coolhandluke121

I have some concerns about that and about Horst's lame duck status. I think a bigger concern is that Marc Lasry is now in charge of the board of governors again, as they take turns in that role. He's the guy who brought us Jason Kidd and all of Kidd's disastrous personnel decisions that he influenced, including some involving his old buddies and players who had the same agent as Kidd (Greivis Vazquez, Mirza Teletovic, Matthew Dellavedova, Rashad Vaughn, MCW). I'll try to do a post on Khris's situation next.

Big catch-22 there. How can you let him make such critical long-term decisions without reassuring him that he's in the team's long-term plans? You don't want someone making those decisions if he isn't necessarily going to be with the team to sink or swim on those decisions. Without a new contract, he has incentive to make more short-sighted decisions that might look good if he goes searching for a new job next summer, but might not look as good in the long run. I don't want that.

I like them all to varying degrees and I hope they keep them. I think they can all be rotation players next year, and they need rotation players on rookie contracts. I sure hope they don't give any of them away just to save a few million. Having played with the team and coaching staff for a year makes them valuable. I wouldn't complain if they give up Brown or Pat C with pick #30 to get rid of Snell though. That would probably free up enough breathing room to justify the loss. ETA: You may have meant it more as who they can replace with one of those guys, which is crucial. I could see them giving Wilson a chance to replace Mirotic, for example. But even then, I think they should try to retain as many guys as possible, even if it's just to jump at the chance to work with a bigger payroll and have more trade chips.

Brook Lopez --------- Was signed with the bi-annual exemption (BAE) Cap hold is $4.1m, representing a 20% raise on his current salary - this is the most they can pay him without using cap space or the MLE Bucks do not have Bird Rights Bucks have to stay under the tax apron to offer the full MLE (probably not a realistic possibility if they keep everyone else) Could accept the tax MLE, which would make things a lot easier but is probably a lot less than he can get from several other teams Could also get the "cap room MLE" if the Bucks renounce their Bird Rights to their other free agents, but the Bucks would lose a lot more talent than they gain by going the cap space route Bottom line: accepting the taxpayer MLE or, better yet, the $4.1m that the Bucks are allowed to offer as an extension of his current deal, would be a godsend for the Bucks. However, that seems like a lot to ask considering the year he's had, so he has to really want to stay. I think he will get full MLE offers from several teams, including some other contenders, and some bigger offers from mediocre teams with more cap space. The Bucks would have to waive Hill or renounce their Bird Rights to Khris or Mirotic to stay under the tax apron and have the full MLE available for Lopez. Even then, as of now they would have to sign him before Brogdon signs an offer sheet (a risky thing to rely on) and/or before they go over the tax apron for some other reason (to re-sign someone else, for example). I think they should just keep Hill and resign themselves to losing Lopez if he won't accept the tax MLE. It would be incredibly dumb to waive Hill only to find that you can't keep Lopez anyway, either because he commands more than the MLE on the open market or because Brogdon signs an offer sheet during the moratorium, putting them over the tax apron. Lopez probably has the most complicated situation, and losing him might be the best way to minimize your losses. There's a pretty decent chance you could make sure he's the only rotation player you lose, simply because you have everyone else's Bird Rights. I think giving up someone's Bird Rights would be a mistake, because they give you more control. Bird Rights in the hand are worth two in the bush, or something. Also, letting Lopez go does save at least the tax MLE for someone to replace him. Don't forget they got Lopez for a lot less than that in the first place, and the system helped him.

The problem with this off season is that all it takes is one team to really want a guy and overpay him. And if that happens to 3 or 4 different players, the Bucks are in a tough spot. That's why it's such an unusual situation. The talk of needing two true superstars and the right role players has always been an overblown cliche on the court IMO, but your payroll structure is where it really matters. It's so much easier to give, say, Bosh, Wade, and Lebron max deals and fill out the roster with serviceable, experienced vets than it is to figure out how much you can pay all these good players in their primes. ETA: Prime example, if you have to pay Khris Middleton almost as much as OKC had to pay Paul George, that goes to show the real value of guys like George. It's possible to be just as good as the super teams with more 2nd-tier stars like the Bucks had this year, but it's harder to retain so many good players.

Malcolm Brogdon ------------ Restricted free agent (RFA) - Bucks have 48 hours to match any contract offer he signs. Low $3m cap hold before he signs an offer sheet, which the Bucks can use to their advantage with Brogdon's cooperation. Any offer sheet he signs will immediately replace his cap hold, which is just a placeholder estimate of his 2019-20 salary. Can sign an offer sheet during the moratorium period, before other free agent deals can be made official. Will surely get more than a 20% raise, meaning the old CBA would call him a "base-year compensation" player and make sign-and-trades much harder because his outgoing salary would differ substantially from the amount of matching salary the Bucks can absorb in a trade. That offer sheet during the moratorium scenario is crucial. I don't remember that being the case in the old CBA, but they needed to make the new CBA more fair for RFA's and this new rule helps. If an RFA signs an offer sheet during the moratorium, the 48 hour deadline doesn't start until the moratorium ends, but his new 2019-20 salary does count unless you renounce the right to match. In other words, don't count on being able to use his low cap hold for wriggle room. RFA's have to get the best offers they can and strike quickly, or they risk a stalemate where nobody will make them an offer because they assume the current team will match. There's no reason to assume Brogdon will cooperate, though he might. He runs too great of a risk of missing out on a good payday as teams spend their cap space elsewhere. Bottom line: There's a good chance Brogdon will eat up a lot of cap space very early. The only obvious way the Bucks can be in control of his cap hold is to preemptively offer him a generous deal so he doesn't go out looking for an offer sheet, but don't make the deal official until they've achieved whatever other free agency objectives they have.

This is one of the most fascinating and compelling off seasons for any team in a long time. It's so rare that a 60-win team has so many free agents... and even when they do, they're often able to keep the best of their free agents with max offers, whereas the Bucks don't have anyone clearly worth a max contract. It's also rare that a young team can be at risk of breaking up so soon after their first year as anything more than a first-round upset hopeful. That's the downside of building a contender with just one perennial all-star and a whole bunch of good-but-not-great players - mostly veterans - supporting him. Here's the guaranteed money, assuming they keep Brown and Pat C, with some rounding (a few 100k doesn't make much difference in the grand scheme of things): Giannis - 25.8m Bledsoe - 15.6m Snell - 11.4m Ersan - 7m Wilson - 3m DDV - 2.9m Pat C - 1.7m Brown - 1.6m Hill - 1m (if waived; 18m if they pick up his option) Spencer Hawes - 2m (dead cap) Larry Sanders - 1.9m (dead brain cells) cap holds on vacant roster spots - 1.8m each (times 4, since the above only fills 8 roster spots) cap hold on pick #30 - 1.6m (I assume this reduces the number of cap holds on vacant roster spots to 3) Since Brown, Pat C, and pick #30 are actually cheaper than a cap hold on a vacant roster spot, I'm including them in the 2019-2020 salary. If having as much cap space as possible is your goal, it makes sense to have a few spots filled by guys making less than the 1.8m cap hold on a vacant roster spot. However, you could free up about 2m more by replacing Pat C, Brown, and pick #30 with rookie free agents on minimum contracts, who only make about 900k... but that would be a terrible decision consider how inconsequential the savings are. So the total guaranteed salary is just under $81m, leaving $28m in cap space. But that's without cap holds on Brogdon, Khris, or Mirotic, and without a cap hold on the exception money that many believe is needed to keep Lopez. So basically, there's probably not enough cap space to justify renouncing all your free agents to pursue an outside free agent. And even if you do unload Snell, which I think will be difficult, you still probably want to keep low cap holds on Brogdon and Lopez, just in case. I will break down each individual's situation, particularly with regard to the ridiculously complicated CBA, in a series of posts over the next few days. Salary cap: 109m Luxury tax: 132m MLE: 9.25m taxpayer MLE: 5.7m "room MLE" for teams using cap room first: 4.75m Luxury tax apron (hitting this affects flexibility in playing the cap): 138.3m

LOL. I remember someone showing me this picture of Michael Redd, as proof of the error of my ways, when I said he had bulked up too much: http://www3.pictures.gi.zimbio.com/Michael+Redd+USA+Basketball+Challenge+_N1aLrDCzy0l.jpg Then a year later, after his first ACL tear and rehab, he finally admitted that he had often played at over 20% body fat for a few seasons. So yeah, there is about 20 pounds of extra flab there, and yeah, it is really hard for some people to see it. It's going to appear as a very thin layer of fat on any part of a basketball player that is exposed, but one good place to look is where the shoulder muscles end and the biceps begin. That gap will be noticeably less pronounced in a basketball player with 12-15% body fat or more when compared to the most fit players because of a thin layer of fat under the skin - even if the player otherwise looks like a phenomenally fit individual by normal standards.

Because he is quicker by nature. Doesn't mean losing some of that extra weight wouldn't make FVV a quicker version of himself too. And god help us if FVV's physique and defensive ability become the standard we hold Brogdon to on the salary he's about the get. I give up though. Obviously Brogdon just wants to fit into some skinny jeans and score with some hipster chicks in North Brooklyn. Couldn't possibly be that I had a valid point about his size.

I'm not saying it about every guy who doesn't look like Corey Maggette. Not even close. I am saying it about Khris and Malcolm, and I said I was worried about how it would affect Malcolm before he had a pretty serious 2 month lower body injury yet again this year. Does the fact that he got hurt again and then said himself he is gonna try to lose some weight this offseason not support my hypothesis at all? Really??

I have no problem with this kind of post as long as you own it if and when Shaw admits he wasn't in the best of shape this year. Unfortunately, nobody ever does own it, even though my suspicions in these things usually prove correct. Just look at this thread as an example, unless you're going to argue that Brogdon literally saying he wants to lose weight doesn't support my mid season assertion that he should lose weight, an assertion that was derided in much the same fashion you are doing with Shaw. Personally I think it is silly to completely dismiss the possibility, but carry on.

Trimming down definitely helps quickness. And just as importantly, you don't get tired as quickly if you're carrying less weight. Being able to be quick in short bursts is no more important than being able to maintain top speed for long periods of time chasing a guy like Norman Powell or Fred Van Vleet through screens. And even if he is just doing for his feet, that just proves my point about how his previous injuries are a concern moving forward, another point that got me some excessively incredulous replies despite being supported by known facts and, now, by Brogdon's own words.

Well I think it's weird that people can't see it, and that they argue about it and take exception to my observations. Brogdon and especially Khris both need to trim down a little. Toronto's small ball lineups ran circles around the Bucks, and nobody will ever convince me that's not part of the reason why. Given Brogdon the starting SF job if Khris walks and he's fine, but losing 10 pounds will make a big difference in his defense as a guard.

Interesting that Brogdon says he wants to shed a little weight this summer. I know I've mentioned his bulk and lack of quickness a few times and people keep trying to dismiss it, so it's vindicating to hear from the horse's mouth. Not that I ever doubted myself on that; I've always found it really easy to see when a player is carrying more than the ideal amount of weight, even when everybody else denies it. https://www.nba.com/bucks/video/teams/bucks/2019/05/27/2625143/1558984549961-exit-interviews-malcolm-brogdon-2625143 On that note, I hope they find a way to avoid losing talent for nothing, but I'm really not looking forward to seeing Khris's physique next fall after his salary more than doubles. He even acknowledged that he takes about a month off before training each summer. That seems like a lot.

I think its pretty well known that I am no fan of the UW program, but if the bucks want to give these guys 2 way contracts, I do not care. They are for little money and they are easy to get out from under and you move on to the next one. I'm pretty sure that the 2 guys the bucks originally signed 2 way contracts with was not the team before the bucks broke camp (and maybe even before they began camp) It's not that you can't move on from them; it's that you miss out on some of the best 2-way candidates if you waste time on lost causes, because they will have already been scooped up by some other team. Granted, the chances of getting a rotation player are very slim, but that doesn't justify wasting the chance recklessly. That would be like drafting Happ late in the 2nd; unlikely to get a good player anyway, but that doesn't excuse a "may as well draft the UW guy" cavalier attitude about the lost opportunity.

Certainly an FVV type would make sense. Mo Williams was originally a 2nd-round pick. Seems you can get guys like that. I can't really object to the Bucks drafting for need considering they're a contender, and sometimes you see little guys develop faster. It's not like a 7-footer who's still gaining body control or filling out.

Obligatory "Ethan Happ!" suggestion. Seriously though, I doubt this group wastes a draft pick or 2-way contract on a Wisconsin player with no chance at making the NBA. Gotta assume they all learned a lesson from giving Bronson Koenig a 2-way contract.

I expect Burnes to be an asset in the pen towards the end of the year, but he's got to work out his issues in AAA. I predict it's going to be a lot like Woodruff's 2018 season. You'll recall high expectations for him after some impressive moments in spot duty in 2017, but then he fell flat on his face and wasn't much of a factor until after the ASB. Pretty normal stuff really, although the extent of Burnes' struggles are anything but normal even for a young guy.

NCAA is much worse for competitive balance. In the NBA, you may stay on top for years, but any team has a chance to be that team if they draft well and get a little lucky. In the NCAA, it's just all this blue-blood garbage and all kinds of scandals. I would like more parity in the NBA, but I understand why they don't encourage it. It's strictly business. It has more bandwagon fans than any other sport. Many players are fans of the greatest players, rather than being fans of the home team. I'm not, but I understand it. Every sport has that to some degree, and ratings are always king, but the NBA has more of a vested interest in creating payroll rules that encourage heavyweight teams to keep duking it out for years. I'd like a hard cap, but I'm not going to advocate for one now because the soft cap is finally in the Bucks' favor, allowing them to keep this team together for several more years if they are willing to pay that much luxury tax. And make no mistake - small market teams can afford to have top-5 payrolls in the NBA. The revenue sharing is adequate, unlike in baseball.

Zach Davies, Roger Clemens, and Walter Johnson. The only 3 RHP's in history to have 5 consecutive road starts with at least 6 ip's each and no earned runs. He would be my guess for last Brewer pitcher of the month, but I'm not looking any of this up. I don't remember Hader or Knebel getting it.

Yeah, playing 10 feet off Bledsoe was as big of a factor in building The Giannis Wall as anything else. So no thanks to Rondo. I used to like him despite the attitude, but without being quicker than everyone else, he's not nearly as much of a weapon. You know who probably would have been a gamer and not choked or tightened up in this series? Divincenzo. I had wanted him on the Bucks since he roasted UW as a true freshman in the NCAA tournament, and of course he was Final Four MVP a few years later. Really looking forward to seeing what he can do next year.

This reminds me of complaining about stranding the most runners in a season. It's actually the best offenses that strand the most runners, for the simple reason that they get more people on base. Not saying Wisconsin teams are consistently among the best, but realistically you gotta accept that only one team can win a title in any given season. Should any team or its fans that came close consider the season a failure because they didn't go all the way? I don't think so. "Second place is first loser" is basically a parody of a dumb, annoying jock bro IMO, even though I know some people really believe it. Also, all these teams showed up big many times just to get as far as they did. Look at how clutch the Brewers were in catching the Cubs last year, or how Aaron Rodgers guaranteed a playoff berth, or how Brett Favre said "bet against me", or how the Bucks came back against the Hornets in 2001 after losing game 5, or how these Bucks survived so many injuries and delivered a 60-win season and ECF berth after spinning their wheels in mediocrity for years. This really stinks of looking at the last thing they did, as opposed to judging the overall body of work. I don't disagree that the way it happened was really disappointing, but does any team that loses such a high stakes match ever get any satisfaction from the way it happened?

I'm at total peace. It helps that I always believed Toronto was capable of being a great team. They kind of got overlooked even more than the Bucks did, with everyone slobbering over rosters with more star power in bigger markets. I hope they beat the Warriors, and I believe they're capable of doing so. Can we have an off season thread? With the first 3 pages dedicated to arguing about Hill please and thank you?

I don't even care if Giannis says he might leave if they don't make the finals, which by the way isn't even what that story reported. Technically it said making the finals would convince him to stay, which isn't exactly the same as saying he is considering leaving. It's saying he won't consider leaving if they make the finals, but it's not saying he is considering leaving if they don't. It just means he's not locked in to staying yet, nor should he be. It's good that he's putting pressure on them. They need to feel pressure to pay that luxury tax and keep the team together. Saying he's staying for sure could cause them to take him for granted. I remember a few years ago he backtracked and said he wants to stay, but if they don't do their job and eventually make the team better, he would have to consider other options. Nothing wrong with that. And don't forget that he signed for less than a full max extension on his current contract because he wanted to be eligible for the supermax sooner. Only the Bucks can give him that. And it's obviously a stupid time to ask that question because you can't read anything into a player's reaction after such an emotional loss.

At least a couple people said he was bad last night. Basically because of that one bad lob to Giannis and a missed 3 in the 4th. And this was not just during the game, which is an emotional reaction, but after the game that people said he was bad.