Trade Targets (postcript on yesterday-other teams)

[breakchains]

You could probably get Dragic for the 2015 first. That's a big asset to give up for a guy who you lose all control over as soon as the season ends. You ready to roll the dice that the guy will re-sign in Milwaukee when all the big market teams will be ready to offer him as much or more money?

That's how GMs lose jobs.

I would hope the clear promise of a starting spot, no competition, and playing under Jason Kidd would be enough to convince him, but it is still risky. How much is Dragic going to get? If I have my choice of Dragic for 15 or Knight for 11, I take Knight, because I think he will have to defer to Giannis and Parker as stars in the future as they demand the ball more.

That is nothing though. Every team that wants to offer him $15M would implicitly be offering that except for the Jason Kidd part. You can't throw away real assets like that on the hopes that the appeal of Jason Kidd will be more than say, Los Angeles or New York. It is begging for disaster. It's not like we don't have precedent for this type of thing. It has happened to our very franchise on numerous occasions. Banking on being able to keep a top free agent in Milwaukee with little prior connection to the city/team, no matter how much the culture is changing, is a fools errand.

[machu46]

Since salaries will be similar, to me it's Knight at ages 23-25 vs. Lawson at ages 27-29. My money is on Lawson being a better value. I just don't agree with inking Knight to a large deal to be our future PG. If another team views him as a significant asset now, I'd pack his bags.

Neither player is the ideal answer at PG long-term. If I had to pick one I'd pick Knight for reasons stated earlier. Knight is also an asset that could be moved in future seasons. Maybe we don't need a 'true' PG. They seem to be less and less available. The Russell Westbrook type PGs seem to be the thing now. Knight is fine and comes with very little risk. If we can move him for a decent asset I'd be down, but not for Lawson.

Yeah, this is pretty much how I feel. I don't think this team needs a pure point guard and think Knight still has room to grow, whereas Lawson is probably more likely to decline than improve at this point with his ankles.

And re: Dragic, no thanks. I wouldn't trade for him even if he were agreeing to re-sign.

[ampd]

If Lawson has off court issues it would explain his stagnation / decline along with the injuries since he signed his deal. with how good our locker room is I'd be careful about who I add to it right now.

dragic is going to get overpaid this off season and I'd rather we not give up any assets to rent him for 30 games. I don't see the appeal in trading for him at all. It's a waste of assets.

[LUKE23]

Neither player is the ideal answer at PG long-term. If I had to pick one I'd pick Knight for reasons stated earlier. Knight is also an asset that could be moved in future seasons. Maybe we don't need a 'true' PG. They seem to be less and less available. The Russell Westbrook type PGs seem to be the thing now. Knight is fine and comes with very little risk. If we can move him for a decent asset I'd be down, but not for Lawson.

I disagree that he has very little risk and will be easily tradeable after he signs his deal. He has around 48 hours left as an asset.

[JustinCredible]

If Lawson has off court issues it would explain his stagnation / decline along with the injuries since he signed his deal. with how good our locker room is I'd be careful about who I add to it right now.

dragic is going to get overpaid this off season and I'd rather we not give up any assets to rent him for 30 games. I don't see the appeal in trading for him at all. It's a waste of assets.

Yea, I hope like hell that we aren't renting any players ala JJ Redick unless it is helping us clear future salary (Mayo, Ersan). There is no way we are making rental moves.

[WeekapaugGroove]

You could probably get Dragic for the 2015 first. That's a big asset to give up for a guy who you lose all control over as soon as the season ends. You ready to roll the dice that the guy will re-sign in Milwaukee when all the big market teams will be ready to offer him as much or more money?

That's how GMs lose jobs.

I would hope the clear promise of a starting spot, no competition, and playing under Jason Kidd would be enough to convince him, but it is still risky. How much is Dragic going to get? If I have my choice of Dragic for 15 or Knight for 11, I take Knight, because I think he will have to defer to Giannis and Parker as stars in the future as they demand the ball more.

I have a feeling 15 mil will be the starting point for dragic although it's a real possibility the Lakers or Knicks get desperate and offer more. Gorans only made around 30mil total in his career so he will and should take the best offer he can get this summer. And I think the Rockets would gladly offer the pels pick for him so my guess is the bucks 1st won't be the best offer available.

As a suns fan I'm torn on goran. part of me says sell him now to eliminate the risk of losing an asset for nothihg. But on the other hand overpaying him might not be a big deal. With the cap rising his deal probably won't look too bad in a couple years. Plus more importantly I don't think cap space will matter those first couple summers after the spike. If the cap rises 20 mil almost every team will have cap space and very few will be even remotely close to the lux tax. So I expect most teams will just overpay their own free agents that summer and the few guys who actually do leave will get to pick from nearly every team not just a few with space you have in normal years. Will probably be a bunch of teams those summers with a bunch of money and no one to spend it on.

Sent from my SM-G900V using RealGM Forums mobile app

[JustinCredible]

Neither player is the ideal answer at PG long-term. If I had to pick one I'd pick Knight for reasons stated earlier. Knight is also an asset that could be moved in future seasons. Maybe we don't need a 'true' PG. They seem to be less and less available. The Russell Westbrook type PGs seem to be the thing now. Knight is fine and comes with very little risk. If we can move him for a decent asset I'd be down, but not for Lawson.

I disagree that he has very little risk and will be easily tradeable after he signs his deal. He has around 48 hours left as an asset.

If he is an asset now he will be with a new deal. Do you think teams don't know he is on his last year and know his market value? If they are viewing him as an asset now that means they think he is worthy of an extension. If they think he is worthy of an extension, then they would still view him as an asset with a new contract. The only way he isn't an asset is if his game declines.

[raferfenix]

What if we could get Dragic / Plumlee for something like Henson / Ersan (and maybe the LAC pick)?

If the Bucks tear up the East and Kidd makes a convincing case that much more is coming once Parker gets back, then maybe we'd have a shot at keeping Dragic considering we also can offer him more money and an extra year.

That'd be a major risk though with the Lakers and so many other teams waiting with baited breath. Then again, is Henson (with or without the LAC pick) really the kind of player that stops you from taking a shot at a player like Dragic?

[JustinCredible]

What if we could get Dragic / Plumlee for something like Henson / Ersan (and maybe the LAC pick)?

If the Bucks tear up the East and Kidd makes a convincing case that much more is coming once Parker gets back, then maybe we'd have a shot at keeping Dragic considering we also can offer him more money and an extra year.

That'd be a major risk though with the Lakers and so many other teams waiting with baited breath. Then again, is Henson (with or without the LAC pick) really the kind of player that stops you from taking a shot at a player like Dragic?

We'd be looking extremely thin at bigs unless another move followed.

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

dragic is going to get overpaid this off season and I'd rather we not give up any assets to rent him for 30 games. I don't see the appeal in trading for him at all. It's a waste of assets.

stop saying its a dragic rental. you can say you don't want to max him..... but if youre willing....there is no way in hell he turns down bird rights max for 30-40 mil less on the 4 year max. i stated in the proposal wed talk to his agents and find out if he was ok signing here. if he is, and we offer the extra year then we get him. he hasn't gotten paid with that monster deal yet. its as simple as that.

[machu46]

dragic is going to get overpaid this off season and I'd rather we not give up any assets to rent him for 30 games. I don't see the appeal in trading for him at all. It's a waste of assets.

stop saying its a dragic rental. you can say you don't want to max him..... but if youre willing....there is no way in hell he turns down bird rights max for 30-40 mil less on the 4 year max. i stated in the proposal wed talk to his agents and find out if he was ok signing here. if he is, and we offer the extra year then we get him. he hasn't gotten paid with that monster deal yet. its as simple as that.

I'm just not interested in Dragic long-term, nor am I interested in trading assets to rent him for 30 games. He's a good fit with the right team, but I don't think his career timeline lines up with the rest of the core, whereas Knight's does.

[machu46]

Neither player is the ideal answer at PG long-term. If I had to pick one I'd pick Knight for reasons stated earlier. Knight is also an asset that could be moved in future seasons. Maybe we don't need a 'true' PG. They seem to be less and less available. The Russell Westbrook type PGs seem to be the thing now. Knight is fine and comes with very little risk. If we can move him for a decent asset I'd be down, but not for Lawson.

I disagree that he has very little risk and will be easily tradeable after he signs his deal. He has around 48 hours left as an asset.

I feel like he's probably held close to the same regard around the league as Lawson is when people take their relative age and health into account. I doubt being paid slightly more than Lawson would result in Knight being untradable while Lawson is considered a steal on his contract. He did just miss out on the All-Star game after all. I don't think the league perceives Knight as a scrub like some here do.

[LUKE23]

If he is an asset now he will be with a new deal. Do you think teams don't know he is on his last year and know his market value? If they are viewing him as an asset now that means they think he is worthy of an extension. If they think he is worthy of an extension, then they would still view him as an asset with a new contract. The only way he isn't an asset is if his game declines.

How so? If another team signs him to more than he's worth to the majority of the league, and we match, he's no longer an asset. But the real issue here is dollar vs. win impact. It isn't there with Knight and I don't see how that changes unless he gets a far lower offer sheet than I'm expecting.

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

dragic is going to get overpaid this off season and I'd rather we not give up any assets to rent him for 30 games. I don't see the appeal in trading for him at all. It's a waste of assets.

stop saying its a dragic rental. you can say you don't want to max him..... but if youre willing....there is no way in hell he turns down bird rights max for 30-40 mil less on the 4 year max. i stated in the proposal wed talk to his agents and find out if he was ok signing here. if he is, and we offer the extra year then we get him. he hasn't gotten paid with that monster deal yet. its as simple as that.

I'm just not interested in Dragic long-term, nor am I interested in trading assets to rent him for 30 games. He's a good fit with the right team, but I don't think his career timeline lines up with the rest of the core, whereas Knight's does.

i believe dragic is a perfect fit for this team. and if we could get him with a proposal like i made with a guy like Gibson... then wed be a top 2-3 ec team and potential finals candidate for the next 4-5 years. who cares about timelines beyond that if you could become a legit contender now? i believe we would be a legit contender too btw. wed have our hands full in a series out west but short of that id take that team against anybody in the east.

[Badgerlander]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/dempseypost/status/567765853043974147[/tweet]

[machu46]

stop saying its a dragic rental. you can say you don't want to max him..... but if youre willing....there is no way in hell he turns down bird rights max for 30-40 mil less on the 4 year max. i stated in the proposal wed talk to his agents and find out if he was ok signing here. if he is, and we offer the extra year then we get him. he hasn't gotten paid with that monster deal yet. its as simple as that.

I'm just not interested in Dragic long-term, nor am I interested in trading assets to rent him for 30 games. He's a good fit with the right team, but I don't think his career timeline lines up with the rest of the core, whereas Knight's does.

i believe dragic is a perfect fit for this team. and if we could get him with a proposal like i made with a guy like Gibson... then wed be a top 2-3 ec team and potential finals candidate for the next 4-5 years. who cares about timelines beyond that if you could become a legit contender now? i believe we would be a legit contender too btw. wed have our hands full in a series out west but short of that id take that team against anybody in the east.

I just disagree. I think by the time the rest of the team is ready to be contenders, Dragic and Gibson have already hit the wall. I'd rather roll with Knight and let him continue to grow with the rest of the core and figure out the 5th starter at some point in the next year or two.

[ampd]

dragic is going to get overpaid this off season and I'd rather we not give up any assets to rent him for 30 games. I don't see the appeal in trading for him at all. It's a waste of assets.

stop saying its a dragic rental. you can say you don't want to max him..... but if youre willing....there is no way in hell he turns down bird rights max for 30-40 mil less on the 4 year max. i stated in the proposal wed talk to his agents and find out if he was ok signing here. if he is, and we offer the extra year then we get him. he hasn't gotten paid with that monster deal yet. its as simple as that.

Im sure he'd take it but I wouldn't want anything to do with signing him at 5 years $100+ million.

[drew881]

i believe dragic is a perfect fit for this team. .

White PG from Slovenia doesn't quite have the same ring to it as Duke.

[paulpressey25]

Im sure he'd take it but I wouldn't want anything to do with signing him at 5 years $100+ million.

Yeah, I would not want Dragic at that pricetag, even though I think he'd be a great fit here. And if you gave up an asset for him, you need to be prepared to pay that type of contract just in case he is offered something crazy by NY, LAL, etc. Otherwise it is like the Redick deal where you spend the asset for a 30-game rental.

That's why Lawson, Taj and even Isiah Thomas have more appeal to me since they contractually are tied up for another year or two after this one.

[Frank Nova]

Dragic would be better here than Lawson imo. If the intention is to keep Knight around.