Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Josh Smith’

A Whole New Series: Bucks 111 – Hawks 104

April 27th, 2010 Jeremy Schmidt 12 comments


Check out the reaction by the Bucks bench. Priceless.

If it hadn’t been done before, and it’s probably foolish that it wasn’t, the word “can’t” was officially removed from the dictionary on the Milwaukee Bucks 2009-10 season. It’s uses were once prevalent. Milwaukee can’t get to the line. They can’t score inside without Andrew Bogut. Brandon Jennings can’t finish. The Bucks can’t hang with the Hawks in the playoffs.

Can’t, can’t, can’t, can’t. These Bucks seem to know not of this word. Every time the rest of the world decides they aren’t capable of doing something, they go on and do it anyway. Milwaukee shot 32 free throws Monday night. They outscored the Hawks in the paint 44-26. Jennings was 9-16 from the field and didn’t hit a 3-pointer.

And the Bucks tied up their first round series with the Hawks at two.

In front of a raucous crowd with only a few pockets of empty seats in a sold out Bradley Center, the Bucks squeezed every last drop of effort out of 10 different players and played as close to flawless a game as they have without Bogut. The Bucks, a team once known for their selfishness on the court and corrosive chemistry off of it, relied on the formula that’s been working for them all season: above average ball movement and a sense of togetherness I haven’t seen in Milwaukee.

Asked about this being one of those games the old Bucks used to lose, Jerry Stackhouse had a very appropriate answer after the game:

I don’t know any of them old Bucks teams.

Can’t? Not these Bucks, not yet. Read more…

Game Four Preview: We could have a real series here

April 26th, 2010 Jeremy Schmidt 5 comments

Milwaukee Bucks (Scott Skiles) 1-2

vs.

Atlanta Hawks (Mike Woodson) 2-1

Date: 4/26/2010
Time: 7:30
TV: NBA TV & FS Wisconsin

Keep Smith Contained

Milwaukee and Josh Smith combined to do a great job stopping Josh Smith in game two. As much as I’d love to slather all the credit on Luc Richard Mbah a Moute, I’ll admit that it seems like Smith just didn’t have the same lift he’d had in the previous few games. Specifically on the offensive glass and in transition, he wasn’t the same. Smith had five dunks and layups in transition and on the offensive glass in game two. Saturday at the Bradley Center, Smith was 1-6 combined in transition and after offensive rebounds. Some of this was good help defense after he grabbed boards, some of this was luck. For the game, Smith was 2-10 at the rim. Don’t expect another performance like that. Milwaukee will just have to make the Hawks top athlete work hard for everything he gets and keep a body on him at all times. Making his life difficult should be the Bucks focus once again.

10 3’s Again?

Okay, so Milwaukee had enough breathing room, they didn’t need all 10 of the threes they hit Saturday. But three point shooting will still more or less define the Bucks for however long this season goes on. Saturday didn’t appear to be much of an aberration either. No Bucks player hit more than three from distance and no one shot over 50% on their three point shots. If anything, the Bucks could expect Carlos Delfino to perform slightly better than he has been lately. Milwaukee’s game is all about moving the ball and finding open shooters and their seven assists on 10 three point shots indicates they did that very well on Saturday. Maybe Milwaukee won’t hit another 10 threes Monday night, but there is some reason to expect another strong performance again on Monday night and not the disastrous ones that were games one and two.

More (or just as much) Gadz

I vividly recall thinking Terry Porter’s biggest mistake in 2004 was not giving Dan Gadzuric virtually any burn in the Bucks first round series against a much larger Detroit Pistons squad. This was back when Gadz was still young and before he got “The Contract”, so everyone loved him and he seemed to have a bright future. I called for him over and over, but he logged just nine minutes in the Bucks 4-1 losing effort of a series. Predictably, as I look back, I see that in those nine minutes his PER was 24.6 and he had the teams’ second best defensive rating.

Now, all these years later, I’m still finding myself wanting Gadz on the court in the post season. Sure, it has a lot to do with Andrew Bogut being out and Kurt Thomas being most productive in limited minutes, but it’s strange how some things stay the same. Gadzuric was a terror in his 17 minutes Saturday night, racking up five fouls and 10 rebounds in classic Gazuric style. He had an absurd 33.2 rebound rate, meaning he grabbed roughly a third of available rebounds while he was on the court. If he plays to his strength, rebounding and running around like a mad man, he can impact this series in a positive way.

Brandon Jennings Early and Often

Jennings started things out with a bang on Saturday, then had plenty of time to rest in the fourth quarter. I can’t see Atlanta coming out with the same lackluster effort that allowed Milwaukee free reign on Saturday, so he’ll likely log more minutes and more meaningful ones Monday night. When Jennings gets the Bucks going they seem to play loads better. If he’s feeling it on Monday night, he should absolutely not be shy about getting his shot off whenever he pleases. Sometimes when he’s feeling it, it seems like he backs off to get other guys involved. I guess that’s the instincts of a guy who’s a classic point guard, but sometimes Milwaukee needs him to take over like he did in game one. I have a lot more confidence in Jennings than I do in a lot of other players on this team

Keep Dodging The Crawford Bullet

The likely sixth man of the year, Jamal Crawford has made a season of blowing up off the bench for the Hawks. This series he’s 11-34 and has served as more of a thorn in the side of Atlanta than Milwaukee. But, this is Jamal Crawford we’re talking about. He’s liable to go off for 30 at any given time. In game one he did some typical Jamal Crawford stuff, pulling up for crazy threes and drilling them to take the air out of the Bucks sails when a potential comeback was on the horizon. Milwaukee will need to keep doing whatever they’ve been doing against Crawford and hope his tough shots keep out of the net.

So, maybe this is possible: Bucks 107 – Hawks 89

April 24th, 2010 Jeremy Schmidt 1 comment

I remember walking out of the Bradley Center on March 28th feeling very good about things. Milwaukee had just defeated the Grizzlies, the day was still young after the early game, the temperature was in the 60’s and a possible successful playoff run was on the horizon.  Now, less than one month later, clouds draped the air on a cold and damp Saturday afternoon when I approached. It was almost too perfect a representation of Milwaukee’s season.

What was once so bright, had turned so dim that the light was nearly off

And then Brandon Jennings hit a three and busted out the three point monocle.

And then he did it again.

And again.

Then John Salmons got involved. When it was all said and done, Milwaukee was up 36-19 after one, the Jennings/Salmons duo was 9-10 and the brightness had officially returned to Milwaukee’s season.

Surprise seems to be the appropriate reaction, but should anyone really be shocked? Atlanta was a below average road team this season, MIlwaukee was an above average home team and Milwaukee had shot very poorly from three in the first two games. All those factors seemed to work in Milwaukee’s favor.

There was some smaller things Milwaukee did well to get themselves off first round life support — switching Luc Richard Mbah a Moute onto Josh Smith comes to mind — but remembering that they at one time used to hit open shots this season was by and large the most important thing Milwaukee did in game three.

Offense

I’ve been saying it and saying it: eventually the Bucks would start hitting some shots. All it took was getting back to the comforts of home. After three point shooting percentages that rivaled the temperatures on a normal winter day in Wisconsin, the Bucks finally found the bottom of the net on Saturday evening, hitting 10-21 3s. I actually pinpointed 10 as the number of threes the Bucks would need to hit to win game two, so I guess I was just a game early.

For all the coaching adjustments, matching up and other things that go into a playoff series, sometimes it’s the simple things that end up making the biggest difference. For the Bucks, that “little thing” was finally hitting the three at a respectable clip.

  • I said this during the Daily Dime Live Chat and I’ll say it again: what a relief it must have been for the Bucks coaching staff and entire Bradley Center crowd to see Kurt Thomas’ long lost 15-foot jumper. Thomas finished 4-4 from the field. He looked good scoring eight points and grabbing 13 rebounds. Thomas and Delfino have deservedly shouldered plenty of blame for the Bucks struggles in the first two games, but it’s only appropriate to mention how Thomas’ playing his typical game played a big part in the Bucks taking game three.  Milwaukee doesn’t need Thomas to do anything outside of his comfort zone, they just need him to do things longer than he might be built for at this point. The three days off seemed to do wonders for him.  
  • Yes, Brandon Jennings did cool off once again. But that didn’t mean he stopped contributing. As my first defense in this case I’d present his behind the back pass to Jerry Stackhouse after hounding Mike Bibby into a turnover. Stack finished with a dunk and senior citizens everywhere were suddenly inspired. Jennings was 5-11 (3-6 3FG) and scored 13 points to go with five assists.
  • While Jennings couldn’t maintain his hot start, John Salmons did. Yet again.  The Bucks big pickup (seriously, shouldn’t he get to hold John Hammond’s executive of the year award for a few months a year) came through when Milwaukee needed him the most with 22 points on 9-11 shooting. Even better, Salmons tallied seven assists and was creating for the Bucks who can’t create so much for themselves. He’s a humanitarian that John Salmons.

Defense

If I had the power to write things on the Bucks chalk board before games I would have wrote these three words in all caps: STOP JOSH SMITH. And you know what? I would have been pleased with Milwaukee’s effort in doing just that. Unequivocally the biggest thorn in the side of the Bucks through the first two games, Smith finally was contained a bit. Smith had been feasting on offensive rebound putbacks and fast break dunks, but the Bucks weren’t giving anything easy away to him on Saturday. Sure, he still managed  nine offensive rebounds, but few of them resulted in dunks for him or points at all for the Hawks. Atlanta scored just 12 second chance points on 6-18 shooting. After shooting over 70% through the first two games, Smith finished Saturday’s game 2-12. Someone find Luc Richard Mbah a Moute’s belt and put another notch in it.

  • So what’s the more accurate representation of this Hawks team? The over 50% efforts from the field they had in games one and two, or this sub-40% shooting effort they produced Saturday night? It’s probably somewhere in the middle. The key to keeping them down for Milwaukee was preventing all the easy baskets they got in games one and two. When Josh Smith was heading in for a dunk, he had Mbah a Moute, Ilyasova, Thomas and Dan Gadzuric meeting him at the rim. Defensively, Milwaukee was simply a much more confident group.
  • I’d be remiss to let a nice night from Dan Gadzuric go by without pointing it out though. After many cries from the crowd for Gadzuric after Thomas struggled so badly in the first two games, Gadz saw 17 minutes and produced 10 rebounds. It’s just what he does.

Final Thoughts

I now find myself wondering, “will we ever get a good game in this series?”  The Hawks seem prone to both blowouts and doing the blowing out, but I can’t help but expect game four to be a lot closer than game three either way. Milwaukee will not continue to shoot at the clips they did and the hawks will probably find a way to put some more points on the board.  But as my final final thought, I did really enjoy something I saw from Milwaukee that I haven’t in years.

The mild-mannered Luke Ridnour holding his pose on a three to put the Bucks up 93-65 with the shot clock running down.  If you think Brandon Jennings wasn’t the rookie of the year, I get that.  But don’t try and tell me he didn’t have more of an impact on a team than any other rookie. This one started with Jennings and the monocle and ended with Ridnour holding his pose. These are not your slightly older brother’s Bucks NBA fans.

A few thoughts during a few days off

April 23rd, 2010 Jeremy Schmidt 4 comments
  • Why on Earth is there so much time between games in the playoffs? Is it me, or has the little amount of air that was in this series been let out? Imagine that the Bucks and Hawks had a real competitive, back and forth series. How frustrating would it be to have to wait two and three days before each game then? I guess I don’t understand how the NBA makes more money this way, but I’m sure they do some how, because money dictates everything obviously. Game four should have been Thursday and game five Saturday. Instead, the Bucks play Saturday and go up against a Brewers game that matters roughly fifty times more to people than the Bucks game. Well done NBA. I’m looking forward to all the jokes about the Bucks inability to fill their arena for a playoff game.
  • Josh Smith became the latest in a long line of athletes to rip Milwaukee for it’s general lack of things to do.

“Would you go there?” Smith asked. “Everybody knows there ain’t nothing to do in Milwaukee, man. Everybody knows that, (even) the people that live there.”

I’m not going to waste my time being offended that Smith isn’t excited to come to Milwaukee, but this did get me thinking. Not more than a week or so ago, Joakim Noah had similar comments about the city of Cleveland. So it would seem players have the same general perception of Milwaukee that they do of Cleveland. In recent history, this hasn’t stopped free agents and those interested in being traded from being open about wanting to head to Cleveland. Obviously that has something to do with playing with Lebron, but I think it’s more about wanting to win titles. A while back, John Hammond said something to the effect of he didn’t think players valued the city they are playing in as much as they value the chance to win as a factor when choosing teams in free agency. I’m starting to come around on this. I’m now slightly hopeful that Milwaukee will land a mediocre free agent in the off-season following next instead of a bad free agent.

  • I’m not sold on the process for end of the season award voting. And by not sold I mean I can’t stand it. The big issue I have with letting media members vote is that they simply aren’t able to see enough games. For example, if a television announcer votes, they are basing their vote off seeing one team for 82 games and other teams for no more than four. So they end up going to statistics and making their choices based on numbers. That’s why Scott Brooks wins coach of the year. His team had the largest improvement, therefore he won. Everyone ignores the fact that the Thunder have gobs of talent, more than the Bucks could ever dream of. Why not let scouts vote on these types of awards? Who is watching more teams play, with a better understanding than scouts? Perhaps that would rectify the silly results we often see in coach of the year voting. Judging from recent history (Byron Scott, Sam Mitchell) I wouldn’t be shocked to see Brooks dismissed sooner rather than later. Such is life in the NBA.
  • Wouldn’t it be nice if Andrew Bogut were healthy?

Hope continues to fade: Hawks 96 – Bucks 86

April 21st, 2010 Jeremy Schmidt 5 comments

Before the series, I assumed the Bucks would be down two games to zero after the first two in Atlanta.  Many targeted game three as the Bucks best opportunity to steal one from the Hawks.

Now I’m closer than ever to believing the Bucks will be swept.

Feelings of optimism reigned after a hard fought second half in game one.  It appeared the Bucks may have put a few things together and had a strategy for how to attack and at least slow down the Hawks. Few of those things were on display for more than a few minutes at a time on Tuesday night.  For Milwaukee, Tuesday’s loss in Atlanta had to seem like a loud and clear message from the opposition.  That message?

We’re more talented than you across the board and we’re going to continue to exploit every advantage we have, regardless of how you attempt to counter it.

It’s fun to see a coach pull counter moves and try and out strategize the other team. But the thing about the Hawks is that, regardless of what strategies the Bucks want to try, they aren’t the ones that will need to adjust.  The Hawks are ready for everything the Bucks throw at them and can swap the same seven guys in and out. Atlanta constantly forces Milwaukee to adapt, try new things and attempt to match up.  Atlanta has controlled six or seven of the eight quarters this series has seen. When they’ve had momentary lapses, they’ve made sure they were just momentary.  Regardless of what moves Coach Scott Skiles wants to make, the Hawks have been in control.

A lot of this starts with Josh Smith.  Smith has been everywhere the last two games. If I didn’t know better, I’d swear the Hawks had two guys named Smith, both of whom were ridiculously athletic. He’s grabbing offensive rebounds (five on Tuesday), blocking shots while getting steals (four combined Tuesday), finding teammates for baskets (nine assists) and dunking. He’s doing lots of dunking. I haven’t seen someone dunking this much in a game in years. So. Much. Dunking. What’s been the worst thing about Smith, is how he’s gotten all these dunks.

  • Fast breaks

The Hawks are constantly looking to run on Milwaukee.  They’re running on turnovers, they’re running on misses and they’re running on makes.  Atlanta’s motto seems to be: never stop running.  But they aren’t doing it irresponsibly, mind you.  They’re in control the whole time.  If there isn’t an easy shot, Atlanta is pulling it back out.  But they are at least exploring the opportunity to see if there is something they can get easy.  The fast breaks that have come off Milwaukee turnovers have been especially effective.

Atlanta spent the majority of game two trapping the Bucks ball handlers on the pick and roll.  If Milwaukee wanted to run a pick and roll, Atlanta was going to force a long pass.  Atlanta was rotating defenders to make the pass to the open man a lengthy pass.  Once they created a lengthy pass, they often intercepted it once Milwaukee threw it.  Those interceptions create fast breaks and easy dunks.  Often, Atlanta is able to completely abandon Luc Richard Mbah a Moute, freeing Josh Smith to roam around in the half court and make plays. It’s hard for the Bucks to counter this, as Mbah a Moute is their worst offensive player and can’t really hit a jump shot or create.

  • Offensive rebounds

Milwaukee is allowing 10.5 offensive rebounds per game against the Hawks, after allowing an average of just 9.6 a night in the regular season.  That may sound like just one more opportunity, but that doesn’t quite paint a vivid enough picture. Atlanta converted on six scoring opportunities on 10 offensive rebounds on Tuesday night. The Hawks size and strength advantages inside create easy opportunities on their offensive rebounds.  Milwaukee has a hard enough time defending them, giving them second chances is almost assuring them of a basket.

Milwaukee is doing a great job of beating themselves, something Atlanta is already more than capable of.

Now the Bucks have lost two games, by only 10 points each, which really isn’t a lot of points. Yes, there was a little bit of garbage time in each game, but it worked in Milwaukee’s favor once and against them once when reflected in the final score. So is there anything else (aside from cutting down turnovers that lead to fast breaks and limiting Josh Smith’s offensive rebounds) the Bucks can do to beat the Hawks?

There is, and it’s not that complicated.

Hit some threes.

For all the things that have gone wrong for Milwaukee in these last two games, the most baffling has been their complete inability to hit a three. After hitting 35.6% of their threes in the regular season, the Bucks have hit just 10 threes on 44 attempts in the post season (22.7%).

It’s not hard to imagine one or both of these games turning out a little different had the Bucks hit more threes.  Tuesday, Milwaukee finished 4-24 on threes.  They weren’t all bad shots either, Milwaukee was indiscriminately missing on wide open threes as often as they were contested ones. I’d love to say I have an explanation for this sudden inability to connect from deep, but I don’t.  I could see Carlos Delfino’s current 0-5 effort on threes and 5-16 on all attempts being written off to aftereffects from the injury he suffered a few weeks ago, but it’s difficult to see any other Bucks player with a valid excuse.

They just aren’t making their shots.

Fortunately, the lack of reasons why could be a sign that things will eventually even out.  Perhaps the Bucks will come out firing once they get back home and keep it going throughout the rest of the series.  Playoff jitters likely aren’t a factor, but maybe coming back home with a couple games under their belts will improve the Bucks ability to hit threes.  If that isn’t the answer, then we could have a long two games in Milwaukee followed by a considerable gap until the Bucks next game: next season.