Nellie's Bucks

[ceiling raiser]

Nelson coached them for 11 years (well, he took over during 76-77):

77: 27-37, -2.99 SRS, missed playoffs (12 ranked O, 21st ranked D)
78: 44-38, -0.59 SRS, beat PHO, lose to DEN (8th ranked O, 19th ranked D)
79: 38-44, 2.12 SRS, missed playoffs (6th ranked O, 13th ranked D)
80: 49-33, 3.56 SRS, lose to SEA (5th ranked O, 8th ranked D)
81: 60-22, 7.14 SRS, lose to PHI (2nd ranked O, 3rd ranked D)
82: 55-27, 4.38 SRS, lose to PHI (9th ranked O, 1st ranked D)
83: 51-31, 4.32 SRS, beat BOS, lose to PHI (10th ranked O, 6th ranked D)
84: 50-32, 4.04 SRS, beat ATL, beat NJN, lose to BOS (12th ranked O, 2nd ranked D)
85: 59-23, 6.70 SRS, beat CHI, lose to PHI (6th ranked O, 2nd ranked D)
86: 57-25, 8.69 SRS, beat NJN, beat PHI, lose to BOS (4th ranked O, 2nd ranked D)
87: 50-32, 4.05 SRS, beat PHI, lose to BOS (7th ranked O, 4th ranked D)

83 guys played for them during this span, 6 for 10k+ minutes:

Sidney Moncrief 19032
Marques Johnson 18240
Junior Bridgeman 16408
Brian Winters 15627
Quinn Buckner 12154
Paul Pressey 10895

and 7 more for 5k-10k minutes:

Alston Lister 8929
Terry Cummings 8161
Bob Lanier 7463
Harvey Catchings 7314
Craig Hodges 6382
Dave Meyers 5882
Ricky Pierce 5534

http://bkref.com/tiny/4iDSs

Some questions to drive the conversation:

1) What went right, and what went wrong?
2) What are some of the innovative things these Bucks teams tried?
3) From 81-87, they lost to Philly 4 times, and Boston 3 times. What was the reason for this? Matchups, or just a super tough conference?
4) Before the 80-81 season Milwaukee (along with Chicago) moved to the West, and the Spurs/Rockets moved to the East. If this realignment doesn't happen, how does Milwaukee fare in the playoffs from 81-87?
5) Thoughts in general on the Bucks offense? Defense?

[ronnymac2]

The early 80's Bucks were the most athletic team of the their era — yes, including the Showtime Lakers in my opinion — and one of the most athletic ever. Johnson/Moncrief/Bridgeman on a fastbreak is a thunderous dunk every time.

The team at the 2/3/4 was extremely athletic and long throughout the 80's, and then they'd at various times have either Dave Cowens and/or Bob Lanier at the end of their careers manning the middle and giving them a physical presence inside. Pressey/Moncrief/Johnson at different times were the primary ball-handler.

Maybe their weakness was that they never had that true top point guard that could direct all these superb athletes and execute an offense.

[Owly]

Nelson coached them for 11 years (well, he took over during 76-77):

77: 27-37, -2.99 SRS, missed playoffs (12 ranked O, 21st ranked D)
78: 44-38, -0.59 SRS, beat PHO, lose to DEN (8th ranked O, 19th ranked D)
79: 38-44, 2.12 SRS, missed playoffs (6th ranked O, 13th ranked D)
80: 49-33, 3.56 SRS, lose to SEA (5th ranked O, 8th ranked D)
81: 60-22, 7.14 SRS, lose to PHI (2nd ranked O, 3rd ranked D)
82: 55-27, 4.38 SRS, lose to PHI (9th ranked O, 1st ranked D)
83: 51-31, 4.32 SRS, beat BOS, lose to PHI (10th ranked O, 6th ranked D)
84: 50-32, 4.04 SRS, beat ATL, beat NJN, lose to BOS (12th ranked O, 2nd ranked D)
85: 59-23, 6.70 SRS, beat CHI, lose to PHI (6th ranked O, 2nd ranked D)
86: 57-25, 8.69 SRS, beat NJN, beat PHI, lose to BOS (4th ranked O, 2nd ranked D)
87: 50-32, 4.05 SRS, beat PHI, lose to BOS (7th ranked O, 4th ranked D)

83 guys played for them during this span, 6 for 10k+ minutes:

Sidney Moncrief 19032
Marques Johnson 18240
Junior Bridgeman 16408
Brian Winters 15627
Quinn Buckner 12154
Paul Pressey 10895

and 7 more for 5k-10k minutes:

Alston Lister 8929
Terry Cummings 8161
Bob Lanier 7463
Harvey Catchings 7314
Craig Hodges 6382
Dave Meyers 5882
Ricky Pierce 5534

http://bkref.com/tiny/4iDSs

Some questions to drive the conversation:

1) What went right, and what went wrong? Right: Talent Acquisition. The Cummings-Johnson trade. Rebuilding on the fly. Wrong: Timing, their best years coincided with some epic Boston years (and heck even when they sweep Boston they run into epic Philly); Moncrief's body.
2) What are some of the innovative things these Bucks teams tried? Most obviously Johnson and Pressey as point forwards (not wholly original ... John Johnson etc). Lanier and Sikma were both centers who could play away from the post which could give them different looks.
3) From 81-87, they lost to Philly 4 times, and Boston 3 times. What was the reason for this? Matchups, or just a super tough conference? Haven't seen enough to know. The latter might be nearly enough by itself because going through one elite team usually wasn't enough. Then add in luck and maybe matchups too.
4) Before the 80-81 season Milwaukee (along with Chicago) moved to the West, and the Spurs/Rockets moved to the East. If this realignment doesn't happen, how does Milwaukee fare in the playoffs from 81-87? Probably better though the West didn't get really soft (Lakers aside) until mid-decade. Combine that with Moncrief somehow staying healthy and the actual things like Pierce's development; a weirdly peaking 33 year old pickup John Lucas and you have yourself a very serious contender (not that they weren't that anyway, just they'll have a better chance, favourable conditions).
5) Thoughts in general on the Bucks offense? Defense?

[ceiling raiser]

For those who were watching at the time (or have read a bit), were the Bucks taken seriously? Somebody on another site mentioned that they were similar to the Clips presently (with the Spurs/Thunder being considered better), who many don't look at as a contender (for right or wrong).

[penbeast0]

They were considered a second tier contender; the only teams considered "true" title threats in this period were LA, Boston, and Philly with much bigger names and actual titles. They were in the next tier with teams like San Antonio and Atlanta though pretty consistently the best of that tier. Oh, and at that time, Don Nelson was considered one of the best coaches around (today his rep is considerably worse) and the team weakness was generally considered to be center -- not that Lister, Breuer, Lanier, Sikma, etc. were bad but they were none of them all-star caliber (during their Bucks tenures) and they were competing with the primes of Moses and Parish plus the slightly past prime but still all-time great Kareem.

[TrueLAfan]

What the Bucks lacked was toughness and leadership. Marques Johnson was, rightly or wrongly, perceived as a bit selfish. (His contract holdout didn’t help.) Moncrief was wonderful but maybe too deferential. Lanier brought some necessary value in those areas, and Lanier’s impact on the team (far) exceeded his numbers. The Bucks were 29-27 when they traded for Lanier in 1980. They went 20-6 the rest of the way, and averaged 54 wins a game the rest of the time he was there. His knees were a mess by then. Nelly did with Lanier what the Spurs do with Duncan now…limit his minutes in the RS so he’d be ready to go in the playoffs. It largely worked; Lanier averaged 16 and 8 and over three and half assists a game in 32 mpg in the postseason in his first three years. The Bucks players knew how bad Lanier’s knees were and how painful it was for him to be on the court. It may sound corny, but it was inspiring.

When Lanier retired and the team shook up its roster in 1985, there was short term success. The team had great perimeter D; really, the Bucks’ outside players were just solid at that time. Cummings played outside a lot for a PF of the time (as Sikma did when he arrived). This was before Cummings blew out his knee…and Terry Cummings would have been a mortal lock for the HOF if he hadn’t gotten hurt. Really, he still has a great case. He averaged 21 and 9 on about 50% shooting in his first 10 seasons, and upped that a bit in the playoffs. He got MVP votes in four seasons, and made a second and third all-NBA team as a Buck. He’s largely forgotten now; he was a terrific player. Although he was/is a religious fella, Cummings was tough too. He and Barkley had a personal war in the 1986 playoffs.

One of the interesting things about those Bucks teams (and, really, was unusual for Nelly teams) was the emphasis on perimeter D. Lanier was tough, but still had the bad knees and played about half the available minutes as a Buck. Alton Lister helped. Most of the team’s strength on D was predicated on perimeter D (Moncrief, Pressey, Buckner). And, although they were athletic (really, kind of super athletic), the Bucks were a slow paced team by the standards of the 80s. You slugged it out with the Bucks. They were a physical team—and were even more physical on the perimeter.

And, really, Nelly platooned a lot. That’s the most unusual thing I remember. Although Marques Johnson and Sidney Moncrief and Terry Cummings were legitimate stars, pretty much nobody (other than Marques and Moncrief and Pressey) played over 35 mpg. Even Terry Cummings didn’t play 35 mpg. There’s a whole list of people—Lanier, Lister, Winters, Buckner, Bridgeman, Pierce, Breuer, Sikma, Hodges, Mickey Johnson—that were 22-33 mpg players. Looking at that list of players, it may show Nelly’s genius … Lanier and Sikma were older. Most of the other players were just good, but not great. The Bucks generally had about one and a half stars to pair with that group, and they were winning 50+ pretty much every year.

It wasn’t really a “point forward” thing with those Bucks teams. Everyone passed well. (Well, except Lister and Breuer.) The Bucks really didn’t have ball dominant players in those years. Even Pressey, who was the only Bucks player in that time period to start over 40 games and average over 6 assists, wasn’t a really high usage guy. You didn’t ever have 8 apg guys with the 80s Bucks. But you had a whole lot of 3.5 to 6 apg guys. Like I said, Paul Pressey averaged 6.8, 7.2, and 7.8 apg in his best years. That’s three seasons out of seven with a player getting 6 apg. That’s low. But there were something like 22 other players that got between 3.5 and 6 apg…3 or 4 a year. This went with the platooning thing. The Bucks players assist totally from 1980 to 1987 look really weird. Other than Pressey, nobody had over 400 assists in a year. But 28 players—4 a year!—had between 225 and 385. The only team this year that has more than two players with 225 to 400 assists is the Pelicans. Like I said, weird.

In general, I think some statistical analysis overstates the value of the Bucks. The 1981 Bucks were a great team; the 1986 Bucks weren’t. SRS says the 1986 Bucks were better than the Lakers. That’s ridiculous. But you had to take the Bucks seriously. If you’re winning 50-60 games a year (which the Bucks did from 1980-7; I count the 49 in 1980 as 50 because of Lanier’s impact), and win multiple playoff series and play .500 playoff ball (which the Bucks essentially did in that period) then, yes, you get taken seriously. The early 80s Bucks were comparable to the Mavs in the 6-7 years before they won the title, or the pre-Duncan Spurs from 1989 forward. Those teams averaged around 55 wins a year too. People took them seriously.