the "option NOT exercised" team

[jdev82]

Alexander is in a tough situation.
a #8 pick, who not even can make the 3rd year, has written bust all over him. and now he's injured for about half of the season. and has Warrick, Ilyasova, Mbah and Delfino ahead in the rotation. so, no chance to see the court at all.
he will be happy to get a guaranteed minimum contract next summer. most teams very likely will only offer make good deals.

John Hammond doesn't exactly look like a GM with a plan.
he got the job in April last year and his first trade was Yi and Simmons for Jefferson, who was then traded for virtually nothing to SA.
so the #6 pick 2007 was burned for nothing in return. then he picks Alexander instead of Lopez, Anthony, Lee, Speights etc. and Alexander doesn't even make the 3rd year.
#8 pick 2008 also burned.
I wonder what will happen to Brandon Jennings.......

this is my area of expertise, being a bucks fan from milwaukee. heres the thing. skiles is a flip flopping, cant make his mind up coach, unless its about hating players. joe quickly found his way into the doghouse, and it didnt help that he sucked balls and sustained two injuries. as for the hammond/ RJ/ bobby simmons/ Yi situation, there are two reasons. the main one being to save salary for 2010. getting rid of simmons contract and RJs in a year was saving 20 mill. Yi was a diffucult situation. he didnt play any defense. skiles hated him. he was soft. couldnt rebound. and simmons was a 3 pt chucker who played the worst d in the league. what we were trying to do there last year is get away from what the bucks were in the past( a no defense, 3 pt, stupid ass team) as for hammonds plan, seems to me like he put the bucks in salary dump mode for 2010. redd is a big factor there, because he has a player option next year for 18 mil, making it likely that he will be traded for an expiring contract. watch the bucks attract a 2nd tier superstar or two in 2010 in a desparate plea to stay relevant and in the great state of wisconsin.

go spurs,
-jess

[mountainballer]

this is my area of expertise, being a bucks fan from milwaukee.

believe me, this board isn't an area of expertise despite the number of Spurs fans from SA.

as for the hammond/ RJ/ bobby simmons/ Yi situation, there are two reasons. the main one being to save salary for 2010. getting rid of simmons contract and RJs in a year was saving 20 mill.

wait. they trade away the big contract that expires 2010 (Simmons) and take back a much bigger contract that goes till 2011 (RJ) and then you tell us that the main reason for the moves was to clear cap space for 2010 and that getting rid of both saved 20 million????
so there are at least two people in Milwaukee not really qualified for a GM job.

watch the bucks attract a 2nd tier superstar or two in 2010 in a desparate plea to stay relevant and in the great state of wisconsin.

don't know exactly what superstars are 2nd tier. maybe you think about someone like Amare or J. Johnson. forget it. Bucks will be happy to get a 3rd tier borderline good player. someone like Boozer, if they burn their whole cap space for him. Bucks won't be relevant till they get a #1 pick and somehow run into a real franchise player and not another Bogut. (not sure if they wouldn't have picked Darko over Lebron)

[jdev82]

believe me, this board isn't an area of expertise despite the number of Spurs fans from SA.



wait. they trade away the big contract that expires 2010 (Simmons) and take back a much bigger contract that goes till 2011 (RJ) and then you tell us that the main reason for the moves was to clear cap space for 2010 and that getting rid of both saved 20 million????
so there are at least two people in Milwaukee not really qualified for a GM job.



don't know exactly what superstars are 2nd tier. maybe you think about someone like Amare or J. Johnson. forget it. Bucks will be happy to get a 3rd tier borderline good player. someone like Boozer, if they burn their whole cap space for him. Bucks won't be relevant till they get a #1 pick and somehow run into a real franchise player and not another Bogut. (not sure if they wouldn't have picked Darko over Lebron)

hey you, asshole. boguts still young and the bucks will have like 30 mil free next summer. eat a ,
-jess

[Höfner]

hey you, asshole. boguts still young and the bucks will have like 30 mil free next summer. eat a ,
-jess

LOL that's sig worthy

[Mel_13]

hey you, asshole. boguts still young and the bucks will have like 30 mil free next summer. eat a ,
-jess

Obnoxious and wrong, not the best combination.

The only way the Bucks will have much more than the MLE next summer is if they can unload Redd for expiring contracts. Good luck with that.

Even if they could get rid of Redd's contract, they project at much closer to 20M than 30M.

You fail.

[draft87]

kinda browsed but I didn't see Jordan Farmar on this list.


Rudy Gay.....
actually thought he was a good risk before the Jeff trade. Figured Memphis owed us a nice one after the Gasol gift....

[Kori Ellis]

Obnoxious and wrong, not the best combination.

The only way the Bucks will have much more than the MLE next summer is if they can unload Redd for expiring contracts. Good luck with that.

Even if they could get rid of Redd's contract, they project at much closer to 20M than 30M.

You fail.

Redd has a player option for 2010-11 and people are saying he's not picking it up. So without his salary, they only have about $30M in committed salary.

[Mel_13]

Redd has a player option for 2010-11 and people are saying he's not picking it up. So without his salary, they only have about $30M in committed salary.

With a lottery pick and roster requirements, they may have around 20M in cap space if Redd is traded for expirings or decides to exercise his option. There's no way they get anywhere near 30M in cap space.

[Blackjack]

Hey, Stewie went off against the C's.

[DPG21920]

Redd has an ETO; why would he terminate that contract early? He is not going to get paid anywhere near that money again. Boy must want to win really bad if that is true.

[Mel_13]

Redd has an ETO; why would he terminate that contract early? He is not going to get paid anywhere near that money again. Boy must want to win really bad if that is true.

I suppose for long term security, but he'll need several things to go his way. First, he'll need to stay healthy and have a really good season. Everything else is external. What is the cap number next? How many teams will have enough cap space to make it worth his while to leave 18M on the table? Are any of those teams likely to be interested enough in a 31 yr old SG with a recent injury history to offer a multiyear deal?

We'll see, but every NBA expert predicted that Boozer would opt out this year. LeBron, Wade, and Bosh will certainly opt out, others like Redd and Amare are less certain.

[mountainballer]

I would really really be surprised, if Redd walks away from 18.3 million. he will be 31 next summer. it doesn't make much of a difference if he's 31 or 32, when he negotiates his next contract. he is on the wrong side of 30, so he won't get the 5 years max offers that players of 27 get. very likely his next contract won't be for much more than the 18.3 million, but for 3 years.

hey you, asshole. boguts still young and the bucks will have like 30 mil free next summer. eat a ,
-jess

yeah, Bogut is still young. gives the Bucks the chance to get 8-10 more years of mediocrity from him. for the big bucks of course.
hey did you check how Paul and Williams are doing lately? hmm, let's see....uups, Paul is averaging 30ppg and 8 apg........Williams: 22ppg and 9apg.........no time to check Bogut, is he already the 20 and 10 player the Bucks would desperately need? don't worry, Andrew Bynum also doesn't exactly...oh wait, Bynum delivers 21 and 9 and he is still really young at 22..........looks as if you picked the wrong Andrew B. back in 2005. epic fail.

and sorry, as others mentioned, you won't have 30 million next year, even if Redd walks out the door. but it wouldn't have made any difference. your team would blow the cap space in a Bobby Simmons type signing anyhow.

[jdev82]

Obnoxious and wrong, not the best combination.

The only way the Bucks will have much more than the MLE next summer is if they can unload Redd for expiring contracts. Good luck with that.

Even if they could get rid of Redd's contract, they project at much closer to 20M than 30M.

You fail.

youre re ed. kurt thomas(3.8 mil) is more likely than not gone or retired, the bucks will do anything they can to dump redd(17 mil), ridnours on a 6.5 mil expiring deal, elsons deal (1.5 mil) is up at the end of the year, as are alexanders(2mil) and ukics(1.3). that comes out to over 30 mil of cap space free. next time you feel like talking about something of which you know nothing, you better make damn sure that you know for a fact that the person you're "schooling" knows less than you, or risk looking like a re again. got any other bush league ass arguments? im from milwaukee. i know my .

[jdev82]

Obnoxious and wrong, not the best combination.

The only way the Bucks will have much more than the MLE next summer is if they can unload Redd for expiring contracts. Good luck with that.

Even if they could get rid of Redd's contract, they project at much closer to 20M than 30M.

You fail.

also, OWNED BY KORI

eat it.

[Mel_13]

youre re ed. kurt thomas(3.8 mil) is more likely than not gone or retired, the bucks will do anything they can to dump redd(17 mil), ridnours on a 6.5 mil expiring deal, elsons deal (1.5 mil) is up at the end of the year, as are alexanders(2mil) and ukics(1.3). that comes out to over 30 mil of cap space free. next time you feel like talking about something of which you know nothing, you better make damn sure that you know for a fact that the person you're "schooling" knows less than you, or risk looking like a re again. got any other bush league ass arguments? im from milwaukee. i know my .

Still obnoxious and still wrong.

The bolded part shows how little you know. The value of contracts coming off the books does not equal cap space available. The fact that you think it does proves how little you know about the subject.

Go ahead and try to show us your projected salary cap for next year and compare that to the obligations the Bucks have for next year. Then show a difference of 30M. You won't be able to. Best for you to just go away now.

Oh, people who actually have a point to make are able to do so without personal insults.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

youre re ed. kurt thomas(3.8 mil) is more likely than not gone or retired, the bucks will do anything they can to dump redd(17 mil), ridnours on a 6.5 mil expiring deal, elsons deal (1.5 mil) is up at the end of the year, as are alexanders(2mil) and ukics(1.3). that comes out to over 30 mil of cap space free. next time you feel like talking about something of which you know nothing, you better make damn sure that you know for a fact that the person you're "schooling" knows less than you, or risk looking like a re again. got any other bush league ass arguments? im from milwaukee. i know my .

You don't know your . You just know .

[jdev82]

Still obnoxious and still wrong.

The bolded part shows how little you know. The value of contracts coming off the books does not equal cap space available. The fact that you think it does proves how little you know about the subject.

Go ahead and try to show us your projected salary cap for next year and compare that to the obligations the Bucks have for next year. Then show a difference of 30M. You won't be able to. Best for you to just go away now.

Oh, people who actually have a point to make are able to do so without personal insults.

these are the contracts longer than one year. the rest expire at the end of the year. the only reason im not including redd in the list of next years obligations is that the basis of this argument is the assumption that redd will be traded for expiring contracts.
obligations: dan gadzuric: 6.7 mil charlie bell: 3.6 mil brandon jennings: 2.1 luc mbah a moute: 736,000 jodie meeks: 650,000 andrew bogud: 10 mil.

we are only obligated to pay around 23.5 million in payroll next year, given that we give away redd, and dump the expiring contracts to rebuild.
I happen to know that the value of contracts expiring is not the same as salary cap, i was merely going by the assumption that the bucks are willing to go over cap as much as this year. the bucks are 25 million over cap with an 83 million dollar payroll. subtract the obligated salaries, and you get 59.5 in avaliable room, if the bucks are willing to be in the same luxury tax bracket as this year. i may have misspoke, but you mis-thought. you

[Mel_13]

these are the contracts longer than one year. the rest expire at the end of the year. the only reason im not including redd in the list of next years obligations is that the basis of this argument is the assumption that redd will be traded for expiring contracts.
obligations: dan gadzuric: 6.7 mil charlie bell: 3.6 mil brandon jennings: 2.1 luc mbah a moute: 736,000 jodie meeks: 650,000 andrew bogud: 10 mil.

we are only obligated to pay around 23.5 million in payroll next year, given that we give away redd, and dump the expiring contracts to rebuild.
I happen to know that the value of contracts expiring is not the same as salary cap, i was merely going by the assumption that the bucks are willing to go over cap as much as this year. the bucks are 25 million over cap with an 83 million dollar payroll. subtract the obligated salaries, and you get 59.5 in avaliable room, if the bucks are willing to be in the same luxury tax bracket as this year. i may have misspoke, but you mis-thought. you

Ever more obnoxious and ever more wrong.

The Bucks are not lux tax payers this year. Their payroll this year is 68M, not 83M.

Even without Redd and the other expiring contracts, the Bucks still have over 30M obligated next year.

As to your conclusion in the bolded section.

That may be the single most ridiculous summary of a team's cap situation ever posted here, and that's really saying something.

It really is in your best interest to just go away. Further posting on this subject is bound to cause you further embarrassment.

[Höfner]

This thread delivers.

[jdev82]

Ever more obnoxious and ever more wrong.

The Bucks are not lux tax payers this year. Their payroll this year is 68M, not 83M.

Even without Redd and the other expiring contracts, the Bucks still have over 30M obligated next year.

As to your conclusion in the bolded section.

That may be the single most ridiculous summary of a team's cap situation ever posted here, and that's really saying something.

It really is in your best interest to just go away. Further posting on this subject is bound to cause you further embarrassment.

prove to me its 68 mil got

[Mel_13]

prove to me its 68 mil got

http://www.shamsports.com/content/pa...ries/bucks.jsp

http://www.storytellerscontracts.com/

http://www.sportscity.com/NBA/Milwaukee-Bucks-Salaries

http://hoopshype.com/salaries/milwaukee.htm

http://thehoopdoctors.com/online2/20...team-payrolls/

Now just go away.

[benefactor]

[benefactor]

http://www.shamsports.com/content/pa...ries/bucks.jsp

http://www.storytellerscontracts.com/

http://www.sportscity.com/NBA/Milwaukee-Bucks-Salaries

http://hoopshype.com/salaries/milwaukee.htm

http://thehoopdoctors.com/online2/20...team-payrolls/

Now just go away.

[Blackjack]

Just..

[jdev82]

still doesnt prove your point. i worked with an innacurate source, i now see that, but none of the you provided here proves what you were saying in the beginning, i.e. that they would be lucky to attract even a borderline good player next offseason. show me your basketball smarts, not just your google searching prowess