HiAndTight

I agree with Paul as clearly a better fit over Westbrook. However, contracts do matter in that yes they're roughly matching this year but it's the huge commitments going forward that are important. 40 mil per for RW for 4 years. Paul actually still has 3 years left on his for about 41 per and he's already 34 years old. Totally agree if you could trade Bled for Paul straight up just to play one bball game today that of course you'd take Paul, but the logistics on it in reality are very tough to get behind. Yeah, I've seen the Cuban ripping on Bayless, I've seen the TO ripping Bayless, I've seen all of them. That has absolutely nothing to do with Kawhi and Giannis. IIRC, one of the things that Cuban took Bayless to task for was speaking in these vague generalities. Well, I gave you some pretty clear cut statistical evidence of how Kawhi defending Giannis changed the entire Bucks offense. These are facts. They're not Skip terms like "shrinking from the moment," or "disappearing," one of his favorite lines. This is what happened when Kawhi defended Giannis. It had nothing to do with Giannis' effort level, it had everything to do with one of the couple guys in the league, maybe thee only guy now who can match Giannis' length, his quickness and who's more experienced. I don't understand how people could have watched that series and say that Kawhi didn't lock Giannis up. Atfter Kawhi forced some turnovers, Giannis changed the way he attacked down low. He didn't play the same. When they played Boston mainly Horford, but Horford, Morris,Bayne and others created a wall for Giannis, he found ways around that. He wasn't able to find a way around a guy who is as long as he is, who's stronger than he is at this point in his career when he does have the post moves to get him off balance or the touch to hit that little 12 foot fadeaway. It'll come, but it wasn't there in the ECF's. And Skip Bayless is the last person I ever want to hear or see or listen to. If you want an actual reference about the impact Kawhi had on Giannis and the Bucks, go over to 538. They had some articles that outlined the impact for the entire series as well as the regular season.

No, it's totally inexcusable. I can understand maybe they're looking at a 6-7 year period here where they're going to be competitive and they don't want to pay the tax every year, but there's absolutely no reason to NOT clear that room so you have the TPE in your back pocket just to give Horst something else to work with. It's asinine. I don't know if it's why they didn't sign Brogdon, but that TPE could have helped out in getting someone like Bradley Beal to Milwaukee indirectly. Now he's not quite the caliber of star Luke was talking about coming available, but he's absolutely the type of player that could put the Bucks over the top. And like last year being a year where everything was wide open(though we didn't know that going in) this year is DEFINITELY a year we know things are wide open. The Clippers are gonna have a helluva team, but not an unbeatable one. The Nets are at least a year away with KD down. The Lakers pissed away the chance to add several really nice players waiting on Kawhi to decide if he's coming back and all of these teams are going to be adding talent in the next couple years. Beal could have given you a guy who at the least was as good as Middleton(who I do think is very underrated on here, but not a true #2 on a championship team). Jesus Christ....c'mon. Even if you don't use it, just get it so that you have that option. This is so incredibly stupid. That Brogdon trade COULD have looked a lot better. A 1st, 2 2nd's and then a veteran that a non-contending team was trying to move. I'm gonna wait until I hear for sure, but if you're right, this is just asinine.

Well, first of all, I agree we're fine in the regular season with Bledsoe. Better than fine actually. He's a stud. He's aggressive, he's so physical. He's built like an ideal safety with a thick build to take contact and those long arms. But he chokes in the playoffs. He already has talked about how he gets nervous in big games and it's back to back playoffs he's choked now. So I'd definitely be alright with an inferior PG during the regular season if it meant getting a seasoned player who has experiance in the playoffs. As for Livingston, he can play the point. He really didn't in Golden State because they didn't need him to, but that's what he was. It's what he came up as. He's definitely the type of guy who'd be extremelely limited, but he came into this league as a bit of a phenom until that gruesome injury derailed his career. But he isn't an explosive point who can break down the defense. Then again, in this scenario we'd be signing him for the minimium. So he's provide depth and he's certainly got the experiance. Dragic, I wouldn't trade Bledsoe for him, it'd be more of a situation where I'd like to see the Bucks use their TPE to pick up a player/players and then maybe as part of a three-team deal trade for him. He's one of three prominent PG's who's the subject of trade talks at the moment with Westbrook and Paul. I'd actually take a chance on a guy like Westbrook....if we didn't have Giannis. I think it's possible he could change his game a bit if he was playing with Giannis, and it'd certainly be an exciting team to watch, but I just don't trust the guy. I don't trust him in the post-season. He can be the best PG in this league, but he's not a great shooter and despite the reputation he has as being an intense, Jordan-esque type player concerned only with winning, he strikes me as a guy who it's more important the team wins because of him and that he gets his numbers and none of that fits in Milwaukee. Chris Paul is old and he's gonna get injured, but when he's healthy, he's still great. The all time great. He wouldn't have to expand as much energy playing for the Bucks and we could keep his minutes way down, sit him on the 2nd half of back to backs, but I just don't see how the salary works out....unless it's a 3 team trade. No, the only way it's likely we end up with Paul is at the end of his career most likely on a BAE or MLE. Somehow he's still just 33 years old. Massive contract, but man, he would be the perfect fit for us without having to give away the farm. The Bucks SHOULD have gone out and tried to sign someone like Troy Daniels, a PG from the Suns. A great 3 point shooter who can handle the ball, has good size for the position. I would have said Ricky Rubio, but again, with this ridiculous FA market, he ended up getting 3/51 which is about 40 more than he really should have. The best remaining FA PG's, most of whom would be vet minimum types are; Jerryd Bayless-I guess you could hope he stays healthy. He was AWFUL last year. Darren Collison-He's "walking away" due to his religious beliefs, but I've also seen where he may come back later in the year and join a team "if the fit is right." With Giannis' and his personality, I doubt the fit would be much better anywhere else. He's got the handles to deal with the pressure, he hit 47 pct of his 3's last year('17-'18). This would probably be the best possible signing the Bucks could make. Keep them under the luxury tax, keep their few assets and give them exactly what they need. Raymond Felton-Not a fan, not a fit IMO. Devin Harris-A Fan, not really a fit. He's was more of a drive and dish type guy in his prime and he's way past that. Raul Neto-Played ~10 minutes in about half of the games for the Jazz last year. NO idea what he is. He could be worse than Frazier who we let walk to Detroit, but it looks like he's a solid shooter. Shelvin Mack-He's been around for a while, I remember watching him play in college, but I really don't know anything about him either. What I do remember, he's a Felton type and not really a fit with the Bucks. Correct me if I'm wrong though. There are a bunch more guys who have yet to sign. If we're going to sign one more guy to a vet minimum, I guess other than Livingston it'd be Trey Burke who's not real exciting. Bradley Beal is definitely a best case scenario type trade. And Washington is the same team that traded Otto Porter Jr for Parker and Bobby Portis. That makes me wish we'd have re-signed Parker because then we could just have let Middleton walk, re-signed Brogdon and we'd have saved quite a bit of money.

Ok, Machado JUST turned 27 a couple days ago and has a 2.2 WAR for the season. Bryce Harper is all of 26 and has produced 1.6 WAR for the season. Where's the Mike Trout signing? He's older than either and signed for 428 million. Or how about Nolan Arenado? He's the oldest of all 4 and he's got a higher AAV than Trout Machado or Harper? Please provide the evidence that you've been "proven right" that they're going to "cripple" their franchises? I'll stop you, despite both starting out poorly with their new teams, there isn't any yet. It's ridiculously early. And this thread...it's ridiculously late. You're not breaking news here by saying that teams shouldn't be handing out the monster 10 year deals to 30 year old players. You're about...well, 10 years late on that. It MIGHT be the single biggest shift in how free agency has worked since Curt Flood came along. But here's the thing. Just saying, "long time, lots of money=bad," there's a bit more nuance to it. Trout, Arenado, Harper and Machado are all being paid what they should. The "lesson" you want teams to "finally" learned, they learned a long time ago. You sign the younger players to the big deals, not the guys who are entering their 30's. That's what's happening. That's not what happened with Pujols and company. This thread really feels like it should have been posted in 2008 when it was more relevant as it's the EXACT thing teams are trying to avoid. What I REALLY want to know is when are teams going to figure out that having pitchers throw 33 complete games a year is not good for their arms!

Ok, how about a couple more realistic options at PG. 1-Shawn Livingston He wants to keep playing, the Warriors just waived him and he wants to join a contender. He's certainly not the player he was at the start of the Warriors run, but he's played in Milwaukee before and he's a veteran who's got more finals experience than just about anyone. Probably is I'm not sure he's really a PG anymore. Or at least not that dynamic ball handler you want. 2-Goran Dragić The Suns nearly dealt him to the Mavs to in a 3 way deal to facilitate the Butler sign and trade and are still looking to move him. Not 100 pct sure why, but I know I'd rather have him. I don't know how you'd get this done. Probably around the trade deadline. Apparently, you can't combine your TPE with anyone or anything else(per CHL). So I don't know how this works out exactly, how you give the Heat what they'd want. I guess it'd involve getting something of consequence for the TPE and then turning around and dealing that+ some of our own assets to the Heat. Though again, to me, it makes little sense to trade a really solid PG who's got a reasonable contract and is in the final year of his deal. Unless you're trying to clear cap room...in which case, you'd still keep him since the cap room isn't doing you any good this year and it'd conceivably be for next off-season when he'd be coming off the books. #1 would be a minimum signing we could do now(though I suspect multiple teams who figure to contend would be interested, I do think Milwaukee would be the best fit as he could play 60 games this year, keep his minutes down and hopefully help out in the playoffs. #2-Another seemingly unrealistic trade, but I don't really understand how the Heat ends up with Jimmy Butler or how a lot of these trades happen. I mean, I understand it, but they often seem very unrealistic.

Game 1-2 Kawhi played Giannis very little. Game 3 they changed and Kawhi played him almost half the possessions. The Bucks offensive rating dropped 20 points when they started playing Kawhi on Giannis more, on the 94 possessions in which Kawhi was the primary defender in the first 4 games of the post-season, Giannis made 7 shots. When Siakam was the primary defender, he was much-much better. Better than average. I don't need to be told that "primary defender," doesn't mean nobody else helps out. I understand things as simple as that. However when the Raptors used someone other than Kawhi Giannis was very effective. When they used Kawhi, he was not. Kawhi shut down Giannis. Pretty straight forward. I'm not "fundamentally" misunderstanding anything and only an absolute idiot would think that "Primary" would mean only. The very definition of the word tells you that. I think you're fundamentally wrong and I think it's fundamentally condescending to put words in people's mouths... The facts from the series tell the story for anyone who didn't watch it. For anyone who did, you shouldn't even need those. Both bear out the truth. Kawhi effectively shut down Giannis when he defended him. That's not a media narrative, that's just facts. Also, I never heard the narrative that Jordan never missed a clutch shot. In fact, I heard those tired old stats about how many of them he had to miss in order to make them. The old, "even the best fail," crap for the last 15 years now.

Well, Paul was a more fantastical pie in the sky type of suggestion. Beal is a guy we could definitely work out a deal for on our end, it's just a question of would the Wizards be interested in what we could offer in return. But what I'm thinking about is how much can we trust Eric Bledsoe? Maybe he matures like Lowry did and he is able to perform in the playoffs. More likely to me he doesn't. Either way, George Hill is not a guy who you want playing more than ~20 MPG in the regular season and if you don't believe you can depend on Bled in the post-season, then finding another ball handler should be a priority at some point. It obviously doesn't need to be an old, overpaid Chris Paul(though he's still a very good player and would be a great fit on this team IMO...especially if we could really do the whole load management thing with him). Nor does it mean you have to go out and get Bradley Beal(though I'd really be trying to get him as then you could have your #2 guy and people might appreciate Middleton more as the #3 option). It's a long season and lots of names will come up. Those are just the only two big ones I can think of now(other than Westbrook and nobody really wants to see that I don't think) who have been talked about with regard to potential trades.

A huge question mark AT BEST? Sure, if the question is "Will Paul George contend for the MVP again this season or just all NBA 1st team." No, these are minor surgeries for an athlete like him. He's getting what amounts to maintenance. He played with these minor injuries and he was phenomenal with them. It's really wishful thinking to believe that these surgeries are going to have much of an impact on George in the near future.

Are there any realistic scenario's anyone can come up with in which the Bucks make a ballsy move and try to trade for a PG? Right now I'm just spitballing, but Paul wants out of Houston, Westbrook wants out of OKC and wants to go to Miami. We have a healthy TPE we could get to acquire a player. It can't be used in addition to others according to CHL and I'll take his word for it. But just a hypothetical that would never happen. Chris Paul is older and breaking down. He'd also clearly be the 2nd best player on this team and is really being just totally wasted as a player in Houston with Harden dominating the ball. d So the mission, should someone choose to accept it, tell me how we could use the 15 million we have that we could use to acquire a player(I'm assuming if we have a 12 million PTE, 15 would be the highest we could go to match salaries) and use them and Bledsoe to trade to Houston, or just find a really good ball handler, doesn't have to be a PG, Hill can start and they can find another PG later when he gets bought out, even if it's a shooting guard who's a really good ball handler. What players that may be available could we get and or, what would it take to pull off a Chris Paul trade? And I know it's nuts, I'm just speaking hypothetically. Bledsoe+whoever we were to acquire for ~10-15 million+Ersan for Paul. I know it's never gonna happen, but we've got a while before the Bucks are back in Camp.

Ok, first of all, I don't think this was a very heated debate or anything. Just a difference of opinion. Second, it's debatable because I believe you are wrong. I KNOW you're wrong when you say that Kawhi didn't guard him one on one, Kawhi did in fact start to defend Giannis more and more after game 2. You're saying that someone else started out on Kawhi and then Kawhi came over and helped out. No, not what I'm talking about at all. They put Kawhi on Giannis at times throughout the series. Again, as I said, not the whole seires, but for large stretches. I'm also saying when Kawhi defended him in the half court, he pretty much locked him up on his own. I realize that's a BIG statement, but he stripped Giannis a couple times, he blocked a shot, forced a jump ball and made Giannis tentative because he couldn't get around him and Kawhi was just as long. And no, I do not think Giannis would have put up "gaudy" stats vs Kawhi this past year when he was the only defender on him because he didn't in the limited time he was the only defender on him. There is empirical evidence of this beyond just anecdotal evidence and the eye test. I posted some, but don't really care to dig a whole lot deeper and go back and re-read other articles that were more in depth. So...sorry, but I just don't agree with you. I think Kawhi shut him down. He did NOT get shut down when Siakam was the primary defender and then the help came. So what you're saying about how you could have been the primary defender and then Kawhi and whoever could have come, that's entirely different than what I'm talking about. I'm saying playing man defense, somehow Kawhi was able to lock up Giannis. Not how the Raptors slowed Giannis down with the Wall, or how Gasol and Ibaka were allowed to be more physical with Giannis because he's Giannis and he was less effective there. I'm straight up talking about half court sets, Giannis getting the ball at the elbow or top of the key, Kawhi defending him and Giannis not being able to do much. Certainly not put up gaudy stats. Something he was able to do vs Siakam. And the 3 for 30 stat for example, that's not Kawhi starting out on Giannis and then Gasol coming over and blocking the shot. That's when Giannis' shooting during the regular season when Kawhi defended him. If you're owing this all to help defense, why wouldn't it be the same or similar when Siakam was on him? Siakam is a very good defender. But Giannis was actually better than he normally was against Siakam. I don't really think this is worthy of much debate because you don't agree and you think it's crazy I disagree(that's fine, I take no offense) and Luke doesn't agree either. So we have different opinions. What I'm surprised if that YOU'RE that surprised that I have a different one from you. It's the conclusion a whole lot of people outside of that just about every "expert" or former player outside of Milwaukee also came to and the statistics back it up. I'm also for the record not bothered by it because it really kinda exposed that while Giannis has come so far, he's still got SOOO much room to improve his game. His touch around the basket, his jumper, being forced to go to another move(which I have no doubt will force him to help further develop a counter and then a counter to their counter). So honestly I was just mostly impressed that Kawhi was able to do what he did on Giannis and I'm also not worried about it because I think Giannis is going to get better. But it's absolutely nothing like you starting out defending Giannis and then AD and someone else coming over and contesting the shot. It's Kawhi guarding Giannis, not allowing penetration and then him contesting the shot, deflecting a pass(or just forcing a pass) or blocking his shot/forcing a jump ball situation. You can both acknowledge Giannis is the greatest young player the NBA has seen since LeBron and how much better he could get and also concede that Kawhi really just flat out dominated him(and Middleton) this series. I honestly didn't think that opinion would get much pushback from people who were watching every possession like I know the people on here were. But I'm not gonna argue about it any longer because....well, I don't want to and it's not a fun topic. I don't want to post video's of what I'm talking about and then have to watch those video's that aren't fun. So look at the stats and good Kawhi's defense on Giannis or something about how they changed their defensive matchup's after game 2 or don't. It's frankly a depressing topic.

Very true...and we SHOULD get out of the East. Philly has some really talented young guys and they're going to play really good defense and rebound well. Not sure who's gonna handle the ball or play guard. I'm still a LITTLE worried about the Celtics even though they lose Kyrie and replaced him with a worse version in Kemba, but a MUCH better leader, better person and someone who doesn't believe the Earth is flat. So not an idiot. So chemistry may be better, but then you factor in they also lost Horford? The question will be how much better Heyward looks and if he doesn't look better, with Stevens keep throwing him out there instead of budding young stars Tatum and Brown. And with Tatum, does he want to become a superstar or find himself as the guy putting up 22 on an 8 seed in the future by just deciding to shoot everytime. I actually think now that the black hole that is Kyrie is gone, they'll move the ball more and be a ~50-ish win team and challenge the Sixers. Bucks will play the Pacers in the 2nd round, beat the Sixers in the ECF's and then play in the finals.

Even that Pistons team had several regular all-stars. Billups made it 5 times, Hamilton 3, Rasheed 4, Big Ben 4, McDyess 1, and heck, even Derrick Coleman had 1 though that's pretty irrelevant. They were more a testament to a team being able to without a true superstar, but they had lots of stars. Dirk had Marion with 4 all-star selections and Kidd with 10 when he won a title. They were past their primes, but still easily better than anything the Bucks have besides Giannis IMO. Tyson Chandler would also be an all-star later on and Jason Terry was at least comparable to Khris or Brook in all-star worthiness but the competition at his position in his conference was very different from what Lopez and Khris faced. The only really close comparison I can come up with is Olajuwon in 1994. Otis Thorpe made one all-star game in '92 and Cassell would make one much later, but Hakeem was amazing. I think that's the level of impact Giannis ultimately gets to, though with some differences in their game, and I think Hakeem should be a dark horse for top 5 all-time but those lists don't usually appreciate defense enough so not many people put him there. I think the Hakeem comp would be the closest in terms of not having a legit #2 star. It's kinda like calling a pitcher an ace. Just being a good pitcher on a good team doesn't mean you're a legit ace and Middleton being an all-star on a good team doesn't make him a true #2. He's not far off and he's capable of performing like one, but you need a transcendent superstar and a lot of good players around him in order to pull it off. The Pistons, they were built a little differently, but for instance, I don't think Rip Hamilton was a better player than Middleton. All of those pieces just fit SOO well together. I think people forget how good of a defender Prince was, Ben Wallace was a Rodman-esque presence in those years, Billup's was good, but the regular season, I'd take Bledsoe or at least I think it's close. It's just that a big chunk of Billup's rep(rightfully so) was built on being such a clutch player. He hit a lot of shots, but just running that team and being a leader and not choking like Bledsoe did. But that team was together for a while and got deep into the playoffs, but didn't get over the hump until they added 'Sheed. He was probably the biggest star on that team, but they were all so close and played so well together. I doubt we see a team in the near future win with their best player being as "bad" as that Pistons teams best player. So not a good comp, but a team that won without multiple legitimate All-NBA type players. I don't think I agree with you on the Mavs. I don't think they ever should have won first of all, but if you're going by the level of play when they won it, Kidd was basically like a Rondo. Just a ball distributor who was somewhat effective on defense only because he was smart enough to anticipate, but old and slow and I'd argue their 2nd and 3rd best players were Marion and Chandler at that point. And maybe not even in that order. Kidd had to have been mid 30's, late 30's. Same with Marion, he was older and his best days were long behind him. Not as old as Kidd. I'd put Terry ahead of those guys and I'd rate Middleton ahead of Marion if you're picking Middleton right now or Marion from that team. But they were a team that was built around Dirk. They have Haywood, another big guy, so between Chandler, Marion, and Haywood, the could keep Dirk clean and he was the only guy on that team who was really an all-star player still. That team's probably an aberration though because they just should never have beaten that Heat team. I definitely don't think you can say that Kidd at that point and Marion were easily better than Middleton. I think Marion as a whole was overrated. He was good with the Suns when they had Nash and D'Antoni running the show and he put up big numbers, but by the time he was on the Mavs, he was nowhere near an all-star caliber player by that point. Not that this is really the point, agree with your fundamental point, Dallas was a team with one superstar who was far-far better than their next best player and won. I just think Middleton gets undervalued because of his style of play. You see lazy, I see just an even-keeled guy who has been asked to change his style of play. He's not supposed to be running off multiple screens like Reggie was all game long, he's supposed to spot up and wait for the ball to come to him. That's probably another adjustment the Bucks could make with the post-season in mind, adding a little more motion to their offense for when you run into guys who can slow Giannis down, you have other ways to create shots other than Giannis and Bled dribbling into a crowd and trying to then kick out. But on that Mavs team, I'll take Middleton over 38 or 39 year old kid and Marion for sure. Chandler was a player from a pretty different era. And Terry was more like a veteran Mark Acquire at that point. Maybe I'd take Terry over him, I don't know. The Jordan AA days when Houston won a couple I'll definitely grant you is the best example. They built a team around Hakeem. I'm sure in today's NBA Hakeem would be a 38 pct 3 point shooter, but probably the most underrated player I've watched play in the last 30 years, he was so dominant and so athletic on the block offensively, you just need some shooters around him. I really hope they get together again and Giannis works on improving his play on the block because he's even more athletic than Hakeem was, and while he's capable of bringing the ball up if he could develop some of Olajuwon's arsenal that would totally change this teams ability in the half court. He can score because he's so much better right now against almost everyone, but if he improves his game with his back to the basket, that would have to make the game that much easier for the other guys. Again, not expecting him to turn into Hakeem anymore than I expect him to become Reggie Miller as a shooter, but as graceful as he is and with how incredible his footwork is on his Euro-steps, there's no reason he can't incorporate more of a Hakeem style of play offensively. Defensively, I don't think even Giannis is where Hakeem was during that stretch, but not far off. I'd say top 5 may be a bit too high, but if you're going to include big men, I'll take him over Shaq any day, hard for me to give an informed opinion on Kareem or Wilt as I can only see what the stats say. But I'd also EASILY take him over, Robinson and Duncan. Basically any big man I've watched since I started following the game in the early 90's. He was like Mutumbo defensively and so good and efficient offensively. Definitely a top 5 all time big and while I think Robinson was unstoppable when he played and relentless, Duncan was so skilled and such a smart player, Shaq freakishly dominant, I'd take Hakeem over any of them. Moses Malone was old when I started watching but doesn't look like he was in the same group either. So it'd be Shaq or Hakeem and I'd take the guy who could do more, win in a larger variety of ways and who you didn't NEED that so-called "closer" for in Kobe because Hakeem could actually hit his FT's. Thorpe was kinda a Kevin Willis type, but smaller and more of a scorer. So I guess..Horace Grant? Anyway, I'm with you on the Rockets and the Bucks being a similar comp. The only difference is that Hakeem at that point was a finished product and Giannis is just starting out. That and when you wing a ring, the perception of others changes. Or even just after you've played a full career. I think if the Bucks win one or two and Middleton sticks around for a while, he'll probably make a couple more All-Star games and be looked upon more favorably as the years go by, but no doubt, this is a ONE superstar team. Edit-Malone. There was another really good big that I couldn't think of from that era. I don't really consider Barkley part of the group at 6'4 or 6'5. But I bet a lot of people would put Malone ahead of Hakeem. And he was great, but imagine a career of Hakeem and Stockton running that pick and roll? And if he played today, he'd have been a mix of Embid and KG. Anyway, I'm rambling. Flew out yesterday afternoon, turned around, took the red-eye home and just got home a while ago. But anyway, point is, Giannis can lead the Bucks to a title. He's good enough. He needs more help starting with Bledsoe being a competent PG and goes from there.

I agree with OTB here, setting up in the low post like a traditional big isn't really a part of his game yet that he seems comfortable with. Not against the elite defenders you're talking about anyway. Even if his jumper is no better than last year, if he can just add a couple moves, that Hakeem shake and up and under, with his length, he could be unstoppable. As for the "no excuse" comment, that's what you're gonna get when you look like you could be one of the 5-6 best players to ever play this game. You're right, if guys aren't hitting shots, Giannis will have every excuse, because even in basketball, you can't win it by yourself. You can come closer than any other sport, but not by yourself. I think we're on the same page with Giannis. It looked like he was going to do something unprecedented in his first trip to the ECF's and going deep into the playoffs and find a way to win it without a 2nd true star, but that's hard. I can think of the last Pistons team, the ones you mentioned, the Mavs with Dirk was a good one, but it's rare to have someone the caliber of Middleton and be the 2nd best player on a championship team. As much as I'm glad we re-signed him, he's Mychael Thompson on the showtime Lakers. He's DJ at the end. He's not Worthy, or McChale or Pippen or even close. But just talking about the Clippers, this is a series I could actually see going big helping us. Robin Lopez is a pretty good low post scorer, Brooks we already know can do both, I think Wilson will take a big jump forward and they have a nice promising young C in Zubic, but he hasn't done much yet. I do know the Clippers..as currently constructed aren't as good as the Warriors have been, I don't even think they're as good as the Heat were during their 4 year run. And and that's healthy and without much rooom for improvment form their young players. George probably had a career year last year, Kawhi was the best version of himself vs us and then they have role players. This isn't the 96 Bulls. They can be beat. I really hope they can find another explosive, athletic guard that a team is trying to dump though. Someone who can handle the ball well at some point in the upcoming season. Doesn't have to be someone like Beal, just another guy like George Hill. No idea right now who that guy is, but we need another ball handler.

I don't totally disagree, but I think you're ignoring what Kawhi did to Giannis. And I don't know that we could have adjusted much. Guys were missing the shots they did have and then the Raptors shooters who hadn't been hitting anything started hitting the ones they got. But if Kawhi didn't shut Giannis down, he sure changed the way he played. I recall a couple plays in particular, Giannis driving against him and the one time he just reached up and tied Giannis up. I don't think Giannis is used to a guy who's as long and as strong as Kawhi. Another Giannis was spinning to the hole, a play Paul George...probably the 2nd best wing defender who's not just a defensive specialist-could not have stopped and Kawhi got a big old mit in there and took it away. After a few of those and Giannis well-chronicled struggles regular season struggles when defended by Kawhi, I just he was just a bit off his game. Primarily in the half court. He was still great in this series, we're really just talking about him not being AS great as he was during the regular season and even in the game when he got nothing going offensively, he still controlled the game like only Draymond and Ben Simmons can do. Ben Simmons is basically Giannis floor at this point. Bad Giannis=Ben Simmons. That's pretty formidable. But whatever, I don't really care about what Kawhi did last year to Giannis. We've seen every-single-year Giannis come back and we're hoping for just marginal improvements and he makes these big leaps. A couple years ago he was basically ~22/11 and without looking, I'd guess he had ~5 assists and probably over 1.5 steels and blocks a game. Two years later he's expanded his game so much and he's still just 24. So I don't care how good Kawhi is, I watch Giannis every night and I believe he's actually good enough to get us over the top.

You can acquire multiple guys for the TPE, just like you could have acquired multiple players from Indiana in the Brogdon deal - up to the amount of matching salary you're allowed to take in the deal. As far as I know, exact terms of Brogdon's deal aren't out yet, so I'm not 100% sure on all the calculations. But regardless of his exact salary next year, Brogdon is definitely a "BYC" player (huge raise, Bird Rights are salary cap exceptions for keeping your players, the NBA got tired of it being a loophole for signing and trading them) so the Bucks would only allowed to take back half his starting salary in the trade. But there's a margin of error of roughly +/- 25%, so I assume his starting salary is about $19m and 125% of half of that is about $12m. Ok, assuming it's 12 million. We can trade for a guy making ~15 million. We can't do anything else? Include cash or any other players? So basically the only thing we can do is taking a guy another team wants to dump essentially?

The only person on here who seems as concerned with Beverely as ontheblack is you. You mentioned him quite a few times. Do you not like the guy for some reason? I know I'm a fan. Especially after watching him in Houston and now with the Clippers and what he does to his opponents. The Warriors were whining that the guy about 10 inches shorter than KD was being too physical with him when he was getting posted up. I'd happily trade Bledsoe for him.

That's absolutely true. Look at the Warriors to start the playoffs, KD playing great, they were healthy. By the finals, two superstars were down with devastating injuries, Looney was hurt, Igudola was injured and they were trying to milk minutes out of either young guys with little experience or vets ready to retire like Livingston. Maybe the Lakers don't beat them, maybe they just beat them up in a long series.

Well, the Sixers, especially if they find a gem or two at the guard spots, and they do have some young talent there are a really good team. Maybe not a better team than last year, but Horford, Simmons and Embid are all gonna start for them. That's a hellacious defensive backcourt. Whoever else starts, they'll have a 6'9 guy as they're second smallest player. I don't trust Embid, but if he somehow magically decides to get in shape this year, they're even scarier. I don't think it'll happen and I think he's going to end up injured again, but if not, that Sixers team is really good. That's really the only team I see as of now that could knock them off on paper as of now. Also, I don't think it's fair to say he's got no excuses anymore. It's not like he's KG and hasn't been able to get his team out of the first round well into his career. And it's not like he's a guy that makes excuses. I get what you're saying, the East is wide open for him, but it's not like people have made excuses for him or he has for himself. He's improved so much every year, I think he's well ahead of where anyone could have predicted.

I think it works out better for the Bucks if Kawhi stays in Toronto. We can beat that team. We had them on the ropes. The Clippers are a much-much more talented team and if you're just looking at it as a whole, not just winning the East, but the title, there's now one team that's far-far more talented than any of the other teams. And I don't thnk the Warriors or the Lakers are much of a problem at this point for the Clippers. LAL has no depth. They bet it all on Kawhi and lost. And the Warriors will be without Klay most of the year and I think DeAngelo Russell is a fine PG and Curry's great, but they've lost too much. I hope you're right, but a superteam with a super coach and a great ownership, front office, etc...it hurts our odds at winning a title. Maybe it helps our odds at reaching one, but not winning one.

I don't argue with people because of who they are or because of past interactions. Heck, I hardly even notice who is posting. I argue for what I believe. I pretty much agree with everything you said. Kawhi and Paul George are amazing. Some of my most heated past arguments have been about Harden vs. Giannis, so you know how much I value defense... among other issues with Harden. I would give Kawhi the defensive edge over anyone since Pippen on the wing. Paul George, Iguodala, and Tony Allen are decent. The Clippers are a tough match-up for the Bucks because of small-ball, but they don't have bigs like Gasol, Siakam, and Ibaka. I think it's revisionist of the media and fans to stay Kawhi stopped Giannis; aside from a few highlight blocks, he mostly just slowed him down enough for the help defender to come. The great defensive rotations of their bigs, especially Gasol, was the biggest factor. Gasol is an incredible defender. Not as athletic as Hakeem or Robinson, but he's a true savant with his rotations and timing. Kudos to OKC for basically giving up on winning with Westbrook and George. Westbrook is extremely flawed IMO. I don't think it matters much where they trade him. They would be very lucky just to get rid of his salary. He's just not a fit on a contender, which is a big reason Durant left in the first place. His fit is putting up gaudy numbers to carry a mediocre team to the playoffs, but sometimes the hand you hold is the hand that holds you down; he just isn't a great fit on most contenders that don't need him to play so much hero-ball. I don't like how the East always stays weak. I kind of wanted Kawhi to stay so they could have a rematch next year. I look for Indiana to be a huge threat, just because of how good I think Oladipo is. It will take time for him to return to form, but if he's good by the playoffs, their seed won't matter much. I agree with everything you said BUT...I think Kawhi's even better than Pippen and I do think he did shut Giannis down when he was on him and he stiffled Middleton all series long when he was on him. Sure, Gasol is a great defender(and Serge is still elite as well). But Kawhi's length, his strength and his quickness gave Giannis fits even before or when he didn't get help. Now HE didn't shut Giannis down because he wasn't on him most of the time, most of the time it was the bigs and Giannis being a little too aggressive(as young Superstars almost always are) and attacking and getting a little out of control. Hardly something you knock him for, just part of the learning curve(plus the Raptors did a great job playing the passing lanes so when he'd normally kick it out to a shooter, they anticipated that and really created deflection and or turnovers. But when he was on Giannis, Giannis really couldn't do anything. He had him locked up pretty good. I think Coach Bud is gonna have to find more creative ways to get ball movement in the half court and get Giannis on the block and Giannis is also going to have to work on his game down there. He does need a little more than in his repertoire than what he currently has if he wants to jump into that next level. Like how LeBron improved his low post game and his jumper, how Jordan evolved from the high flyer who attacked relentlessly to the guy who to later in his career developed one of the most unstoppable fadaways in the game. Giannis needs a couple moves and that little half hook-shot put thing he does, that's fine, but he's at least gotta get better at it. But Kawhi's the only guy you can put on Giannis without help in this league and Giannis isn't going to find a way to be effective and at least somewhat efficient. At least that's been the case thus far. I do agree that the Kawhi vs Giannis thing was a bit overblown, but primarily because Kawhi just wasn't on Giannis most of the time. When he was, he made life real hard for him. Westbrook would be a great PG if he could actually play a little slower. He is a great passer, obviously he's got a lot of bounce and he can get to the basket, but he was not very good this past year. The ONE thing is I do think Paul George is just a little bit overrated. I think he's great. I agree he's a top 10 player, but there's a sizeable game right now in MY opinion between Kawhi, LeBron and Giannis and the rest of the NBA. Especially with Durant hurt. Not over 82 games, but in a series or in the post-season. LeBron's still the freakishly gifted athlete he's always been, Kawhi is amazing with those long arms, big hands and his strength, his physical skills, but it's how calm he is. Even while defending. It just looks so easy for him. But whatever, Kawhi missed most of the year two years ago, the Warriors were supposed to win this year with ease a year ago at this time and the Celtics were probably the overwhelming favorites to come out of the East. They've got good players, but they haven't started the grind and done anything yet. Still, I'm with you, I'd really wish Kawhi woulda stayed in Toronto. He had a championship team there, he was more than making up for the tax burden(especially now that he moved to LA) with the free condo and everything else. And he could have elevated himself and his legacy by staying, being THEE superstar on the team, not one of the superstars and continued to battle. It would have been better for the league. More parity. More really good teams who have a real chance. As for Westbrook, I do wonder how differently his career goes and how differently he's looked at if OKC just decides to pay the luxury tax and don't low ball Harden? They offered him a few million less than the max and gave him an hour to decide and then traded him when he hadn't yet decided. That was a team coming off a finals appearance, homegrown, KD, Harden, Westbrook and Serge. Maybe they grow together, Westbrook doesn't become such a high usage player who doesn't really make players around him better. Instead, while he still dominates the ball, OKC builds a true dynasty to compete with LeBron's teams. It really wouldn't have taken much. I think the difference was less than 10 million over the 4 years. The "what if's" will kill any team. What if we'd taken Sabonis over Thon. I'm gonna bet Westbrook ends up playing for the Knicks. Just because it's the perfect place for him. He can put up 30/10/10 and win 30 games a year.

I don't presume to speak for CHL, but the Clippers just traded away one of the better young PG's in the NBA, they gave up a ton of draft capital(so at least they won't keep finding these gems) and most importantly, they play in the West while we play in the East. Also, I think Paul George is overrated. Sure, he's top 10, but he's closer to 10 and Giannis is real close to #1. Just add that mid-range shot and some moves around the basket. That floater that disappeared on him in the post-season last year, a turnaround and he could easily be the best in the league next year. Plus, the Bucks have a pretty good coach and front office as well and....well, anything can happen. Best I can do in looking for the upside here.

To the inside baseball world, scouts, front office, I would argue Woodruff right at this second, is valued as high as Walker Buehler, or any other young stud pitcher we can think of. I would be willing to bet you a significant amount of money he is not considered to be in the group with Walker Buehler. It's always that extra step or 4 too many. Brandon Woodruff is great. Walker Buheler has been better and is younger. Better production+more talent+younger=more value. At least it does as long as their team control is the same and they are. I don't believe anyone wouldn't take any pitcher we've got and trade him for Buehler really without giving it a second thought..and take about .02 seconds to decide to do so.

Literally the article in the first couple of posts which you would've realized had you not been so mad about me thinking that a couple of mediocre at best prospects would be enough for a guy who's nearly produced 3 WAR already with 3 more years of control. No, it literally did not. It did NOT say we could trade Boyd for those TWO players. It mentioned those two players AMONG the players we could trade for Boyd. Show me where it says, "The Tigers would trade Boyd for Dubon and Ray." So it literally did NOT say that and while your over the top....schtick may sometimes be warranted on here, it feels it's pretty much the go-to move now. Also, Boyd does NOT equal Verlander in his prime. He's a nice pitcher. Not some superstar that would change the fate of franchises.

I feel like you pretty much just repeated what you said in the first post here and ignored what everyone else has since replied. Also, if you think the Cubs are better that's fine. They were more talented last year as well. But go over to their message boards right now. If the sky is falling here, the universe is collapsing on them over there.

Mey, with the two Lopez's, Ersan, Wilson(I keep accidentally typing Henson when I want to say DJ Wilson) and maybe/maybe not Leuer, I think the tank would have seen a lot of DNP's. I would have liked him better than Robin Lopez though. That didn't make much sense to me. I did just see something about the Bucks are working on something else. An optimist might think they're working on adding a nice 2 guard with the TPE and maybe using DDV or someone to throw in, but my guess is it's something like Pau Gasol will sign for the Vets Min on a non-guaranteed deal. After this flurry, if we go into the season with this squad, I'd be fine. Especially since the POTENTIALLY turned Brogdon into a 12 million dollar trade exception, a 1st and 2 sends. Still would rather have Malcom, but there are a whole lot of players who could help us at that price. Like maybe THIS YEAR would be a good year to trade a promising young player at the deadline for someone like JJ Reddick as opposed to the year they were just a contender to lose in the 1st round and gave up a 19 year old future all-star. I'd be pretty shocked if we added anyone else that really tipped the scales one way or the other at this point.