RealGM

Joe at this point isnt worth enough to land us a high teir pg unless we package him.. it would be a high mistake to trade him.. how bout we trade redd and mo first.. you will get no where in this league trading talent that hasnt had time to play one game in the league.. this is just ludacris thinking..

Sigra wrote:

John6988 wrote:How bout we give our rookies a chance to develop before we continue to trade them away.

Nah. That is for rebuilding teams. We are in win-now direction and we actually use our young talents and "potentials" to get real players and grown people. Hint: See Yi

you know there can be a combination of the 2.... It doesnt HAVE to be "win now" or "win later".

We can keep young talent for "later" and also get the vet guys (redd and RJ) for "now"

Sigra wrote:#1
Trade Redd for AK47

#2
Trade Mo and Gadz for AV and expiring contract(s)

#3
Trade Alexander, CV and Mason for Rip Hamilton

#4
Sign free agent Duhon

#5
Re-sign Ersan Iliasova

#6
Sign new contract with Bogut

Starting 5:
Sessions
Rip
RJ
AK47
Bogut

Bench:
Duhon
Bell
Mbah A Moute
Ersan
AV

Do you like that team? Can they score? Can they defend? Are they going to have good chemistry? Are they good fit with Skiles? Other thoughts?

Hell no! That is too soft...

Some of you should just stop. LOL. Please....You are even bringing in the type of players even the GM and Coach said he is looking for!

What do you need with AK with Alexander and Jefferson here? And what the hell does Varejo bring to you except goofy ass flops and a mop as his lid?

And then you have Ersan on top of that...I think some of you do things just to get a reaction rather then make sense.

What good does this team do you? This team is worse then the team we have now! We have not won in so long some of you do not know what it takes to win in the NBA.

This team will be overmatched every night.

#2, #4, and #5 I am good with.

#2
Trade Mo and Gadz for AV and expiring contract(s)
#4
Sign free agent Duhon
#5
Re-sign Ersan Iliasova

That leaves us with

Sessions / Duhon / Bell
Redd / RJ / Bell
RJ / JA / Ersan / Moute
CV / AV / Ersan
Bogut / AV

I could live with that.

RAtheMONsession wrote:
you know there can be a combination of the 2.... It doesnt HAVE to be "win now" or "win later".

We can keep young talent for "later" and also get the vet guys (redd and RJ) for "now"

That is what killed Bucks in last 20 years. No clear direction.

Sigra with that line of thinking you can say that no team in the league has any clear direction.. or directions is simple.. get better.. make more money.. but from a business standpoint everyone knows you cant do that all in one day.. that takes time.. we are building our team while still trying to remain competative.. good idea to me.. does that mean a title.. most likely not.. playoff in the future? possibly but not every year.. it would be crazy to trade our young talent until we know what we have (ie Mo and Redd). we are going in the right direction but all of the people that are on here arent GMs simply because we come up with these ideas that are just crazy.. Joe is a great talent and good be a good player in the league.. trading him would be a death sentence for most GMs because if he pans out you look horribly bad.. give it some time..

I like it, Ilhan.

For al those who complain this team would be too soft, we're replacing:
Mo with Duhon
Redd with Rip
CV with AK
Yi with Ersan
Gadz with AV
Mason with Mbah a Moute

I'd say each and everyone of those replacements is tougher than the player we have now, except maybe for Des. We'd still lack some muscle inside, but less than last year.

I'm not sure about AK playing PF, iirc he prefers to play SF.

The bench lacks scoring though, too many defenders/role players and not enough creativity. (sorry Charlie)

If you try to sit on 2 chairs at the same time, you will end up with your ass on the ground. God knows Bucks did all of this years.

John6988 wrote:Joe at this point isnt worth enough to land us a high teir pg unless we package him.. it would be a high mistake to trade him.. how bout we trade redd and mo first.. you will get no where in this league trading talent that hasnt had time to play one game in the league.. this is just ludacris thinking..

I don't believe that to be true at all. Plenty of trades are made over the years between the end of a team's season and the draft that involve a 1st round draft pick as an asset, and that draft pick basically represents the ability to secure the almost exclusive rights to "talent that hasn't had time to play one game in the league"

Then you have trades made on draft day itself involving draft rights to the players selected (this is the current status Joe Alexander is in ). Then you continue through the end of June, the end of the then current season. Then you still see these players involved in trades from time to time. On top of that, you can sign your draft pick to their rookie scale contract (the most popular time to do this is during the July Moratorium, since this is one of the few things you are permitted to do and it factors in to getting the player into summer league) and then still trade them 30 days after you sign them.

The 30 day rule is something that was an explicit rule change in the 2005 CBA. In the 1999 CBA, the same trade restriction that applied to a free agent signing (the later of three months or December 15th) applied to draft rookies. NBA front offices were interested in greater flexibility with being able to trade an asset that they selected in the draft without having to keep him in unsigned limbo or then wait until a significant portion of the season was over before trading him, if they are unable to make some kind of trade before/on draft day or before July 1st.

Boston didn't really care that they were trading talent that hadn't yet played in the NBA when they traded away what the 5th pick which they could have used on either Jeff Green or Yi. Did adding Ray Allen to that team make them a title contender at that point? Not especially. It was a step in the right direction though. You have to start somewhere.

To the broader point about keeping youth vs. win-now mode, I am not one who believes that the two are mutually exclusive. During recent weeks when circumstances were such that time was so short I ended up not posting, I really grew frustrated at times reading how various attempts to improve the team with any player who had more than 4 years of experience was pointless and unwise, since most of the individual moves suggested would not make the Bucks a lock to win a championship after only that move.

I saw suggestions that a move would make sense if we were only seemingly that move away from being a title contender. It is hard to be one move away without making a series of move.
Move X might not make a team one move away, but if they make move X, and follow it up at some point (either very soon after move X or at some point a few months down the road, it can vary) with move Y, and then move Z, they might have just put something together that gets them in the position to be ready to make a title run should they enjoy a bit of good fortune.

Every team that wins the title comes across some portion of good fortune on their way. You really need to catch some kind of significant break. Even if that significant break is that your 9 best players have very little problems with injuries that season/postseason. Or you are part of a favorable trade, etc.
The key is to do what you can to make yourself a good enough team that if some good fortune is bestowed upon you, then you can seize the day and try to ride that wave to a championship.

Things can turn very quickly in either direction in the NBA. Look at Miami between winning their championship and this past season (and now they have a chance to rise back up if they make the right moves). Same for Chicago during basically that same time period. On the other side, you had teams like the Lakers and the Celtics who were completely in disarray it seemed. And it can happen QUICKLY. A year ago at this time may people couldn't fathom why Kobe wouldn't want to go to a significantly better team (the Bulls) and get away from that sub-par Lakers team.
And you can't even just dismiss that with the argument that the Lakers were "gifted" Gasol or whatever. Things had already turned for the Lakers long before that (the Gasol trade allowed them to not only survive Bynum's injury, but to actually improve over what they were with Bynum).

When the Hornets signed Peja to that ginormous contract, it had some people scratching their heads (I might have been one of them, I can't seem to recall). As if Peja was going to be part of some title run the Hornets might make...
Well...

Many examples over many years.

You do not have to completely abandon all of your young players when trying to win now, or vice-versa. Boston didn't go further and try to trade Rondo and Perkins for veterans. The Pistons didn't do the same with Stuckey and Maxiel. And other examples.

On the flip side, I think you have to make sure you are getting enough value out of your assets. The above players that I just mentioned (and others) were assets that those teams got good value from. Their low salaries were of course a factor there.

For the Bucks, I share Sigra's belief that keeping Joe Alexander is not maximizing his value for us. He seems like he would have a higher value to a team that would be looking to use him more at SF both now and in the future. Unless we are going to try and put some big lineups out there with Jefferson getting minutes at SG, Jefferson is going to be eating up 37mpg of those 48 SF minutes. That really leaves only 11mpg for Alexander.
Can he really provide enough value for us playing PF for us to not justify using him as a trade asset? I am currently of the opinion he cannot. That is really a very important variable here.

You can say he might not be ready his rookie season for too many minutes anyway, so it won't be a problem, but that doesn't really help the case for not trading him, IMO.

It isn't just about trading away youth though. I am not clamoring to trade away Sessions, for example. For one thing, unlike Alexander to this point, we've seen some of what Sessions can do against other NBA players during NBA games. PG is such a crucial position (especially relative to SG and SF) that having a good starter as well as a good backup is very important. Having a guy like Sessions either as your 1st string or 2nd string PG seems to fit in well in this model, especially if the other PG you bring in is also big enough to play backup SG without being undersized. Obviously your individual opinion of Sessions here is going to influence how you view his fit here.

I do think that the particular subset of fans that are predisposed to be part of our community here on RealGM often place too much value on drafts in general. The next big thing syndrome, etc.
This has been a particular problem with this draft (and it was the case with the 2006 draft as well) since entire drafts and individual draft picks relative to other years don't seem to be appropriately weighed. So I think Alexander's value relative to current NBA players is being inflated right now. Yes, he's the 8th pick in the draft, but he's the 8th pick in THIS draft. His value isn't quite as high as what an 8th pick might have in other drafts.

This has nothing to do with me not liking Alexander either. I do like him. Even after the Jefferson trade, I still thought Alexander was the right person to take with the 8th pick (with the intention of trading him, mainly) and said so all day. I have also since said that after seeing/hearing him in the media and from everything else I've seen and heard involving him, if he were to remain a Buck, I can easily see him becoming my favorite Buck in short order, supplanting Andrew Bogut.

I just think we are best served to use him along with one or more of our other assets to make a trade for someone whose value we can more fully make use of, especially over the next 2 or 3 seasons.

[quote][For the Bucks, I share Sigra's belief that keeping Joe Alexander is not maximizing his value for us. He seems like he would have a higher value to a team that would be looking to use him more at SF both now and in the future. Unless we are going to try and put some big lineups out there with Jefferson getting minutes at SG, Jefferson is going to be eating up 37mpg of those 48 SF minutes. That really leaves only 11mpg for Alexander.
Can he really provide enough value for us playing PF for us to not justify using him as a trade asset? I am currently of the opinion he cannot. That is really a very important variable here.
/quote]

I disagree, I think ALexander has the size (almost 6'10 in shoes) and athleticism to play alot of 4, I believe he will be very hard to keep off the floor at the end of games...I think he is that good. I hope they don't consider trading him because talent and versatility is what this league is about...Bogut in the post with Jefferson/Alexander slashing while Redd spaces the floor.....sounds like a great combo. The Bucks are looking to have a very good team defense, this takes athleticism and intelligence...that is the direction the Bucks have take with everyone they have picked up so far. Alexander will play both forwards in a back-up role while Jefferson will spots Redd at the 2 while manning the 3 spot.

Great post GAD. Sad times when you are not here

Why bother. The only thing I see that could happening is the Cleveland trade and maybe signing Duhon.

GrandAdmiralDan wrote:

John6988 wrote:Joe at this point isnt worth enough to land us a high teir pg unless we package him.. it would be a high mistake to trade him.. how bout we trade redd and mo first.. you will get no where in this league trading talent that hasnt had time to play one game in the league.. this is just ludacris thinking..

For the Bucks, I share Sigra's belief that keeping Joe Alexander is not maximizing his value for us. He seems like he would have a higher value to a team that would be looking to use him more at SF both now and in the future. Unless we are going to try and put some big lineups out there with Jefferson getting minutes at SG, Jefferson is going to be eating up 37mpg of those 48 SF minutes. That really leaves only 11mpg for Alexander.
Can he really provide enough value for us playing PF for us to not justify using him as a trade asset? I am currently of the opinion he cannot. That is really a very important variable here.

You can say he might not be ready his rookie season for too many minutes anyway, so it won't be a problem, but that doesn't really help the case for not trading him, IMO.

It isn't just about trading away youth though. I am not clamoring to trade away Sessions, for example. For one thing, unlike Alexander to this point, we've seen some of what Sessions can do against other NBA players during NBA games. PG is such a crucial position (especially relative to SG and SF) that having a good starter as well as a good backup is very important. Having a guy like Sessions either as your 1st string or 2nd string PG seems to fit in well in this model, especially if the other PG you bring in is also big enough to play backup SG without being undersized. Obviously your individual opinion of Sessions here is going to influence how you view his fit here.

I do think that the particular subset of fans that are predisposed to be part of our community here on RealGM often place too much value on drafts in general. The next big thing syndrome, etc.
This has been a particular problem with this draft (and it was the case with the 2006 draft as well) since entire drafts and individual draft picks relative to other years don't seem to be appropriately weighed. So I think Alexander's value relative to current NBA players is being inflated right now. Yes, he's the 8th pick in the draft, but he's the 8th pick in THIS draft. His value isn't quite as high as what an 8th pick might have in other drafts.

This has nothing to do with me not liking Alexander either. I do like him. Even after the Jefferson trade, I still thought Alexander was the right person to take with the 8th pick (with the intention of trading him, mainly) and said so all day. I have also since said that after seeing/hearing him in the media and from everything else I've seen and heard involving him, if he were to remain a Buck, I can easily see him becoming my favorite Buck in short order, supplanting Andrew Bogut.

I just think we are best served to use him along with one or more of our other assets to make a trade for someone whose value we can more fully make use of, especially over the next 2 or 3 seasons.

That's my reasoning to add him in a deal for Brand, if possible. I think Brand is the ideal power forward for our current team.

Nebula1 wrote:That's my reasoning to add him in a deal for Brand, if possible. I think Brand is the ideal power forward for our current team.

I'd be all about getting Brand.
I've been wanting to bring Brand here for a long time, but especially since the 2005 offseason.

GrandAdmiralDan wrote:

Nebula1 wrote:That's my reasoning to add him in a deal for Brand, if possible. I think Brand is the ideal power forward for our current team.

I'd be all about getting Brand.
I've been wanting to bring Brand here for a long time, but especially since the 2005 offseason.

You're the CFO around here... is Brand even a possibility now? It bugs me that we even discuss Haslem or Craig Smith until Brand is completely off the table.

Nebula1 wrote:

GrandAdmiralDan wrote:

Nebula1 wrote:That's my reasoning to add him in a deal for Brand, if possible. I think Brand is the ideal power forward for our current team.

I'd be all about getting Brand.
I've been wanting to bring Brand here for a long time, but especially since the 2005 offseason.

You're the CFO around here... is Brand even a possibility now? It bugs me that we even discuss Haslem or Craig Smith until Brand is completely off the table.

Brand is definitely a possibility.
I just created a thread regarding Brand, specifically with the updated info from tonight.