RealGM

Delayed arrival

Bucks still struggling to put all their pieces together

The Bucks were stuck -- again. Scheduled to arrive in New York about 4 p.m. Monday in advance of Tuesday night's game at New Jersey, their plane was stuck circling the airport waiting for a clear path to land.

Unsettling as the situation was, that sense of uncertainty is something Milwaukee should be accustomed to, as it has circled the Eastern Conference all season while looking for a clear path to the playoffs.

After a 7-4 start, which included a five-game winning streak highlighted by victories against the Cavs, Lakers and Mavericks, the Bucks have sputtered in that familiar Bucks way, losing 25 of their next 36 games to fall to 18-29.

That may not be anything unusual for a team that has averaged 47 losses the last four seasons. But for a team that doled out $70 million last summer to retain free-agent point guard Mo Williams and top reserve Charlie Bell; that had been building around former No. 1 pick Andrew Bogut for two seasons; and that had signed shooting guard Michael Redd to a maximum-level $90 million contract in 2005, this season's struggles are no longer considered the growing pains of a contender in development. Indeed, owner Herb Kohl has said this is a "very important year" for the Bucks.

"Our expectations going into the season were that we thought we were a playoff team," Bucks general manager Larry Harris said in a telephone interview the other day. "I really felt going into the season that this was the best team that I had had in my five seasons as general manager; I told the team that, I told the community that, I told the fans that.

"We have experience, we have an inside game, we have an outside game, we have some veterans, we have some toughness. Sometimes it's played itself out, but there have been times we've been in games and had some things transpire and it ends up getting away from us quickly. Those are growing pains that we've had and we assumed would take place, but not to the level it has to this point. We're certainly not happy with our record, but ... when you're in the Eastern Conference, you still feel like you've got a chance even as well under .500 as we are."

With Harris in the last year of his contract, his optimism about a team that has beaten only two clubs with winning records since November may be as much about painting a rosy picture of his front-office work as it is the reality of being only two games out of the East's final playoff seed through Wednesday.

Or maybe it reflects the vision of someone who sees a roster loaded with individual talents: Redd is averaging at least 23 points for the fourth consecutive season; Williams has the ability to distribute and shoot; and the 7-footer Bogut averaged 16.3 points (on 56.4 percent shooting), 9.7 rebounds and 3.1 assists in January.

But that array of talent, bolstered this season by versatile No. 6 pick Yi Jianlian, has yet to coalesce into anything more than an array of talent, especially on the road, where the Bucks are 5-22 after Wednesday's 112-69 loss at Philadelphia.

"They are a contradiction in styles," an NBA scout said. "The players want to go up-tempo; [coach Larry] Krystkowiak wants to keep things a little more disciplined and control what they do offensively. He would like to play more of a power game, but their players are better suited for getting up and down. Redd feels a bit more free about taking shots. And if you're going to give Williams money and then make him your point guard, you've got to play loose. He's not a pure point, and when they're trying to play a strict style, that makes him easy to guard. If he's going to be one of the focal points of your team, you've got to let him play and put pressure on people to defend him and Redd."

To that end, Harris agrees that "your players dictate the style you're going to play," but cautions that the Bucks are trying to develop some semblance of offensive balance.

"We're a good perimeter-shooting team," Harris said, "but when we're willing to up-tempo the ball, our turnovers are tremendously high. An all-out fast-breaking team is not our style because we do have a low-post guy [in Bogut] and we want to play through him as well.

"So we'll run when we have opportunities, but Larry is a defensive guy. He's a no-nonsense person. He understands you need to have an inside-outside game. And adjusting our team to that style, because we've been so much the other way, [has required] almost a reprogramming that you can actually win that way."

On the other end, the team's free-and-easy approach to defense is all too clear. Pick the metric, and the Bucks are struggling with it. Points allowed? They rank 21st in the league. Field-goal percentage allowed? They're 28th. The numbers look just as bad on a more advanced scale: Milwaukee sits 27th in defensive efficiency, a measure of how many points a team allows per 100 possessions.

That wasn't the plan when coach Terry Stotts was fired with 18 games left last season and replaced by Krystkowiak, who was given a multiyear deal while preaching defense. But it is the inescapable truth for a team whose identity is still forged on offense.

"It's a matter of focus," Williams said. "When things are not going well in other areas, when guys get frustrated on offense, it snowballs to the defensive end."

That isn't much different from any number of teams whose ability to win is based solely on their marksmanship. But it doesn't allow any room for the many nights when shots aren't falling, when defense and grit are the only paths to victory.

Contrary to some published reports, though, Harris isn't looking to expand that margin through a big personnel change.

"There are always conversations that take place when you're a month away from the trade deadline," Harris said. "But as for reports that we should break things up -- that's not what winning organizations do. I think our core is intact and we're building around that core. If you're a fan of the Milwaukee Bucks, if you're within the organization, you have to feel like we can identify what we're trying to do, who we're building around, who our future is and how we're trying to fit those pieces together."

"They are a contradiction in styles," an NBA scout said. "The players want to go up-tempo; [coach Larry] Krystkowiak wants to keep things a little more disciplined and control what they do offensively. He would like to play more of a power game, but their players are better suited for getting up and down. Redd feels a bit more free about taking shots. And if you're going to give Williams money and then make him your point guard, you've got to play loose. He's not a pure point, and when they're trying to play a strict style, that makes him easy to guard. If he's going to be one of the focal points of your team, you've got to let him play and put pressure on people to defend him and Redd."

Neapolitan Buck wrote:Exactly. This was the perfect team for Stotts.

bigzy wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



But how many times was he criticized for not changing his style?

EastSideBucksFan wrote:Bogut - Can post up, but is very effective in transition

paulpressey25 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



This is one of those comments that people make, but I'm not sure where there is any basis for it.

Bogut is not an up-tempo player for a running team:

a) He's not fast (when was the last time you saw Bogut on a fast break for anything?) Usually he gets winded and is the last guy down the court.

b) He's really not a good outlet passer. I thought Bogut would be a great outlet passer, but he isn't. He has to methodically get the rebound, make sure no one steals it, then think about handing it to the guards. By that point, any chance of a great outlet pass downcourt is gone.

c) On offense, yes Bogut does better scoring when he's part of a moving play. But those take awhile to set up. And his only real serious scoring stretch for him has come in the last month, when we've called those very long to develop isos where he pounds the ball for the hook. Don't get me wrong, I like those plays....but that's not transition ball....

Get this team a halfcourt PG instead of Mo and things will start to improve.

Get this team a brawler PF instead of Yi and things will start to improve.

GrandAdmiralDan wrote:-=
We could have done that presumably if we had been willing to trade Villanueva and the 6th pick to Atlanta for the 3rd pick, drafted Horford, and then outbid Detroit for Billups. No Mo. No Yi. No Villanueva. No Desmond. But Billups and Horford instead.

paulpressey25 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



I suppose you are going to tell me you think that the Hawks would have bit on a CV/#6 for Horford? Please don't ruin my night.

Yes, a Billups/Horford combo would have done wonders for this team under Larry K.

GrandAdmiralDan wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Both teams were considering that trade (Atlanta only if Conley or Yi was still available at pick 6), but both teams got cold feet and both teams ended up being pleased on draft night that they had not made that trade. I think we would have been able to talk the Hawks into that if we had first talked ourselves into it.

I remember europa being in favor of us getting that trade done at the time it came to light and most people on this board were really opposed to it on the time. Now I can't remember how I weighed in. I really wish the search feature on this forum was useful enough to be able to look something like that up.

europa wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



I think Press might have been the only other person who was on my side with that trade. Maybe a couple of other people were too but I don't recall many others. I like Yi's potential but if that trade was available right now I'd still make it. I think a lot of people in this forum really under-estimated just how good Al Horford is going to be and what a significant impact he could make for the Milwaukee Bucks alongside Bogut.

As far as this story, the basic foundation of it suggests the Bucks have accumulated "talent" but haven't put together a team. That sure sounds familiar.

LukePliska wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



I thought the trade was CV + 6th for the 3rd + 11th... I remember being strongly in favor of that trade, just like I was strongly in favor of the trade with Philly for Carney + their 3 picks.

Al Horford is exactly what we need in a PF.

europa wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



If I recall it was Villanueva/6 for 3. People here added the 11th because they didn't like the original offer. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong but that's what I recall.

europa wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



I think Press might have been the only other person who was on my side with that trade. Maybe a couple of other people were too but I don't recall many others. I like Yi's potential but if that trade was available right now I'd still make it. I think a lot of people in this forum really under-estimated just how good Al Horford is going to be and what a significant impact he could make for the Milwaukee Bucks alongside Bogut.

As far as this story, the basic foundation of it suggests the Bucks have accumulated "talent" but haven't put together a team. That sure sounds familiar.

GrandAdmiralDan wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



We could have done that presumably if we had been willing to trade Villanueva and the 6th pick to Atlanta for the 3rd pick, drafted Horford, and then outbid Detroit for Billups. No Mo. No Yi. No Villanueva. No Desmond. But Billups and Horford instead.