Bucks looking at Bledsoe, probably.

[paulpressey25]

I posted on the Suns board the question if they would match a 4/$64 offer. I think the Suns would do it assuming LeBron doesn't come, but it would be a tough call IMO.

[JoeJohnson2two]

I posted on the Suns board the question if they would match a 4/$64 offer. I think the Suns would do it assuming LeBron doesn't come, but it would be a tough call IMO.

I poised the question on another board (well, more like made a comment), would the Suns be cool with offering Lance Stephenson the $10-12 Million they wanted to land Bledsoe with and then letting Bledsoe walk?

[Chemthethriller]

Please no Bledsoe... I'll take Lin if we get the pelicans 1st also... We need to build this team not look for the quick fix...

[pilprin]

I agree that a quality PG will help Gianni's and Parker develop. Lin, Bledsoe, or Teague would be my choices. However, I wouldn't go balls to the wall on any of them.

[JoeJohnson2two]

Bledsoe isn't a "quick fix" though...

[Baddy Chuck]

I don't get how Bledsoe is giving up on the rebuild. He's 24 and probably better than anyone we would draft.

I think it all comes down to where you think we are at. If you think we are pushing for Mudiay or Okafor you don't do it, if you think we're going to be somewhere around 5+ range (or maybe even 3+) I would much prefer Bledsoe/10+ to most of those prospects. Is "rebuilding" the "right way" getting Smart or Randle instead of Bledsoe and Saric? I don't think so.

[raferfenix]

Bledsoe and Lebron both have Rich Paul as an agent. Not sure how that will come into play but it matters.

Also, Bledsoe would likely be the highest profile free agent we have ever acquired. Sure is better than Bobby Simmons.

It would mark a big change for our franchise. And if he successfully raises the game of Parker and Giannis like a good PG should, it could be a massive boost to everything the Bucks are doing.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[skones]

28 years old is likely your physical prime as an athlete. Exactly how is having a 28 year old Eric Bledsoe a bad thing?

A 28 year old Eric Bledsoe has taken a lot of lumps given his playing style. The guy barrels into the lane like a little bowling ball and draws contact. If he's ALREADY showing signs of injury problems at 24, I shudder to think of what he'll be 4 or 5 years down the line. He's the type of player who just gets the **** beat out of him night after night.

[theFireBlanket]

PP- LeBron and Bledsoe have the same agent and the remote shot that LeBron would go to Phoenix would be in part to play with his buddy Bledsoe. So if Bledsoe signs an offer sheet it would be a sure sign the LeBron dream is over and at that point the suns would just match. After LeBron is gone the suns won't be worried about saving cap space since there's no good alternative player to sign if they let Bledsoe walk.

Sent from my SM-N900V using RealGM Forums mobile app

They're probably likely to match simply to have him as a trade asset moving forward as well, unless someone's willing to pay high because it's pretty likely that they can re-coup more or better assets than Knight/Henson in a future deal.

[skones]

Bledsoe and Lebron both have Rich Paul as an agent. Not sure how that will come into play but it matters.

Also, Bledsoe would likely be the highest profile free agent we have ever acquired. Sure is better than Bobby Simmons.

It would mark a big change for our franchise. And if he successfully raises the game of Parker and Giannis like a good PG should, it could be a massive boost to everything the Bucks are doing.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Well that might be asking a bit too much. Bledsoe isn't a good point guard. He benefited greatly from playing next to Dragic.

[RRyder823]

Thats not what you said though. Generally you are forced to overpay in FA though. At least in this case we are getting a 24 year old high ceiling guy. Like I said ill be shocked if we land a better PG moving forward. I think its a better use of cap room than how we otherwise end up spending it.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using RealGM Forums mobile app

The key years that we should be building around start with like the 2018 season and ahead. I would be surprised if by then we do not have a better option than a close to 30 PG who likely doesn't age well since he relies heavily on athleticism.

Bledsoe will be 28-29 before our core is even approaching it's prime. At that point, either we continue paying huge money to a PG on the decline or we get rid of him meaning he was of no long term value to us.

Almost every move should be looked at in regards to how it will help our core in 2018 and beyond.

Spot on. Adding Bledsoe to a 25 year old Parker/Giannis would be great. Pairing him with two 19 year olds is a waste. Its why I also don't get how Sanders factors into the core of this team. When GA/JP is ready to compete we're going to be excited about having a 30 year old center who relies on his athleticism? Yeah no.

God I love how some people think that 28-30 is to old to be part of the core of a championship team..... Don't sign Bledsoe because he'll be 28 by the time Parker/Giannis hit their primes. And now sanders because he'll be around 29-30...... first that's on the assumption it takes 4 more years for those two to develop. Maybe its just me but I think that Giannis, who's already been in the league a season, and Parker, who is coming in as the most NBA ready prospect might just be ready for primetime before that 4 year time table runs out. And even if it does happen to take 4 more years for them to hit their peak since when did 28-30 be to old to be apart of a championship core??? I thought most people here saw what the spurs did this year.

Sorry if this comes off like I'm ranting but this whole age argument is getting on my nerves. It just seems like some people around don't think players can truly be core piece's to a championship team after they start hitting the 28-30 year old range unless they're superstar quality or that they'll just magically fall from the sky when Giannis/Parker hit their primes..... If your constantly trading in ability for youth that's not a winning formula in my opinion. If you got the talent on the roster to make run after Giannis/Parker develop even if its just for a 2-4 year window you ADD to it. You don't trade it away and "Hope" to find something better just because it's a little bit younger

[JoeJohnson2two]

I don't get how Bledsoe is giving up on the rebuild. He's 24 and probably better than anyone we would draft.

I think it all comes down to where you think we are at. If you think we are pushing for Mudiay or Okafor you don't do it, if you think we're going to be somewhere around 5+ range (or maybe even 3+) I would much prefer Bledsoe/10+ to most of those prospects. Is "rebuilding" the "right way" getting Smart/Randle instead of Bledsoe and Saric? I don't think so.

I agree with you. I'd love to land Mudiay/Okafor/Towns/Oubre but it's nowhere near a guarantee that we're bad enough to get them. I'd be more than happy with grabbing a 24 year old Eric Bledsoe and then landing someone like Marc Garcia/Caris LeVert/Tyus Jones at 10+.

[Baddy Chuck]

28 years old is likely your physical prime as an athlete. Exactly how is having a 28 year old Eric Bledsoe a bad thing?

A 28 year old Eric Bledsoe has taken a lot of lumps given his playing style. The guy barrels into the lane like a little bowling ball and draws contact. If he's ALREADY showing signs of injury problems at 24, I shudder to think of what he'll be 4 or 5 years down the line. He's the type of player who just gets the **** beat out of him night after night.

At worst probably something like this



And any team on the verge of contending would be lucky to have that guy.

[skones]

I don't get how Bledsoe is giving up on the rebuild. He's 24 and probably better than anyone we would draft.

I think it all comes down to where you think we are at. If you think we are pushing for Mudiay or Okafor you don't do it, if you think we're going to be somewhere around 5+ range (or maybe even 3+) I would much prefer Bledsoe/10+ to most of those prospects. Is "rebuilding" the "right way" getting Smart or Randle instead of Bledsoe and Saric? I don't think so.

I don't agree with this at all. I don't think we're a bottom 5 team next season with our roster. I think you're looking at it in a bit of a vacuum if youre going straight with Bledsoe/10 because you're not necessarily taking into account the impact of the money involved. Success in the NBA is about roster composition. Allocating that much money to a player like Bledsoe in our current situation isn't smart money. In doing so, you're assuming A LOT about Parker and Giannis that may or may not come to fruition. If it doesn't, you've put a pretty low ceiling on your squad by making that type of commitment to Bledsoe and effectively delaying a rebuild even further.

[JoeJohnson2two]

Well that might be asking a bit too much. Bledsoe isn't a good point guard. He benefited greatly from playing next to Dragic.

And what about the times he filled in for Chris Paul? Was he not a PG then either?

[Matches Malone]

I don't get how Bledsoe is giving up on the rebuild. He's 24 and probably better than anyone we would draft.

I think it all comes down to where you think we are at. If you think we are pushing for Mudiay or Okafor you don't do it, if you think we're going to be somewhere around 5+ range (or maybe even 3+) I would much prefer Bledsoe/10+ to most of those prospects. Is "rebuilding" the "right way" getting Smart or Randle instead of Bledsoe and Saric? I don't think so.

I guess I agree with this a little bit. The only thing is if you are rebuilding the "right way" adding Bledsoe is most likely going to add wins and take you out of the top 5 maybe top 10. If that happens, I'm fine with it, but the issue I have then is how are we going to add rebuilding pieces? With the way John Hammonds trading has been, I'm not sure I trust him in that aspect.

[FlagsFlyForever]

28 years old is likely your physical prime as an athlete. Exactly how is having a 28 year old Eric Bledsoe a bad thing?

It would be fine to have him when he's 28. The problem is if Bledsoe signs with us, he will become a free agent when he's 28. I don't believe Bledsoe is a superstar, therefore I think signing him to a max contract is short sighted if you look at where the Bucks are now.

The problem is the fact that we'd be paying max money to an unproven guy when Giannis & Parker are 19 & 20 years old and still have a long ways to go in their games.

[skones]

28 years old is likely your physical prime as an athlete. Exactly how is having a 28 year old Eric Bledsoe a bad thing?

A 28 year old Eric Bledsoe has taken a lot of lumps given his playing style. The guy barrels into the lane like a little bowling ball and draws contact. If he's ALREADY showing signs of injury problems at 24, I shudder to think of what he'll be 4 or 5 years down the line. He's the type of player who just gets the **** beat out of him night after night.

At worst probably something like this



And any team on the verge of contending would be lucky to have that guy.

We're not on the verge of contending. That's the problem. We're very early in the rebuilding process. If Parker and Giannis don't hit, do you really want to be paying a Kyle Lowry caliber player the max? Good luck with that.

[JoeJohnson2two]

I don't get how Bledsoe is giving up on the rebuild. He's 24 and probably better than anyone we would draft.

I think it all comes down to where you think we are at. If you think we are pushing for Mudiay or Okafor you don't do it, if you think we're going to be somewhere around 5+ range (or maybe even 3+) I would much prefer Bledsoe/10+ to most of those prospects. Is "rebuilding" the "right way" getting Smart or Randle instead of Bledsoe and Saric? I don't think so.

I don't agree with this at all. I don't think we're a bottom 5 team next season with our roster. I think you're looking at it in a bit of a vacuum if youre going straight with Bledsoe/10 because you're not necessarily taking into account the impact of the money involved. Success in the NBA is about roster composition. Allocating that much money to a player like Bledsoe in our current situation isn't smart money. In doing so, you're assuming A LOT about Parker and Giannis that may or may not come to fruition. If it doesn't, you've put a pretty low ceiling on your squad by making that type of commitment to Bledsoe and effectively delaying a rebuild even further.

Allocating what money exactly? Bledsoe's max would coincide with Parker's rookie contract and we'd be able to retain Giannis with his bird rights regardless of our cap situation (which still wouldn't be bad). Bledsoe's contract now wouldn't really affect us in the long run...

[MrPerfect1]

The key years that we should be building around start with like the 2018 season and ahead. I would be surprised if by then we do not have a better option than a close to 30 PG who likely doesn't age well since he relies heavily on athleticism.

Bledsoe will be 28-29 before our core is even approaching it's prime. At that point, either we continue paying huge money to a PG on the decline or we get rid of him meaning he was of no long term value to us.

Almost every move should be looked at in regards to how it will help our core in 2018 and beyond.

Spot on. Adding Bledsoe to a 25 year old Parker/Giannis would be great. Pairing him with two 19 year olds is a waste. Its why I also don't get how Sanders factors into the core of this team. When GA/JP is ready to compete we're going to be excited about having a 30 year old center who relies on his athleticism? Yeah no.

God I love how some people think that 28-30 is to old to be part of the core of a championship team..... Don't sign Bledsoe because he'll be 28 by the time Parker/Giannis hit their primes. And now sanders because he'll be around 29-30...... first that's on the assumption it takes 4 more years for those two to develop. Maybe its just me but I think that Giannis, who's already been in the league a season, and Parker, who is coming in as the most NBA ready prospect might just be ready for primetime before that 4 year time table runs out. And even if it does happen to take 4 more years for them to hit their peak since when did 28-30 be to old to be apart of a championship core??? I thought most people here saw what the spurs did this year.

Sorry if this comes off like I'm ranting but this whole age argument is getting on my nerves. It just seems like some people around don't think players can truly be core piece's to a championship team after they start hitting the 28-30 year old range unless they're superstar quality or that they'll just magically fall from the sky when Giannis/Parker hit their primes..... If your constantly trading in ability for youth that's not a winning formula in my opinion. If you got the talent on the roster to make run after Giannis/Parker develop even if its just for a 2-4 year window you ADD to it. You don't trade it away and "Hope" to find something better just because it's a little bit younger

The fact of the matter is that Age matters. Nba guards who rely primarily on athleticism do not age well. Wade is a prime example of this. He was amazing when young but people knew would not age well. He began breaking down by age 30. Also, 28-30 is nowhere close to physical prime. There is a reason why Rbs by 30 are washed up, tennis players are often in the low 20s, etc. Peak physical prime is generally in the low 20s like 22-23. In sports more reliant on muscle mass is a little later since it takes a little time to accumulate muscle.