A lot of people liked Milwaukee's moves for whatever reason, but they never made sense to me. I thought it was terrible decision-making. Milwaukee should have continued to slowly add pieces that fit their core, rather than adding a bunch of mediocre, overpaid players.
Its the whole idea that you can add a player with on attribute to a team, and even though you expect him to play 20-30 minutes his downsides won't hurt the team.
The Bucks couldn't score last year, so adding Maggette surely will help fix their offense...... not so much clearly.
The Drew Gooden deal still boggles my mind, he's disappointed everywhere he's gone.
That...and they weren't that good before that.
To me, the problem wasn't the additions of Gooden and Maggette, it was that they bought into the hype of the year before.
In 2009-2010, they hit things perfectly. They had a rookie PG trying to prove teams wrong for overlooking him, they had the perfect veteran backup who could carry the reigns when the kid struggled, or step back when they needed. They had a bunch of tough, hard nosed players who bought into the idea of being underdogs, and playing harder than the other team on any given night. And they picked up a notoriously streaky wing who was on a mission to get another big contract.
Somehow, the fans and management bought into this as something real, rather than just a mediocre team catching lightning in a bottle and catching the rest of the league sleeping.
So, they went out and overpaid some role players, let a key glue guy (and the safety net for their new franchise PG) go, and the role players started to buy into the hype, losing their edge.
It was incredibly predictable even before they made those moves.
...and BTW, I think Philly is set up perfectly for a similar situation, but it sounds like they see through it, and are looking at the big picture (which is why they are trying to move Iggy).
