Giannis Thread - On Asking for a Trade - "I am not this kind of guy, they would have to kick me out”.

[aboveAverage]

Bucks don't need to "get out in front" of anything - they could say tomorrow that they were shopping Giannis and 29 teams would line up with their best offers.

But as others are saying, it doesn't matter anyways because Giannis isn't wired like the NBA media wishes he were. Otherwise, we would've been having this conversation 5 years ago after losing to the Heat in the bubble (and almost every year since, except '21).

Exactly. Get out in front of what? It’s hilarious. The Bucks are in the driver’s seat here. It’s so weird just HOW desperate the national media are to get Giannis out of Milwaukee. You don’t see it with any other star. The only other players I remember them doing this with was Cleveland LeBron and Minnesota KG.

[Ron Swanson]

I feel like one of these three options will happen:

- Giannis will want to stay and chase a "three time MVP, two time world champion, one team" legacy. Horst will be aggressive in putting a highly specialized roster of 3+D players around GA. The 25-26 team will be frisky but also a first round exit. The following year or two we'd have opportunities for substantial improvement. This would necessitate moving on from Doc

- Bucks and GA will quietly agree to move on, and we'd take a massive offer from San Antonio or three way trade involving Dallas. First year or two would be rough. But if done right we'd have youth and talent and be watchable

- Bucks take the most unimaginative path which involves: announcing that Giannis is staying, keeping Doc, making a panic trade such as reacquiring Jrue, all to have Giannis get sick of it all around the all star break and end up demanding a trade in a fashion that somehow reduces the Bucks leverage and return

Out of those options, the third feels more possible than it should be. One is what I am hoping for. The second would hurt more than most here realize the first year or two, but if done right lead to a fun team down the road. I think if basketball front office people win out, we go 1. If financial minded and uncreative owner types win out, three seems (to them) like the safe and profitable way forward (until it all crashes and burns)

That doesn't make much sense to me because the original Jrue trade idea would be the opposite of unimaginative and financially scrupulous. I'd much rather we have a creative GM who's willing to leverage our new cap flexibility in trades with 2nd apron teams when we're so asset/draft pick starved. All this crap about "Dame trades" for the past 12-months because uncreative people could only think about trading our best players in order to "get younger", but it's almost like a lot of us have been banging the table for these on-the-margins moves that would have easily accomplished the same goal (see: Bobby trades, using Brook's expiring, breaking up a future 1st into multiple lesser firsts, etc.) for years now. This past trade deadline where we got two plus athlete rotation guys for nothing but salary filler corpses just further reinforces it.

[MartyConlonOnTheRun]

That doesn't make much sense to me because the original Jrue trade idea would be the opposite of unimaginative and financially scrupulous.

Maybe I'm lost in conversation, but 1. I don't think he was saying the original trade was unimaginative and financially scrupulous - just that trading for him now would be. 2. I think the first trade was unimaginative and financially scrupulous. We just threw a ton of first and money at a borderline all-star in hopes of keeping Giannis happy. It worked because he stayed and we won a 'ship, but it could have gone wrong a million different ways (us losing to the nets, Giannis actually tearing his ACL and we have a tanking year without a draft pick, etc)

[machu46]

Not a fan of Nick Wright but I like that he (or someone on his staff) put together potential trade offers that fit in the new salary cap/apron rules.

Watch on YouTube

Curious if any of you like the potential trades mentioned IF GIANNIS WANTS OUT:

-Houston-(Bucks get Sengun, Reed Sheppard, Landale, PHX 2027 1st, PHX 2029 1st, Houston 2028 1st, Houston 2030 1st) I personally would say keep Sengun/Landale and give me Amen/cap filler like Aaron Holiday which works in trade checker

-Philly (Bucks get Maxey, McCain, Philly's 2025 first-third overall, LAC 28 1st, and LAC 29 swap) So basically our team would be Maxey, McCain, Ace Bailey

-NYK (Bucks get KAT, McBride, 26 1st round swap, 28 1st round swap, and 30 1st round swap) Personally I say no thanks

-OKC-(Bucks get SGA, Kenrich Williams) Ok this is a dumb option and OKC doesn't even consider it at this point.

-SAS (Bucks get Castle, K. Johnson, Barnes, ATL 2027 1st, Chicago 2027 1st, Boston 2028 1st, Dallas 2030 1st, and Minnesota 2030 1st)

I don't know that I'd be okay with it, but the Philly one is at least interesting to think about. Houston and Spurs I would want more. Knicks is obviously nowhere near enough. OKC is an obvious yes but OKC isn't doing that.

[Licensed to Il]

I feel like one of these three options will happen:

- Giannis will want to stay and chase a "three time MVP, two time world champion, one team" legacy. Horst will be aggressive in putting a highly specialized roster of 3+D players around GA. The 25-26 team will be frisky but also a first round exit. The following year or two we'd have opportunities for substantial improvement. This would necessitate moving on from Doc

- Bucks and GA will quietly agree to move on, and we'd take a massive offer from San Antonio or three way trade involving Dallas. First year or two would be rough. But if done right we'd have youth and talent and be watchable

- Bucks take the most unimaginative path which involves: announcing that Giannis is staying, keeping Doc, making a panic trade such as reacquiring Jrue, all to have Giannis get sick of it all around the all star break and end up demanding a trade in a fashion that somehow reduces the Bucks leverage and return

Out of those options, the third feels more possible than it should be. One is what I am hoping for. The second would hurt more than most here realize the first year or two, but if done right lead to a fun team down the road. I think if basketball front office people win out, we go 1. If financial minded and uncreative owner types win out, three seems (to them) like the safe and profitable way forward (until it all crashes and burns)

That doesn't make much sense to me because the original Jrue trade idea would be the opposite of unimaginative and financially scrupulous. I'd much rather we have a creative GM who's willing to leverage our new cap flexibility in trades with 2nd apron teams when we're so asset/draft pick starved. All this crap about "Dame trades" for the past 12-months because uncreative people could only think about trading our best players in order to "get younger", but it's almost like a lot of us have been banging the table for these on-the-margins moves that would have easily accomplished the same goal (see: Bobby trades, using Brook's expiring, breaking up a future 1st into multiple lesser firsts, etc.) for years now. This past trade deadline where we got two plus athlete rotation guys for nothing but salary filler corpses just further reinforces it.

I track what you are saying, and I didn't explain that very well. I was trying to say, there is a path where we do something pretty bland in hopes that one or two moves makes us a viable top 6 team in the East, and then it doesn't, and then we blow everything up. I imagine that ownership wants to keep the cash cow (selling tickets to see a top 15 all time player) and would sign off on anything that keeps that the status quo. But of course there are Kuzma or Bobby or the 2031 pick trades that make us worse. So my "option 3" was referring to something that appears to strengthen us opening day, but by the all star break we realize we've taken on more salary, given up more picks, and Giannis feels even more hopeless about winning in Milwaukee than he surely does right now.

[Ron Swanson]

That doesn't make much sense to me because the original Jrue trade idea would be the opposite of unimaginative and financially scrupulous.

Maybe I'm lost in conversation, but 1. I don't think he was saying the original trade was unimaginative and financially scrupulous - just that trading for him now would be. 2. I think the first trade was unimaginative and financially scrupulous. We just threw a ton of first and money at a borderline all-star in hopes of keeping Giannis happy. It worked because he stayed and we won a 'ship, but it could have gone wrong a million different ways (us losing to the nets, Giannis actually tearing his ACL and we have a tanking year without a draft pick, etc)

I had thought this was in reference to my Kuzma/Pat for Jrue + the 28th pick proposal because we'd be "re-acquiring" Jrue but I could be wrong. But yes, running it back with Doc would indeed be unimaginative and makes anything we do this offseason pointless anyways.

[ReasonablySober]

Yea, any deal with SA needs to have both Castle and the #2. Not really interested in any of those other deals.

[MartyConlonOnTheRun]

I dont think we are the team for it salary wise, but feel KP could be a buy low. His contract is just 1 year and he will put up an extremely efficient 20 points and play decent d albeit in only 50 games. Always thought he was the heir apparent to Lopez.

Wonder if the Lakers try going old again and take on Jrue and KP for a pooh-pooh platter.

[BUCKnation]

Kind of interesting to see the media vs players talk about this. I feel like most respected former players think he should stay or at least go for way more than some of these offers (KD saying on twitter the offer should be 4 starters and picks, for example), while the media is throwing out mostly garbage proposals and frothing at the mouth about any potential move.

[soxperry]

The Celtics are not going to tank without Tatum. They just have way too many winning players to tank even if they reconfigure

[MartyConlonOnTheRun]

Yea, any deal with SA needs to have both Castle and the #2. Not really interested in any of those other deals.

SAS has always been my favorite from both a value aspect and ok with Giannis wearing that jersey. I think they have some flexibility on keeping either #2 or Castle though since they do have a lot of decent value picks*.
#2; 2026 Hawks First, 2027 Hawks First, 2028 Better of Boston/Spurs, '30/31 with some juicy swaps, Mamu, Johnson, Vassell

We would be getting 1 high-end pick, probably 2 lottery picks, 2 low-end picks and 2 young players and 1 euro stud. Not saying its my favorite package but at least a start. But then i look at our own draft picks......Jesus christ is it is just a pit of despair recognizing we can't even tank and rebuild until 2030-31. The only light at the end of the tunnel is probably 2027-28 when we start to have cap room and make OKC trading for Paul esque trades.


*I'm not sure what picks the spurs actually own and what are actually legal at this point
NBA really needs to do something to simplify pick swaps. Like WTF does this even mean?

SAS will receive the more favorable of its 2026 1st round pick and ATL's 2026 1st round pick; UTA will receive the most favorable of its 2026 1st round pick protected for selections 9-30, MIN's 2026 1st round pick and CLE's 2026 1st round pick; MIN will receive the less favorable of its pick and the UTA pick if conveyable; ATL will receive the more favorable of (1) the less favorable of its 2026 1st round pick and SAS's 2026 1st round pick and (2) the less favorable of (a) the CLE pick and (b) the more favorable of the UTA pick if conveyable and the MIN pick

[PG Graveyard]

Yea, any deal with SA needs to have both Castle and the #2. Not really interested in any of those other deals.

Plus Vassel and all the rest of their picks.

[MickeyDavis]

The Celtics are not going to tank without Tatum. They just have way too many winning players to tank even if they reconfigure

Yup. Celtics are a good team without Tatum, definitely a playoff team.

[humanrefutation]

OKC isn't sending us SGA for Giannis, even though I think they should because Giannis is better than SGA ever will be.

[BUCKnation]

Celtics will definitely be a playoff team in a weak east, but as we've said before, they'll have a very different roster next year.

[Ron Swanson]

Of course they'll be a playoff team. They won 61-games with a +9.4 net-rating. But no one's taking them as a serious contender next season and rightfully so. I mean, they were gonna be down 3-1 to a good but not spectacular Knicks squad anyways even before the Tatum injury.

[soxperry]

Yea, any deal with SA needs to have both Castle and the #2. Not really interested in any of those other deals.

SAS has always been my favorite from both a value aspect and ok with Giannis wearing that jersey. I think they have some flexibility on keeping either #2 or Castle though since they do have a lot of decent value picks*.
#2; 2026 Hawks First, 2027 Hawks First, 2028 Better of Boston/Spurs, '30/31 with some juicy swaps, Mamu, Johnson, Vassell

We would be getting 1 high-end pick, probably 2 lottery picks, 2 low-end picks and 2 young players and 1 euro stud. Not saying its my favorite package but at least a start. But then i look at our own draft picks......Jesus christ is it is just a pit of despair recognizing we can't even tank and rebuild until 2030-31. The only light at the end of the tunnel is probably 2027-28 when we start to have cap room and make OKC trading for Paul esque trades.


*I'm not sure what picks the spurs actually own and what are actually legal at this point
NBA really needs to do something to simplify pick swaps. Like WTF does this even mean?

SAS will receive the more favorable of its 2026 1st round pick and ATL's 2026 1st round pick; UTA will receive the most favorable of its 2026 1st round pick protected for selections 9-30, MIN's 2026 1st round pick and CLE's 2026 1st round pick; MIN will receive the less favorable of its pick and the UTA pick if conveyable; ATL will receive the more favorable of (1) the less favorable of its 2026 1st round pick and SAS's 2026 1st round pick and (2) the less favorable of (a) the CLE pick and (b) the more favorable of the UTA pick if conveyable and the MIN pick

I get that they are confusing but if you "simplify" them then you are placing unnecessary restrictions on apron teams that further limits their flexibility. Im very much against that.

[MartyConlonOnTheRun]

Not a fan of Nick Wright but I like that he (or someone on his staff) put together potential trade offers that fit in the new salary cap/apron rules.

Watch on YouTube

Curious if any of you like the potential trades mentioned IF GIANNIS WANTS OUT:

-Houston-(Bucks get Sengun, Reed Sheppard, Landale, PHX 2027 1st, PHX 2029 1st, Houston 2028 1st, Houston 2030 1st) I personally would say keep Sengun/Landale and give me Amen/cap filler like Aaron Holiday which works in trade checker

-Philly (Bucks get Maxey, McCain, Philly's 2025 first-third overall, LAC 28 1st, and LAC 29 swap) So basically our team would be Maxey, McCain, Ace Bailey

-NYK (Bucks get KAT, McBride, 26 1st round swap, 28 1st round swap, and 30 1st round swap) Personally I say no thanks

-OKC-(Bucks get SGA, Kenrich Williams) Ok this is a dumb option and OKC doesn't even consider it at this point.

-SAS (Bucks get Castle, K. Johnson, Barnes, ATL 2027 1st, Chicago 2027 1st, Boston 2028 1st, Dallas 2030 1st, and Minnesota 2030 1st)

I don't know that I'd be okay with it, but the Philly one is at least interesting to think about. Houston and Spurs I would want more. Knicks is obviously nowhere near enough. OKC is an obvious yes but OKC isn't doing that.

I feel like the OKC trade is a no even from our end unless the plan is to flip SGA? I have SGA maybe slightly better and obviously younger than Giannis, but it is the same 2 year deal without Giannis's attachment to Milwaukee. Would we be any better in that 2 years with SGA? I just dont see the upside of getting SGA over Giannis.

[bucksfansince88]

all the media talking heads just keeping pushing the doom and gloom narrative the bucks arent in as bad of a position as they are making it seem. at the end of the day we have a top 10-15 all time guy in Giannis, so we will always have a shot. I dont think he needs another ball dominant star like dame next to him, our biggest problem at this point seems to be our inept ownership group and front office that lacks savvy creativity and the balls to do what it takes to properly maximize this window with GA in his prime

[Ron Swanson]

The only trade that ever would have made me consider sitting down with him and saying "we believe it's best to rebuild going forward" would have been the San Antonio haul if they got #1. Flagg by himself on a team of G-leaguers for the next 5-years is firmly in the "what's the point?" category, and just getting the New Orleans 2026/27 swap/pick back is equally pointless when Portland controls our 2028-2030 drafts.

I mean, I guess if you can find a way to get the current Spurs best offer (#2, #14, Castle, Atlanta picks) as well as flip-a guy like Vassell to New Orleans for our 2027 pick back? Sure, I'd probably settle for that if he demands a trade. But as is all the Flagg ideas died for me when SA or Houston didn't win the lottery. There's just no other trade offers out there outside of OKC giving up the absolute farm (Jalen/Chet plus all the firsts) that even remotely interest me anymore.