Game 24: Pacers at Bucks - 12/13/23 - 7:00 - BSWI

[MickeyDavis]

Read on Twitter

[soboMP3]

Ugh, my wife and I need to get back there. It's been over a year.

[Pacers_Freak]

Pacers fan invading here. I fully expect a Bucks blowout win tonight. Take my gift of -6.5. The Bucks are the better team and the Pacers have gotten them twice in close games. I fully expect the Bucks to come out with some motivation tonight and water will find its level. I'd love to be wrong, but I think this one if over by halftime.

You can't reverse mojo us. Nice try.

No reverse mojo. Putting my money where my mouth is. My DK account will be taking a nice dent if I'm wrong.

On a side note your board is one of the few visiting team boards I visit. My affinity for Bucks fans goes back to when my seats in Indy one game were conveniently located right next to Squad Six. Met a lot of good folks and had a lot of fun during the game that night. It's been fun to watch a fellow small market enjoy the success you have recently.

[old skool]

I don't know if Griffin will succeed as Bucks coach. I HOPE he succeeds. And if he doesn't I HOPE he is replaced in short order, as the Antetokounmpo window will close more quickly than any of us want. But I recognize that I don't understand what Griffin is trying to teach the Bucks players to do, nor do I understand what the upside come Spring can be for what he is trying to teach and implement. I see the uneven results, but don't know how much to blame Griffin for Lillard shooting like a end of rotation player, or for Middleton to be averaging 12 ppg or for the Bucks to be outrebounded more often than not. I HOPE the Bucks win against the Pacers, but watching Williams and Popovich struggle tells me that maybe it is not the wisest thing to make absolute judgements based on short term results because players impact winning more than coaches.

What a pleasure to read a thoughtful, insightful post. Well done.

Like you I've been thinking about Monty Williams standing there with his arms folded as his Pistons team reels off 20 losses in a row. Player deficiencies will rip that "I'm a Genius" button off your lapel in a heartbeat.

Griffin hasn't yet gotten his button, but he's gotten plenty of challenges to deal with -- great expectations, two megastars, one of whom superficially should be good in the pick-and-roll but is instead a diver to the basket who makes that play easy to defend, and a supporting cast that is on-again, off-again. He's managed to compile a good record without earning style points.

He'll continue to attract hysterical, misplaced criticism here, but I'm good with watching his journey continue.

Not sure what misplaced criticism you're referring to.

Is the criticism that he is playing weak defending guards too far out on the court, thus allowing every guard they play to get into the paint, a misplaced criticism?

Or that he is playing Giannis too far out on the court and doubling players too far out on the court, a misplaced criticism?

I could go on, but my point is that there are, at least to me, obvious flaws that he refuses to react to.

Under Bud, the Bucks defense took a huge step back when Lopez was hurt that one year (he continued to play the drop even without Lopez). They were like 15th in the league. So I expected some regression exchanging Jrue for Lillard.

But being one of the worst defensive teams in the league with Giannis and Lopez on the roster is not acceptable, unless we can see incremental improvement.

This isn't about how you treat a coach and giving him a chance. It's about having an open window for a limited period and trying to maximize it. If the Bucks had the Bulls talent, I'd say give Griffin a year or two. We don't have that luxury.

I think the bigger "unacceptable" is that the Budenholzer Bucks was a very good defensive team that failed in the playoffs three times as the #1 seed. The conundrum is that we fans don't know exactly what Griffin is trying to teach, and nor do we know if the team is making enough progress and whether things will be better come playoffs. We only have short term results to measure progress, but we know that short term results do not adequately project playoff results. So we really don't know squat. We just know that we don't like the short term result and possibly get overly focused on short term details, in spite of a W-L record comparable to last season.

Maybe what Griffin is trying to teach the Bucks to do is complicated and takes a few months to instill. Maybe there are a lot of things to learn and fix, and maybe the "obvious unacceptables" are appropriately not the the things to focus on early in the RS. We fans seem to think that all a coach has to do is tell a team what results are best and the team will execute perfectly to achieve the desired result. If teaching and learning was so easy and automatic, every high school algebra teacher in the country would be fired when every student isn't getting 100% correct on every test within a few weeks.

If teaching NBA players how to be successful is so easy, why do NBA teams have so many assistant coaches? What are those coaches teaching if it is all so easy? Why doesn't the head coach just demand that each player fix the 5 or 10 or 20 things that is holding the team back, and then instant success and a championship will be guaranteed? You know, like a school principal who doesn't need classroom teachers, because all that is needed is to tell the students what they need to know. They can simply read the book.

Except that NBA success is eminently more complicated than a school subject where everything one needs to know is written down in a 350 page textbook. That Griffin needs to teach his players and team how to execute the new schemes against a defensive minded Knicks and an offensive minded Pacers belies the virtual certainty that early season results will be uneven. Serious NBA observers should understand that.

NBA coach should be held accountable. But it doesn't make sense to draw definitive conclusions based on short term results when the reason so many wanted Budenholzer replaced was that his great short term results did not carry over to the playoffs. If Griffin does not have a long term plan that would reasonably be expected to be successful, he should be replaced. But I don't think he should be replaced if his plan is complicated and will take a few months or so to teach and implement.

We fans don't know squat. We don't know all of what Griffin is trying to teach and implement. We don't know what individual and team understanding, recognition and execution needs to improve. We don't know how much progress is being made, or where things have stalled or regressed. We don't know which coach or coaches are working with which players to correct which issues, much less what progress has been made and how much progress needs to be made going forward. This is more complicated than telling students to read and learn textbook page 167. Ignoring the complexities involved make it easier to embrace misplaced anxiety over short term results. The reality is that we won't know how this ends up until it ends up, and the eventual result is not impacted by fan reaction or lack thereof, because we don't know squat.

[Brewhoopfan]

Sorry but I'm kinda over the whole "we have a weak defensive backcourt" thing when Ty Lue is out here having the Clippers as a Top-5 defense with a PG rotation of Harden and Westbrook. I said before the season that anything less than a Top-15 defense with a Giannis/Brook frontcourt is completely unacceptable, and it continues to be completely unacceptable.

the Clippers are 13-10, who cares about a top 5 defense

Also their starting 1-3 is Harden, Mann, George

ours is Dame, Bealey, Khris

which is better defensively on paper? (lol)

I honestly don't think any coach in history could figure out how to guard the perimeter well with our starting 1-3

Dame saves his energy for offense most of the time and is maybe average when he tries

Beasley's just not good on that side of the ball, gambles way too much

Khris is good if he can get set, but he's useless if he has to move laterally at all



we badly need jae and pat back or one of mj/ajj/aj to make an ACTUAL leap

or a trade

JB Bickerstaff (not a great coach) had the Cavs as the #1 defense in basketball last season with a 1-3 rotation of Garland, Mitchell, and Caris LeVert. Ruminate on that for a second.

This comparison falls flat on several levels. I'm also convinced the Bucks defense can sneak into the top 15 with Giannis and Brook as long as they stay in drop coverage. Obviously, keeping Brook near the basket benefits him, but it also allows everyone else to stay home. This means Giannis doesn't have rotation responsibilities and he can just ball watch and wreck things. Neither are all-defensive NBA players outside of the drop scheme. Too much reliance on the drop scheme was Bud's downfall, and relying on it again considering our guards can't get over a screen is fools gold. I'll take the defensive flexibility and mobility of Allen and Mobley every time.

The trio of Garland, Mitchell, and Caris LeVert at least have the physical capability of staying in front and getting through screens. Middleton and Beasley can't. At best, Dame is a won't.

I'm also a firm believer that a decent coach with a sound scheme can make a defense much better than the sum of it's parts. It's just great communication and the discipline to rotate quickly and close gaps (Thibs 101). Here's the elephant in the room: Giannis is really REALLY bad at this. Can he be taught? Not sure.

Enough complaining. Solution: Trade Brook, Marjon, picks etc. Bring in a mobile 4 and a good wing defender. Play Giannis at the 5 half the time, and get them ready to switch screens for the playoffs.

[jschligs]

Emotionally hedged by taking Pacers +205. If we lose, at least I'll make a pretty penny.

[mediocrityrules]

Those that want to give Griffin time to grow into the role don't seem to realize that we are 'win now'. We don't have time for someone to find his feet and work through things and see where we end up so that we can really go hard next season. We need someone who can take this version of the Bucks from the last 5 years and with some needed tweaks, harden them for playoff basketball (where we are definitely lacking), and lead them to the Finals this season.

I don't think it's wrong for anyone to expect that by Christmas we would have seen improvement in this team in the areas where the numbers noted deficiencies early on, and continue to note them. That's giving it a few months to see how we're working through things and understand what it is that Griffin is looking to do.

Our offense has improved, and everyone believed that this would be a real strength of ours once we picked up Dame, and it's proving to be just that. Even though he's not playing well, he's still creating spacing on the floor that Giannis has not seen in years, and with Giannis playing with better efficiency than he ever has, this is bringing others along for the ride.

Our defense however has plummeted from the past 5 years where it was consistently a top 1-3 defense to where it is stagnating down around 23rd or worse at times. And it's not getting better. We can't 'put the clamps' on anyone when we really need to get a stop. We leak points consistently. We've turned strengths into weaknesses with this team, and we're not seeing any change (it seems, unless the players ask for it). PO's are won off of a good defense. We don't have that.

Griffin hasn't given us any reason for optimism in his skills as a HC with how he projects himself and how he coaches, both from game to game and in-game. I'm sure no one here wants to change HC if we can avoid it, and people want Griffin to work out. But we can't see anything from him yet that makes us confident that he will. There is a common opinion on here that we're winning despite Griffin a lot of the time, because of the raw talent on the floor. I don't want to know that Griffin will be a great HC 3-4 years from now. I want to know that he is now. Because we need him to be now. The Bucks are not currently constructed as a sandbox for him to test and learn with anything other than immediate, tactical, 'win now' moves (tweaks really).

What we're looking for as fans is what Griffin has as a vision for this team. When he was pitching for the HC role, what was it that convinced the Bucks decision-makers that Griffin was the man to win us the 'chip this season? What team identity and playstyle did he talk about and sell the organization on? He needs to sell us on that too. We need to come along for the ride as well. Unfortunately, we're not on board right now.

What's the plan Coach?

[jimmybones]

At this point, I'd much rather go with Prunty than Griffin. Could he be worse? No.

It's much harder getting someone mid-season, but they should be looking. I don't want Rivers (although he's still a step up) because whoever they get is unlikely to be fired at the end of the season (firing three coaches in a year?).

They are in a bind. In retrospect, Nurse was the obvious choice.

Yeah, I think this is an important point. It's going to be challenging enough to find a replacement mid season but you almost have to commit multiple years to whoever it is. The optics of firing Bud, AG, and a third guy in one year, while being relatively competitive, would be bad. How many potential candidates do you turn off with that kind of chaotic firing spree, let alone the chemistry/continuity issues.

I think emunney mentioned this, maybe jokingly, but I'd honestly just double down on offense if a move is made and switch to a more conservative defensive strategy. Bet that our math offensively is better than your math and just outscore teams faces off. Defensive focus on protecting the paint and rebounding and keeping people in front of us. Yes, teams will occasionally go scorched earth from deep but I'd rather force teams to do that to beat us the laying out a red carpet to the rim.

[JonHeist]

if we win by 20 there will be an 8-page PGT

if we lose by 1 there will be an 80-pager

[pifhluk23]

if we win by 20 there will be an 8-page PGT

if we lose by 1 there will be an 80-pager

But either way both will come to the same conclusion, the D still sucks.

[BigO]

He'll continue to attract hysterical, misplaced criticism here, but I'm good with watching his journey continue.

Not sure what misplaced criticism you're referring to.

Is the criticism that he is playing weak defending guards too far out on the court, thus allowing every guard they play to get into the paint, a misplaced criticism?

Yes, I think it is misplaced. I suppose you could play a lot of zone with Beasley and Lillard as undersized pillars just waiting to be shot over. Or you could not play them at all, as you seem to want, offense be damned.

Watching Griffin try to solve this Rubik's Cube has been frustrating for all of us. But I think eventually his feckless spinning the thing this way and that will turn into a solution, and these early struggles will be forgotten. If it doesn't, and this team doesn't make it at least to the ECFs, you move on.

You could make a case for giving Griffin another month, but you didn't. It appears that in your mind, no matter how the Bucks look on the court, that he has "earned" the right to fail for at least this year.

I'm not that patient (at my age, patience is not a virtue), but I get it.

But please don't put words in mouth. I didn't imply not playing Lillard or Beasley. What I did imply was that there are other defenses that might better suit their skill set. And playing zone is near the bottom of that list.

In any case, this is nice conversation, but I still think Griffin being replaced is a longshot. I look forward to improvements along the way.

[AussieBuck]

Betting on Giannis suspended

[msiris]

if we win by 20 there will be an 8-page PGT

if we lose by 1 there will be an 80-pager

But either way both will come to the same conclusion, the D still sucks.

We need to score 120 to win this game. That might not be enough anyways. Vs the Bull nothing changed. Here is to all the people who think it gets better with time. I need what you are smoking. I won't root for loses, but a defensive rating of 23 isn't winning jack.

[engelmartin]

Can we just combine with the pacers and take the league by storm? Can Halliburton play the two?

[sidney lanier]

Not sure what misplaced criticism you're referring to.

Is the criticism that he is playing weak defending guards too far out on the court, thus allowing every guard they play to get into the paint, a misplaced criticism?

Yes, I think it is misplaced. I suppose you could play a lot of zone with Beasley and Lillard as undersized pillars just waiting to be shot over. Or you could not play them at all, as you seem to want, offense be damned.

Watching Griffin try to solve this Rubik's Cube has been frustrating for all of us. But I think eventually his feckless spinning the thing this way and that will turn into a solution, and these early struggles will be forgotten. If it doesn't, and this team doesn't make it at least to the ECFs, you move on.

You could make a case for giving Griffin another month, but you didn't. It appears that in your mind, no matter how the Bucks look on the court, that he has "earned" the right to fail for at least this year.

I'm not that patient (at my age, patience is not a virtue), but I get it.

But please don't put words in mouth. I didn't imply not playing Lillard or Beasley. What I did imply was that there are other defenses that might better suit their skill set. And playing zone is near the bottom of that list.

In any case, this is nice conversation, but I still think Griffin being replaced is a longshot. I look forward to improvements along the way.

It's not that Griffin has earned the right to fail. It's that he hasn't proven to be a failure yet. A lousy Drtg, crabby Bobby, Stotts leaving in a huff -- none of that outweighs a possibly improving team with a top-3 record already. The rest of the innuendos bruited about here are little more than gossip or wishful thinking or confirmation bias.

The Stotts thing does bother me a little, though. Not because of what it says about Griffin -- what it says about Stotts, who never offered an explanation or extended an olive branch. Griffin said nice things about him that were never reciprocated in the public press.

[MoreTrife]

Read somewhere defensive rating is getting worse again. So not sure the team can be classified as possibly improving.

[KidA24]

Yes, I think it is misplaced. I suppose you could play a lot of zone with Beasley and Lillard as undersized pillars just waiting to be shot over. Or you could not play them at all, as you seem to want, offense be damned.

Watching Griffin try to solve this Rubik's Cube has been frustrating for all of us. But I think eventually his feckless spinning the thing this way and that will turn into a solution, and these early struggles will be forgotten. If it doesn't, and this team doesn't make it at least to the ECFs, you move on.

You could make a case for giving Griffin another month, but you didn't. It appears that in your mind, no matter how the Bucks look on the court, that he has "earned" the right to fail for at least this year.

I'm not that patient (at my age, patience is not a virtue), but I get it.

But please don't put words in mouth. I didn't imply not playing Lillard or Beasley. What I did imply was that there are other defenses that might better suit their skill set. And playing zone is near the bottom of that list.

In any case, this is nice conversation, but I still think Griffin being replaced is a longshot. I look forward to improvements along the way.

It's not that Griffin has earned the right to fail. It's that he hasn't proven to be a failure yet. A lousy Drtg, crabby Bobby, Stotts leaving in a huff -- none of that outweighs a possibly improving team with a top-3 record already. The rest of the innuendos bruited about here are little more than gossip or wishful thinking or confirmation bias.

The Stotts thing does bother me a little, though. Not because of what it says about Griffin -- what it says about Stotts, who never offered an explanation or extended an olive branch. Griffin said nice things about him that were never reciprocated in the public press.

What would their record have to be, right now, having played the 2nd easiest schedule in the NBA thus far, for you to be questioning Griffin?

[Ayt]

I've been reduced to box score watching the last few games because I can't stand watching a Grief coached team. I'm tuning in tonight, so I hope they prove me wrong and actually play some good basketball before I tune them out because they play with less discipline than a typical AAU team.

[Baddy Chuck]

Read on Twitter

Has a chance to be hilarious.

[BigO]

Not sure what misplaced criticism you're referring to.

Is the criticism that he is playing weak defending guards too far out on the court, thus allowing every guard they play to get into the paint, a misplaced criticism?

Yes, I think it is misplaced. I suppose you could play a lot of zone with Beasley and Lillard as undersized pillars just waiting to be shot over. Or you could not play them at all, as you seem to want, offense be damned.

Watching Griffin try to solve this Rubik's Cube has been frustrating for all of us. But I think eventually his feckless spinning the thing this way and that will turn into a solution, and these early struggles will be forgotten. If it doesn't, and this team doesn't make it at least to the ECFs, you move on.

You could make a case for giving Griffin another month, but you didn't. It appears that in your mind, no matter how the Bucks look on the court, that he has "earned" the right to fail for at least this year.

I'm not that patient (at my age, patience is not a virtue), but I get it.

But please don't put words in my mouth. I didn't imply not playing Lillard or Beasley. What I did imply was that there are other defenses that might better suit their skill set. And playing zone is near the bottom of that list.

In any case, this is nice conversation, but I still think Griffin being replaced is a longshot. I look forward to improvements along the way.