Bogut:5-yr/$60mm Guaranteed + $12.5mm possible bonuses (OLD)

LUKE23 · Post #121 » by **LUKE23** » Wed Jul 9, 2008 6:43 pm

I'm going to wait until the details come out. If it's incentive-based UP TO $72.5M, then I'm fine with it because those incentives likely include all-star appearances, Bucks win totals, or playoff advancement that will make that contract total worth it. If it's straight out 5/72.5 guaranteed, then I think we overpaid by $2.5M a year.

GHOSTofSIKMA · Post #122 » by **GHOSTofSIKMA** » Wed Jul 9, 2008 6:47 pm

You guys are way overeacting. 5/72 is a good deal... Lets see what Okafor gets from GS. Would any of you trade Bogut for Okafor?

Okafor turned down 5/60 last year and I'll bet GS now offers him more. If we were willing to lowball him we could have offered 5/60. Then next year we might have had to match more than this if hed improved on his current trajectory.

You guys are overreacting. This is a fair deal.

Sigra · Post #123 » by **Sigra** » Wed Jul 9, 2008 6:52 pm

GHOSTofSIKMA wrote: This is a fair deal.

No it's not. Not even close to be fair. And I am big fan of Bogut

Post #124 » by **ReasonablySober** » Wed Jul 9, 2008 6:52 pm

Sigra wrote:
GHOSTofSIKMA wrote: This is a fair deal.

No it's not. Not even close to be fair. And I am big fan of Bogut

midranger · Post #125 » by **midranger** » Wed Jul 9, 2008 6:53 pm

Fair deal? On what planet?

Jamaal Magloire put up 14/10 while finishing the season with a couple dominating months like Bogut on a good Hornets team as a 25 year old.

Did he deserve 73 million? This is ridiculous.

emunney · Post #126 » by **emunney** » Wed Jul 9, 2008 6:54 pm

It's a fair deal if the extra 12 million is contingent on him shooting 75% from the line. I actually love that idea. Props to Sigra.

aboveAverage · Post #127 » by **aboveAverage** » Wed Jul 9, 2008 6:56 pm

Well, first of all, the 72 million seems to be the max, including incentives and all of that extra stuff. I think the actual deal is closer to 5/60, which is fair. If Bogut ever does earn the entire 72 million, that will mean that he will have become a perennial all star, which no one would complain about. I don't think the bucks are offering 5/72 million base.

LISTEN2JAZZ · Post #128 » by **LISTEN2JAZZ** » Wed Jul 9, 2008 6:56 pm

And aside from the discussion of fair, is the discussion of whether the risk/reward of waiting one more year to evaluate him make this contract sensible. I think there was almost no risk of him blowing up to a contract worth more than this.

GrandAdmiralDan · Post #129 » by **GrandAdmiralDan** » Wed Jul 9, 2008 7:00 pm

midranger wrote:Ugh. Just awful.

Why sign him now to an absurd deal? What's the point? Where's the discount?

Stupid.

I have yet to find out who was all involved in the process (such as Steinmiller, Burr, Walter, etc.) and I have yet to find out what Hammond's role was in all of this, but I have learned that Herb Kohl himself was intimately involved in these negotiations.

The whole "Hammond is in control" thing seems to have lasted all of not quite 3 months.
We'll see if Kohl will at least scoot back out of the way now.

Balls2TheWalls · Post #130 » by **Balls2TheWalls** » Wed Jul 9, 2008 7:01 pm

emunney wrote:It's a fair deal if the extra 12 million is contingent on him shooting 75% from the line. I actually love that idea. Props to Sigra.

12 million? Make it 80%.

jerrod · Post #131 » by **jerrod** » Wed Jul 9, 2008 7:01 pm

adamcz wrote:And aside from the discussion of fair, is the discussion of whether the risk/reward of waiting one more year to evaluate him make this contract sensible. I think there was almost no risk of him blowing up to a contract worth more than this.

there's probably more of a risk of him actually spontaneously combusting than there is of him blowing up and being worth this deal

Simulack · Post #132 » by **Simulack** » Wed Jul 9, 2008 7:02 pm

It just wouldn't be a real Bucks off-season without grossly overpaying for at least one NBA player. We never seem to be able to sign a guy to a deal that outsid fans and objective observers think is "fair value." I guess its just a function of being in a city no one wants to live in and having a team that has been pretty bad since the mid-80's.

LUKE23 · Post #133 » by **LUKE23** » Wed Jul 9, 2008 7:04 pm

Two sources are reporting 5/60 (1250 WSSP and Woelfel), one source is reporting 5/72.5 (MJS). I will wait and see.

And yes, if it was incentive-laden up to 72.5M, and Bogut reached the incentives laid out, he definitely would have earned the deal. Bogut after THIS past season in today's market was worth 11-12M a year, and an incentive-laden deal would obviously expect improvement to reach the incentives.

Sigra · Post #134 » by **Sigra** » Wed Jul 9, 2008 7:07 pm

Balls2TheWalls wrote:
emunney wrote:It's a fair deal if the extra 12 million is contingent on him shooting 75% from the line. I actually love that idea. Props to Sigra.

12 million? Make it 80%.

You think that Bogut can shoot 75% from free throw line for season? No way. So far he is around 60%. For example Toni Kukoc was around 73% in his career and Kukoc was SF with great shoot. If it is 75% then Bucks really got him for 60 millions

Simulack · Post #135 » by **Simulack** » Wed Jul 9, 2008 7:10 pm

Its pretty staggering how much money the Bucks are going to have invested in relatively mediocre/slightly above average players.

I know we need to be patient to give Hammond time to turn things around but right now it looks like are trying to win-now with a bunch of overpaid guys who are going to have a very difficult time even stealing a #7 or #8 seed in the next season or two.

If I was Kohl, I'd certainly find a more entertaining (and probably perverse) way of pissing away millions of dollars than Bucks basketball.

LUKE23 · Post #136 » by **LUKE23** » Wed Jul 9, 2008 7:14 pm

Redd/RJ/Bogut are definitely well above average players. The next three seasons you are correct, this is the team we will live and die with due to our salary situation, but lets call a spade a spade with the roster.

In regards to the playoffs, it will depend on team D. If Skiles can improve the D to even middle of the pack level, they have a ton of offense and will be able to make the playoffs. If it's more of the same, then we will likely be sitting at home again.

But Redd/RJ are both top 10 NBA scorers (I realize there is more to the game than scoring, just putting this as a reference to the terms "mediocre" and "slightly above average"), and Bogut is one of the better young bigs in the league, who in most people's estimation is not done improving.

I realize people like to be pessimistic by nature on this forum, but lets be realistic.

Profound23 · Post #137 » by **Profound23** » Wed Jul 9, 2008 7:17 pm

Simulack wrote:Its pretty staggering how much money the Bucks are going to have invested in relatively mediocre/slightly above average players.

I know we need to be patient to give Hammond time to turn things around but right now it looks like are trying to win-now with a bunch of overpaid guys who are going to have a very difficult time even stealing a #7 or #8 seed in the next season or two.

If I was Kohl, I'd certainly find a more entertaining (and probably perverse) way of pissing away millions of dollars than Bucks basketball.

emunney · Post #138 » by **emunney** » Wed Jul 9, 2008 7:19 pm

Sigra wrote:
Balls2TheWalls wrote:
emunney wrote:It's a fair deal if the extra 12 million is contingent on him shooting 75% from the line. I actually love that idea. Props to Sigra.

12 million? Make it 80%.

You think that Bogut can shoot 75% from free throw line for season? No way. So far he is around 60%. For example Toni Kukoc was around 73% in his career and Kukoc was SF with great shoot. If it is 75% then Bucks really got him for 60 millions

Exactly my point. With the way NBA incentives work -- divided up into "likely" and "not likely" where "likely" counts against the cap while "not likely" doesn't -- if we give him a goal that he didn't reach this past season (even 70% would be fine and reasonable), it doesn't count against the cap. Maybe it seems to Bogut and his agent that he should be able to reach that incentive fairly easily. And if he really works on it and works on it the right way, it's certainly possible that he could get there... if not this year, than at least at some point over the length of the contract. I really hope it's a FT% incentive. That would be brilliant. Worst case scenario? Obviously ppg.

carmelbrownqueen · Post #139 » by **carmelbrownqueen** » Wed Jul 9, 2008 7:19 pm

GrandAdmiralDan wrote:
midranger wrote:Ugh. Just awful.

Why sign him now to an absurd deal? What's the point? Where's the discount?

Stupid.

I have yet to find out who was all involved in the process (such as Steinmiller, Burr, Walter, etc.) and I have yet to find out what Hammond's role was in all of this, but I have learned that Herb Kohl himself was intimately involved in these negotiations.

The whole "Hammond is in control" thing seems to have lasted all of not quite 3 months.
We'll see if Kohl will at least scoot back out of the way now.

fam3381 · Post #140 » by **fam3381** » Wed Jul 9, 2008 7:19 pm

LUKE23 wrote:Two sources are reporting 5/60 (1250 WSSP and Woelfel), one source is reporting 5/72.5 (MJS). I will wait and see.

1) Isn't Woelfel/WSSP the same source?
2) Unless Bauman is lying to everyone, I don't think the w/incentives number of $72.5 million is wrong. It's just a question of what those incentives are.

ETA: clearly Bauman is going to quote the highest possible number because he's Bogut's agent, so I wouldn't necessarily assume that it means those are easily reachable targets.