Bucks get their pg from Bulls

drosereturn · Post #1 » by **drosereturn** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 3:20 am

Bucks seem to lack playmaking and scoring from their awful bench.
How about Bledsoe plus Divincenzo for Sato and White with a possible Kris Dunn sign and trade if needed?
Bucks get a more pure pg and a 6th man yr type developing rookie with high usage.
Bulls get their starting pg after missing out on Brogdon sweepstakes and get Lavines future replacement.

Pipp33 · Post #2 » by **Pipp33** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 7:25 am

drosereturn wrote:Bucks seem to lack playmaking and scoring from their awful bench.
How about Bledsoe plus Divincenzo for Sato and White with a possible Kris Dunn sign and trade if needed?
Bucks get a more pure pg and a 6th man yr type developing rookie with high usage.
Bulls get their starting pg after missing out on Brogdon sweepstakes and get Lavines future replacement.

Bulls should not give up White for Bledsoe. Bledsoe should be a 6th/7th man on a good team, not a starting PG. He's a good solid gaurd, but average shooter at best. White may never be much better than he is now, but he can get hot quickly and at worst looks like being a great bench scorer

skones · Post #3 » by **skones** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 7:33 am

Milwaukee gives up the two best players in this deal, so that's gonna be a pretty emphatic no from me. No better way to fix an "awful bench" than to deal two better players for two worse ones.

shagadelic45 · Post #4 » by **shagadelic45** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 11:27 am

sato and sweetener for bledsoe.........

PlayerUp · Post #5 » by **PlayerUp** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 12:57 pm

shagadelic45 wrote:sato and sweetener for bledsoe.........

Define sweetener? Can that sweetener be Felicio?

PlayerUp · Post #6 » by **PlayerUp** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 12:58 pm

Bulls are not in win mode right now. They don't need 30+ year old vets. They tried that added Thad Young, Wade, Rondo and the list goes on. It does not work until you have a player to build around which the Bulls do not have currently. Be patient and wait for AK to transform this team.

Post #7 » by **NuggetsWY** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 1:30 pm

PlayerUp wrote:Bulls are not in win mode right now. They don't need 30+ year old vets. They tried that added Thad Young, Wade, Rondo and the list goes on. It does not work until you have a player to build around which the Bulls do not have currently. Be patient and wait for AK to transform this team.

THIS!

ChettheJet · Post #8 » by **ChettheJet** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 2:23 pm

No way the Bulls do that, just no way. Get older, take on more money with no room for growth. If Bledsoe isn't enough of a PG to play with one of the biggest stars in the league how does he possibly help the Bulls? Check, he got fewer assists than Lavine this year and who had a 28PPg scorer to throw passes to?

drosereturn · Post #9 » by **drosereturn** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 4:00 pm

skones wrote:Milwaukee gives up the two best players in this deal, so that's gonna be a pretty emphatic no from me. No better way to fix an "awful bench" than to deal two better players for two worse ones.

No doubt they are better now, but thats not the point. You get better friendly contracts with a better fit by improved playmaking and bolster the bench with White who scored like 20+ for the last month straight. Better talent means nothing when they dont fit together which is why they are available in trade talks. Bledsoe is the type of player to do much better on a lottery team which is why has more value to the Bulls than the Bucks.

chrbal · Post #10 » by **chrbal** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 4:26 pm

Bledsoe/Wilson for Satoranský/Young

Bulls add a solid veteran point guard and take a chance on Wilson. The bucks get two players who better fit their needs without really adding major payroll.

db-coop · Post #11 » by **db-coop** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 4:29 pm

drosereturn wrote:No doubt they are better now, but thats not the point. You get better friendly contracts with a better fit by improved playmaking and bolster the bench with White who scored like 20+ for the last month straight. Better talent means nothing when they dont fit together which is why they are available in trade talks. Bledsoe is the type of player to do much better on a lottery team which is why has more value to the Bulls than the Bucks.

I don't see why Milwaukee would want to downgrade their lineup. I think Milwaukee needs to make a significant move to improve whether that is trading for Chris Paul or getting a more switchy lineup that doesn't include Lopez. If I was the Bucks I would use my time trying to find such a move and work out any smaller deals to improve the fit after this. Fundamentally I don't see this trade helping them in the short term the way they would like. They need Bledsoes salary to trade out in a big trade likely anyway.

For Chicago I also don't see it. Chicago is sort of trapped in the middle. Long term I think there is a better chance White is special than Divincenzo so I would rather keep white. I still think they will be stuck in no mans land with Bledsoe so why make the deal. I would probably look around for picks or young players with high upside and try to trade Porter/Lavine/Young if someone values any of them enough to give me something good for them.

Post #12 » by **Texas Chuck** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 4:46 pm

Bucks never ever turn this down. Sato is an easier salary matching contract to move and White has more value than DDV. So they would immediately agree before Chicago came to their senses and ask for a couple days before making it official while rounding up a 3rd team to forward Sato/White/pick for to get the offensive PG they need.

Bulls package is just flat worth more so the Bucks would absolutely leverage that.

skones · Post #13 » by **skones** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 7:47 pm

Texas Chuck wrote:Bucks never ever turn this down. Sato is an easier salary matching contract to move and White has more value than DDV. So they would immediately agree before Chicago came to their senses and ask for a couple days before making it official while rounding up a 3rd team to forward Sato/White/pick for to get the offensive PG they need.

Bulls package is just flat worth more so the Bucks would absolutely leverage that.

These things are both just wrong. Satoransky is not an "easier salary matching contract to move." Milwaukee will be looking to consolidate players for higher levels of talent. Going from an 17M to 10M doesn't help the cause at all when you're already trying to nickel and dime as is.

On top of that, you're pretty consistently WAY off on how Milwaukee values DDV, and how I feel he should be valued in general. He's more the the "meh" piece you consistently tout in trade proposals.

Post #14 » by **Texas Chuck** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 8:00 pm

skones wrote:
Texas Chuck wrote:Bucks never ever turn this down. Sato is an easier salary matching contract to move and White has more value than DDV. So they would immediately agree before Chicago came to their senses and ask for a couple days before making it official while rounding up a 3rd team to forward Sato/White/pick for to get the offensive PG they need.

Bulls package is just flat worth more so the Bucks would absolutely leverage that.

These things are both just wrong. Satoransky is not an "easier salary matching contract to move." Milwaukee will be looking to consolidate players for higher levels of talent. Going from an 17M to 10M doesn't help the cause at all when you're already trying to nickel and dime as is.

On top of that, you're pretty consistently WAY off on how Milwaukee values DDV, and how I feel he should be valued in general. He's more the the "meh" piece you consistently tout in trade proposals.

I'm wrong or I just disagree with you? One could argue that my take might be likely to be as accurate if not more because of no attachment to the players, right?

But we can let others weigh in. I'm willing to defer to the group's view on this and can acknowledge if I'm the outlier. But I believe Sato/White is a clearly better trade package than Bledsoe/DDV and the salary difference can be made up readily for all but Chris Paul not that it's relevant in a 3 team deal because the Bucks get credit for Bledsoe's salary not Sato's.

skones · Post #15 » by **skones** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 8:04 pm

Texas Chuck wrote:
skones wrote:
Texas Chuck wrote:Bucks never ever turn this down. Sato is an easier salary matching contract to move and White has more value than DDV. So they would immediately agree before Chicago came to their senses and ask for a couple days before making it official while rounding up a 3rd team to forward Sato/White/pick for to get the offensive PG they need.

Bulls package is just flat worth more so the Bucks would absolutely leverage that.

These things are both just wrong. Satoransky is not an "easier salary matching contract to move." Milwaukee will be looking to consolidate players for higher levels of talent. Going from an 17M to 10M doesn't help the cause at all when you're already trying to nickel and dime as is.

On top of that, you're pretty consistently WAY off on how Milwaukee values DDV, and how I feel he should be valued in general. He's more the the "meh" piece you consistently tout in trade proposals.

I'm wrong or I just disagree with you? One could argue that my take might be likely to be as accurate if not more because of no attachment to the players, right?

But we can let others weigh in. I'm willing to defer to the group's view on this and can acknowledge if I'm the outlier. But I believe Sato/White is a clearly better trade package than Bledsoe/DDV and the salary difference can be made up readily for all but Chris Paul not that it's relevant in a 3 team deal because the Bucks get credit for Bledsoe's salary not Sato's.

You're legitimately wrong. A) This is CERTAINLY not the direction Milwaukee would move in, and B) I'm spot on when it comes to matching contracts. The Bucks lack larger deals to move, Bledsoe represents that, Satoransky doesn't. It's just really not that debatable. Could it be different under different salary circumstances? Sure, but you have to work within the context of your own salary cap situation. 10M dollars is an MLE level deal in 2020. It makes it more difficult to deal for guys in the 25-30M dollar range.

Post #16 » by **Texas Chuck** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 8:06 pm

skones wrote:
Texas Chuck wrote:
skones wrote:
These things are both just wrong. Satoransky is not an "easier salary matching contract to move." Milwaukee will be looking to consolidate players for higher levels of talent. Going from an 17M to 10M doesn't help the cause at all when you're already trying to nickel and dime as is.

On top of that, you're pretty consistently WAY off on how Milwaukee values DDV, and how I feel he should be valued in general. He's more the the "meh" piece you consistently tout in trade proposals.

I'm wrong or I just disagree with you? One could argue that my take might be likely to be as accurate if not more because of no attachment to the players, right?

But we can let others weigh in. I'm willing to defer to the group's view on this and can acknowledge if I'm the outlier. But I believe Sato/White is a clearly better trade package than Bledsoe/DDV and the salary difference can be made up readily for all but Chris Paul not that it's relevant in a 3 team deal because the Bucks get credit for Bledsoe's salary not Sato's.

You're legitimately wrong. A) This is CERTAINLY not the direction Milwaukee would move in, and B) I'm spot on when it comes to matching contracts. The Bucks lack larger deals to move, Bledsoe represents that, Satoransky doesn't. It's just really not that debatable. Could it be different under different salary circumstances? Sure, but you have to work within the context of your own salary cap situation. 10M dollars is an MLE level deal in 2020. It makes it more difficult to deal for guys in the 25-30M dollar range.

Again, I suggested a 3 team deal. So I'm certainly not wrong about the salary matching even if you put it in all caps.

Post #17 » by **Ruzious** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 8:16 pm

Everyone seems to think the Bucks need to trade Bledsoe but me. He had a good regular season and laid an egg in the playoffs again, but I think it's reasonable to assume part of that was because he was playing hurt. I can't recall the injury, but he missed a game from it and probably came back too soon. If they trade him now, they're most likely not going to improve the talent base, so I'd be fine with keeping him.

Post #18 » by **Texas Chuck** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 8:25 pm

Ruzious wrote:Everyone seems to think the Bucks need to trade Bledsoe but me. He had a good regular season and laid an egg in the playoffs again, but I think it's reasonable to assume part of that was because he was playing hurt. I can't recall the injury, but he missed a game from it and probably came back too soon. If they trade him now, they're most likely not going to improve the talent base, so I'd be fine with keeping him.

It goes beyond just another massive playoff flop by Bledsoe though. It was Miami showing the whole league how you solve the Bucks--they simply don't have enough shooters to be afraid of. And they had Giannis doing his thing, plus a little Middleton iso and then nothing. They need another creator desperately and they need more dead eye shooting. And Bledsoe is clearly the most expendable guy with any salary for matching.

You could use Lopez and move Giannis to center and I'm okay with that, but then you still have the same shooting issues. I'd be stunned if Bledsoe starts next season with the Bucks. Stunned.

WICKED17 · Post #19 » by **WICKED17** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 9:07 pm

Sorry but proposed deal is beyond terrible for the Bulls.
Bucks would accept this deal in a nanosecond.

Post #20 » by **Ruzious** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 9:27 pm

Texas Chuck wrote:
Ruzious wrote:Everyone seems to think the Bucks need to trade Bledsoe but me. He had a good regular season and laid an egg in the playoffs again, but I think it's reasonable to assume part of that was because he was playing hurt. I can't recall the injury, but he missed a game from it and probably came back too soon. If they trade him now, they're most likely not going to improve the talent base, so I'd be fine with keeping him.

It goes beyond just another massive playoff flop by Bledsoe though. It was Miami showing the whole league how you solve the Bucks--they simply don't have enough shooters to be afraid of. And they had Giannis doing his thing, plus a little Middleton iso and then nothing. They need another creator desperately and they need more dead eye shooting. And Bledsoe is clearly the most expendable guy with any salary for matching.

You could use Lopez and move Giannis to center and I'm okay with that, but then you still have the same shooting issues. I'd be stunned if Bledsoe starts next season with the Bucks. Stunned.

This thinking that there's no possible way to improve the team without trading Bledsoe seems nuts to me. I think their management needs to be a little more creative than that. DDV and Hill were also massive dropoffs - not just Bledsoe. They were the 3 point shooters the team needed - but that was before the season started back up. Some players just didn't adjust when the season started back up. Next season may or may not be different for them. And I don't buy that Miami showed anything about the Bucks. Milwaukee had already dropped big-time before the playoffs started, and everyone could see that. What Miami showed is that Miami is one helluva team that improved without people seeming to notice.