Bogut wants to stay....

[trwi7]

-= original quote snipped =-



I'm a big Bogut fan but I can't believe there's a team in the league dumb enough to give him $16M a year. Not even the Bucks are that stupid.

I hope.

Come on you've been a Bucks fan long enough to know this wouldn't be out of the ordinary at all.

[europa]

-= original quote snipped =-



Come on you've been a Bucks fan long enough to know this wouldn't be out of the ordinary at all.

Indeed. That's the scary part.

[fam3381]

Who this Aussie agent was? I have no idea. Most likely he is an affiliate ot the American agent and is firing the first shots across the bow from the other side of the Pacific.

That's Dwight Howard money, so I'm guessing (praying) that the Bucks wouldn't touch that.

Other guys who will be worth paying attention to are Biedrins and Bynum. Biedrins will be restricted, so he has to get a new deal, while the Lakers will probably try to lock up Bynum before he puts up even bigger numbers next year. Biedrins seems like a very good fit for Golden State, and if Philly's the only team with cap room you know he's not going there with Dalembert entrenched at the center spot. I think I remember hearing that the Warriors low-balled Biedrins this off-season, so especially with his numbers basically unchanged this year it will be interesting to see if Golden State manages to sign him for close to $8-9 million per. I'm not sure anyone will be able to beat that sort of offer, though tons of teams would probably love to have him. As productive as Biedrins is, Bogut is more important to the Bucks and his raw numbers are bigger, so he should be able to get more than Biedrins (even if Biedrins is more productive per minute).

Bynum is already slightly or significantly better than Bogut in pretty much every category except passing, and he's three years younger too. So it will be interesting to see if he signs before Bogut and how he will affect the Bogut negotiations and vice versa. I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't sign this offseason in anticipation of putting up much bigger numbers next year.

[LISTEN2JAZZ]

An Aussie' sports agent recently stated on National Ten News that he expects Bogut to be offered 5yr - $80mil.

I'd assume an Australian agent speaking to an Australian audience would quote in Australian dollars? That's $72 million in American dollars.

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm

If I'm reading this thing correctly, Bogut should be eligible to receive a max offer which will be slightly higher next season than the $13 million it was this season, plus 10.5% raises each year.

That would put the absolute max for a five year deal at $78 million. And the totals for the last years are Redd-esque. If Bogut gets that, there is no hope for the future, and I stop following the Bucks. Honestly.

[GrandAdmiralDan]

-= original quote snipped =-



Yes...GAD has made a similar point a number of times. A million here or there might not affect our cap space, but it probably does affect how much Herb wants to spend on coaches, GMs, facilities, fan giveaways, etc.

Exactly.
And that was an excellent post by adamcz. I'm sure I never presented that point in such a succinct manner.

The total budget concern is always a concern. And it isn't just the case that wasting a few million here or there just uses up part of the budget. The relationship between our payroll, the salary cap, and revenue has fluctuated a bit from year to year. So the budget is somewhat flexible and isn't totally strict, but when we end up in the red for the fiscal year, that difference is coming directly out of Herb Kohl's pocket.

Sure, he'll get a return on his original purchase price of the team when he sells the team, but he has basically been spending parts of that future profit already whenever he covers the teams' losses in the meantime.

Obviously you would prefer not to have players with the kind of salaries and production levels of Simmons and Gadzuric, regardless of whether you think Simmons current level of production was foreseeable or not.

But the Bucks also frequently waste money on an extra player or two that really just aren't wise investments. For example, some people look at Voskuhl's $3 mil and say that it is only a one year deal, and that it isn't overpaying him by that much, etc.

All of that is true. But we did already have Gadzuric on the payroll. The difference between what Gadzuric and Voskuhl might provide is debatable, and somewhat of a luxury that doesn't make sense to have as a high enough priority that it would be worth an extra $3 mil at this point.
Voskuhl is a minimum salary level player. We should have signed him for the minimum salary or we should have signed another minimum salary player like Ruffin to be our third string center. We signed them both, compounding the mistake. Ruffin is at the minimum salary which is what should have been spent, meaning the entire $3 mil was a waste.

Adding a fourth PG (after having Greer part ways from the team with the effect being that he would cost us $0 at that point) to a roster of Mo, Bell, and Sessions wasn't even the most prudent thing to do either, but at least in that case one of the players was a rookie PG who was seen as needing some time in the NBADL. And Bell was the 2nd stringer at both PG and SG, so extra guard depth was needed either at PG or SG. So Ivey was signed. Fine. We didn't need any more guards though. We had even chose to keep SG/SF Noel and his minimum salary for the 07-08 season, even though it was a team option we could have completely rid ourselves of.
Unfortunately we had already wasted money on Awvee Storey and given him a guaranteed contract. Another $770,610 wasted this season.

A complete waste of $3.77061 mil just this season. And we also screwed up the negotiations for Mo Williams contract. I am closer to those who view Mo Williams' contract as in line with what he deserves to be paid than I am with those who think he is overpaid, but that debate isn't even really relevant. We outbid ourselves and paid Mo Williams more than we had to pay him for no reason. We already had an offer on the table that significantly trumped Miami's offer. There was no need to up our bid after that. But let's be conservative and just say that cost us only an extra $500k this season and another extra $500k next season.

In 05-06 we wasted a combined $675,509 on Josh Davis who was then replaced by Jermaine Jackson. Unnecessary depth. A 4th string PG is imprudent depth.
So now we're at $5.446119 mil of total waste over 3 years.

Let's say we didn't spend that. Now all of a sudden you have banked all of the money necessary to cover the difference in between what you are comfortable paying Bogut on this new extension or contract and perhaps what ends up being what it will take to get Bogut to sign an extension or new contract.
Some people are fine with spending an average of $10 mil per year on Bogut over 5 years. Well, if we had that extra $5.446119 mil that we hadn't spent, then paying Bogut an average of $11.1 mil over 5 years would have already been covered.

Maybe that makes the difference between either the Bucks or Bogut choosing to enter into an extension or a new contract. Where is that money better spent? On Bogut? Or on what I described it was actually spent on?

Or, let's say if that money was spent on 2 years of a coaches salary for a higher priced coach than LK. Add that amount to what we gave LK, and all of a sudden you are talking about a price tier that lets you pursue many more coaching options, and if you kick in more money on top of that, you are now offerring top dollar for a head coach.

[GrandAdmiralDan]

-= original quote snipped =-

I'd assume an Australian agent speaking to an Australian audience would quote in Australian dollars? That's $72 million in American dollars.

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm

If I'm reading this thing correctly, Bogut should be eligible to receive a max offer which will be slightly higher next season than the $13 million it was this season, plus 10.5% raises each year.

That would put the absolute max for a five year deal at $78 million. And the totals for the last years are Redd-esque. If Bogut gets that, there is no hope for the future, and I stop following the Bucks. Honestly.

You did the calculation correctly otherwise you would have came out with a number higher than $78 mil there, but I just want to clarify for other people that it is not 10.5% raise each year. It is 10.5% of the first year salary that is the maximum allowable annual increase or decrease.

[magpies]

Firstly Bogut is and always will be a better player then Brooks

secondly Bogut has under achieved and we will need to pay him too much

Thirdly we need to pay him if he wants to stay, we don't get great free agents, we do not get good or great players through trades. Which better then Bogut centre would want to play here with Redd and Mo the answer is NONE

Fourth we waste draft picks cause we draft either wrongly on miss use them or our expectations are too high

Bogut is way more a team player then Mo or Redd and he is the type of player we need more of.

Yes Mo and Redd can score but no one can believe that they will lead us deep into the playoffs, yes neither will Bogut but at least if he had the right players around him he will lead us into the playoffs. Mo and Redd just want to score and think that is all they need to do

[LISTEN2JAZZ]

You did the calculation correctly otherwise you would have came out with a number higher than $78 mil there, but I just want to clarify for other people that it is not 10.5% raise each year. It is 10.5% of the first year salary that is the maximum allowable annual increase or decrease.

Is there a word for that? Non-compounded? Static? Seems like there should be a word to describe that.

[boknoy]

Bogut's way overrated on this board. Neither are great defensively. Neither of them will ever be great rebounders. Neither of them will ever have a great fg% for a big man. Lopez, however will hit free throws. Bogut is who he is and he's just average. He tries hard, hustles and says all the right things, but this being year 3 I don't see him getting much better. 13pts/9rb is not something you can build a team around. If Andrew Bogut is the best player on the Bucks, we'll never win. I hope I'm wrong and next year he averages 18/11 and ups his fg%.

Bogut earned his present NBA status by achieving multi college ball honors. whatever, your amigo Brook Lopez needs to prove himself to be in the level of Bogut today. Gracias.

[blkout]

The difference is Duncan and Yao take jumpshots. Bogut rarely shoots outside of 5 feet.

Yeah but the fact remains they still shoot 50% from the field and it's not harming their team, 50% is 50% no matter where you're shooting from. If this guy seriously thinks 50% is that bad and damaging the team I'd question his sanity.

I'd give him 11 mil (starting) per year max... I would be fairly comfortable if the top of the payroll showed Bogut at 11 and Mo at 7 or whatever he's on, I think that's pretty good value overall. Not so comfortable if Redd stays on the team though and ideally Bogut would take 8 or 9 and be happy.

[Sigra]

The Bucks are the team that gave max contract to MICHAEL REDD. I will be suprised if the DON'T give max contract to Bogut considering that Bogut is C who is already better player than Redd when Redd got his contract.

[EastSideBucksFan]

-= original quote snipped =-



That's Dwight Howard money, so I'm guessing (praying) that the Bucks wouldn't touch that.

Other guys who will be worth paying attention to are Biedrins and Bynum. Biedrins will be restricted, so he has to get a new deal, while the Lakers will probably try to lock up Bynum before he puts up even bigger numbers next year. Biedrins seems like a very good fit for Golden State, and if Philly's the only team with cap room you know he's not going there with Dalembert entrenched at the center spot. I think I remember hearing that the Warriors low-balled Biedrins this off-season, so especially with his numbers basically unchanged this year it will be interesting to see if Golden State manages to sign him for close to $8-9 million per. I'm not sure anyone will be able to beat that sort of offer, though tons of teams would probably love to have him. As productive as Biedrins is, Bogut is more important to the Bucks and his raw numbers are bigger, so he should be able to get more than Biedrins (even if Biedrins is more productive per minute).

Bynum is already slightly or significantly better than Bogut in pretty much every category except passing, and he's three years younger too. So it will be interesting to see if he signs before Bogut and how he will affect the Bogut negotiations and vice versa. I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't sign this offseason in anticipation of putting up much bigger numbers next year.

I've been watching quite a few Warriors games on LP and it's hard for me to believe that Biedrins is that much better than Gadzuric.

Biedrins is putting up 9/9 this year, right about what Gadz put up the year he started all year. They are both very comparable players. Biedrins is a bit smarter about staying on the floor and staying out of foul trouble.

But I'd like to keep a close eye on Biedrins contract as I doubt he'll get any more than Gooden money (3YRS/$24M)


I have a feeling with the injury that Bynum took this year, he'll wait till next year to look to sign his extension. While his value is pretty high, he needs to prove to be more consistent (health and numbers wise)

[showtimesam]

The bucks already shot themselves in the foot by giving Redd and simmons way more than they are worth. And even though Mo is talented it would have been better to let him leave.

But now we're going to draw the line in the sand with Bogut?

He's the one player we have to keep if we ever want to be any good.

I'm all for a 10 or 11 million dollar deal and hopefully thats where it'll end up. But the Bucks really need to keep Bogut. Luckily this offseason there won't be any competition so if he doesn't want the extension he can wait another year and try to force the bucks to break the bank by putting up bigger numbers.

[fam3381]

I've been watching quite a few Warriors games on LP and it's hard for me to believe that Biedrins is that much better than Gadzuric.

Biedrins is putting up 9/9 this year, right about what Gadz put up the year he started all year. They are both very comparable players. Biedrins is a bit smarter about staying on the floor and staying out of foul trouble.

That's actually a great comparison, though I think most people see the comparison and say "What? Biedrins can't be that bad!" But Gadzuric put up pretty incredible numbers per minute in 04/05 before he got his contract:

13.3 ppg and 15.1 rpg per 40 minutes, .539 fg% and 18.16 PER.

Biedrins this year: 14.6 ppg, 13.6 rpg per 40, .622 fg%, 18.16 PER

One key difference is that Biedrins is about to turn 22 while Gadz was already 26 in his breakout year, so Biedrins has more hope of developing beyond what he is. I'm not sure anyone expects him to be more than a fantastic garbageman, but still.

[jerrod]

kaman's deal would be cool with me, maybe bump it up to 12 if we have to. there's more fiscal responsibility now it seems(aside from rashard lewis, yikes) so i don't think any team will offer the max.

[LISTEN2JAZZ]

Offer him a flat 10 mil per year for 5 years, and if he claims he's worth more than that, let him prove it next season and get another contract offer a year later.

I'm not convinced that the benefits of signing him so early outweight the risks of signing him to a larger offer than that so early.

[ReasonablySober]

The bucks already shot themselves in the foot by giving Redd and simmons way more than they are worth. And even though Mo is talented it would have been better to let him leave.

Why?

He's not overpaid. He isn't locked into an unmovable contract. Should the Bucks wish to trade him down line, he'll bring back a valuable asset.

[icat2000]

And what are the reasons for keeping Mo? I don't believe that the notion that he's not overpaid and might be a valuableasset down the track is a strong enough reason to not trade him now.

[ReasonablySober]

And what are the reasons for keeping Mo? I don't believe that the notion that he's not overpaid and might be a valuableasset down the track is a strong enough reason to not trade him now.

I'm not saying he should be kept over someone like Bogut or Yi either. Maybe even Redd.

But it's hard to rationalize trading him, either, when:

- we don't have a PG waiting in the wings
- his salary isn't preventing the Bucks from making a splash in free agency
- he's not on the downside of his career
- as bad as his defense is, removing him from the lineup doesn't appear to have any effect on the points this team allows because nobody else on the team wants to defend either

I'll trade anyone on the team if it makes sense. What would you trade Mo for?

[icat2000]

I was hoping that Coach K would give some meaningful minutes to Sessions for the remaining games. Too see if he would be a useful piece.