Trading for MYLES TURNER doesn’t even make sense at this stage.

The reason for this article is because of other articles claiming a Myles Turner trade makes sense.

Of course difference in opinion and being able to express it, makes the base for democracy to exist. But above all, for an opinion to exist, it must be fully justifiable and backed up with reasoning… Otherwise there isn’t an “opinion” but a bold statement which stands as a “meteor upon chaos”…

A hypothessis…

Lets first examine what the addition of Myles Turner would bring…

1. An improvement over Brook Lopez in shooting the long shot, rebounding the ball and in protecting the rim too… Not a huge improvement, but never the less, still an improvement.

2. A huge improvement to the younger, for the age average of the Bucks… Yes indeed, but only if the player is retainable in the long term.

Who pays the bill?

Hmmm… I’ve said earlier that for an “opinion” to exist, one has to examine and give justifiable explanations on all the parameters involved. You simply can’t suggest to a man who can no way afford to buy a Ferrari, “you need to buy a Ferrari cause you are a top driver which can get the car to it’s limits”… You simply can’t… Unless of course if you are prepared to pay the bill instead of him and gift the car to him, cause you are a big fun of his driving abilities!

Sam is suggesting to trade Brook, Hill and give away two future 1st picks in order to land Myles in Mil… Other than the fact that our GM J.Horst has made absolutely clear in his recent interviews that he will not trade Brook, there are a few more questions arising…

The missing analysis…

1. Would the Pacers consider the terms? Think about it… Two players they would surely waive (they don’t fit their future time plans) and two 1st picks both guaranteed to be under No26 (since they are coming from a team sure to contend for many years to come)… I believe they can find much better around!

Heck… A promising asset and a pick guaranteed to be “mid 1st” would surely be valued by the Pacers much higher if offered by another team!

2. Who the Bucks replace Hill with? After the Bucks would trade Hill, they would need another combo guard to extend their playmaking able guards depth beyond Holiday and Carter…

As I said before, you can’t suggest a deal and leave it unsupported without proposing a solution for every aspect that is involved.

3. Turner will demand a 4 years 100-120M deal next. As I many times have explained in my previews articles, the Bucks are under the severe threat of the repeaters tax kicking in for the 23-24season…

A Turner renewal, would surely make the repeaters tax unavoidable and a 4/100M  renewal of Turner, would cause another 625M in taxation over the next four years!

4. How much you spend on your “bigs”? The Bucks are in need for a 5th starter which would make justice to the rest of the roster… Ultimately, they already have 3 bigs on Giannis, Bobby and Brook and the plan is to retain all of them, but Brook will surely be extended on a near “veteran minimum” contract after his contract expires this season…

This would keep the salaries for the two starters and the “back up big” down to 61M for the (crucial) 23-24 season. You simply can’t raise this up to 85M.

No way! It subtracts crucial cup space from all of the rest of the team’s payroll and demands parting with either Kris or Jrue! This of course would cause more damage than any benefit of adding Turner over Lopez.

5. The Bucks will still miss the “priority need” they have… You can’t of course start all your bigs in a five players game… The need for a 5th starter, which can either be an SF/PF combo forward and Khris moved at SG, or a combo guard with Khris starting at SF, it will still remain an unsolved matter.

No solution will be feasible at sometime in the future either, the financial condition will nor permit it…

Conclusions.

I’ve many times seen bold articles/suggestions ruling on the web… Articles that “enter from one ear and exit from the other” on readers and pull them away from reading sites…

In my opinion, other publications make 11 (or is it 22?, perhaps 44?) of them for every 10 “articles” they publish! I do believe the luck of credibility and reasoning are the most important issues which lead funs to not take sites seriously…

If the writers could make a beneficial for readers analysis on subjects, which would be in co-line with the front office policies, It would then help the readers to think creatively on how to optimize the roster with respect to the resources there are available.

We could then be a great community which is a little more knowledgeable on matters, than the play console there may exist at home…

I’m pretty sure Jon Horst doesn’t let his play console direct him on his decisions either and would go as far as to say, that he doesn’t own one!

It would surely be great if the Bucks could add Myles Turner. But only when they can afford him, have room for him and  after solving the roster matters  which are of priority first… Weather he will be available when these maters are solved, is another subject which we can discuss when the the time comes!

I could perhaps use the play console’s suggestions and end up with adding not only Turner, but KD and/or Donovan Mitchell joining the Bucks too… But the console doesn’t pay the BILLION per season such a roster would cost to maintain… Neither can I, nor J.Horst, or the owners can pay it…