Do the Bucks bite?

[sdceltsfan]

I've heard rumors of MIL taking offers on both Monroe, Parker, and Carter-Williams. They are a team who may be in one of the worst positions of all. Hovering somewhere between lower mediocrity and bad, and being in a small-market to boot.

It's probably in their best interest to consider a full, nuclear rebuild, so I came up with a trade that offers them a true restart, and puts us in win-now mode.

Boston Trades: David Lee, Jared Sullinger, James Young, Terry Rozier, BKN 2016, DAL 2016, BOS 2016, BOS 2017, BKN 2018, Boston 2016 2nd rounder (the one that comes up first)

Milwaukee Trades: Greg Monroe, Jabari Parker, Michael Carter-Williams, MIL 2017


At first glance, it seems like MIL hangs up the phone. However, if you look at the trade, it is very similar to what we made with Brooklyn, HOWEVER, we are not making the same mistake as Porkorov, in trading for 2 Stars in their twilight years.

The Celtics would also maintain a good portion of their draft stock, and would be primed for the 2017 Draft, where there should be some real prize-players to be had. Milwaukee likely turns in to a really bad team, and struggles next season. So we would get their pick, in exchange for them to be able to start developing two top-10 picks immediately. MIL also free's up to have more cap-space than just about any team in the league, to add any FA's whenever they so chose.

[sdceltsfan]

New Depth Chart (assuming we re-sign Zeller, Turner, and take Amir's team option)

PG: IT/Smart/Carter-Williams
SG: Bradley/Smart/Turner/Carter-Williams
SF: Crowder/Turner/Parker/Jerbeko
PF: Parker/Olynyk/Johnson/Jerbeko/Mickey
C: Monroe/Johnson/Zeller

Insane starting 5, and maybe one of the best 2nd-units you will ever see (at least on paper). This team would have immense depth, allowing for players to remain fresh. Plenty of assets to make future moves if the chemistry is off. A lot of it hinges on Parker becoming a more consistent scorer, but with this kind of talent around him, I think he gets a lot more solid looks than he does now in MIL.

[PhoSita]

I can only imagine, but deer probably do bite given the right circumstances, and I suspect it'd be painful.

[Bucketgetter]

Not even a nibble.

[Csfan1984]

If I'm the Bucks very much bite. C's probably not. If you take out Boston 2017 (pick swap rights you dont want to trade that), and Nets 2018 then the C's might pull the trigger. With those out its still a fair deal.
Rozier >=MCW
Nets 2016>=Parker
Sully, Lee, Young, Dallas 1st, C's 1st, Philly 2nd>=Monroe

[nickagneta]

No they suck!

[arctic 3.0]

5 first round picks for Monroe Parker and mcw?
That's pretty much giving up most of our future flexibility.
I don't think the return is enough of a sure thing to pay that price

[sdceltsfan]

I think we are giving up two legit 1st round picks in the BKN picks, and 3 mediocre picks with our own two in 2016/17 and Dallas 2016.

We are getting two players back who were selected top 10 and are proven commodities, so it's the price you kind of have to pay. Our future is by no means fully compromised, as we will still have two (likely top 5-10) picks in a very strong 2017 draft, and more than enough assets on the team, plus these picks, to make future trades if the chemistry doesn't work out for some reason.

[Jon]

I don't do it because it's an all in move that takes our biggest shot at acquiring a transcendent player off the table in terms of the Brooklyn pick. I suppose you can make the argument that we could try to trade some of our remaining talent (say Smart and Crowder) for a star or try to sell Durant or the like with joining the team. But I don't like the idea of giving up the Brooklyn picks unless we get someone we feel comfortable taking over a game in the 4th quarter of the finals. Parker and Monroe don't really fit that, at least right now.

[alldaboston]

They've been bad since they got Monroe. Detroit was bad when they had Monroe. If we have to trade our incredible future to get a guy who has made all his teams worse, count me OUT.

[Evantime34]

The Bucks would probably do that, but we really shouldn't.

 The C's would be trading away their entire stash of draft picks and close them down to future opportunities.Any player we get in a deal needs to be a star if they are going to deplete our entire draft stash.

[Denis998]

why MCW?

[Csfan1984]

I think we are giving up two legit 1st round picks in the BKN picks, and 3 mediocre picks with our own two in 2016/17 and Dallas 2016.

We are getting two players back who were selected top 10 and are proven commodities, so it's the price you kind of have to pay. Our future is by no means fully compromised, as we will still have two (likely top 5-10) picks in a very strong 2017 draft, and more than enough assets on the team, plus these picks, to make future trades if the chemistry doesn't work out for some reason.

This isn't accurate the 2017 Nets pick is swap rights for C's 2017 1st. C's can't trade their 2017 1st without losing swap rights.

[arctic 3.0]

I think we are giving up two legit 1st round picks in the BKN picks, and 3 mediocre picks with our own two in 2016/17 and Dallas 2016.

We are getting two players back who were selected top 10 and are proven commodities, so it's the price you kind of have to pay. Our future is by no means fully compromised, as we will still have two (likely top 5-10) picks in a very strong 2017 draft, and more than enough assets on the team, plus these picks, to make future trades if the chemistry doesn't work out for some reason.

Trading our 2017 pick means giving up the right to swap picks with Brooklyn. that means you are giving up all three Brooklyn picks plus our own 2016 and the Dallas 2016.
This trade would mean we don't have a first rounder until 2018 and we give Milwaukee all the benefit of the Nets suckitude.

I'll pass

[ssspence]

Horrible.