emunney wrote:Curious to know how much better you guys think we'd be with Brogdon.
In the regular season this team has proven that it does not depend on any single player to be great (except Giannis and maybe - I speculate - Brook due to his importance in the scheme).
The question is how Brogdon's absence will affect the Bucks in the playoffs. It is of course a hypothetical since you can never know for sure, but it is a valid question.
Food for thought related to this question.
- Did the Bucks miss Brogdon in last year's playoffs as much as people think? Did Brogdon coming back in the last games in the Celtics series make such a big difference in the way Bucks played?
My speculation is that Brogdon (while a very good player when evaluated without the context of a team), is not the missing piece for the Bucks roster to win a championship this year. If they fix some issues with adaptability in the playoffs, the Bucks have a very good chance to win it all as they are currently. If they don't, Malcolm will not be the missing piece to gift the Bucks a championship either way. So, does not having Brogdon really matter in any significant way in the end?
(I am not even considering scenarios where you retain Brogdon and lose other players from the rotation, which is more complicated. For example, not having Hill in this roster would have been a disaster, compared to not having Brogdon.)