FOLLOW US ON TWITTER @SaveOurBucks
It has been 48-hours since the sale of the Bucks was announced. We wanted to wait before posting our thoughts, to allow some time to absorb the details. Our reaction to the news is extremely positive and we are optimistic about the team’s long-term future in the City. Let’s now talk specifics: Continue reading
FOLLOW US ON TWITTER @SaveOurBucks
We haven’t published two pieces in one day, but given the news broken by Bill Simmons that hedge fund managers Marc Lasry and Wes Edens are the front-runners to purchase the team, we felt there needed to be a bit more commentary on the subject.
In our earlier piece, we provided some background on Lasry and Edens for those unfamiliar with them. We encourage everyone to read that article first, as it will help provide context for this companion discussion. In this piece, we’d like to sound a note of caution for Bucks fans that the long-term future of the franchise could still be fragile if Senator Kohl goes forward with a sale to Lasry and Edens. Continue reading
Editors Note: After this piece was published, we followed up with a companion piece that talks in more detail about how the Bucks themselves make an attractive hedge fund target in a sense, and some of the potential risks of selling to Lasry and Edens.
FOLLOW US ON TWITTER @SaveOurBucks
Most of you following the Bucks on social media received the news regarding the names of the front-runners to purchase the Bucks, as reported by Bill Simmons in his weekly “Mailbag” column over at Grantland. That said, we aren’t sure this giant tree falling in the forest made an impact locally, so we’re here to offer some thoughts on it.
A week ago this time, Simmons set Bucks Nation ablaze with his report that the Bucks were very close to being sold, for a price in the $525 million dollar range. That lead off a speculative frenzy as to who the potential buyers might be. We thought Rich Kirchen of The Business Journal might have nailed it with his profile of Chicagoan Dr. Richard Chaifetz, a self made millionaire who has in the past few years been linked to groups trying to purchase the Minnesota Timberwolves and St. Louis Rams. Not the case, as Simmons followed up yesterday with his reporting that:
The guys who thought they had it as recently as two days ago? Hedge-fund billionaires Marc Lasry and Wes Edens, who slid under the radar this entire time and thought they landed the Bucks with an offer in the $550 million range (slightly more than Vivek Ranadivé paid for the equally unappealing Kings). As recently as Wednesday, Lasry and Edens were expecting the NBA to vote on their bid at next week’s Board of Governors meeting.
So … what happened? Continue reading
The local debate regarding a new arena facility is just starting to heat up in earnest. While we are all very interested and want to have our voice heard, we still don’t yet have any details on an arena plan or location. As we noted in our prior article, this process is going to take some time to play out. We are only in the early innings. That said, we’d like to suggest two ways that you can help right now. Continue reading
On Tuesday March 11, 2014 at 6:00pm, there will be a public listening session at the Mardak Center (1558 N. 6th Street in Milwaukee) to allow the public to provide input to the Cultural and Entertainment Needs Task Force.
At this session the 48-member committee will be listening to input from the public on metropolitan capital needs (hint – a new arena) and how to pay for such a project. As Bucks’ fans, we strongly encourage you to attend, if only to show the committee that people are interested in the future of the team in Milwaukee. Our spokesman Paul Henning will be there, and afterwards there will be a SaveOurBucks viewing party of that night’s Bucks game against Minnesota at The Loaded Slate. For more information, check out the Facebook page we have set up for the meeting.
For those who are not able to make the meeting, do not despair. We are likely only in the second inning of a nine-inning ballgame. This is going to be a long-process and not something that is going to get decided in the next six-months. While the 2017 deadline set by the NBA for the Bucks to have a new facility is a real threat, the building does not need to be constructed by that date; the Bucks just need to have approved and firmly in place the plans for a new facility. They can always reside another year or two in the BMO Harris Bradley Center if needed while construction is completed on a new building.
With that overview, we’d like to note some things to watch for in the near future as it relates to a potential new home for the Milwaukee Bucks. Continue reading
FOLLOW US ON TWITTER @SaveOurBucks
George Steinbrenner, Jerry Jones, Mark Cuban and Al Davis.
Collectively that may be the Mt. Rushmore of “hands-on” owners in professional sports.
Those four represent owners who are (or were) the face of their franchise. They took an open and active role in all aspects of franchise operation, right down to wanting to be involved in the calling of actual plays on the field.
In Part I last week, we examined the track record of Bucks’ General Manager John Hammond, and the fact that many of his player personnel moves tended to look like losers very quickly after they were made. Hammond apparently agrees with our take, since said players acquired or signed to a new contract have been so often traded by Hammond shortly thereafter. However, the question that has dominated the Bucks fan base the past two decades is exactly how responsible is the team’s general manager for the overall record and talent base of the team at any given moment?
Senator Herb Kohl has a long-standing reputation as a “hands-on” owner, similar to the NFL’s Jerry Jones and Al Davis, MLB’s George Steinbrenner, and the NBA’s Mark Cuban. While their respective franchises have had varying degrees of success, the fingerprints of their involvement in the management of their teams are obvious, often to the point of detriment. This article will explore how Senator Kohl’s reputation for this first came about, illustrate some of the historical instances of “meddling” and finally discuss how Kohl, much like his college roommate Bud Selig, has an opportunity for civic immortality if he is able to successfully navigate the Bucks to a long-term future in Milwaukee.
Continue reading
Ramon looking pleased during his first stint as a Buck; wearing #7, before Ersan wore #7, but after Ersan wore #19. Now Ramon wears #13, after Luke Ridnour had been #13 for the Bucks, twice. Confused?
Immediately after last week’s trade deadline we sent out a couple tweets regarding the Bucks trade of Gary Neal and Luke Ridnour to Charlotte for Ramon Sessions and Jeff Adrien. On the surface, it was a good deal. The team dealt two players that didn’t fit, for two players that might fit better, and in the process saved $3.5 million in contract liabilities. Additionally, neither Sessions nor Adrien have guaranteed contracts for next season, so it may open up another roster spot for a new rookie moving forward.
Had this trade been made by a brand new Bucks front office we probably would have applauded it as a nice minor move, and not had much further to say. However when you put the trade into a larger multi-year context, we were struck by how the trade fit a revolving-door pattern that has been going on with the Bucks front office for many years now.
Giving an opinion on Twitter, while using only 140 characters, can be a challenging task, and a few of you let us know that you didn’t think this was our best work. The issue with our tweets was that we didn’t do a good job of laying the foundation for our thoughts on the trade as part of a larger, overall dysfunctional pattern of player asset management.
In today’s Part I we’ll look at how the Bucks roster under John Hammond has been a high-speed, revolving door of players who never seem to work out. In next week’s Part II, we will examine how much autonomy John Hammond or any Bucks General Manager has under the front office structure employed by Senator Kohl.
We hope you enjoyed Part I of Accelerated Tanking – A David Stern Legacy. In Part II we will examine the flaws with the draft lottery, and suggest some improvements. The 2013-14 season has been dominated with talk of “tanking”. We believe that come June there will be pressure from some quarters to scrap or modify the current lottery system, having a new commissioner onboard may conceivably allow that to happen. Is there an event in the near future that will lead to reform? The tipping point may occur on May 20, 2014 in New York City at the ABC/Disney Times Square Studio: Continue reading
We thought we’d use the retirement of David Stern to examine one of his legacies, the NBA draft lottery. The lottery was created by Stern thirty years ago as a response to the Houston Rockets engaging in “tanking,” in an effort to obtain the #1 overall draft pick. In Part I of this article, we are going to address why the lottery was created, why “tanking” isn’t a dirty word, and how smart franchises use the draft lottery to their advantage. Part II will examine some of the tanking controversies created this season, and offer suggestions on how to correct them. (Editors note: We are going to put a number of terms in this article in quotes, due to them still being “controversial” depending on your perspective on the matter).
Most of you are familiar with Bob McGinn, the widely read Packers beat writer for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (MJS). Whether you agree or disagree with his opinions and conclusions, he’s known locally and nationally for excellent coverage of the team.
Due to his skill, he’s highly compensated. A few years ago, Milwaukee Magazine ran a blurb about some dissension in the MJS newsroom over a supposed salary that broke the “six-figure” mark, and had many other reporters at the paper somewhat envious. He earns his money though, as he’s a dogged reporter who loves his assignment, and is always setting the agenda for coverage of the team.
We thought of McGinn as we read Charles Gardner’s recent interview with John Hammond. We’ve talked at length about the lack of critical coverage of the Milwaukee Bucks, and some of the reasons for it. We’re going to use Gardner’s recent interview as guidebook for how he, and other journalists, might be able to cover the Bucks in a manner that would be more productive and interesting for the reader, ala how McGinn covers the Packers. With that as a backdrop, let’s discuss the interview with Hammond, and how it might have been improved upon. Continue reading