The Milwaukee Bucks have secured Miles Turner with a four-year, $170 million contract, aiming to replace Brook Lopez as a floor-spacing center alongside Giannis Antetokounmpo. This move appears pivotal for bolstering the team. However, from another perspective, the Bucks seem to be navigating a period of increasing desperation, lacking both a starting point guard and center.
After some strategic moves, the Bucks have addressed at least one of these issues. To afford Turner, they chose to waive Damian Lillard, committing to paying him $22.5 million annually over the next five years instead of settling $113 million over the next two. While this decision may raise eyebrows, winning games and contending for championships could justify it.
Yet, conventionally, the Bucks remain a team centered around their superstars but with significant flaws. The absence of a point guard and Turner's role, though above league average, may not suffice in crucial moments, as seen in his Pacers days during their miraculous path to the Finals.
The Bucks' persistence in pleasing Giannis since their 2025 championship win has led to operations that, in reality, set the team back. Giannis supports Turner's arrival but disapproves of cutting Lillard, understanding it limits the team's long-term flexibility and rebuilding capability around him.
It's possible Giannis exerted behind-the-scenes pressure, unwilling to endure a decline phase. However, persisting with a flawed roster, without Lillard but with an expensive Lopez clone, might not be a reasonable long-term choice.
Turner, a skilled big man with well-rounded offensive and defensive capabilities, isn't a stable self-creator. His three-point shooting efficiency dropped to 29.9% without Tyrese Haliburton, who boosted it to 39.6%. With whom will he run pick-and-rolls? Kevin Porter Jr., Gary Trent Jr., Kyle Kuzma, or even Giannis?
Merely fitting into the roster doesn't prove the contract's value, let alone the extreme measures the Bucks took for this signing. Before losing control, their initial off-season moves to retain Pat Connaughton, Georges Niang, Trent Jr., and Porter Jr., all with player options in the final year, seemed prudent.
However, these signings won't substantially strengthen the team, which may still face a play-in scenario. Further moves appear superficial rather than substantive.
While these contracts could be packaged for trades mid-season, they initially aimed to complement Giannis and Lillard's combination. Before cutting Lillard and signing Turner, the Bucks could have used mid-range contracts to strengthen their existing core.
Optimistically, reallocating funds to Horford or other free agents could have avoided long-term burdens. Unfortunately, that didn't occur, and Lillard departed Milwaukee with a hefty sum.
From the Pacers' viewpoint, criticisms for releasing Turner due to tax concerns after their Finals run are emotional rather than practical. Turner's pivotal role in defense and occasional offensive hot streaks are undeniable. However, turning 30 next March, he faces challenges in the absence of Haliburton.
Even during the Finals, Turner's shooting against the Thunder was disappointing at 42.6%, struggling in perimeter defense against MVP-caliber scorers and failing to contain Towns in the Eastern Conference Finals.
Returning to the Bucks, crucial questions remain:
Without their main guards, how will they manage when Giannis sits? How many Eastern teams outcompete the Bucks? Teams like the Cavaliers, Knicks, Magic, Hawks, and Pistons are strong contenders. Optimistically, even the Philadelphia 76ers could qualify.
In conclusion, the Bucks may view Turner as a savior, yet the risks and rewards behind this decision are concerning. One day, Giannis may request a trade, and the $22.5 million annual salary could be a critical constraint.
Regarding this cutback decision, remarkable in NBA history, it's challenging to assess its merits or faults at this moment.
