JayMKE wrote:36 year old Pat Bev gives you the same or honestly better production than Bruce Brown.
Yeah, I'm not going to go this far.
Moderators: paulpressey25, MickeyDavis
JayMKE wrote:36 year old Pat Bev gives you the same or honestly better production than Bruce Brown.
Ron Swanson wrote:Sure, then trade Bobby. Point is, one of him or Brook needs to go. And all this “just play Andre and AJ Green” stuff sounds a hell of a lot like last offseason when we tried to get ourselves hyped about “Marjon Swolechamp” and some guys named Omari Moore and Jazian Gortman. You need a reliable, proven wing/guard beyond Dame and Khris that you know is a 16-game player.
Frank Nova wrote:It really sucks we don’t have just 1 more lucrative future 1st still. I would think Brook, 31’ 1st and any other future 1st we still had could be a competitive offer for Markkanen. That trade would be incredible to pull off and then immediately extend Lauri. Brook and the 31’ 1st just isn’t enough and that makes me real sad.
John Henson wrote:This lady just asked me who I play for and I said the Milwaukee Bucks, she quickly replied “oh the highschool across the street?”
Bernman wrote:Ron Swanson wrote:Sure, then trade Bobby. Point is, one of him or Brook needs to go. And all this “just play Andre and AJ Green” stuff sounds a hell of a lot like last offseason when we tried to get ourselves hyped about “Marjon Swolechamp” and some guys named Omari Moore and Jazian Gortman. You need a reliable, proven wing/guard beyond Dame and Khris that you know is a 16-game player.
Except these suggestions are going off their on court play, where they weren't far away from being sufficient starters already. Then you make a natural development projection.
Anyway, it's always a matter of cost-benefit analysis. So if the cost is another 1st rd pick when we're going to suck in those yrs (not that it's legal right now anyway), then no thanks.
You balked on lower investment options like Grimes. Ideally I want better options than Green, AJJ, & Bev project to be. And I don't think it's going to take a 1st rd investment attachment. But if so, have to bite the bullet in trying out our own guys, until the deadline, at minimum. The playoffs are after the deadline, maybe you've heard.
Ron Swanson wrote:ShootingtheJ wrote:Ron Swanson wrote:Just do the Brook for Bruce Brown 3-team deal and send Brook to OKC. Get some future draft assets back for your trouble.
Brown can't do anything our own guys can do, and that doesn't fix our apron issues. Keep looking
Sure he can. He defends 1-3 and has proven he can be a Top-6 player on a championship roster. If OKC can kick in some minor draft assets (a future 1st or 2nds) then all the better. At this point you guys have to be realistic about Brook’s trade value. That’s a solid deal and still gives you flexibility to flip Bobby plus draft assets at the deadline for another starter level player.
LUKE23 wrote:JayMKE wrote:36 year old Pat Bev gives you the same or honestly better production than Bruce Brown.
Yeah, I'm not going to go this far.
Bucksmaniac wrote:I'm sorry, but I'm starting to sour on Giannis
Baddy Chuck wrote:Frank Nova wrote:It really sucks we don’t have just 1 more lucrative future 1st still. I would think Brook, 31’ 1st and any other future 1st we still had could be a competitive offer for Markkanen. That trade would be incredible to pull off and then immediately extend Lauri. Brook and the 31’ 1st just isn’t enough and that makes me real sad.
I don't think that would be even remotely close to what Utah would want or get for Markkanen.
Bucksmaniac wrote:I'm sorry, but I'm starting to sour on Giannis
RiotPunch wrote:#1
MKE: Stewart, MKE '25 1st (5-30 protected)
NOP: Lopez
DET: McCollum, NOP '30 2nd, NOP '31 2nd
#2
MKE: Cam Johnson, Vince Williams Jr.
MEM: Portis
BKN: Connaughton, Konchar, Beauchamp, MKE '25 1st (no protections)
htr wrote:RiotPunch wrote:#1
MKE: Stewart, MKE '25 1st (5-30 protected)
NOP: Lopez
DET: McCollum, NOP '30 2nd, NOP '31 2nd
#2
MKE: Cam Johnson, Vince Williams Jr.
MEM: Portis
BKN: Connaughton, Konchar, Beauchamp, MKE '25 1st (no protections)
Second one is fine. First one is rather have McCollum or Ingram and deal with no direct
Bucksmaniac wrote:I'm sorry, but I'm starting to sour on Giannis

RiotPunch wrote:#1
MKE: Stewart, MKE '25 1st (5-30 protected)
NOP: Lopez
DET: McCollum, NOP '30 2nd, NOP '31 2nd
#2
MKE: Cam Johnson, Vince Williams Jr.
MEM: Portis
BKN: Connaughton, Konchar, Beauchamp, MKE '25 1st (no protections)
paulpressey25 wrote:RiotPunch wrote:#1
MKE: Stewart, MKE '25 1st (5-30 protected)
NOP: Lopez
DET: McCollum, NOP '30 2nd, NOP '31 2nd
#2
MKE: Cam Johnson, Vince Williams Jr.
MEM: Portis
BKN: Connaughton, Konchar, Beauchamp, MKE '25 1st (no protections)
I don’t know what to think of Vince Williiams, would they part with him. He’s sort of the key to that deal.
Bucksmaniac wrote:I'm sorry, but I'm starting to sour on Giannis
paulpressey25 wrote:RiotPunch wrote:#1
MKE: Stewart, MKE '25 1st (5-30 protected)
NOP: Lopez
DET: McCollum, NOP '30 2nd, NOP '31 2nd
#2
MKE: Cam Johnson, Vince Williams Jr.
MEM: Portis
BKN: Connaughton, Konchar, Beauchamp, MKE '25 1st (no protections)
I don’t know what to think of Vince Williiams, would they part with him. He’s sort of the key to that deal.
RiotPunch wrote:htr wrote:RiotPunch wrote:#1
MKE: Stewart, MKE '25 1st (5-30 protected)
NOP: Lopez
DET: McCollum, NOP '30 2nd, NOP '31 2nd
#2
MKE: Cam Johnson, Vince Williams Jr.
MEM: Portis
BKN: Connaughton, Konchar, Beauchamp, MKE '25 1st (no protections)
Second one is fine. First one is rather have McCollum or Ingram and deal with no direct
Can't do the 2nd one without the 1st one. And McCollum would be terrible here.

RiotPunch wrote:I think they might for Bobby, but yeah he's your starting 2 after this so kind of need him. Cam alone doesn't solve that problem.