emunney wrote:Not going to comment on the potential veracity of the "source" but I will say that I'd be happy with getting Vanderbilt.
Love me some Vanderbilt
Moderators: paulpressey25, MickeyDavis
emunney wrote:Not going to comment on the potential veracity of the "source" but I will say that I'd be happy with getting Vanderbilt.
emunney wrote:Haven't dug into their roster situation, but on the surface, it seems like total fantasy that they'd pull the QO.
LuessiT wrote:If we really can get Vanderbilt I want reemphasize how you want to utilize lesser draft capital in trades and not actually draft. Vanderbilt is a better prospect than anyone we could have got with #31 and trading #31 got us Allen (and let us dump Merrill), who again is a lot more talented than anyone we could have got with #31.
I'm not saying you never want to draft in the second round but the Bucks can attain such a high level of players for the minimum that the opportunity cost of offering a roster spot to a draftee is so high that as long as this fact remains you probably want to trade draft picks over drafting.
emunney wrote:If not for the dead money, we could do a S&T.
emunney wrote:If not for the dead money, we could do a S&T.
emunney wrote:If not for the dead money, we could do a S&T.
ShootingtheJ wrote:So we could offer Vanderbilt roughly 3 years $6.3 million. That's probably light, we'd have to talk him into how our player development a long with playing with Giannis will massively increase his market down the road.
ShootingtheJ wrote:emunney wrote:If not for the dead money, we could do a S&T.
Nah, we'd be hardcapped, and we're over the apron. Plus, what salary are we sending out?
slos wrote:ShootingtheJ wrote:So we could offer Vanderbilt roughly 3 years $6.3 million. That's probably light, we'd have to talk him into how our player development a long with playing with Giannis will massively increase his market down the road.
Minnesota would be so happy to match this. I don't know if it is legal but can we talk them into not matching and send them Diakite for the favor?
jschligs wrote:Am I the only one who doesn't know who the **** SupremeHustle is?
Badgerlander wrote:LuessiT wrote:If we really can get Vanderbilt I want reemphasize how you want to utilize lesser draft capital in trades and not actually draft. Vanderbilt is a better prospect than anyone we could have got with #31 and trading #31 got us Allen (and let us dump Merrill), who again is a lot more talented than anyone we could have got with #31.
I'm not saying you never want to draft in the second round but the Bucks can attain such a high level of players for the minimum that the opportunity cost of offering a roster spot to a draftee is so high that as long as this fact remains you probably want to trade draft picks over drafting.
Short term you are correct BUT the player you get at #31 should be under team control for ~6+ years. Allen is exactly what we needed and if we win it again then everything is golden but I just have this feeling that we are only keeping one of DDV or Allen come next year. I look over at the Hawks younger deep roster and then look at the end of our bench and think we could do better.
emunney wrote:ShootingtheJ wrote:emunney wrote:If not for the dead money, we could do a S&T.
Nah, we'd be hardcapped, and we're over the apron. Plus, what salary are we sending out?
Numbers could be off but I think we're over the apron because of the dead money. Probably Donte with something else coming back to us.
LuessiT wrote:If we were to bring in Vanderbilt it really would cut into Thanasis usefulness cause in the moments you want to mix it up defensively you probably go to him over Thanasis. Not sure what the plan is there but if it was cut and dry it would probably have been announced by now.