Who wants to help promote Stephen Jackson's club appearance?

[LUKE23]

He's been solid. But a long-term starter? No. He's a very solidly priced two year bench guy.

[europa]

But this trade hasn't been near the epic fail many here paint it out to be.

That will be determined by Harris vs. picks 7-18 in the coming years. Really, that was all that mattered the entire time anyway.

I agree and said that on draft night as well. So why are we drawing conclusions now and blasting away at it relentlessly? Because people here think Hammond's an idiot and want to hammer away at him for everything he does even if moves he makes aren't as bad as people make them out to be. That's why. Pretty cut and dried, really.

[paul]

He's been solid. But a long-term starter? No. He's a very solidly priced two year bench guy.

He's 26 and could easily be our long term starter or 6th man depending on how the roster is shaped. I'm a big fan.

[EastSideBucksFan]

Maggette/7 for Jax/19. The move that keeps on giving.

And Livingston. Why do people keep doing that?

Biyombo had 11 pts, 12 rebs, 2 stl, 1 blk in his first start 3 days ago.

Have you heard about this kid Harris? Not sure who he plays for but he had 19 the other night and I read some crazy stat that he's scored at least 12 points on better than 50% shooting every time he's played 20 minutes. Sure wish we'd traded up for him...

Have you heard that Andrew Bogut the Bucks starting C is out for 8-12 weeks and they are starting Drew Gooden at C?

I would rather have Biyombo starting over Gooden and I'd rather have Biyombo over Tobias who while a nice young player, is not a starting center candidate.

[paulpressey25]

19/Livingston for 7
I have zero problems with this right now. Love what I've seen in terms of talent and potential from Harris and Livingston was a shrewd pickup.

I don't think any GM in their right mind drops from 7 to 19 and only obtains Sean Livingston back in return. Do you think the Pistons in the 2010 draft would have dropped from number 7 (Greg Monroe) down to #19 and Avery Bradley in exchange for Carlos Delfino?

As posted earlier, it represents terrible asset management. We'll know in two years how badly that draft slot drop was or wasn't. It could be horrifying though.

The trade comes back to the team thinking they could get a better version of FTD John Salmons in the form of Stephen Jackson. That's why they did that deal.

[LUKE23]

He's been solid. But a long-term starter? No. He's a very solidly priced two year bench guy.

He's 26 and could easily be our long term starter or 6th man depending on how the roster is shaped. I'm a big fan.

If he's our long-term starter at SG, we have some issues. Agreed on 6th man/bench guy, depending on deal.

[europa]

19/Livingston for 7
I have zero problems with this right now. Love what I've seen in terms of talent and potential from Harris and Livingston was a shrewd pickup.

I don't think any GM in their right mind drops from 7 to 19 and only obtains Sean Livingston back in return.

They do if they believe the talent at 19 is comparable to what's available at 7. Based on what we've seen so far from Harris I think you can make a strong case for that. Include Livingston, whose talent has never been questioned and is still a youngish player, and you may have upgraded your team rather well.

If you want to argue Hammond hasn't effectively built a quality team to this point I'm in complete agreement. But this trade in and of itself looks to be a fine move in my opinion at this point in time. It's still early and we need to see how good Harris can become but right now I don't think this trade has turned out badly.

[paul]

Maggette/7 for Jax/19. The move that keeps on giving.

And Livingston. Why do people keep doing that?

Biyombo had 11 pts, 12 rebs, 2 stl, 1 blk in his first start 3 days ago.

Have you heard about this kid Harris? Not sure who he plays for but he had 19 the other night and I read some crazy stat that he's scored at least 12 points on better than 50% shooting every time he's played 20 minutes. Sure wish we'd traded up for him...

Have you heard that Andrew Bogut the Bucks starting C is out for 8-12 weeks and they are starting Drew Gooden at C?

I would rather have Biyombo starting over Gooden and I'd rather have Biyombo over Tobias who while a nice young player, is not a starting center candidate.

No, he's a starting SF candidate. We don't need one of them?

It's way too early to judge these guys but if you stopped the music right now Harris has looked twice the prospect Biyombo has, easily.

[EastSideBucksFan]

I'm more concerned about a young player to play C to play backup and potentially start when Bogut is out than who we can plug in at SF.

[paul]

19/Livingston for 7
I have zero problems with this right now. Love what I've seen in terms of talent and potential from Harris and Livingston was a shrewd pickup.

I don't think any GM in their right mind drops from 7 to 19 and only obtains Sean Livingston back in return. Do you think the Pistons in the 2010 draft would have dropped from number 7 (Greg Monroe) down to #19 and Avery Bradley in exchange for Carlos Delfino?

As posted earlier, it represents terrible asset management. We'll know in two years how badly that draft slot drop was or wasn't. It could be horrifying though.

The trade comes back to the team thinking they could get a better version of FTD John Salmons in the form of Stephen Jackson. That's why they did that deal.

So we're going to abuse Hammond based on a hypothetical assessment of a situation rather than the reality, and that's OK?

Talk about Gooden's contract and I'll light the pitchforks for you, but you guys are reaching here.

[Newz]

You know it's bad when you think moving back 12 spots in the first round of the draft was even close to okay just because you got back a decent bench player.

Shaun Livingston is totally irrelevant when it comes to actually winning.

[paul]

I'm more concerned about a young player to play C to play backup and potentially start when Bogut is out than who we can plug in at SF.

Why? The way I figure it we are better with a vet backup C if we are keeping Bogut anyway.

Aside from that do you really think Sanders couldn't have a single 11/12 game if given the starting job on the tanking Bobcats? Biyombo may turn out to be good but he's done little to get excited about at this stage.

[Rockmaninoff]

The problem isn't really about extracurricular activities, it's more about how Hammond (and the Bucks organization in general) keep exchanging cynical, broken down wings for each other in an attempt to accelerate the formation of a winning team, under success assumptions provided by existing models.

The Bucks (Hammond, Skiles, Kohl, etal) need to stop overvaluing the possible contributions of these veteran players, and start believing in the ability of younger players to fill these roles and provide sustainable success.

The Bucks also need to work with a statistician that can provide estimates of the probability of certain events occuring, for each potential transaction. They need an actuary.

If Jackson was performing up to career norms (regardless of the fact that his norms are not that great), the extracurriculars wouldn't be a discussion.

[-Jragon-]

19/Livingston for 7
I have zero problems with this right now. Love what I've seen in terms of talent and potential from Harris and Livingston was a shrewd pickup.

I don't think any GM in their right mind drops from 7 to 19 and only obtains Sean Livingston back in return. Do you think the Pistons in the 2010 draft would have dropped from number 7 (Greg Monroe) down to #19 and Avery Bradley in exchange for Carlos Delfino?

As posted earlier, it represents terrible asset management. We'll know in two years how badly that draft slot drop was or wasn't. It could be horrifying though.

The trade comes back to the team thinking they could get a better version of FTD John Salmons in the form of Stephen Jackson. That's why they did that deal.

Common though in the NBA is that SG and SF are the easiest position to fill and these Bucks trades at those position confirms thats our stance. Bucks thought they had their star Center and are developing their star PG (hardest positions to fill with trade and FA because no one will give up a good one). And likely banked on that Larry Sanders was going to develop as a legit 2nd tower starting PF. Assuming that the 2 and 3 ARE in fact the easiest positions to fill with trades and free agents (2 of Salmons, Maggette, Delfino, Jackson, Moute, or Livingston could start) the Bucks biggest mess up is Bogut getting injured and Sanders not developing (or being a bust perhaps).

Planned lineup was:
Jennings and backup
Salmons or Jackson (whoever panned out)
Maggette or Delfino (whoever panned out)
Sanders and Ersan backup
Bogut and Gooden backup

[paulpressey25]

So we're going to abuse Hammond based on a hypothetical assessment of a situation rather than the reality, and that's OK?

Even in a "weak draft", the value board for moving back from 7 to 19 is very high. I just see no other GM's around the league who could justify dropping that far and only obtaining Sean Livingston in return.

If that trade in a vacuum runs across the desk on ESPN on draft night, Ric Bucher, Jay Bilas and Andy Katz all spit out their soda. It instantly makes Chad Ford's column the next morning on "What was Milwaukee thinking?!?"

I think the better way to defend that trade is to simply say that if Jackson played to his career norm, he would have been a positive asset for this team and given them a shot at FTD II. As much as I don't like Hammond, even the original detractors of that deal from last June would never have forecast the guy would be this bad.

[paul]

You know it's bad when you think moving back 12 spots in the first round of the draft was even close to okay just because you got back a decent bench player.

Shaun Livingston is totally irrelevant when it comes to actually winning.

No, I think right now it looks OK because Harris looks like an excellent prospect, that could change or not. I just find it hilarious the lengths people go to to leave Livingston totally out of any talk on the deal so that Hammond is easier to target.

[Rockmaninoff]

Common though in the NBA is that SG and SF are the easiest position to fill and these Bucks trades at those position confirms thats our stance.

It's easy to find role players (catch and shoot, defense) to fill the wing positions, but scoring wings (guys with high usage/efficiency, that also get to the line, and contribute in other areas) are much harder to find. That is role that Jackson was brought in to fill.

[paulpressey25]

Why? The way I figure it we are better with a vet backup C if we are keeping Bogut anyway.

The backup center situation is the second part of the Jackson trade debacle.

If the team wants trade away future assets like the 7th pick for a win now Stephen Jackson, then they need to also get a legit veteran backup center. You could have sold me on Stephen Jackson if you amnestied Gooden and went all in on Sam Dalembert or the like.

[Newz]

You know it's bad when you think moving back 12 spots in the first round of the draft was even close to okay just because you got back a decent bench player.

Shaun Livingston is totally irrelevant when it comes to actually winning.

No, I think right now it looks OK because Harris looks like an excellent prospect, that could change or not. I just find it hilarious the lengths people go to to leave Livingston totally out of any talk on the deal so that Hammond is easier to target.

The trade won't be a disaster if Tobes ends up being a legit starter at SF.

Livingston, like I said, isn't even remotely close to good enough to turn that trade from awful to even decent.

He's a good back up swing man who can play some emergency PG. We signed that in Mike Dunleavy on a cheap contract this offseason... those guys are easy to find, dime a dozen time of players.

[europa]

You know it's bad when you think moving back 12 spots in the first round of the draft was even close to okay just because you got back a decent bench player.

Why are we forgetting about Tobias Harris all of a sudden?