PG Nets: WIN!

[FrieAaron]

This is the issue with bringing Dame into this particular roster. We've already got one guy who is super ball dominant. I don't know how we sideline him, to put into place running tons of stuff for Dame.

I'm still skeptical of the pairing working long-term. Maybe Middleton will be the link that makes it work.

Dame has been surprisingly unselfish.. I just think his team/coaches need to make him be more aggressive particularly after he makes a shot or 2 and see if he can get the magic going... the whole team will be fired up if we get Dame tapping his wrist again; it won't hurt the team.

Bucks are 16-2 in the Dame era when he gets 10 assists. He should concentrate on that. We have shooters for taking the shots.

We need to try to make it a point when they're both in together that Dame and Giannis both touch the ball on as many possessions as possible. During our 9-1 stretch they averaged 9.1 and 8.2 asts respectively. Harder to do against harder competition but it's something to work on for the next 60issh games.

[kanyon]

I hope there's a report on that weird ass ref review

Yeah, I've seen a lot of people puzzling over this, and I still haven't seen a satisfying explanation of how they landed on counting the basket after the play was blown dead. I understand the intuition that he would have probably made the shot, but from a rules point of view I don't understand how you can build that into the resolution. You blew the play dead - that irreversibly alters the behavior of everyone on the court. That the ball would have most likely gone in here is irrelevant, and I think it should have been a jump ball.

Malloy said that when the whistle blew, the rebounder had already started the shooting motion to put the ball into the basket, which by rule, means that the basket must count if the challenge was successful.

I've never seen that particular sequence of events before, but that doesn't mean that the ruling was not correct.

Yeah I *guess* but the foul was on the play right before that so... That doesn't seem like part of the play even if it's a late whistle. Just seems like it should have been Nets ball. Seems like everyone should shoot a shot after every foul just in case then... It's sorta a dumb precedent to set.

[BUCKnation]

I hope there's a report on that weird ass ref review

Yeah, I've seen a lot of people puzzling over this, and I still haven't seen a satisfying explanation of how they landed on counting the basket after the play was blown dead. I understand the intuition that he would have probably made the shot, but from a rules point of view I don't understand how you can build that into the resolution. You blew the play dead - that irreversibly alters the behavior of everyone on the court. That the ball would have most likely gone in here is irrelevant, and I think it should have been a jump ball.

I feel like the refs need to step in here and be like, 'hey, the whistle blew after the putback, if we rule this a non-foul, the basket will count, do you still want to challenge?' Obviously the answer would be no in this case with AJJ only on 1 or 2 fouls, but its weird that they can just bring in other rulings on challenges that should be limited to the foul call itself.

Same with the AJ Green 3 that got ruled off b/c of the moving screen. The challenge should be limited to whether or not he got fouled on the 3 and not because he got fouled due to them initially missed a marginal moving screen. It'd be like challenging an catch in the NFL and the refs saying it was incomplete, but the receiver was interfered with so were calling a pass interference and the ball will be placed at the spot of the foul.

Simply, it should be is there a foul or not, and if not, make it a side out or a jump ball.

[tsamo]

I hope there's a report on that weird ass ref review

Yeah, I've seen a lot of people puzzling over this, and I still haven't seen a satisfying explanation of how they landed on counting the basket after the play was blown dead. I understand the intuition that he would have probably made the shot, but from a rules point of view I don't understand how you can build that into the resolution. You blew the play dead - that irreversibly alters the behavior of everyone on the court. That the ball would have most likely gone in here is irrelevant, and I think it should have been a jump ball.

I feel like the refs need to step in here and be like, 'hey, the whistle blew after the putback, if we rule this a non-foul, the basket will count, do you still want to challenge?' Obviously the answer would be no in this case with AJJ only on 1 or 2 fouls, but its weird that they can just bring in other rulings on challenges that should be limited to the foul call itself.

Same with the AJ Green 3 that got ruled off b/c of the moving screen. The challenge should be limited to whether or not he got fouled on the 3 and not because he got fouled due to them initially missed a marginal moving screen. It'd be like challenging an catch in the NFL and the refs saying it was incomplete, but the receiver was interfered with so were calling a pass interference and the ball will be placed at the spot of the foul.

Simply, it should be is there a foul or not, and if not, make it a side out or a jump ball.

Honestly, I have no problem one way or another. I just want consistency.

Just in the previous match against the Celtics, Giannis was driving to the basket against 2 players and the ball went out of bounds by the interference of the defenders. Celtics challenged the call and they were right that the ball came out last from Giannis, but it was also obvious that he was fouled and should have gotten free throws for it.

So, which is it? Because at this point it really feels like it is whatever fits our opponents.

[BUCKnation]

Honestly, I have no problem one way or another. I just want consistency.

Just in the previous match against the Celtics, Giannis was driving to the basket against 2 players and the ball went out of bounds by the interference of the defenders. Celtics challenged the call and they were right that the ball came out last from Giannis, but it was also obvious that he was fouled and should have gotten free throws for it.

So, which is it? Because at this point it really feels like it is whatever fits our opponents.

Good point, I had forgotten about that.

Yeah, basically the same thing, the initial foul caused the turnover/foul, make the same call then.

[drew881]

Pat C bench flyby, in case it hasn’t been posted:

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/15PGvHHD7H/?mibextid=UalRPS

[randy84]

I just think we win by bigger margins treating Dame like Steph for small stretches after makes.

This is the issue with bringing Dame into this particular roster. We've already got one guy who is super ball dominant. I don't know how we sideline him, to put into place running tons of stuff for Dame.

I'm still skeptical of the pairing working long-term. Maybe Middleton will be the link that makes it work.

I think it depends on what you mean by work. If the Bucks got Dame as a hedge against either Khris or Giannis being out during the playoffs as has been the case the last couple of years, then it should work. Dame just went into Miami and beat them without either Giannis or Middleton.
If you mean that Giannis' and Dame's games work well together on the floor then it is a little more difficult. As people mentioned they are both ball dominant to a high degree, so one of them has to change their game. Dame is obviously a rhythm player so you probably should try to get him going early. Giannis can get his points anytime.
If you knew that Giannis and Middleton were going to be completely healthy through the playoffs, then Jrue was a perfect PG as a third option. But Jrue was never a good choice as a first or second option to carry the team with one of those guys out. Dame at least gives you that chance.

[Ron Swanson]

Some of you guys must be flabbergasted by how literally any high usage superstar duo managed to work together in the past, despite it being far and away the most proven formula for championship success in the entirety of NBA history. Magic/Kareem, Lebron/Wade, Lebron/Kyrie, Jordan/Pippen, Oscar/Kareem, Kobe/Shaq, Steph/KD, Russ/KD, Harden/Paul, etc. It's like once you saw that Dame/Giannis didn't perfectly fit the Stockton/Malone or Nash/Amare archetype, you just immediately decided it wasn't going to work lol. The irony of course, is that those latter two duos never won a championship.

[-Jragon-]

Some of you guys must be flabbergasted by how literally any high usage superstar duo managed to work together in the past, despite it being far and away the most proven formula for championship success in the entirety of NBA history. Magic/Kareem, Lebron/Wade, Lebron/Kyrie, Jordan/Pippen, Oscar/Kareem, Kobe/Shaq, Steph/KD, Russ/KD, Harden/Paul, etc. It's like once you saw that Dame/Giannis didn't perfectly fit the Stockton/Malone or Nash/Amare archetype, you just immediately decided it wasn't going to work lol. The irony of course, is that those latter two duos never won a championship.

This is 100% ... and why coaching is important to smooth it over and get the role players around those 2 doing the right thing. KM and BP hoisting up open 3s off gravity and hitting them will give scouting opponents nightmares because if you stay on them then Dame and Giannis lick their chops and get to flexing and wrist tapping.

[emunney]

My working over-simplification of the Khris Effect is that Giannis and Dame have teams at capacity so Khris is pure overflow.