Bucks News, Trade Ideas, Transactions - No Politics

[thonnisbeastley]

It's a good thing that Khris Middleton, who isn't worth a max deal, didn't sign a max deal.

I can't stand this take when talking about his contract. The most he could've signed for was 5/190. He signed for $12M less than the absolute max, $2.4M/per less than it could have been. He's going to be making 35/38/40 over the next 3 years. That's essentially max money. He will be one of the most overpaid players in the league over the last 2 seasons of his deal unless he starts putting up 25ppg and plays well/makes a difference in the postseason. The contract probably wouldn't look so terrible if they had front loaded it or evened out the salary per/year. But he's definitely not a $40M player.

Lol, he's overpaid because of PPGZ? Yeah, carry on, I'll sit this one out

No, he's overpaid because he's overpaid. But if he's going to be making 38/40 per year, he needs to do more, Senor VORP.

[tydett]

Lol, guys, you don't trade 5 years' of draft picks for 20 games of a guy just so you can flip him for marginal players. Sunk cost fallacy is a huge thing.

[KidA24]

It's a good thing that Khris Middleton, who isn't worth a max deal, didn't sign a max deal.

I can't stand this take when talking about his contract. The most he could've signed for was 5/190. He signed for $12M less than the absolute max, $2.4M/per less than it could have been. He's going to be making 35/38/40 over the next 3 years. That's essentially max money. He will be one of the most overpaid players in the league over the last 2 seasons of his deal unless he starts putting up 25ppg and plays well/makes a difference in the postseason. The contract probably wouldn't look so terrible if they had front loaded it or evened out the salary per/year. But he's definitely not a $40M player.

Holy hell man. You're almost not worth engaging over this, but you cannot front load contracts in the NBA, you cannot smooth contracts in the NBA unless guys are taking a huge discount due to the rules of how contracts & raises must be structured by the CBA.

Go read this, then come back and spout something decent.

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q23

[StickeeFingaz]

10 games missed and motherfu***** act like they forgot about Jrue.

[thonnisbeastley]

It's a good thing that Khris Middleton, who isn't worth a max deal, didn't sign a max deal.

I can't stand this take when talking about his contract. The most he could've signed for was 5/190. He signed for $12M less than the absolute max, $2.4M/per less than it could have been. He's going to be making 35/38/40 over the next 3 years. That's essentially max money. He will be one of the most overpaid players in the league over the last 2 seasons of his deal unless he starts putting up 25ppg and plays well/makes a difference in the postseason. The contract probably wouldn't look so terrible if they had front loaded it or evened out the salary per/year. But he's definitely not a $40M player.

Everyone looks at Middleton for what he lacks compared to other top tier wings in the league but it’s all the little things he provides night in and night out like great passing, good defense and being an unselfish player which get overlooked by most Bucks fans. He will never be a #1 option on a contender but he does provide enough in his all around game to warrant a top 20 contract in this league. It was obvious based on last year’s play and All-NBA snub (garnered more votes than two players who made the 3rd team). Middleton does just as much as Scottie Pippen did during the Bulls’ two 3 peat runs.

I agree he should've gotten that 3rd All-NBA spot. But yeah, he's no Pippen, not even close. He's a shooter, and pretty average/slightly above average at everything else. I wouldn't call him a great passer and he dribbles the ball off of his foot at least once a game. He doesn't really create for his teammates and he can't really attack the basket. He's been average at best in the postseason outside of that BOS series a few years ago. Look, I think he is a great overall player and compliment to Giannis. I'm not **** on him, just his contract. He shouldn't be making 38/40 per in an NBA season, he's not that type of player.

[thonnisbeastley]

It's a good thing that Khris Middleton, who isn't worth a max deal, didn't sign a max deal.

I can't stand this take when talking about his contract. The most he could've signed for was 5/190. He signed for $12M less than the absolute max, $2.4M/per less than it could have been. He's going to be making 35/38/40 over the next 3 years. That's essentially max money. He will be one of the most overpaid players in the league over the last 2 seasons of his deal unless he starts putting up 25ppg and plays well/makes a difference in the postseason. The contract probably wouldn't look so terrible if they had front loaded it or evened out the salary per/year. But he's definitely not a $40M player.

Holy hell man. You're almost not worth engaging over this, but you cannot front load contracts in the NBA, you cannot smooth contracts in the NBA unless guys are taking a huge discount due to the rules of how contracts & raises must be structured by the CBA.

Go read this, then come back and spout something decent.

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q23

There are plenty of contracts in the NBA decreasing from first year - final year. There's no rule that players need to receive a raise every year in their contract, and plenty of examples to back that up. You linked to a 4 year old FAQ on max salaries. Middleton did not sign a full-max salary as others have condescendingly pointed out to prove that the Buck's didn't overpay. But they did, which was the whole point of my post.

[skones]

Saw this article today which suggests we trade Holiday and DiVicenzo to Charlotte for Rozier, Graham and their 2021 and 2023 1sts. As much as I like Jrue and Donte this deal returns similar offensive production along with some draft assets which could be flipped in trades to add better depth to our roster. It also drops our payroll by $8.3 million which allows us to add salary’s at the trade deadline. Personally I’d ask them to include Biyombo for a future 2nd since we could use the front court depth. Thoughts?
https://www.nbaanalysis.net/2021/02/27/nba-rumors-milwaukee-bucks-charlotte-hornets-trade-jrue-holiday/

I saw it this morning as well.

I'm a big no. Yah, picks come back but which of those two players are better than DDV? Argubly none.

That would be a massive step back for a team trying to win it all this season.

Sent from my HTC U11 using RealGM mobile app

It's a small sample yes, but it's really not debatable between who's better between Rozier and DDV right now. I think it's flying under the radar a bit but Rozier is 26 years old pumping out 21, 4, and 3 on 49.2/44.3/81.4. It's not arguably none. With that being said, it's still not a good deal for us as it pertains to use winning now.

[BigO]

No, we need a coach who knows how to defend teams when they adjust. Continuing to rearrange the deck chairs with the same captain is a recipe for failure.

Except for the fact the the defensive rating with the starters on the floor is very very good. Just need the backcourt reserves to not kill us.

Can you link where you saw this information? Two weeks ago, the starters as a unit were not rated high.

[skones]

It's a good thing that Khris Middleton, who isn't worth a max deal, didn't sign a max deal.

I can't stand this take when talking about his contract. The most he could've signed for was 5/190. He signed for $12M less than the absolute max, $2.4M/per less than it could have been. He's going to be making 35/38/40 over the next 3 years. That's essentially max money. He will be one of the most overpaid players in the league over the last 2 seasons of his deal unless he starts putting up 25ppg and plays well/makes a difference in the postseason. The contract probably wouldn't look so terrible if they had front loaded it or evened out the salary per/year. But he's definitely not a $40M player.

Holy hell man. You're almost not worth engaging over this, but you cannot front load contracts in the NBA, you cannot smooth contracts in the NBA unless guys are taking a huge discount due to the rules of how contracts & raises must be structured by the CBA.

Go read this, then come back and spout something decent.

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q23

FWIW, you can certainly front-load contracts in the NBA. You can't however, do that with max/maxish deals based on percent raises and maximum pay by years of contract/service/accolades.

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

I'm hoping they would, because my preference for Jrue is a S&T this offseason. I think of value as league wide consensus NOT what a few teams are willing to do. One team willing to give up positive value for Wiggins doesn't make Wiggins actual positive value when the greater majority of teams would scoff at the notion of doing so.

league wide consensus is called a team friendly deal. any deal all the teams would take would be massive under value for jrue. i dont care if clothes, cars, gold, electronics...anything..... if you sell something at a price that everybody would jump on it then it means you sold it too low. thats just common sense

I don't think you understand what "league wise consensus" means if you think it means a team friendly deal. That's not at all when consensus means. The league wide consensus can CERTAINLY be that a deal signed is a horrible deal. See: Mosgov, Timofey or Plumlee, Miles.

Sent from my SM-N986U1 using RealGM mobile app

i wouId agree pIayers can Iose vaIue virtuaIIy overnight unIike other things so there is that.... but theres a reason 90% of contracts are panned by fans in the offseason and its because market vaIues are aImost aIways set by just a handfuI of interested teams. the idea there wouId be Ieague wide consensus on a guy wouId aImost aIways mean the deaI is Iike a "no brainer". maybe were taIiking about two different things tho?

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

if 5-6 teams wouId offer jrue max or near max then isnt he a max? its not to say every team wouId vaIue him based on their own roster constructions and saIary situations but i wouId wager we wouId be IiteraIIy the Ieast incIined team in the Ieague to give up a pg Ike jrue over the cap. IiteraIIy he has more vaIue to us than anybody eIse by a miIe. our hands are going to be tied regardIess with giannis on who we sign, were in the tax, Iike aII contenders our abiIity to improve wiII be Iimited..... what possibIe reason wouId we be worried about saving money for the onIy better option wouId be 1st and 2nd team aII nba ers

[skones]

league wide consensus is called a team friendly deal. any deal all the teams would take would be massive under value for jrue. i dont care if clothes, cars, gold, electronics...anything..... if you sell something at a price that everybody would jump on it then it means you sold it too low. thats just common sense

I don't think you understand what "league wise consensus" means if you think it means a team friendly deal. That's not at all when consensus means. The league wide consensus can CERTAINLY be that a deal signed is a horrible deal. See: Mosgov, Timofey or Plumlee, Miles.

Sent from my SM-N986U1 using RealGM mobile app

i wouId agree pIayers can Iose vaIue virtuaIIy overnight unIike other things so there is that.... but theres a reason 90% of contracts are panned by fans in the offseason and its because market vaIues are aImost aIways set by just a handfuI of interested teams. the idea there wouId be Ieague wide consensus on a guy wouId aImost aIways mean the deaI is Iike a "no brainer". maybe were taIiking about two different things tho?

You're assuming league wide consensus works only one way. Consensus is agreement. It does not mean ONLY an agreement in favor of a deal. It can also mean that most everyone can agree a deal is bad. I don't know how more plain I can put it. Thus league consensus on a deal certainly does not automatically equates to "team friendly."

As far as value, look at it this way, I have a pen, you have a contract to sign in front of you, doesn't matter what it is, you want to sign it, you need to, you need a pen. I have a pen, it's worth 50 cents. I tell you, you can have it for $2, because I know you need the pen. Your willingness to pay that $2 in that moment does not change the way everyone else feels about this pen being worth a mere 50 cents. Market price and market value are two different things. That $2 represents market price, not value, as in real estate for example.

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

I don't think you understand what "league wise consensus" means if you think it means a team friendly deal. That's not at all when consensus means. The league wide consensus can CERTAINLY be that a deal signed is a horrible deal. See: Mosgov, Timofey or Plumlee, Miles.

Sent from my SM-N986U1 using RealGM mobile app

i wouId agree pIayers can Iose vaIue virtuaIIy overnight unIike other things so there is that.... but theres a reason 90% of contracts are panned by fans in the offseason and its because market vaIues are aImost aIways set by just a handfuI of interested teams. the idea there wouId be Ieague wide consensus on a guy wouId aImost aIways mean the deaI is Iike a "no brainer". maybe were taIiking about two different things tho?

You're assuming league wide consensus works only one way. Consensus is agreement. It does not mean ONLY an agreement in favor of a deal. It can also mean that most everyone can agree a deal is bad. I don't know how more plain I can put it. Thus league consensus on a deal certainly does not automatically equates to "team friendly."

As far as value, look at it this way, I have a pen, you have a contract to sign in front of you, doesn't matter what it is, you want to sign it, you need to, you need a pen. I have a pen, it's worth 50 cents. I tell you, you can have it for $2, because I know you need the pen. Your willingness to pay that $2 in that moment does not change the way everyone else feels about this pen being worth a mere 50 cents. Market price and market value are two different things. That $2 represents market price, not value, as in real estate for example.

id argue the pen is worth 2 doIIars if 5 guys had pens in the room and nobody was coming off the 2 bucks. and pens you saw the week before somepiace eIse for .50 have no reIevence to that room or that week either. vaIue and/or market price is not what you once saw that guy before, over there, once seII a pen for. if jrue signs for Iess than the max its because forces besides market or vaIue are infIuencing his decision. imo.....us demanding some sort of coupon deaI after we showed him how much we vaIue him with that trade wouId be moronic not to mention insuIting

[skones]

i wouId agree pIayers can Iose vaIue virtuaIIy overnight unIike other things so there is that.... but theres a reason 90% of contracts are panned by fans in the offseason and its because market vaIues are aImost aIways set by just a handfuI of interested teams. the idea there wouId be Ieague wide consensus on a guy wouId aImost aIways mean the deaI is Iike a "no brainer". maybe were taIiking about two different things tho?

You're assuming league wide consensus works only one way. Consensus is agreement. It does not mean ONLY an agreement in favor of a deal. It can also mean that most everyone can agree a deal is bad. I don't know how more plain I can put it. Thus league consensus on a deal certainly does not automatically equates to "team friendly."

As far as value, look at it this way, I have a pen, you have a contract to sign in front of you, doesn't matter what it is, you want to sign it, you need to, you need a pen. I have a pen, it's worth 50 cents. I tell you, you can have it for $2, because I know you need the pen. Your willingness to pay that $2 in that moment does not change the way everyone else feels about this pen being worth a mere 50 cents. Market price and market value are two different things. That $2 represents market price, not value, as in real estate for example.

id argue the pen is worth 2 doIIars if 5 guys had pens in the room and nobody was coming off the 2 bucks. and pens you saw the week before somepiace eIse for .50 have no reIevence to that room or that week either. vaIue and/or market price is not what you once saw that guy before, over there, once seII a pen for. if jrue signs for Iess than the max its because forces besides market or vaIue are infIuencing his decision. imo.....us demanding some sort of coupon deaI after we showed him how much we vaIue him with that trade wouId be moronic not to mention insuIting

A) I'm not going any further with this. We obviously disagree and I feel like you're just making me repeat myself because you're not listening.

B) Adding conditions to my scenario doesn't change what my scenario means, it creates an entirely different scenario. But I'll play anyway. Those pens don't exist in that room because that room isn't a vacuum.

C) You misunderstand what market value and/or price are in real estate which is important given that's the context I'm using. Value is " the opinion of what a property would sell for in a competitive market based on the features and benefits of that property (the value), the overall real estate market, supply and demand, and what other similar properties have sold for in the same condition." Price is what a single qualified buyer is willing to play. These things are not the same thing, as I've already stated. Yet, for whatever reason, you're continually insisting they are.

D) I literally don't want Jrue on a mammoth long term deal, and I'm not demanding a "coupon deal." If he doesn't want to sign at a much lesser number, start looking at S&T scenarios and let us know. If not, buh bye. Thanks for the one year in service, it didn't work, time to move on.

[Fotis St]

I repeat. So so so SO stupid to sign Jrue to sign a long term extension right now.

It was so so so so stupid to sign Henson on a long term deal
It was so so so so stupid to sign Delly on a long term deal
It was so so so so stupid to sign Plumlee on a long term deal
It was so so so so stupid to sign Snell on a long term deal with a Player Option

This is what Bucks Org Does ...

So signing Jrue on a long term deal after the boatload of picks we gave up for him is not stupid.

Anyway I know where your argument comes from. Maybe you could begin to realize how me and DavidDunn21 feel about Khris all those years.

We don't hate the players we just evaluate them lower than most of you. Till now they have shown that they are not superstars , I believe they are actually elite role players on a Championship team.

Don't hate me for being honest. I wish we win it all , I still support them , I would be super happy to prove me wrong and win it all, but I am more times right than wrong.

Recent example : Lavine was my No1 Priority in the off season .

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

You're assuming league wide consensus works only one way. Consensus is agreement. It does not mean ONLY an agreement in favor of a deal. It can also mean that most everyone can agree a deal is bad. I don't know how more plain I can put it. Thus league consensus on a deal certainly does not automatically equates to "team friendly."

As far as value, look at it this way, I have a pen, you have a contract to sign in front of you, doesn't matter what it is, you want to sign it, you need to, you need a pen. I have a pen, it's worth 50 cents. I tell you, you can have it for $2, because I know you need the pen. Your willingness to pay that $2 in that moment does not change the way everyone else feels about this pen being worth a mere 50 cents. Market price and market value are two different things. That $2 represents market price, not value, as in real estate for example.

id argue the pen is worth 2 doIIars if 5 guys had pens in the room and nobody was coming off the 2 bucks. and pens you saw the week before somepiace eIse for .50 have no reIevence to that room or that week either. vaIue and/or market price is not what you once saw that guy before, over there, once seII a pen for. if jrue signs for Iess than the max its because forces besides market or vaIue are infIuencing his decision. imo.....us demanding some sort of coupon deaI after we showed him how much we vaIue him with that trade wouId be moronic not to mention insuIting

A) I'm not going any further with this. We obviously disagree and I feel like you're just making me repeat myself because you're not listening.

B) Adding conditions to my scenario doesn't change what my scenario means, it creates an entirely different scenario. But I'll play anyway. Those pens don't exist in that room because that room isn't a vacuum.

C) You misunderstand what market value and/or price are in real estate which is important given that's the context I'm using. Value is " the opinion of what a property would sell for in a competitive market based on the features and benefits of that property (the value), the overall real estate market, supply and demand, and what other similar properties have sold for in the same condition." Price is what a single qualified buyer is willing to play. These things are not the same thing, as I've already stated. Yet, for whatever reason, you're continually insisting they are.

D) I literally don't want Jrue on a mammoth long term deal, and I'm not demanding a "coupon deal." If he doesn't want to sign at a much lesser number, start looking at S&T scenarios and let us know. If not, buh bye. Thanks for the one year in service, it didn't work, time to move on.

i hear what youre saying and just disagree in the strongest regard. with giannis extended it just doesnt even cross my mind he shouIdnt be extended with IiteraIIy a bIank check assuming were agreed others wouId offer him that. he shouId make from us what others wouId offer. but.....i think youre a good poster so as you said there isnt anything Ieft to discuss here.... I wiII continue to enjoy your posts eIsewhere

[DingleJerry]

Saw this article today which suggests we trade Holiday and DiVicenzo to Charlotte for Rozier, Graham and their 2021 and 2023 1sts. As much as I like Jrue and Donte this deal returns similar offensive production along with some draft assets which could be flipped in trades to add better depth to our roster. It also drops our payroll by $8.3 million which allows us to add salary’s at the trade deadline. Personally I’d ask them to include Biyombo for a future 2nd since we could use the front court depth. Thoughts?
https://www.nbaanalysis.net/2021/02/27/nba-rumors-milwaukee-bucks-charlotte-hornets-trade-jrue-holiday/

I saw it this morning as well.

I'm a big no. Yah, picks come back but which of those two players are better than DDV? Argubly none.

That would be a massive step back for a team trying to win it all this season.

Sent from my HTC U11 using RealGM mobile app

It's a small sample yes, but it's really not debatable between who's better between Rozier and DDV right now. I think it's flying under the radar a bit but Rozier is 26 years old pumping out 21, 4, and 3 on 49.2/44.3/81.4. It's not arguably none. With that being said, it's still not a good deal for us as it pertains to use winning now.

I saw this idea last night too and I actually think I would do it. Your getting two guys back that align better age-wise with Giannis and they're both shooters which is what we need in the playoffs. IMO, due to that skillset I value both over DDV, while loving everything else DDV brings. As most know, I'm all about getting more bucket getters here around Giannis. Plus, we recoup some draft picks for flexibility to try something else down the line.

Basically though, I view this year as out for title contention. PRetty much next year too with our setup now and BKN/LAL what they are. So then we're into Jrue getting to 33ish years old. Something like this trade I think gets us younger and probably can't win titles the next two years but gets us younger and more flex to try and put that team together in the next 5 years.

[skones]

I saw this idea last night too and I actually think I would do it. Your getting two guys back that align better age-wise with Giannis and they're both shooters which is what we need in the playoffs. IMO, due to that skillset I value both over DDV, while loving everything else DDV brings. As most know, I'm all about getting more bucket getters here around Giannis. Plus, we recoup some draft picks for flexibility to try something else down the line.

Basically though, I view this year as out for title contention. PRetty much next year too with our setup now and BKN/LAL what they are. So then we're into Jrue getting to 33ish years old. Something like this trade I think gets us younger and probably can't win titles the next two years but gets us younger and more flex to try and put that team together in the next 5 years.

I suggest you take a deeper look at Graham. He's been hot garbage this year on 35.2/34.7/77.5. Last season he was 38.2/37.3/82.0. He was comfortably below league average efficiency last season and he's WAY under this season. I'd rather just cut out the DDV/Graham portion of the deal.

[DingleJerry]

I saw this idea last night too and I actually think I would do it. Your getting two guys back that align better age-wise with Giannis and they're both shooters which is what we need in the playoffs. IMO, due to that skillset I value both over DDV, while loving everything else DDV brings. As most know, I'm all about getting more bucket getters here around Giannis. Plus, we recoup some draft picks for flexibility to try something else down the line.

Basically though, I view this year as out for title contention. PRetty much next year too with our setup now and BKN/LAL what they are. So then we're into Jrue getting to 33ish years old. Something like this trade I think gets us younger and probably can't win titles the next two years but gets us younger and more flex to try and put that team together in the next 5 years.

I suggest you take a deeper look at Graham. He's been hot garbage this year on 35.2/34.7/77.5. Last season he was 38.2/37.3/82.0. He was comfortably below league average efficiency last season and he's WAY under this season. I'd rather just cut out the DDV/Graham portion of the deal.

I'm confident he'd thrive with Giannis. But yea, I'd have not beef cutting out that side of it too. I certainly see an argument for DDV over him, and I do love DDV so I'd be fine with that too. Guess it depends how Cha values it. If they view Graham as better than DDV, yea let them keep and get better picks in return or something. If they view DDV as better so they're giving us Graham + stuff then I'd take it. If they view it as a push, well I'm fine either way. But I'd take the shooting/scoring upside.

[Ron Swanson]

I'll never understand this dumb obsession with the max guy label. There's only about 10 or so (if even that) players in any given year that are actually "worth" 30% of your salary cap. If another team would give said player a max contract, then what, you just cash out for prospects and draft picks just because the guy isn't a superstar? Lot of cheap-skate and penny-pinching armchair GM's that would rather have endless cap flexibility with no "worthy" players to spend it on. I'm not even the biggest Jrue fan but you basically have to retain him outside of some nightmare scenario (injury/major playoff collapse). Terry Rozier? C'mon....hell no.