The NBA Draft Lottery was created to dissuade tanking. Whether or not the lottery has succeeded, is up to your own judgment (Quick answer: no). Milwaukee did their best to tank their way to the top of the Greg Oden/Kevin Durant lottery, but the basketball Gods did not reward the regular efforts of Damir Markota and Jared Reiner. Milwaukee slipped right into the retreating arms of Easy Yi and the rest is history.

The Bucks made the playoffs every year for the first two incarnations of the lottery. In 1985, the order of the non-playoff teams were fully determined by the lottery and they all had an equal chance at the top pick. In 1987, they modified the lottery so only the first three picks were determined by lottery. All non-playoff teams had an equal shot at the top three picks and all other picks were determined by record. In 1990, they weighted the lottery. The worst team had 11 out of 66 chances to get the top pick; the second-worst team had 10 out of 66 chances and so on and so forth. The Bucks first foray into the lottery was in 1991. Since then the Bucks have been in the lottery more often than not and the NBA has changed the lottery system to be weighted out of 1000 combinations instead of 66.

*traded to Portland along with a conditional ‘96 first-round pick for Shawn Respert

**traded to Minnesota for Ray Allen and a future first-round pick

*** traded to Denver along with Johnny Newman and Joe Wolf for Ervin Johnson

****traded to Dallas along with draft rights to Pat Garrity for Robert “Tractor” Traylor

It should also be noted that the Bucks drafted T.J. Ford in 2003 at the eighth spot. The pick came from a trade with the Atlanta Hawks that saw the Bucks trading Glenn Robinson for the lottery pick, Tony Kukoc and Leon Smith. So in all, the Bucks have had 13 lottery picks and have traded four of those picks.

Read more…

Recently, the TrueHoop Network’s D-League blog D-League Digest polled the network to see what respective blogs thought about their team’s usage of the D-League as a development tool.

As far as the Bucks are concerned, I gave them a D.  Here’s a sample of my thoughts on the matter:

It’s tough to criticize the Bucks when talking about developing young players. Brandon Jennings and Luc Richard Mbah a Moute have been getting minutes from day one as draft picks of John Hammond. But why the Bucks didn’t use the D-League more with Joe Alexander or Meeks is a curiosity.

You can read more here, but I’m now wondering if I was too harsh.

Can I blame the Bucks for wanting to keep closer tabs on their young players instead of shipping them away and hoping for more development?  Milwaukee may feel that their coaches and system can offer better development than coaches who have little to no knowledge of the Bucks system and very little at stake with the players they are receiving.

Matt Moore made the point in the review that the Bucks use the D-League as a banishment system.  When they no longer have use for a player, they ship them to the D-League, never to hear from them again.  This is obviously a nod to the Joe Alexander experience.  After proving that he knew little about playing the game of basketball in his rookie season, Alexander mysteriously broke down with an injury at the start of camp last season and then played a few games in the D-League while still on the Bucks roster before his trade to Chicago.  Milwaukee wanted no part of him and sent him away not for development, but for the sake of separation.

But they’ve had success before, albeit with a different regime.  Ramon Sessions was a star in the D-League and Ersan Ilyasova was passable in his first go-round there.  I made the point on D-League Digest that Jodie Meeks could have used some regular shots that the D-League could have provided, but he did provide the Bucks with athleticism they did not have elsewhere in the early parts of last season.  Milwaukee often sees space and use on their roster for rookies.

This coming season should be the first when they have little space and use for their second-round-pick and will be an interesting test of their faith in the D-League system.  If Darington Hobson heads down and improves, this D could improve drastically and quickly.

Jeremy Schmidt writes the Milwaukee Bucks blog Bucksketball.com

I’m constantly reading, hearing, seeing and being told how the Bucks may make a mistake and draft “another Joe Alexander” in Gordon Hayward.

But I don’t get it. If it means drafting a player who won’t work out, that makes some sense, but Milwaukee will run that risk with anyone they draft. Of course, I don’t think that’s what people mean when they say Hayward is “another Alexander.” I think people really believe that the two have some similarities. Which blows me away. If anything, the player I think most resembles Alexander in this class is Hassan Whiteside, another workout wonder with very little successful basketball on his resume. Of course, Whiteside is nearly 7-foot tall with the wingspan of a small plane, so Alexander rarely is mentioned in the same sentences as him. Oh, and there’s another difference between Whiteside and Alexander that seems to be playing a more significant role in this conversation.

Both Alexander and Hayward are indeed white. And that’s why they are linked. Foolishly, that’s how many people first judge players. White players are typically unathletic, good shooters and rely on their intelligence to make up for their inability to dunk or do fancy dribbling tricks. That is the stereotype that exists. It’s so powerful that before Alexander was drafted, two other friends and I had to spend 15-25 minutes of a car ride convincing another friend that Joe Alexander was in fact one of the most athletic players in the draft, much to his disbelief. But the games, experience and production of Alexander and Hayward are so drastically different, I’ve assumed everyone would be able to get by the fact that they are both white and see how they could have completely different impacts with the Bucks.

But that appears to have been wishful thinking.

Anyway, I’ve put together a handy comparison of Alexander and Hayward hoping to put to rest the talk of their similarities, though I’m fully aware the comparisons will continue on as long as Hayward is connected with the Bucks. Bear in mind that I obviously have not listed every difference and similarity, just enough so that I feel like the two are justifiably different.

I’m not naive and I know if Hayward is drafted by the Bucks, none of this is going to go away unless he proves that he can be a productive player. But as someone who enjoys basketball and seeing the differences in players that play it, the comparisons between these two are one of my pet peeves. This is my pet peeve therapy.

Without ever having been in one, it’s difficult for me to know just how NBA teams’ war room’s operate. I do have my ideas though. I imagine piles of data everywhere, organized by player, with a dry erase board full of player’s names (probably on magnets) and ranked by position, overall and where they will likely be drafted. When one team reaches further down that board than other organizations expected, I envision a mass panic ensuing, resulting in the shuffling of the mock draft that’s been set up and a call to action to figure out why things have happened the way they have.

And while it seems a safe bet to assume that this room is being run by a general manager (or owner if he’s very hands on), it’s difficult to peg just how much input everyone else in the room has.

With that being said, I’m not sure how much stock to put in John Hammond’s drafts as a member of the Detroit Pistons front office. Sure, we now have two years worth of data about Hammond’s first picks as the Bucks general manager, and a season of statistics about his second draft in Milwaukee, but we potentially have tons more information about the thoughts and ideas that shape John Hammond’s draft philosophy from his days in Detroit. Even if Hammond didn’t have lots of direct input on who would be the pick, it’s likely he’s shaped his philosophies based on his time in that front office. Read more…

The Bucks have made a trade. Details have not been finalized and the two players the Bucks give up could end up being HakimWarrick and Joe Alexander, but here was the initial report.

From ESPN TrueHoop:

The Chicago Bulls and Milwaukee Bucks were nearing completion of the John Salmons trade Thursday morning. However, although the early word last night was that the Bucks would send Kurt Thomas and Francisco Elson to the Bulls, sources close to the process told ESPN.com this morning that there is a “90 percent chance” Milwaukee sends Chicago Joe Alexander and Hakim Warrick instead.

JSOnline is reporting it is indeed Warrick and Alexander.

The financial implications are as such:  The combined salaries of Warrick and Alexander ($5,583,360) leave the Bucks on the hook for just $253,646 additional dollars in salary this year, as Salmons contracted called for $6,421,151 (Salmons’ deal – combined money going out, divided by the remaining games left is the math there).

Salmons will have one year left on his contract after this season at 5,808,000, while the now former Bucks Warrick and Alexander are expiring contracts.

***All salary information from ShamSports.com