#12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
Moderators: paulpressey25, MickeyDavis
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 20,350
- And1: 4,118
- Joined: Jun 25, 2005
-
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
I think that if we trade to get a 2nd pick in the early part of this draft, that we could bring about some excitement on this team. I wish we had the firepower to pull off a trade to get Harrison Barnes without having to trade the #14 pick.
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 11,007
- And1: 2,260
- Joined: Jul 25, 2005
- Location: Central Wisconsin
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
Love it that some people think we got a atarting Center who is going to change how good of the team we are. Still a late lotto or 8th seed team in my eyes. Nothing will change unless we hit it right on a player in the draft.
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 27,829
- And1: 1,571
- Joined: Aug 06, 2005
- Location: Underground King
-
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
[quote="europa"]What assets do the Bucks have to make big moves? I think they blew their last shot with the bungled Bogut trade. I think all they have left now is to make smaller type deals. If people are being critical because this trade doesn't have the "wow" factor (and I agree it doesn't) I'd be interested to hear what realistic trades you think can be made with what the Bucks have that will land them a star or a "wow" type talent. And again, it's important to keep in mind that the goal is to make the playoffs and it appears at the present time neither Jennings nor Ellis are going to be made available.[/quote]
Ellis and/or Udrih and/or Dunleavy at the break, post Skiles departure.
I definitely think the Bucks have to go to the Lottery well again in the 2013 draft. Maybe swing two top 10 picks and target Archie Goodwin if top 2 are off the table.
Ellis and/or Udrih and/or Dunleavy at the break, post Skiles departure.
I definitely think the Bucks have to go to the Lottery well again in the 2013 draft. Maybe swing two top 10 picks and target Archie Goodwin if top 2 are off the table.
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
- ampd
- RealGM
- Posts: 21,669
- And1: 5,082
- Joined: Dec 06, 2010
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
raferfenix wrote:having Daly gives us more flexibility in terms of not needing to plan to acquire a center some other way.
Yes, I think this has less to do with who we draft and more to do with taking all the pressure away from giving out a horrible free agent contract to Kaman, which was a lot of people's nightmare scenario around here.
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
- Baddy Chuck
- RealGM
- Posts: 51,281
- And1: 25,437
- Joined: Apr 18, 2006
-
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
Balls2TheWalls wrote:Baddy Chuck wrote:Balls2TheWalls wrote:To be successful you have to be able to make small moves as well as big ones. This was a successful small move.
So what's the big move we're going to make this season to make these little moves worth while?
Gotta keep hope alive, man. The team has been effectively un-watchable for a long time. If he can get rid of Ellis, amnesty Gooden, trade into the top 10 with players, and we dump Dalember during the season, then I would say he has been successful in moving one direction positively.
So if we undo our 3 biggest moves the past 3 seasons we'll be on the way. Awesome.
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 20,350
- And1: 4,118
- Joined: Jun 25, 2005
-
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
Baddy Chuck wrote:So if we undo our 3 biggest moves the past 3 seasons we'll be on the way. Awesome.
I think you are mistaking me for a Hammond fan. The tools are all there to blow the team up, easily. I think that this was a positive value trade, whether we are playing to win now or trying to blow the roster up. It also keeps us from signing Kaman, who is pretty much Satan.
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 39,613
- And1: 11,379
- Joined: May 12, 2002
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
Really good trade for a different team in a different situation. Really good.
For us.... meh. I mainly just agree with everything jake had to say.
Another grasp at the mediocrity that always seems just out of reach. Meanwhile, we sacrifice developing our young players and sacrifice (mildly in this case) on draft assets. If Dalembert was a SF, he'd be RJ, Maggette, and/or Jax.
The sad part is it'll work for this year with half the teams in the East in shambles (including a couple due to injury), and the other half just above poor.
For us.... meh. I mainly just agree with everything jake had to say.
Another grasp at the mediocrity that always seems just out of reach. Meanwhile, we sacrifice developing our young players and sacrifice (mildly in this case) on draft assets. If Dalembert was a SF, he'd be RJ, Maggette, and/or Jax.
The sad part is it'll work for this year with half the teams in the East in shambles (including a couple due to injury), and the other half just above poor.
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
- ampd
- RealGM
- Posts: 21,669
- And1: 5,082
- Joined: Dec 06, 2010
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
Balls2TheWalls wrote:Baddy Chuck wrote:So if we undo our 3 biggest moves the past 3 seasons we'll be on the way. Awesome.
I think you are mistaking me for a Hammond fan. The tools are all there to blow the team up, easily. I think that this was a positive value trade, whether we are playing to win now or trying to blow the roster up. It also keeps us from signing Kaman, who is pretty much Satan.
All you need to do to blow this team up is nothing. It literally self destructs after this season.
Assuming Monta opts out, amnesty Gooden and you have 4.6 million dollars committed next season (16 million if you count the various team options for guys on rookie deals). It will likely be a bit more than that due to whatever rookies we sign but the point is still the same.
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 39,613
- And1: 11,379
- Joined: May 12, 2002
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
BTW, I assume Leuer was really good on advanced stats, which is likely why Morey was all over him.
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
- yuedar
- Rookie
- Posts: 1,067
- And1: 59
- Joined: Jul 20, 2004
-
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
Balls2TheWalls wrote:Baddy Chuck wrote:So if we undo our 3 biggest moves the past 3 seasons we'll be on the way. Awesome.
I think you are mistaking me for a Hammond fan. The tools are all there to blow the team up, easily. I think that this was a positive value trade, whether we are playing to win now or trying to blow the roster up. It also keeps us from signing Kaman, who is pretty much Satan.
no, just no ...
this team won't be blown up these were all win now moves to do just that.if they don't work out more win now moves will happen. This is our destiny just accept this fate.
You guys keep dreaming of blowup and rebuilds then your hatred for coaches, GM's, and players occur yet this teams owner keeps saying thats the exact opposite of whats going to happen.
Just give it up already...
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 37,108
- And1: 17,267
- Joined: Jul 20, 2004
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
midranger wrote:Really good trade for a different team in a different situation. Really good.
For us.... meh. I mainly just agree with everything jake had to say.
Another grasp at the mediocrity that always seems just out of reach. Meanwhile, we sacrifice developing our young players and sacrifice (mildly in this case) on draft assets. If Dalembert was a SF, he'd be RJ, Maggette, and/or Jax.
The sad part is it'll work for this year with half the teams in the East in shambles (including a couple due to injury), and the other half just above poor.
Nearly everyone on this board realizes this, and it's extremely frustrating. Rather than complaining about it over and over, I'd rather focus on ways to get better in ways that are actually plausible under the current regime.
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 11,007
- And1: 2,260
- Joined: Jul 25, 2005
- Location: Central Wisconsin
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
What bothers me the most is that this is one of deepest draft we have seen in awhile. Yet we still have only one pick. There is a chance that several players in the low 20s could become all stars. Yet we keep on looking for aging vets too improve this team. This trade was not a bad trade nor is it a good trade. Its way better for Houston since they moved up two more spots and they still have two more picks in the teens yet. So who has a better chance at getting an all-star? Just another sideways move.
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 39,613
- And1: 11,379
- Joined: May 12, 2002
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
skones wrote:midranger wrote:Really good trade for a different team in a different situation. Really good.
For us.... meh. I mainly just agree with everything jake had to say.
Another grasp at the mediocrity that always seems just out of reach. Meanwhile, we sacrifice developing our young players and sacrifice (mildly in this case) on draft assets. If Dalembert was a SF, he'd be RJ, Maggette, and/or Jax.
The sad part is it'll work for this year with half the teams in the East in shambles (including a couple due to injury), and the other half just above poor.
Nearly everyone on this board realizes this, and it's extremely frustrating. Rather than complaining about it over and over, I'd rather focus on ways to get better in ways that are actually plausible under the current regime.
Like drafting a superstar or a couple allstars?
How does this move help?
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
- raferfenix
- RealGM
- Posts: 24,204
- And1: 4,520
- Joined: Apr 05, 2003
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
Daly is in no way the center equivalent of Maggette / RJ / Jax.
He plays great defense, doesn't have injury issues, and isn't overpaid.
Dalembert can anchor our defense against the other team's starters. It won't prevent young players from getting clock they deserve, but it will prevent us from trotting out Gooden or Kaman or whoever to try and fail at those starter minutes.
If going young and rebuilding right were an option we'd all take it. Since it's not, this is a trade that at least gives us hope that we could be a 45 win team next year if we make another savvy move or two (a lot to ask from this franchise, I know).
He plays great defense, doesn't have injury issues, and isn't overpaid.
Dalembert can anchor our defense against the other team's starters. It won't prevent young players from getting clock they deserve, but it will prevent us from trotting out Gooden or Kaman or whoever to try and fail at those starter minutes.
If going young and rebuilding right were an option we'd all take it. Since it's not, this is a trade that at least gives us hope that we could be a 45 win team next year if we make another savvy move or two (a lot to ask from this franchise, I know).
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
- WEFFPIM
- RealGM
- Posts: 38,521
- And1: 473
- Joined: Nov 14, 2005
- Location: WEFFPIM. I'm the real WEFFPIM.
-
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
skones wrote:midranger wrote:Really good trade for a different team in a different situation. Really good.
For us.... meh. I mainly just agree with everything jake had to say.
Another grasp at the mediocrity that always seems just out of reach. Meanwhile, we sacrifice developing our young players and sacrifice (mildly in this case) on draft assets. If Dalembert was a SF, he'd be RJ, Maggette, and/or Jax.
The sad part is it'll work for this year with half the teams in the East in shambles (including a couple due to injury), and the other half just above poor.
Nearly everyone on this board realizes this, and it's extremely frustrating. Rather than complaining about it over and over, I'd rather focus on ways to get better in ways that are actually plausible under the current regime.
Yup. And for once, Hammond made a deal to do that that didn't cost a ton. And there's only two players under an actual contract after next season, Jennings' QO, team options to Udoh, Sanders and Harris, and Ellis' player option. Add into that the shakiness of the future of Skiles and Hammond, and you have a lot that can change after next season.
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
- paul
- RealGM
- Posts: 32,398
- And1: 1,038
- Joined: Dec 11, 2007
-
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
Very sad to see Leuer in particular go, but it's a vast improvement on Hammonds last trade.
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 11,007
- And1: 2,260
- Joined: Jul 25, 2005
- Location: Central Wisconsin
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
Dalembert makes us a 45 win team.
A major move would be needed.

Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 16,760
- And1: 8,169
- Joined: Feb 06, 2006
-
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
WEFFPIM wrote:skones wrote:midranger wrote:Really good trade for a different team in a different situation. Really good.
For us.... meh. I mainly just agree with everything jake had to say.
Another grasp at the mediocrity that always seems just out of reach. Meanwhile, we sacrifice developing our young players and sacrifice (mildly in this case) on draft assets. If Dalembert was a SF, he'd be RJ, Maggette, and/or Jax.
The sad part is it'll work for this year with half the teams in the East in shambles (including a couple due to injury), and the other half just above poor.
Nearly everyone on this board realizes this, and it's extremely frustrating. Rather than complaining about it over and over, I'd rather focus on ways to get better in ways that are actually plausible under the current regime.
Yup. And for once, Hammond made a deal to do that that didn't cost a ton. And there's only two players under an actual contract after next season, Jennings' QO, team options to Udoh, Sanders and Harris, and Ellis' player option. Add into that the shakiness of the future of Skiles and Hammond, and you have a lot that can change after next season.
After we get laughed at by the Howard, Paul, and Harden:
Tony Allen
Marvin Williams
Zaza Pachulia
Your 2013 offseason ladies and gents.
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
- europa
- RealGM
- Posts: 44,919
- And1: 471
- Joined: Jun 25, 2005
- Location: Right Behind You
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
paul wrote:Very sad to see Leuer in particular go, but it's a vast improvement on Hammonds last trade.
Well the bar was set pretty low after that.

Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 16,760
- And1: 8,169
- Joined: Feb 06, 2006
-
Re: #12, Brockman, Leuer, SL for #14, Dalembert
Forgive me if I sound like a pessimist dick with all these posts, it's just so GD hard to have any faith in any John Hammond move after the last 4 years.