we'd be able to break apart the trade into components that work on their own.

So if we would legally be able to do two trades of A for B, and C for D, then we would be able to do one trade of A+C for B+D. We can also receive more players than we are sending out, if, once again, the components of the trade would work if done separately. So if legally we'd be able to trade A for B and C for D+E, then we can do one trade of A+C for B+D+E. The second apron also restricts us from taking back even $1 more in a trade than we send out. We can take back less salary than we send out, but not more. We cannot send out two players for 1 if the player we are receiving makes more than just 1 of the players we send out. If we can legally trade A for B and C for no player in return (the other team would need a large enough traded player exception, disabled player exception, or enough cap space, to absorb the salary of player C, and then can send us a draft pick and/or cash instead of a player), then we can trade A+B for C+cash/pick(s).

Unfortunately, whatever team we would be trading with might have their own restrictions to deal with. They could be under first apron restrictions, second apron restrictions, or hard capped at either apron, because they chose to use one or more exceptions that trigger a hard cap, or made a trade that triggers the hard cap, etc.

"Bucks can only include one player in a trade" is just not accurate

Hey, GAD. I’ve seen Pat + Marjon proposed for thybulle with the explanation that we wouldn’t have to aggregate salaries for it to work. Is that true?

Pat 9.4M
Marjon 2.7M
Thybulle 11M

If we were a non tax team and could take back 125% of salary, then this being a two component trade of pat for thybulle and marjon for nothing lumped into one would work.

But

If we’re a second apron team, aren’t we still aggregating salaries with pat and marjon, because pat by himself wouldn’t work for thybulle, or are the individual components of trades not subject to our apron status?
I.e.

Component 1: Pat for thybulle falls under 125% of salary
Component 2: Marjon for nothing

In total 12.1 out and 11 back, so we fall under 100% salary as one trade.

Portland has a TPE they can use for MarJon, that's why it would work.

But maybe not?

[raferfenix]

So…Deni makes it that much easier for Portland to trade Jerami Grant.

His injury history scares me. And his bloated contract makes a deal hard with 2nd apron stuff. Plus Tim Thomas syndrome worries.

But, you know, athletic versatile forward who can defend that Horst has targeted before and is boys with Dame who (because of the issues above) might not take a huge amount to acquire. Idk.

[Daver]

Crazy sellers market. I’d be trying to unload Lopez and Middleton asap.

What do you do if Giannis balks at those moves? Just call his bluff and do it anyway?

Think giannis balks more at midds being traded thsn lopez think they hsve great chemistry

[jakecronus8]

Crazy sellers market. I’d be trying to unload Lopez and Middleton asap.

What do you do if Giannis balks at those moves? Just call his bluff and do it anyway?

Think giannis balks more at midds being traded thsn lopez think they hsve great chemistry

Quite frankly, maybe it’s time for Giannis to get a little uncomfortable and stop getting what he wants. He’s locked up, so he’s gonna have to deal with it. Ridiculous he’s playing in the Olympics right now so we gotta do what we gotta do.

[RiotPunch]

I wonder how cheap we could get Kispert? I don't love him but he is very solid.

[yb90]

Of course I'd do this.

I Don't like it at all. You're trading a starter for two players who are fringe rotational playoff players. I guess Daniels is young enough to consider him as a prospect in the draft but even still that would be Nance, a lotto pick, and #21 for Lopez and #33. I think Lopez is more valued.

Lopez is a fringe rotation player in the playoffs. We'd be better off not playing him, but we haven't had other options.

Daniels isn't fringe, he'd be the best defender on the team next to Giannis. Huge role for defenders in the playoffs. He's just presently wasted on a team that already has Herb Jones.

Lopez is still a starter and played starter minutes. Daniels played 17 minutes in the entire series. They could have played him over Alverez but chose not too. He is a developmental player.

[yb90]

I wonder how cheap we could get Kispert? I don't love him but he is very solid.

Pat and #33 would be ideal.

[soxperry]

Crazy sellers market. I’d be trying to unload Lopez and Middleton asap.

here's an analogy that may make sense to you.

pretend this is the housing market. the wizards and nets dont need their homes right now. they've got somewhere they can go. for quite a while. it makes sense for them to sell.

the Bucks do not have another place to go right now. therefore, if they sell their home, they would need to turn around and buy another one (also in the seller's market). so while there may be a brook or middleton trade that makes sense, it's not as simple as unloading them for max value. if we trade one or both of them, it's for the right combination of players coming back and how those players better suit the Giannis and Dame combo.

[ShootingtheJ]

I Don't like it at all. You're trading a starter for two players who are fringe rotational playoff players. I guess Daniels is young enough to consider him as a prospect in the draft but even still that would be Nance, a lotto pick, and #21 for Lopez and #33. I think Lopez is more valued.

Lopez is a fringe rotation player in the playoffs. We'd be better off not playing him, but we haven't had other options.

Daniels isn't fringe, he'd be the best defender on the team next to Giannis. Huge role for defenders in the playoffs. He's just presently wasted on a team that already has Herb Jones.

Lopez is still a starter and played starter minutes. Daniels played 17 minutes in the entire series. They could have played him over Alverez but chose not too. He is a developmental player.

He missed games with injury in that series. He just turned 21. He has all the skills. He'll be the best player in this trade next season. We're also getting a 1st in this deal.

[ShootingtheJ]

Crazy sellers market. I’d be trying to unload Lopez and Middleton asap.

Why in the world would we be sellers? Now is not the time to start a rebuild.