Reports suggest the Milwaukee Bucks are prepared to go into the luxury tax for the right deal in the months ahead. Should it have been sooner, though?
The Milwaukee Bucks are in an ideal spot as the turn of the calendar year draws ever nearer, with their start to the 2019-20 season being about as close to perfect as is feasible in the NBA.
With that kind of situation comes a whole host of important decisions, though, as there can be little doubt that this Bucks’ team has an incredibly realistic chance of getting their hands on the Larry O’Brien trophy for just the second time in franchise history.
More from Bucks News
- Bucks 2023-24 player profile: Can MarJon Beauchamp take a leap?
- Piecing together the Milwaukee Bucks’ dream starting 5 in 5 years
- Predicting Thanasis Antetokounmpo’s 2023-24 stats for the Bucks
- Grade the trade: Bucks land reputable backup guard in swap with Pacers
- New workout video should have Milwaukee Bucks fans excited
A 2018-19 season that finished with 60 wins, and a playoff run that left Milwaukee 2-0 up in the Conference Finals before everything went wrong against the Raptors, certainly established the Bucks’ credentials as contenders. A roster that added new options for this year, comes with a year’s added experience under their coach and in the preferred system, along with Giannis Antetokounmpo‘s place at the core of the team as an officially crowned MVP winner, only further verifies those credentials.
A 24-4 start to this campaign and a streak of 18 consecutive wins have understandably only further fueled the sense that the Bucks really could end their championship drought this season, and with that the question then becomes what exactly are they prepared to do to make that a reality.
According to ESPN’s Zach Lowe, speaking on the recent Woj & Lowe TV special, one thing the Bucks are reportedly prepared to do is cross over into the luxury tax if the right deal was to surface. In Lowe’s words:
"“I have heard, they’re a little bit under the luxury tax, I think they would go over it for a deal that puts them over the top.”"
Of course, this isn’t something Bucks fans haven’t heard before. Ownership have bristled somewhat at the suggestion that the franchise’s decision-making suggests an unwillingness to pay the tax, and general manager Jon Horst has also spoken on that topic on multiple occasions.
One such notable example came back in September, when Horst spoke at length at a Town Hall event about the issue with sliding into the luxury tax purely being one of timing for the Bucks:
"“I want to be really clear with this. We’re sitting in this area, we’re looking at that arena, the practice facility is across the street. We have an ownership group that will stop at no expense to bring a championship to the state of Wisconsin, this city of Milwaukee. And the luxury tax only factors in terms of how it limits our flexibility, our ability to continue to build this team and be in a position to capitalize on opportunities. So, we’re not afraid to spend. We’re not going to spend just to spend, we’re going to spend intentionally. We’re going to spend some more and do that at the right time. We’re going to invest in this team when we need to.”"
Lowe suggested that elite role players such as Robert Covington and J.J. Redick could be targets for the Bucks as the year goes on, and players of that caliber would certainly make sense in terms of strengthening an already formidable roster.
But wouldn’t it be even better to go into the tax for a player who may well be taking part in the All-Star game in the week after this year’s trade deadline? If offered the chance to add an All-Star talent to this team, that would seem like the kind of obvious move that could push a great team over the hump. The kind of move that nobody inside the organization could deny was worthy of paying the tax.
Well, with Malcolm Brogdon currently averaging 19.1 points, 7.7 assists, 4.5 rebounds, and 1.0 steals per game, the Bucks had the opportunity to go into the tax for a player who likely fits that exact billing.
It pains me to bring the conversation back to Brogdon all of these months later, particularly with the Bucks playing so well, but the fact is it seems only logical given the decisions that could lie ahead for Milwaukee in the next few months.
Of course, Brogdon’s numbers are a byproduct of a role with the Pacers that is much higher usage than he would have been playing in Milwaukee. But the Bucks don’t need a player to fill a role of that nature. Instead, Milwaukee may well be looking for a boost of talent and depth later in the season, and are almost certainly going to be unable to attain any at the same level as the former Rookie of the Year.
In that context, what does Horst’s statement of spending “intentionally” actually mean? Perhaps Brogdon’s injury history — or the prospect of a deal consigning the team to multiple years over the tax and, therefore, the prospect of the repeater tax — factored into the decision to swap him out for a first and two second round picks in the offseason. The reality, though, is that those same picks may well end up being used for a deal that sends the Bucks over the tax before the deadline, and there’s no guarantee they won’t send the team toward multiple years of that same fate too.
To speak to the aforementioned examples, Redick is under contract through to the end of the 2020-21 season, while Covington’s deal runs a year longer than that.
If paying Brogdon a significant deal as a player who was older than the average coming off his rookie deal was a concern, the fact remains that he’s two years younger than Covington. Pushing even further down that scale, Redick is 35, and at that age may yet even become more susceptible to injury than Brogdon is at this current juncture. Most importantly of all, Brogdon offers considerably more than that duo, and most players who could realistically be expected to be available to Milwaukee in the next few months beyond them.
Just because the Bucks are playing well, there’s no reason to venture into the kind of revisionism that many have been eager to trot out in relation to the Brogdon situation.
As a restricted free agent, the Bucks controlled Brogdon’s destiny in the offseason. After his departure, Brogdon suggested he was eager for a change, but that in itself can only be considered in context, and should be taken with a grain of salt. Was it more likely for Brogdon to paint the decision as one that was actively in his interest or one where he was blindsided and left to feel rejected by a team with whom he’d started to thrive? The answer seems pretty obvious.
Also worth pointing out, if the Bucks were to have re-signed Brogdon, there’s no guarantee that much else would have had to change. Robin Lopez and Wesley Matthews could still have been signed on their deals, just as Brook Lopez and Khris Middleton could have inked their new contracts. George Hill would have had to leave some money on the table as the Bucks didn’t hold his rights, but there’s no reason to believe that wasn’t a possibility. Essentially, the only thing that may have had to change about Milwaukee’s offseason was to use the roster spot that ultimately went to Dragan Bender on Brogdon.
Would trying to make that situation work not be the best reason to go into the tax? More importantly, are the Bucks now going to end up with a move that gives them a better opportunity to win a title than having Brogdon on this roster would have?
Like so much of the Bucks’ undoubtedly challenging offseason, Brogdon’s future represented an important instance of asset management for the franchise. It was for that reason that many hailed the eventual sign and trade deal as a win for Milwaukee, but that argument loses all plausibility if the picks received in that deal are ultimately used to acquire a lesser player than Brogdon who simply sends the Bucks into the tax at a slightly lower number.
It has to be noted that Horst was right to stress the incredible financial commitments of the Bucks’ ownership since arriving in Milwaukee. The franchise has been modernized beyond recognition in that spell, and much of that has contributed to the success that is now evident on the court. Credit should be given to the owners for their activity and willingness to spend on that front.
Still, the summer’s decision-making, and the rationale that has been offered since don’t quite add up. With the restrictions of the Bucks’ cap sheet for the formidable future, and the still underwhelming collection of future picks at their disposal, the truth is there likely wasn’t a better time to go into the tax than when confronted with Brogdon’s future last summer.
Maybe the Bucks are so good that this will be immaterial. Perhaps they’ll opt not to make a move at all and still be rewarded with a championship come June. But either way, the Bucks’ decision-making around the tax is guaranteed to remain a major topic of discussion right up until any potential parade routes need to be put into action in the Cream City.