Milwaukee/San Antonio/New Orleans

[Texas Chuck]

I think 3 and 6 were pretty reasonable outcomes for a team that's best player next year might be Kyle Kuzma and Kevin Porter Jr. I don't understand the hyperbole of jumping to whatever you just did.

The point is you laid out very specific picks when we have no idea. I'm pointing out extremes to show you that we have to evaluate the deal on the actual variance not on a specific scenario.

Its cool that you would prefer multiple shots to just Harper btw. Its also cool that other people think hes a good enough prospect to just take him and not force themselves to suck for 3 years in hopes of maybe getting someone better but also maybe not.

Force themselves to suck? Brother they are going to suck all by themselves and be giving Pelicans two top 10 picks while doing it.

They actually do not have to bottom out at all just because they trade Giannis. Look who is the Finals right now. Both teams have traded star players without immediately going into long prolonged tanks and came out the other side quickly and in great shape.

This idea that the only way to build a team is to suck and pick high with you own picks ignores how most contending teams happen.

OKC -- they got lucky on SGA. They drafted well with deeper picks, they picked up smart players nobody else believed in. Chet is the only guy on the team as the result of lotto luck from their own pick.

Indy -- no high lotto picks anywhere. Smart trades have built the core of that team.

Denver -- got Joker absurdly late. Gordon a trade. Murray picked at 7

Boston -- another team's picks. A bunch of smart trades.

Knicks -- Towns a high pick, but not by them. Trades and free agency built this team.

And if we go back, the Bucks weren't built by high picks in the first place. In fact the high pick they got from themselves was a total bust.. Warriors weren't. Lakers weren't. Mavericks weren't. Spurs got Duncan but the rest was done very differently.

You guys want to force this to be the only way. ITs not. Its not even the most common way.

[JMAC3]

The point is you laid out very specific picks when we have no idea. I'm pointing out extremes to show you that we have to evaluate the deal on the actual variance not on a specific scenario.

Its cool that you would prefer multiple shots to just Harper btw. Its also cool that other people think hes a good enough prospect to just take him and not force themselves to suck for 3 years in hopes of maybe getting someone better but also maybe not.

Force themselves to suck? Brother they are going to suck all by themselves and be giving Pelicans two top 10 picks while doing it.

They actually do not have to bottom out at all just because they trade Giannis. Look who is the Finals right now. Both teams have traded star players without immediately going into long prolonged tanks and came out the other side quickly and in great shape.

This idea that the only way to build a team is to suck and pick high with you own picks ignores how most contending teams happen.

OKC -- they got lucky on SGA. They drafted well with deeper picks, they picked up smart players nobody else believed in. Chet is the only guy on the team as the result of lotto luck from their own pick.

Indy -- no high lotto picks anywhere. Smart trades have built the core of that team.

Denver -- got Joker absurdly late. Gordon a trade. Murray picked at 7

Boston -- another team's picks. A bunch of smart trades.

Knicks -- Towns a high pick, but not by them. Trades and free agency built this team.

And if we go back, the Bucks weren't built by high picks in the first place. In fact the high pick they got from themselves was a total bust.. Warriors weren't. Lakers weren't. Mavericks weren't. Spurs got Duncan but the rest was done very differently.

You guys want to force this to be the only way. ITs not. Its not even the most common way.

Cool Story. Now give all those teams none of their own first round picks and see if they repeat the process....

[Texas Chuck]

You are only proving my point. But I forgot how stubbornly you stick to an idea. You simply can't even consider any other possibility once you fixate on something. So leaving you to this one. Not sure why you posts OPs though when you only want agreement?

[One_and_Done]

If you are Milwaukee, would you rather have #2 (Dylan Harper) or #7 and both of your swaps returned via Pelicans?

Milwaukee sends: Giannis
Milwaukee receives: #7, 2026 swap rights (Milwaukee), 2027 Milwaukee first, #14, 2026 Hawks swap, 2027 Hawks first, Vassell and Keldon

Spurs send: #2, 2025 Hawks first, 2026 Hawks swap, 2027 Hawks first, Vassell and Keldon
Spurs receive: Giannis

Pelicans send: #7, 2026 swap rights (Milwaukee) and 2027 Milwaukee first
Pelicans receive: #2

Spurs aren't trading anything like this for Giannis. Also you can't trade swaps per se. Take out the #2 and put Castle in, and build a deal around that foundation.

[One_and_Done]

Force themselves to suck? Brother they are going to suck all by themselves and be giving Pelicans two top 10 picks while doing it.

They actually do not have to bottom out at all just because they trade Giannis. Look who is the Finals right now. Both teams have traded star players without immediately going into long prolonged tanks and came out the other side quickly and in great shape.

This idea that the only way to build a team is to suck and pick high with you own picks ignores how most contending teams happen.

OKC -- they got lucky on SGA. They drafted well with deeper picks, they picked up smart players nobody else believed in. Chet is the only guy on the team as the result of lotto luck from their own pick.

Indy -- no high lotto picks anywhere. Smart trades have built the core of that team.

Denver -- got Joker absurdly late. Gordon a trade. Murray picked at 7

Boston -- another team's picks. A bunch of smart trades.

Knicks -- Towns a high pick, but not by them. Trades and free agency built this team.

And if we go back, the Bucks weren't built by high picks in the first place. In fact the high pick they got from themselves was a total bust.. Warriors weren't. Lakers weren't. Mavericks weren't. Spurs got Duncan but the rest was done very differently.

You guys want to force this to be the only way. ITs not. Its not even the most common way.

Cool Story. Now give all those teams none of their own first round picks and see if they repeat the process....

All methods to win a title are unlikely to succeed, because only one team wins a title each year, but the best way is clearly through the draft. That doesn't mean you have to use the picks per se, sometimes you can get good by trading those lotto picks. The thing that is the least likely to work is a plan that revolves around 'I will just rip off everyone in trades and get really lucky', because it's out of your control and relies on luck. There's a reason teams like the 04 Pistons or 25 Pacers are so rare.

Some of the other teams you allude to above also have non-replicable strategies (e.g. be LA so guys will force there way there, or play in an era when nobody thought Euros/HSers were good so you can draft a good one late, rely on a one time salary cap explosion to sign KD, etc). Curry was the 7th pick, and only fell that far because the his attempt to force his way to NY (which failed btw). He did no work outs, and tried to scare teams off. His player type was also not valued as much at the time.

[Texas Chuck]

Yes winning a title is hard. I'm not suggesting anyone can replicate anything. All I am pointing it out is champions and contenders are being built all the time without high lotto picks.

In fact who is the last champion built on their own high lotto pick? Are we going all the way back to Tim Duncan? Lebron doesn't count because he came back as a free agent. Yep we have to go all the way back to Tim Duncan.

I'm the guy say being open to all options. Not the guy insisting on only one lol.

[JMAC3]

You are only proving my point. But I forgot how stubbornly you stick to an idea. You simply can't even consider any other possibility once you fixate on something. So leaving you to this one. Not sure why you posts OPs though when you only want agreement?

I am stubborn because I think Bucks would prefer multiple bites at the apple over 1 guy? If that is the case just trade Giannis for Mobley and hope to figure the rest out... Or just keep Giannis and hope to get lucky in one of the ways you are stating. You're examples aren't even backing what you are saying.

Knicks were formed by trading a RJ Barrett (#3 pick) for OG, trading 6 firsts for Bridges.
Pacers traded 3 firsts for Siakam and depth from having multiple lottery picks
Nuggets traded multiple firsts for Aaron Gordon.
OKC had a million draft picks, that is how they got lucky and hit on Chet (2) JDub (12), Cason (10)etc... traded Giddey (6th pick) for Caruso.

If anything all of these scenarios prove my point that in order to get good Milwaukee has to stack multiple assets whether that is hitting on them in draft or trading them.

[One_and_Done]

I mean, there are lots of ways of trying to do something, but some of them are much harder than others. Daryl Morey, who has never tanked (because his owners wouldn’t let him) has literally said high draft picks are the easiest way to build a team, and that the middle is the worst place to be stuck. As I said, you don’t need to necessarily use those picks, you can trade them for good players, but trying to go another route is far less likely to work.

To suggest “well, we need to go back to Tim Duncan to see it work” is silly. OKC just won 68 games, and is on the cusp of a title, and they built their team through the draft (or through trading guys who they acquired through the draft to get other guys who became their current stars). A lot of the assets and players OKC was able to get were also a product of them being bad, so that they could leverage their cap space to take bad contracts for more picks and better picks. Boston traded their existing stars to get high draft picks, which netted them Tatum & Brown; the core of a title team, whose final opponent was built around a #3 pick in Luka. The Cavs just won 64 games, and it’s driven by a #3 and #4 pick in large part. Houston was second in the West, also in large part the back of high draft picks. The Warriors first title run featured two #7 picks playing a big role, and then a unprecedented cap spike allowing them to upgrade one of those #7 picks into KD. As I noted, they only got Curry as low as #7 due to a confluence of unlikely events. Lebron only went back to the Cavs because they were the team who drafted him, and his Robin was a #1 pick (they also started a #4 pick in a key role, and their 3rd best player was a guy they traded the #1 pick for; clearly they sowed the fruits of tanking to win). I could go on and on. OKCs first contender was built around high draft picks, and could easily have won a title with a little luck. Lebron only went to Miami because they had Wade, who they needed a top 5 pick to get. The CP3 Clippers only happened because they had drafted Blake #1, and had a bunch of draft capital to move for CP3. Some of these examples show how, even if your team isn’t run competently, you can fall ass backwards into a contender with the lotto.

If you’re LA or NY, you might have some different team building options open to you, because guys like Lebron/AD/Kawhi/PG13/Shaq/Kobe/Brunson will force their way there, but for most teams you can’t build this way. As I said, a plan of “I’m going to rip off everyone else in trades” or “I’ll just draft Jokic in the 2nd round” is also not really something you can plan for. If you can rebuild your team without tanking, good for you. It’s clearly less likely to be effective though. Masai and Joe Dumars stand out as two examples of GMs who had absurd amounts of luck go their way, and flopped hard afterwards when they tried to pursue the “catch lightning in a bottle” strategy a second time. It’s not replicable.

[Texas Chuck]

But OKC did that without high picks(Except for Chet). And his whole argument was the Bucks must get their picks bank, then tank, thats it.

This is my point, you keep missing it. All these teams have built contenders without picking a star high in the draft or trading their own high pick for pieces. They've done it without getting their own high picks.

In fact the easiest way to win titles is to not bottom completely out and have a terrible losing culture. We see the teams that spend all their time at the top of the lottery struggle to get out. Cleveland got the 1 pick 3 times in 4 years and only got out because Lebron decided to come back.

Meanwhile we see the well run organizations find other ways to build their team.

Ya'll can be stubborn and quote Morey, but history shows us there are all kinds of paths. Yes picking Tim Duncan is the easiest one. But he doesn't come around all that often so lets keep our minds just a little more open.

[YayBasketball]

It is interesting how much the value of that swap may have dropped since the latest Zion news. If I'm the Bucks, I'm looking at the Pelicans' situation: Zion scandal looming, Murray out half the season recovering from Achilles tear, rest of roster lackluster with question marks, competing in a brutal West. That swap next season isn't too scary after all.

But on the flip side, Pels trading the 2027 Bucks/Pels 1st would leave Pels in a similiar situation: without their own first two seasons away, with a non-contending roster. Unless they somehow link the Hawks in to return their part of the swap ('27 lower of Bucks/Pels), untanging the swap altogether. Seems complicated and unlikely.

[YayBasketball]

Let's make some compromises for alternative frameworks. Pels extinguish the '26 MIL swap and give McCullom, in return for pick 14 and Vassell. Something like that. Maybe in exchange for the '27 NOP/MIL 1st, Pels get the '27 ATL 1st via Spurs. So let's try that alternative framework:

-----
Milwaukee sends: Giannis
Milwaukee receives: #2, 2026 swap rights (Milwaukee), 2027 MIL/NOP first (best of), 2026 Hawks/Spurs swap option, 2026 IND first via NOP, Keldon, Hawkins, McCullom

Spurs send: #2, #14, 2026 Hawks/Spurs swap, 2027 Hawks first, Vassell and Keldon / NOP 2nds ('26, '28, '29)
Spurs receive: Giannis

Pelicans send: 2026 swap rights (Milwaukee) and 2027 Milwaukee/New Orleans first (best of), 2026 IND first, McCullom, Hawkins,
Pelicans receive: Vassell, #14, 2027 Hawks first, NOP 2nds back ('26, '28, '29)
--------

So if you break it down, Bucks are trading #14, Vassell, '27 Hawks 1st /for/ '26 MIL swap extinguished, '27 MIL/NOP best of, Hawkins, McCullom.
An alternative could have Spurs could take McCullom and send Barnes, Branham, if they want more shooting.
-
Bucks rebuild with an immediate core piece in Harper to give the fan base some immediate excitement in the transition. Hawkins is a flyer, and McCullom joins as a veteran mentor on an expiring, can be kept til' trade deadline or flipped right away, a la Holiday to Boston. They get some valuable picks the next two seasons. They may require some future ones, too.

Spurs win now with Giannis.

Pels join the party to cash in on Bucks' desire to get their pick control back, getting an extra late lotto pick in this draft and upgrading from CJ/Hawkins to Vassell, forming a nice wing trio with Herb and Murphy, or even replacing Herb if they go that direction.

[Euphonetiks]

Let's make some compromises for alternative frameworks. Pels extinguish the '26 MIL swap and give McCullom, in return for pick 14 and Vassell. Something like that. Maybe in exchange for the '27 NOP/MIL 1st, Pels get the '27 ATL 1st via Spurs. So let's try that alternative framework:

-----
Milwaukee sends: Giannis
Milwaukee receives: #2, 2026 swap rights (Milwaukee), 2027 MIL/NOP first (best of), 2026 Hawks/Spurs swap option, 2026 IND first via NOP, Keldon, Hawkins, McCullom

Spurs send: #2, #14, 2026 Hawks/Spurs swap, 2027 Hawks first, Vassell and Keldon / NOP 2nds ('26, '28, '29)
Spurs receive: Giannis

Pelicans send: 2026 swap rights (Milwaukee) and 2027 Milwaukee/New Orleans first (best of), 2026 IND first, McCullom, Hawkins,
Pelicans receive: Vassell, #14, 2027 Hawks first, NOP 2nds back ('26, '28, '29)
--------

So if you break it down, Bucks are trading #14, Vassell, '27 Hawks 1st /for/ '26 MIL swap extinguished, '27 MIL/NOP best of, Hawkins, McCullom.
An alternative could have Spurs could take McCullom and send Barnes, Branham, if they want more shooting.
-
Bucks rebuild with an immediate core piece in Harper to give the fan base some immediate excitement in the transition. Hawkins is a flyer, and McCullom joins as a veteran mentor on an expiring, can be kept til' trade deadline or flipped right away, a la Holiday to Boston. They get some valuable picks the next two seasons. They may require some future ones, too.

Spurs win now with Giannis.

Pels join the party to cash in on Bucks' desire to get their pick control back, getting an extra late lotto pick in this draft and upgrading from CJ/Hawkins to Vassell, forming a nice wing trio with Herb and Murphy, or even replacing Herb if they go that direction.

Spurs cannot trade the ‘27 ATL without getting back a ‘27 pick. Bringing in ATL to unwind the ‘27 Pels/Bucks first makes sense, but it takes too much value away from the Giannis return.

I think the Bucks have to be happy with the ‘26 swap rights being extinguished and count the ‘27 pick as a sunk cost for the ring otherwise they will be disappointed with the return.

[wegotthabeet]

I don’t think the two swaps make up the difference between the 2nd & 7th. Tier 3 starts at pick 3. New Orleans isn’t competitive in the west either so how valuable are those swaps really?

[Ron Swanson]

I feel like this board should have gotten enough feedback from Bucks fans at this point for us to believe that this idea of "getting their picks/swaps back" is not any sort of priority or need in the event they trade Giannis, so maybe we should stop building trade proposals around that faulty premise? All this does is weaken/dilute the overall trade package they'd be getting back, instead of the smart thing of viewing those as potential sunk cost assets.

Also, absolutely no guarantees that New Orleans and Portland are gonna be better in the immediate future than Milwaukee even in the event that they trade Giannis. Stands to reason but I guess it needs to be repeated that pick swaps are not actual first round picks, so no, the Bucks are not without any firsts for "the next 5-years". There's a very real possibility that they only give up their pick in 2027 and 2029......that's it. So yeah, prioritizing getting potentially meaningless swaps back is not something they should be doing. To answer the OP question, Milwaukee would easily value #2 (in addition to all the other assets/picks SAS can throw on top of course) over #7 and getting their 2027 pick back. I don't know how that's even a question.

[JMAC3]

I guess I am not understanding the narratives here because the Suns, don't have their own picks and everyone says they are in the worst spot in the League... but Milwaukee doesn't own their own firsts and we are told owning your own firsts is overrated and they can make it work without it.

Also, rich coming from a Dallas fan, who just had the franchise saved by owning their own pick and not owing it or swapping it landed the #1 pick.

[JMAC3]

I don’t think the two swaps make up the difference between the 2nd & 7th. Tier 3 starts at pick 3. New Orleans isn’t competitive in the west either so how valuable are those swaps really?

This seems counterintuitive. On one side you are saying there is a big value gap between the 2nd and 7th pick right now in this draft... but then 2 seconds later questioning how valuable will the swap be if both teams are bad... I mean we could legit be in the same situation next year where Milwaukee ends up top 3 and has to swap with Pelicans in the mid lottery. Would that not be valuable?

[Texas Chuck]

Also, rich coming from a Dallas fan, who just had the franchise saved by owning their own pick and not owing it or swapping it landed the #1 pick.

I know some posters are only focused on their own team. Which is totally cool. Its pretty obvious since you are clearly familiar with my posts, that I like to discuss the entire league.

Dallas isn't relevant to this topic at all. So the luck of getting Flagg has nothing to do with anything.

However, were Dallas to do what many other Dallas posters hope for and trade AD, you know what I wouldn't do? Chase trying to get the Mavs own picks back diluting the return. Those deals are done. Those picks no longer belong to Dallas. And I hate any rebuilding plan that says I should plan on sucking for years and years to maximize the value of my best asset I traded to start said rebuild.

[jayjaysee]

The 2026 Atlanta pick is a nice scratch off ticket, but Milwaukee will be tanking and Atlanta will be going for the 6th seed. So wouldn’t put too much weight into it..

I think SA owes a lot more though.

[JMAC3]

Also, rich coming from a Dallas fan, who just had the franchise saved by owning their own pick and not owing it or swapping it landed the #1 pick.

I know some posters are only focused on their own team. Which is totally cool. Its pretty obvious since you are clearly familiar with my posts, that I like to discuss the entire league.

Dallas isn't relevant to this topic at all. So the luck of getting Flagg has nothing to do with anything.

However, were Dallas to do what many other Dallas posters hope for and trade AD, you know what I wouldn't do? Chase trying to get the Mavs own picks back diluting the return. Those deals are done. Those picks no longer belong to Dallas. And I hate any rebuilding plan that says I should plan on sucking for years and years to maximize the value of my best asset I traded to start said rebuild.

Dallas having Kyrie, AD, Flagg and whatever else is a massive difference in needing their own picks back vs a team like Milwaukee post Giannis. I would hope you can understand the difference but for some reason you have your heals dug in on this one. I think we can agree not every situation is the same and 1 strategy doesn't apply to every team across the league.

Read on Twitter

Maybe hope in the comments on twitter here and tell everyone how dumb this is as well since you feel so passionately about it.

[JayMKE]

I am just keeping Giannis, neither of these are prizes. Also the Rutgers kids prove this a 1 player draft if they’re 2 and 3.