Bucks are looking to dump Snell's and Ilyasova's contracts at draft night.

buckalis · Jun 20, 2019

flyerhawk said:
It was always dubious that the Cavs would give up the Smith contract AND take on Snell's contract for a late 1st.

I've already said that the Bucks would be interested on buying Smith, only if the had a major trade preagreed and locked coming up until the 1st if July...

Now the Bucks have shed the entire 12.5M of Snell's 20/21 salary off their books and have additionally shed 2.5M off this season.

Luere and Ilyasova add up to 16.5M of expiring salaries for this season (Ilyasova's 3rd season isn't guaranteed) which makes them perfect "salary fillers" if used on another (or two) trade(s) at anytime and not necessarily until the 1st of July, as it would be the case if they would buy JR Smith...

It rather means that the Pistons value Snell quite more than you think if they've invested on him while over the cap... doesn't it?

tlance · Jun 20, 2019

CitySushi said:
Lol and the Bucks had to take Leuer back. Basically Snells contract is so bad the Bucks had to give up the 30th pick just to shed 4m of the bad contract. LOL.

They also get an extra year.

Snell expires in 2021

tlance · Jun 20, 2019

buckalis said:
I've already said that the Bucks would be interested on buying Smith, only if the had a major trade preagreed and locked coming up until the 1st if July...

Now the Bucks have shed the entire 12.5M of Snell's 20/21 salary off their books and have additionally shed 2.5M off this season.

Luere and Ilyasova add up to 16.5M of expiring salaries for this season (Ilyasova's 3rd season isn't guaranteed) which makes them perfect "salary fillers" if used on another (or two) trade(s) at anytime and not necessarily until the 1st of July, as it would be the case if they would buy JR Smith...

It rather means that the Pistons value Snell quite more than you think if they've invested on him while over the cap... doesn't it?

Wow you are dense.

Leuer has absolutely zero production value on the court. Snell maybe has a little.

The Bucks had to give Detroit a 1st round draft pick for Detroit to take Snell in exchange for a guy who has appeared in 49 games and averaged about 4 points and 2 rebounds over the last 2 seasons and is clearly a worse player than Snell.

Detroit does not "value Snell". They offloaded an inconsequential player with an expiring deal and basically bought a draft pick by being willing to take on Snell's deal.

Now, you might see Detroit make a similar move next summer where they trade Snell for another longer term bad contract and add another asset.

This is how NBA trades works. A player's trade value completely depends on their contract. Snell has negative value and this deal is definitive proof.

buckalis · Jun 20, 2019

tlance said:
They also get an extra year.

Snell expires in 2021

...Which is more important for the Bucks, because they will have the cap space to extend Giannis next.

It also means that coach Casey counts on Snell contributing for his roster...

It clearly is a win~win trade for both, since by adding Snell and the pick the Pistons end up better and the Bucks not only have their cap future secured, but two expiring "salary fillers" that worth a total of 16.5M in their roster to use on other trades and end up even better than last season.

tlance · Jun 20, 2019

buckalis said:
...Which is more important for the Bucks, because they will have the cap space to extend Giannis next.

It also means that coach Casey counts on Snell contributing for his roster...

It clearly is a win~win trade for both, since by adding Snell and the pick the Pistons end up better and the Bucks not only have their cap future secured, but two expiring "salary fillers" that worth a total of 16.5M in their roster to use on other trades and end up even better than last season.

I am not questioning that this is a good trade for both.

It is.

Your valuation of Tony Snell is simply wrong.

He has negative value.

buckalis · Jun 20, 2019

tlance said:
I am not questioning that this is a good trade for both.

It is.

Your valuation of Tony Snell is simply wrong.

He has negative value.

The Pistons didn't buy Snell to trade him... It therefore looked good value for them adding 14M in their books (Snell + the pick's salary) for strengthening their roster up.

Now what they do next season with Snell, that's a completely different subject... They'll trade him if they can end up even better, or keep him and extend him (most probably for less than he now makes) depending on Snell's contribution to their roster, this season!

tlance · Jun 20, 2019

buckalis said:
The Pistons didn't buy Snell to trade him... It therefore looked good value for them adding 14M in their books (Snell + the pick's salary) for strengthening their roster up.

Now what they do next season with Snell, that's a completely different subject... They'll trade him if they can end up even better, or keep him and extend him (most probably for less than he now makes) depending on Snell's contribution to their roster, this season!

Get this straight:

The pistons didn't buy Snell.

They bought a first round pick.

Snell's contract was the price they had to pay. Snell might play for them next year. But the Pistons are going nowhere in the short term. This trade is all about acquiring the pick for a bad contract.

buckalis · Jun 20, 2019

tlance said:
Get this straight:

The pistons didn't buy Snell.

They bought a first round pick.

Snell's contract was the price they had to pay. Snell might play for them next year. But the Pistons are going nowhere in the short term. This trade is all about acquiring the pick for a bad contract.

That's your opinion and of courseyou are entitled in one, even if it's wrong (as it usually is).

Now....

Going back to the Bucks cap space status as it forms after Leure's addition (which is the subject of this thread), the Bucks now have 68.5M of gurranteed salaries for next season and need some 65M to add in their books as to bring back all MIddleton, Brogdon, Lopez, Mirotic, Connaughton and Frazier, which will bring them just into the lux tax for a few (3~5)M if they do...

So the Bucks have the following choices this season:

1. Bring everybody back and look to trade their expirings of Leure and Ilyasova later this season, attached to Bledsoe and/or Mirotic, or attach an asset (or two ~ out of Connaughton, DDV, Wilson or Brown) in their expirings and end up better than last season... (possible).

2. Not bring back Mirotic, stay below the lux tax threshold and look to improve the roster like before (highly unlikely as Mirotic is valuable on a trade than let him just go).

3. Not bring back Lopez, but add a free agent instead (Horford ?), go just a bit deeper into the tax and then procceed like before to improve the roster while sheding part of the salary out of the expirings at the same time... (possible).

4. Bring back all AND a free agent, go deep into the tax (some 15M) for only one season and proceed on trades using the expirings as to shed as much of the excessive salary as possible during the season (highly unlikely but not impossible)

Note that the owners have no objection going into the lux tax if it results on a more competitive team.

IMO, best choice is if the Bucks can land Horford and not bring Lopez back if they can have Horford and then look to improve the roster further by moving Bledsoe along with an expiring after September, and then Mirotic and the other expiring before Chrismas... Otherwise, if they can't have Horford, bring everybody back and proceed like before with BLedsoe and Mirotic.

tlance · Jun 20, 2019

buckalis said:
That's your opinion and of courseyou are entitled in one, even if it's wrong (as it usually is).

Now....

Going back to the Bucks cap space status as it forms after Leure's addition (which is the subject of this thread), the Bucks now have 68.5M of gurranteed salaries for next season and need some 65M to add in their books as to bring back all MIddleton, Brogdon, Lopez, Mirotic, Connaughton and Frazier, which will bring them just into the lux tax for a few (3~5)M if they do...

So the Bucks have the following choices this season:

1. Bring everybody back and look to trade their expirings of Leure and Ilyasova later this season, attached to Bledsoe and/or Mirotic, or attach an asset (or two ~ out of Connaughton, DDV, Wilson or Brown) in their expirings and end up better than last season... (possible).

2. Not bring back Mirotic, stay below the lux tax threshold and look to improve the roster like before (highly unlikely as Mirotic is valuable on a trade than let him just go).

3. Not bring back Lopez, but add a free agent instead (Horford ?), go just a bit deeper into the tax and then procceed like before to improve the roster while sheding part of the salary out of the expirings at the same time... (possible).

4. Bring back all AND a free agent, go deep into the tax (some 15M) for only one season and proceed on trades using the expirings as to shed as much of the excessive salary as possible during the season (highly unlikely but not impossible)

Note that the owners have no objection going into the lux tax if it results on a more competitive team.

IMO, best choice is if the Bucks can land Horford and not bring Lopez back if they can have Horford and then look to improve the roster further by moving Bledsoe along with an expiring after September, and then Mirotic and the other expiring before Chrismas... Otherwise, if they can't have Horford, bring everybody back and proceed like before with BLedsoe and Mirotic.

How can you possibly conclude that Tony Snell is an asset that teams want after seeing last night's trade?

If there was even a single team that wanted Tony Snell, the Bucks would not have had to attach a first round pick to take back an inferior player.

Simple logic.

Sparhawk · Jun 20, 2019

So, Detroit paid 12-14M for the 30th pick.

buckalis · Jun 20, 2019

tlance said:
How can you possibly conclude that Tony Snell is an asset that teams want after seeing last night's trade?

If there was even a single team that wanted Tony Snell, the Bucks would not have had to attach a first round pick to take back an inferior player.

Simple logic.

Yes! Quite right! ...your logic is simple if you can't understand that the Pelicans PAYED his next season's salary (which the Bucks needed to shed) in order to add him in their roster... The Bucks also didn't want to add this pick's salary in their books...
Because the Bucks have no use for Snell, it doesn't mean that other teams also don't... I wonder what you will say if Snell proves to be a major rotation piece for the Pistons this season?

tlance · Jun 20, 2019

buckalis said:
Yes! Quite right! ...your logic is simple if you can't understand that the Pelicans PAYED his next season's salary (which the Bucks needed to shed) in order to add him in their roster... The Bucks also didn't want to add this pick's salary in their books...
Because the Bucks have no use for Snell, it doesn't mean that other teams also don't... I wonder what you will say if Snell proves to be a major rotation piece for the Pistons this season?

In other words,

Tony Snell has negative trade value because he is on a bad contract.

buckalis · Jun 20, 2019

Sparhawk said:
So, Detroit paid 12-14M for the 30th pick.

Quite right! In his "opinion" the 30th pick of this draft worths that much!

tlance · Jun 20, 2019

buckalis said:
Yes! Quite right! ...your logic is simple if you can't understand that the Pelicans PAYED his next season's salary (which the Bucks needed to shed) in order to add him in their roster... The Bucks also didn't want to add this pick's salary in their books...
Because the Bucks have no use for Snell, it doesn't mean that other teams also don't... I wonder what you will say if Snell proves to be a major rotation piece for the Pistons this season?

Snell does have a chance to play a decent role for the Pistons this year. No doubt about it.

And yet, he still has negative trade value.

That is why the Bucks had to give a pick along with Snell

buckalis · Jun 20, 2019

tlance said:
How can you possibly conclude that Tony Snell is an asset that teams want after seeing last night's trade?

If there was even a single team that wanted Tony Snell, the Bucks would not have had to attach a first round pick to take back an inferior player.

Simple logic.

You really have ro jump into 2~3 threads simultaneously and post all the same irrelevant to the subject of the thread asto divert it although you already have been answered... don't you?

tlance · Jun 20, 2019

buckalis said:
You really have ro jump into 2~3 threads simultaneously and post all the same irrelevant to the subject of the thread asto divert it although you already have been answered... don't you?

Answered incorrectly by you.

Was a topic on multiple threads.

Still deflecting I see

buckalis · Jun 20, 2019

tlance said:
Answered incorrectly by you.

Was a topic on multiple threads.

Still deflecting I see

Still it's not the topic here (the topic here is the Bucks creating more cap space they can use) and still it all has been answered...

Didn't I replied to you before that "you are entited to have an opinion" different than mine?

So... please don't delibaretly divert subjects, I don't give a dime what you think on Snell.

handicappers · Jun 20, 2019

buckalis said:
Yes! Quite right! ...your logic is simple if you can't understand that the Pelicans PAYED his next season's salary (which the Bucks needed to shed) in order to add him in their roster... The Bucks also didn't want to add this pick's salary in their books...
Because the Bucks have no use for Snell, it doesn't mean that other teams also don't... I wonder what you will say if Snell proves to be a major rotation piece for the Pistons this season?

why did you capitalize a misspelled word? to highlight your derp?

Shanemansj13 · Jun 20, 2019

LMAO he STILL thinks Snell is an asset. You couldnt make this shit up if you tried :laugh3:

tlance · Jun 20, 2019

buckalis said:
Still it's not the topic here (the topic here is the Bucks creating more cap space they can use) and still it all has been answered...

Didn't I replied to you before that "you are entited to have an opinion" different than mine?

So... please don't delibaretly divert subjects, I don't give a dime what you think on Snell.

First off, the topic of this thread is Snell and Ilyasova

Second, this isn't a matter of opinion. You clearly have no understanding of how NBA economics work and how players are valued. Yet, you try to come on here and insult everybody else calling us stupid, when all we are doing is correcting your blatantly obvious mistakes.

There is no gray area here. This trade proves exactly what we have all been saying about Snell all summer.

Snell is very clearly a better and more useful NBA player than Jon Leuer.

Yet, the Bucks were the ones giving the pick in this deal. Not the Pistons.

There is only one logical conclusion to be made regarding Snell's trade value, and that is that he cost the Bucks an asset to get rid of him because he is a bad contract.

And there is no other legitimate argument to be made on this subject.

Bucks are looking to dump Snell's and Ilyasova's contracts at draft night.

Trainer of Don Diego de la Vega

Kyrie Hater

Kyrie Hater

Trainer of Don Diego de la Vega

Kyrie Hater

Trainer of Don Diego de la Vega

Kyrie Hater

Trainer of Don Diego de la Vega

Kyrie Hater

SportsHoopla Ombudsman

Trainer of Don Diego de la Vega

Kyrie Hater

Trainer of Don Diego de la Vega

Kyrie Hater

Trainer of Don Diego de la Vega

Kyrie Hater

Trainer of Don Diego de la Vega

FAT STACKS BITCHES

Finger Poppin Dat Pussy

Kyrie Hater

Similar threads