SB Nation - Dan Gadzuric

Recap: Magic 100, Bucks 98

Alex Boeder — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 08:14:56 -0000

Jennings and Howard: Agony and ecstacy

MILWAUKEE - They aren't the defending conference champs for a reason; they are the defending conference champs for many reasons. Unfortunately, 16,128 saw just enough of those reasons at the Bradley Center tonight, where the Bucks lost for the second time this season, for the second time in a way that hurts all the way home.

The Bucks hosted a road team that entered Milwaukee with wins in Boston, Atlanta, and Toronto (twice) already this season. Those three at home against other teams? 19-2.

Orlando wins the pregame matchups when everyone is ready to roll, but: Howard + Carter - Bogut - Mbah a Moute = Abject Inequality. Still the Bucks raced to a lead, and not just a lead, a double digit advantage that ballooned all the way to 17 in the third quarter before Jason Williams and Vince Carter popped that balloon with threes and dunks like it was 1999, or thereabout. The YouTube wonderbackcourt of years past combined for 16 points in the final six and a half minutes of the third.

A back-and-forth fourth quarter ended after Ersan Ilyasova and Luke Ridnour both missed shots with less than a half minute and the Magic up two. But Ilyasova and Ridnour were more heroic than scapegoats despite the misses, and the shorthanded Bucks were more impressive than anything else despite the loss...

Three Bucks

Ersan Ilyasova. Milwaukee's Man of the Match missed a free throw late and then a potential game-winning three with half a minute to go, but there's no faulting someone who earned a (partial) standing ovation for a single offensive rebound -- especially when it was one of seven reeled in off the offensive glass.

Ilyasova hauled in a rebound of a missed three pointer by Brandon Jennings in the third quarter, earning a roaring approval from the crowd as Milwaukee called for time. The Bucks missed five shots in a row in that series midway through the third quarter, but Ersan kept possessions alive all night.

His day in the late-game sun will come; he's too good of a shooter to keep coming up short in the clutch. But for now I'm fully satisfied with his Howardish 20 points and 16 rebounds and un-Howardish zero turnovers. Would anyone rather have Charlie Villanueva right now?

Luke Ridnour. The vet, backup point again outplayed Jennings tonight, but let's keep him coming off the bench, where he's thriving. I continue telling myself (and you) that he can't shoot like this forever, but Ridnour's aim remained very on for at least another night. He was easily the team's most efficient offensive player with 20 points on 9-15 from the field, and he made his only free throw and three pointer.

But like Ilyasova, he missed at the end. And that decision to shoot a tough, fadeaway jumper with a new shot clock available and 27 seconds remaining in the game was certainly questionable. But he wasn't worrying about degree of difficulty the whole night, and they were mostly falling until then. Both he and Ilyasova gained the confidence throughout to attempt those decisive shots, and that's nice. So is 20 points, 6 assists and a couple steals from the backup point guard.

Hakim Warrick. Four straight 15+ point games for Warrick, who is forming a rather sufficient power forward duo along with Ersan. Hak belongs around the basket. He can start his dunk from just about anywhere inside the perimeter and make it happen. That's high percentage, even if he misses a dunk, like he did once tonight (those two points would've been nice). And he usually has that one-track-dunk-mind. So it was a bit strange to see three falling-away jumpers look so very clean in the first half.

I like that he made those jumpers, but even on a good night like this one he only made 3-7 on shots outside the paint. Warrick is one of the few Bucks who is capable of getting to the line (led the team in making a modest 4-4 free throws tonight) and he gets there when aggressive. Diversifying the offensive portfolio is great, but right now he can drive to the basket with authority like no other Buck, so let's focus on that, cool?

Three Numbers

6. The Bucks committed just six turnovers in the entire game, the same number as Dwight Howard had all by his lonesome. The starting backcourt of Jennings and Bell combined for just a single turnover in 70 minutes.

8-9. Milwaukee made 8-9 three pointers to start the game, helping push them to an early lead. Ultimately they couldn't sustain shooting threes like that, or not-so-coincidentally the lead. But they still outshot the three-point-happy Magic from outside, making a marksmanlike11-19 in the game compared to 8-22 for Orlando.

56.0 %. A game after facing the league's most accurate from the line in OKC, the Bucks faced the NBA's worst free throw shooting team, and the Magic lived down to the billing by hitting just 14-25 (.560) from the line. Combined with Milwaukee's hot outside shooting, this one was ripe for the taking.

Three Good

Happy home. I don't know (or maybe I don't want to know) how close to .500 the Bucks can play on the road, but all indications are that they will post plenty of wins at home. The only two losses so far came against a very good Mavs team on a Dirk overtime buzzer-beater, and now tonight against the (improved) defending Eastern Conference champs by a couple points. Milwaukee had chances to win both games, and opponents haven't looked very happy following pre-game warmups at the BC this year.

Not a bad home performance yet among eight, and attendance reached a season-high 16,128 tonight... feelin' like a legit home court advantage.

Supersubs. Missing three usual starters in Bogut, Redd, and Mbah a Moute, Milwaukee's bench realistically shouldn't be so hot. Especially compared to a very good, deep team in better health. Ryan Anderson, J.J. Redick, and Brandon Bass lead one of the finest seconds units in the league, but the Bucks' bench was better tonight. The aforementioned Ridnour and Warrick were stars and scored a dozen more points (36) than the entire Magic bench.

And with Dan Gadzuric accurately deemed helpless against Howard (4 fouls in 4 minutes), Kurt Thomas assumed the unenviable task of guarding the superstar for almost 30 minutes. He slowed, even frustrated Howard some, and pulled down a few offensive boards in a solid run off the bench.

Care. Skiles has spoken often recently about the Bucks turning the ball over too much. Just six turnovers tonight. And after a couple weeks having trouble while facing tremendous defensive pressure and specific gameplans targeting him, Jennings didn't commit a single turnover against a good defensive team, ranked 5th in the NBA coming in.

Three Bad

Leads to losses. Going into this game, the Bucks had no business winning, but once you accumulate a lead as big as 17, it's yours to lose. And they lost it. The Magic are really good, and if this was something new, it would be more understandable. But after so recently blowing the Hornets game, it's not new at all. And they crashed pretty hard against the Bulls to start this month, too. I don't see the Bucks coming back from big deficits to win, so there is really no evening out here.

The Bucks led by 17 points with under three minutes in the first half after a three by Jennings. Even against a premier opponent like the Magic, that's a healthy lead. But Milwaukee quite quickly gave it up, as Orlando closed to within nine by halftime.

In fact, the Bucks closed quarters poorly all night. After allowing that game-high 17 point second quarter lead dwindle to nine, they finished the third quarter even worse. Up 70-58 with four and change left in the third, the Magic went on a 15-2 run to take a lead into the fourth quarter. And we know how that quarter ended...

The end. Skiles maintained that it was the correct decision to play straight-up defense down by two on the final possession.

"I would foul if it was a bad foul shooter, but we've got to be able to make a stop right there, get the rebound, take a timeout, and have another chance," Skiles said.

But with 27 seconds and thusly a three second difference between the shot and game clock, the Magic could and should have waited until the last second to shoot, which would have left maybe a second if the Bucks secured the defensive rebound... which obviously was never meant to be anyway. Not sure I'm comfortable with that defensive philosophy though. Okay, I am sure. That I'm not.

Hurting. If Redd was perfectly spritely the past few games, that would be a bigger problem than any. So it's reassuring in some ways that Mike is still hurting; at least we can assume he will eventually play better, which shouldn't be too difficult. But the fact the team's two biggest, pre-Jennings names never seem quite right is a real worry hanging over the franchise even while the rest of the club plays so admirably in their absence.

It doesn't help that Mbah a Moute, who was originally considered day-to-day, doesn't physically appear ready to return right away.

Game 16 Preview: Oklahoma City vs. Milwaukee

Zorgon — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 21:46:20 -0000

More photos » by Darren Hauck - AP

Neither of these guys will be playing tonight, which could, in itself, explain why we lost to the Bucks twice last year.

Browse more photos »

This also counts as an open thread, so feel free to post your thoughts during the game here.

Time: 8:30 PM Central Standard Time

Place: The Ford Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma

TV: Fox Sports Oklahoma, ESPN

Radio: WWLS The Sports Animal (98.1)

Enemy Blog(s): BrewHoop, Bucks Diary, The Bob Boozer Jinx, Bucksketball

Backstory: Well, it's that time of year again. Everybody has loaded up on Turkey, I'm ready to go buy discounted video games like some sort of crazed mad man, and the Thunder are getting ready to take on the hot hot Bucks on National Television. Wait, what was that third one?

That's right, the Thunder are on National Television. After an impressive 8-7 start, ESPN finally considers them to be hot material, at least, hotter than a blowout matchup between the Suns and Timberwolves. And rightfully so. This matchup, in an national perspective, could be seen as a proving ground for both teams. Both are playoff teams right now, which nobody expected at the start of the season. And both are probably not considered to be long-term success teams. That is, most are expecting them to fall into the lottery by the time the season is over. So, who's expected to win?

To be honest, they should expect us to win. The Bucks do have a better record, but their wins have only come over Detroit, Minnesota, Denver, Golden State, New Jersey, Charlotte, and Memphis. Aside from the win against Denver, they've pretty much won against all of the NBAs current doormats. And their losses don't look that much more impressive, with losses to the sub-.500 76ers, Bulls, and Hornets, with the only other losses coming to the struggling Spurs and the rather good Mavericks. Thus, if you put it all together, the only good teams they've played have been Denver and the Mavericks. They've visited almost every non-playoff team in the East (besides the Wizards) and almost every non-playoff team in the West (besides the Clippers, Kings, and Jazz). Now, I'm not saying that the Bucks continuing their run of success in the weaker East isn't possible, I'm just saying that this team isn't the powerhouse we thought they were. Combine that with the loss of Andrew Bogut and possible loss of Luc Richard Mbah A Moute, and you have one giant over-hyped sandwich.

On our side of things, things feel much more real. We're coming off of a huge wins in Utah and Miami, with a more minor win against the Wizards and losses against the Magic and Lakers. All of that doesn't look bad on paper, but it covers up our past losses to teams like the Clippers and Kings. If we can win this game, it will put us at 2 games above .500, and in a very good position moving forward. Thus, this game will decide, on a national stage, whether we are just another bad team having a good early season run, or whether we really are ready for the playoffs.

Below: Matchups, Prediction

Matchups:

Center: Nenad Krstic vs. Dan Gadzuric

Ah, the Bucks resident backup Center, Dan Gadzuric. He could double-double in this game, if he gets enough minutes in which to do so. However, I'm pretty sure Krstic will have the better scoring night, as no one knows Gadzuric as a defensive stalwart or anything.

Power Forward: Jeff Green vs. Ersan Ilyasova

Ilyasova is a rare example of how going back to the Euroleague can help your game, He was drafted in 05, played only in the D-League, and then played only sparingly in 06-07. Since he wasn't happy with his situation, he went to play for F.C. Barcelona, averaged decent stats for two years, improved his game, and then came back to the Bucks, where he's now a rather successful Power Forward, averaging 10 Points, 7 Rebounds, and 1 Assist per game in only 22 minutes. Still, this is weaker matchup for Jeff Green, so if he can stay out of foul trouble, he should manage to put up good numbers, and can probably beat Ilyasova in every category.

Small Forward: Kevin Durant vs. Carlos Delfino

You read correctly, Carlos Delfino is indeed playing Small Forward. He went to play in Russia last year and averaged decent statistics, but Delfino is already a known quantity, so that only served to raise his stock and get him decent pay. Nevertheless, even though Delfino is a jack of all trades who will produce in every category, he will almost certainly be overpowered by Kevin Durant and scored upon many times.

Shooting Guard: Thabo Sefolosha vs. Charlie Bell

Charlie Bell, at one point, was the worst shooter in the NBA. He's improved since, but he's not going to be a scoring threat any time soon. He'll fill up the intangibles, just as Thabo will, making this matchup a draw.

Point Guard: Russell Westbrook vs. Brandon Jennings

And here is the matchup of the hour. Brandon Jennings is the super rookie who decided to play in Europe for a year, and, boy, has it paid off. He has averaged 23 Points, 5 Rebounds, and 6 Assists in his rookie campaign, all while sporting very stylish haircuts (I've seen him with the flat top, the faux-hawk, and whatever you call the badass hair-style he has now). If Scott Brooks is smart, he'll have Thabo defending this guy, because Russell Westbrook doesn't have a chance in hell of stopping him. Jennings wins this matchup easily, and I shudder to think what will happen if Mike Wilks is forced to step on the floor.

Battle of the Benches:

This is a complete waste of time. Even without Mbah A Moute and Bogut, the Bucks still have a much more powerful bench, containing former SuperSonic Luke Ridnour, former Raptors star Roko Ukic, former Grizzlies star Hakim Warrick, and Kurt Thomas. We have Harden, Etan Thomas, Collison.....and Mike Wilks. Oh yeah, they still have Michael Redd off the bench, too. I'd say they get the win.

Coaching and Intangibles:

The one intangible on the Thunders side to pay attention to is Mike Wilks. It's not know if we'll have to play him, but if we do, the situation could get drastic, especially against the amazing Brandon Jennings. On the Bucks side, it's not know if Michael Redd can return to his former scoring form yet. If he can, it would certainly create a dynamic duo of a back court, making our situation even more desperate. Where's Kyle Weaver when you need him?

Bottom Line:

The Bucks are like the Raptors of a couple of years ago. They signed foreign talent, combined it with what they had, and became a threat to win on any given night. But, the team is flawed. If Michael Redd can't find his stride, then Brandon Jennings is the only serious scorer on the roster. If Thabo shuts him down to an extent, we can get an easy win. But, if they can get both of their scorers going and have another X-Factor step up, then we're screwed. Also, watch Mike Wilks. If he plays, he could be a huge liability when defending Brandon Jennings. Hopefully, it won't come to that.

Prediction: Oklahoma City 110, Milwaukee 105

Sorry, Bucks fans. I think we've got this one in the bag. Too bad the game is on the worst sports broadcaster of all time.

How do you think the game will go? Vote in the Poll!

And, again, feel free to drop any comments you might have during, before, or after the game below. I'll be in the Ford Center cheering the team on, but I'll be back to write a recap later tonight. Go Thunder!

Poll

Who's going to win tonight?

The Oklahoma City Thunder

23 votes

The Milwaukee Bucks

7 votes

30 votes | Poll has closed

Here we go again? Bogut to miss 2-4 weeks

Frank Madden — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 02:04:22 -0000

More photos » by Gary Dineen - NBAE/Getty Images

Sadly, we won't be seeing this for a while.

Browse more photos »

Just when it was starting to be fun to be a Bucks fan, this happens. Figures, right?

The Bucks announced today that Andrew Bogut will miss up to a month thanks to the so-called "left leg strain and contusion" he suffered in the waning minutes of last night's win over New Jersey. Bogut suffered the injury on a loose ball under the Nets' basket, playing one more possession before walking to the locker room under his own power. It was hoped the injury would be a minor one, but an MRI today said otherwise.

As always seems to be the case when Bogut gets injured, the Bucks' description isn't particularly informative--kind of like the "leg sprain" Bogut suffered in October 2006 (His whole leg was sprained? What does that even mean?) or the misdiagnosed back injury that ended his season a year ago. As you might remember, Bogut took less than a month to recover from his leg sprain, which was initially thought to shelve him for 6-8 weeks. I'm not sure how similar this injury is, but hopefully he again beats expectations and is back in a week or two (and yes, I'm blocking out what happened last year, when the exact opposite happened with his back injury...happy thoughts, happy thoughts).

Bogut's injury comes just as Michael Redd is getting healthy, so if you were looking for an experiment to demonstrate the relative values of each guy, now you'll get it. In Bogut's stead you can obviously expect to see more of Dan Gadzuric and Kurt Thomas, and Francisco Elson might even make an appearance. But after a strong start to the season, Gadzuric hasn't played more than nine minutes in any of the Bucks' last four games, and Thomas hasn't played in three of the Bucks' last five (maxing out at six minutes). The Bucks will probably be going small more regularly as well, so don't be surprised to see Ersan Ilyasova getting more minutes in the pivot. How well the Bucks can hold the fort without Bogut is unclear (see our poll), but it will clearly have a lot to do with Brandon Jennings' ability to continue shouldering the scoring load. All we can say is this: feel better, Drew.

Poll

Andrew Bogut is out...what now?

In Brandon we trust.

357 votes

And thus begins the Bucks' annual downward spiral.

232 votes

589 votes | Poll has closed

How accountable is Mike D'Antoni?

Seth — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 01:44:52 -0000

More photos » by Morry Gash - AP

Browse more photos »

I could recap last night's game, but it'd just be a mixture of the usual nonsense and disgust at Dan Gadzuric's beard. Instead, I'd like to turn our attention to the coach. I rarely question coaching and management in this space because so much of that takes place behind the scenes and out of earshot. One thing strikes me, though, and I think it's something you guys have picked up on as well. D'Antoni gets very hot; he nearly throttled a referee last night after a foul on David Lee went unnoticed. We haven't really seen him let loose on his players, though. It's hard to say what goes on in the locker room, but from what we see on TV, D'Antoni has yet to hold his guys accountable in the form of scolding. With a team that's 1-6 and can't find any semblance of chemistry, that probably shouldn't be the case. I understand that D'Antoni is a "player's coach" and cares deeply about his squad, but something has to give. It doesn't have to be the coach himself yelling and screaming. It could be a quicker trigger on calling timeouts, or it could be more willingness to bench guys who are a step slow (which, to be fair, made an appearance last night). D'Antoni could even preserve his camaraderie with the players by having an assistant play the role of bad cop, like Doc in Remember the Titans. Can't you picture Herb Williams yelling "you're lookin' like a bunch of BUMS out there!" after a huge opposing run?

Anyway, to put poorly what Tommy expressed quite well, I'm of the opinion that D'Antoni's at fault not for his system, but for his motivational techniques. Just like Tommy, I saw Coach passionately preach defense throughout training camp. I don't doubt that his intentions are pure. It just seems like his message lacks a punch, and that's where a little anger might help matters. But that's just me. How accountable do y'all think D'Antoni is for this woeful start? Is it a matter of strategy, motivation, or something else entirely? Discuss the 'stache in the comments.

Around the Association: 2009-2010 Milwaukee Bucks: Saving a few buck$

jae — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 13:00:15 -0000

More photos » by Jason DeCrow - AP

Brandon Jennings desperately tries to hide his excitement after being selected by Milwaukee. (AP Photo/Jason DeCrow)

Browse more photos »

This is a story of a team dead set on avoiding the NBA's salary tax. This is a story of a team with a lofty payroll but without similarly lofty win totals. This is the story of the Bucks offseason, and the team it has produced.

It was a busy off-season for Bucks GM John Hammond. High profile and highly paid SF Richard Jefferson was traded to the Spurs for Bruce Bowen, Kurt Thomas and Fabricio Oberto. Bowen was waived as his salary was only partially guaranteed. Oberto was promptly sent to the Pistons for Amir Johnson, who himself was later traded to Toronto along with Sonny Weems for Ukic and Delfino. Weems had not been under the Bucks' control long himself, having been acquired earlier in the offseason from Denver along with Walter Sharpe in exchange for Malik Allen. In the end, it much ado about nothing, or as close to nothing as the Bucks could manage as all moves seemed to point to getting the team safely under the luxury tax rather than upgrading or even rearranging talent.

Arriving:

Brandon Jennings (Drafted #10 overall after year overseas)

Jodie Meeks (Drafted #41 overall out of Kentucky)

Hakim Warrick (FA, MEM)

Kurt Thomas (Trade from Spurs)

Ersan İlyasova (FA, Turkey)

Carlos Delfino (Trade from TOR)

Roko Ukic (Trade from TOR)

Departing:

Ramon Sessions (FA to MIN)

Charlie Villanueva (FA to DET)

Richard Jefferson (Trade with SAN)

Synopsis:

Salary reduction seemed to be the name of the game. Ramon Sessions, a gifted young point guard with a knack for getting the ball in his hands and then getting it to the hot hand, leaves the team for Minnesota. The Bucks opted not to match a modest by NBA standards offer from the T-Wolves [Oh if only the Warriors had made such an offer, he'd have at worst solidified the backup PG position behind still untested Monta Ellis or provided a means to keep Monta as a combo guard along side Sessions, who plays bigger than his combine measurements would suggest.] Charlie Villanueva was similarly allowed to depart to Detroit rather than incur the wrath of the luxury tax that keeping him well could have resulted in.

From a business perspective these moves may make sense. It makes little sense to pay premium matching dollars for a team that seemed unlikely to vastly improve on their 34 win season. However, these moves mean that staying at that level may be difficult and it looks like another trip back to the lottery. The ever-bizarre nature of the CBA's tax and cap rules have conspired to slice deep into the Bucks' chances for 09-10.

The cupboard isn't entirely bare. Michael Redd can shoot and score. Luke Ridnour is a competent solution at the point (though certainly not good enough to make Sessions expendable). Andrew Bogut is an above average center who hits his shots and grabs rebounds, but he does not appear to be a franchise cornerstone. These returning starters are joined by 2^nd year SF Joe Alexander. Alexander has the athletic tools to excel but showed little as a rookie. He will have to do more, much more for Milwaukee to have any realistic shot at improvement. Hakim Warrick, signed away from the Grizzlies, will likely join Bogut in the front court. Warrick is another top notch athlete, but the net effect is that of a tweener forward, lacking the rebounding ability to solidify the 4 spot and without the perimeter skills to be an effective "3". His high percentage scoring is a plus, but the rest of his game is quietly underwhelming. The most intriguing story may be Brandon Jennings. Jennings showed signs of being an electric playmaker, but whether he can quickly move up to direct an NBA club and whether he can shoot well enough to be a legitimate scoring threat remain to be seen.

Other intrigue? Dan Gadzuric and Francisco Elson give the team a pair of adequate backup centers who both hail from the Netherlands.

Anyone who can get excited about Meeks and the triple-shot of 'meh' in the form of Ukic, Delfino and İlyasova should seek help.

Prediction: 27 wins.

For more on the Milwaukee Bucks check out Brew Hoop:

2009-2010 Around the Association

Introduction
Atlanta Hawks: Sorry, Mrs. Jackson. The Hawks are for real.
Boston Celtics: Sheed in Green + Another Answer
Charlotte Bobcats: They Do Exist
Chicago Bulls: Ring Around the Rose-y
Cleveland Cavaliers: Now or Never
Dallas Mavericks: The Curse of the Dampier
Denver Nuggets: If it ain't broke...
Detroit Pistons: The Return of the Bay Boys
Houston Rockets: Yao-ch!, that's gotta hurt
Indiana Pacers: A One Man Show
Los Angeles Clippers: Warriors South No More
Los Angeles Lakers: Big Brother, Little Brother
Memphis Grizzlies: Going Back to Vancouver
Miami Heat: Need to get the point
Milwaukee Bucks
Minnesota Timberwolves
New Jersey Nets: The Year of the Yi
New Orleans Hornets: Two first names, one great point guard
New York Knicks
Oklahoma City Super Sonics
Orlando Magic
Philadelphia Sixers
Phoenix Suns
Portland TrailBlazers
Sacramento Kings
San Antonio Spurs
Toronto Raptors
Utah Jazz
Washington Wizards
Rewind

Poll

What lesser known Bucks player are you most likely to totally and completely ignore?

Carlos Delfino

33 votes

Ersan İlyasova

268 votes

Roko Ukic

146 votes

447 votes | Poll has closed

Sessions/Lee sign-and-trade difficult, but not impossible

Frank Madden — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 02:43:12 -0000

For a while I've been playing the role of spoiler whenever the possibility of a Ramon Sessions sign-and-trade is broached. "The CBA makes a BYC S/T too difficult!" I know, it's annoying. And too full of acronyms. But it's true for the most part.

Sign-and-trades are hard enough to negotiate with unrestricted free agents, since both the player and two teams have to all agree on a deal. What makes them even harder with restricted free agents is two-fold. First, there's the additional leverage the incumbent team has in being able to match any offer for a player. With Sessions, even the Bucks' lukewarm public stance on his future in Milwaukee has been enough to prevent the Knicks from actually making him an offer. Further complicating matters is that any good restricted free agent will be in line for a sizable raise, which immediately makes them a base year compensation (BYC) player. That means his new salary is discounted by half for the purposes of making a trade--but only from the perspective of their original team. And since capped out teams (like the Knicks and Bucks) are restricted to taking back 125% plus $100k of the salaries they send out, the BYC provision makes it very difficult to strike a deal. But let's not be discouraged, and pose a difficult question instead: would there be a way to not only sign and trade Sessions to New York, but make Knicks' restricted free agent David Lee part of the package headed to Milwaukee? There's a ton of moving parts, but the short answer is yes.

Let's start with the options both teams have. If the Knicks wanted to sign Sessions to a deal starting at $5 million, the simplest thing is to just make him the offer, get his signature, and then hope the Bucks don't match. After the offer sheet is signed, the Bucks can't sign-and-trade him anywhere else so it's winner-take-all. Either the Bucks pass and Sessions walks, or they match and he's a Buck.

If the Knicks are concerned about the Bucks matching, then Donnie Walsh and John Hammond can get together to see if they can come to an agreement, though they also have to be mindful of the fact that Sessions also has to agree to sign on to whatever they cook up. As it happens, Gery Woelfel tweeted today that the two GMs did talk yesterday about that very possibility. So far so good.

OK, so what could the Bucks realistically do to get Sessions to New York in a S/T? From the Bucks' perspective, Sessions would count for only half his new 09/10 salary, which would obviously have to first be negotiated between the Knicks and Sessions. Given the Knicks seemed hesitant to do a full MLE deal, let's assume it's $5 million for now (the length is irrelevant for trade purposes). For a one-for-one trade to work, the Bucks could take back no more than $5 million x 50% (BYC effect) x 125% + $100k = $3.225 million. But since both teams are over the cap, the Knicks would have to send out at least ($5 million - $100k)/125% = $3.92 million. In other words, the minimum the Knicks have to send out is more than the maximum the Bucks can take back....so it's impossible. The same would be true if the Bucks wanted to get Lee, who probably wants $10 million per but can't get it from anyone, at least not as a RFA. A couple weeks ago John Hammond spoke glowingly of Lee on ESPN 540, so it appears he's a fan. But with the Bucks having less than the MLE to work with (Jodie Meeks' $650k deal cut into the MLE since it wasn't a minimum deal), there's no way they can offer enough dollars without a sign-and-trade.

So what can help bridge the gap? More contracts. Since the NBA's trade rules are percentage-based, adding significant salary to both sides can help overcome the BYC asymmetry that makes it hard to work out a deal. For discussion's sake, let's throw Lee into the equation at maybe $7 million as a starting salary, which could get him $32.4 million over four years assuming max raises. Is that enough to entice him to come to Milwaukee? Maybe, maybe not. It does seem to be more than the 2010-mindful Knicks want to give him, but I'm speculating there as well. Let's also assume that if possible the Knicks and Bucks would be content to swap RFAs at those two starting salaries.

As you can imagine, Lee for Sessions straight up doesn't work because both guys would be BYC. OK, so let's add some deadweight salary...how about Dan Gadzuric ($6.75 million) and Jared Jeffries ($6.47 million)? Both guys have two years left and are essentially worthless on the court, so they don't really change the dynamics of a trade from a value perspective. Still, Sessions/Gadzuric for Lee/Jeffries doesn't work with those Sessions/Lee starting salary assumptions of $5 and $7 million respectively. And playing around with the starting salaries doesn't change things (unless I'm missing something). We need even more salary.

What about adding Luke Ridnour ($6.50 million) and Chris Duhon ($6.03 million)? Again, their contracts are practically mirror images, as both guys have just one year left while providing backup-level production on the court. From the Bucks' perspective, the deal now sends out 50% x $5 million + $6.75 million + $6.5 million = $15.75 million while taking back $7 million + $6.47 million + $6.03 million = $19.5 million. Even though that's almost $4 million more going in than coming out, it works because they can take back as much as 125% x $15.75 + $100k = $19.79 million. From the Knicks' perspective, they send out 50% x $7 million + $6.47 million + $6.03 million = $16 million. They take back $5 million + $6.75 million + $6.5 million = $18.25 million, which again works because they can take back as much as $16 million x 125% + $100k = $20.1 million.

Given the Bucks' apparent disinterest in bringing back Sessions, I'd gladly take that deal even if Lee gets a big contract out of it. I'm not sure if the Knicks do it, though they don't seem eager to pony up long-term dollars for Lee and just drafted Jordan Hill as a potential replacement anyway. Instead they get a quality young point guard and otherwise retain their 2010 cap flexibility. The Bucks would be adding $6.25 million on net to their payroll, so they'd have to start cutting salary to avoid the luxury tax. That means waiving Bruce Bowen (who has been rumored to be heading out anyway), Sonny Weems (if that deal actually happens), and Salim Stoudamire plus finding other cost-cutting moves thereafter (like buying out Kurt Thomas).

But let's be clear: any deal remotely resembling this would be tough to work out. Sessions and Lee would both have to agree to the contracts in addition to the Bucks and Knicks working out things between each other. We haven't seen anything concrete suggesting a deal like this could go down, but all the circumstantial evidence out there suggests it could satisfy all parties. Bowen's deal becomes fully guaranteed over the weekend, so if he's part of any trade it would seemingly have to happen in the next 24 hours (Update: Dan has a good example of a Sessions/Lee deal that involves Bowen over at RealGM). If the Bucks don't find a deal then they will just waive Bowen and save $2 million, which would help facilitate a deal that adds salary such as the one above.

Let's Keep Quentin Richardson on the Move, Shall We?

Ben Q Rock — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 13:00:20 -0000

More photos » by Fernando Medina - NBAE/Getty Images

Browse more photos »

Monday afternoon, the Los Angeles Clippers and the Minnesota Timberwolves engaged in a fairly inconsequential trade. You can read more analysis at Clips Nation and Canis Hoopus, but the gist is this: L.A. shipped Quentin Richardson to Minnesota, receiving Sebastian Telfair, Craig Smith, and Mark Madsen. In Telfair, the Clippers have a solid backup point guard to Baron Davis, while Smith adds depth to a fairly beefy front-line which already includes Marcus Camby, Chris Kaman, and #1 draft pick Blake Griffin. Minnesota? It gains Richardson's $8.7 million expiring contract while simultaneously filling a void at shooting guard and small forward, a void created when it dealt Mike Miller and Randy Foye to Washington for the 5th overall selection in this year's draft. Two lottery teams are now slightly deeper and better off financially. So why do we care?

Because it's, frankly, amusing that Richardson has changed teams three times in the last three weeks. New York, for which he's played the last 3 seasons, traded him to Memphis for Darko Milicic. The Grizzlies, in turn, sent him to L.A. for Zach Randolph. Now, he's Minnesota-bound. The novelty of a career role-player being a hot commodity on the trade market appeals to us irony-craving folks, especially in the doldrums of the NBA offseason, with few marquee free agents left to sign and with most contenders having already filled out their rosters.

Richardson's third move in three weeks blew up the NBA Twitterverse. Richardson (@QRich), for his part, is taking his latest move in stride:

Round and round I go on this NBA tour. Where o where will it stop no one knows. Lol. Right now I'm a t'wolf. Tomorrow? Who knows? Lol.

So it is in that spirit we suggest ways to get Richardson to the 26 teams of which he hasn't been a part this summer, with commentary on select trades. It all follows the jump.

to Atlanta for Jamal Crawford

The Hawks themselves just acquired Crawford, and he fits coach Mike Woodson's "type" as an undersized shooting guard who can shoot from distance, so it's doubtful they'd give him up. Then again, with no progress in their hopes to re-sign Marvin Williams, their starting small forward and a restricted free agent, they could pull the trigger on this deal for Richardson and hope to explore sign-and-trade avenues with Williams.
to Boston for Kendrick Perkins and Brian Scalabrine

Nope, I can't even reach for a basketball reason here: the Celtics have no need for Richardson, nor would they be inclined to part with Perkins, an outstanding post defender whose NBA experience (364 games over 6 seasons) belies his age (24).
to Charlotte for Boris Diaw

Not much of a reason for Charlotte to unload Diaw if all it's getting is Richardson, although it might enjoy divesting itself of Diaw's deal. The Bobcats have a lot of long-term money committed to mediocre players, so losing Diaw--although he's an above-average player--might be worth the financial flexibility down the line.
to Chicago for Kirk Hinrich

Well, Richardson's a finished product, so I'm not sure why the Bulls would want him. They tend to be more interested in younger players whose growth they can stunt, am I right, Matt and Kelly? Zing!
to Cleveland for Daniel Gibson and Delonte West

Yup, it'd be crazy for the Cavs, a championship contender, to part with two decent, young combo guards. Clearly, they're not worried about saving money, having traded for Shaquille O'Neal (owed $20 million) last month. But sources did tell Marc Stein last week not to be surprised if the Cavs traded West this season... wait for it... in order to save money.
to Dallas for Greg Buckner and Matt Carroll

Hey, the Mavs can add another thirtysomething to their rotation! Buckner, 32, has the age, but won't play for Dallas. Richardson? He could conceivably see the floor as a situational shooter, and will turn 30 in April. As a bonus, he could join homophonically named Quinton Ross on the roster.
to Denver for Nene
to Detroit for Tayshaun Prince
to Golden State for Stephen Jackson and Marco Belinelli

Jackson is a favorite of Ws owner Chris Cohan, which is why he got a hefty extension last season despite still having a few years left on his deal as it was. Given how awful the Warriors are now, it's probable that even Cohan would be willing to part with Jackson's silly deal in exchange for Richardson's cap relief. Plus, Richardson's three-point marksmanship--he's a career 39.8% shooter from beyond the arc--would blend well with Golden State's trey-happy offense.
to Houston for Brent Barry and Shane Battier

Houston will likely hit the lottery this season, having lost Yao Ming and Tracy McGrady for the duration. Richardson's expiring deal would give Rockets GM Daryl Morey plenty of flexibility next summer. Morey? With options? Frightening, and that's not me being pithy.
to Indiana for Jamaal Tinsley
to the L.A. Lakers for Adam Morrison and Sasha Vujacic
to Miami for Mark Blount and Yakhouba Diawara
to Milwaukee for Charlie Bell and Dan Gadzuric
to New Jersey for Keyon Dooling, Jarvis Hayes, and Eduardo Najera
to New Orleans for Rasual Butler and Morris Peterson

This potential trade is notable for its being comprised entirely of three players who Tweet regularly. We previously linked Richardson's account. Here's Peterson (@mopete9) and Butler (@RasualButler45). Also, the Hornets wouldn't be the Hornets if they weren't stocked with swingmen (don't forget James Posey and Julian Wright!) while their frontcourt is so barren they're forced to play Sean Marks and Melvin Ely heavily.
to Oklahoma City for Chucky Atkins and Nenad Krstic
to Orlando for Mickael Pietrus and J.J. Redick

Magic GM Otis Smith values flexibility as much as the rest of the league's executives, but not even he's willing to part with Pietrus, his starting small forward, for a few extra bucks next summer.
to Philadelphia for Willie Green and Louis Williams
to Phoenix for Leandro Barbosa and Jared Dudley
to Portland for Steve Bake and Martell Webster
to Sacramento for Beno Udrih

The Kings would accept this deal faster than Mavis Beacon can type "Richardson." Udrih, with a career Player Efficiency Rating of 12.9, is owed $26.7 million over the next 4 seasons.
to San Antonio for Matt Bonner, Michael Finley, and Roger Mason
to Toronto for Marcus Banks, Patrick O'Bryant, and Antoine Wright
to Utah for Mehmet Okur
to Washington for Brendan Haywood and DeShawn Stevenson

What the RJ/Amir trades mean for the draft, free agency, and beyond

Frank Madden — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 04:45:46 -0000

So now that we're slowly wrapping our minds around the Bucks' big day of wheeling and dealing, what does it all actually mean? We start with the Bucks' current cap situation (above) and work our way forward.

There's enough room to sign Sessions and maybe someone else. If the luxury tax comes in at $71 million (perhaps slightly optimistic), then the Bucks would have nearly $8 million to play with in free agency. Well, not really play with, because that's space under the luxury tax, not space under the salary cap. They'd have Early Bird Rights to sign Sessions and Ilyasova and their MLE in case those guys aren't signed. Similarly, they could re-sign Villanueva using their Bird Rights without having to tap the MLE. That's the assumption in the table above, which also reflects Bowen being cut and owed half his $4 million salary while Kurt Thomas stays with the team (not clear if that will happen). Factoring in the two draft picks the Bucks have and Elson/Allen taking their options, the Bucks would also have 14 guys on the roster even excluding Sessions/Villanueva/Ilyasova. Considering how many expiring deals they now have on the roster, that suggests more trades could be on the way.

Given that Sessions can't be offered more than the MLE (which could go up to about $5.8 million), the Bucks now have plenty of cushion to match any offer sheet. A four or five year deal that balloons in the third season might well get them to blink, but at least they can now credibly state their intent to match offers for Sessions. Until now they haven't done that and might not have been convincing even if they did--stay tuned to see if they change their tune. I'm hoping it does. Meanwhile, I've been going on the assumption that Charlie V was gone regardless of whether the Bucks freed up more space, but every summer I predict Charlie V's departure and it never happens, so I suppose I shouldn't be so quick to judge.

Bringing Ilyasova back to replace Villanueva would appear less likely now than 24 hours ago. Like Sessions, Ilyasova has played two years in the NBA and the Arenas rule applies to him--other teams can only offer him up to the MLE as a starting salary, but the Bucks can match. The Bucks might be able to spread out $7.8 million between Sessions and Ilyasova (especially if Sessions doesn't get a full MLE offer elsewhere), but the Bucks also wouldn't need Ilyasova as much now that they've got Johnson and Thomas (if he's not bought out). Still, neither of those guys can spread the floor like Ersan, so he could still bring something to the table.

This probably doesn't change the draft strategy. OK, so that statement implies we actually know what the draft strategy is, which we might not. But on the surface it certainly seems like the Bucks would be happy to take Jordan Hill if he falls (looking less likely), with point guards Jonny Flynn, Jrue Holiday, and maybe Brandon Jennings right there as well. Unless something strange happens, at least a couple of those guys will be available at 10, and one of the PGs is certain to be around. So if the Bucks really want to pick a PG, they can have one. DeJuan Blair and Earl Clark will also be available, but no one seems to think those guys are in the mix, unless they trade down (like for instance by swapping 10 for the Bulls' 16th and 26th picks). They could also try to trade up to get Hill, but with Washington trading their pick to Minnesota earlier today, the obvious way to do that is now no longer an option.

Picking a point would give them insurance against losing Sessions, but more practically would also pave the way for a trade of Luke Ridnour. As a mediocre player on an expiring deal, Ridnour will be getting shopped hard no matter what the Bucks do, but taking a point in the draft and freeing up the cash to re-sign Sessions makes it even easier.

John Hammond alluded the other day to also possibly taking a wing if that player was BPA, and with Jefferson gone a wing player would actually be somewhat useful in the short-term as well. Still, the Bucks haven't worked out DeMar DeRozan and Tyreke Evans, and neither guy figures to be around at 10 anyway. Just like the Bucks picked Joe Alexander and Luc Mbah a Moute despite the RJ draft day acquisition a year ago, I'd expect the Bucks will go with the BPA and worry about their roster later.

What gives among the bigs? While it's not going to scare anyone, the Bucks' frontcourt added a fair bit of depth with the acquisitions of Johnson and Thomas--though for completely opposite reasons. Johnson is a human pogo stick who shot 60% last year on athleticism alone, and even in a down year rebounding the ball he was above-average for a PF (15.1 rebound rate). Defensively, he immediately becomes the Bucks' best shotblocker (1 bpg in only 15 mpg) but he also fouls at a ridiculous rate--2.8 pfs in only 14.7 mpg last year. Not even Dan Gadzuric was that bad. Despite that, Johnson's defensive on/off splits were rather exceptional: the Pistons allowed 9.0 fewer ppg while he was on the court than off it. At 36, Thomas is all savvy and experience, not shooting much anymore but capable of sticking a mid-range jumper while defending both frontcourt positions. I'd easily take him over Gadzuric, Elson, and Allen, though that isn't saying much. Both Allen and Elson are expected to pick up their player options for next year, but I'll hold out a tiny bit of hope that acquiring Johnson and Thomas could scare them into looking for PT elsewhere.

Who's at three? Then you have the small forward position, which all of a sudden is wide open for Luc Mbah a Moute and Joe Alexander to grab meaningful minutes. A couple national reports I've seen have alluded to Alexander now having the chance to start, but it would seem like Mbah a Moute would be the obvious choice for now. The only problem? Mbah a Moute doesn't shoot threes, and neither does Sessions or any of the true PFs on the current roster. That means a hypothetical lineup of, say, Sessions/Redd/LRMaM/Johnson/Bogut would have only one player capable of hitting a three point shot, which I don't see as a sustainable way of playing in the NBA. That would be a clear benefit of signing Ilyasova (or even CV), since he can actually be a perimeter threat at the 4.

The summer of 2010 should be drama-free. You know how we've spent the past few months moping about the possibility of losing two affordable young players, all because we've got two good but overpaid wings nearing the age of 30? Well, we probably would have been in the same boat next summer, banging our heads against the wall about Dan Gadzuric making $7 million a year and forcing us to dump good players for nothing to avoid the tax.

Good news! As you can see in the above table, the fact that all the players acquired today have expiring deals means that the Bucks are now in very nice shape for 2010. And by "very nice" I mean "not awful." It's possible the Bucks could actually have a decent chunk of cap space if they were to deal Redd for expiring deals before the deadline, but for now let's celebrate the fact that they at least shouldn't have any problem staying under the tax. That could of course change if they parlay some of their expiring deals into players with longer-term contracts, but let's cross that bridge when we come to it, OK?

2002 NBA Draft Second Round Re-draft, Part 1

Jon L — Mon, 25 May 2009 17:00:13 -0000

More photos » by Chris Carlson - AP

Luis Scola was a late-second round pick in 2002. How long will he last when we're calling the shots? (AP Photo/Chris Carlson)

Browse more photos »

That's right, we're going to keep going with these. Up next, the 2002 draft, which saw Yao Ming, Tayshaun Prince, Amar(')e Soutdamire and Caron Butler drafted in the first round. Oh, and Nikoloz Tskitishvili, Fred Jones, Jiri Welsch and Dan Dickau.

As we've seen in 2005 and 2003, there are usually some quality players still around in the second round, even in drafts considered weak. In 2002 Carlos Boozer, Luis Scola and Udonis Haslem (among others) were still on the board once the second round began. So let's get to re-drafting.

29. Golden State Warriors (original pick - Steve Logan)

Well my pick isn't going to be Steve Logan, I can tell you that. The Warriors drafted Mike Dunleavy Jr. in the first round, and had Gilbert Arenas, Antawn Jamison and Jason Richardson on their 2002-2003 roster. If you put that team together now people would talk about making a deep playoff run. The Warriors that year finished 38-44. Ah, time. Golden State is set (or set enough) at center and their forwards were okay, but after Arenas and Richardson the Warriors' backcourt situation was kind of rough. Hence Logan, I guess. I'm going to stay with a guard but draft Roger Mason Jr. and make this even more of a Wizards reunion.

30. Chicago Bulls (original pick - Roger Mason Jr.)

Mason took a few years to round into form as a player, but he developed into a solid three-point shooter with the Washington Wizards and broke several teams' hearts this year with the Spurs. The Bulls didn't really need a guard, though, as they had just drafted Jay Williams and had Jalen Rose and Jamal Crawford on the team (don't laugh, that's a solid rotation). Plus, as you'll find out, the guard crop in this draft is terrible. The Bulls didn't really have any decent forwards that year, relying mainly on Marcus Fizer and Donyell Marshall. We can certainly do better than that here, and will pair Williams up with his Duke teammate Carlos Boozer. Boozer's gotten somewhat of a rep as an unreliable producer in the last year or two, but the numbers are (or at least were) there.

31. Memphis Grizzlies (original pick - Robert Archibald)

I'm not really sure why Memphis wanted another forward (especially a tall one), since they already had Pau Gasol, Shane Battier, Mike Miller, Drew Gooden, Stromile Swift and Lorenzen Wright. And remember, this was the time when people still expected things from Swift and Wright. Now I'll name their guards: Jason Williams, Michael Dickerson, Brevin Knight, Earl Watson and Gordon Giricek. That's, uh...that's not good. The best guard available is probably Ronald "Flip" Murray.

32. Denver Nuggets (original pick - Vincent Yarbrough)

I don't even know where to begin with how much of a mess this Denver roster was. Just take a look for yourself. The guard situation is probably worse off, but it's not really surprising that team only won 15 games, is it? Guards, guards...let's see...at this point we're looking at Jannero Pargo, Smush Parker, or Milos Vujanic. And Juan Carlos Navarro if we're being generous. I told you this was a thin guard crop. I don't really see many guys on that roster who can score, so let's roll the dice with Vujanic, who was the Euroleague's leading scorer in 2002-2003.

33. Milwaukee Bucks (original pick - Dan Gadzuric)

Milwaukee got this pick from a trade with Houston, and we won't undo that. Drafting a center wasn't a terrible idea, since the Bucks were relying on Ervin Johnson with Joel Przybilla as a backup, and they had Sam Cassell and Michael Redd all season and Ray Allen for part of it at guard. The team's power forwards included Jason Caffey, Marcus Haislip and Anthony Mason so we'll look there, and lucky for Milwaukee there are a few good ones available. He's not absolutely the best available, but Udonis Haslem worked himself into a very good rebounder and decent offensive option. He also doesn't need the ball a lot, which is good, because did I mention Sam Cassell, Ray Allen and Michael Redd played for this team?

34. Cleveland Cavaliers (original pick - Carlos Boozer)

Boozer's gone, and power forward was definitely a position of need for the Cavaliers. Luis Scola should be able to replace whatever production they would've gotten from Boozer, with even better defense.

35. New York Knicks (original pick - Milos Vujanic)

The center position for this team is pretty gross. Travis Knight, Michael Doleac, and sort-of Othella Harrington. Vujanic is a talented player, but he's gone from our board and would be more of a luxury anyway. Unfortunately for the Knicks, Dan Gadzuric is probably as good as it gets for the center position, at least for guys who could make an immediate contribution.

36. Atlanta Hawks (original pick - David Andersen)

Another roster that's all over the place. Look at those guards, though. Jason Terry and a lot of Dan Dickau and a lot of Dion Glover. We'll give the Hawks Jannero Pargo and let he and Terry sort out the ballhandling duties.

37. Houston Rockets (original pick - Tito Maddox)

Drafting a point guard wasn't a terrible idea, but drafting Maddox kind of was. The Rockets needed a backup to Steve Francis, but Maddox spent large parts of the season on the injured list, then was out of the league the next year. Smush Parker had some decent moments with the Lakers before moving to the D-League and finally to Europe.

38. Washington Wizards (original pick - Rod Grizzard)

Ugh, so many bad draft memories from that period in Wizards history. It wasn't just the Kwame Brown pick that sunk the Jordan-as-Wizards-GM era. I guess they wanted a scoring guard, but their frontcourt was really terrible that year. Look it up for yourself (http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/WAS/2003.html), I can't bear to type the names. If they had drafted a forward in real-life it probably would've been Lonny Baxter or something, but while I reallllly wanted to go back and move everything around so the Wizards could draft Scola, Darius Songaila is the best PF available. He's established himself as a good passer and a solid man defender with the Wizards (against other forwards anyway), though he's not a great rebounder.

39. Washington Wizards (original pick - Juan Carlos Navarro)

See what I meant about a top-to-bottom poor draft record from that era? Navarro was sort of like a proto-Jose Juan Barea, a small Spanish point guard who scores more easily than he plays point guard, only Navarro was less successful at it. This isn't favoratism, the Wizards really did have two consecutive picks, and Matt Barnes is the best available player. I'm sure Jordan would've let him develop as a small forward, right?

40. Los Angeles Clippers (original pick - Mario Kasun)

Kasun was drafted as a center, though he's more of a power forward. His list of basketball heroes includes Drazen Petrovic, Kevin Garnett, Rasheed Wallace and Chris Webber. The Clippers certainly didn't need another power forward, as they had Elton Brand, Lamar Odom and Chris Wilcox. They had the right idea, though, as their centers that year were Michael Olowokandi and Melvin Ely. Jason Jennings didn't make it in the NBA, though he was the Sun Belt Conference Defensive Player of the Year in 2002 and had two seasons with at least 100 blocks, and would've been an intriguing pick here at least.

41. Milwaukee Bucks (original pick - Ronald Murray)

Everything I said about the Bucks still applies, though Murray would've been a decent pick if he were available to give Milwaukee a backup point guard option. He's not, though. Drafting a center still wouldn't have been a terrible idea, so we'll let them get a jump on the whole Australian thing and draft David Andersen. Andersen averaged 11 points and four rebounds last year in the Eurloleague, which is better than Gadzuric has given them.

42. Portland Trail Blazers (original pick - Jason Jennings)

This was the downslope of that era's Portland teams, a few years removed from the Western Conference finals. There was still talent there, though, and no completely obvious holes except maybe backup center. That was already a thin position in this draft, though, and we've just given away several of them. So I'll stretch things a little bit and say Rasheed Wallace and Dale Davis can be the backup centers (I think they might've been anyway), and instead look at small forwards. Rasual Butler is still around, and could've provided a formidable three-point shooting tandem with Wallace as well as a nice complement to Bonzi Wells' post-up game.

43. Chicago Bulls (original pick - Lonny Baxter)

We'll end part 1 of this re-draft where we (sort-of) started, the Bulls. Boozer-Fizer-Marshall is a better forward rotation, but not much. I guess the Bulls could afford to go with the best available player here, and I was tempted to have them roll the dice on Juan Carlos Navarro, though with Jay Williams they didn't need another point guard. Whaddya say we make it interesting and draft Mario Kasun here. Kasun had a decent pre-draft camp, though he played in Europe for a few years before returning and playing parts of a few seasons with the Magic (he's now playing in Turkey). Kasun's free throw shooting needs work, and his field goal percentage isn't great for where he plays on the floor, but maybe with some more development in the NBA he could have become a decent backup option. And anyway, the Bulls drafted Lonny Baxter in the real thing, so it's not like they had any better ideas.

Bucks Team 2000s: First Round vs Second Round

Alex Boeder — Fri, 22 May 2009 12:17:10 -0000

While you are voting for your preferred #10, don't forget about #41: An unusual bit of draft history has seen the Bucks score about as often in the second round as the in first since the turn of this century. Which got me hypothetical-ing...

Probable starters:
	vs
BrewHoop Court
T.J. Ford (2003: 1.8)	PG	Ramon Sessions (2007: 2.26)
Joe Alexander (2008: 1.8)	SG	Michael Redd (2000: 2.14)
Yi Jianlian (2007: 1.6)	SF	Luc Mbah a Moute (2008: 2.7)
Marcus Haislip (2002: 1.13)	PF	Ersan Ilyasova (2006: 2.6)
Andrew Bogut (2005: 1.1)	C	Dan Gadzuric (2002: 2.5)

You can choose from a few more solid second rounders, including Keith Bogans (2003: 2.14), Flip Murray (2002: 2.13), and Jason Hart (2000: 2.20) And of course this doesn't include Mo Williams (2003: 2.18), whom the Bucks grabbed after a short first season in Utah.

The only other first round option is Jason Collier (2000: 1.15). This is considering only players the Bucks actually picked, but if we went back a couple more years, the first rounders would have Dirk Nowitzki (1998: 1.9) while Rafer Alston (1998: 2.10) would become a second round possibility. Alas, this post-1900's only.

Poll

5 on 5, pick your victor.

2000s First Round Bucks

55 votes

2000s Second Round Bucks

345 votes

400 votes | Poll has closed