Bucks News, Trade Ideas, Transactions - No Politics

[skones]

Guys like him regularly get paid that much on the open market. It's not a big deal. He was part of literally one of the best regular season benches of the century for two years and he's just entering his prime years. Of course I want every contract to be a bargain, but it's not always an option. I believe someone else would have paid him about this much, although maybe not for 3 years - but that was a requirement of using his early bird rights.

Give me a list of wings who averaged under 5.5 points per game, shot 33.1% from distance, that aren't elite defensively, that got multi-year deals worth 5 million plus. Guys who do that DO NOT regularly get paid that much on the open market. That's false. In fact, WE got THAT guy for 2 years and a total of 3.2 million.

I'm not going to that trouble, do it yourself. But you shouldn't need to do that to realize that teams pay guys like Pat in hopes they will make a leap all the time. And so far he has made that leap. He's 13th in RPM among all SG's, has a PER of 15.9, and is hitting over 43% of his 3's. He only has 690 3-point attempts in his entire career and it's normal for guys with great form to get much better around this stage of their careers. Some guys attempt 690 in a season. He hit ~40% of his 3's in the bubble and it was the start of a trend. I don't believe for a second that he's a negative asset right now.

You want something to be mad about? Try to trade Jrue today for 25% of what they gave up to get him, to say nothing of all the flexibility they lost in the trade. Pat actually added flexibility because of his Bird Rights and salary slot, to say nothing of the fact that some teams might want him.

Man, you're not going to that trouble because you can't put together that list. It doesn't exist. You're now using 17 games to justify a bad deal. Think about how shaky that ground is. Teams DO NOT pay 27 year old players with the numbers he had hoping they make a leap. Again, that's just false.

[coolhandluke121]

Man, you're not going to that trouble because you can't put together that list. It doesn't exist. You're now using 17 games to justify a bad deal. Think about how shaky that ground is. Teams DO NOT pay 27 year old players with the numbers he had hoping they make a leap. Again, that's just false.

It happens all the time. You have no perspective on NBA salaries if you don't think this is completely normal. And citing his PPGZ! is extremely disingenuous because he's been playing for arguably the deepest regular season team of the century for two years and clearly could have scored more if given more minutes. I'm definitely willing to bet his agent showed the Bucks their offers and said Pat wants to stay if they pay him a comparable salary.

Took me about 47 seconds to find a guy who got a lot more (relative to inflation) in a similar situation. Garrett Temple in 2016. He has slightly more volume stats because he got minutes on a bad team and he got $8m per season. Teams are watching other teams' bench players in pursuit of gems, and they're regularly willing to pay them.

[DingleJerry]

Yea as much as it is an eye roll or funny type thing when he flies by a guy, aren't we also complaining on our lack of covering 3s. So here we have a guy contesting 3s and we're mocking him for it.

[emunney]

Give me a list of wings who averaged under 5.5 points per game, shot 33.1% from distance, that aren't elite defensively, that got multi-year deals worth 5 million plus. Guys who do that DO NOT regularly get paid that much on the open market. That's false. In fact, WE got THAT guy for 2 years and a total of 3.2 million.

I'm not going to that trouble, do it yourself. But you shouldn't need to do that to realize that teams pay guys like Pat in hopes they will make a leap all the time. And so far he has made that leap. He's 13th in RPM among all SG's, has a PER of 15.9, and is hitting over 43% of his 3's. He only has 690 3-point attempts in his entire career and it's normal for guys with great form to get much better around this stage of their careers. Some guys attempt 690 in a season. He hit ~40% of his 3's in the bubble and it was the start of a trend. I don't believe for a second that he's a negative asset right now.

You want something to be mad about? Try to trade Jrue today for 25% of what they gave up to get him, to say nothing of all the flexibility they lost in the trade. Pat actually added flexibility because of his Bird Rights and salary slot, to say nothing of the fact that some teams might want him.

Man, you're not going to that trouble because you can't put together that list. It doesn't exist. You're now using 17 games to justify a bad deal. Think about how shaky that ground is. Teams DO NOT pay 27 year old players with the numbers he had hoping they make a leap. Again, that's just false.

It exists, but is it what you want to emulate?

[coolhandluke121]

Man, you're not going to that trouble because you can't put together that list. It doesn't exist. You're now using 17 games to justify a bad deal. Think about how shaky that ground is. Teams DO NOT pay 27 year old players with the numbers he had hoping they make a leap. Again, that's just false.

It exists, but is it what you want to emulate?

In a vacuum, no. You'd like to sign guys like that before they start to become intriguing gambles so you can pay them minimum deals and have a real bargain. But if you're pretty confident the guy is going to take a leap and that's what you have to pay him, then you do it - especially with the payroll implications his Early Bird rights have.

I still think the deal ends up looking like a bargain.

[Chad34]

Read on Twitter

[skones]

Man, you're not going to that trouble because you can't put together that list. It doesn't exist. You're now using 17 games to justify a bad deal. Think about how shaky that ground is. Teams DO NOT pay 27 year old players with the numbers he had hoping they make a leap. Again, that's just false.

It happens all the time. You have no perspective on NBA salaries if you don't think this is completely normal. And citing his PPGZ! is extremely disingenuous because he's been playing for arguably the deepest regular season team of the century for two years and clearly could have scored more if given more minutes. I'm definitely willing to bet his agent showed the Bucks their offers and said Pat wants to stay if they pay him a comparable salary.

Took me about 47 seconds to find a guy who got a lot more (relative to inflation) in a similar situation. Garrett Temple in 2016. He has slightly more volume stats because he got minutes on a bad team and he got $8m per season. Teams are watching other teams' bench players in pursuit of gems, and they're regularly willing to pay them.

I mean, you're not "going to the trouble" while claiming it "happens all the time," doesn't make any sense. If it "happens all the time," you should have readily available examples of instances this has occurred, but again, you haven't, and you won't because it doesn't exist. You're sitting there making an argument, I'm asking for supporting evidence, and you're claiming that it's what? Bothersome?

47 seconds to find one guy, from 4 years ago, which was a bad deal, AND it was the Sacramento Kings. Happens all the time! Are you trying to tear down your own argument orrrrr? But right, I'm the one who has "no perspective on NBA salaries." It's the other way around champ.

[WRau1]

Man, you're not going to that trouble because you can't put together that list. It doesn't exist. You're now using 17 games to justify a bad deal. Think about how shaky that ground is. Teams DO NOT pay 27 year old players with the numbers he had hoping they make a leap. Again, that's just false.

It happens all the time. You have no perspective on NBA salaries if you don't think this is completely normal. And citing his PPGZ! is extremely disingenuous because he's been playing for arguably the deepest regular season team of the century for two years and clearly could have scored more if given more minutes. I'm definitely willing to bet his agent showed the Bucks their offers and said Pat wants to stay if they pay him a comparable salary.

Took me about 47 seconds to find a guy who got a lot more (relative to inflation) in a similar situation. Garrett Temple in 2016. He has slightly more volume stats because he got minutes on a bad team and he got $8m per season. Teams are watching other teams' bench players in pursuit of gems, and they're regularly willing to pay them.

I mean, your not "going to the trouble" while claiming it "happens all the time," doesn't make any sense. If it "happens all the time," you should have readily available examples of instances this has occurred, but again, you haven't, and you won't because it doesn't exist. You're sitting there making an argument, I'm asking for supporting evidence, and you're claiming that it's what? Bothersome?

47 seconds to find one guy, from 4 years ago, which was a bad deal, AND it was the Sacramento Kings. Happens all the time! Are you trying to tear down your own argument orrrrr? But right, I'm the one who has "no perspective on NBA salaries." It's the other way around champ.

Temple's contract was immediately trashed throughout the media and nba "sources" and even then, he was actually a better utility player than current PatC. Temple could legitimately play the 1, 2 & 3 while also being a short term spot-starter that wouldn't hurt the team. And yeah, it was the Kings.

[coolhandluke121]

47 seconds to find one guy, from 4 years ago, which was a bad deal, AND it was the Sacramento Kings. Happens all the time! Are you trying to tear down your own argument orrrrr? But right, I'm the one who has "no perspective on NBA salaries." It's the other way around champ.

That's just because of the way I looked for an example. Yes, unproven guys get paid $5m/season for 2-3 years all the time. I'm not going to make a list because it's tedious to match contracts to the arbitrary, meaningless statistical parameters you've set for what Pat should be paid. It's about what you expect to pay a rotation guy from the best regular season team in the NBA two years running who's also about to enter what are usually a player's best years.

[coolhandluke121]

It happens all the time. You have no perspective on NBA salaries if you don't think this is completely normal. And citing his PPGZ! is extremely disingenuous because he's been playing for arguably the deepest regular season team of the century for two years and clearly could have scored more if given more minutes. I'm definitely willing to bet his agent showed the Bucks their offers and said Pat wants to stay if they pay him a comparable salary.

Took me about 47 seconds to find a guy who got a lot more (relative to inflation) in a similar situation. Garrett Temple in 2016. He has slightly more volume stats because he got minutes on a bad team and he got $8m per season. Teams are watching other teams' bench players in pursuit of gems, and they're regularly willing to pay them.

I mean, your not "going to the trouble" while claiming it "happens all the time," doesn't make any sense. If it "happens all the time," you should have readily available examples of instances this has occurred, but again, you haven't, and you won't because it doesn't exist. You're sitting there making an argument, I'm asking for supporting evidence, and you're claiming that it's what? Bothersome?

47 seconds to find one guy, from 4 years ago, which was a bad deal, AND it was the Sacramento Kings. Happens all the time! Are you trying to tear down your own argument orrrrr? But right, I'm the one who has "no perspective on NBA salaries." It's the other way around champ.

Temple's contract was immediately trashed throughout the media and nba "sources" and even then, he was actually a better utility player than current PatC. Temple could legitimately play the 1, 2 & 3 while also being a short term spot-starter that wouldn't hurt the team. And yeah, it was the Kings.

And he was paid twice as much as Pat; more than twice as much when adjusted for inflation.

[skones]

47 seconds to find one guy, from 4 years ago, which was a bad deal, AND it was the Sacramento Kings. Happens all the time! Are you trying to tear down your own argument orrrrr? But right, I'm the one who has "no perspective on NBA salaries." It's the other way around champ.

That's just because of the way I looked for an example. Yes, unproven guys get paid $5m/season for 2-3 years all the time. I'm not going to make a list because it's tedious to match contracts to the arbitrary, meaningless statistical parameters you've set for what Pat should be paid. It's about what you expect to pay a rotation guy from the best regular season team in the NBA two years running who's also about to enter what are usually a player's best years.

You're not demonstrating proof of concept in going back 4 years to find one guy which was a bad deal. I don't know why you think it is. The statistical parameters aren't "meaningless," they're his production. Guys are paid in this league relative to their production. Mo Harkless, a guy who spent most of last season with an NBA contender in the Clippers before being traded to the Knicks for Morris, same age, one year, 3.6 million. Torrey Craig, know him? He's on our team, remarkably similar production to Connaughton 29 years old, 1.6 million. Alfonzo McKinnie of the 18-19 Warriors, 4 years 7.2 million. These guys aren't getting paid like you're claiming.

[crowhead76]

I think Garrett Temple would be a great addition to this current Bucks team.

[WRau1]

I mean, your not "going to the trouble" while claiming it "happens all the time," doesn't make any sense. If it "happens all the time," you should have readily available examples of instances this has occurred, but again, you haven't, and you won't because it doesn't exist. You're sitting there making an argument, I'm asking for supporting evidence, and you're claiming that it's what? Bothersome?

47 seconds to find one guy, from 4 years ago, which was a bad deal, AND it was the Sacramento Kings. Happens all the time! Are you trying to tear down your own argument orrrrr? But right, I'm the one who has "no perspective on NBA salaries." It's the other way around champ.

Temple's contract was immediately trashed throughout the media and nba "sources" and even then, he was actually a better utility player than current PatC. Temple could legitimately play the 1, 2 & 3 while also being a short term spot-starter that wouldn't hurt the team. And yeah, it was the Kings.

And he was paid twice as much as Pat; more than twice as much when adjusted for inflation.

And was a better player paid by universally stupid team after turning down a reasonable contract offer from his current team, just like the Bucks should've done.

[DingleJerry]

I mean, the Bucks gave 44 million to guy who avg 8 and 5 pts in the previous years. Playing roughly the same position.

A guy like Wayne Ellington has gotten up to 8 mil a year. Of course you can find ones you point out as cheaper, but there is plenty of other mid level deals too that get signed every year. No one is really arguing they couldn't have done better on it and it wasn't bad how they botched the negotiation. They're just saying it's not that egregious as it's being made out. And it seems to me the hate on his contract has carried over to nonsensical hate on the player even though he's played quite well so far this year, and really the last two years too.

You could probably find 20 big men easily who were paid way more than they should and didn't live up to. This is the blackhole of money and draft picks in the NBA

[blazza18]

Continue to take great joy in being on the right side of Horst handing out bad contracts.

[ReasonablySober]

Continue to take great joy in being on the right side of Horst handing out bad contracts.

I dunno, I would think a fan of the Bucks would hate being right about that.

[giannis and 1]

PatC and DJA are negative assets, especially PatC. We don't have the assets to attach to them to dump unless it's for a bigger, just as bad contract. We should especially not attach them to anything remotely considered a positive asset if we're looking for an actual rotation player.

Based on Pat's improved shooting, I think he has positive value around the league.

He'll have to sustain it a little longer, but I absolutely agree. I played devil's advocate for the contract all along because I felt he had the potential to shoot the 3 much better this year. His form is terrific and it's not unusual for someone his age to make a leap in that department. If he sustains it until the deadline, he's got positive value. If he sustains it all year, he's a huge asset.

It's becoming a bit of a social fad to see who can diss him harder regardless of whether he's actually performing. I'll grant that he's a bad player if he's not hitting his 3's, but that's true of literally hundreds of perimeter players around the league, including many who make more money than Pat and are still considered assets. His RPM is actually very good for his contract, although it won't be if he goes back to hitting 35% of his 3's.

Pat's contract is also the only reason they were able to operate this far over the cap and have this salary slot available for a trade because they had his Early Bird rights. People should be glad the Bucks were willing to raise the payroll that much. I'm keeping him for now and betting on his improved stroke.

I just don't like the minutes he gets from Bud. If he can be packaged with some other things to get an upgrade, or swapped for a player that fits our team better, that would be great. Also, Bud would lose his toy.

[coolhandluke121]

I just don't like the minutes he gets from Bud. If he can be packaged with some other things to get an upgrade, or swapped for a player that fits our team better, that would be great. Also, Bud would lose his toy.

Bud really has to stop playing all the average/bad players together. I don't lump Pat in with the worst ones, but I can see why some people might given how the lineups he's usually part of perform. His RPM gives some tentative evidence that he's not one of the ones responsible for those lineups tanking though.

[giannis and 1]

I just don't like the minutes he gets from Bud. If he can be packaged with some other things to get an upgrade, or swapped for a player that fits our team better, that would be great. Also, Bud would lose his toy.

Bud really has to stop playing all the average/bad players together. I don't lump Pat in with the worst ones, but I can see why some people might given how the lineups he's usually part of perform. His RPM gives some tentative evidence that he's not one of the ones responsible for those lineups tanking though.

Yup and some of those minutes could be used to develop the rookies. See how Nwora or Merrill do with 4 starters.

[coolhandluke121]

Bud really has to stop playing all the average/bad players together. I don't lump Pat in with the worst ones, but I can see why some people might given how the lineups he's usually part of perform. His RPM gives some tentative evidence that he's not one of the ones responsible for those lineups tanking though.

Yup and some of those minutes could be used to develop the rookies. See how Nwora or Merrill do with 4 starters.

I'd support playing any of the no-defense snipers with the starters more. It seems so obvious. And DDV could help keep some bench lineups from collapsing completely, especially by breaking up some of those damn Forbes/DJA chipmunk squad minutes.