[Shams] Sources: Giannis Antetokounmpo to explore best fits outside of Milwaukee

[Andri]

Much talk about trading for him straight, and I feel there will be multiple teams involved to satisfy what Bucks may ask in return and Gianni's preferences about the destination

[jowglenn]

ESPN submits clickbait all the time and that’s your shining example of reputable news? Maybe reexamine the slop you so eagerly hawk down. If you read the Shams article it doesn’t assert anything other than “teams will want to make a deal to get Giannis” and the irony is you laughing here when what you’re defending is a joke

Stage one: Denial

Soon: Anger

[Dan Z]

I know there's some beef between Bucks and Pacers, but it's not enough to over come what makes sense. Bucks get good assets for Giannis, and some players to build with for the future and still be entertaining in the present.

Can you piece together a hypothetical package that makes sense? Turner is an unrestricted FA this summer so he is not an asset unless they S&T him I guess?

Pascal is worth about 4 mid FRPs, which loosely translates to like 1 decent lotto pick

Nembhard would be a really good young player but I doubt they’d want to part with him

A lot of their good bench pieces are due for salary increases. They can’t pay them all so why would a team give up value to take on their expiring assets?

You're undervaluing Pascal. He's a 2 way PF and an all-star who's been durable. We got shafted in the Pascal trade because Masai waited too long to make it and nobody was going to give assets for a 3 month rental. Take a look at a list of PFs in this league - he's a top 10 PF. Bridges got 5 1st round picks in comparison, and Bridges' value isn't as high. Pascal is under contract for 3 more years and a decent contract at that. Nembhard is coming up for a big pay day in 2 years' time. It's true Pacers may want to hang on to him for one more season, but they won't be able to pay him in 2 years so why not get the max value you can right now? Pascal, Nembhard, Sheppard and 2 picks. Or Pascal, Turner, Sheppard/Mathurin, no picks. That's a huge trade but one Pacers can make work. Nobody can come close to this package IMO.

Pascal is a 31 year old player who will make 45, 48 and 52 million the next three years. He's a good player, but not someone the Bucks need going forward if they move on from Giannis.

How much value will another team give for him? They'd have to match salary plus give up assets.

Late Indiana picks and young players like Nembhard, Sheppard or Mathurin are okay, but not enough for the Bucks to trade Giannis IMO. Think about where they'd be after a trade like that? Late picks, plus those players mentioned above and they don't have control of their own picks until after 2030. That would be awful.

[ball_takes23]

Shams' initial report was "Giannis open to exploring potential fit outside Milwaukee" lol. ESPN needed to juice up the draft lottery, didn't they?

There's literally a playoff game on after the lottery. The fact Bucks fans are so in denial and running with the "trying to increase ratings" narrative is kind of sad honestly.

Not more than two months ago Giannis said the quote "I am not that kind of guy [to ask for a trade], they would have to kick me out." He certainly has said in the past that he wants to be with the Bucks as long as they want to remain competitive as his way of 'putting pressure' on the Bucks. I'll simply wait until he actually comes out to say he'll be requesting a trade before assuming anything.

that's literally what every player says - right before they ask for a trade.

"but MY superstar's different. he's not like the other ones."

no he's not. yes he is.

[zimpy27]

In a Giannis trade I see 2 options:

- the trade must somehow involve the Pelicans if Bucks are expecting to tank after a Giannis trade with Lillard injured.
- if Bucks aren't tanking then Giannis will be traded for all star talent.

[JRoy]

He gone.

[TorontoBarneys]

People expecting teams to empty their entire asset pool for 2 years of Giannis are about to get a rude wake up call.

[shotsquatch]

The market for superstars has been **** since the Gobert trade. Realistically, OKC and HOU have the most to offer. But in recent years we've seen plenty of crazy superstar deals that don't make logical sense.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

If Giannis wants to stay a Buck, you keep him until he retires. Maybe that hurts your team a bit as you missed out on getting a killer package for him, but there’s a special connection you get with a loyal player who wants to spend their entire career in your city that makes every second of that journey worth it.

However, if Giannis is considering leaving, like the report suggests, you trade him as soon as you can. If he’s considering leaving, it’s very likely someone will convince him to. Why? Because the Bucks situation sucks. They have no promising young talent, no cap space, and no picks. If he’s thinking about leaving, it will be easy enough for someone to paint a picture to him of being in a better situation. If you try to take a super patient route in trading him, it opens up the door to what we’ve seen so many superstars do, which is to tell teams “I’ll only play here, here, or here.” which massively hurts their trade value.

I hope Giannis wants to spend his career with the Bucks, but Shams doesn’t report BS that I’m aware of. If the Bucks get the impression he may try to leave, they need to get ahead of it before he limits what they can do.

[SkyBill40]

If XXXXX wants to stay a XXXX, you keep him until he retires. Maybe that hurts your team a bit as you missed out on getting a killer package for him, but there’s a special connection you get with a loyal player who wants to spend their entire career in your city that makes every second of that journey worth it.

However, if Giannis is considering leaving, like the report suggests, you trade him as soon as you can. If he’s considering leaving, it’s very likely someone will convince him to. Why? Because the Bucks situation sucks. They have no promising young talent, no cap space, and no picks. If he’s thinking about leaving, it will be easy enough for someone to paint a picture to him of being in a better situation. If you try to take a super patient route in trading him, it opens up the door to what we’ve seen so many superstars do, which is to tell teams “I’ll only play here, here, or here.” which massively hurts their trade value.

I hope Giannis wants to spend his career with the Bucks, but Shams doesn’t report BS that I’m aware of. If the Bucks get the impression he may try to leave, they need to get ahead of it before he limits what they can do.

Fixed that first comment since it's applicable to just about every team's major star player.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

If XXXXX wants to stay a XXXX, you keep him until he retires. Maybe that hurts your team a bit as you missed out on getting a killer package for him, but there’s a special connection you get with a loyal player who wants to spend their entire career in your city that makes every second of that journey worth it.

However, if Giannis is considering leaving, like the report suggests, you trade him as soon as you can. If he’s considering leaving, it’s very likely someone will convince him to. Why? Because the Bucks situation sucks. They have no promising young talent, no cap space, and no picks. If he’s thinking about leaving, it will be easy enough for someone to paint a picture to him of being in a better situation. If you try to take a super patient route in trading him, it opens up the door to what we’ve seen so many superstars do, which is to tell teams “I’ll only play here, here, or here.” which massively hurts their trade value.

I hope Giannis wants to spend his career with the Bucks, but Shams doesn’t report BS that I’m aware of. If the Bucks get the impression he may try to leave, they need to get ahead of it before he limits what they can do.

Fixed that first comment since it's applicable to just about every team's major star player.

Sure, but you have an entire generation of people crying about how they’re wasting their prime on a dead end team and so on. It gets into players heads and ends ups screwing the player over more times than not overall.

[ball_takes23]

People expecting teams to empty their entire asset pool for 2 years of Giannis are about to get a rude wake up call.

I don't think anybody is thinking this. Giannis will release a list of teams that he will sign an extension with, and one of those teams will trade for him.

[BigGargamel]

ESPN making an article where all 29 teams attempt to trade for Giannis. They are such disgusting vultures. Been trying to get Giannis out of Milwaukee for 10 years.

[bledredwine]

I want him to find a good supporting cast but I'm sick of the teaming up.

Teaming up with another top 5 players is ridiculous. Please do anything but that.

If he can find a spot where they have great support and a solid fanbase, that'd be perfect.
Then, the league is more interesting.

Besides, him and Jokic both facilitate, as do many stars in this type of open game.

[SkyBill40]

If XXXXX wants to stay a XXXX, you keep him until he retires. Maybe that hurts your team a bit as you missed out on getting a killer package for him, but there’s a special connection you get with a loyal player who wants to spend their entire career in your city that makes every second of that journey worth it.

However, if Giannis is considering leaving, like the report suggests, you trade him as soon as you can. If he’s considering leaving, it’s very likely someone will convince him to. Why? Because the Bucks situation sucks. They have no promising young talent, no cap space, and no picks. If he’s thinking about leaving, it will be easy enough for someone to paint a picture to him of being in a better situation. If you try to take a super patient route in trading him, it opens up the door to what we’ve seen so many superstars do, which is to tell teams “I’ll only play here, here, or here.” which massively hurts their trade value.

I hope Giannis wants to spend his career with the Bucks, but Shams doesn’t report BS that I’m aware of. If the Bucks get the impression he may try to leave, they need to get ahead of it before he limits what they can do.

Fixed that first comment since it's applicable to just about every team's major star player.

Sure, but you have an entire generation of people crying about how they’re wasting their prime on a dead end team and so on. It gets into players heads and ends ups screwing the player over more times than not overall.

Oh, I don't refute that at all. The thing is, a player is a member of that team until such a time that either the team decides otherwise or their contract expires. I really despise players who purposely undermine the team and don't play up to their ability because they don't want to be there any longer. If someone has it in their mind that they no longer want to be a member of that team, they player should go to the team and make that known. Using subterfuge and leaking stuff in the media is both poor character and unsportsmanlike. Keep that stuff where it belongs: QUIET.

I'm hopeful Giannis doesn't go down the Anthony Davis path (or any number of others who have made that choice) and is genuinely good about the process. If it's his time to go, so be it.

[Onlytimewilltel]

Giannis for Paolo still makes the most sense for both teams. Both teams say yes to that if Giannis wants to move on

If I’m Miami I’m not doing that for a 30 year old Giannis. Paolo will be a superstar and Gianis will decline hard once that athleticism fades.

Pat Riley's influence spans all of Florida

Ah, yes indeed, good catch

[Onlytimewilltel]

Giannis for Paolo still makes the most sense for both teams. Both teams say yes to that if Giannis wants to move on

If I’m Miami I’m not doing that for a 30 year old Giannis. Paolo will be a superstar and Gianis will decline hard once that athleticism fades.

If you’re Miami you don’t have Paolo to trade

Very true, good catch. Too bad it seems like Milwaukee also won’t have Giannis soon either

[ConSarnit]

Can you piece together a hypothetical package that makes sense? Turner is an unrestricted FA this summer so he is not an asset unless they S&T him I guess?

Pascal is worth about 4 mid FRPs, which loosely translates to like 1 decent lotto pick

Nembhard would be a really good young player but I doubt they’d want to part with him

A lot of their good bench pieces are due for salary increases. They can’t pay them all so why would a team give up value to take on their expiring assets?

You're undervaluing Pascal. He's a 2 way PF and an all-star who's been durable. We got shafted in the Pascal trade because Masai waited too long to make it and nobody was going to give assets for a 3 month rental. Take a look at a list of PFs in this league - he's a top 10 PF. Bridges got 5 1st round picks in comparison, and Bridges' value isn't as high. Pascal is under contract for 3 more years and a decent contract at that. Nembhard is coming up for a big pay day in 2 years' time. It's true Pacers may want to hang on to him for one more season, but they won't be able to pay him in 2 years so why not get the max value you can right now? Pascal, Nembhard, Sheppard and 2 picks. Or Pascal, Turner, Sheppard/Mathurin, no picks. That's a huge trade but one Pacers can make work. Nobody can come close to this package IMO.

Pascal is a 31 year old player who will make 45, 48 and 52 million the next three years. He's a good player, but not someone the Bucks need going forward if they move on from Giannis.

How much value will another team give for him? They'd have to match salary plus give up assets.

Late Indiana picks and young players like Nembhard, Sheppard or Mathurin are okay, but not enough for the Bucks to trade Giannis IMO. Think about where they'd be after a trade like that? Late picks, plus those players mentioned above and they don't have control of their own picks until after 2030. That would be awful.

I can’t see the Bucks wanting a player like Siakam. So they can toil as maybe a player-in team for the next 2-3 years? They can’t build around a lower level vet star like Siakam because Dame’s contract is an anchor and they won’t get free agents anyways. It’s better to get whatever draft (or young) assets they can trying to flip Siakam. I get that maybe they’ll suck for the next 2-3 years (with no upside draft payoff) but trying to build your new Bucks team around multiple bites at the draft apple is better than spinning your wheels with a Siakam centric team that is also going nowhere and has fewer draft picks to try and hit on.

The Bucks won’t get a vet star good enough to carry the team the next 2-3 years so they might as well get as many draft picks as possible and try to rebuild that way. Winning 38 games doesn’t get you much further than wining 25 games a season.

[MavsDirk41]

Any chance the Lakers can get him? They don't have the draft picks I'd think.

Reaves/Knecht/Hachimura/1sts?

Milwaukee will get a better offer than that. Miami could offer a package around Bam with some picks. Houston could offer Jabari Smith, Eason, and some draft capital.

[___Rand___]

Can you piece together a hypothetical package that makes sense? Turner is an unrestricted FA this summer so he is not an asset unless they S&T him I guess?

Pascal is worth about 4 mid FRPs, which loosely translates to like 1 decent lotto pick

Nembhard would be a really good young player but I doubt they’d want to part with him

A lot of their good bench pieces are due for salary increases. They can’t pay them all so why would a team give up value to take on their expiring assets?

You're undervaluing Pascal. He's a 2 way PF and an all-star who's been durable. We got shafted in the Pascal trade because Masai waited too long to make it and nobody was going to give assets for a 3 month rental. Take a look at a list of PFs in this league - he's a top 10 PF. Bridges got 5 1st round picks in comparison, and Bridges' value isn't as high. Pascal is under contract for 3 more years and a decent contract at that. Nembhard is coming up for a big pay day in 2 years' time. It's true Pacers may want to hang on to him for one more season, but they won't be able to pay him in 2 years so why not get the max value you can right now? Pascal, Nembhard, Sheppard and 2 picks. Or Pascal, Turner, Sheppard/Mathurin, no picks. That's a huge trade but one Pacers can make work. Nobody can come close to this package IMO.

The Bucks don’t control their own picks so why would they put together a team around Pascal? Like have you really thought about this from a basketball and a business standpoint? Nobody is buying tickets to go see Pascal Siakam lead the team. They’re probably fighting for play-in territory if their best players are Pascal and Nembhard.

I’ve noted earlier that the Pacers can’t maintain Turner, Sheppard, Mathurin, and Nembhard going forward. Why would the Bucks do them a favor by giving up an MVP level player for a collection of assets they can’t retain anyways? Let them make tough decisions without us bailing them out

There are better rebuild options out there than cobbling together a play in team

You think you can get a superstar back for Giannis? Nobody wants to give up a superstar. Giannis wants out. GL getting a superstar back.

You get what you can, flip for younger assets or picks, hope one of them develops.