Small forward is a position of need for the Milwaukee Bucks. Addressing that roster hole in the draft would make a lot of sense. Tennessee's Nate Ament is one option. Florida's Thomas Haugh is another. Other than that, it's a rather thin group in the Bucks' drafting range, which right now looks likely to fall anywhere from ninth to the backend of the lottery.
What if Ament and Haugh are gone by the time Milwaukee is on the clock? Trading back in the draft to accrue more assets, in the form of additional picks or as part of a trade to add an NBA player from another team, could be the optimum strategy, but no one is talking about it for the Bucks.
Spending their pick just because they have it might not be ideal
Bleacher Report's latest mock draft has the Bucks going with injury-prone power forward Jayden Quaintance at No. 9, which doesn't really fit their needs. But that's another discussion. In BR's draft, Ament goes 10th to Chicago. Haugh falls 14th to the Thunder (they own the Clippers' pick).
If the Bucks' pick falls in the 11-14 range, however, their most likely slots if they make the Play-In, Ament could be gone. Haugh might be, too, or the front office might decide they want more upside than the 22-year-old forward offers. In that case, trading down in the draft should be a very real consideration.
By doing so, the Bucks could turn their one first-rounder into multiple picks later in the round. At the tail end of the lottery, their own pick would have good but not elite value, limiting its overall upside. Rather than force it on yet another 6-foot-4 guard (they have plenty of those), why not turn the selection into multiple shots later on?
Milwaukee could use one of the later picks on an actual small forward (BR has Wake Forest's Juke Harris going 31st to the Kings) or simply to select the best talent available while having multiple cracks at hitting on a prospect. The Bucks will not have a second-rounder this draft (technically, they own Utah's, but it's protected 31-55), so an extra selection could be a worthwhile investment.
Alternatively, the Bucks could dangle a draft-night pick swap as a trade chip to acquire an established NBA player. That would be one way to make a win-now addition.
Pushback on that strategy would be justifiable. The franchise hasn't had a lottery pick since 2016, when they spent it on Thon Maker. That didn't work out. General Manager Jon Horst has an atrocious draft record, so fans may be hesitant to stack the odds against him by trading down.
The counter to the second caveat is that having two shots rather than one could increase the chances of a successful pick. In the 9-14 range, anyway, even in a strong draft class, there isn't a "guaranteed" star like AJ Dybantsa, Darryn Peterson, or Cameron Boozer.
As for the first part, it would hurt to give up what the Bucks haven't had in a decade, but at the same time, drafting a player they don't need would simply waste the value of an asset they could spread out in more effective ways.