The New Look of the Milwaukee Bucks

Next years team will still be in the lottery, even in a wimpy wimpy eastern conf. 

 

That is a good thing.  One more youngster for the core then make 'em play together til they fall down. 

Could that new look include Jason Kidd?

http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/b...on/story?id=24352843

That would really burst the positivity bubble that has occurred over the last few weeks....with new owners, Jabari, etc....

 

Kidd sucks as a human being. 

Agree.

 

Not a good start for the new owners to have a tin ear about Kidd's reputation among fans---especially those who they hope  will fill their arena.

 

Wife-beaters are great shirts....but awful humans.

Not a big fan of Kidd either but he's supposedly tight with Lasry

Good news, it won't be as POBO, and if the Nets won't take a 2nd rounder, it won't be at all.  We might wake up from this nightmare.

Well, suddenly Kidd is all about Milwaukee and the city and the Bucks. Its great and all, but I am glad Hammond is still running personnel. I believe his vision is sound and his evaluation of talent is strong. He has not been perfect- he got too cute with the Alexander selection- but he has more than made up for that. Jennings was a pretty good pick, and since then he has added what is now the core of the team's future in successive drafts.

Meanwhile, Kidd arrives as seemingly a willing participant in the teams vision. He needs to get two 19 year olds and a 22 year old (Knight) to grow up quick. Sanders is 25, Henson 23. Mayo is 26, Middleton 23. Ilyasova is the elder statesman (except Pachulia) at 27. This is a really really really young team.

El Ka may be right- another year of lottery and failure and one more top pick to have the base of talent needed. But at some point, you have to get better and your young players have to be the ones who do it.

And this rumor has me intrigued:
http://hoopshype.com/twitter/media.html

Bledsoe is a pretty talented guy. Pushing Knight to SG is something a lot feel will benefit both him and the team.

Hopefully Hammond gets the right mix, and Bledsoe could be that guy.

I really wanted Jeff Teague last year but adding Bledsoe would be a very good move.   The problem is Phoenix can and probably will match any offer since he's a RFA 

I am not sure Hammond is bulletproof anymore - lest we forget the Tobias Harris trade to go along with Alexander (bust) and then Jennings pick (wasted choice now later) 

 

Thats not an endorsement of Kidd running the show either but this ownership group is going to want results.  

 

 

your two best players are 19.  Nothing wrong with another year in the lottery to bring one more kid along for the ride.

 

No ZaZa, Mayo, blah blah type signing.  One year deals this year, then next year teach 'em how to win. 

Well, Pachulia isn't a good example- especially on this team, he's a perfect example of the kind of player you want. You gotta have 8-9 guys to play in the games, plus your practice guys. Pachulia can bang their bigs guys in practice, and gets 10-15 in the game, and not have a 10 figure salary. I see your point- let the kids play play play. But a guy like Zaza is the exact kind of guy you keep on your roster.

What this roster is seriously lacking is G depth. They're sending Wolters to summer lague to see if they really have something in this kid or not. They have Knight, whom the consensus is that he's a combo G in the mold of James Harden. The Mayo, a pure SG. The don't have a PG beyond The Jackrabbit, and that's not going to help the team if their 2 best players are Fs.

I like the Bledsoe idea, not so sure about the idea of Lin, and Vasquez to me is bleh. Would like to see a true PG acquired ASAP.

I think the jury is out on Hammonds.  No credit for Parker as that selection was a no-brainer.  Tons of credit for Antekoumpo (sp?).

 

I don't fault him for Alexander as not all picks pan out.

 

Sanders seems to be a character liability.  I think jennings was.  Then you have the Tobias Harris loss.

 

Score

Antekoumpo - +1

Sanders - -1

Jennings - 1

Harris Trade - -1

Parker - NA (too easy)

Alexander - pass

 

-2

 

Pedestrian. 

 

Summary:

Main liability is taking chances on people who are character risks.

Guy signed Drew Gooden.  -10

 

I think he has an eye for talent, and perhaps Kohl's mandate to be a playoff team handcuffed him. 

 

but Drew Gooden. 

Hammond has been a disaster as GM. Keep in mind that while last season was a huge success from a rebuilding angle (tank and get the #2 pick), that wasn't his intention at all! He actually signed a bunch of veterans in the off-season to help with a playoff push! There were some teams that intended to tank but did well (Phoenix), but I can't think of another example of a team that tried to do well and ended up in a full tank. That's how bad Hammond's moves have been.

 

Drafting has actually been his strong point (minus the awful Alexander pick).

 

But unfortunately for JH, there are two other parts of the job -- paying your own and other free agents and making trades. And he's been awful at those two.

 

The list is almost too long too consider...just off the top of my head, here are some of the bad contracts he's given out: Salmons extension, Drew Gooden, Gary Neal, Caron Butler, OJ Mayo, Ersan extension, Sanders extension. Outside of Ersan and Sanders, none of these deals made any sense at the tiem -- they were head scratchers at the moment they were announced.

 

On the trade front...just as bad. To trade Andrew Bogut for Monte Ellis was a disgrace -- espcecially if reports that Curry may have been available were true. Tobias Harris for Reddick was obviously inane. The trade of draft picks for Stephen Jackson, who then forced his way out of Milwaukee (who could have forseen that). Trading for Corey Magette. And his complete inability to turn expiring contracts or assets into future picks, young players was also bad (e.g., Michael Redd).

 

I know the argument has been that his hands were tied by management to make win now moves. But even within that lens, his moves have failed.

 

I can buy that with Hammonds decent draft record + the lack of time post sale, it made sense to keep him on for the draft. But the first move after the draft should have been to replace Hammond with a strong GM or POBO who's first job would be to find a coach. Hiring Jason Kidd without that makes little sense and makes me worry that Kidd will ultimately move into one of those roles or have undue influence on those roles. 

 

 

Wow, what an accurate and scathing assessment.

 

Sounds like Hambone royally sucks!!!

John Hammond won Exec of the Year. That's what happens when you hit. And while the Gooden and Salmons deals were ultimately mistakes, when the owner says be competitive, these are the mistakes that happen. There are deals like this made every year by every team. But when you're the Bucks, you pay more for them. Hammond knows the kind of team he wants to assemble. He's doing it. He has not been a disaster. He had a winning team on the cusp when Bogut ruined his right arm. The dominoes that fell after are what happens when your most important player ruins his career.

The key is their cap is in good shape, and now they have real talent to develop.

I'm not sure how much stock I put in the "Exec of the Year" accolade.

 

Other winners include Elgin Baylor, Joe Dumars, Bryan Colangelo (twice!) and Geoff Petrie (twice!). Meanwhile, arguably the best GM of the past 15 years, RC Buford, just won his first one.

 

Also, what evidence is there that Hammond knows the kind of team he's trying to assemble? Because from an outside perspective, there doesn't seem to be any consistency to his moves.

 

He had good team chemistry during the Fear the Dear season, that was promptely shot when he brought in career malcontents Magette and Gooden. He dealt Bogut for a shoot first, no defense small guard in Ellis who was very similar to Jennings, who they arleady had. The Bucks are now in complete rebuild mode with young players, but that's just a year removed from trading a nice young player in Harris for a rental in Reddick and giving injured journeymen like Butler, ZaZa, and Delfino contracts during free agency. If he has a plan, what is it?

How are his draft picks a strong suit?

 

Alexander was a terrible choice 

Sanders?  Who the hell knows 

Henson?  Almost the same thing 

Harris looks good right now in Orlando 

Jennings?  Enigma and what's he doing to help Milwaukee

Parker was a no brainer 

 

 

quote:

He had good team chemistry during the Fear the Dear season, that was promptely shot when he brought in career malcontents Magette and Gooden.

The team chemistry? When Bogut destroyed his right arm, it left them with no ability to score. Salmons, whom Hammond traded for and was instrumental in that team's success in the second half of the season, became a completely different player after the contract. They knew it, and pulled the plug on the deal to shorten the loss (1 fewer year on the deal, IIRC). This happens all the time in the NBA.

quote:

He dealt Bogut for a shoot first, no defense small guard in Ellis who was very similar to Jennings, who they arleady had.

Bogut was done. His arm was shot, and he had a busted ankle. And what excactly was the reasonable return for Bogut? Ellis was available, and not much else. Did you expect to get a first round pick? What GM would have done that? Ellis is a decent player, but it was more salary dump than anything else.

quote:

The Bucks are now in complete rebuild mode with young players, but that's just a year removed from trading a nice young player in Harris for a rental in Reddick and giving injured journeymen like Butler, ZaZa, and Delfino contracts during free agency. If he has a plan, what is it?

They have to fill the roster with someone. It's easy to say these roster fill moves are "mistakes" in a vacuum. In fact, you could say that about every move made- in a vacuum it's a disaster.

The only move I didn't understand was the Redick/Harris deal. I think Skiles convinced Hammond that Harris couldn't play D, which has proven to be true, and would ultimately be a 1 dimensional player. It was a mistake in my opinion too, and kinda might lend some insight to the falling out between the Bucks and Skiles.

You're dead wrong on Hammond, and I think this roster will provide the evidence.

The rumor was Milwaukee had their pick between Curry and Ellis and chose Ellis b/c of the concerns over Curry's ankle. But who knows if that's true. We can agree to disagree on that deal.

 

EDIT: UGGGH! http://blog.sfgate.com/warrior...b-talks-steph-curry/

 

Again, though, what has been his plan for this organization?

 

As bad as Philly was last year, it's clear what their plan is…lose games and accumulate young assets so you can be relevant in a few years.

 

What has Hammond's plan for this franchise been?

 

It hasn't been rebuild around youth (which I think many fans want). If that was the case, no way you trade Harris or move down in the draft to acquire a guy like Jackson. And instead of signing aging veterans like Delfino, Butler, Neal, and ZaZa, you'd boldly go after young assets like a Bledsoe (who Milwaukee helped get to Phoenix for some reason).

 

Many would say his plan was to compete year in and year out for the playoffs, mainly because of pressure from ownership. I think that's a dumb philosophy, especially if it means you get swept in the first round of the playoffs. But fine…if that's his plan for this team, then he failed with flying colors. Literally every move he made last year was a failure from a "win now" perspective…extending Sanders/Ersan, signing those veterans, hiring Drew, etc. Ironically his best move last year was drafting the Greek Freak, which was not a win now move.

 

Bottom line is he's both failed to produce a competitive team while also failing to produce a youth rebuild. 

 

As far as this roster providing any evidence, it's unclear how much power he even has. Drafting Parker was a no-brainer once Embiid was injured. And it sounds like he wasn't even in the know with the Kidd courting and hiring.

quote:

Bottom line is he's both failed to produce a competitive team while also failing to produce a youth rebuild.

This would only be true if they didn't have the roster they have. Your claim seems hollow, as it was just 3 years ago when they dealt Bogut. That was the white flag. Last years was the final culmination.

He's doing what you said he should have done. The roster you see today is the result of his efforts.

I don't really think his plan was to break it down to build it back up.  He wasn't shooting for the worst team in basketball when he set last years roster. 

 

If trading Bogut was a "white flag", then why on earth did Hammond:

• Trade Bogut for Monte Ellis instead of expiring contracts and picks (e.g., Boston's deal to New Jersey)
• Trade Tobias Harris for JJ Reddick
• Sign OJ Mayo, Gary Neal, Caron Butler, Carlos Delfino, and ZaZa?

 White flag is what Boston or Philly did last season. Hammond did no such thing. 

 

The moves above were done because he was trying to field a competitive team. You could argue it wasn't his preferred plan -- that it was only his plan b/c it's what Herb wanted. But that was his plan, and he failed spectacularly. His plan to make the team competitive resulted in them having the worst record in the leage, even worse than teams who were actively trying to lose more than him. If that's not a fireable offense, then what is?

Good post, RR. Not impressed with Hammond. He seemingly has no plan in place.

If you think last year's roster wasn't assembled to lose 60+ games, you don't know what you're looking it. I said it from the start. The roster was a tank roster fit for one purpose- get atop a draft with the most depth of possible impact players in years. Better than tanking the previous year to get into one of the worst drafts ever. Timing, of course, is always everything.

 

I get that I'm not going to convince you, but your complaints about veteran players getting signed is ignorant of how the NBA works. You have to spend money- you cannot have a roster with $10M in contracts like baseball. The salary cap has a minimum too. So you shell game until the timing is right. Meanwhile, trade for pieces to bide time, draft and develop, and that's exactly what they have done. The post Bogut injury years (2 of them) were the time when they were trying to be competitive- and because he didn't get better, they finally pulled the plug. Then they were stuck in no man's land with an owner trying to sell. Finally last year, they let the axe fall. Signed a bunch of pieces that would never work, got really bad, and landed a star.

 

So when you're making a trade, you're asking yourself "can I get expiring deals"? Well, assuming you have a target in mind, yes. Who wants to come to MKE? Melo? LeBron? In NBA hell (i.e., Milwaukee), you trade bad contracts for less bad contracts. You have to keep pouring bad money into the team when they suck, the same as if they're good. To believe that Hammond was blindly looking at the team and trying to win with the roster they had is foolish.

 

I suppose it doesn't matter now, anyway. They got what they wanted/needed with a home run pick with Antetokounmpo, and then the face of the franchise in Parker. The table is set. The only missing piece is the right PG to run the team. I hope they can get Bledsoe- he has the all around game they need. Though I am somewhat concerned about injury with him, he's the only PG worth looking at in this market.

 

Yes, you are correct there is a minimum salary cap. 

 

But if you are trying to tank, that minimum salary cap ends up playing right into your hands.

 

The true shell game and model of a tanker is to send a useful role player to a contender and take back an expiring contract + either a young asset or a future draft pick. That way you take on salary to meet the minimum while also getting assets. 

 

That's what Philly did. That's what Boston did when they dumped Pierce/Garnett for Gerald Wallace and draft picks. That's why guys like Emeka Okafor or Jason Richardson, etc. are all moved in the final year of their deals and don't play for the new teams.

 

That's how you play the tank game. What you don't do is give a guy like OJ Mayo a 3-year contract for $25 million. What's the point in that if you are trying to tank? You don't get any assets, you commit $ over multiple years, and then if you want to get rid of him you actually have to give up assets to unload him.

 

No way he was trying to tank last year…no way Herb would even allow that given the franchise was for sale.

 

But whatever…they did horribly despite their intentions and I'll agree that they are much better off because of it. I agree that Bledsoe would be a big get.

Hey MC,

 

I really like your contributions/knowledge of basketball, but I do not get your sense that Hammonds has done a good overall job.

 

As a particular, can you explain the Mayo signing?

I think this roster is something to be excited about. That's why I think Hammond deserves credit for it. He isn't perfect. I am simply willing to rationalize the moves made. I don't think it was a bad job, and the reason is this roster right now .

The Mayo signing? He's 26. He could still be really good. He can play. I don't think he's ever cared. So you're Hammond- young player, has skills, just needs the right place. You have to spend money. Roll the dice.

quote:

That's what Philly did. That's what Boston did when they dumped Pierce/Garnett for Gerald Wallace and draft picks. That's why guys like Emeka Okafor or Jason Richardson, etc. are all moved in the final year of their deals and don't play for the new teams.

You do realize that they started the season with 11 new players, right? Have you seen their cap? They tanked. It was clear from the start that they were tanking. At least to me it was...

good to know a few million dollars isn't enough to motivate OJ to do his job. 

You could say that about an awful lot of Pro athletes..

not the ones I try to use as evidence for "sound general manager decision making."

And your making that call now? That he's a bust? Nothing to offer? Spare me your critique of my argument.

If Tom Thibideaux can get Nate Robinson and DJ Augustine to be productive players, the right situation can get Mayo to be good (and he's better than both the aforementioned).

I'm not sure if I am supposed to answer your questions, or not respond.

 

Mixed messages here. 

When did this guy decide to swallow his couch?

 

Kent Benson really changed.

The good thing about Hambone is he hasn't killed them with a number of bad (long term) albatross like contracts.  We can complain about Zaza and OJ and but thankfully he didn't sign Jennings or Ellis or Bogut to max deals.  I don't care for the Sanders or Ersan contracts but they have at least shown glimpses of being solid players.  

 

Overall their cap situation is pretty good and thats half the battle.  The issue I have is the draft picks have been boom or bust.   For every Giannis there has been an Alexander and the Jennings pick made no sense.  The Tobias Harris pick and trade looks awful and John Henson is a paradox.  

$27 million dollars next year will be allocated for OJ Mayo, Ersan, ZaZa and Drew Gooden.  That is 61% of the payroll.  Over 80% of the roster is tied up if you add Sanders. 

 

The only good news is Delfino and Gooden are off the books next year.  The cap might be in OK shape, but it is loaded with 14 win talent in an OK cap. 

You do realize that Gooden doesn't count toward the cap and they saved over 10MM from last year to this year with Sessions and Butler?