The Giannis Sweepstakes

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
9,309
Why would he stay with the Knicks more than a year instead of just staying in Milwaukee?
The Knicks would have room to bring in another max player. And Giannis plus a legit running mate in New York would likely make them a magnet for ring chasers.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
19,369
where I was last at
The Knicks would have room to bring in another max player. And Giannis plus a legit running mate in New York would likely make them a magnet for ring chasers.
Your crystal ball is far more prescient than mine.

I'm just suggesting that the Knicks meet all the requirements, young players to deal, a bag full of 1s, some potentially lottery picks, and an owner who has lusted after a super-star for years, to aggressively bid for GA.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
9,309
Your crystal ball is far more prescient than mine.
I was just responding to snowmanny who couldn’t understand why Giannis would go to New York. The Knicks have lots of cap space the next two FA signing periods, so it wouldn’t be hard for them to add running mates to Giannis.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
19,369
where I was last at
I was just responding to snowmanny who couldn’t understand why Giannis would go to New York. The Knicks have lots of cap space the next two FA signing periods, so it wouldn’t be hard for them to add running mates to Giannis.
My experience with the knicks is that they generally fuck things up. And they would still be playing in the Atlantic Div. against 3 arguably pretty good teams over the next 1-4 years. I wouldn't be so quick to concede a post-season spot in '21 or '22 to the Knicks.

YMMV
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
9,309
I mean it's top eight make the playoffs regardless of division, so they can share the division with three pretty good teams and the Nets and still make the playoffs. If they made the deal in the next fiscal year they could even add the inducement of taking the Giannis contract outright while only sending back Barrett, unsigned players (i.e. the guy they draft #8) and picks leaving the Bucks a TPE to add talent with. And the Knicks would still have cap space to add a running mate to Giannis.

Put another way, there would be good reasons for Giannis to stay in New York and there'd be huge variance for the Bucks on those future picks.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
19,369
where I was last at
The Knicks would have to do a lot of rebuilding in '21-'22 mostly signing complimentary players, and building team chemistry etc. There is no guarantee they would go from one of the worst teams in the league to a post-season team in 1 or 2 years. It might take time and some of those #1-picks in the early years ('21, '22) might be better than you imagine.

And i agree and posted that NYC has for some reason (notwithstanding a history of pretty consistent suckage) been considered the mecca of basketball, and GA might like big city life. I'm guessing Adam Silver or the rights holders, wouldn't mind either.

All i'm suggesting is that the pieces are there for the Knicks to aggressively compete in a trade for GA.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
52,022
No superstar in their right mind is voluntarily going to work for James Dolan given other alternatives. Also NYC looks a lot less exciting right now than it did pre-virus, still no indoor dining allowed, who knows how many restaurants will survive.

The Knicksiest thing is that they trade everyone for him and then he leaves in a year.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
34,735
Again, Golden State looks like the obvious fit. They may well be in even more of a win now mode not just because their core but also because they have a brand new arena to fill in an area that may see some pretty decent demographic shifts for the same reasons ja cites.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,935
Kiev, Ukraine
Again, Golden State looks like the obvious fit. They may well be in even more of a win now mode not just because their core but also because they have a brand new arena to fill in an area that may see some pretty decent demographic shifts for the same reasons ja cites.
I agree with this. They're confident he'd re-sign, so they can go all-out in making an offer. I think the price they'd have to pay is very high, and a lot of the deal would come down to whether Milwaukee thinks there's a chance that their future in 3-5 years could plausibly be bad.

With the Lakers, Clippers, and Rockets future-mortgaging trades, it's very easy to talk yourself into any of those teams being very, very bad in a 3-5 years with no clear way out of pick hell. I'm not totally sure that holds, given that we've seen Giannis+ be a good team, but probably there's a case to be made there.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
13,324
Somewhere
If you’re gonna trade for him, you need to give up multiple high draft picks, an established player who is at least “really good” if not a star in his own right, and be able to send back enough salary to make the numbers work.

How many teams could do that?
Miami with Bam + Iguodala and Olynyk
Philly with Embiid

Tons of draft picks moving to Milwaukee for either team. Trying to think of worst-case scenarios vis-a-vis the Celtics.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Staff member
Dope
Yeah, Milwaukee would/should do that in a heartbeat. I wonder whether Philly would feel comfortable that Giannis re-signs.
I also wonder if Giannis would consider that an upgrade on his current situation — the team wouldn’t be built around his talents like the Bucks are, and for whatever reason, Philly isn’t perceived as a plum destination.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,935
Kiev, Ukraine
I also wonder if Giannis would consider that an upgrade on his current situation — the team wouldn’t be built around his talents like the Bucks are, and for whatever reason, Philly isn’t perceived as a plum destination.
Yeah, my thoughts exactly. They're on the road to Knicksville, or at least Sarverville. (I think Sarver gets a bad rap, but he definitely needs circumstances to line up correctly in order to not f things up.)
 
I also wonder if Giannis would consider that an upgrade on his current situation — the team wouldn’t be built around his talents like the Bucks are, and for whatever reason, Philly isn’t perceived as a plum destination.
Giannis could pick his preferred coach in Philadelphia, of course.

FWIW, I'm trying to think of ways to get Giannis on the Hawks, who have a talented young core and the most cap space in the league. But I'm not going to @Sam Ray Not embarrass myself by posting them here. ;)
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Staff member
Dope
The Suns could be a dark horse. I’d give up Ayton and picks/salary pieces.
Even if Giannis is gone for sure after next season, the Bucks would pass on that deal. How can you trade the best player in the league for a guy who just got pinched for steroids and expect your season ticket holders to keep plunking down money?

A lot of the ideas in this thread start from the assumption that making one more title run with Giannis and then rebuilding is the worst-case scenario for the Bucks. It’s not.
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
7,084
NYC
A lot of the ideas in this thread start from the assumption that making one more title run with Giannis and then rebuilding is the worst-case scenario for the Bucks. It’s not.
Certainly not the worst-case, but if Giannis has made it 100% clear to management he plans to leave after next year, having a desultory, lame-duck superstar on your team for a year might not be the best-case scenario, either. And that's without considering the benefits of starting the rebuild a year earlier, with a treasure chest of assets instead of none. On the other side of the ledger you get: one more bite at the apple, in a league with the Clips, Lakers, Celtics, Raptors, Warriors, and ascendant Mavericks, Heat, and Nets, among other potential powerhouses.

I dunno ... if Steph Curry one year from free agency tells the Warriors flat out, "hey guys, I'm done, thanks for all the memories, but am moving to Charlotte next year" I think I'd probably take the boatload of young assets and the immediate reboot. Steph — like Giannis — seems to thrive on joy, and having much of that joy drained by the spectre of him leaving would be rough on the team and its fans, I think. Though I suppose Kerr would be better qualified than anyone to sell the team and the fanbase on the idea of a Last Dance. Maybe the Bucks could fire Coach Bud and hire Pippen?
 

DourDoerr

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2004
2,165
Berkeley, CA
Again, Golden State looks like the obvious fit. They may well be in even more of a win now mode not just because their core but also because they have a brand new arena to fill in an area that may see some pretty decent demographic shifts for the same reasons ja cites.
The W’s best players are older and well paid - not much upside. Those players are still good enough together so the W’s draft picks will be late round. I see why they’d like a deal, but don’t see the Buck’s incentive - unless you’re thinking of a 3 team trade or the like. I do think the Bucks’d go for a rising young star like Tatum or Simmons. It’s like with Betts - many are still antagonistic toward the FO and they might have gotten a decent return. The Bucks need somebody to fill the arena. Either GA, a Tatumesque player or a very high draft pick which you’ll get if you hang onto GA and your prayers are unanswered.
 
Maybe you could tempt Giannis by re-hiring the coach who got you 60 wins and a #1 seed a couple years ago? :cool:
I know your tongue is at least somewhat in cheek, but he left us (and we let him go), not the other way around. Which is fair enough - Coach Bud didn't need to stick around for a rebuild - but I'm not sure what his reputation is now that he seems to have conclusively proven with two different teams that he's an outstanding regular season coach and a decidedly replacement-level postseason coach.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Staff member
Dope
Certainly not the worst-case, but if Giannis has made it 100% clear to management he plans to leave after next year, having a desultory, lame-duck superstar on your team for a year might not be the best-case scenario, either. And that's without considering the benefits of starting the rebuild a year earlier, with a treasure chest of assets instead of none. On the other side of the ledger you get: one more bite at the apple, in a league with the Clips, Lakers, Celtics, Raptors, Warriors, and ascendant Mavericks, Heat, and Nets, among other potential powerhouses.

I dunno ... if Steph Curry one year from free agency tells the Warriors flat out, "hey guys, I'm done, thanks for all the memories, but am moving to Charlotte next year" I think I'd probably take the boatload of young assets and the immediate reboot. Steph — like Giannis — seems to thrive on joy, and having much of that joy drained by the spectre of him leaving would be rough on the team and its fans, I think. Though I suppose Kerr would be better qualified than anyone to sell the team and the fanbase on the idea of a Last Dance. Maybe the Bucks could fire Coach Bud and hire Pippen?
Of course you would. The Warriors have won four titles with Curry. They are also in a top-5 market; they can realistically hope to lure a free-agent star down the road.

The Bucks’ situation is not comparable. Unless Giannis is going to shoot his way out of town, the Bucks almost have to bring him back unless they get a star in return, or at least a top-3 pick for the fan base to wish on.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,935
Kiev, Ukraine
The W’s best players are older and well paid - not much upside. Those players are still good enough together so the W’s draft picks will be late round. I see why they’d like a deal, but don’t see the Buck’s incentive - unless you’re thinking of a 3 team trade or the like. I do think the Bucks’d go for a rising young star like Tatum or Simmons. It’s like with Betts - many are still antagonistic toward the FO and they might have gotten a decent return. The Bucks need somebody to fill the arena. Either GA, a Tatumesque player or a very high draft pick which you’ll get if you hang onto GA and your prayers are unanswered.
Lol yes, the Bucks would go for Tatum or Simmons. There’s also < 0 chance they get the first, and getting the latter would surprise me.
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
7,084
NYC
Of course you would. The Warriors have won four titles with Curry.
Three, but who’s counting. (You can give us a half-title each for the one we lost on the Draymond suspension and the one where we lost two superstars to career-altering injuries in consecutive games, so long as you still give us the one where Kyrie and Love were hurt).

On topic: I can see the nuances, but I think the central issues of having a lame-duck star and losing out on assets apply in all situations like this. I think the Pels are in a much better place right now than they might have been had they kept AD around, for example (in a world where AD had been a bit less of a tool about forcing his way out). Again, an imperfect comparison since the Bucks have a much more realistic title shot than the Pels did in their one last bite at the apple, but many of the same truisms apply.

In any case, I think we agree that — assuming he makes it clear he’s not re-signing — keeping him around for his last season may not be the best-case scenario, even if it isn’t the worst.
 
Last edited:

Euclis20

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
3,604
Imaginationland
Certainly not the worst-case, but if Giannis has made it 100% clear to management he plans to leave after next year, having a desultory, lame-duck superstar on your team for a year might not be the best-case scenario, either. And that's without considering the benefits of starting the rebuild a year earlier, with a treasure chest of assets instead of none. On the other side of the ledger you get: one more bite at the apple, in a league with the Clips, Lakers, Celtics, Raptors, Warriors, and ascendant Mavericks, Heat, and Nets, among other potential powerhouses.

I dunno ... if Steph Curry one year from free agency tells the Warriors flat out, "hey guys, I'm done, thanks for all the memories, but am moving to Charlotte next year" I think I'd probably take the boatload of young assets and the immediate reboot. Steph — like Giannis — seems to thrive on joy, and having much of that joy drained by the spectre of him leaving would be rough on the team and its fans, I think. Though I suppose Kerr would be better qualified than anyone to sell the team and the fanbase on the idea of a Last Dance. Maybe the Bucks could fire Coach Bud and hire Pippen?
This is pretty easy to say when you've got a few recent championships in the bank. At this point those young assets and immediate reboot look nicer than a decent shot at a title next year, but the calculus isn't the same for the Bucks and their fans. The Bucks ECF appearance last year seemed like a mild disappointment given their regular season, but it was their first appearance in the ECF in 18 years and just their second since 1986. This will be their 50th season without a title. From that vantage point, a 10-20% chance of a title looks pretty darn appealing, plus factoring in the non-zero chance that Giannis does re-sign.
 

DourDoerr

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2004
2,165
Berkeley, CA
Lol yes, the Bucks would go for Tatum or Simmons. There’s also < 0 chance they get the first, and getting the latter would surprise me.
Well, I wrote “...for a rising young star like Tatum or Simmons,” so I thought it was pretty clear that I didn’t intend “for Tatum or Simmons.” LOL, I guess.
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
7,084
NYC
This is pretty easy to say when you've got a few recent championships in the bank. At this point those young assets and immediate reboot look nicer than a decent shot at a title next year, but the calculus isn't the same for the Bucks and their fans. The Bucks ECF appearance last year seemed like a mild disappointment given their regular season, but it was their first appearance in the ECF in 18 years and just their second since 1986. This will be their 50th season without a title. From that vantage point, a 10-20% chance of a title looks pretty darn appealing, plus factoring in the non-zero chance that Giannis does re-sign.
Totally get all this. I think one X factor here is how much of a “non-zero” inkling Giannis gives them he might re-sign. It doesn’t seem like him to say “no effing way” the way AD did — let alone refuse to play till he gets moved to his preferred destination — but who knows. We’ll find out soon enough.
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
13,938
Waltham, MA
I wonder if his game of driving with a full head of steam through/around players in front of him will make him more likley to have ankle rolls in the future.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,935
Kiev, Ukraine
After watching the Boston-Toronto series, I'd absolutely take the (presumably forthcoming) GSW mega-package over a Siakam+ one if I were Milwaukee. The latter seems like a one-way ticket to the 5 seed for a few years, and then he's 30. But, as noted, different ownership groups have different priorities.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
24,355
Totally get all this. I think one X factor here is how much of a “non-zero” inkling Giannis gives them he might re-sign. It doesn’t seem like him to say “no effing way” the way AD did — let alone refuse to play till he gets moved to his preferred destination — but who knows. We’ll find out soon enough.
Agreed. If I were guessing, I think Mil fires Budenholzer, hires someone who they think has a good plan for Giannis' happiness (after they check that this is not in fact Bud---I just don't know) and then sees how the season goes up until the trade deadline. That is really zero-hour for them---while easier to make a deal of that size pre-season I think they still can get a ton at the deadline and the difference between Giannis re-signing, Giannis trade, and an "after the fact" sign and trade when they have no leverage at all is pretty huge in terms of the return for them

GSW's assets won't look that different. Sure, you'll have "player x" instead of the second pick but Mil will be happy with the player as they'll be in rebuild mode anyway.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,935
Kiev, Ukraine
Agreed. If I were guessing, I think Mil fires Budenholzer, hires someone who they think has a good plan for Giannis' happiness (after they check that this is not in fact Bud---I just don't know) and then sees how the season goes up until the trade deadline. That is really zero-hour for them---while easier to make a deal of that size pre-season I think they still can get a ton at the deadline and the difference between Giannis re-signing, Giannis trade, and an "after the fact" sign and trade when they have no leverage at all is pretty huge in terms of the return for them

GSW's assets won't look that different. Sure, you'll have "player x" instead of the second pick but Mil will be happy with the player as they'll be in rebuild mode anyway.
If I’m Milwaukee, I throw out a lot of smoke about the guy I want at #2, and GSW probably drafts him. Then you get a free option: if he looks like a stud, can move Giannis for him, if not, look for another offer or ask for more.

This is the same blueprint GSW followed in signing Mr Darcy, so hardly an unprecedented thought process for them.
 

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,357
Santa Monica
Agreed. If I were guessing, I think Mil fires Budenholzer, hires someone who they think has a good plan for Giannis' happiness (after they check that this is not in fact Bud---I just don't know) and then sees how the season goes up until the trade deadline. That is really zero-hour for them---while easier to make a deal of that size pre-season I think they still can get a ton at the deadline and the difference between Giannis re-signing, Giannis trade, and an "after the fact" sign and trade when they have no leverage at all is pretty huge in terms of the return for them

GSW's assets won't look that different. Sure, you'll have "player x" instead of the second pick but Mil will be happy with the player as they'll be in rebuild mode anyway.
The only thing that comes close to resembling Giannis, that they could possibly land, is Ben Simmons. Other than some sort of mega-deal centered around BS/GA. I have to believe Giannis stays. Bud stays. Milwaukee blames the effects of a 3-month stoppage, the Orlando bubble, the mini stoppage before the series, Giannis lingering ankle injury, and losing the home-court advantage. Their failure in the playoffs will be framed around "from a record-setting season performance to one rough week of hoops".

IF the world returns back to normal??? They make another run and see how it all plays out until the trade deadline next season before moving Giannis. If Giannis demands a trade this Summer, they'll slow play it worse then NOLA/AD.
 

Royal Reader

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2005
1,820
UK
Yeah, Milwaukee would/should do that in a heartbeat. I wonder whether Philly would feel comfortable that Giannis re-signs.
Embiid feels like, of all second stars, the number one pick for "Guy who'd work least well next to Giannis."


Well, I wrote “...for a rising young star like Tatum or Simmons,” so I thought it was pretty clear that I didn’t intend “for Tatum or Simmons.” LOL, I guess.
Ambiguity of like meaning both "such as" or "similar to." But who is there who is similar to those guys who would actually be available? Apart from the Embiid/Simmons bad fit, teams with guys like that are generally looking for the second guy. Trading the guy they have for Giannis feels like a lateral move for that team, and one where GA doesn't seriously consider re-signing.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,935
Kiev, Ukraine
Ambiguity of like meaning both "such as" or "similar to." But who is there who is similar to those guys who would actually be available? Apart from the Embiid/Simmons bad fit, teams with guys like that are generally looking for the second guy. Trading the guy they have for Giannis feels like a lateral move for that team, and one where GA doesn't seriously consider re-signing.
Yeah, my point was mainly that there aren't really guys "like" Tatum or Simmons who are available. Donovan Mitchell, perhaps?

I think most of these teams with X Stud Young Guy are going to want to keep him and get the guaranteed 5-6 more years under contract + the chance he re-signs + further development.

Giannis' 3 consecutive playoff flameouts may be cause for concern as well, in terms of fit. He needs shooting and ballhandling around him. That's not soooo hard to find, especially because he's so good defensively (a lot of guys work).
 

Royal Reader

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2005
1,820
UK

Yeah, my point was mainly that there aren't really guys "like" Tatum or Simmons who are available. Donovan Mitchell, perhaps?

I think most of these teams with X Stud Young Guy are going to want to keep him and get the guaranteed 5-6 more years under contract + the chance he re-signs + further development.

Giannis' 3 consecutive playoff flameouts may be cause for concern as well, in terms of fit. He needs shooting and ballhandling around him. That's not soooo hard to find, especially because he's so good defensively (a lot of guys work).
The more I look at this, the more Boston looks like the team I would speak to if I'm the Bucks. Jaylen Brown, one other Cs starter not named Tatum, #14, #30 and the next two tradeable Celtics firsts seems the only package that tops high lottery picks in the next two drafts in terms of asset collection, and I probably do that if I'm the Cs. Obviously a lot depends on if MIL would rather go full rebuild.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,935
Kiev, Ukraine
The more I look at this, the more Boston looks like the team I would speak to if I'm the Bucks. Jaylen Brown, one other Cs starter not named Tatum, #14, #30 and the next two tradeable Celtics firsts seems the only package that tops high lottery picks in the next two drafts in terms of asset collection, and I probably do that if I'm the Cs. Obviously a lot depends on if MIL would rather go full rebuild.
Yeah, it's tough only because of the contract uncertainty, but you have to do that one imo. Tatum+Giannis+Kemba would be the overwhelming Finals favorite.

GSW is clearly going to have the best "full rebuild" package imo, and they're in the other conference.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
24,355
The only thing that comes close to resembling Giannis, that they could possibly land, is Ben Simmons. Other than some sort of mega-deal centered around BS/GA. I have to believe Giannis stays. Bud stays. Milwaukee blames the effects of a 3-month stoppage, the Orlando bubble, the mini stoppage before the series, Giannis lingering ankle injury, and losing the home-court advantage. Their failure in the playoffs will be framed around "from a record-setting season performance to one rough week of hoops".

IF the world returns back to normal??? They make another run and see how it all plays out until the trade deadline next season before moving Giannis. If Giannis demands a trade this Summer, they'll slow play it worse then NOLA/AD.
Yes, but that is no more or less true now than it will be at the deadline. They aren't getting a similar asset for Giannis in all probability---they will get some different (likely multiple) assets for him.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
24,355
The more I look at this, the more Boston looks like the team I would speak to if I'm the Bucks. Jaylen Brown, one other Cs starter not named Tatum, #14, #30 and the next two tradeable Celtics firsts seems the only package that tops high lottery picks in the next two drafts in terms of asset collection, and I probably do that if I'm the Cs. Obviously a lot depends on if MIL would rather go full rebuild.
The challenge, as has been mentioned over time, is that you need to know Giannis is open to staying before you make the deal. Frankly, we also have to see how this season plays out; I am not saying I wouldn't do it but I think a strong enough run this year makes you think very, very, very hard about breaking things up. The chemistry among the top guys is tough to create and shouldn't be casually discarded
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
4,186
around the way
I know that it's the Giannis trade thread, but the wet blanket POV is that what Milwaukee is missing is shooting and slashing around Giannis and Middleton. Same can be said for Philly IMO.

I don't think that Giannis needs a Batman or even another Robin (nor does Embiid/Simmons). They just need a few Alfreds. They're just poorly constructed teams
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,935
Kiev, Ukraine
I know that it's the Giannis trade thread, but the wet blanket POV is that what Milwaukee is missing is shooting and slashing around Giannis and Middleton. Same can be said for Philly IMO.

I don't think that Giannis needs a Batman or even another Robin (nor does Embiid/Simmons). They just need a few Alfreds. They're just poorly constructed teams
The funny thing is that if you name guys in the ~20M range who are exactly what Giannis needs, the first name that comes to mind is Malcolm Brogdon.

Milwaukee deserves everything they’re about to get for being too cheap to re-sign him.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
24,355
Agreed; letting Brogdon go was a terrible decision. Extending Bledsoe was also terrible, in part because it contributed to the decision to let Brogdon go.

You could defend the Brogdon thing for regular season play, but this was a team that knew it needed to win in the playoffs and Brogdon has the offensive skillset they sorely lack otherwise to beat good defenses when it counts. This was not hard to see last summer, either.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
4,186
around the way
Agreed; letting Brogdon go was a terrible decision. Extending Bledsoe was also terrible, in part because it contributed to the decision to let Brogdon go.

You could defend the Brogdon thing for regular season play, but this was a team that knew it needed to win in the playoffs and Brogdon has the offensive skillset they sorely lack otherwise to beat good defenses when it counts. This was not hard to see last summer, either.
Philly guessed wrong on their shooters and otherwise prioritized some of the wrong shit.

Milwaukee let Brogdon go because they needed jags like Bledsoe and Lopez. Totally asinine. Bledsoes grow on trees.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
24,355
I think Philly's is much worse overall, because of the zig-zag: they traded a bunch of assets for Harris and Butler (bad idea). They kept Harris and let Butler go (probably bad idea). They maxed Harris to do it (bad idea). They then signed Horford (really bad idea).

Milwaukee screwed up (agree with you they picked the wrong guys and wrong positions) but they were at least partially influenced by the financial implications. Philly just has no idea what it is doing baskebtball-wise
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
10,271
The funny thing is that if you name guys in the ~20M range who are exactly what Giannis needs, the first name that comes to mind is Malcolm Brogdon.

Milwaukee deserves everything they’re about to get for being too cheap to re-sign him.
Before the Celtics got Kemba, the guy I wanted them to get was Brogdon. I thought he'd be a perfect fit here. Now Kemba has turned out to be just phenomenal with this team and this particular group of players. But I was very high on Brogdon a year ago and still think he's a terrific player. Bad move by Milwaukee indeed.
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
7,084
NYC
Philly guessed wrong on their shooters and otherwise prioritized some of the wrong shit.

Milwaukee let Brogdon go because they needed jags like Bledsoe and Lopez. Totally asinine. Bledsoes grow on trees.
Bledsoe and Lopez didn’t need to preclude Brogdon, since they owned his Bird rights. And there would have been no obvious issues of fit or minutes-crunch had they re-signed Brogdon, since big, versatile defenders who can play on and off ball fit in any rotation and system. Bledsoe and Brogdon would have been a fine hoops fit.

As with OKC and Harden, the Bucks just cheaped out.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
4,186
around the way
Agreed completely.

I just think that Giannis/Middleton and Embiid/Simmons both need shooters around them and secondary scorers. And both had them. And both teams screwed the pooch.

But yeah, in Milwaukee's case their motivations are more understandable.
 

Euclis20

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
3,604
Imaginationland
Before the Celtics got Kemba, the guy I wanted them to get was Brogdon. I thought he'd be a perfect fit here. Now Kemba has turned out to be just phenomenal with this team and this particular group of players. But I was very high on Brogdon a year ago and still think he's a terrific player. Bad move by Milwaukee indeed.
Brogdon would have been nice, but logistically I'm not sure it was ever a possibility. Kemba was a sign and trade (because we were over the cap) with Charlotte that only worked because Charlotte wanted to sign Rozier for big money. I don't see that happening with Milwaukee.