Grade the first 1/3 of Bogut's career

LISTEN2JAZZ · Post #1 » by **LISTEN2JAZZ** » Tue Mar 3, 2009 6:27 pm

How well do you guys think Bogut did during the first third of his career? Overall, he played in 262 out of 328 possible games (80%), and averaged 11.9 points, 8.7 rebounds, 2.5 assists, 1.0 blocks, 2.0 turnovers, and shot 54% from the field, and 59% from the line. He has generally ranked in the top 3 each season in drawing charges as well.

His best season measured by per game averages was this one, putting up 11.7 points (57%), 10.3 boards, 2.0 assists, 1.0 blocks, 2.4 turnovers in 31.2 minutes per game.

He has appeared in 5 playoff games, and averaged 8.6/6.2/3.4.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... tan01.html

EastSideBucksFan · Post #2 » by **EastSideBucksFan** » Tue Mar 3, 2009 6:32 pm

With an objective eye, its hard to give him anything higher than a C. He's been a stellar rebounder, but his FT % stinks, his offensive game seems to have regressed, his blocks have regressed from last year, and his charges are causing him back problems and now he's out again for the end stretch of the year.

I have to say, I'm pretty disappointed in my favorite player on the Bucks.

aaprigs311 · Post #3 » by **aaprigs311** » Tue Mar 3, 2009 6:40 pm

B-/C+

You have to take into account his defensive presence. He's one of those guys that does a lot things that don't show up on the boxscore so he doesn't necessarily get the credit he deserves. On the other hand, he was a number one pick and has disappointed most of us. Overall, I'm thankful Bogut is on my team.

europa · Post #4 » by **europa** » Tue Mar 3, 2009 6:44 pm

B-

His presence has had a significant impact on this team's ability to win games since the start of his career. Historically, the Bucks have been far better with him than without him. He has become a legitimate defensive anchor and one of the best rebounders in the league. He's already elite in terms of taking charges though I'm personally concerned about the impact that's having on his durability. Offensively, he remains inconsistent but he is an offensive facilitator, can score in the post and when he faces up and is a terrific passer. His FT shooting is a major weakness and that's an area of disappointment for me this season as I was hoping it would improve.

Overall, he is the most important player on the Bucks' roster. Their defense has gone from Top 10 in the league with him to putrid without him. He brings intelligence and intangibles that greatly help this team's chances to have success. There isn't a young center in the East (and maybe not in the entire league) I'd rather have than Bogut after Dwight Howard. He has become one of the game's better young players. He'll never be Chris Paul, but he's become pretty darn good and he's invaluable to the Bucks.

Post #5 » by **paulpressey25** » Tue Mar 3, 2009 6:45 pm

Has any player been talked about so much who has made so little an impact in their first four years in the league?

The guy unfortunately will not have a career as good as Swen Nater's

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... rsw01.html

C-

europa · Post #6 » by **europa** » Tue Mar 3, 2009 6:46 pm

paulpressey25 wrote:The guy unfortunately will not have a career as good as Swen Nater's

Man, you've become depressing.

Post #7 » by **paulpressey25** » Tue Mar 3, 2009 6:50 pm

europa wrote:Man, you've become depressing.

Look at Swen's numbers. I was amazed looking at them just now. The guy was a Bogut on steroids so to speak.

The future of Bogut may be great. He is our most valuable player. But this season is in a sense no different than the prior three. We see spurts indicating that maybe, just maybe he can be a middle-income man's Tim Duncan. But then it blows away like the wind with an injury or some other team dynamic or coaching problem.

I'm waiting for the complete package to show up. The 17ppg/12rpg/4apg/52% FG/65%FT/2bpg guy.

He's shown he can do all those things, just not at the same time or in the same season.

europa · Post #8 » by **europa** » Tue Mar 3, 2009 6:51 pm

The only concern I have right now about Bogut is durability. I worry about the constant pounding he takes with the charges could lead to a shortened career. I want him to improve aspects of his game (become more refined offensively, for example), but overall he's become a very good player and when it comes to issues on this team, he's WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY at the bottom of the list for me.

Post #9 » by **MickeyDavis** » Tue Mar 3, 2009 6:52 pm

I remember Swen and I agree, Swen > Bogut.

InsideOut · Post #10 » by **InsideOut** » Tue Mar 3, 2009 6:55 pm

C+. I'm glad we have him but 11.9/8.7/2.5 is not great. He does do a lot of the little stuff which helps. I feel he could be so much better but it just never happens. Missing 20% of his games is also a big concern.

Oct 16th 1968 · Post #11 » by **Oct 16th 1968** » Tue Mar 3, 2009 6:57 pm

B- Mainly due to my man-crush.

Edit.. would have been a C+ without the man-crush.

Post #12 » by **ReasonablySober** » Tue Mar 3, 2009 6:58 pm

InsideOut wrote:C+. I'm glad we have him but 11.9/8.7/2.5 is not great. He does do a lot of the little stuff which helps. I feel he could be so much better but it just never happens. Missing 20% of his games is also a big concern.

europa · Post #13 » by **europa** » Tue Mar 3, 2009 7:01 pm

I remember Nater too. What also needs to be remembered is the game has changed quite a bit since he played. In those days, centers put up insane rebounding numbers almost regardless of talent level. That isn't the case these days. For example, Nater averaged more than 12 rebounds a game seven times in his career. Only two players in the league are doing that this season (Howard and Camby). I'm not sure Nater would average 16 rebounds per game in the current NBA the way he once did in his day.

jerrod · Post #14 » by **jerrod** » Tue Mar 3, 2009 7:03 pm

Oct 16th 1968 wrote:B- Mainly due to my man-crush.

Edit.. would have been a C+ without the man-crush.

pffft, one grade improvement? that's not a man crush, what nebula has is a man crush

DH34Phan · Post #15 » by **DH34Phan** » Tue Mar 3, 2009 7:12 pm

D

Assuming we win 40 games this year, that means we have averaged 33 wins a year in Bogut's career.

He has not met expectations, which would be my requisite for a C, so he gets a D because he hasn't failed completely.

Bernman · Post #16 » by **Bernman** » Tue Mar 3, 2009 7:30 pm

europa wrote:I remember Nater too. What also needs to be remembered is the game has changed quite a bit since he played. In those days, centers put up insane rebounding numbers almost regardless of talent level. That isn't the case these days. For example, Nater averaged more than 12 rebounds a game seven times in his career. Only two players in the league are doing that this season (Howard and Camby). I'm not sure Nater would average 16 rebounds per game in the current NBA the way he once did in his day.

Yeah, they played a faster pace in the NBA during those years. Also, the NBA didn't institute the 3-point line until 79-80. That didn't seem to effect Nater's rebounding much, but it had to help bigs a little. How much would Bogut dominate on the glass if he didn't have to deal with the long rebounds caused by 3-point shot? And Bogut's impact is always going to be more than the stats indicate because of all the little things he does and their de-emphasis on defense. If you go by the similar player by stats list on basketball reference, he's going to be one of the most unfairly judged players (although it's funny he's compared to the superfreak who he tried to discredit during the combine).

That said he's been a disappointment for a #1 pick. He's about a #3 pick level player. I gave Carm crap for comparing him to Divac pre-draft because of their athleticism disparity, and it still is apparent to me, but she was accurate about the sum of what each bring to the table. I wish Drew Olson or somebody would finally ask the tough question which has befuddled many Buck die hards about him.....and that is why on Earth can't he translate the jumper he displayed in college and international play. That would open up so many opportunities for himself and his teammates. And he would improve beyond a Divac level player.

LUKE23 · Post #17 » by **LUKE23** » Tue Mar 3, 2009 7:31 pm

Record isn't relevant when analyzing an individual player. Otherwise Durant has a F so far, as does Al Jefferson, Chris Bosh, Danny Granger, Kevin Martin, Rudy Gay.

You measure it by how much a team lacks in certain areas when that player is off the floor. The Bucks D and rebounding has been SIGNIFICANTLY negatively impacted by Bogut's departure. He's never going to be an alpha scorer, but if he continues to play this D and rebound at this rate (along with scoring efficiently), he's worth his contract.

I'd say B- so far in his career. If he could keep the same offensive efficiency while bumping his scoring up to 14/15, then he's pushing A.

DH34Phan · Post #18 » by **DH34Phan** » Tue Mar 3, 2009 7:41 pm

I think record should matter, especially in Bogut's case.

When we got Bogut, he was thought of as the missing link to what could be a powerful team in the East. Bogut did very little to improve the team in his first 2 seasons, and it was only in his 3rd season where his defense abilities came to fruition. We went from an up and coming team in the East to one of the worst teams in the NBA with Bogut.

So basically, Bogut has been terrible offensively his first 4 seasons, great defensively once in 4 seasons, and been a good rebounder his whole career.

Grading Bogut based on expectations, he has to be a C or below, and I gave him a D. He has done nothing to further the franchise, nobody is coming to play for Milwaukee because of him, and it's obvious he is only a good role player. Yes, he may be the most valuable player on this team because of the defense he brings, but that isn't saying much on a team that has averaged 33 wins a year in his 4 seasons.

carmelbrownqueen · Post #19 » by **carmelbrownqueen** » Tue Mar 3, 2009 7:48 pm

EastSideBucksFan wrote:With an objective eye, its hard to give him anything higher than a C. He's been a stellar rebounder, but his FT % stinks, his offensive game seems to have regressed, his blocks have regressed from last year, and his charges are causing him back problems and now he's out again for the end stretch of the year.

I have to say, I'm pretty disappointed in my favorite player on the Bucks.

I have to agree with your assessment but I would probably give him a C-.

EastSideBucksFan · Post #20 » by **EastSideBucksFan** » Tue Mar 3, 2009 7:51 pm

carmelbrownqueen wrote:
EastSideBucksFan wrote:With an objective eye, its hard to give him anything higher than a C. He's been a stellar rebounder, but his FT % stinks, his offensive game seems to have regressed, his blocks have regressed from last year, and his charges are causing him back problems and now he's out again for the end stretch of the year.

I have to say, I'm pretty disappointed in my favorite player on the Bucks.

I have to agree with your assessment but I would probably give him a C-.

CBQ, your contributions on this board have been missed.

I'm assuming you are sick of being "hated on" for your opinion of CV.