Comments on: Milwaukee Bucks and John Hammond working on contract extension

By: OB

OB — Fri, 11 Jan 2013 21:23:13 +0000

Even with a qualifying offer to Jennings and the 11 mil option for Ellis, the Bucks cap number going into next season is at 46 million, well under the cap. Next year if Monta opts out they will have room for a max contract and then some.

Sure the Bucks can’t go crazy and live in the tax range like the Lakers, but they are usually right at or above the actual cap.

They could go after a Chris Paul or Dwight Howard, now getting those guys to agree to come and play for the Bucks is the issue and it doesn’t have to do with money.

By: Bryon

Bryon — Fri, 11 Jan 2013 16:00:04 +0000

The way I look at it though is we will never have a star like Kevin Durant or even a James Harden or a Chris Paul. Nobody wants to come to Milwaukee. Ouch…I hated saying that. Strike that, never said that. I don’t mean it but in the back of my mind….that’s what I keep thinking.

However, maybe $ could do the talking but we’ll never had that sort of $ to lure them in. I think we could surprise some teams in the playoffs. I really think we could do some damage. Maybe that’s just a bias opinion but we still have the same size players as the rest of the league. We have talent. It’s not like we are a team full of rookies or just some decent players like Phoenix. Man…they looked pretty bad.

I think we have promise and I have faith, but in regards to Hammond….he’s a fan of the game and I’m sure he wants to win. He wouldn’t be in the position he is in, if he didn’t want to win.

By: buckcity

buckcity — Fri, 11 Jan 2013 14:33:54 +0000

You’re right in that we are a small market, but you’re wrong to think Hammond will bring us to the next level. He’s great a keeping us mediocre. If you want the next level like OKC or Memphis, then get rid of this guy.

By: buckcity

buckcity — Fri, 11 Jan 2013 14:32:35 +0000

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo. Whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy???

By: Bryon

Bryon — Thu, 10 Jan 2013 16:38:45 +0000

Is John Hammond playing on the team?

I can almost guarantee you, he is doing the best he can to put a quality product on the court with the resources he has. We aren’t a big market like Chicago, San Antonio, New York or LA.

Pointing fingers at Hammond is the obvious start but doesn’t it really come down to the guys on the team working together? Practicing and working to be better. I don’t think you can really expect much more from a scrappy team like what we have now. We have the best level of quality of players that this mid-market city could really afford.

I honestly think they are doing the best they can do and have the best interest for us fans.

By: sillybilly

sillybilly — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 15:26:26 +0000

“the GM is still putting together limited talented rosters that have no balance and uneven depth”.

Couldn’t agree more, but I think it all goes back to the direction given by Herb Kohl which is aimed at making the playoffs and against rebuilding. I still think Hammond has made some dumb moves (Salmons, Maggette, Jefferson, Gooden, Jackson) but I think his hands are tied as far as doing whats necessary to acquire star talent.

By: sillybilly

sillybilly — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 15:22:36 +0000

Skiles is a good coach, Boylan isnt going to play Dalembert or Harris either.

By: OB

OB — Tue, 08 Jan 2013 22:37:52 +0000

Why in the heck would they extend Hammond? 1 playoff appearance, tons of bad moves and contracts. They finally have the opportunity to change directions and hope a new GM/Coach can utilize all the expiring contracts in the next 2 years and build a program. But, no because its the Bucks, we will fire one of the problems and give an extension to the bigger overlying problem.

Such a terrible idea. No coach is going to be able to sustain winning with the moves Hammond has done, you might (assuming they hire the right coach) improve this team by a few wins, but the GM is still putting together limited talented rosters that have no balance and uneven depth.

By: JP

JP — Tue, 08 Jan 2013 20:45:26 +0000

One guys makes a bunch of moves, the other won’t change whatsoever. One guy brings in talent, the other guy does everything in his power to alienate it. One guy signs Marquis Daniels to be the last shooting guard on the end of the bench, the other guy starts him for a month straight. One guy trades for a veteran post player, the other guy throws him on the end of the bench and won’t talk to him. One guy shakes things up and changes the team’s identity, the other guys refuses to make any adjustments. One guy tries to make the most of the situation with a small-market franchise, the other guy stews and broods and hates.

One guy gets a contract extension, the other guy gets fired. I, for one, am TOTALLY okay with this. Lots of good coaches need a job, and while they can’t get Pop or Phil, they could get someone who players will want to play for, which changes everything (both Van Gundy boys, for instance, are currently out of basketball…)

By: Justin

Justin — Tue, 08 Jan 2013 20:34:21 +0000

good move to provide some stability and identity. I like Hammond and while I don’t always agree with his decisions he definitely has the pedigree to make them.. plus with this move we know that he’s not just throwing darts at a board, but making his stamp on the future of this team