Why isn't John Hammond fired?

[Bucks_MacGyver]

Ernie G and Geroge Karl pretty much screwed over this franchise, but atleast they had a plan on what they thought would turn the bucks into a contending team. even though it failed and that same plan set back this team 15 years, they at least tried, and didnt sugar coat what the plan was.

[vlietinho]

Morway definitely knows what he is doing. I think the writing is on the wall for him to be our next GM. When that will be is anyone's guess.

Unless you ask Bird.

http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/2012/06/larry-bird-to-fire-david-morway-replace-him-with-kevin-pritchard/

The Bucks signing Mayo was a big...



...from Morway to Bird.

wow how did that pic end up here. lol. it's from my soccer team (Feyenoord Rotterdam)

As for Hammond, as long as Kohl and his croonies are there it doesnt really matter i guess

[InsideOut]

Ernie G and Geroge Karl pretty much screwed over this franchise, but atleast they had a plan on what they thought would turn the bucks into a contending team. even though it failed and that same plan set back this team 15 years, they at least tried, and didnt sugar coat what the plan was.

They did turn the Bucks into a contending team...the only one in the past 23 years. Yes, it did end poorly.

When you say they set the Bucks back 15 years that means you feel the Bucks are bad today because of Karl and Ernie.

[humanrefutation]

FWIW, I'm not going to be losing sleep over trading Wolters. I just don't like the Asik deal because it doesn't advance us in any reasonable fashion.

[Bucks_MacGyver]

Ernie G and Geroge Karl pretty much screwed over this franchise, but atleast they had a plan on what they thought would turn the bucks into a contending team. even though it failed and that same plan set back this team 15 years, they at least tried, and didnt sugar coat what the plan was.

They did turn the Bucks into a contending team...the only one in the past 23 years. Yes, it did end poorly.

When you say they set the Bucks back 15 years that means you feel the Bucks are bad today because of Karl and Ernie.

yes that is what I meant, even though I dont blame them for the poor job harris/hammond/kohl have done, but Ernie G and Karl moves have put the domino effect of the state of the bucks are in today.

[coolhandluke121]

If anything, his successful drafting just underscores how terrible his other moves have been. Just throwing darts at a dartboard in free agency and trades, he should have been able to average 40+ wins in the East with mediocre vets and astute draft choices. But he's actually managed to consistently overpay vets in exchange for making the team worse. WTF?

On the other hand, you do have to realize that a lot of the good draft choices get their numbers, in part, because the team just had no other options. That's a common problem with perpetually bad teams; they get fooled into thinking their role players are building blocks because they inevitably take advantage of the opportunity to put up numbers on a team that's forced to overlook their weaknesses. Guys like Ersan, Jennings, Mo, Redd, etc all had their day in the sun when they were young and considered part of the future, but they all just became the type of player who couldn't take you to the next level, but wouldn't let you bottom out either. I could see Harris and Henson being in the same category. Even Bogut was in that group, although more due to injuries than lack of ability to impact the game enough.

[ReddWing]

Unless you ask Bird.

http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/2012/06/larry-bird-to-fire-david-morway-replace-him-with-kevin-pritchard/

The Bucks signing Mayo was a big...



...from Morway to Bird.

wow how did that pic end up here. lol. it's from my soccer team (Feyenoord Rotterdam)

As for Hammond, as long as Kohl and his croonies are there it doesnt really matter i guess

Its a pretty iconic message board photo/response. People Photoshop their team logo on the kid.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using RealGM Forums mobile app

[MrPerfect1]

On the other hand, you do have to realize that a lot of the good draft choices get their numbers, in part, because the team just had no other options. That's a common problem with perpetually bad teams; they get fooled into thinking their role players are building blocks because they inevitably take advantage of the opportunity to put up numbers on a team that's forced to overlook their weaknesses. Guys like Ersan, Jennings, Mo, Redd, etc all had their day in the sun when they were young and considered part of the future, but they all just became the type of player who couldn't take you to the next level, but wouldn't let you bottom out either. I could see Harris and Henson being in the same category. Even Bogut was in that group, although more due to injuries than lack of ability to impact the game enough.

This is only partly true. Raw stats will get inflated and trick people into thinking certain players on bad teams are better than they really are. However, smarter people look beyond raw stats and look at efficiency. Efficiency based stats are quite effective at showing how useful someone is. I bet there are truly few examples of a player with High Usage + High Efficiency on a bad team who then later went to a good team and sucked/became suddenly inefficient.

[ReddWing]

That Jon Leuer trade is becoming Tobes-esque.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using RealGM Forums mobile app

[InsideOut]

Ernie G and Geroge Karl pretty much screwed over this franchise, but atleast they had a plan on what they thought would turn the bucks into a contending team. even though it failed and that same plan set back this team 15 years, they at least tried, and didnt sugar coat what the plan was.

They did turn the Bucks into a contending team...the only one in the past 23 years. Yes, it did end poorly.

When you say they set the Bucks back 15 years that means you feel the Bucks are bad today because of Karl and Ernie.

yes that is what I meant, even though I dont blame them for the poor job harris/hammond/kohl have done, but Ernie G and Karl moves have put the domino effect of the state of the bucks are in today.

I'd love to hear you explain how what those two did 12 years ago is hurting the Bucks today? I personally find that statement a little unbelievable. Almost all the moves those guys made were off the books ages ago. What exactly did those guys do that is making us bad right now? I believe the 15 years will be up 3 years from now. I'd love to know your thoughts behind what they those two did will be affecting this team 3 years from now? Do you have any examples like the Bucks would be better today because of X but it didn’t happen because Karl did Y?

I’m not saying mistakes weren’t made but those two brought us the only success that we’ve had under Kohl (other than what Kohl inherited when he bought the team). Seems a little odd to faulting them and now blaming them for the current state of this franchise.

[MrPerfect1]

All these trades will be worth it when we get Wiggins in the draft

[wichmae]

That Jon Leuer trade is becoming Tobes-esque.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using RealGM Forums mobile app

Leuer was permanently in Skiles shithouse. That whole deal was all because of what Skiles wanted, and Boguts trade to GSW. Cant blame Bone for that one

[tski1972]

That Jon Leuer trade is becoming Tobes-esque.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using RealGM Forums mobile app

just checked Leuers numbers for December....28min/game, 15pts, 8reb, 50%fg.

[JimmyTheKid]

That Jon Leuer trade is becoming Tobes-esque.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using RealGM Forums mobile app

Leuer was permanently in Skiles ****. That whole deal was all because of what Skiles wanted, and Boguts trade to GSW. Cant blame Bone for that one

You know the organization is f***ed when the Head Coach has more influence on trades than the GM. Not surprising, but still sad.

[JimmyTheKid]

That Jon Leuer trade is becoming Tobes-esque.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using RealGM Forums mobile app

just checked Leuers numbers for December....28min/game, 15pts, 8reb, 50%fg.

And its not like he wasn't playing good basketball in Milwaukee as a rookie. He most definitely looked like he belonged. Similar to Tobias Harris. Promising from the very beginning. And shipped out for garbage.

[worthlessBucks]

Leuer was added to that Dalembert deal to make salaries work and Hammond said he regretted having to do it.

[paulpressey25]

Leuer was added to that Dalembert deal to make salaries work and Hammond said he regretted having to do it.

And I am guessing Weltman told him that, because he wasn't smart enough with math or the cap to know that himself.

[coolhandluke121]

On the other hand, you do have to realize that a lot of the good draft choices get their numbers, in part, because the team just had no other options. That's a common problem with perpetually bad teams; they get fooled into thinking their role players are building blocks because they inevitably take advantage of the opportunity to put up numbers on a team that's forced to overlook their weaknesses. Guys like Ersan, Jennings, Mo, Redd, etc all had their day in the sun when they were young and considered part of the future, but they all just became the type of player who couldn't take you to the next level, but wouldn't let you bottom out either. I could see Harris and Henson being in the same category. Even Bogut was in that group, although more due to injuries than lack of ability to impact the game enough.

This is only partly true. Raw stats will get inflated and trick people into thinking certain players on bad teams are better than they really are. However, smarter people look beyond raw stats and look at efficiency. Efficiency based stats are quite effective at showing how useful someone is. I bet there are truly few examples of a player with High Usage + High Efficiency on a bad team who then later went to a good team and sucked/became suddenly inefficient.

There are other possible weaknesses besides just scoring inefficiently. Ersan is usually quite efficient as a shooter and rebounder, but he has some holes in his all-around game. Redd was efficient. Mo was efficient. I don't think I have to remind anyone about their flaws. I'm not comparing inefficient, raw stats to more efficient stats; I'm comparing all flawed players who put up stats on a bad team, whether they do so efficiently or not, to their counterparts on good teams who might have comparable stats but are better players for a variety of other reasons (not just efficiency). A lot of players on the Bucks have been able to put up good stats because they've gotten more minutes than they would have gotten on a good team. Not all of them, but a lot of them.

[Nowak008]

He has been a good drafter. I mean, you really won't be able to find much outside of the draft that he has done right, but with respect to position, he's drafted very well. Personally I think that should be his only role with the organization. Everything else has been a train wreck.

I think he is decent at drafting - I wouldn't say good though. I'm not sure how you can go through 6 drafts and not come away with one all star and say he is all that great. There have plenty of times he could have traded up and gotten a difference maker. *Insert Hammond phone pic* Instead he traded back two times. Trading down in the NBA - for the most part - is not a good idea.

A good drafter would have identifed Drummond was a stud, and done whatever it took to trade for him. A good drafter takes Lopez even with Bogut on the roster. A good drafter doesn't trade down and takes Klay Thompson or Leonard instead. Hammond sucks.

[ReasonablySober]

He has been a good drafter. I mean, you really won't be able to find much outside of the draft that he has done right, but with respect to position, he's drafted very well. Personally I think that should be his only role with the organization. Everything else has been a train wreck.

I think he is decent at drafting - I wouldn't say good though. I'm not sure how you can go through 6 drafts and not come away with one all star and say he is all that great. There have plenty of times he could have traded up and gotten a difference maker. *Insert Hammond phone pic* Instead he traded back two times. Trading down in the NBA - for the most part - is not a good idea.

A good drafter would have identifed Drummond was a stud, and done whatever it took to trade for him. A good drafter takes Lopez even with Bogut on the roster. A good drafter doesn't trade down and takes Klay Thompson or Leonard instead. Hammond sucks.

I think when you compare what he's done to what others teams have managed to pull off outside the top five picks you could call it a great job of drafting. The majority of his picks would go a lot higher than they were originally taken if drafts were done over.

But your criticism over him not moving up is a legit mark against him, I'll definitely give you that.