Milwaukee Bucks

100

Final Recap | Box Score

107

Chicago Bulls

	Luc Richard Mbah a Moute, SF 12 MIN | 2-5 FG | 0-0 FT | 0 REB | 0 AST | 4 PTS | -6 I don’t know where LRMAM belongs on this team. He definitely belongs somewhere, right? Without Bogut, the Bucks can’t afford Moute’s weak offense and the best offensive options for the power forward and wing spots are clear.
	Drew Gooden, PF 36 MIN | 6-14 FG | 10-10 FT | 15 REB | 6 AST | 23 PTS | +1 I look at his stats and then I think about what I saw and then my brain hurts. No matter how I slice it, Gooden was an offensive force. He was wild though: looking unruly on his drives to the basket. Plus his passes are always just a bit off. But it isn’t offense that he needs to replace. He has to replace Bogut’s all-world defense. For that he is woefully incapable. Sure, let’s give him a pass today because he was protecting the rim against Derrick Rose and that’s a problem for 98% of the league. But Gooden and the other big men need to reliably guard the paint on their own. Often the wings had to swarm into the paint which left easy passes to make to open shooters from the post.
	Brandon Jennings, PG 37 MIN | 10-22 FG | 1-1 FT | 7 REB | 3 AST | 25 PTS | -1 Jennings was all fire in the first quarter. After that he did what stat geeks like to call ‘regressing to the mean.’ He was unaggressive in the second and third quarters and ineffective in the fourth. He’s going to lead the Bucks to a lot of close losses. Jennings wasn’t looking for teammates as much as he usually has this season. Perhaps he feels a lone without his buddy Bogut. The pair was looking awfully good together before the injury.
	Jon Leuer, F 20 MIN | 9-11 FG | 0-0 FT | 5 REB | 0 AST | 19 PTS | 0 It took a Bogut injury and Ilyasova foul trouble, but Leuer finally got back on the floor after he was benched for no discernibly good reason at all. The dude just knows how to ball: has a wonderful understanding of floor spacing and how to cut. Plus he has a swell jumper.

Related posts:

1. Ugh: Mavericks 102 – Bucks 76 Milwaukee Bucks 76 Final Recap | Box Score 102...
2. A Wisconsin alumnus’ take on Jon Leuer Nestled close to the radio in the 50 degree temperature...
3. Bucks Had GREAT First Half: Sacramento Kings 103 – Milwaukee Bucks 100 Milwaukee Bucks 100 Final Recap | Box Score 103...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Darington Hobson, Larry Sanders, Drew Gooden, Jon Leuer and Beno Udrih were on the court for that final stretch. That’s a far cry from what the Bucks actual crunch time lineup will be. The only thing that anyone can really take from that last minute is that Sanders may continue to be in coach Scott Skiles’ doghouse, after the bouncy but occasionally brainless forward tossed away an inbounds pass and ultimately the lead in the final seconds.

For all the talk of Bucks bringing in playmakers in Mike Dunleavy, Beno Udrih and Stephen Jackson, Brandon Jennings is still the best distributor the team has (he finished with nine assists for the game). The trade-off for Jennings distribution is that he’s going to take poor shots for himself. Jennings is a much worse shooter off the dribble than he is in catch-and-shoot situations (he went 4-13 for the game, his makes were two lay-ups, a dunk and a catch-and-shoot. His misses were a whole lot of him dribbling).

At Media Day, Jennings said he could be both a scorer and a creator for the team, but his talents require that he take a far different approach for each role: playing with the ball as a distributor and playing without the ball as a scorer. So what’s Jennings choice? Trying to have his cake and eat it too hurts him as a player and leaves the team without an identity.

Dunleavy’s off-ball movement is infectious. Also infectious: Stephen Jackson taking heat checks (hit his first two threes and then nothing for the rest of the night).

“I’m not going to grade him [Jackson] too harshly with anything that happened. I was just glad to see him out there,” said Scott Skiles.

Great point, coach. With his back problems, Jackson isn’t going to be attacking the rim a lot, so expect a lot of threes in the immediate future and not too much penetration. Doesn’t matter though, Jackson looks rather dapper with the red armbands, so that more than makes up for anything he does on the court.

But back to Dunleavy. He’s been the standout of the preseason. My friend texted me mid-game to say Dunleavy was the best passer on the team. Pushing aside the fact that that’s false, but the eye-test certainly indicates that the Bucks offense hums a bit more when Dunleavy is on the court. Chalk that up to his floor spacing and movement, but also his relationship with Jennings, “He [Jennings] has a nice little rapport with Mike Dunleavy already,” Skiles commented.

The big adjustment for the game was starting Luc Mbah a Moute at the power forward in place of Drew Gooden. It was a much needed adjustment for the Bucks who needed to contain Kevin Love who had 21 points and went 4-7 from three in the last Saturday. For the first quarter, Moute held love to two points on 1-4 shooting and didn’t foul Love once. Without Moute playing at all in the second quarter, Love scored five points with four free throw attempts. That’s the reason they resigned him, folks. The great thing about Moute is that he takes so much pride in his defense. He gets visibly upset when his man scores even when he’s done everything he possibly could.

On the offensive end, Moute had 14 points on 6-11 shooting. The Wolves were leaving him open in the corner and he was hitting it. “Those 14 – 17 foot baseline shots in particular are really his shot and the ball comes around the perimeter and when his form and technique are correct, it’s usually right there for him,” said Skiles. It looked correct tonight, but what he was struggling with was finishing at the rim. Moute is normally a good finisher at the rim, but his lack of strength always forces him to double pump or shoot awkwardly in the paint.

Preseason was fun, but the arduous march toward the playoffs starts next Monday at Charlotte.

Ian Segovia is a contributor to Bucksketball.com. Follow him on Twitter, fan us up on Facebook.

Related posts:

1. Preseason Game 2 Preview: Bucks vs. Timberwolves In their first preaseason match-up, the Timberwolves steam-rolled the Bucks...
2. The specific work of Larry Sanders According to Breaking Bad’s Skyler White, “the devil is in...
3. Larry Sanders assigned to Fort Wayne of the D-League From the Milwaukee Bucks: The Milwaukee Bucks have assigned rookie...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

So why do a post on PNRs instead of spot-up plays? PNRs setup spot-ups, not the other way around. The Bucks two best players (Andrew Bogut and Jennings) are involved in PNRs. The biggest gains can be made in that play type as Jennings improves. There hasn’t been a big statistical fluctuation in spot-ups between the successful 2009-10 campaign (0.99 PPP/38.9 FG%/37.3 3P%) and the woeful 2010-11 season (0.96/38.9/37.3).

Also, Beno Udrih is the statistical god of PNR ballhandling, ranked second in that category by Synergy with 1 PPP.

The Roll Men

In Jennings’s rookie year, the Bucks PNR roll men averaged 1.04 points per possession (PPP), good for eleventh in the league. Their field goal percentage was 50.5 percent and they scored 50.2 percent of the time.  For the 2010-11 season, the Bucks ranked eighteenth in the PNR roll man category. They scored 0.97 PPP, had a 49.2 FG% and scored only 47.5 percent of the time.

After digging through more stats, I saw that Jennings’s assists at the rim dropped from 2.2 his rookie year to 1.5 last season. So initially I formed the hypothesis that Jennings wasn’t looking inside as much as he used to. Jennings has problems in the PNR, but they weren’t the reason for the drop in production.

The main problem is that his teammates refuse to put themselves in position to score.

The entire platoon of power forwards insist on spotting-up, not rolling to the basket. That’s fine for Drew Gooden, but it’s about time everyone just gives up on Luc Mbah a Moute’s jump shot. It’s not happening. That’s not to say that he never should shoot it again. If he’s open like he always is, put it up.

But since he is always open no matter what he does, why not play to his strengths and make him cut to the basket. He’s a career 59.9 percent finisher at the rim. He cuts to the basket very well. Same goes for Larry Sanders. It might be a little early to give up on his jump shot, but damn it if I haven’t already.

Beno Udrih

The first thing that stands out when watching Udrih in PNRs is how efficient he is shooting  off the dribble, but seems to absolutely refuse to shoot a three off the dribble.  He only shot seven threes all of last year as the PNR ballhandler, converting on five. Plus, 90.8 percent of Udrih’s three-pointers were assisted. Udrih is also very good at running around ballscreens, often forcing his defender to chase behind him or run into the screen, but he doesn’t have the speed to sustain very many drives to the basket.

So what does all of this result in? A lot of midrange jumpers and floaters off dribble penetration. I abide by the philosophy that no one outside of Dirk Nowitzki should be taking a lot of long twos off the dribble. It’s just a really inefficient way to play offense.  But Udrih is an exception because of how consistently efficient he’s been. Since joining the Kings, he’s never shot below 43 percent from 16-23 feet away and has shot below 50 percent once from 10-15 feet away (48.5 percent in 2009-10).

Because he’s so good at using ballscreens, but is very tentative about shooting the three, defenders often go under high screens against Udrih. Being proactive against Udrih’s midrange game really cuts into his effectiveness in the PNR. Yes, he’s a great finisher at the rim, converting over 70 percent of his shots in the last two years, but he has a hard time getting there on his own (his 15 percent FG increase in shots at the rim coincided with a 15 percent increase in his number of assisted FGs at the rim). His passing in the PNR is also highly suspect.

Last year, the Kings finished 27th in the league in the PNR roll men category with 0.65 PPP.  That ‘s a team stat affected by Jason Thompson’s terrible hands and Tyreke Evans lack of a single point guard bone in his body, but Udrih is as much to blame. Synergy shows that Evans and Udrih shared PNR ballhandling duties evenly, running 270 and 251 plays respectively.

Udrih should be encouraged to shoot more threes coming off ballscreens. He has a flat shot that loses its effectiveness when he ventures into three-point land (35.7 3P%), but as pointed out before, the three-pointer is a big key to the Bucks offense.

So what about Bogut? Don’t worry. I’ll be covering him and delving more into his two-man game with Jennings (or lack thereof) in a follow-up post.

Ian Segovia is a contributor to Bucksketball.com. Follow him on Twitter, fan us up on Facebook.

Related posts:

1. An offensive clinic: Suns 102 – Bucks 88 Stopping Steve Nash was at the forefront of Scott Skiles...
2. Milwaukee Bucks trade John Salmons, Corey Maggette and number 10 pick He’s the latest chunk of Milwaukee Bucks information floating in...
3. The New NBA CBA and Milwaukee Bucks fans Legal jargon has turned into business jargon as the NBA...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

If you’re hardcore into labor negotiations and need the full breakdown, check out Larry Coon’s breakdown of the last CBA vs. the new CBA.

If you’re looking to learn some of the highlights and how they apply to the Bucks, we got you covered.

• Amnesty Clause

Upon first reports of the new CBA allowing teams to purge themselves of one bad contract, keyboards everywhere took a pounding as people excitedly slammed out the letters D-R-E-W G-O-O-D-E-N alongside the word good riddance. But intel appears to have quelled that movement amongst Bucks fans. Today, Chad Ford and John Hollinger report yet again, that the team is unlikely to use the amnesty clause on Gooden this season.

The clause would clear Drew Gooden’s contract from the Bucks salary cap (something the last amnesty provision didn’t do), which would give the team just over $6 million to do with what they may this off-season. But the team would still have to pay Gooden, so whatever player replacing him would essentially be earning his salary and Gooden’s salary. The doubling of salary is probably one reason Milwaukee hasn’t been so anxious to clear Gooden from the books.

The other reason is likely the lack of time Gooden spent on the court with Andrew Bogut last season.

Milwaukee’s ideal pairing up front spent just 411 minutes on the court together last season. By comparison, Bogut spent 826 minutes with Luc Mbah a Moute as his power forward last season. When Gooden wasn’t injured, he was often forced into a backup role, as the Bucks lacked much behind Bogut. If Milwaukee can get Bogut and Gooden on the floor together often this season and still doesn’t see results? This CBA’s amnesty clause can be rolled over and used any time until the next CBA expires, so long as it is used on deals signed during the last CBA. Next season could be Gooden’s last as a Buck if his pay and performance don’t line up a little closer.

If, as Don Walker’s sources say, the Bucks had been receiving roughly $5 million a year in revenue sharing, under the new agreement, that will jump to $15 million. Details have yet to be finalized on the revenue sharing deal though, so we can’t be sure just what sort of impact that extra $10 million will have, but any time a team with as thin as profit margin as the Bucks have can pick up three times as much money as they had been, that’s a help.

• Luxury Tax

Milwaukee has never paid a dollar in luxury tax penalties, and don’t expect that to change any time soon. Unless the extra revenue being generated from revenue sharing has The Senator feeling awfully generous, the additional luxury tax penalties that will be levied upon teams starting in 2012-13 should be all the more reason for Milwaukee to keep salaries relatively tight. Teams previously paid a dollar for every dollar they went over the calculated tax level, starting in 2012-13, penalties will grow with even $5 million above the tax level a team goes.

The league has advertised this sort of penalty system as a means of competitive balance. Their logic is major market teams won’t be able to spend as freely in free agency and through contract extensions if their owners are paying out so much in penalties. But this sort of tax could come back to haunt a young team like the Bucks if they hit big on a few drafts. If Bogut and Brandon Jennings are the anchors the Bucks are hoping for and if Tobias Harris or another young player proves to be someone worth legitimate money, all of those contracts adding up at once could be too much for a small market team to handle, revenue sharing or not.

The luxury tax keeps the onus on Milwaukee to be smart when handing out contracts to non-star players, but really won’t be an issue unless the team ends up with a couple of star young players.

• Restricted  and Unrestricted Free Agency

Teams will now have just three days to match an offer sheet signed by a restricted free agent. Mbah a Moute falls into that boat as soon as free agency gets started, so the Bucks could be one of the first teams to have to make a quick decision.

Additionally, free agent deals are now limited to five years with 7.5 percent raises for Bird free agents (a player who has played with a team for three years) and four years with 4.5 percent raises for other free agents. Shorter contracts are one thing owners were very insistent about, and I’m sure Herb Kohl felt no different, having had an up-close and personal seat for Michael Redd’s final few years in Milwaukee.

Jeremy Schmidt writes the Milwaukee Bucks blog Bucksketball.com. Follow him on Twitter and become a fan on Facebook.

Related posts:

1. Ersan Ilyasova could be on the way out of Milwaukee The rumblings of Ersan Ilyasova heading to Europe have apparently...
2. Herb Kohl’s actions may be betraying his words Within the past year, Herb Kohl has been one of...
3. Milwaukee Bucks acquire Stephen Jackson, Shaun Livingston and Beno Udrih And we’re off. Draft day begins with a bang for...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

If I could love any one thing as much as Luc Mbah a Moute loves playing defense, I’d be a better man.

If I approached a woman the same way LRMAM approaches offense, I’d be slapped.

As hard as it is to believe, there are parts of LRMAM’s offensive game that are actually pretty good. It’s hard to believe, but trust. The essence of his offense originates in his defense.

What makes LRMAM’s defense great isn’t his length, speed, strength or any other physical attribute. It’s his mind. LRMAM reads individuals and teams like a children’s book. He knows what you’re doing and where your teammates are going. He never bites on pump-fakes and makes it difficult for anyone to get the spot they want on the floor. He bites just hard enough on PNRs to give his teammate time to recover, but not let his man get away.

Back to his offense. It’s too bad that once the ball touches his hands, everything goes to hell. His handle is a minor tragedy. People pray that his jump shot will improve, but that’s like hoping the characters from It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia become good people. LRMAM’s off-ball movement is actually pretty good. His cuts are crisp. That’s why he finishes so well at the rim: over 60 percent field goal percentage at the rim in his first two seasons. But that percentage dropped last season to 57 percent.  After setting picks, he rolls well to the basket and can also find the open spot for a jumper. He gets open partly because the opposing team often doesn’t see him as an offensive threat, but the bigger part is that he always knows where he needs to be on the court.

Flashback to the first time many of us ever saw LRMAM. Elite Eight. Gonzaga v. UCLA. 71-70. 19.7 seconds left. Gonzaga inbounds to Adam Morrison whom Mbah a Moute traps with Aaron Afflalo. Morrison passes to J.P. Batista who gets the ball stripped by Jordan Farmar. At that moment, everyone loses it. The crowd’s and benches are going nuts. Gus Johnson is being Gus Johnson. Most of the players on the court on the court are still processing what’s happening and don’t move for another second.

LRMAM instinctively cuts to the basket for the easy-layup.

Bold statement: 90 percent of college players don’t make that cut. Most pros wouldn’t either. But the kid from Cameroon who started playing basketball at the age of 14 does. Some things you can’t teach.

When the offense was rolling just after the Bucks traded for John Salmons in 2010, he was an asset. A glue guy that is an elite defender at three positions is something that a lot of teams want. Then the wheels fell off last season and he’s been seen as nothing but a liability since. Everyone forgets what he brings to the table and only sees a guy who offensively plays best as a mediocre four, but is too small to rebound effectively at the position. If only the statkeepers worked as hard as LRMAM does every given night, we could have stats for deflecting loose balls to teammates, recovering after helping on defense and making the opposing team’s best player swear in frustration. If little things like that were recorded, LRMAM would be a double-double threat every night and we could really have proof of everything he brings to the table.

Ian Segovia is a contributor to Bucksketball.com. Follow him on Twitter and become a fan on Facebook.

Related posts:

1. Taming the beast: Mbah a Moute on Griffin, work ethic and instincts “I doubt anybody is going to guard (Blake Griffin) any...
2. The Best of a Bad Situation: 19. Todd Day (We’re counting down the best 20 Bucks since 1991 over...
3. The Best of a Bad Situation: 18. TJ Ford (We’re counting down the best 20 Bucks since 1991 over...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Maggette has been incredibly disappointing this year, not only because he’s been a shell of his former self as a scorer, but because he’s often been so bad on both ends of the court that he’s failed to even earn minutes.  Alone, this would be a troubling issue for the Bucks.  But his below average production doesn’t stand by itself in a corner.  It’s smack dab in the middle in one of the many rooms full of problems for the Bucks.

The Corey Maggette Wrecking Ball that’s been turned onto the Bucks instead of their opponents has amplified the problems at the small forward spot for the Bucks.  If Carlos Delfino were still playing, Maggette’s struggles would be noticable, but nothing Milwaukee wouldn’t be able to withstand.  But Maggette’s poor play and Delfino’s absence have left Luc Mbah a Moute logging more minutes at the three than anyone would like to see.

Recently Chris Douglas-Roberts has gotten more action at the three, and he’s produced somewhat better results.  But he’s still limited and rough around the edges offensively. So, despite a strong start to the season, Roberts has played like many would expect a third year, second round pick who is getting his first taste of supposedly meaningful basketball after spending two years with the Nets.  He hasn’t exactly been a godsend.

The play of Milwaukee’s sub-par forward trio has been reflected in the numbers.

Last season, led primarily by Delfino, Milwaukee’s net small forward production resulted in a 14.6 PER according to 82games.com.  That’s a tick below the league average of 15, but Milwaukee wasn’t crippled at that spot.  And Delfino’s perpencity for ball movement was reflected in the group’s 1.58:1 assist to turnover ratio.  Delfino is as perfect a fit at the three in Milwaukee’s offense as possible.  At least when he’s making shots he is.

With Delfino largely removed from the equation this season, Milwaukee’s small forward position has been significantly below average.  Their net PER is just 10.6 and their assist to turnover ratio has fallen to just .82:1.  For those of you who aren’t especially fond of math, that means Milwaukee’s had more turnovers than assists at the three this season.  And I haven’t even gotten into the 3-point shooting yet.  But do I really need to?  Do I really need to say much about the 3-point shooting of Maggette and Mbah a Moute?

The issues the Bucks are currently having demonstrate the importance of a player being the right fit for a team.  Not only was Delfino a good fit, but Maggette and Mbah a Moute especially are bad fits at the three for Milwaukee.  That’s why the absence of a role player like Delfino has been so significant for Milwaukee.

So here the Bucks sit.  Seven games under .500, with Delfino still improving, but not all that close to returning.  In the meantime, they’ll continue to trot out small forwards unable to shoot from deep and more likely to turn the ball over than to assist a teammate in scoring.

Jeremy Schmidt writes the Milwaukee Bucks blog Bucksketball.com.  Follow him on Twitter.  Then become a fan on Facebook (in the sidebar).

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

That’s not entirely his fault though.  It’s largely his fault, but he can’t take all the blame.  Think back a ways, remember the good times with Bill Hall.  He was once an effective utility man for the Brewers. In 2005 and 2006, he alternated between third base, shortstop, second base and then eventually centerfield, never truly mastering any of them, but playing competently enough that he earned at bats practically every day.  Having someone who could fill in and play a number of different positions is always a nice luxury to have, especially for a smaller market team like the Brewers.

Hall did his best playing all those positions, but ultimately wanted to settle on one spot and the Brewers appeared to desire likewise.  Both parties worked towards Hall becoming the new Brewers centerfielder and then when that didn’t work, the new third baseman and then when that didn’t work, the newest Brewer on a different team.  That didn’t work so well for Hall, but fit the Brewers like a glove.  It was a sad story.  Perhaps had Hall just succumbed to the life of a utility man, things could have been salvaged for him, though his inability to produce offensively may have caught up to him regardless of where his was playing.

Ultimately, everyone has to be able to produce something offensively in baseball and the story isn’t all that different in basketball.  For all the great defense some players play, they have to have a niche on offense.  Some never find that niche and are banished to the ends of benches or losing teams.

No one wants to see Luc Richard Mbah a Moute banished.  He is just better suited for the utility role, just like Bill Hall before him.  Off the bench, Mbah a Moute can come in and defend multiple positions for a few possessions, even if he has to play out of position on offense.  That doesn’t kill Milwaukee’s offense, because it’s a fairly limited dosage.  But when he’s forced to be the corner release as a small forward in Milwaukee’s offensive sets, for more than 20 minutes a night as he has been lately, it’s nothing but trouble for the Bucks.  He’s clearly a guy who needs to be around the hoop on offense.

Mbah a Moute has his niche: he can score at the rim.  No, he isn’t posting up and dropping in eight foot hook shots or driving for rim rattling dunks, but he can come out of a pile of bodies with the ball and dunk or lay shots in off the glass.  Mbah a Moute struggled earlier this year finishing around the rim, but he’s come around and is now back up over 50% at the rim (51.5% to be exact).  He’s incredibly limited every where else on the court, but Mbah a Moute can clean up a mess as well as any other Bucks player.

What he can’t do though, is effectively play small forward on the offensive end.  And that’s playing no small part in the Bucks monumental offensive struggles right now.  I’m not heaping this whole stinking pile of offensive suck on Mbah a Moute, that’s not fair, but his increased playing time with Carlos Delfino out of the lineup has turned the negative of Delfino’s absence into a significant double negative.  It’s bad that Delfino’s gone and worse that the Bucks have replaced him with a player not fit for small forward play.  Let’s take a look at a set the Bucks run over and over throughout games.

Brandon Jennings brings the ball up and after Mbah a Moute and John Salmons swap position on the wings, the ball almost always heads to Salmons on the wing. After the pass, Jennings heads to right of the top of the key outside the arc and Mbah a Moute heads to the short corner. The big that is closer to the hoop generally moves outside of the basket area.

After catching, the center or power forward (it seems interchangeable, in this case Ersan Ilyasova at center) moves down to set a screen for Salmons. Salmons now penetrates through the paint, and his next move depends on what the defenders of both Jennings and Mbah a Moute do. If neither helps, he keeps towards the hoop.

If either Jennings’ defender or Mbah a Moute’s defender steps in Salmons way, he has a pass to make.  This play worked well on Saturday, as D.J. Augustin continuously stepped in to help on Salmons who was able to find Jennigns for a number of threes in which Jennings had time to set himself up.  Often this seaso though, Salmons has forced up shots over a defender switching onto him from Mbah a Moute or the center that set the original screen with much less success than he had last season.  Mbah a Moute isn’t an outside threat though, so he must sink in more than Delfino ever did and in turn, that shrinks the court and gives his defender less room to make up if said defender steps up to defend Salmons.

It should come as no surprise that Mbah a Moute’s PER as a small forward is a paltry 6.1.  His skill set is not a great fit for the small forward position at this point in his NBA career and if he’s spending his time wasting away in the short corner, his above average offensive rebounding ability isn’t as easy to apply.  Yes, he’s athletic enough to defend virtually any player on the court, but that doesn’t mean he’s a natural fit for a position that typically requires ball handling and shooting.  As Milwaukee’s finest defender outside of Andrew Bogut, no on wants to see a huge minute reduction for Mbah a Moute.  Just a minute reapplication in which he spends the majority of them at the four and not the three.

So long as Delfino’s out, there aren’t a lot of other answers at the three for Milwaukee.  Chris Douglas-Roberts has looked promising offensively in his first two games, but nowhere near ready to go on the other end.  Corey Maggette is battling a few issues himself, but even when he’s healthy he may not be the answer the Bucks are looking for, as he’s never been known as a court spacer or corner 3-point shooter.  Part of the reason Mbah a Moute is starting is necessity.  With CD-R back though, it may be wise to give him a look as the starting small forward next to Mbah a Moute as the new starting power forward.

Answers have been hard to come by for the Bucks thus far and it doesn’t look like Luc Mbah a Moute at the three is one of them.

Jeremy Schmidt writes the Milwaukee Bucks blog Bucksketball.com.  Follow him on Twitter.  Then become a fan on Facebook (in the sidebar).

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

And yet, I see another pressing concern for the Milwaukee Bucks.

The development, or lack thereof, of young players Luc Richard Mbah a Moute, Ersan Ilyasova and, yes, Brandon Jennings. Through 13 games, all three of them are performing either worse than, or nearly exactly the same as, they did last season.

In the case of Mbah a Moute, he’s playing the worst offensive basketball of his career this season, which, for him, is saying quite a bit.  Now in his third season in the league, we have a good idea of what LRMAM is about.  He’s a great defender and has been able to finish at the rim the last two seasons.  This year, even that tiny spec of offensive ability has seemed escaped him, as he’s currently shooting a career worst 41.1% from the field.  And I say from the field generically, not honestly, as 27 of his 56 shot attempts this season have been directly at the rim.  Last year, that would have been a good thing, as he hit 62.2% of attempts at the rim, but this season, he’s down to 48.1% at the rim.  Away from the rim, he’s virtually the same player he’s been for three years now, hesitant and unsure of himself.

For whatever reason, LRMAM has gotten no better as an offensive NBA player and is not working out at the small forward position for the Bucks.  He does his finest work at the hoop and is incapable of creating any offense from the wing.  The injury to Carlos Delfino was extra costly, as not only did it remove Milwaukee’s finest shooter from their starting lineup, but it left them with their worst small forward taking his place.

We’ve all heard about his terrific work ethic and commitment to improving.  Just last season, Coach Scott Skiles had this to say about Mbah a Moute, “Whatever Luc’s high water mark as a player is going to be in the league he’s going to reach it.  When he’s done playing you’re going to say he’s gotten the most out of his ability.”  Perhaps he’s done that and the rest of us just expected too much of him offensively.

Of course, Mbah a Moute moving away from the power forward position for part of the game in theory opened up space for Ilyasova to get more minutes and recapture what he had last season as a stretch four.

Things haven’t worked out so well in that regard though.  In the six games Delfino’s missed, Ilyasova has averaged just 7.8 points and 6.2 rebounds, numbers pretty much on par with his averages of 6.2 and 4.5 respectively on the season.  From a 23-year-old who produced averages of better than 10 points and six rebounds per game last year, those are troubling numbers.  The games in which he’s played the best this season have, not coincidentally, been the ones he’s played the most.  In 35 minutes against Boston, he produced 15 points and seven rebounds and in 27 minutes against the Atlanta Hawks, he had 17 points and 10 rebounds.  But what comes first, the playing time or the production?

Skiles has been saying for a while that he would like to see more consistency out of Ilyasova, but that can be difficult to obtain when playing time is sporadic.  In a recent five game stretch, Ilyasova shot 50% or better three times and twice failed to make a shot on the evening.  Something is surely amiss with the game of a forward whose 3-point shooting is desperately needed on a team free of many others with that skill.

One of the others who has that skill is Jennings, though that comes and goes without notice.  His 3-point shooting percentage is down to 34.3% this year from 37.4% last season, somewhat offsetting the overall improvement in his shooting percentage, which is up to 39.4% this season from 37.1% last season.  The natural improvements in strength and awareness were expected to get Jennings much closer to, if not over, 40% shooting this season and his improvement to 58.3% shooting at the rim can attest to those improvements.  If his long range shooting isn’t coming along for the ride though, what does that really mean.  Jennings limitations in his size and strength are never going to allow him to get to the rim as often as a guy like Derrick Rose. He needs that outside accuracy more than other point guards.

Aside from that, his play in pick and roll situations has been questionable.  As Zach Lowe of Sports Illustrated’s Point Forward blog pointed out today, Jennings is often going east and west in pick and roll situations, rather than north and south.  Even worse, I can probably count on my hand the number of times I’ve seen Jennings pass in a pick and roll this year (less than five if I’m right, and I think I am).  I asked Coach Skiles about his guard’s problems with finding big men in pick and rolls this season before Saturday’s game.

“It’s always easy for the coach or the fan even to stop the action right at a split second and say ‘okay we’ve got three guys open, why don’t we see him,” Skiles said.  “But when you’re in the game it happens quickly.  We have to get better at those decisions, because we do have people open.  We do have some shots we’re turning down, our execution needs to get better, all those things.  Lets face it, in the real world they get paid to make those plays and we need to do a better job making them.”

Players have to make plays.  It always comes back to that, doesn’t it?  In the case of the Bucks young players, they need to start making the plays everyone thought they would be able to this season, or things could get away from the Bucks quickly.

Jeremy Schmidt writes the Milwaukee Bucks blog Bucksketball.com.  Follow him on Twitter.  Then become a fan of Bucksketball on Facebook (to the right).

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

For once, the Milwaukee Bucks opponents could only sit and watch as one shot after another went in.  For once, the Bucks played with confidence on offense.  For once, offense wasn’t the primary concern at halftime.

For once, the Bucks got a big win.

Milwaukee’s offense was finally everything the front office dreamed it would be in the first quarter of their 107-80 win over the New York Knicks at home Tuesday night.  In that first glorious 12 minutes, the Bucks could not be tamed.  Milwaukee shot 15-22 (68.2%) from the field, 3-6 (50%) from 3-point range and 8-10 (80%) from the line.

After building a 22 point first quarter lead, the Bucks needed to do little more than hang on for the rest of the game.  And with a defense like the one Milwaukee has, hanging on to a big lead isn’t much of a problem.   Before the game, Coach Scott Skiles talked about the importance of keeping the Knicks from establishing tempo.

“What you want to do is limit their 3-point attempts if you can and try to make them shoot a poor percentage on those.  You cant get caught up in trying to slow the game down.  If team’s are shooting 3-point shots and missing those, those are almost always long rebounds that are coming down in guards or small forwards hands.

In the pros, you got to be able to come down and convert that.  That’ll be a big part of the game, can we make them miss some of those perimeter shots and get the rebound and get some perimeter baskets.”

1. Limit their 3-point attempts: Coming into Tuesday’s game, the Knicks were shooting 25 3-point shots per game.  Tuesday, they shot 19. Even better, they made just five.  Check.
2. Long rebounds: Luc Richard Mbah a Moute (masquerading as a three for some of the night) grabbed six defensive rebounds (eight total).  John Salmons had six defensive rebounds (six total) and Brandon Jennings had three defensive rebounds (five total).  Check.
3. Converting: Off Knicks 14 3-point misses, here’s the Bucks stat line: 2-5 FG, 2-4 FT, six points, eight rebounds and one turnover.  Not such a check.

Of course, when a team like the Bucks shoots 51.3%, they can live without piling up the easy points on the break off missed threes.

Offense

Rarely have the Bucks appeared in sync, confident in themselves or one another on offense this season.  Monday they were all that and more.  Players weren’t passing up on open shots, nor did they “pump fake air” as Coach Skiles said they had been doing lately.  When players received the ball and were open, they shot.  When they caught a pass but were covered, they passed.  When they had room, they drove and finished.  When they were crowded, they drove and passed.  It was a beautifully simple game the Bucks were playing and, as they rarely had this season, they made it look so easy.  It all comes back to hitting shots and feeling good.  It’s amazing what a couple of baskets can do for a team’s mindset.

• Jennings said he wanted to be more aggressive, and in the first quarter he was.  Jennings was 5-6 (2-3 3FG) in the first quarter and launched four consecutive successful shots at one point.  It was just like old times, the good ones though, not the bad ones.  Earlier today, I, regrettably, worried that Jennings would return to his chucking ways and leave the team even further from the success they had last season.  For a little while, he played a lot like he did last season, but that would not last.  Despite those six first quarter attempts, Jennings was just 8-13 (2-5 3FG, 1-2 FT) on the evening.  It’s important that he be aggressive at times, but that he pick his spots.  He helped get the team going early tonight and that’s a logical way to go about things.

• After the game, Skiles said he thought Salmons played his finest game of the season.  While Salmons still isn’t shooting the ball particularly well, (3-8 on the night) he contributed in other ways he’s yet to make as much of an impact in this season.  Salmons finished with six rebounds and five assists against zero turnovers.  He was able to drive and kick and did knock down a few open shots along the way.

• Drew Gooden had a lot to do with the Bucks strong start, hitting four of his first five shots from the field before struggling down the stretch.  It was important for the Bucks that Gooden finally get back on track a little bit though.  If he’s able to consistently hit a mid-range or short corner jumper, he could very effectively play the role Scott Williams once did so well in 2001.  Gooden can be a hustle guy at times too, even if scoring is his M.O.  Gooden tracked dove for a loose ball in the second quarter, keeping it alive long enough for Jennings to come through and scoop it up on the way to the hoop for a breakaway dunk.  Milwaukee needs more of first quarter Gooden.

Defense

Milwaukee’s finest defensive effort came against a perimeter shooting team with LRMAM starting at the small forward.  That sounds about right.  Milwaukee limited the Knicks to just 37.8% shooting from the field and a season low 80 points.

While they didn’t do a great job on converting off missed 3-pointers, the Bucks did do a very good job of turning Knicks turnovers into Bucks points.  Milwaukee scored 31 points off 20 Knicks turnovers.  A strength advantage inside was also apparent, as the Bucks dominated the glass 45-34 and easily outscored the Knicks in the paint 46-32.

Final Thoughts

This is the first real complete game the Bucks have played all season.  Even in Boston, Milwaukee’s first quarter was kind of a let down.  There was no letting up against New York.  In a third quarter stretch when the Knicks were hinting at possibly having some interest in getting back into the game, Andrew Bogut rejected an Amar’e Stoudemire shot, ran the court and caught a between the legs pass from Jennings which he promptly flushed through the hoop, capping a 10-0 run to put the Bucks back up 24.  He roared to the crowd as the Knicks called a timeout and removed Stoudemire for the game for good.  The game was over, the Bucks would soon again be victors and the ship appeared back on course.

For now.

Jeremy Schmidt writes the Milwaukee Bucks blog Bucksketball.com.  Follow him on Twitter.  Then become a fan of Bucksketball on Facebook (to the right).

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Construction workers are trying to see if any positives can come out of the Bucks bricks over the first seven games.

“It’s starting to get a little bit ridiculous.” – Brandon Jennings

It really is, Brandon.  After another sub-40% shooting effort (38.6%) in their Saturday night 87-81 loss to the New Orleans Hornets, the Milwaukee Bucks saw their team shooting percentage fall under 40% for the season (okay, so 39.9%, but still).  More importantly, they saw the players who seemed to be coming around, regress.  Most importantly, they saw their record fall to 2-5.

Offense is first and foremost the biggest hurdle the Bucks have in front of them right now, but inside of this one, the Hornets were able to capitalize on a defensive match-up in the fourth quarter to hold onto their lead.

David West must have stopped somewhere in Wisconsin and picked up a deer hunting license for the way he was shooting down the Bucks Saturday.  He spent the majority of the game abusing smaller Bucks defenders in the post with incredible aggressiveness or killing them softly with an all touch fadeaway.  Before entering the game in the fourth quarter, West had already piled up 22 points on 10-11 shooting (he’d finish with 25, 10-12 FG 5-7 FT).  Out of other options, Scott Skiles went to Andrew Bogut on West in the fourth quarter .  New Orleans saw this as an opportunity.

As soon as Bogut picked up West, New Orleans planted him outside and saw the paint open up for them.  The Hornets scored eight of their 32 points in the paint in the final 6:32 of the fourth quarter after West checked in.  Hornets coach Monty Williams, saw an opportunity.

“As soon as they did that, Emeka posted up and got an and-1,” he said.  “If they take something away, we go to something else.  They didn’t want to double team tonight, I think because of our shooters.  We took advantage of what was there.”

Those shooters played a role in the quarter too.  The Hornets sandwiched threes from Trevor Ariza and Marco Belinelli around a Jennings three to maintain a seven point lead with under four minutes to go.  Milwaukee defenders repeatedly were beat off the dribble in the fourth quarter, forcing their teammates to collapse.  They could only watch helplessly as the Hornets hit two crucial, wide open threes.

Offense

As Jennings said, things have gotten ridiculous here.  Without a strong 9-18 fourth quarter, the Bucks shot just 35.3% for the game Saturday night.  Carlos Delfino, the early season reliable 3-point threat, was 1-6 from the field and 0-3 from deep before leaving with a neck strain.  Corey Maggette was 3-9, dropping his field goal percentage to 36.1%.  That’s impossibly bad for a player who shot better than 50% from the field on over 800 attempts last season.  Something is broken in the Milwaukee Bucks offense, but no on is really sure how to fix it.  That’s a problem.  Not everyone is suffering though.

• Bogut had a strong return to the Bucks lineup, scoring 19 points (7-11 FG 5-6 FT) while grabbing 14 rebounds.  Often, the Bucks find Bogut repeatedly in the first quarter and then forget about him late, but he attempted three shots in the second quarter and four in the third.  He didn’t take a shot from the field in the fourth, and while that seems to be a problem, it’s hard to argue with the Bucks fourth quarter offense.  Milwaukee scored 27 points on 9-18 shooting in the quarter.  Bogut did touch the ball, he shot two free throws and had a particularly nice behind the back feed to an open Drew Gooden for a jump shot, he just wasn’t put in position to shoot.  Maybe he needs to be more aggressive or maybe the team needs to improve on moving without the ball.  It seems like the offense slows down a lot when Bogut gets it inside.  Everyone waits for the defense to collapse, so they can get an open look that they haven’t been making this season anyway.  If Bogut is going to get the ball in the fourth quarter, Milwaukee will have to move off the ball better, to take advantage of his passing skills and prevent double teams.

• Early in the second quarter, I noted that points off turnovers would be important for the Bucks, as the Hornets were very giving with the ball and the Bucks offense wasn’t able to muster up much scoring elsewhere.  Things initially went well for the Bucks.  Generally a slow paced team, they had 10 fast break points in the first half, largely due to Hornets turnovers.  But many opportunities were blown, whether it was by a bad pass on a fast break or sloppy offense when the Hornets were able to get back.  Milwaukee scored just 21 points on 19 Hornets turnovers.

• Some have criticized the Bucks for not “taking it to the basked” enough.  It’s a popular criticism when a team is struggling offensively.  This team took it inside plenty though, taking 25 shots at the rim, compared to 15 for the Hornets.  The problem is conversion.  Milwaukee hit just 13 of their 25 at the rim attempts, for a paltry 52% shooting percentage.  The issue with Milwaukee doesn’t seem to be a lack of attempts at driving, but rather an indecisiveness inside.
  

  “We went to the rim tonight and several got swatted out of bounds or back at us,” Skiles said after the game.  “You gotta be able to go in there and either finish or draw the people and make proper plays.  And if a proper play is made, you’ve got to be able to make the shot, and that’s something we’ve struggled with.”

Defense

West is sure to give Bucks front court defenders nightmares after his two performances this season, but Chris Paul isn’t too shabby either.  Paul was a quiet assassin in this one, waiting until late to pick his spots offensively.  The league’s best point guard had six points in the game’s final six minutes, including two that sealed the deal with 21.5 to go on a floater most guards in the league wouldn’t dream of hitting regularly.  It looked like just another shot for Paul though.  Milwaukee tried to throw something different at him, guarding him with Luc Richard Mbah a Moute down the stretch, but it didn’t do much good.  Paul was amused when the though of Mbah a Moute being a challenge for him was presented and Monty Williams didn’t see it as much of a problem.

“We expected that, we talked about it a few games ago,” he said after the game.  “You’re not going to fool the great ones, they’ve seen every defense.  He’s played against bigger guys, he’s learned how to figure it out.”

• Defensively, the Bucks are still close to where they need to be to win games.  Outside of David West, the Hornets didn’t do much all night and had they missed their two open threes late in the game, may have dropped this one.  Milwaukee’s defensive rating of 96.7 (points per 100 possessions) is right where they want to be.

Final Thoughts

Milwaukee has to figure out how to make more shots.  It’s a simple statement about a complicated task.

Jeremy Schmidt writes the Milwaukee Bucks blog Bucksketball.com.  Follow him on Twitter.  Then become a fan of Bucksketball on Facebook (to the right).

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.