Page 3 of 4
Re: Hollinger: Bucks 9th in East, 38-44
Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 6:29 pm
by GHOSTofSIKMA
europa wrote:Besides adding some length in the frontcourt where is this team noticeably better than the one that couldn't beat a good team to save its life after the trade? You still have a gigantic question mark in the backcourt; there are massive defensive questions at PG, SG and SF (without Moute); we still need to see which Ilyasova will show up consistently long term and who the hell knows what Skiles is going to do. I don't think it's difficult at all to believe this team could regress, especially if Skiles zones out.
yes we got by beat by every decent team we played last year for the last 3/4 of the season. we literally couldnt have done worse. and youre suggesting that is why we'll do even more worse this year?
that math doesnt add up. for us to do worse the team would have to regress, we would have to start losing more to lotto teams, and still manage not to beat virtually ANY of the playoff teams. with the improvements that have been made that is HIGHLY unlikely.
i agree it would be POSSIBLE to regress if every question mark on the team went stone cold against us. but since when is that how you write a balanced review.
Re: Hollinger: Bucks 9th in East, 38-44
Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 6:32 pm
by europa
EastSideBucksFan wrote:europa wrote:Besides adding some length in the frontcourt where is this team noticeably better than the one that couldn't beat a good team to save its life after the trade? You still have a gigantic question mark in the backcourt; there are massive defensive questions at PG, SG and SF (without Moute); we still need to see which Ilyasova will show up consistently long term and who the hell knows what Skiles is going to do. I don't think it's difficult at all to believe this team could regress, especially if Skiles zones out.
The Bucks had great length in the backcourt last season.
Stephen Jackson & Shaun Livingston....where did that get us?
Who said length was the only thing needed to defend? Jennings is a marginal defender at best, Ellis is pathetic, Udrih is terrible and Dunleavy is putrid defensively at SG. This team has major defensive issues on the perimeter in my opinion without Moute.
I'm not worried about the offense. I think this team will be able to score for the most part - especially if the Ilyasova we saw post-break is the one we'll always see now - although I do wonder how effective the offense will be against good teams. I'm glad the Bucks got longer and stronger up front. Unfortunately, they may need every bit of that length and strength because it could be an easy pass ride to the hoop a lot of nights - especially when Moute is out.
Re: Hollinger: Bucks 9th in East, 38-44
Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 6:33 pm
by europa
GHOSTofSIKMA wrote:europa wrote:Besides adding some length in the frontcourt where is this team noticeably better than the one that couldn't beat a good team to save its life after the trade? You still have a gigantic question mark in the backcourt; there are massive defensive questions at PG, SG and SF (without Moute); we still need to see which Ilyasova will show up consistently long term and who the hell knows what Skiles is going to do. I don't think it's difficult at all to believe this team could regress, especially if Skiles zones out.
yes we got by beat by every decent team we played last year for the last 3/4 of the season. we literally couldnt have done worse. and youre suggesting that is why we'll do even more worse this year?
No. I'm saying this team stunk against good teams last season. In order to show meaningful improvement this season it will have to beat good teams. Where is the sense of confidence I should feel that will occur? Blind faith is nice but I'd like something tangible to grasp onto if I'm going to predict/expect meaningful improvement from this team.
Re: Hollinger: Bucks 9th in East, 38-44
Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 6:47 pm
by GHOSTofSIKMA
europa wrote:
No. I'm saying this team stunk against good teams last season. In order to show meaningful improvement this season it will have to beat good teams. Where is the sense of confidence I should feel that will occur? Blind faith is nice but I'd like something tangible to grasp onto if I'm going to predict/expect meaningful improvement from this team.
my posts have been about hollingers expectation of regression from last year with the moves that have been made. my expectation of how much we'll improve has nothing to do with that. get on topic.
Re: Hollinger: Bucks 9th in East, 38-44
Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 6:49 pm
by europa
GHOSTofSIKMA wrote:europa wrote:
No. I'm saying this team stunk against good teams last season. In order to show meaningful improvement this season it will have to beat good teams. Where is the sense of confidence I should feel that will occur? Blind faith is nice but I'd like something tangible to grasp onto if I'm going to predict/expect meaningful improvement from this team.
my posts have been about hollingers expectation of regression from last year with the moves that have been made.
And I'm saying it's not difficult to envision a potential regression for the reasons I stated.
Re: Hollinger: Bucks 9th in East, 38-44
Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 7:55 pm
by ampd
europa wrote:Besides adding some length in the frontcourt where is this team noticeably better than the one that couldn't beat a good team to save its life after the trade?
We aren't starting Gooden at C.
Also any one of Jennings / Ellis meshing well, Tobes breaking out, Jennings continuing his preseason efficiency into the regular season, or Monta returning to his pre moped accident form would put us over the top.
I don't know that we will be a lot better against good teams but we will definitely be different without Gooden logging major minutes at the 5.
Re: Hollinger: Bucks 9th in East, 38-44
Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 7:58 pm
by europa
ampd wrote:europa wrote:Besides adding some length in the frontcourt where is this team noticeably better than the one that couldn't beat a good team to save its life after the trade?
We aren't starting Gooden at C.
That's the one definitive upgrade I see. Of course, that could be underminded by Skiles still playing Gooden more than he should play.
I'd say Tobes at SF if I had any confidence that Skiles will use him properly but I don't.
Re: Hollinger: Bucks 9th in East, 38-44
Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 8:03 pm
by averageposter
I still feel like there will be a trade to shore up the perimeter and clear some of the log jam at the front. It would be great if it were Gooden.
Every time I feel like he has no value I just remind myself he's played for nine teams some of them twice and been traded like a half dozen times. Gooden has been the same player throughout. I think someone takes him at some point. We probably need a team with playoff aspirations to get thin up front. Kevin Love going down is well covered by the wolves but an injury like that to a different playoff bound team might open the door.
Re: Hollinger: Bucks 9th in East, 38-44
Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 8:11 pm
by ampd
europa wrote:I'd say Tobes at SF if I had any confidence that Skiles will use him properly but I don't.
Yeah I have this fear also. The last couple games he got the Bogut treatment where we ran a post up to him the first couple times down the floor and then never got another play the rest of the night
Re: Hollinger: Bucks 9th in East, 38-44
Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 8:13 pm
by europa
ampd wrote:europa wrote:I'd say Tobes at SF if I had any confidence that Skiles will use him properly but I don't.
Yeah I have this fear also. The last couple games he got the Bogut treatment where we ran a post up to him the first couple times down the floor and then never got another play the rest of the night
Skiles is possibly my biggest concern going into this season. I simply don't trust him at this point to play the players who deserve to play or utilize them properly.
Re: Hollinger: Bucks 9th in East, 38-44
Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 8:16 pm
by ampd
I am at least a little encouraged by his starting Larry Sanders in the pre season, but whether thats because he has any intention of playing the young guys or he is just sending a message to fat Dalembert to get in shape is a question I don't have the answer to
Re: Hollinger: Bucks 9th in East, 38-44
Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 8:19 pm
by AussieBuck
You can't ignore the Gooden parts, it's like the year his preview had us improving because we added another second tier star in Maggette to add to Bogut. Just about everything Hollinger writes is clouded by his belief that PER isn't fundamentally flawed.
Re: Hollinger: Bucks 9th in East, 38-44
Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 2:39 am
by jeremyd236
I completely agree with what he said about our bench. It's going to be very solid this year, the best in years. The only problem is our starters are marginally better, if at all, than our bench players.
Re: Hollinger: Bucks 9th in East, 38-44
Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 2:46 am
by Rockmaninoff
Bucks can be better than 38-44 if Skiles eschews the typical salary and tenure politics, and plays the guys that are for real.
Re: Hollinger: Bucks 9th in East, 38-44
Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 2:50 am
by ReasonablySober
Rockmaninoff wrote:Bucks can be better than 38-44 if Skiles eschews the typical salary and tenure politics, and plays the guys that are for real.
Absolutely.
Not going to happen.
Re: Hollinger: Bucks 9th in East, 38-44
Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 3:25 am
by paul
DrugBust wrote:Rockmaninoff wrote:Bucks can be better than 38-44 if Skiles eschews the typical salary and tenure politics, and plays the guys that are for real.
Absolutely.
Not going to happen.
Yup.
Re: Hollinger: Bucks 9th in East, 38-44
Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 12:05 pm
by CanadaBucks
Treebeard wrote:On a related note....
CBS Sportsline evaluation of the Central
1. Indiana
2. Chicago
http://www.cbssports.com/nba/blog/eye-on-basketball/20580583/2012-13-eob-nba-division-previews-central-divisionOn The Cliff: What do you make of the Milwaukee Bucks? They've changed who they are with the Andrew Bogut trade that brought in Ekpe Udoh and Monta Ellis. They've stockpiled a closet full of long, lanky forwards. They've got some scorers, some good defenders and some potential breakout players.
But are they any good?
You can pencil the Bucks in for at least 30 wins for sure. That's a guarantee (good health assumed). Are they a playoff team though? Can they make a surprise push and reinstate Fearing the Deer? Can Brandon Jennings break through? Can Ersan Ilyasova be a star? What does a full season of Ellis and Jennings look like? Are John Henson, Udoh and Larry Sanders the same person?
There's a whole lot to like about this Bucks team, and a whole lot to dislike. They're close to being something it seems, but it's hard to know what.
Think this is the art of saying something without saying anything.
Re: Hollinger: Bucks 9th in East, 38-44
Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 12:10 pm
by CanadaBucks
InsideOut wrote:Optimists hate the article while realists think it is mostly accurate (except Gooden). Shocked
We go through this every season when the articles pick the Bucks to finish below .500 and miss the playoffs.
Not sure why people who disagree are optimists and people who agree are realists, couldn't it be the other way around and your optimists are realists and realists are pessimists? Just because it's your opinion doesn't make you a realist, an opinion is just that....
Re: Hollinger: Bucks 9th in East, 38-44
Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 2:02 pm
by InsideOut
CanadaBucks wrote:InsideOut wrote:Optimists hate the article while realists think it is mostly accurate (except Gooden). Shocked
We go through this every season when the articles pick the Bucks to finish below .500 and miss the playoffs.
Not sure why people who disagree are optimists and people who agree are realists, couldn't it be the other way around and your optimists are realists and realists are pessimists? Just because it's your opinion doesn't make you a realist, an opinion is just that....
This optimist/realist/pessimist topic goes back well over half a decade so I'm guessing you are too new to get the meaning of the post. Another example of this is when you see people write optimists win when the Bucks do something good. But either way thanks for the lecture mom.
Re: Hollinger: Bucks 9th in East, 38-44
Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 2:07 pm
by paul
Hush up IO, optimists win
