The Buck Stops Here Roundtable #7: 2016-17 Predictions
By Tim Wray
What are your overriding impressions of the MCW/Tony Snell deal? Did the Bucks win the trade, or were they just more interested in moving on?
Jordan Treske (@JordanTreske): I’m hesitant to say they “won” the trade, but it was ultimately the necessary move to make, especially after losing Middleton. As we talked about on last week’s Win in 6, I think the trade speaks more to the Bucks conceding the MCW experiment than it does speak on how they view Snell. That’s not a knock on Snell by any means, but it was becoming clear that salvaging MCW’s fit within the team was hard to overcome with everything considered.
That’s what the trade came down to in my eyes. It’s not about the quality of the players, it is and will always be about fit and there’s more ways to envision Snell making a positive impact/fitting in with how the team is constructed than there were for MCW.
Rohan Katti (@rkattijr): The MCW/Tony Snell trade was absolutely about moving on from Michael Carter-Williams. It has been clear for a long time that the Bucks organization had been trying to trade MCW, but they could not find the right deal for him. Since he is a former Rookie of the Year, it’s not surprising that the Bucks were looking for a good deal.
However, the NBA market proved that MCW was not worth much, so Tony Snell is the best they could do. I do like Tony Snell though, he can defend and hit threes, so maybe a change of scenery is exactly what he needed.
Lukas Harkins (@hardwiredsports): It’s hard to say that any team truly “won” this trade, especially since we are yet to see either player in their new situation. Both players are under 26-years-old and there is still time for them to adapt to a different environment and succeed. As for Michael Carter-Williams, I do not think that Chicago is a good fit, especially with Rajon Rondo holding down the starting spot. The Bulls already lack shooting, and giving up a shooter for a non-shooter seems to be going in the wrong direction.
As for Milwaukee, this trade showed that MCW had such little value throughout the NBA landscape. Tony Snell is a fine addition, but it is nothing great. I think it is fair to say that the Bulls got the better player out of this deal, but the Bucks received the better fit. Without Khris Middleton, Snell will likely start for Milwaukee as well as play the most minutes per game in his career. He is a solid defender and knocks down the three with consistency.
He saw his three-point shooting decrease from 37.1% to 36.1% from Year 2 to Year 3, but he also struggled mightily from the corner last season. After shooting 41.1% in 14-15, he dropped to 30.6% last season. If that number goes back up, we might see him have a career year from beyond the arc, which would be incredibly valuable to the Bucks.
Milwaukee really wanted to get rid of MCW, and grabbing a starter for this season who could have a future with the team is certainly a positive.
Tom Pheister (@BucksPhanTom): I was a bit disappointed that the Bucks traded MCW for Tony Snell. While Snell’s skill set is undoubtedly a better fit with the Bucks core, I feel like the disparity in skill level more than offsets that. Essentially, I think MCW is a better player than Snell, and it is hard to feel like the team really improved by making this trade. Perhaps the additional opportunities that Snell will find here will result in a jump in his level of play. But I’m not counting on it.
Adam McGee (@AdamMcGee11): I think ultimately it was a deal made out of necessity. I feel like they wouldn’t have minded keeping MCW around a little longer, but ultimately wing depth became a much more pressing need for their chances this season than an alpha point guard who could look to seize control of the offensive unit as a scorer.
It’s always too soon to declare winners in the immediate aftermath, but I will say I think this is a good deal for the Bucks. I’ve long been of the opinion that MCW held little to no value around the league, so in getting Snell to fill a more pressing need, they did fine. If Snell beds in, improves and signs an extension to be a key bench piece for years to come, then the Bucks will have won the deal regardless of what MCW does elsewhere. Snell is hypothetically a good fit for the Bucks, practice proved that MCW wasn’t.
Tim Wray (@TRW24): I think we all seriously hoped that MCW could overcome the questionable fit and become a quality sixth man contributor for the Bucks this season, but ultimately it seems like the front office conceded that it was going to continue to be problematic for the team going forward, especially with the injury to Khris Middleton.
To a certain extent, I also think the deal says a lot about the Bucks lack of confidence in giving starters minutes to Vaughn or throwing Brogdon in the deep end from opening night. As Lukas said, the Bulls got the better player, but the Bucks received the better fit. If anything, I don’t understand the Bulls motivation behind the move because it does little to improve their already sparse three-point shooting back court.
In Snell, Milwaukee gets desperately needed flexibility between the shooting guard and small forward positions, decent on-ball defense and another respectable three-point shooter. From this point of view, the Bucks won the trade by addressing their needs and weaknesses whereas the Bulls only gained more questions.