PDA

View Full Version : Bucks may look to trade Magloire, and Mo Williams



Frank Slade
06-06-2006, 01:06 PM
06/05: Bucks' Williams piques curiosity

BY GERY WOELFEL

Bucks general manager Larry Harris and several members of the Milwaukee Bucks' organization will be flying to Orlando, Fla., Tuesday for the start of the NBA's pre-draft camp. The event will be held on the DisneyWorld grounds where Mickey and Minnie draw a crowd.

It's almost a foregone conclusion Harris will be a popular attaction himself. That's because the Bucks have two players who could be rather appealing to other teams in a trade: veteran center Jamaal Magloire and young combo guard Mo Williams.


It's hardly a secret Magloire could be dealt if Harris finds the righ deal. Ideally, the Bucks want to shift rookie Andrew Bogut from power foward to his natural position at center. On a recent "Pro Hoops Show'' on WSSP Radio (1250 AM) in Milwaukee, Harris candidly acknowledged several teams have contacted him about Magloire and that he had sent out some feelers to a few other teams as well.


Because Magloire is a center, and there is a dearth of quality centers in the NBA - you don't even need the fingers on both hands to count them - the Bucks won't have any problem moving him. Likewise, Williams has become a hot commodity on the trade market.
After signing with the Bucks as a free agent two summers ago, Williams fnever figured to be anything more than the second or third point guard on the roster. But that isn't the case anymore. Williams' game flourished last season, especially during the first two months when he was arguably the Bucks' second-best player behind All-Star guard Michael Redd.
Williams scored a career-high 35 points on Dec. 2 against Washington and had 30 points against New York on Dec. 30. He also hit game-winning shots against Washington and Indiana.

But the explosive Williams hurt his left foot in January and, without adequate time to rest it, was never the same player the rest of the season. Bucks officials fully expect him to be fully recovered by training camp in the fall, though.

With T.J. Ford penciled in as the Bucks' starting point guard next season and with the emergence of Charlie Bell as a competent backup, Harris will undoubtedly be tempted to move Williams. And, just like Magloire, Harris will discover - if he hasn't already - that several teams would be willing to compensate him nicely for Williams' services.


An Eastern Conference player personnel director recently told me the Bucks could get a mid first-round draft pick for the 23-year-old Williams.

And that would put the Bucks in an enviable position to draft a quality swingman - i.e. Arkansas' Ronnie Brewer or Memphis' Rodney Carney - to back up small forward Bobby Simmons and Redd.
So while Harris will be checking out potential picks for the June 28th draft, he'll likely to be spending more time conversing with other GMs about deals in involving Magloire and Williams.



Article Link (http://www.journaltimes.com/nucleus/index.php?itemid=6037)

The Annual Magloire watch is on ..again

Anthem
06-06-2006, 01:11 PM
So what would they want? I don't see how we could put together a decent offer.

Jeff Foster and Steven Jackson works for Mags and Mo, and we'd obviously include our pick.

I don't think that would get it done. But I'd do it in a heartbeat.

Unclebuck
06-06-2006, 02:16 PM
Magloire is very overrated. He's not a bad player, but I wouldn't give up much to get him

btowncolt
06-06-2006, 02:23 PM
There is a dearth of quality centers in the NBA. And if there were 45 Jamaal Magloires, there would still be one.

ChicagoJ
06-06-2006, 02:24 PM
Magloire is very overrated. He's not a bad player, but I wouldn't give up much to get him

Then you agree that you'd give up Foster in exchange for him. :devil:

SoupIsGood
06-06-2006, 02:24 PM
Mo Williams would be nice to have.

Gamble
06-06-2006, 02:24 PM
I would still take him over Foster but I am sure other teams will give a
whole lot more for him.
2005-06
Statistics
PPG 9.2
RPG 9.50
APG 0.7
EFF + 12.76

Foster
PPG 5.9
RPG 9.10
APG 0.8
EFF + 13.10

SoupIsGood
06-06-2006, 02:24 PM
Then you agree that you'd give up Foster in exchange for him. :devil:

Yes, sadly Mags is still better than Foster... urgh.

Anthem
06-06-2006, 02:37 PM
So what do you guys think? Is Foster/Jack/pick enough?

Trader Joe
06-06-2006, 02:37 PM
I would gladly give up Foster for Magloire. What about Foster, Sarunas, and our 2nd round pick for Magloire? Would Milwaukee bite?

ChicagoJ
06-06-2006, 02:38 PM
I've seen Mags put a body on someone. So Magloire >>>> Foster in my book.

I'd like Magloire on a two to three year basis to help David learn to stop using his hands and foul all the time.

We don't need a "great" center to play alongside JO, we just need a physical one (or three). Getting Magloire would be a serious upgrade over anyone we're currently playing at center.

Trader Joe
06-06-2006, 02:40 PM
So what do you guys think? Is Foster/Jack/pick enough?

IMO I think that is too much to give up for Magloire and Mo Williams. I am not quite as high on Williams as others are. That leaves us with a bigtime logjam at PG. Also I value draft picks quite a bit.

ChicagoJ
06-06-2006, 02:41 PM
So what do you guys think? Is Foster/Jack/pick enough?

I wish...

Let's put it this way, there are a lot of players I'd be willing to throw in to make it work. Tinsley (yes, I said that.) Fred. AJ. Saras (duh.) I might even consider David if pushed.

Too bad James Jones is no longer available, he'd be nice filler for a trade like this one.

SoupIsGood
06-06-2006, 02:44 PM
So what do you guys think? Is Foster/Jack/pick enough?

I would't want to include the pick

rexnom
06-06-2006, 02:49 PM
I would't want to include the pick
I'd prefer to give them a second rounder or nothing at all too but if a first rounder is what it takes then so be it. We get two starters. I don't see the downside. Also, I think JO's life would be easier with Magloire.

Anxiety
06-06-2006, 02:59 PM
Whoever ends up getting Magloire will get 1-year rental. He is from toronto and has expressed numerous times that he'd like to play for the Raptors. If he does not end up there this summer he'll sign in 2007 as a free agent.

beast23
06-06-2006, 03:09 PM
Magloire isn't a big enough upgrade for me to say that there aren't risks.

With Foster, we know exactly what we are going to get... a pretty decent defender who is a very good rebounder that does not have to start and does not need the ball to be happy. He's a professional, and we know exactly how he blends in with his other teammates. We also know that he will never be a source of problems chemistry-wise on the bench or in the locker room.

I just don't believe Magloire is a big enough upgrade to warrant taking the risks. The other portion of the trade would be Jackson for Williams... which gets rid of Jackson, but doesn't exactly return a player that we need. At least not without giving up one of our own PGs in the trade.

So the trade really doesn't work for us with either of the players from the Bucks... and as such I sure as heck wouldn't be throwing in our #17.

indygeezer
06-06-2006, 03:19 PM
What is Mag's health record. Does he have the back spasm problems of our other 5's (Jeff and Scot)? That is my criteria for determining whether a replacement is an upgrade. At this time in Pacer history, it's not how well he can play but how often (I'm about 85% serious here). We need consistency as much as quality.

Young
06-06-2006, 03:29 PM
So what do you guys think? Is Foster/Jack/pick enough?

I don't know that the Bucks do it.

- Why do they need Jackson?
They have Michael Reed and Bobby Simmions at the 2/3. I don't see much room for Jackson. Jackson probably is valued much by the Bucks.
- Foster is nice but he ain't worth Jamal Maglorie or Mo Williams.
- Our pick is alright but they would probably want a lot more.

Honestly, I don't know if I want the Pacers to do it. I love getting Mo Williams, but I don't know about Maglorie. At the beginning of the season, I was all for the Pacers getting Maglorie. He is a top 5 center. He would make a big difference. But with our current roster do we want to pay Maglorie big money? He will likely command a multi year contract somewhere around 10 million a year, so I don't know that it would be wise for the Pacers to invest in him at this point in time. We are re-building or re-tooling.

I like both Maglorie and Mo Williams, but I think the Bucks will have better offers out there and besides, I don't want to see the Pacers invest a lot of money into Maglroie and I don't think we have room for Mo Williams on this roster right now.

I just don't think it would be wise for the Pacers to go after these two right now, nor do I think we have much that would interest the Bucks.

purdue101
06-06-2006, 03:34 PM
everything i have read since the bucks were knocked out of the playoffs points to harris wanting a quality SG/SF off the bench. apparently he was not pleased with the performance simmons put up this season. jax & AJ or jax & sarunas should work for Magz salary wise. I would not include our first rounder though....maybe a second rounder or the rights to lorbek.

i wouldn't be surprised at all if bird has inquired about his availablility.

getting magz would also allow us to use foster to try and land a decent SG.

Young
06-06-2006, 03:48 PM
everything i have read since the bucks were knocked out of the playoffs points to harris wanting a quality SG/SF off the bench. apparently he was not pleased with the performance simmons put up this season. jax & AJ or jax & sarunas should work for Magz salary wise. I would not include our first rounder though....maybe a second rounder or the rights to lorbek.

i wouldn't be surprised at all if bird has inquired about his availablility.

getting magz would also allow us to use foster to try and land a decent SG.

If Harris wants a quality SG/SF off the bench than I think that Jackson would make perfect sense for them. He is a willing 6th man too. Wasn't he the Spurs 6th man in 03?

My question is why would the Bucks want AJ or Saras if they want to trade Mo Williams?

beast23
06-06-2006, 03:52 PM
If Harris wants a quality SG/SF off the bench than I think that Jackson would make perfect sense for them. He is a willing 6th man too. Wasn't he the Spurs 6th man in 03?

My question is why would the Bucks want AJ or Saras if they want to trade Mo Williams?I think that Jackson vocalized that he was "okay" with being our sixth man when he arrived, because he knew that Reggie would soon be retiring. He was quoted saying as much a few times in the Indy Star.

However, what was he supposed to say as he was playing behind Reggie? He said what was politically expedient, probably something unique for him. But don't believe for a moment that starting is not of the utmost importance to Jackson. He has now been a starter and certainly will not willingly take a step backwards to become someone's sixth man.

tdubb03
06-06-2006, 03:53 PM
Mo Williams is a nice player, but he's not the missing piece. I've only seen Magloire play against Indy, and in those games I was far from impressed.

Pass.

Gamble
06-06-2006, 04:00 PM
My question is why would the Bucks want AJ or Saras if they want to trade Mo Williams?

They wouldn't. The Bucks feel that the pg postion is filled and
Mo is at his highest stock.

I didn't realize Mag has only 1 year left on his contract. I would have to
reconsider this.

Kegboy
06-06-2006, 04:30 PM
Frankly, IMHO the question isn't "who would we trade for Mo and Mag?" It's "who whouldn't we trade for Mo and Mag?"

I almost wept last year when I heard we almost got Magloire for Jeff and Cro. Is he great? No, but he's solid, which is more than I can say than just about anybody on our stupid roster. And he's cheap too, at least for a year.

JayRedd
06-06-2006, 04:36 PM
Magloire is better than Foster in virutally all aspects. He's bigger, more physical, a MUCH better shotblocker and MUCH better in the post offensively. The only place he may not be quite as good is on the offensive glass, but their DRB as virtually the same throughout their careers, with Magloire having a slightly better DRB/40 and Foster having a slightly better Rebound Rate.

But, Magloire has been much healthier. He missed 50 games two years back, but that was with a broken finger, which is a fluke-type thing compared to Foster's chronic back. Plus, it gets Foster's next two years off the books and gives us a little more flexibility as to whether we want to re-sign Magloire or move in another direction as we remake this team. I think Mags and JO in the paint is a pretty formidable defensive back line.

And, I think Jax is the exact type of guy the Bucks need. Michael Redd is better suited to shoot more than penetrate, and Bobby Simmons can't really make his own shot off the dribble. He's a good slasher, but Milwaukee doesn't really have any perimeter guys that have similar tools to Jax, i.e., shoot the three, drive to the lane, post up little guards, punch fans, etc.

Foster/Jax/2nd rounder for Mags/Williams is a really great deal for us I think.

Mourning
06-06-2006, 05:24 PM
Magloire is better than Foster in virutally all aspects. He's bigger, more physical, a MUCH better shotblocker and MUCH better in the post offensively. The only place he may not be quite as good is on the offensive glass, but their DRB as virtually the same throughout their careers, with Magloire having a slightly better DRB/40 and Foster having a slightly better Rebound Rate.

But, Magloire has been much healthier. He missed 50 games two years back, but that was with a broken finger, which is a fluke-type thing compared to Foster's chronic back. Plus, it gets Foster's next two years off the books and gives us a little more flexibility as to whether we want to re-sign Magloire or move in another direction as we remake this team. I think Mags and JO in the paint is a pretty formidable defensive back line.

And, I think Jax is the exact type of guy the Bucks need. Michael Redd is better suited to shoot more than penetrate, and Bobby Simmons can't really make his own shot off the dribble. He's a good slasher, but Milwaukee doesn't really have any perimeter guys that have similar tools to Jax, i.e., shoot the three, drive to the lane, post up little guards, punch fans, etc.

Foster/Jax/2nd rounder for Mags/Williams is a really great deal for us I think.

Yeah, but I think the question was IF we would be willing to offer our first rounder this year too?

I like Mags a lot. He's not a superman or something, but he gives us a bigger guy at center who actually is decently durable, physical, can score a little, rebounds well and knows how to defend well. I think he's the sort of player JO was referring to a few weeks ago.

Mo is nice, but I doubt he would fit in our current team make up, then again ... we don't know how that team will look like at the end of the summer.

IF we could convince Mags to stay with us after next year then I would not even doubt about approving this trade. But, since we don't have that guarantee (yet) it makes me doubt the deal again.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

ChicagoJ
06-06-2006, 05:31 PM
They wouldn't. The Bucks feel that the pg postion is filled and
Mo is at his highest stock.

I didn't realize Mag has only 1 year left on his contract. I would have to
reconsider this.

Cap space, and a much better on-court mentor to David than anybody he's played with during his first two seasons. Maybe David could really be ready to play by the end of a season with Magloire. I like this, but there's no way Milwaukee would do this trade as proposed here. Why would they take two of our problem players (one with attitude, one who is just simply a terrible fit alongside JO) within the division?

SoupIsGood
06-06-2006, 05:35 PM
Cap space, and a much better on-court mentor to David than anybody he's played with during his first two seasons. Maybe David could really be ready to play by the end of a season with Magloire. I like this, but there's no way Milwaukee would do this trade as proposed here. Why would they take two of our problem players (one with attitude, one who is just simply a terrible fit alongside JO) within the division?

Magloire isn't perfect either, he is a 'problem player' for them. They also need some guys with experience and toughness, imo.

Jermaniac
06-06-2006, 06:30 PM
MO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Mo and Mags for Foster,Jack and Saras

Jon Theodore
06-06-2006, 07:55 PM
jermaine/jack/tins for mo/mag/redd

pizza guy
06-06-2006, 08:50 PM
jermaine/jack/tins for mo/mag/redd

:jawdrop:
:chin:

wooolus
06-06-2006, 09:36 PM
jermaine/jack/tins for mo/mag/redd

Indiana Bucks ehh....

Pig Nash
06-06-2006, 09:38 PM
Mags/Hulk
Granger/Foster
Stojacovic/Granger
Redd/Fred
Mo/AJ/Saras

Am I crazy or does this not sound too bad?

SoupIsGood
06-06-2006, 09:41 PM
Well, it's better than last season if they're all healthy..... of course, that's not saying a lot.

Jermaniac
06-06-2006, 09:47 PM
Mags/Hulk
Granger/Foster
Stojacovic/Granger
Redd/Fred
Mo/AJ/Saras

Am I crazy or does this not sound too bad?Danny playing PF for 82 games for at least 25 mpg AMAZING PLAN. That team looks like ****.

rexnom
06-06-2006, 10:08 PM
Danny playing PF for 82 games for at least 25 mpg AMAZING PLAN. That team looks like ****.
Agreed, next.

Anthem
06-06-2006, 10:25 PM
Danny playing PF for 82 games for at least 25 mpg AMAZING PLAN. That team looks like ****.
Jermainiac is absolutely right.

Fireball Kid
06-06-2006, 11:15 PM
jermaine/jack/tins for mo/mag/redd

Could I have whatever your smokin?

Seriously, your just messin' with us, right?

Pig Nash
06-06-2006, 11:43 PM
Well if you think about it, we've also got Croshere at the 4 so you could go with

Mags/Hulk
Foster/Cro
Peja/Danny
Redd/Fred
Mo/AJ/Saras

Jermaniac
06-07-2006, 12:55 AM
YAY We can get a total of 12 points from our frontcourt everygame.

Jon Theodore
06-07-2006, 02:06 PM
I was basically joking, but if we drafted a big guy we would be in good shape with that trade. No worse off than we are now.

rexnom
06-07-2006, 02:14 PM
I was basically joking, but if we drafted a big guy we would be in good shape with that trade. No worse off than we are now.
I think we would. Swingmen are a dime a dozen...IF we trade JO there better be a legit star coming back and someone who can be considered a low post threat (or a combo of both, i.e. KG).

Shade
06-07-2006, 05:35 PM
Read the sig, and get 'er done!

Jermaniac
06-07-2006, 05:41 PM
You still want Tins to stay? I thought only Me,Jay and Ragnar wanted Tins to stay.

Shade
06-07-2006, 05:43 PM
You still want Tins to stay? I thought only Me,Jay and Ragnar wanted Tins to stay.

I like Tins. Ragnar can vouch for me there, as can Able. I just get pissed when he's on the bench every other game with an injury. But I don't see all of these attitude issues everyone brings up all the time.

That said, I'm not adverse to trading him if it brings an upgrade.

able
06-07-2006, 06:31 PM
Uhh Jermaniac, pls change that list to at the very least include me?

and yes Shade to, though that ¨upgrade¨ nonsense should be dropped, trading him would never bring an upgrade and after 5 years of Bender, I can take 2 years of Tin easily, I say play him this year and see, if not, bye bye

Shade
06-07-2006, 06:43 PM
and yes Shade to, though that ĻupgradeĻ nonsense should be dropped, trading him would never bring an upgrade and after 5 years of Bender, I can take 2 years of Tin easily, I say play him this year and see, if not, bye bye

Tinsley is not going to bring equal value by himself in a trade, not even close if he's healthy. We would have to package him with another starter to get an upgrade at the point.

SoupIsGood
06-07-2006, 06:50 PM
Can we trade Tinsley for better refs?

Jermaniac
06-07-2006, 07:40 PM
Uhh Jermaniac, pls change that list to at the very least include me?

and yes Shade to, though that ĻupgradeĻ nonsense should be dropped, trading him would never bring an upgrade and after 5 years of Bender, I can take 2 years of Tin easily, I say play him this year and see, if not, bye bye

OH MAN, I forgot Mel's number 1 fan. Sorry Able I dont know how I forgot you.

beast23
06-08-2006, 12:58 PM
Can we trade Tinsley for better refs?What the hell? I'd even trade Tinsley for bad refs, as long as they are CONSISTENTLY bad for both teams.

As for what it would take to get a decent PG in return, I've always said that it would take Tinsley + Jackson for a PG and a bad contract in return.

pizza guy
06-08-2006, 03:56 PM
What the hell? I'd even trade Tinsley for bad refs, as long as they are CONSISTENTLY bad for both teams.

As for what it would take to get a decent PG in return, I've always said that it would take Tinsley + Jackson for a PG and a bad contract in return.

Funniest thing I've ever read.

:rotflmao: