PG: Bucks Pound Thunder

[rilamann]

With the Celtics probably going 65-17 or 66-16, the Bucks could end up looking really smart that they kind of coasted all season to the #2 seed with 52 or 53 wins.

Think about it, had the Bucks went all-in on the regular season and went 64-18, they'd still be in the exact same position sitting at the #2 seed.

Have to get the #2 seed though, if the Bucks slip up in these final 11 games and slip to the #4 seed, then they will look like fools.

But if they can win 7 or 8 of these final 11 games and grab the #2 seed, they're going to come out smelling like roses and looking like geniuses.

[jakecronus8]

Shai is the prefect example of a guy whose name (rightfully) comes up in the MVP discussion, but will probably never actually win the award.

He'll get one. He's young enough and as we saw with Embiid last year, eventually it'll be "his turn" whether he deserves it or not.

His chances greatly go up by leaving OKC and that is some BS but the cold hard truth.

If Giannis was a Knick he'd have 4-5 MVPs right now.

[chonestown]

With the Celtics probably going 65-17 or 66-16, the Bucks could end up looking really smart that they kind of coasted all season to the #2 seed with 52 or 53 wins.

Think about it, had the Bucks went all-in on the regular season and went 64-18, they'd still be in the exact same position sitting at the #2 seed.

Have to get the #2 seed though, if the Bucks slip up in these final 11 games and slip to the #4 seed, then they will look like fools.

But if they can win 7 or 8 of these final 11 games and grab the #2 seed, they're going to come out smelling like roses and looking like geniuses.

Wouldn't coasting mean playing starters less?

Probably more accurate to say they underperformed record-wise without affecting seeding.

[Turk Nowitzki]

With the Celtics probably going 65-17 or 66-16, the Bucks could end up looking really smart that they kind of coasted all season to the #2 seed with 52 or 53 wins.

Think about it, had the Bucks went all-in on the regular season and went 64-18, they'd still be in the exact same position sitting at the #2 seed.

Have to get the #2 seed though, if the Bucks slip up in these final 11 games and slip to the #4 seed, then they will look like fools.

But if they can win 7 or 8 of these final 11 games and grab the #2 seed, they're going to come out smelling like roses and looking like geniuses.

What does "going all in on the regular season" mean and how is it different than what we've been doing? They're in a good spot for everything that's gone on this season but we don't have to invent some sort of fake narrative around it.

[Jez2983]

I wonder why OKC set basically no screens for Shai? And when they did they were poor. Beasley and Lillard can do ok in a man to man situation, and they sure did tonight.

Excellent coaching by Doc, OKC need a solution.

OKC seemed to decide the play was screen for Shai to get Dame switched on him then ISO him. Dame did a great job of forcing him middle towards Brook and Giannis.

For as good of a shooting team as OKC is, you can leave Giddy, Dort, and several bench guys open and recover on close outs due to slow and/or hesitant releases from league average or below three point shooters.

You basically treat Shai like teams treat Giannis. Dare Dort and Giddy to beat you.

Yep, makes sense. In my head initiating with Giddy, who is taller, would have made more sense, along with getting Shai loose on some off-ball screens and having him catch on the move. Oh well, not our problem to fix their issues.

Just so many excellent defensive efforts tonight, Pat Bev on Joe, Bobby was making an effort to wave his hands around more to disrupt passing lanes, Beas' dive on the floor, Pat shelving his fly-bys on the perimeter and that excellent D on the challenge. And Dame has really been working hard on that end for a few games now.

Imagine the score line if we hit more of our threes, or Dame getting more FTs/hitting some early ones.

[Jez2983]

With the Celtics probably going 65-17 or 66-16, the Bucks could end up looking really smart that they kind of coasted all season to the #2 seed with 52 or 53 wins.

Think about it, had the Bucks went all-in on the regular season and went 64-18, they'd still be in the exact same position sitting at the #2 seed.

Have to get the #2 seed though, if the Bucks slip up in these final 11 games and slip to the #4 seed, then they will look like fools.

But if they can win 7 or 8 of these final 11 games and grab the #2 seed, they're going to come out smelling like roses and looking like geniuses.

What does "going all in on the regular season" mean and how is it different than what we've been doing? They're in a good spot for everything that's gone on this season but we don't have to invent some sort of fake narrative around it.

Yeah we aren't coasting, a lot of the season has been a struggle. It's just good to see more good than bad, and that players are finally starting to thrive, not just survive.

[rilamann]

With the Celtics probably going 65-17 or 66-16, the Bucks could end up looking really smart that they kind of coasted all season to the #2 seed with 52 or 53 wins.

Think about it, had the Bucks went all-in on the regular season and went 64-18, they'd still be in the exact same position sitting at the #2 seed.

Have to get the #2 seed though, if the Bucks slip up in these final 11 games and slip to the #4 seed, then they will look like fools.

But if they can win 7 or 8 of these final 11 games and grab the #2 seed, they're going to come out smelling like roses and looking like geniuses.

Wouldn't coasting mean playing starters less?

Probably more accurate to say they underperformed record-wise without affecting seeding.

I think playing with half ass effort half the time is coasting.

I've watched all the games this season, Bucks have played with a preseason level of effort and intensity a lot this season. I guess that is pretty much the same thing as underperforming.

You honestly think that when the Bucks lost to the Grizzly's G-league squad that they were playing with a high level of effort? Or when they lost by almost 30 at home to a shorthanded Heat team?

Or how about when they lost by 35 to a mediocre Kings team that is struggling to stay out of the play-in?

Last night against the OKC, the Bucks played with a high level of effort and defensive intensity. If they the Bucks had hypothetically played with that level of effort and intensity for all 82 games, Bucks probably win somewhere between 60/65 games IMO.

Which still would only be good enough for the same #2 seed that can probably grab with about 52 wins.

You could say in the long run it was smart because when you coast as I call it, it puts you at less risk of fatigue and injuries.

[rilamann]

With the Celtics probably going 65-17 or 66-16, the Bucks could end up looking really smart that they kind of coasted all season to the #2 seed with 52 or 53 wins.

Think about it, had the Bucks went all-in on the regular season and went 64-18, they'd still be in the exact same position sitting at the #2 seed.

Have to get the #2 seed though, if the Bucks slip up in these final 11 games and slip to the #4 seed, then they will look like fools.

But if they can win 7 or 8 of these final 11 games and grab the #2 seed, they're going to come out smelling like roses and looking like geniuses.

What does "going all in on the regular season" mean and how is it different than what we've been doing? They're in a good spot for everything that's gone on this season but we don't have to invent some sort of fake narrative around it.

Losing to the Grizzly's G-league team and losing by 30+ to a bunch of mediocre teams like the Kings and Warriors is what I call not going all-in on the regular season.

What I am saying is the Bucks could be a banged up and fatigued team that had went all-in trying win 60 games, and they would still be same #2 seed that can be if they go 7-4 in these final 11 games.

Unless you actually think that the Bucks were going 110% in every game since October. Maybe you think that, in that case I can see why you are getting upset here.

[Dick Tate]

Giannis coasting at MVP level

[MiltownMadness]

This is the third TV game he's done. The first and this one he was good. The second one he was stumbling for some reason. Misidentified players, got other stuff wrong. But overall yes he's much better than Lisa

He has a terrible habit of making tiny errors that only Bucks nerds would notice. You get over it quickly but always notice it. Better with time I'd assume

No different than Marques calling Chet "Holmgrem" all game

Eh, it's a little different. Koehn says a bunch of statistical errors on the radio, then he won't correct himself so you have the player stats all messed up in your mind. This is only annoying for a very specific demographic of basketball nerds. This is mainly a radio thing and a reason why I think he is better suited for TV. Also he just kind of fumbles over his words often because he doesn't really have a cohost to take the pressure off. I'd say it's a lot different really

[CharityStripe34]

With the Celtics probably going 65-17 or 66-16, the Bucks could end up looking really smart that they kind of coasted all season to the #2 seed with 52 or 53 wins.

Think about it, had the Bucks went all-in on the regular season and went 64-18, they'd still be in the exact same position sitting at the #2 seed.

Have to get the #2 seed though, if the Bucks slip up in these final 11 games and slip to the #4 seed, then they will look like fools.

But if they can win 7 or 8 of these final 11 games and grab the #2 seed, they're going to come out smelling like roses and looking like geniuses.

Wouldn't coasting mean playing starters less?

Probably more accurate to say they underperformed record-wise without affecting seeding.

I think playing with half ass effort half the time is coasting.

I've watched all the games this season, Bucks have played with a preseason level of effort and intensity a lot this season. I guess that is pretty much the same thing as underperforming.

You honestly think that when the Bucks lost to the Grizzly's G-league squad that they were playing with a high level of effort? Or when they lost by almost 30 at home to a shorthanded Heat team?

Or how about when they lost by 35 to a mediocre Kings team that is struggling to stay out of the play-in?

Last night against the OKC, the Bucks played with a high level of effort and defensive intensity. If they the Bucks had hypothetically played with that level of effort and intensity for all 82 games, Bucks probably win somewhere between 60/65 games IMO.

Which still would only be good enough for the same #2 seed that can probably grab with about 52 wins.

You could say in the long run it was smart because when you coast as I call it, it puts you at less risk of fatigue and injuries.

It's also a bit more complicated than just effort. There was the (as we now know) bizarre locker-room environment with Griffin, integrating Dame to the team, some poor coaching strategy that didn't fit the roster, coaching change mid-season and the ensuing adjustment, etc.

Sure, in general and older veteran squad isn't going to go balls out for 82 games. But they've also struggled to maintain a level of consistency and have let some games slip away. I think the theme of this season has simply been inconsistency both with coaching as well as the roster.

[rilamann]

Giannis coasting at MVP level

Of course Giannis doesn't coast.

I guess I should have used the disclaimer that the team coasted with the exception of Giannis. I didn't think that it would have to be said.


I made the mistake of assuming this board as more common sense than it actually does. My bad.

[soxperry]

With the Celtics probably going 65-17 or 66-16, the Bucks could end up looking really smart that they kind of coasted all season to the #2 seed with 52 or 53 wins.

Think about it, had the Bucks went all-in on the regular season and went 64-18, they'd still be in the exact same position sitting at the #2 seed.

Have to get the #2 seed though, if the Bucks slip up in these final 11 games and slip to the #4 seed, then they will look like fools.

But if they can win 7 or 8 of these final 11 games and grab the #2 seed, they're going to come out smelling like roses and looking like geniuses.

What does "going all in on the regular season" mean and how is it different than what we've been doing? They're in a good spot for everything that's gone on this season but we don't have to invent some sort of fake narrative around it.

agree. i think the way to sum up where we are is basically that it is a significant loss that we started the year with a coaching situation like that. and we may not have time to get things completely in order by the time they need to be. but we are heading in the right direction and our peak is very high. next year should be pretty amazing, all things considered. right now, we just need to hope for the best.

[chonestown]

Giannis coasting at MVP level

Of course Giannis doesn't coast.

I guess I should have used the disclaimer that the team coasted with the exception of Giannis. I didn't think that it would have to be said.


I made the mistake of assuming this board as more common sense than it actually does. My bad.

The Barc of Lounger Theory of In-Game Load Management you might have something here except you do not have something here

[Dick Tate]

Giannis coasting at MVP level

Of course Giannis doesn't coast.

I guess I should have used the disclaimer that the team coasted with the exception of Giannis. I didn't think that it would have to be said.


I made the mistake of assuming this board as more common sense than it actually does. My bad.

Every Bucks game I watch, I like Dame a little less.

I hope to hell we trade his overrated ass this off-season.

Please lecture us more about using common sense.

[rilamann]

Wouldn't coasting mean playing starters less?

Probably more accurate to say they underperformed record-wise without affecting seeding.

I think playing with half ass effort half the time is coasting.

I've watched all the games this season, Bucks have played with a preseason level of effort and intensity a lot this season. I guess that is pretty much the same thing as underperforming.

You honestly think that when the Bucks lost to the Grizzly's G-league squad that they were playing with a high level of effort? Or when they lost by almost 30 at home to a shorthanded Heat team?

Or how about when they lost by 35 to a mediocre Kings team that is struggling to stay out of the play-in?

Last night against the OKC, the Bucks played with a high level of effort and defensive intensity. If they the Bucks had hypothetically played with that level of effort and intensity for all 82 games, Bucks probably win somewhere between 60/65 games IMO.

Which still would only be good enough for the same #2 seed that can probably grab with about 52 wins.

You could say in the long run it was smart because when you coast as I call it, it puts you at less risk of fatigue and injuries.

It's also a bit more complicated than just effort. There was the (as we now know) bizarre locker-room environment with Griffin, integrating Dame to the team, some poor coaching strategy that didn't fit the roster, coaching change mid-season and the ensuing adjustment, etc.

Sure, in general and older veteran squad isn't going to go balls out for 82 games. But they've also struggled to maintain a level of consistency and have let some games slip away. I think the theme of this season has simply been inconsistency both with coaching as well as the roster.

There have been other factors involved like you point out here, it's been a pretty crazy up and down ride of regular season.

But I don't think the effort has been great a lot of nights this season.

I actually think that it's smart in a way and could end working out in our favor.

Basically what I am saying is imagine if this old veteran team had went 110% every night since October. Sure, we might be sitting at around 60 wins right now, but we'd probably be worn out and banged up and with Boston 65+ games, we'd still be the #2 seed away.

All I am saying here is essentially is that we're probably better than our record and despite the many bad losses over the course of the season, things might turn out just fine in the end.

This is what I get for being optimistic for a change.

[emunney]

He has a terrible habit of making tiny errors that only Bucks nerds would notice. You get over it quickly but always notice it. Better with time I'd assume

No different than Marques calling Chet "Holmgrem" all game

Eh, it's a little different. Koehn says a bunch of statistical errors on the radio, then he won't correct himself so you have the player stats all messed up in your mind. This is only annoying for a very specific demographic of basketball nerds. This is mainly a radio thing and a reason why I think he is better suited for TV. Also he just kind of fumbles over his words often because he doesn't really have a cohost to take the pressure off. I'd say it's a lot different really

My pet peeve with Koehn on the radio is that he will go 10-15 minutes without reporting the score. He only reports the differential. I acknowledge this is a me problem but it drives me nuts.

[RRyder823]

With the Celtics probably going 65-17 or 66-16, the Bucks could end up looking really smart that they kind of coasted all season to the #2 seed with 52 or 53 wins.

Think about it, had the Bucks went all-in on the regular season and went 64-18, they'd still be in the exact same position sitting at the #2 seed.

Have to get the #2 seed though, if the Bucks slip up in these final 11 games and slip to the #4 seed, then they will look like fools.

But if they can win 7 or 8 of these final 11 games and grab the #2 seed, they're going to come out smelling like roses and looking like geniuses.

Wouldn't coasting mean playing starters less?

Probably more accurate to say they underperformed record-wise without affecting seeding.

I think playing with half ass effort half the time is coasting.

I've watched all the games this season, Bucks have played with a preseason level of effort and intensity a lot this season. I guess that is pretty much the same thing as underperforming.

You honestly think that when the Bucks lost to the Grizzly's G-league squad that they were playing with a high level of effort? Or when they lost by almost 30 at home to a shorthanded Heat team?

Or how about when they lost by 35 to a mediocre Kings team that is struggling to stay out of the play-in?

Last night against the OKC, the Bucks played with a high level of effort and defensive intensity. If they the Bucks had hypothetically played with that level of effort and intensity for all 82 games, Bucks probably win somewhere between 60/65 games IMO.

Which still would only be good enough for the same #2 seed that can probably grab with about 52 wins.

You could say in the long run it was smart because when you coast as I call it, it puts you at less risk of fatigue and injuries.

When they win=Played with intensity

When they lose= Coasted

Get a lil mental toughness coment in there and it's a vintage Rilamann post

Sent from my SM-S918U using RealGM mobile app

[MiltownMadness]

No different than Marques calling Chet "Holmgrem" all game

Eh, it's a little different. Koehn says a bunch of statistical errors on the radio, then he won't correct himself so you have the player stats all messed up in your mind. This is only annoying for a very specific demographic of basketball nerds. This is mainly a radio thing and a reason why I think he is better suited for TV. Also he just kind of fumbles over his words often because he doesn't really have a cohost to take the pressure off. I'd say it's a lot different really

My pet peeve with Koehn on the radio is that he will go 10-15 minutes without reporting the score. He only reports the differential. I acknowledge this is a me problem but it drives me nuts.

NOT A YOU PROBLEM! I have an app called TheScore where I have to look at the score all the time because he won't say it. This problem wouldn't exist with TV. I really do hope he gets called up to do TV because there's a lot I like about him, but I doubt it

[rilamann]

Giannis coasting at MVP level

Of course Giannis doesn't coast.

I guess I should have used the disclaimer that the team coasted with the exception of Giannis. I didn't think that it would have to be said.


I made the mistake of assuming this board as more common sense than it actually does. My bad.

Every Bucks game I watch, I like Dame a little less.

I hope to hell we trade his overrated ass this off-season.

Please lecture us more about using common sense.

If you're arguing against the idea that team has coasted.

I don't know if Dame is the guy you want to bring up. Dame's brain doesn't even look like it's in Milwaukee half the time he's been on court this season.

And nice try with the gotcha with Dame. I still stand 110% behind those two statements.

What did Dame have last night? Like 2pts at the half on like 1-6 shooting? Then hit a couple 3's when we were already up big kind of big to finish 4-12 with 11pts.