Bucks looking at Bledsoe, probably.

[Baddy Chuck]

This unfortunately is going to be the Jeff Teague experiment all over again, but worse.

We will throw out a nice offer sheet to Bledsoe, all signs will point to Phoenix not matching, and then of course, they match.

If we offer the max at least we made an attempt unlike the Teague offer where we lobbed up beach ball for them to hit. Thankfully that worked out for us, Kohl and co. had no intentions of that when it happened though.

[ampd]

I don't see why this matters. Is the argument that we shouldn't improve the roster before we are ready to win a championship in the next year? Wasting opportunities to add elite talent or prospects in the pursuit of some fantasy world where you get an Xbox achievement for doing things "the right way" is just foolish.

I assume you meant to respond to someone else with that post.

I just meant to say that I don't think its really relevant what our chances of winning a championship in the next year or two are since they are so small. We need to focus on adding elite talent, and restricting yourself to doing that through the draft only is a bad idea.

[BuckFan25226]

This unfortunately is going to be the Jeff Teague experiment all over again, but worse.

We will throw out a nice offer sheet to Bledsoe, all signs will point to Phoenix not matching, and then of course, they match.

If we offer the max at least we made an attempt unlike the Teague offer where we lobbed up beach ball for them to hit. Thankfully that worked out for us, Kohl and co. had no intentions of that when it happened though.

Yeah, who's to say we even have new owners right now, much less Jabari Parker if Atlanta doesn't match?

All a part of Bones grand scheme

[Baddy Chuck]

I still don't understand how Bledsoe wouldn't be the right way. We are spending money on a difference maker and we aren't getting anyone that couldn't grow with our core. I mean if we did a Herb Kohl special and picked up Carlos Boozer and Aaron Afflalo to go with Bledsoe that would be another story.

[ampd]

I still don't understand how Bledsoe wouldn't be the right way. We are spending money on a difference maker and we aren't getting anyone that couldn't grow with our core. I mean if we did a Herb Kohl special and picked up Carlos Boozer and Aaron Afflalo to go with Bledsoe that would be another story.

Boozer and Afflalo are both too good for Hambone + Kohl acquisitions. We'd be targeting Ariza and Jameer Nelson.

[Bernman]

I just meant to say that I don't think its really relevant what our chances of winning a championship in the next year or two are since they are so small. We need to focus on adding elite talent, and restricting yourself to doing that through the draft only is a bad idea.

Well that doesn't in any way refute what I've said.

I'm pro signing Bledsoe, using more than one channel to add contending core talent.

And it's not ultra important to me to contend in year 2, I was just making the argument that I thought it was realistic under the caveat laid out by "ElPelegrino" of "if everything goes right". If everything goes right I think they can contend in year 2. But it's not a prerequisite of the plan or anything to have to contend that early. I just really want to be winning significantly more games than we are losing, as well as showing future champ contender promise, by whenever we have to vote for a new arena, because that's what I think it would take to win the vote and keep the team here. So I guess you could say that's a prerequisite for my plan, but I don't think we need to be contenders, and we probably have more than 2 years to achieve that.

[Baddy Chuck]

Hell, I just want to be contending by year 7.

[ampd]

I just meant to say that I don't think its really relevant what our chances of winning a championship in the next year or two are since they are so small. We need to focus on adding elite talent, and restricting yourself to doing that through the draft only is a bad idea.

Well that doesn't in any way refute what I've said.

I'm pro signing Bledsoe, using more than one channel to add contending core talent.

And it's not ultra important to me to contend in year 2, I was just making the argument that I thought it was realistic under the caveat laid out by "ElPelegrino" of "if everything goes right". If everything goes right I think they can contend in year 2. But it's not a prerequisite of the plan or anything to have to contend that early. I just really want to be winning significantly more games than we are losing, as well as showing future champ contender promise, by whenever we have to vote for a new arena, because that's what I think it would take to win the vote and keep the team here. So I guess you could say that's a prerequisite for my plan, but I don't think we need to be contenders, and we probably have more than 2 years to achieve that.

I wasn't trying to refute what you were saying

[BuckFan25226]

Hell, I just want to be contending by year 7.

I just want to play in a game 7 by year 7.

[Matches Malone]

Hell, I just want to be contending by year 7.

I just want to play in a game 7 by year 7.

I just want to play a game in Milwaukee by year 7.

[Baddy Chuck]

Hell, I just want to be contending by year 7.

I just want to play in a game 7 by year 7.

"We're on it."

[DutchManDanFan]

IF we give up a pick you have to put protections on it in case of an injury, like top 10 this year, top 5 next year, etc, because if he does miss significant time then we are tankapalooza part 2. Also if Frye signs elsewhere I would think that they would have interest in Ersan as part of the deal.

But with protection a future pick is worth a lot less. If you want to get an asset now then trading the 2015 pick is the way to go. The Bucks want to compete in 2 or 3 years from now. A 2015 pick in the 4-10 range is not going to help significantly with that. Hoping for a top 3 pick is hoping for lottery luck with 25-30 wins. That's not a good thing to do and Kidd certainly doesn't want that.

[raferfenix]

If the main argument against Bledsoe is that we'd win too many games next year, couldn't we just trade Larry Sanders so that wouldn't happen?

We could also play Giannis at the 2 like the Thunder did with Durant.

My point isn't that I would necessarily do these things, but rather that if we have Bledsoe targeted as a core piece to grow with Giannis and Parker, then the Bucks could still pick him up while going with as much of a rebuilding strategy as they would otherwise.

[FlagsFlyForever]

Why are you assuming we couldn't extend Bledsoe if things work out?

I feel there's a good chance that he doesn't resign here if he does pan out the way people who want him at the max are expecting of him. People have called him an "elite talent". We've seen this with Chris Paul or LeBron or Bosh or Kevin Love or so many others. Elite players don't stay in places like Milwaukee. If an elite Bledsoe is being pursued by the Lakers and the Rockets and the Heat and the Knicks, etc, I think there is a small chance he would resign here.
If he doesn't grow beyond the player he was last year, I feel we could sign him in 2018. My point is that I think people are overrating what signing him now means as far as having him beyond his current contract.

Let me ask this, and I am not trying to suggest this is the black and white situation we face. Theoretically if we could sign Bledsoe at the max right now and there was a guarantee that he would go to another team in 2018, would we still do it?

[SupremeHustle]

I want to remind you guys of how the Bucks put together that awesome 2001 team.

In 1995-1996, the Bucks' two best players were budding second year player Glenn Robinson and All-Star Vin Baker.

25 wins later, the season is over. That off season, the Bucks acquired Ray Allen in a draft day trade.

That brings us to the Robinson, Baker and promising rookie Ray Allen core.

In the 1996-97, with that young core, the Bucks won 33 games. Which in the draft meant: Welcome to MKE, Danny Fortson. Oh, wait. We're a 33 win team. We're on the cusp. Gotta trade Fortson for a need. How about Fortson, Johnny Newman and Joe Wolf to the Denver Nuggets for Ervin Johnson? Great trade for the Bucks.

Still, the core is Robinson, Baker and Allen. Until that September when Baker gets das boot in a three team trade. So long, Vin the all-star who never got his team to the playoffs. Hello... PG Terrell Brandon, PF Tyrone Hill and a conditional 1998 first-round draft pick from Cleveland.

So now we have a core of Robinson, Allen and Brandon and solid bigs with EJ and Hill going into the next season.

97-98, 36 wins. Oh, snap. NBA purgatory. What the hell are we gonna do? Back up a Brinks truck for George Karl to do what? REBUILD. They blew it during that '98 draft, big time, but there was still a feeling of hope in the air because of George Karl.

At the trade deadline in '99, the Bucks move some guys who didn't fit into Karl's plans or who didn't want to be here (Hill, Brandon, etc) and end up with everybody's favorite big 3, Robinson, Allen and Cassell.

Then, the big 3 played together for ten years in perfect harmony, went to the finals 7 times and won 5 championships.

Shut up! It's my dream!

[Newz]

If the main argument against Bledsoe is that we'd win too many games next year, couldn't we just trade Larry Sanders so that wouldn't happen?

We could also play Giannis at the 2 like the Thunder did with Durant.

My point isn't that I would necessarily do these things, but rather that if we have Bledsoe targeted as a core piece to grow with Giannis and Parker, then the Bucks could still pick him up while going with as much of a rebuilding strategy as they would otherwise.

That isn't the only argument against wanting to bring in Bledsoe. I like him as a player, I think there are far worse things we could do and I think if we get him odds are we will be a 50+ win team sooner rather than later who can have continued success.

The things is that it's a big risk. Bledsoe, much like Sanders, has really only had one very good year. If you sign Bledsoe and Sanders, the team this year is likely to jump right back into the 35-40 win range that we have all dreaded so much. With Bledsoe, Sanders, Giannis and Parker we won't be making a trip back to the top 5 in the next 5-10 years.

So from that point on, that's pretty much your core. Yes, you COULD shuffle someone like Bledsoe or Sanders to a different team. But the thing is that if they are good, you aren't going to want to trade them... and if you want to trade them, it's because they are disappointing in some way, shape or form. So when you are making the deal for Bledsoe you are committing to those four guys... or you are committing to some amount of them + the value of whatever the return is for the others.

It's not an awful gamble to make as Giannis and Parker both have high ceilings... but you can acquire guys like Bledsoe fairly often if you are willing to trade a first rounder or if you gather enough young assets to move for a 2nd/3rd tier guy like that.

So what people are saying is they don't necessarily think it's some awful idea to go out and get Bledsoe and that the deal has no chance to work... they are just saying they think it's even better to take a wait and see approach. Maybe Parker is just someone like... I don't know... Big Dog? And maybe Giannis is a player around the level of Batum. Maybe Larry Sanders doesn't turn out to be an elite rim defender and is just a solid center and Eric Bledsoe is a third tier star...

Then that team is fine, it's okay... but it's certain nothing special. If you pass on Bledsoe though and you just have Parker/Giannis it gives you way more flexibility. If neither of those guys looks all that good this year, then you could potentially sell off Sanders and get right back into the top 5 to take another big swing on a super talented prospect.

[LedZepp007]

Why are you assuming we couldn't extend Bledsoe if things work out?

I feel there's a good chance that he doesn't resign here if he does pan out the way people who want him at the max are expecting of him. People have called him an "elite talent". We've seen this with Chris Paul or LeBron or Bosh or Kevin Love or so many others. Elite players don't stay in places like Milwaukee. If an elite Bledsoe is being pursued by the Lakers and the Rockets and the Heat and the Knicks, etc, I think there is a small chance he would resign here.
If he doesn't grow beyond the player he was last year, I feel we could sign him in 2018. My point is that I think people are overrating what signing him now means as far as having him beyond his current contract.

Let me ask this, and I am not trying to suggest this is the black and white situation we face. Theoretically if we could sign Bledsoe at the max right now and there was a guarantee that he would go to another team in 2018, would we still do it?

The main reason no FAs sign with Milwaukee is because we haven't had a contender in a really long time. And it's cold and relatively small lol.

I don't see why Bledsoe wouldn't stay. Our attractiveness as a destination has recently increased dramatically (from worst in the league to somewhere in the middle) due to Jabari, cap space, new owners, and Jason Kidd. And Giannis, too. Crazy. Oh yeah, new arena on the horizon.

[Ayt]

Why are you assuming we couldn't extend Bledsoe if things work out?

I feel there's a good chance that he doesn't resign here if he does pan out the way people who want him at the max are expecting of him. People have called him an "elite talent". We've seen this with Chris Paul or LeBron or Bosh or Kevin Love or so many others. Elite players don't stay in places like Milwaukee. If an elite Bledsoe is being pursued by the Lakers and the Rockets and the Heat and the Knicks, etc, I think there is a small chance he would resign here.
If he doesn't grow beyond the player he was last year, I feel we could sign him in 2018. My point is that I think people are overrating what signing him now means as far as having him beyond his current contract.

Let me ask this, and I am not trying to suggest this is the black and white situation we face. Theoretically if we could sign Bledsoe at the max right now and there was a guarantee that he would go to another team in 2018, would we still do it?

It seems absurd to me to already make the assumption that a guy wouldn't resign here four years from now and then use that as part of the argument for not signing him now.

[raferfenix]

If the main argument against Bledsoe is that we'd win too many games next year, couldn't we just trade Larry Sanders so that wouldn't happen?

We could also play Giannis at the 2 like the Thunder did with Durant.

My point isn't that I would necessarily do these things, but rather that if we have Bledsoe targeted as a core piece to grow with Giannis and Parker, then the Bucks could still pick him up while going with as much of a rebuilding strategy as they would otherwise.

That isn't the only argument against wanting to bring in Bledsoe. I like him as a player, I think there are far worse things we could do and I think if we get him odds are we will be a 50+ win team sooner rather than later who can have continued success.

The things is that it's a big risk. Bledsoe, much like Sanders, has really only had one very good year. If you sign Bledsoe and Sanders, the team this year is likely to jump right back into the 35-40 win range that we have all dreaded so much. With Bledsoe, Sanders, Giannis and Parker we won't be making a trip back to the top 5 in the next 5-10 years.

So from that point on, that's pretty much your core. Yes, you COULD shuffle someone like Bledsoe or Sanders to a different team. But the thing is that if they are good, you aren't going to want to trade them... and if you want to trade them, it's because they are disappointing in some way, shape or form. So when you are making the deal for Bledsoe you are committing to those four guys... or you are committing to some amount of them + the value of whatever the return is for the others.

It's not an awful gamble to make as Giannis and Parker both have high ceilings... but you can acquire guys like Bledsoe fairly often if you are willing to trade a first rounder or if you gather enough young assets to move for a 2nd/3rd tier guy like that.

So what people are saying is they don't necessarily think it's some awful idea to go out and get Bledsoe and that the deal has no chance to work... they are just saying they think it's even better to take a wait and see approach. Maybe Parker is just someone like... I don't know... Big Dog? And maybe Giannis is a player around the level of Batum. Maybe Larry Sanders doesn't turn out to be an elite rim defender and is just a solid center and Eric Bledsoe is a third tier star...

Then that team is fine, it's okay... but it's certain nothing special. If you pass on Bledsoe though and you just have Parker/Giannis it gives you way more flexibility. If neither of those guys looks all that good this year, then you could potentially sell off Sanders and get right back into the top 5 to take another big swing on a super talented prospect.

No it's not the only argument by any stretch (injuries and him not being so much of a true PG are especially big concerns for me), but not being able to get a good enough pick next year does seem to be a central point being made by many.

What I'm adding into the equation though is that we still could "get right back into the top 5 to take another big swing on a super talented prospect" as you put it despite us acquiring Bledsoe.

For instance, playing Henson big minutes at center next to Jabari Parker seems plenty likely to result in a whole lot of losses.

On the flipside, if Bledsoe would blow up and turn into the kind of top tier prospect who could prevent that on his own, well, that would be awesome as is. We haven't had a guy like that in a very long time.

[Thunder Muscle]

I'm intrigued with a Lin deal if it includes an asset and we get rid of some payroll. He's obviously be a stop gap PG. Bledsoe is the best of the bunch but I just don't think we'll end up getting him. I don't know a ton about Vasquez but seems like a guy that we could possibly snag.