The Bucks will NOT break luxury tax threshold in 09-10

Fight the Tank · Post #21 » by **Fight the Tank** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 3:58 pm

Lets say we aren't getting quality offers for RJ. We should be shopping CV while his value is at its peak right now.

Say Ridnour/CV for Camby/Novak.

Maybe something revolving around using CV to get rid of Gadzuric. I don't envy Hammond's situation, but standing pat would be a major letdown for me and is quite frankly what I am expecting right now.

aboveAverage · Post #22 » by **aboveAverage** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 4:02 pm

I'm confident Hammond has something planned. It may not be as drastic of a salary flush as we want, but I think he'll try and clear some salary cap space before the deadline. My guess would be trading Ridnour.

oshmeehan · Post #23 » by **oshmeehan** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 4:04 pm

Gadzuric and our 2009 first rounder to the Cavs for Eric Snow's expiring

Doubt the Cavs would do this, but it would give them another big man, and as a bonus they would get a mid-first rounder from us just for taking on Gadz.

I tried exploring deals involving other teams that would get the Bucks an expiring for Gadz and there isn't really any other possibilities out there

Post #24 » by **paulpressey25** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 4:07 pm

The question is where the organization views CV. As much as I disagree with it, I'm led to look at Europa's comment about them parting with CV as being the current thought.

CV for Landry could be revived very easily, although that doesn't really give much flexibility.

Maybe we can wish that RJ was told..."Play hard and we'll get a good deal for you" and he's got a decent RJ deal out there.

Post #25 » by **ReasonablySober** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 4:10 pm

oshmeehan wrote:Gadzuric and our 2009 first rounder to the Cavs for Eric Snow's expiring

That was the first thing I thought of. Not that specific deal, but the idea of using our 1st to unload Gadzuric (or RJ's) contract.

Look at it this way. If no moves are made and Hammond wants to keep Sessions, he almost has to dump that first round pick. But if he does it on draft day he's only saving himself around $2 million bones. Maybe that number is significant, but it's no where near what it could be if he uses that same pick to make a deal now. Take Gadz off our hands and you can have our lotto pick.

Then deal Luke. He's a solid little PG but at his price tag there's no way he's worth it. Not with Sessions worthy of 36 mpg.

Those are two very easy deals to make and it allows the Bucks to safely bring back CV and Sessions, two guys I'd much rather have than our 1st round pick.

Post #26 » by **ReasonablySober** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 4:11 pm

No way you can let a 22/8 forward walk for nothing. No chance in hell. ESPECIALLY when you consider he could sign for $7 or $8 million and immediately become a relative bargain.

LUKE23 · Post #27 » by **LUKE23** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 4:14 pm

DrugBust wrote:No way you can let a 22/8 forward walk for nothing. No chance in hell. ESPECIALLY when you consider he could sign for $7 or $8 million and immediately become a relative bargain.

Yep.

oshmeehan · Post #28 » by **oshmeehan** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 4:28 pm

I wouldn't have a problem moving the first round pick for this upcoming draft since do we really need to add yet another young player? We already have our project with JA. He can be our "rookie" for next season. Assuming we'd just be trading Gadz and our first rounder and doing nothing else as far as trades go, we'd have these 9 guys under contract still going into next season

Redd
RJ
Ridnour
Bogut
Bell
JA
Elson
Malik
Moute

Resign Sessions and CV and you're at 11. I'd also keep Bogans around if the price is right and if possible sign Ersan as well. We still would need another Center and Zaza is an unrestricted Free Agent. Not sure if it would be possible to bring him in, but he said he still loves Milwaukee. Add our 2nd rounder and then we're at a roster of 15.

It may not be possible financially, but who knows, you'd be looking at a team of (when all healthy):

PG - Ramon Sessions / Luke Ridnour / 2nd rounder?
SG - Michael Redd / Charlie Bell / Keith Bogans
SF - Richard Jefferson / Luc Richard Mbah a Moute / Joe Alexander
PF - Charlie Villanueva / Ersan Ilyasova / Malik Allen
C - Andrew Bogut / Zaza Pachulia / Francisco Elson

Stash the 2nd rounder away in the D-League and keep Elson (when Redd comes back) and Allen on the inactive list

WEFFPIM · Post #29 » by **WEFFPIM** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 4:29 pm

Any logical Bucks fan knew this already.

thetown · Post #30 » by **thetown** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 4:34 pm

Wow. If this is the case, then if everything stays the same we couldn't even give CV the QO, which would be just sad. Make some moves - trade Ridnour, the first, whatever to avoid this absurd situation. San Antonio may be a good match as they could use some added talent and would still have an abundance of cap space in 2010 if they took Gadz.

SupremeHustle · Post #31 » by **SupremeHustle** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 4:42 pm

DrugBust wrote:No way you can let a 22/8 forward walk for nothing. No chance in hell. ESPECIALLY when you consider he could sign for $7 or $8 million and immediately become a relative bargain.

The Bucks have to realize this, right? I mean, I don't want to be drastic or over dramatic, but if the Bucks lose CV for nothing, I swear to God-Almighty I'll be done with them and probably the NBA altogether. My love for them is extremely conditional. They have to stop treating us like the proverbial battered wife who thinks she deserves it.

Great, now I'm pissed.

LISTEN2JAZZ · Post #32 » by **LISTEN2JAZZ** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 4:44 pm

oshmeehan wrote:I wouldn't have a problem moving the first round pick for this upcoming draft since do we really need to add yet another young player?

Yes we do! We don't have nearly enough talent to win the championship. No matter how excited we get about the flashes Sessions and Villanueva have shown us, they are not the important pieces of a 60 win team, and they are not going to put us on top of teams with Lebron James, Dwight Howard, or Chris Paul.

The quest for more talent has only begun, and some of you guys are acting like it's cased closed if we can only keep the same exact guys who are winning us 35 games this year.

We already have our project with JA. He can be our "rookie" for next season.

Right, and maybe in 3 or 4 years he'll develop into a 6th man. Meanwhile, we're still in search of our #1 man. Don't settle for the Larry Harris rebuild and win at the same time strategy. Develop and add to our young core, and be happy that they are fun to watch even when they aren't winning 50 games.

oshmeehan · Post #33 » by **oshmeehan** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 4:49 pm

adamcz wrote:
oshmeehan wrote:I wouldn't have a problem moving the first round pick for this upcoming draft since do we really need to add yet another young player?
Yes we do! We don't have nearly enough talent to win the championship. No matter how excited we get about the flashes Sessions and Villanueva have shown us, they are not the important pieces of a 60 win team, and they are not going to put us on top of teams with Lebron James, Dwight Howard, or Chris Paul.

The quest for more talent has only begun, and some of you guys are acting like it's cased closed if we can only keep the same exact guys who are winning us 35 games this year.

We already have our project with JA. He can be our "rookie" for next season.
Right, and maybe in 3 or 4 years he'll develop into a 6th man. Meanwhile, we're still in search of our #1 man. Don't settle for the Larry Harris rebuild and win at the same time strategy. Develop and add to our young core, and be happy that they are fun to watch even when they aren't winning 50 games.

Right. We're going to get LeBron, Dwight, or CP3 or anyone of that quality with the 15th pick. Please tell me who it is you think the Bucks would be able to get around the 15th pick that would be that immediate star player. Keep dreaming there guy

And our team still would be relatively young with Bogut, CV, Sessions, JA, Luc and Ersan, while our older guys (Redd, RJ, Ridnour, Allen) would be coming off the books after next season or after the following year

Post #34 » by **ReasonablySober** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 4:50 pm

adamcz, I fully agree that we need more young assets, but we can't be losing the ones we have, either. Letting CV and/or Sessions walk at the expense of a 1st rounder is a terrible move. If you have to use the pick this year to clear salary (ONLY if other options have been explored and can't be done) it needs to be done.

WEFFPIM · Post #35 » by **WEFFPIM** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 4:52 pm

SupremeHustle wrote:
DrugBust wrote:No way you can let a 22/8 forward walk for nothing. No chance in hell. ESPECIALLY when you consider he could sign for $7 or $8 million and immediately become a relative bargain.

The Bucks have to realize this, right? I mean, I don't want to be drastic or over dramatic, but if the Bucks lose CV for nothing, I swear to God-Almighty I'll be done with them and probably the NBA altogether. My love for them is extremely conditional. They have to stop treating us like the proverbial battered wife who thinks she deserves it.

Great, now I'm pissed.

How ya doin' there, champ? Ya wanna get an ice cream?

Post #36 » by **paulpressey25** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 4:52 pm

adamcz wrote:[The quest for more talent has only begun, and some of you guys are acting like it's cased closed if we can only keep the same exact guys who are winning us 35 games this year..

I disagree with the premise that we'd be keeping together a 35-win team. The only way I'd buy that is if what we've seen the last six-games (4-2 record) is just a typical Bucks outburst that will go away quickly the next time we play Cleveland, Boston or Orlando.

This team is playing an entirely different style game right now over what we were doing two weeks ago. Based on what I saw of Bogut against Toronto and Atlanta, I think he can play in this style.

I just can't see the young talent we get in this upcoming draft with the 14th pick. I'd rather try to keep the gang together (sans Redd/Ridnour/Gadz), add a Landry and see what happens the last 26 games and next season.

Ramon and CV (and RJ) are all blooming right now with Redd's dead roots moved out of the way.

Post #37 » by **ReasonablySober** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 4:54 pm

Ridnour for Landry/filler?

Post #38 » by **paulpressey25** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 4:56 pm

DrugBust wrote:Ridnour for Landry/filler?

I like it. Then use that #1 pick to move Gadz to the T-Wolves for Jason Collins. Again pick up about $10 million of salary room to work with.

I maintain we need Landry with CV. But if CV then receives a ludacrisp contract offer we can't match, you still have Landry to at least give you some production at PF.

LUKE23 · Post #39 » by **LUKE23** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 5:01 pm

In order of my priority to keep of Sessions/CV/RJ/1st, it would be:

1. Sessions
2. CV
3. 1st
4. RJ

I still explore RJ for an expiring first. He's not a long-term piece here, even with his improved play. As soon as Redd comes back halfway through next year, we aren't going to be seeing the RJ we've seen the last 9 games or so. He and Redd are a poor fit.

I also don't like giving up young talent. What if we could get a dynamic backup PG like Lawson at #14?

If we cannot move RJ for an expiring, then I would reluctantly trade the first rounder with Gadzuric or whatever to clear salary.

I will say this though: CV and Sessions had both better be on this damn roster next year. Or the fans will rightfully put the hammer down on Hammond.

Post #40 » by **ReasonablySober** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 5:04 pm

If CV has a lot of games like he did last night in the next two months, I won't have a problem letting him go if he gets a huge offer. But if he's a regular 22/8/2 (and I think that could be low), we have to match, maybe up to eight figures. Those are numbers you build around. Like El Duderino said in another thread, a big thing with CV may just be that he can match the production of your elite PFs. Maybe he can't stop them from scoring, but if he's also capable of putting up 28-33 points and grabbing 11 rebounds he'll be a positive for this team.