LambeauLeap1250 WSSP


  
Go to page Previous  1 ... 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 ... 42  Next  [ 835 posts ]  New Topic   Add Reply

Milwaukee Bucks 2016 - 2017

Author Message
Offline  Re: Milwaukee Bucks 2016 - 2017
Posted: July 11, 2017, 8:44 PM Post
User avatar
Global Moderator
Posts: 7384
Draft picks have looked good in summer league....as has Vaughn. Thing about Vaughn is that he's still really young. Maybe there's hope although I'm not gonna hold my breath.

"Dustin Pedroia doesn't have the strength or bat speed to hit major-league pitching consistently, and he has no power......He probably has a future as a backup infielder if he can stop rolling over to third base and shortstop." Keith Law, 2006


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Milwaukee Bucks 2016 - 2017
Posted: July 12, 2017, 2:15 AM Post
Posts: 301
homer said:
Draft picks have looked good in summer league....as has Vaughn. Thing about Vaughn is that he's still really young. Maybe there's hope although I'm not gonna hold my breath.


Yeah, I was a little surprised. I knew he was young, but you look at the roster and unless I'm mistaken, he was the 2nd youngest behind only Thon Maker. I wouldn't hold my breath either, but just because so many of our young guys have come in and developed right away doesn't mean it won't take 3 or 4 years for a guy like Vaughn to develop.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Milwaukee Bucks 2016 - 2017
Posted: July 12, 2017, 3:31 AM Post
Posts: 301
Baldkin said:
GAME05 said:
I guess I don't see the Bucks' ownership group as such a mess as others do. Every owner meddles, but at least with our group if we end up with a Herb Kohl governor-owner, at least we get a new perspective after five years.


They haven't done anything right on the basketball side, haven't made any difference making moves, since taking over the team.

They all might meddle, but the Bucks owners clearly are not good at it at all.


They hired what looks to be the perfect coach for this team...despite the fact that it looked like an awful move at the time. They drafted THEE freak..Thon Maker, the rookie of the year. They traded MCW for Snell. The money spent last year was stupid, but they were hardly the exception. Not an excuse, but the market was reset and it was just a lucky time for some players to be FA's. Someone mentioned trading for one of the Celts young guys(turned out to be Bradley)...but I can't imagine Boston would have been real interested in helping to hand us a key contributor just so they could clear cap space.

Now you can obviously come back and list of dumb things they've done, but saying they've done nothing right is over the top.

I do wish they would have just given Giannis the 5 year deal...but for the next 4 years I'm gonna just hope that he means what he keeps saying...1-He wants to be the best ever--something that is obvious from how he's developed his body to how he plays the game and, 2-He wants to play his entire career in Milwaukee. I think the one thing we do have going for us is his family moved here and he great up here.

Oh, one more thing real quick, saying they were lucky to get Giannis at 15...I don't buy that just like I don't buy the Packers were lucky with Rodgers or the Cards were lucky with Pujos. When everyone else passes on a generational type talent and you draft him...you did something good. Not something that should be dismissed as luck. Just like I'll give the Mavs credit for picking Dirk(though we obviously technically did, he was only going to play because of Nelson).


But otherwise, interesting read...I'm obviously late to the conversation, but I enjoyed reading the different opinions.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Milwaukee Bucks 2016 - 2017
Posted: July 12, 2017, 8:16 AM Post
User avatar
Posts: 4480
If you think Kidd is a good coach, that's a non-starter with me.
They didn't draft Giannis. Giannis was drafted and the owners were gifted the #2 overall pick.

The fact that I can come back with an incredibly long list of stupidly horrible moves that this new ownership group has made since taking over and you listed 2 things that are... well, not spectacular and they were both in last year's draft, that gives me no faith in this group moving forward.

"I wasted so much time in my life hating Juventus or A.C. Milan that I should have spent hating the Cardinals." ~kalle8

Twitter: @MKEHiker
Website: http://www.mkehiker.com


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Milwaukee Bucks 2016 - 2017
Posted: July 12, 2017, 8:44 AM Post
Posts: 5865
homer said:
Draft picks have looked good in summer league....as has Vaughn. Thing about Vaughn is that he's still really young. Maybe there's hope although I'm not gonna hold my breath.


Vaughn is young, but it's also his third year in the league. There is hope, there's just something about his game I don't like.

More encourage by Wilson, was not happy with that pick at all on draft night. But he showed he can shoot better than I thought, seems pretty scrappy on the boards. Bronson looked like a 50 year old man out there.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Milwaukee Bucks 2016 - 2017
Posted: July 12, 2017, 9:10 AM Post
Posts: 1700
Location: Madison, WI
Baldkin said:
If you think Kidd is a good coach, that's a non-starter with me.
They didn't draft Giannis. Giannis was drafted and the owners were gifted the #2 overall pick.

The fact that I can come back with an incredibly long list of stupidly horrible moves that this new ownership group has made since taking over and you listed 2 things that are... well, not spectacular and they were both in last year's draft, that gives me no faith in this group moving forward.


Right, they fell *** backwards into a legit 22 yr old superstar. If it wasn't for Giannis becoming way better than anyone could have possibly imagined this team would still be one of the biggest joke franchises in the league.

Edit: Please stop avoiding the swearing filter - CWH


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Milwaukee Bucks 2016 - 2017
Posted: July 12, 2017, 9:52 AM Post
User avatar
Posts: 2753
Well, if Giannis wasn't here we'd also be talking about how great Fulz looks in a Bucks uniform. We'd have had a lot higher draft picks.

Vaughn is young, but you could expect to see flashes of talent now and again. Maybe he shows promise during practice. I kinda figure he's still here only because nobody else is banging on the door to take his spot on the roster.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Milwaukee Bucks 2016 - 2017
Posted: July 12, 2017, 11:52 AM Post
User avatar
Global Moderator
Posts: 4112
Drafting Giannis caused massive groans in the fanbase because he was very raw. Yet he was thought to have the highest upside in the draft that year. So I do believe there was a thought he could be this good.

I also remember when we drafted some German putz that no one knew, but thankfully traded him for that BB legend Robert Tractor Traylor.

Sure, there is always some luck involved in how good a player gets (or in Gianni's case grows). But one thing that John Hammond did well was draft talented players. Not 100%, but certainly better than average.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Milwaukee Bucks 2016 - 2017
Posted: July 12, 2017, 12:26 PM Post
Posts: 1700
Location: Madison, WI
CheezWizHed said:
Drafting Giannis caused massive groans in the fanbase because he was very raw. Yet he was thought to have the highest upside in the draft that year. So I do believe there was a thought he could be this good.

I also remember when we drafted some German putz that no one knew, but thankfully traded him for that BB legend Robert Tractor Traylor.

Sure, there is always some luck involved in how good a player gets (or in Gianni's case grows). But one thing that John Hammond did well was draft talented players. Not 100%, but certainly better than average.


But we're talking about these owners. They had literally nothing to do with getting Giannis that's why they got so lucky for him to fall in their lap. And i don't think even the biggest optimists thought that he'd be starting an ASG at age 22 or that he had "best player in the world" potential. They came in the offseason when we'd already secured the #2 pick/Jabari. Pretty much every offseason since has been, well, not good.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Milwaukee Bucks 2016 - 2017
Posted: July 12, 2017, 1:49 PM Post
Posts: 132
CheezWizHed said:

I also remember when we drafted some German putz that no one knew, but thankfully traded him for that BB legend Robert Tractor Traylor.



Not picking on you, but every time I have read a statement like this over the past 19 years it has driven me crazy.

Dallas had the #6 pick, Milwaukee had picks #9 and #19. This trade was a pre-draft deal. If the Bucks did not agree to this deal, Dallas would have simply picked Dirk at #6. Dallas made the deal because the Bucks were willing to trade them #19 (which they flipped to Phoenix for Nash). There is no scenario in which the Bucks could have ended up with Dirk. They could not have "kept" him because he was never theirs. As soon as the deal was made prior to the draft, he always belonged to Dallas, and if the deal had never been made, he would have been picked by Dallas.

The Bucks have made some incredibly dumb moves over the years, but this one should not be included since they really did not "trade away a future HOFer" which is how people tend to characterize this deal. The criticism they truly deserve from that draft? Paul Pierce was pick #10.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Milwaukee Bucks 2016 - 2017
Posted: July 12, 2017, 2:38 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 910
PrestigeWorldwide said:
CheezWizHed said:

I also remember when we drafted some German putz that no one knew, but thankfully traded him for that BB legend Robert Tractor Traylor.

Not picking on you, but every time I have read a statement like this over the past 19 years it has driven me crazy.

Dallas had the #6 pick, Milwaukee had picks #9 and #19. This trade was a pre-draft deal. If the Bucks did not agree to this deal, Dallas would have simply picked Dirk at #6. Dallas made the deal because the Bucks were willing to trade them #19 (which they flipped to Phoenix for Nash). There is no scenario in which the Bucks could have ended up with Dirk. They could not have "kept" him because he was never theirs. As soon as the deal was made prior to the draft, he always belonged to Dallas, and if the deal had never been made, he would have been picked by Dallas.

Thank you!


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Milwaukee Bucks 2016 - 2017
Posted: July 12, 2017, 4:51 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 4613
Just out of curiosity, wasn't Dallas taking a risk that the Kings would have drafted him at #7 or the 76ers at #8? What would have stopped that from happening?


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Milwaukee Bucks 2016 - 2017
Posted: July 12, 2017, 7:06 PM Post
Posts: 132
My recollection is that they were pretty confident no one else was taking him in the top ten, and it was a chance they were willing to take.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Milwaukee Bucks 2016 - 2017
Posted: July 13, 2017, 6:55 PM Post
User avatar
Global Moderator
Posts: 4112
tmwiese55 said:
CheezWizHed said:
Drafting Giannis caused massive groans in the fanbase because he was very raw. Yet he was thought to have the highest upside in the draft that year. So I do believe there was a thought he could be this good.

I also remember when we drafted some German putz that no one knew, but thankfully traded him for that BB legend Robert Tractor Traylor.

Sure, there is always some luck involved in how good a player gets (or in Gianni's case grows). But one thing that John Hammond did well was draft talented players. Not 100%, but certainly better than average.


But we're talking about these owners. They had literally nothing to do with getting Giannis that's why they got so lucky for him to fall in their lap. And i don't think even the biggest optimists thought that he'd be starting an ASG at age 22 or that he had "best player in the world" potential. They came in the offseason when we'd already secured the #2 pick/Jabari. Pretty much every offseason since has been, well, not good.


Then they weren't lucky. They bought him. Sounds like a good business deal. [wink] I'm not trying to defend the owners (the GM search was embarrassing). I just think its silly to say they were lucky.

Re: I don't recall the talk about Dallas drafting Dirk if Milwaukee didn't trade for him. But I do remember a lot of applause for the Bucks in making that trade. And both players they traded away were better than Traylor. Anyway, my point was that our talent evaluation bad in the day was terrible.

Hopefully, the ownership does get back on the same page. I think they started well, but this GM search was a head-scratcher.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Milwaukee Bucks 2016 - 2017
Posted: July 14, 2017, 2:39 AM Post
Posts: 301
Baldkin said:
If you think Kidd is a good coach, that's a non-starter with me.
They didn't draft Giannis. Giannis was drafted and the owners were gifted the #2 overall pick.

The fact that I can come back with an incredibly long list of stupidly horrible moves that this new ownership group has made since taking over and you listed 2 things that are... well, not spectacular and they were both in last year's draft, that gives me no faith in this group moving forward.



Likewise if you don't think he is.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Milwaukee Bucks 2016 - 2017
Posted: July 14, 2017, 2:44 AM Post
Posts: 301
CheezWizHed said:
tmwiese55 said:
CheezWizHed said:
Drafting Giannis caused massive groans in the fanbase because he was very raw. Yet he was thought to have the highest upside in the draft that year. So I do believe there was a thought he could be this good.

I also remember when we drafted some German putz that no one knew, but thankfully traded him for that BB legend Robert Tractor Traylor.

Sure, there is always some luck involved in how good a player gets (or in Gianni's case grows). But one thing that John Hammond did well was draft talented players. Not 100%, but certainly better than average.


But we're talking about these owners. They had literally nothing to do with getting Giannis that's why they got so lucky for him to fall in their lap. And i don't think even the biggest optimists thought that he'd be starting an ASG at age 22 or that he had "best player in the world" potential. They came in the offseason when we'd already secured the #2 pick/Jabari. Pretty much every offseason since has been, well, not good.


Then they weren't lucky. They bought him. Sounds like a good business deal. [wink] I'm not trying to defend the owners (the GM search was embarrassing). I just think its silly to say they were lucky.

Re: I don't recall the talk about Dallas drafting Dirk if Milwaukee didn't trade for him. But I do remember a lot of applause for the Bucks in making that trade. And both players they traded away were better than Traylor. Anyway, my point was that our talent evaluation bad in the day was terrible.

Hopefully, the ownership does get back on the same page. I think they started well, but this GM search was a head-scratcher.



Nelson was the guy who found Dirk. He went over there, Dirk wasn't planning on playing in the NBA...at least anytime soon. He talked to the parents, he said he'd take care of him. I don't think any other teams were even considering Dirk and I don't think he was considering coming to play for any other team. That being said, we wanted to move up to get our guy. Like people have already said, he was never an option for the Bucks. My guess...at that time, if Dirk hadn't been drafted by us for Dallas in a pre-arranged trade, he'd have been taken in the 2nd round and maybe have come over years later if a team even held his rights that long. European markets weren't scouted nearly as well at that time.

We got lucky this time around with Giannis though because another front office guy, Harris, desperately tried to convince Cuban to pick Giannis a few spots ahead of the Bucks, something Cuban confirmed. Instead he was more concerned with trying to sign FA's, that year Dwight was the target and he needed to keep his cap space for a max, so he traded back. So Dallas actually could have stolen a superstar from us whereas we never really had any chance at Dirk.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Milwaukee Bucks 2016 - 2017
Posted: July 14, 2017, 7:58 AM Post
Posts: 1700
Location: Madison, WI
CheezWizHed said:
tmwiese55 said:
CheezWizHed said:
Drafting Giannis caused massive groans in the fanbase because he was very raw. Yet he was thought to have the highest upside in the draft that year. So I do believe there was a thought he could be this good.

I also remember when we drafted some German putz that no one knew, but thankfully traded him for that BB legend Robert Tractor Traylor.

Sure, there is always some luck involved in how good a player gets (or in Gianni's case grows). But one thing that John Hammond did well was draft talented players. Not 100%, but certainly better than average.


But we're talking about these owners. They had literally nothing to do with getting Giannis that's why they got so lucky for him to fall in their lap. And i don't think even the biggest optimists thought that he'd be starting an ASG at age 22 or that he had "best player in the world" potential. They came in the offseason when we'd already secured the #2 pick/Jabari. Pretty much every offseason since has been, well, not good.


Then they weren't lucky. They bought him. Sounds like a good business deal. [wink] I'm not trying to defend the owners (the GM search was embarrassing). I just think its silly to say they were lucky.

Re: I don't recall the talk about Dallas drafting Dirk if Milwaukee didn't trade for him. But I do remember a lot of applause for the Bucks in making that trade. And both players they traded away were better than Traylor. Anyway, my point was that our talent evaluation bad in the day was terrible.

Hopefully, the ownership does get back on the same page. I think they started well, but this GM search was a head-scratcher.


When they bought the team they had absolutely no inclination or idea that he would be anywhere near this. No one did. That was very lucky to have that happen when they personally had nothing to do with it. And now it's covering up basically terrible basketball ops management since they took over. That's all I'm saying and I don't think it's crazy.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Milwaukee Bucks 2016 - 2017
Posted: July 14, 2017, 11:27 AM Post
Posts: 1751
If they trade a number 1 to unload Henson so they can sign Rose to a $20M per year deal I might be officially done with this leadership. He is fragile and a bad fit for us.

I'd rather they just coach up their bad contracts and hope one or two produces rather than trade a number one and lock up Rose to a big deal.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Milwaukee Bucks 2016 - 2017
Posted: July 14, 2017, 11:31 AM Post
Posts: 1751
PrestigeWorldwide said:
CheezWizHed said:

I also remember when we drafted some German putz that no one knew, but thankfully traded him for that BB legend Robert Tractor Traylor.



Not picking on you, but every time I have read a statement like this over the past 19 years it has driven me crazy.

Dallas had the #6 pick, Milwaukee had picks #9 and #19. This trade was a pre-draft deal. If the Bucks did not agree to this deal, Dallas would have simply picked Dirk at #6. Dallas made the deal because the Bucks were willing to trade them #19 (which they flipped to Phoenix for Nash). There is no scenario in which the Bucks could have ended up with Dirk. They could not have "kept" him because he was never theirs. As soon as the deal was made prior to the draft, he always belonged to Dallas, and if the deal had never been made, he would have been picked by Dallas.

The Bucks have made some incredibly dumb moves over the years, but this one should not be included since they really did not "trade away a future HOFer" which is how people tend to characterize this deal. The criticism they truly deserve from that draft? Paul Pierce was pick #10.


This is very polite spin from the Bucks over the years. If the Mavs wanted Dirk that bad they would have just taken him at 6 and Bucks would have messed up 9 and 19 just fine on their own. To risk 7 and 8 taking Dirk would make no sense for Dallas.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Milwaukee Bucks 2016 - 2017
Posted: July 14, 2017, 1:51 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 910
Boomer5 said:
PrestigeWorldwide said:
CheezWizHed said:

I also remember when we drafted some German putz that no one knew, but thankfully traded him for that BB legend Robert Tractor Traylor.



Not picking on you, but every time I have read a statement like this over the past 19 years it has driven me crazy.

Dallas had the #6 pick, Milwaukee had picks #9 and #19. This trade was a pre-draft deal. If the Bucks did not agree to this deal, Dallas would have simply picked Dirk at #6. Dallas made the deal because the Bucks were willing to trade them #19 (which they flipped to Phoenix for Nash). There is no scenario in which the Bucks could have ended up with Dirk. They could not have "kept" him because he was never theirs. As soon as the deal was made prior to the draft, he always belonged to Dallas, and if the deal had never been made, he would have been picked by Dallas.

The Bucks have made some incredibly dumb moves over the years, but this one should not be included since they really did not "trade away a future HOFer" which is how people tend to characterize this deal. The criticism they truly deserve from that draft? Paul Pierce was pick #10.


This is very polite spin from the Bucks over the years. If the Mavs wanted Dirk that bad they would have just taken him at 6 and Bucks would have messed up 9 and 19 just fine on their own. To risk 7 and 8 taking Dirk would make no sense for Dallas.

Because they didn't think anyone else knew about him or had him ranked that high and thought gaining the 19th pick was worth the risk. If they wanted Traylor so badly, why did they trade him?

And did the Bucks actually draft Marbury and trade him after they made the pick or was it prearranged?



That's how things were done back then, teams that owned that pick made the selection and trades weren't officially announced until July 1 (I think it was July 1).


 Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Go to page Previous  1 ... 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 ... 42  Next  [ 835 posts ]  New Topic   Add Reply
  


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search this forum (phpBB search):
Jump to:  
Search entire board (Google search):
Google
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Test