ImageImage

Shams: George Hill returns 3 years $29 million

Moderators: MickeyDavis, paulpressey25

skones
RealGM
Posts: 26,105
And1: 5,707
Joined: Jul 20, 2004
Location: Milwaukee
     

Re: Shams: George Hill returns 3 years $29 million 

Post#141 » by skones » Mon Jul 1, 2019 1:48 am

LuessiT wrote:
coolhandluke121 wrote:
LuessiT wrote:Just for the record since I wasn't around when the Hill debate started as far as I have deducted, we're doing the following moves so far:

1) Waive Hill. IDK if he waives his guarantee or it gets taken of our cap once we sign him to a contract but it doesn't really matter
2) Waive & stretch Leuer
3) Waive everyone's rights except Middleton including Brogdons
4) Sign Hill to the 3/29m deal starting at ~9.2m
5) Sign Lopez to the 4/52m deal starting at ~12.1m
6) S&T Brogdon for the IND package creating a TPE. Yes, you can S&T Brogdon after you waived his rights

Since we have to execute this on the 6th, things may change. I assume if the price is low enough we may dump Leuer instead of waiving and stretching him creating a ~3.2m in cap space or get back up to ~4.1m in a trade.

But for now we still have the TPE and the room MLE available.


How do you keep a TPE if you don't have Bird Rights to Brogdon? I would be shocked if that's true. Massive loophole. They can sign and trade players after they renounce them, but I think that's only if they have cap space or some other exception. You have to have some right to pay Brogdon in order to have any right to use his exception to pay someone else instead of him.


Maybe you're correct. I'm going to read up on it.


Once you waive Brogdon's rights you waive his rights, thus his cap hold is removed, he is no longer a RFA, and you wouldn't be able to go over the cap (which I believe is necessary in this situation) in order to S&T him. It'd be a massive loophole to just remove rights so you can maneuver and then just go over the cap to keep a guy after the fact.
User avatar
JHSFIVE
Starter
Posts: 2,453
And1: 198
Joined: Jan 27, 2003

Re: Shams: George Hill returns 3 years $29 million 

Post#142 » by JHSFIVE » Mon Jul 1, 2019 2:03 am

This is 100% a Bud signing... and I’m fine with it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
OVERREACT
User avatar
th87
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,496
And1: 2,522
Joined: Dec 04, 2005
   

Re: Shams: George Hill returns 3 years $29 million 

Post#143 » by th87 » Mon Jul 1, 2019 2:18 am

skones wrote:
TroyD92 wrote:
skones wrote:
Have we not been around here long enough to know that the "you can easily trade him" stuff just sounds dumber and dumber and dumber as the year's go by? Trading him later on isn't the point. Being a two year contract isn't the point. It's about the value being greater than dollars spent. That's what good organizations do year after year. Horst has CLEARLY demonstrated he's incapable of getting that.


Dude was one of the most important players on the team last year. I don't really understand what the problem here is. Did they overpay a little ? Probably. Did the overpay make the expiring contract more valuable in year two? Probably.


George Hill is a bench player, an old bench player, who missed 10 games for us, has a history of hip problems, and is only getting older. George Hill was a steady backup in a place where we previously had Delly. It was a massive upgrade. Playoff George Hill was lightning in a bottle. You don't pay for lightning in a bottle because it's an outlier. We paid for lightning in a bottle. We didn't pay for the guy he was for us in the regular season.


Mini-FTD John Salmons situation
User avatar
th87
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,496
And1: 2,522
Joined: Dec 04, 2005
   

Re: Shams: George Hill returns 3 years $29 million 

Post#144 » by th87 » Mon Jul 1, 2019 2:21 am

rrayy wrote:
BigO wrote:
TroyD92 wrote:
I guess I don't see the point in asking questions that are factually ambiguous.


Nothing ambiguous. You said everyone agrees that losing brogdon without a significant addition makes the Bucks worse (fact). So if the Bucks are in a win now mode, why would the owners not resign Brogdon unless they didn't want to pay the luxury tax? And if that's the case, then they are not in a win now mode. Not my money, but a bad move. They must justify it in their minds by thinking DDV or someone else will step forward.
Because Brogodn doesn't want to be in Milwaukee and they don't want to pay a ton of money to a player likely to be a liability because he doesn't want to be in town. Why do people keep ignoring that?


Because it is a disgusting lie?
LuessiT
Head Coach
Posts: 6,559
And1: 1,474
Joined: Jan 08, 2016
 

Re: Shams: George Hill returns 3 years $29 million 

Post#145 » by LuessiT » Mon Jul 1, 2019 2:32 am

Maybe I'm stupid but so far I've trusted people have done the math. But I did it myself now:

Giannis 25,842697
Middleton 19,5 (cap hold)
Bledsoe 15,625
Lopez 12,1
Hill 9,2
Ersan 7
DJ 2,96112
DDV 2,9058
Pat 1,72305
Brogdon 1,676735
Brown 1,61852
2x Min 1,79662

Leuer 3,169348
Hawes 2,007058
Sanders 1,865546

= 108,991494 (without the Hill guarantee)

That means that without the guarantee, everyone fits. And I think the guarantee gets set off. Not 100% sure about that. In the CBA it says 'first team' & 'second team'. Nowhere is listed that the 'first team' & the 'second team' are different from another.
User avatar
Siefer
General Manager
Posts: 9,292
And1: 1,847
Joined: Nov 05, 2006
Location: Madison, WI
     

Re: Shams: George Hill returns 3 years $29 million 

Post#146 » by Siefer » Mon Jul 1, 2019 3:10 am

Really hope we keep the TPE. Overall happy with this deal. ~2/19 and some amount partially guaranteed after that.
vegaspacker
Veteran
Posts: 2,892
And1: 590
Joined: Aug 25, 2012
   

Re: Shams: George Hill returns 3 years $29 million 

Post#147 » by vegaspacker » Mon Jul 1, 2019 3:30 am

Hill is a teammate, good signing. He can and will age well.
I needs shades for this future thing we owning..... 8-) 8-) 8-)
User avatar
H2tObes
RealGM
Posts: 16,489
And1: 6,765
Joined: Oct 18, 2012
 

Re: Shams: George Hill returns 3 years $29 million 

Post#148 » by H2tObes » Mon Jul 1, 2019 3:33 am

I like having George Hill on my basketball team.
Saint Lazarus wrote:Giannis wouldn't even be an all-star if refs accurately called his travels and offensive fouls
User avatar
RiotPunch
RealGM
Posts: 15,967
And1: 4,498
Joined: Jul 05, 2009
Location: LA
Contact:
     

Re: Shams: George Hill returns 3 years $29 million 

Post#149 » by RiotPunch » Mon Jul 1, 2019 3:40 am

LuessiT wrote:Maybe I'm stupid but so far I've trusted people have done the math. But I did it myself now:

Giannis 25,842697
Middleton 19,5 (cap hold)
Bledsoe 15,625
Lopez 12,1
Hill 9,2
Ersan 7
DJ 2,96112
DDV 2,9058
Pat 1,72305
Brogdon 1,676735
Brown 1,61852
2x Min 1,79662

Leuer 3,169348
Hawes 2,007058
Sanders 1,865546

= 108,991494 (without the Hill guarantee)

That means that without the guarantee, everyone fits. And I think the guarantee gets set off. Not 100% sure about that. In the CBA it says 'first team' & 'second team'. Nowhere is listed that the 'first team' & the 'second team' are different from another.

Don't you only have to account for 12 roster spots? Think you can subtract $897,158. I've been wrong before, though.

Image

But yeah, I think the $1M guarantee goes away with the extension, likely with Hill's consent.
Image
Bucksmaniac wrote:I'm sorry, but I'm starting to sour on Giannis
User avatar
CJTURT
Starter
Posts: 2,488
And1: 657
Joined: Mar 11, 2012
Location: Decatur GA

Re: Shams: George Hill returns 3 years $29 million 

Post#150 » by CJTURT » Mon Jul 1, 2019 3:42 am

I’m very happy with this. We need more experienced playoff champions like this on our team tbh.
LuessiT
Head Coach
Posts: 6,559
And1: 1,474
Joined: Jan 08, 2016
 

Re: Shams: George Hill returns 3 years $29 million 

Post#151 » by LuessiT » Mon Jul 1, 2019 3:42 am

RiotPunch wrote:
LuessiT wrote:Maybe I'm stupid but so far I've trusted people have done the math. But I did it myself now:

Giannis 25,842697
Middleton 19,5 (cap hold)
Bledsoe 15,625
Lopez 12,1
Hill 9,2
Ersan 7
DJ 2,96112
DDV 2,9058
Pat 1,72305
Brogdon 1,676735
Brown 1,61852
2x Min 1,79662

Leuer 3,169348
Hawes 2,007058
Sanders 1,865546

= 108,991494 (without the Hill guarantee)

That means that without the guarantee, everyone fits. And I think the guarantee gets set off. Not 100% sure about that. In the CBA it says 'first team' & 'second team'. Nowhere is listed that the 'first team' & the 'second team' are different from another.

Don't you only have to account for 12 roster spots? Think you can subtract $897,158. I've been wrong before, though.

Image

But yeah, I think the $1M guarantee goes away with the extension, likely with Hill's consent.


You have, but the point is that one of those holds only goes away after you sign Lopez or Hill. So you got to have that space beforehand.
User avatar
worthlessBucks
RealGM
Posts: 21,863
And1: 4,450
Joined: Jan 26, 2005
Location: Northwest side with Peter Feigin
 

Re: Shams: George Hill returns 3 years $29 million 

Post#152 » by worthlessBucks » Mon Jul 1, 2019 3:44 am

I love George, he was great the second half the year when the bucks picked him up off the scrap heap. He was left for dead. Wonderful in the playoffs for the Bucks. I haven't seen yet if that 3rd year is some sort of option, but I would have given him a 1 year with a 2nd year team option. 33 years old. oyy.
“Words can not explain my gratitude for the Bucks organization and the faith in me as a leader and a worker. I won’t let you down Mil-town.” -- Larry Sanders
User avatar
th87
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,496
And1: 2,522
Joined: Dec 04, 2005
   

Re: Shams: George Hill returns 3 years $29 million 

Post#153 » by th87 » Mon Jul 1, 2019 3:49 am

Last year really strikes me as him giving his last bit of energy to bring us to the finish line. To bank on three more years of this production, and especially health, is risky.
User avatar
RiotPunch
RealGM
Posts: 15,967
And1: 4,498
Joined: Jul 05, 2009
Location: LA
Contact:
     

Re: Shams: George Hill returns 3 years $29 million 

Post#154 » by RiotPunch » Mon Jul 1, 2019 3:53 am

LuessiT wrote:You have, but the point is that one of those holds only goes away after you sign Lopez or Hill. So you got to have that space beforehand.

Image
Image
Bucksmaniac wrote:I'm sorry, but I'm starting to sour on Giannis
Ayt
RealGM
Posts: 50,246
And1: 5,339
Joined: Jun 27, 2005

Re: Shams: George Hill returns 3 years $29 million 

Post#155 » by Ayt » Mon Jul 1, 2019 4:53 am

Plossum wrote:Glad he’s back but feels like an overpay.

Reminder that Lou Williams is somehow only making 8mill a year.


What does Lou Williams have to do with George Hill?
Ayt
RealGM
Posts: 50,246
And1: 5,339
Joined: Jun 27, 2005

Re: Shams: George Hill returns 3 years $29 million 

Post#156 » by Ayt » Mon Jul 1, 2019 5:07 am

El Duderino wrote:
jakecronus8 wrote:The Bucks spent roughly 259 million dollars today to be worse next year and people are acting like it’s a big win. I don’t get it.


It was bad timing to have four of the five starters and the 6th man on the team all being free agents at the same time, in a league which was swimming in cap space.


It is funny people thought the team would actually improve on paper given the circumstances they were in with all the free agents. It was inevitable that they were going to lose talent given the number of free agents combined with the rules of the salary cap. It isn't like they could let everyone walk and sign upgrades.
skones
RealGM
Posts: 26,105
And1: 5,707
Joined: Jul 20, 2004
Location: Milwaukee
     

Re: Shams: George Hill returns 3 years $29 million 

Post#157 » by skones » Mon Jul 1, 2019 5:17 am

Ayt wrote:
El Duderino wrote:
jakecronus8 wrote:The Bucks spent roughly 259 million dollars today to be worse next year and people are acting like it’s a big win. I don’t get it.


It was bad timing to have four of the five starters and the 6th man on the team all being free agents at the same time, in a league which was swimming in cap space.


It is funny people thought the team would actually improve on paper given the circumstances they were in with all the free agents. It was inevitable that they were going to lose talent given the number of free agents combined with the rules of the salary cap. It isn't like they could let everyone walk and sign upgrades.


I think the larger issue is that Horst is getting bent over on these contract negotiations either by annual salary or length of term (and let's not forget the Middleton PO which makes me irate in principal more than functionality). There's no real creativity at play here, and given the crunch we were under, it was necessary.
User avatar
blazza18
RealGM
Posts: 40,482
And1: 15,407
Joined: Dec 02, 2010
       

Re: Shams: George Hill returns 3 years $29 million 

Post#158 » by blazza18 » Mon Jul 1, 2019 5:33 am

We kinda needed Horst to be a bit more ruthless. That way you bring everyone back and feel good about it. The evidence so far shows the opposite.
trwi7 wrote:Ban yourself you asshole.
LuessiT
Head Coach
Posts: 6,559
And1: 1,474
Joined: Jan 08, 2016
 

Re: Shams: George Hill returns 3 years $29 million 

Post#159 » by LuessiT » Mon Jul 1, 2019 5:37 am

skones wrote:
Ayt wrote:
El Duderino wrote:
It was bad timing to have four of the five starters and the 6th man on the team all being free agents at the same time, in a league which was swimming in cap space.


It is funny people thought the team would actually improve on paper given the circumstances they were in with all the free agents. It was inevitable that they were going to lose talent given the number of free agents combined with the rules of the salary cap. It isn't like they could let everyone walk and sign upgrades.


I think the larger issue is that Horst is getting bent over on these contract negotiations either by annual salary or length of term (and let's not forget the Middleton PO which makes me irate in principal more than functionality). There's no real creativity at play here, and given the crunch we were under, it was necessary.


I agree and kinda disagree. Creativity was needed but not right now but earlier.
Chuck Diesel
RealGM
Posts: 15,077
And1: 8,355
Joined: May 23, 2004

Re: Shams: George Hill returns 3 years $29 million 

Post#160 » by Chuck Diesel » Mon Jul 1, 2019 6:50 am

Ayt wrote:
El Duderino wrote:
jakecronus8 wrote:The Bucks spent roughly 259 million dollars today to be worse next year and people are acting like it’s a big win. I don’t get it.


It was bad timing to have four of the five starters and the 6th man on the team all being free agents at the same time, in a league which was swimming in cap space.


It is funny people thought the team would actually improve on paper given the circumstances they were in with all the free agents. It was inevitable that they were going to lose talent given the number of free agents combined with the rules of the salary cap. It isn't like they could let everyone walk and sign upgrades.


It wasn’t inevitable. They could have brought everyone back and worried about the luxury tax later.

Return to Milwaukee Bucks