Milwaukee Bucks 2018 - 2019

[HiAndTight]

 

Actually, I don't recall how much they were struggling when traded for George Hill. The entire point of trading for him was to save cap space so they could sign their key players. He's a nice player, but it'd be foolish to sign him.

 

 

That was not the "entire point" at all. If it was, they wouldn't be playing him so much, and they wouldn't be a much better team with him. If you don't remember how they struggled without him, you should research it a little and not hold such a strong opinion about what he's worth until you do. They had gone 9-8 in a 17 game stretch before acquiring him, including losses to Phoenix, NY, Charlotte, and Memphis and one of their only blowout losses all year (Portland). It's no exaggeration to say their promising season was falling apart due to the lack of a capable backup pg. They also lost to Cleveland and Phoenix when he missed games later in the season. Others have pointed out their record with and without him and some of the key on/off stats as well. They are literally one of the dominant regular season teams of all time with him, and an ordinary 50-55 win team without him.

 

I think the reason it's hard for some people to realize how important he's been is twofold. One, he's simply effective (as opposed to sensational) and he makes much of his impact on defense and intangibles, which casual NBA fans are notorious for ignoring. Two, you're probably ignoring just how bad the backup pg scrap heap market is. They've been trying to solidify their pg depth for years, and the list of guys who have earned minutes there is vomit-inducing. To act like they could just find someone on the scrap heap shows you have not been paying attention to what's actually been going on for years. They can't and shouldn't run that risk when they are a contender with an MVP just beginning his prime. Don't evaluate him in a vacuum about who he is and what he's worth. Personnel moves don't work that way in the NBA at all. It's not at all like baseball; you have to look at the entire situation.

 

And I know they probably won't keep him. That's not my point at all. My point is that they should, rather than being cheap, because he makes a huge difference in their chances of contending. Again, don't look at his ability in a vacuum; look at the drop-off between him and the other options they've had over the years. People keep suggesting that they don't need a good backup pg, but that's been proven wrong time and time again. It's not about the difference between George Hill and the average player making $18m; it's about the difference between George Hill and the average scrap heap backup pg.

 

Wow...I really didn't think I'd held that strong of an opinion. And I honestly didn't recall how poorly they were playing. All I remembered was some big wins early in the season and the fact that they hadn't lost back to back games. I didn't remember the exact date of the trade. I didn't have the time nor did I really care enough to go as deep into this as others have.

 

My strong opinion comes from the fact that it's almost a foregone conclusion that he's going to be waived and his 18 million won't be picked up.

 

And to be honest, I really didn't even pick up on the "ordinary" 50-55 win team with him. That by definition isn't ordinary, but it's also just pure conjecture.

 

I'm honestly not sure what I did to draw your ire here other than just say I honestly don't recall how poorly they were playing at the time of the trade because, again, I didn't remember when it happened exactly and the fact that they've been atop the East pretty much all season without a back to back loss until recently.

 

There are other things I disagree with, namely that they're one of the most dominant teams regular season teams of all time. Point differential is a very good stat to tell you how a team has played in a given year vs the competition they've played.

This isn't exactly the East of the 90's with Jordan, the Piston's, Pacers, Knicks or even last year when they had Lebron.

 

If they win out they end up a 62 win team and that's assuming they beat a Sixers team fighting for home court, a Brooklyn team fighting for seeding without Giannis likely playing and one of the better teams in the West with OKC.

 

So the that "ordinary" 55 win team doesn't really sound like it'll be that far off from where we actually end up.

 

And finally, since you are a CBA expert, you should know how much he could end up costing the Bucks. You really think it's fair to call them cheap to not want to spend 60 million or more on an aging PG, even one who's been effective and is a great team play? Heck, even if they are not a luxury tax team, do you really think not spending 18 million on a player you've deemed extremely overpaid would even be cheap? I'll hold off on my opinion on the Bucks owners being cheap until I see what they do with the actual core players, Brogdon, Middlton, Lopez and Mirotic. If they end up letting Middleton walk over a few million or any of those guys, I'll be upset and call them cheap. If they decline to effectively spend 60 million on a 33-year-old PG who may end up signing for a very cheap deal with a contender.

 

We're a long way away from knowing how things are going to end up right now anyway. Maybe we make a trade with Snell, throw in Brown and get back a future pick or to a team with cap room and they can get a trade exception back and sign him for a more reasonable figure. I really don't know all the ways they could bring him back and I'm not that worried about it right now.

 

But there was a lot of animosity in there for me simply saying I really didn't remember the Bucks struggling badly this sesaon before Bell.

[FVBrewerFan]

Is it okay to point out how good Hill was last night? Not gonna say anything about the off season, but he has showed multiple times this season that he can step up and still be the Utah version of himself when the team needs him to, but can also fade seamlessly into a perfect veteran stabilizer/glue guy role when needed. I think the lack of big games like last night can make people question his impact, but I think it's actually better to be able to wear so many different hats than it is to just be a guy who scores 15 per game but doesn't have as much impact outside of scoring. His defense is especially crucial. I think all contenders need multiple players like that.

 

Yea, even though the bench is shorter in the playoffs and starters get more minutes, Hill is a really nice piece to have coming off the bench. Sova is another guy like that, nothing flashy but will get you some minutes and play hard and smart on defense. Plus he's been shooting the 3 ball very well lately.

[HiAndTight]

Yes, let's end the this and get back to real Buck's discussion. You disagree with each other's opinions. The horse is dead; move on.

 

 

Yeah, I'm good with that. I guess that foe tab is there for a reason. It just does get a little old anytime someone doesn't agree with another, we hear that person explain how they're an expert and talk down to others while others just don't understand.

 

 

Anyway, I'm loving it. You've Middleton, Giannis, Beldsoe all struggle badly at times and you see someone like Pat Connaughton come in and make a difference on both ends with his surprising athleticism, or Sterling Brown, or Wilson. All guys you expected very little from coming into the season.

 

Frazier even looked good last night. He has the quickness and it appears the ability to be a viable NBA PG(still preferably one who you don't have to count on unless guys go down as they have recently, but still, he's shown a little bit recently).

 

 

I'd definitely still rather have Christian Woods, but that's only because of 4 games in NO. I didn't get to see him enough in Milwaukee to form an opinion.

[CheezWizHed]

Yeah, I'm good with that. I guess that foe tab is there for a reason.

 

If you feel that you can't have a good conversation with someone, then please use it, but I'd prefer people just understand when to walk away from an argument.

 

Realize that opinions are like butts; Everyone has one and sometimes they stink. Just know when to walk away and stop smelling their opinion.

[OnTheBlack]

Yeah, I'm good with that. I guess that foe tab is there for a reason.

 

If you feel that you can't have a good conversation with someone, then please use it, but I'd prefer people just understand when to walk away from an argument.

 

Realize that opinions are like butts; Everyone has one and sometimes they stink. Just know when to walk away and stop smelling their opinion.

 

With respect, it's not always differing opinions, but rather someone constantly talking down to people that's creating the issues. Comments like "what don't you understand," and the like can be a lot more divisive than simply one persons opinion on signing a player or not.

[coolhandluke121]

I don't like the hyped up MVP debate. I don't think it's that much of a controversy. The Bucks are one of the best teams in the NBA on both ends of the court, with Giannis leading the way. They also have one of the ~15 best scoring margins of all time, and I think they're in the top 5 all time for double digit wins in a season. So Giannis plays <33 mpg because of all the blowouts, and that's why he doesn't put up the gaudiest stats. He could play more minutes and pad his stats and the team would still win over 50 games, but without his unselfish approach allowing every supporting cast player to contribute on offense when they have the best scoring opportunity, they wouldn't be as good. So it's dumb because stuff that's used against him in the debate (namely individual stats) should actually be arguments in his favor.

[FVBrewerFan]

I don't like the hyped up MVP debate. I don't think it's that much of a controversy. The Bucks are one of the best teams in the NBA on both ends of the court, with Giannis leading the way. They also have one of the ~15 best scoring margins of all time, and I think they're in the top 5 all time for double digit wins in a season. So Giannis plays <33 mpg because of all the blowouts, and that's why he doesn't put up the gaudiest stats. He could play more minutes and pad his stats and the team would still win over 50 games, but without his unselfish approach allowing every supporting cast player to contribute on offense when they have the best scoring opportunity, they wouldn't be as good. So it's dumb because stuff that's used against him in the debate (namely individual stats) should actually be arguments in his favor.

 

It's like the MVP in any sport. Name recognition, lifetime achievement, basic stats (PPG), etc. all factor in. I can easily see some voters thinking Giannis and Harden are a push, so give it to Harden because Giannis will have plenty of chances in his career. Stupid, but that's the way it goes. It's why I don't really care too much about MVP awards.

[stoutdude04]

I mean, is it hard to score 30 a game when you take 23 3 pointers and get to the line 18 times a game?

 

I am clearly biased.

[SeaBass]

I mean, is it hard to score 30 a game when you take 23 3 pointers and get to the line 18 times a game?

 

I am clearly biased.

Yes, or there would be more guys doing it. Currently there is 1 guy doing it.

[coolhandluke121]

I mean, is it hard to score 30 a game when you take 23 3 pointers and get to the line 18 times a game?

 

I am clearly biased.

Yes, or there would be more guys doing it. Currently there is 1 guy doing it.

 

But it's not a great formula for a team success. There aren't guys who could do what he's doing with the same green light he has, but no contender is going to give anyone the green light to play that way anyway. What I'm getting at is that this is a qualifier to his greatness. "We're in this situation where we have to use a flawed approach to winning, and Harden can execute this flawed approach better than anyone, so we have to give him the MVP." It makes being on an inferior team an asset, when a better team would reduce his usage and he wouldn't have the gaudy stats to make the MVP race a serious contest in the first place. And by extension, it makes Giannis being on a much better team a hindrance to his case, when it's already too much of a hindrance because of how blowouts keep his minutes and volume stats down. That doesn't add up for me. Blowouts should strengthen his case, not weaken it.

 

Giannis has been the best player in the league at his position, on both ends of the court, all season long. He's also playing like an all-time great at both ends. We haven't had that since Lebron was in his prime with the Heat, and I'm not really sure he was the best defensive sf. The last guy who was clearly that (best at his position on both ends) was probably Jordan. You could make a case for KG, Duncan, Olajuwon, Robinson, or Shaq at various times. You can make a case for transcendent offensive stars like Curry or Harden in the absence of a guy like that. But when a great two-way player leads a team without a true second star to the best record in the league and a historic scoring differential, I can't get with that at all.

[SeaBass]

I mean, I understand the point stoutdude04 was making but it's not really fair to dismiss Harden's performance based only on the perceived flaw of his methods of accomplishment. Add in he's not just scoring 30 a game, he's scoring 36+ a game. There's a full 8 ppg buffer between him and the next highest scorer. He's also rebounding, assisting and getting steals at respectable rates.

 

What he's doing isn't easy and there are plenty of teams that have tried very hard to stop him from doing it. That's the main point I was responding to, not so much his overall case for MVP.

 

Of course I want Giannis to win MVP and I believe Giannis has the best case for winning MVP, but if Harden ends up the winner it's not going to be an unbelievable tragedy. He's deserving. The MVP race is coming down to two very deserving candidates, we all have the one we prefer to win but in the end both have had great seasons.

 

I think Giannis will win it, a lot of what I'm hearing/seeing in the media is pretty much tipping that way in the last week or so. Just things like Shaq saying Giannis is better than he was at that age, which is a huge statement not that I think everybody takes Shaq's words as gospel.

[coolhandluke121]

I'm not dismissing what he's doing. There's no shame in finishing a distant second in the MVP race when the winner is starting a long run as the NBA's preeminent player.

[SeaBass]

I'm not dismissing what he's doing. There's no shame in finishing a distant second in the MVP race when the winner is starting a long run as the NBA's preeminent player.

I wasn't accusing you of dismissing Harden, I felt stoutdude04's post that I originally responded to was a little dismissive, him saying it wasn't hard. Otherwise I believe you and I agree.

[HiAndTight]

I mean, is it hard to score 30 a game when you take 23 3 pointers and get to the line 18 times a game?

 

I am clearly biased.

Yes, or there would be more guys doing it. Currently there is 1 guy doing it.

 

But it's not a great formula for a team success. There aren't guys who could do what he's doing with the same green light he has, but no contender is going to give anyone the green light to play that way anyway. What I'm getting at is that this is a qualifier to his greatness. "We're in this situation where we have to use a flawed approach to winning, and Harden can execute this flawed approach better than anyone, so we have to give him the MVP." It makes being on an inferior team an asset, when a better team would reduce his usage and he wouldn't have the gaudy stats to make the MVP race a serious contest in the first place. And by extension, it makes Giannis being on a much better team a hindrance to his case, when it's already too much of a hindrance because of how blowouts keep his minutes and volume stats down. That doesn't add up for me. Blowouts should strengthen his case, not weaken it.

 

Giannis has been the best player in the league at his position, on both ends of the court, all season long. He's also playing like an all-time great at both ends. We haven't had that since Lebron was in his prime with the Heat, and I'm not really sure he was the best defensive sf. The last guy who was clearly that (best at his position on both ends) was probably Jordan. You could make a case for KG, Duncan, Olajuwon, Robinson, or Shaq at various times. You can make a case for transcendent offensive stars like Curry or Harden in the absence of a guy like that. But when a great two-way player leads a team without a true second star to the best record in the league and a historic scoring differential, I can't get with that at all.

 

 

Just with regard to your first paragraph, hasn't it been because of Harden's scoring that the Rockets have been able to play so well this year?

 

I only bring up these two stats because I heard them today(otherwise I frankly don't care enough about him to know either) but the Rockets have the best record in the NBA over the last almost 60 games. It was like 48-8. They were starting with the time injuries hit and when guys started going down and he started his scoring binge.

 

AND I heard them say Harden has the best true shooting pct in the NBA this year by far.....so then it wouldn't be merely a result of the number of shots. Not sure what they deemed "by far," just repeating an argument I heard on sports talk radio rebutting a comment that was made by the play-by-play guy during the Rockets game last night.

 

 

I'm not arguing for him over Giannis either. I'm all on board with Giannis. I feel like as he continues to get better shooting the 3 and improving his game, he's going to start a run where he's like MJ or LeBron and he only doesn't win MVP because they can't give it to him every year.

[coolhandluke121]

 

 

I only bring up these two stats because I heard them today(otherwise I frankly don't care enough about him to know either) but the Rockets have the best record in the NBA over the last almost 60 games. It was like 48-8. They were starting with the time injuries hit and when guys started going down and he started his scoring binge.

 

I'm not arguing for him over Giannis either. I'm all on board with Giannis. I feel like as he continues to get better shooting the 3 and improving his game, he's going to start a run where he's like MJ or LeBron and he only doesn't win MVP because they can't give it to him every year.

 

Not sure where you heard that, but they're 40-16 in their last 56 games. They went 12-5 during Paul's injury. That's pretty good, albeit in a small sample and not all of it against the toughest part of their schedule.

 

The trouble with this sort of debate is that it's easy to come off as overly critical of a great player when really it's just a matter of Giannis setting the bar so high that any little thing you can nitpick in other candidates is magnified.

 

Giannis is neither the best offensive player nor the best defensive player in the game, but he's close on both ends and that's extremely rare. The Bucks have the best drtg and #3 ortg, and it starts with him on both ends. Tied for 5th all-time with 45 double-digit wins, with an outside chance of being alone for 2nd place with 4 games left. Tied for 15th best scoring differential ever. Individual stats hurt by so many blowouts and the reduced minutes, when really that should be a notch in his favor. And all of that with a grand combined total of TWO all-star berths (and both of those borderline ones) for the rest of the team. I don't think I'm being unfair to Harden when I say there's really not a controversy in my mind. Giannis is that good. If Paul was healthy all year, Harden would be just as efficient but wouldn't have such gaudy stats, and nearly everybody would be saying "yeah, Harden is the best offensive player in the game, but I have to give it to Giannis because he's so great on both ends of the court."

[owbc]

Tonight might have gotten Giannis a few more MVP votes.

[DuWayne Steurer]

What an awesome game tonight. Missing Bledsoe and Brogdon. Philly shot over 50% from 3 and got a huge triple double from embiid and the Bucks still win. George Hill was fantastic tonight

[FVBrewerFan]

That was a pretty good way to close a game. I dont care at all if Giannis is named MVP. All I know is there is no other player I would rather have in the playoffs.

[HiAndTight]

 

 

I only bring up these two stats because I heard them today(otherwise I frankly don't care enough about him to know either) but the Rockets have the best record in the NBA over the last almost 60 games. It was like 48-8. They were starting with the time injuries hit and when guys started going down and he started his scoring binge.

 

I'm not arguing for him over Giannis either. I'm all on board with Giannis. I feel like as he continues to get better shooting the 3 and improving his game, he's going to start a run where he's like MJ or LeBron and he only doesn't win MVP because they can't give it to him every year.

 

Not sure where you heard that, but they're 40-16 in their last 56 games. They went 12-5 during Paul's injury. That's pretty good, albeit in a small sample and not all of it against the toughest part of their schedule.

 

The trouble with this sort of debate is that it's easy to come off as overly critical of a great player when really it's just a matter of Giannis setting the bar so high that any little thing you can nitpick in other candidates is magnified.

 

Giannis is neither the best offensive player nor the best defensive player in the game, but he's close on both ends and that's extremely rare. The Bucks have the best drtg and #3 ortg, and it starts with him on both ends. Tied for 5th all-time with 45 double-digit wins, with an outside chance of being alone for 2nd place with 4 games left. Tied for 15th best scoring differential ever. Individual stats hurt by so many blowouts and the reduced minutes, when really that should be a notch in his favor. And all of that with a grand combined total of TWO all-star berths (and both of those borderline ones) for the rest of the team. I don't think I'm being unfair to Harden when I say there's really not a controversy in my mind. Giannis is that good. If Paul was healthy all year, Harden would be just as efficient but wouldn't have such gaudy stats, and nearly everybody would be saying "yeah, Harden is the best offensive player in the game, but I have to give it to Giannis because he's so great on both ends of the court."

 

 

They were 11-14, they're now 52-28. So at the time I posted that, they'd gone 41-14(now 42-14). I'd imagine that's the starting point they were using on the radio as you only throw out these stats to make a point. Where I heard it, I was on my ride home and listening to the radio. I don't recall who as I was coming from out of town and it wasn't local stations.

 

My point wasn't that Giannis wasn't great. Historical. Absolutely everything you said and one of the best things to ever happen to Milwaukee sports or even about the MVP award. I don't care about Harden...and as such, I don't keep myself particularly informed about Harden or the Rockets other than how a casual fan would.

 

 

My only point was in response to those who said that he was a volume scorer and that the type of play he was playing was a not good for winning team basketball. And they injuries I was talking about are a lot more than Chris Paul. They were decimated at one point this season with several guys out of the lineup.

 

So I don't think you need to continue convincing anyone of Giannis MVP viability....though frankly, the term Most Valuable means almost nothing to me anymore. If you gave it to the most valuable, Mike Trout would have...5 or 6 at this point, LeBron and Jordan might have had 10 in their careers.

 

The writers put a lot of other nonsense into this award. "Narrative," for instance. Harden scoring 30+ for more games in a row than anyone since Wilt is gonna get more play than it should.

 

 

So again, only challenging the assertions that Harden is only successful because he shots "23 3's a game and 20 FT's." Or that he can't help a team win that way. I mean...if it were that easy...the uninspiringly athletic James Harden wouldn't be the only guy to do it. He wouldn't be so much more effective than Jordan for example in scoring 35+ a night.

[HiAndTight]

That was a pretty good way to close a game. I dont care at all if Giannis is named MVP. All I know is there is no other player I would rather have in the playoffs.

 

 

I care if he wins it. While they're ancillary benefits of success, I want to see more recognition given to the Bucks and Giannis. I want to see this team win COY, MVP, DPOY(likely not gonna happen, but he really could).

 

I'd like to see Horst win Executive of the year. He made a couple of pretty remarkable trades, adding a whole lot of value and financial flexibility while giving away very little in terms of assets. While we've gone into depth about George Hill on here, we all agree he's a huge asset to this team and you got him while dumping two contracts that were terrible, and then you picked up a sharp-shooting big man who can rebound and showed up and played his best in the post-season last year.

[HiAndTight]

http://www.espn.com/nba/insider/story/_/id/26453070/nba-awards-picks-best-defenders-league

 

Interesting read about the all NBA defensive teams. This guy has Bled as the 2nd team PG and Giannis as the 1st team PF and runner up DPOY.

[Pugger]

Jack Sikma and Sidney Moncrief are going into the basketball HOF.

 

https://www.nba.com/bucks/news/milwaukee-bucks-congratulate-sidney-moncrief-and-jack-sikma-hall-fame-induction

[CheezWizHed]

Jack Sikma and Sidney Moncrief are going into the basketball HOF.

 

https://www.nba.com/bucks/news/milwaukee-bucks-congratulate-sidney-moncrief-and-jack-sikma-hall-fame-induction

 

Wow. I loved me some 80's Bucks basketball, but I'm a little surprised these two are HOF worthy. Buck's HOF absolutely. They were both very good players, but not quite HOF worthy IMO. Granted, I've not paid much attention to whomelse might be in the HOF either.

[nate82]

Jack Sikma and Sidney Moncrief are going into the basketball HOF.

 

https://www.nba.com/bucks/news/milwaukee-bucks-congratulate-sidney-moncrief-and-jack-sikma-hall-fame-induction

 

Wow. I loved me some 80's Bucks basketball, but I'm a little surprised these two are HOF worthy. Buck's HOF absolutely. They were both very good players, but not quite HOF worthy IMO. Granted, I've not paid much attention to whomelse might be in the HOF either.

 

The Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame is not just NBA players it is basically both a professional hall of fame and an amateur hall of fame. This is completely different than the NFL's and MLB's hall of fame. There are whole teams that have been inducted into this hall of fame for example the Harlem Globetrotters have been inducted into the hall of fame.

[trwi7]

http://www.espn.com/nba/insider/story/_/id/26453070/nba-awards-picks-best-defenders-league

 

Interesting read about the all NBA defensive teams. This guy has Bled as the 2nd team PG and Giannis as the 1st team PF and runner up DPOY.

 

Lopez should be on some team.